Joseph Backes

I have a blog where I'm transcribing all the presentations that John Newman gave. Eventually, I will have it linked with the documents he used in his presentations. If you know of a presentation that John made that I do not have a transcript of please let me know about it. And, if possible please send me a videotape, DVD, or audio recording of it and I will transcribe it and put it up as soon as I can. Thanks. The Presentations of John Newman.

Newman is, without doubt, a heavy hitter. Has he, or will he be, joining the forum? His next book has been reported as entitled "JFK and Cuba." Any word on a publisher or a publication date? As far as I know John has abandoned this project. Maybe he will take it up again some day. I think he wanted to devote more time to his family and his job as a teacher. I haven't seen him in years. The last time I saw him was at Archives II. I believe I was there with Malcolm Blunt, Ed Sherry and another friend and we all saw John at another table going through documents. This was more than 10 years ago. John mentioned he had a new grandson, if I remember right, who was about 1 year old at the time.

If you read David Lifton's book "Best Evidence," and Doug Horne's work, "Inside the ARRB," you will know that there were three casket entrances that night at Bethesda. Volume 4 page 1002 gives a chronology. 6:35 p.m. A shipping casket arrives at Bethesda morgue loading dock. JFK is inside it, nude, and in a plastic body bag. This is the first casket entrance. 6:53 - 6:55 p.m. The motorcade from Andrews arrived at the front of Bethesda with the heavy, ornate, ceremonial, bronze, Dallas casket. This casket is empty. 7:07 p.m. - The grey Navy ambulance that was part of the motorcade from Andrews, which sat in front of Bethesda for 12 minutes moves to the rear morgue loading dock. This is the second casket entrance. The Dallas casket comes in but FBI agents Sibert and O'Neill are denied entry into the morgue by Secret Service agent Roy Kellerman. They are basically told the autopsy room isn't ready yet. According to Horne, JFK's body is in the Bethesda morgue and Dr. Humes is performing post mortem surgery to JFK's body to alter the wounds and remove bullet fragments. Once this is completed JFK is wrapped up again so as to resemble how he looked when he left Parkland with a sheet around his body and one around his head. Unknown time, but before 7:50 p.m. - Tom Robinson of Gawlers Funeral Home witnesses the removal of JFK from the autopsy room and he is told the autopsy is being moved to another location. Before 8:00 p.m. JFK's body is then reunited with the Dallas casket and is rushed outside to another grey Navy ambulance where it is "found" by the Joint Service Casket Team who have lost contact with JFK's body and having been driving around the Bedthesda grounds looking for it. It is at this point that the Dallas casket is damaged. Godfrey McHugh did not notice any damage to the Dallas casket on Air Force One. So, it is not true that it was damaged by JFK aides as they tried to bring it aboard Air Force On at Love Field in Dallas. 7:55 The Joint Service Casket Team finds the grey Navy ambulance with the Dallas casket out in front of Bethesda. They then escort this casket to the back of Bethesda to the morgue landing area. This is the third casket entrance. 8:00 JFK's body is in the Dallas casket and is brought into the morgue room and set down next to an examination table. Now Kellerman lets Sibert and O'Neill in observe the autopsy. Joe

What is your source for this friend of RFK saying that It's not JFK in the coffin, it's a wax dummy. Where does that come from? Joe

The March article referenced in the above article Yesterday an old friend of the show, Robbie Good, tweeted the image you see above: a conceptual rendering for a Dealey Plaza logo, along with the explanation that he’s “currently working on one of the most controversial public spaces on Earth.” Good, it should be noted, works for Woodall Rodgers-based graphic-design firm focusEGD, and as Good explained when we spoke this morning, the firm’s been hired to create interpretive signs for Dealey Plaza as part of the much-needed multimillion-dollar makeover being spearheaded by the privately run Dealey Plaza Restoration Committee. The city is also kicking in $750,000 in matching funds. The logo, Good says, isn’t officially part of the restoration, which is being led by architect Jonathan Rollins of Good Fulton & Farrell. FocusEGD has actually been hired by GFF to create the signs, the content of which is still being determined by, among others, the city’s Park and Recreation Department and the Sixth Floor Museum. Says Good, the signs will be “very carefully thought out in terms of what the graphics will be. Right now there’s the historical marker that’s been defaced where it says ‘Lee Harvey Oswald allegedly …’ They want to avoid that type of situation, so it would be historically based signs that say things like, ‘This is the Texas School Book Depository,’ ‘This is where Abraham Zapruder was standing,’ that kind of thing.” Louise Elam, a manager in the Park and Recreation Department who’s leading the project from the city’s side, says the signs will contain “just the facts.” As for the logo, she says Good “presented it for the first time yesterday, and we haven’t even had the chance to discuss or digest it.” The logo, says Good, could still be worked into the interpretive signage. Or not. He just wanted folks to see it and talk about it, which is why he put it out there yesterday. Says he, if nothing else it’s just one “way of ushering in a new era for the plaza.”

Way back in March, Louise Elam, the Park and Recreation Department manager who’s overseeing the desperately needed Dealey Plaza makeover, told us that new interpretive signs being planned for the plaza would be simple and straight-forward — “just the facts,” in other words. Nothing about Umbrella Men or rogue CIA agents or KGB operatives or mobsters or even Lee Harvey Oswald. See for yourself: Below you’ll find docs going before the Landmark Commission’s Central Business District/West End Task Force this afternoon. Contained within are the proposed signs designed by Woodall Rodgers-based focusEGD, and, for now, they still include Robbie Good’s Dealey Plaza logo, now augmented by the Park and Rec logo. “We’ll see what the reaction is today,” says Good, who’ll be presenting these to Landmark for the first time. “I stick by my feeling that it’s basically an international destination, so it ought to have its own brand and identity separate from the city but still ID’d as city-owned park land.” As for the content of the signs, which refer to Abraham Zapruder and the Grassy Knoll and the assassin’s “first shot” but never mention Oswald, Good says the Sixth Floor Museum had a hand in “figuring out what the text was.” Says the designer, “The thought was to avoid anything controversial. So they kept everything pretty to the point about the various facts and kind of as simplified as possible.” Keep in mind: All of this, including the proposal to move the Texas Historical Commission’s landmark plague from the Elm Street side to Commerce, is just a starting point. Even if the task force signs off on the signs today, they still have to pass through the Landmark Commission. The city council won’t have to approve them. “There may still be a few refinements,” Good says. “We haven’t incorporated everything from the internal group and the Parks department, so some refinements and adjustments will be made.” Dealey Plaza Interpretive Signage

I would like to ask that people either read, or re-read John Newman's presentation from Lancer 1999 Mexico City a New Analysis A lot of it is on Mexico City, yes, but John goes into great detail on how Lyndon manipulated people into silence, into stopping investigations, in Dallas at the local level, at the state level, and preventing two from ever starting at the federal level in the House or the U.S. Senate and finally into signing on and as John said "blessing," the lone nut scenario.

No, as usual Bill doesn't get it. The complete waste of time I was and still am referring to is the reproduction of the full print out of information from the RIF. It needlessly wastes space on this forum. Also, the information from the JFK online database is severely out of date with the current condition of the entire JFK Records Collection. Things have been released in one of three ways, open in full, postponed in part, or postponed in full, and just shoved into the JFK Records Collection often with little or no updating at all to the online JFK database. It's not the strategy of focusing on the Postponed In Full documents that is the problem, it's the tactic currently being used that I find fault with. I don't understand why FOIA requests are even relevant. FOIA is horrible has been horrible for years. That's why John Newman was excited about the JFK Act because they were going to have to let stuff go in buckets and then truck loads. Making FOIA requests public and their outcomes public is really a separate issue from the JFK Act and the JFK Records Collection. You were the one going on and on about there being these 1,700 plus CIA documents that were being withheld in full. I have asked repeatedly for this list of RIFs. Instead of sharing that info, if indeed you do have such a list, you've done nothing with it. Give me that list and I'll do something with it. If you have it electronically, just email it to me. What should be going on here is the sharing of information. There should just be a list of RIFs with the agency numbers of documents postponed in full on a website or a blog. I don't need anything more than that. Just two columns, one for the RIF number, if there is one, and often with CIA documents in particular there really isn't one, and the agency file number. That's it. Then take that list and cross check it with every thing the ARRB published in the Federal Register. Then cross reference that with the Mary Ferrell Foundation. Then you go into Archives II and see if indeed every document on that list is indeed Postponed in Full. If so, record what it says about why it is postponed in full and when if any date is given for release. Or, maybe, just maybe the info in the stuff the ARRB published will tell you that such and such a document should have been released in full by now, and should have been so, perhaps years ago. That's how to do this properly. All of this information could be and should be shared. The hard work of physically going to Archives II and checking the true status of the documents could be divided up among people who will go to Archives II when they can. My idea is a better approach. You're getting information from 3 sources, not 1, and you're going into Archives II with all the information there is and checking to see if the documents on your PIF list are indeed postponed in full. This involves checking the documents one by one. And even if you confirm they are PIF I have another idea that might work to find them open in full. Bottom line is, you don't know, or don't want to learn, how to do this properly. One of us has a track record of doing exactly this kind of work properly. And one of us doesn't.

Folks, Honestly, this is a complete waste of time. Going into the JFK online database and finding documents that have been postponed in full there and then reproducing the full text image you get from that here is a huge waste of space for this forum. Let me tell you why. The Archives II people have not been updating that system, at all. You're only seeing what was initially put in there. I don't think there's ever been any update to it at all. To do so was not seen as a priority. They have cut the staff down a lot. There is no public spotlight on them so they get away with doing this. You should really have all the notices that the ARRB published in the Federal Register regarding document releases. Final Determinations for some changed during the lifetime of the ARRB and were so noted in the published notices in the Federal Register. The ARRB made some decisions to open in full documents after they sunset, leaving to NARA to follow up on that. They often didn't bother. Sometimes they did. For example, how many people went into Archives II with the Federal Register notices in hand providing the information that such and such document was to be opened in full sometime after the ARRB sunset, like in 2005? And asked the JFK staff go get them please? I'd wager not many. There's been a lot of talk from Bill Kelly and others of this 1% of the JFK documents still being withheld based on what a now former member of the National Declassification Center said at a public hearing. There has been mentioned on forums and within the JFK assassination research community a list of over 1,000 documents currently listed as postponed in full - PIF. I have asked Archives II, the NDC, and BIll Kelly to get such a list of RIF numbers for these documents to no avail. What should be posted on here is just a plain list of RIF numbers, with, if possible the agency number. That would be helpful. We can go on our own to the JFK online database for more information on a specific document, to see what such and such RIF number was all about, but I'm telling you, from years of experience, that that thing is hopelessly outdated, and unreliable. Every RIF number listed in this thread should be cross checked against what was published by the ARRB in The Federal Register. And you should cross check with the Mary Ferrell Foundation. You're only arming yourself with a fragment of the necessary info you need to know whether or not a document is still PIF. And if you go to Archives II in person you may be pleasantly surprised to find it open. It's not necessarily so that a document listed as PIF at one point, still is. I think they are just waiting until 2017 and then they will release everything they can. Everything that an agency won't object to being released. Joe Backes

Bravo. Well Done, Mr. Lane. Congratulations to Dr. Wecht.

Typical. Even the polite police defenders of Ralph Cinque cannot be bothered to do the homework and learn what nonsensical garbage Ralphie boy, the KING of not bothering to read and do his homework is spinning, even when all Jeffries had to do is review the recent history on this very forum. Go to his site and read that garbage. I mean it. Go. Read. It. http://www.oswald-innocent.com/ All of it. Every Word. This is not a guy saying I think it's Lovelady. No. Read how much photographic alteration he insists is going on in the immediate area of Lovelady. He says there is an entire Addams family of fake characters around Lovelady, there's "Obfuscated Man," and "Black Tie Man," and "Black Hole Man," and "Afro-Woman," whose super power was that she could extend her afro hair to hide White people, and "Fedora Hat Man," and "Super-Woman," holding a child who is "clearly taller than her!" For some reason he has fixated on Ike Altgens 6th photograph. So, if that was Oswald then obviously he wasn’t a shooter, he was innocent. Well, the world is very simple for simpletons. So, Cinque has latched onto this, presenting himself like he’s some kind of new wave Sherlock Holmes. Cinque thinks saying it was Oswald in Altgens all along means SHAZAM he’s solved the whole assassination. We can all stop now. It's solved. All questions now answered, all thanks to Cinque. It’s that dumb. He’s that dumb. And it infuriates me. Why? Because it’s anti-intellectual, anti-science, and anti-fact being presented as though it is the definition of excellence in science and reasoning. He deliberately ignores everything and everyone in the whole history of the case, of 49 years of investigations and research. he has total contempt for any thought or idea that didn't come from his own head. And he has defenders? It’s not Oswald, it really is Billy Nolan Lovelady. Now I went through all of this to the best of my ability and posted the whole origin of this issue on the Education forum. I re-read Weisbergs “Whitewash,” solely looking for information on this Altgens photo and the Oswald/Lovelady issue. I ordered a copy of an obscure book that Weisberg mentioned, "The Kennedy Assassination and the American Public," by Greenberg and Parker (How many of you have this book sitting on your shelf? Hmm?) that told of how a TV station looked at the photo, asked themselves about it, choose not to air their questions, and instead contacted the FBI about it and the investigation into this issue starts. Now there is also an article in a New York newspaper. I went to the NYS library in Albany and got the entire article. Part of it is a WC exhibit. I went through all of it. Now this is primary, basic research that anyone can do, even you Jeffries, but Cinque can’t be bothered to do. It’s not a personal choice he's advocating. It’s not, I think this, you think that. It’s more than that. It’s not, hey, look at the Altgens photo and tell me do you think this figure here in the doorway, seeming to be leaning out and looking at the limo as the shots are fired, does it look like Oswald or Lovelady to you? No, no, no, no, no. This is way more than that, far-and-away more stupid beyond that. Fetzer and Cinque, especially Cinque, not only believe that it is indeed Oswald, which would be one thing, but they believe that the image has been MASSIVELY altered to make the figure look like Oswald. That there is this amalgamation of the face, like a bizarre game of Mr. Potato Head, using other faces from other people in Altgens, and part of Lovelady's face from his wedding, as though the conspirators had this photo ready to go, to use it, prior to the assassination, because they knew, prior to the assassination, exactly what Altgens 6th photo would look like and what they'd need to fake and to get it done in 30 minutes And here’s where we enter wacko-ville. Now stop giving idiocy a chance, Jeffries. The know nothings do not have something important to say. The Problem of the Uneducated Mind Some people who are uneducated, or for whatever reason have some kind of learning impairment, maybe they have one and it was never diagnosed, whatever is going on between their ears, these people turn the process of learning into a confrontation. For them learning is a status game. They will not admit they are having trouble understanding something and in a defense mechanism they project their ignorance onto the person who is trying to help them in understanding something. They project their ignorance, trying to use it as a bludgeon in an argumentative situation, that you, the one who is educated, and can understand simple things; you are the problem, not them. Nothing is wrong with them. Nothing is ever wrong with them. None of the beliefs or conclusions they have are ever wrong. Anything they can’t understand is the result of some external problem, of someone not “respecting” them or challenging their status or perceived status. They feel threatened and react in a way to gain a higher status to this person they perceive only as being confrontational to them by any way they can to avoid recognizing the problem is internal, that they lack either a skill or some knowledge. He doesn’t know a damn thing about the JFK assassination or photography and makes stuff up. He doesn’t know anything about the physical process of photography in 1963, of lenses, shutter speeds, film emulsion, make and model of various cameras, the difference between film and still photography. His conclusions are clearly the ravings of an uneducated man. He’s been booted off every known JFK assassination forum, INCLUDING THIS ONE. Why does he persist? Because to him, he’s championing the idea that there was a conspiracy in the JFK assassination, and that Oswald was innocent. And like the scoundrel whose last place of refuge is the American flag then for him the cloak of being this advocate, this flag bearer for conspiracy is supposed to wash away or distract from the bat-xxxx crazy claims. This is the case with “Dr.” Ralph Cinque. So, instead of doing any reading or any learning Cinque just repeats his nonsense. If you say 2 + 2 = 5.896 long enough, then it will. So, lets’ examine his stuff. Cinque thinks that the Altgens photo was altered to make people think that “Doorway Man,” and I’m going to refer to him as this when Cinque gets goofy about the figure. The guy is Billy Nolan Lovelady, period. No matter what Cinque says its Lovelady. Please keep that in mind. So, people have tried to tell both Cinque and Fetzer that there is a pretty solid chain of possession with Ike Altgens photographs. They won’t listen. The fact that the Altgens photograph was always in the custody of Altgens and then put onto the AP wires within 30 minutes of the assassination means nothing to these idiots. No, somehow the Altgens photo was intercepted and massively faked, all within that 30 minute time frame. Is that really reasonable to you, Jeffries? And Cinque has gone on to insist that Lovelady as seen in color, in profile, in the Martins film is a fake too. Was the whole TSBD a fake? Was it really the Empire State building in disguise? Was all of Dealey Plaza a fake? Was it really the Grand Canyon in disguise? Cinque claims Lovelady as seen in a still photo from the Charles Buck film is a fake inserted into the Charles Buck film. He has at various points claimed that this Lovelady is a “midget” that the others are all actors. He also said that this Lovelady was “DeNiro Lovelady.” Cinque has claimed that this was done to a film always in the possession of a local TV camera crew and which was aired that weekend! That the “actors,” were pixilated into the film, a process that did not exist in 1963! That the single frame he found somewhere on the internet was FAKED and inserted into the film. Think how stupid that is. He knows nothing about film or that 24 frames per second will reproduce motion. No, to him, they went to great effort to fake ONE film frame. Do you really want to defend this Jeffries? Now people on the Education Forum told Cinque where he can see the entire Charles Buck film. I showed him where we all can see it in a DVD that the 6th floor sells. He doesn’t listen. He’s in his own bubble. And he’s acting now that he’s a victim. People who KNOW things are his "detractors." His unending garbage makes people, like me, lose their cool, and he then pretends he's a victim. It's called being an agent provocateur. It's the oldest game in this case. And you fell for it Jeffires. If you like Cinque, good luck with that Bromance. Joseph Backes

Whatever Pat. Well, that seems to be the NAME of the game. Don't name the individuals at the OIC and your page stays up. So, let's see if we can get more "likes" than them, which is what they are really afraid of. BTW, if you create a page, for whatever reason, you can even have several pages that you administer, and from each and every one of them you can LIKE, whatever, so really all of you know who's likes could merely be him liking himself, which is ironic as, in a way, that's what we all want him to do.

FWIW, the latest incarnation of The Oswald Innocence Campaign is a Fraud is at http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Oswald-Innocence-Campaign-is-a-Fraud/250544825071988?ref=hl Please drop by and LIKE it, if it's still up. Joe

OH, BTW, i have a new blog - http://www.ralphcinq...h.blogspot.com/ And it just so happens to have a Facebook LIKE button at the bottom. So, you can like it to your heart's content, and the thing can't do squat about it. Joe

Can you see the photo I attached? I'm having a little computer difficulty. Do such photos have to be under 1k in size or something? BTW, the little swine seems to have a direct line to someone at Facebook, so whenever I mention his name on that site, some swine yells, "Sir, Yes Sir!" And deletes my site. It's happened 4 times so far. So, depending on if I'm sleeping or at work, later that same day I will put it back up. As long as I don't directly name the pig then the site seems to stay up.

This is a member of the Oswald Innocence Campaign. Oh, that's right I can mention the SOB's name here, the mouse fart that answers to the name, Ralph Cinque. Some of them think they can resurrect the idea that the man in the doorway looking at the presidential limousine from the steps of the TSBD really is Oswald. One of their ideas is to make an identification based upon this man's clothing, whether or not he is wearing a crew cut T-shirt or a V neck T-shirt is important to them. This area is partially in shadow in Altgens 6. This is caused by the sun hitting the chin of the man in question ( Billy Nolan Lovelady, not Lee Harvey Oswald ) and creating a shadow which falls upon his T-shirt, thus obscuring the ability to ascertain what kind of T-shirt it was. So, these people think they can recreate the circumstances captured in Altgens photo. So, it would help to get someone who looked like the figure in question. They don't, one of them is far too vain for that. He stands in for this "Doorway Man." He looks nothing like the man in question, so his chin is obviously different, his height is different, he is not positioning his body in the correct stance that "Doorway Man," was seen to be in Altgens 6, making the whole experiment moot. Not only that, but this particular fool cannot get his face into the sunlight to begin with, which also makes the experiment completely pointless. Now, you can clearly, clearly see his face is half in the shadow caused by the proscenium arch of the TSBD entranceway. It's my favorite photo of their whole project and proves, pun intended, beyond a SHADOW of a doubt that they are incompetent idiots. Attached photos have to be under 11K? Are you s**ting me? Well, I had to crop it to get it under 11K.

I'm with you brother. File it fast. I'm telling you BELO has got deep pockets. An "Occupy" movement approach will not work. They will just slaughter any such attempt and then get mad if any pepper spray or blood got near them and go even more beserk. Can you believe this ploy, that the City of Dallas gave the 6th floor a permit to control the whole of Dealey Plaza for a week, which does not really exist, no one can get such a permit at all, and then say with a straight face that the 6th floor "gave" it back to the City of Dallas, like this was some kind of sacrificial play? Unbelievable.

Hello, A lot of articles on the plans for the 50th anniversary are on my blog. www.justiceforkennedy.blogspot.com - plus some snarky commentary. Also, please visit and hit the LIKE button on my Facebook site http://www.facebook.com/TheOswaldInnocenceCampaignIsAFraud Thank you, Joe Backes

If you're on Facebook, I have a The "Oswald Innocence Campaign" is a Fraud page. Please visit it and hit the Like button if you'd be so kind. Thank you. The Eternal Idiot was spotted in Dealey Plaza this weekend. Supposedly he thinks he has recreated the Altgens photo. Get ready for the comedy festival. Joe

Good for you Greg! Fetzer and Cinque need to be removed from JFK assassination research as much as humanly possible.

Well, it's clear I have to add Greg Parker to my ignore list. 2,700 plus pages of RFK's CUBA papers MUST be discussed in one and only one thread because Greg Parker says so. God forbid there should be more than one discussion about 2,700 pages of materials. Why not combine all threads and for that matter all JFK forums together? Let's have only one website about JFK too. Parker is like those Tea Party morons who are still complaining about how many pages the "Obamacare" bill was.

Mr. Colby, You should practive what you preach. You criticize Jim DiEugenio for referring to Fitzgerald letters without giving a link to them while seeming to heap praise upon a newspaper article which also fails to provide links to the documents it talks about. Now there’s a whole lot of stupid things being said about the documents in these RFK CUBA papers. And a whole mess of stupid crap being said about RFK. The number one implication is that if the document is in RFK’s papers then that means the idea(s) mentioned in them are RFK’s. An ignorant press is being spoonfed total BS. The idea that the CIA hired the mob to try to whack Castro is a bit old. That’s at least early 1970’s Rockefeller Commission stuff. But, no mention is made of this. No effort to compare and contrast this “new” document in the RFK papers to the old story. No one questioned it in the media. No one brought up the old story in the event at the JFK Library today about the 50th anniversary of the Cuban Missile Crisis. Nothing. There’s this unspoken notion that if the idea in the document is in the RFK papers then the idea was RFK’s. That’s the implication. It’s not so. Yet, these esteemed historians and lazy, friendly media types are putting that notion out there. They are also highlighting the fact that it’s “unusual” for an Attorney General to have access and be involved in national security matters of this type, supervising covert ops, reading records about covert ops, etc., as though RFK is this power mad lose cannon when the reality of why JFK tasked RFK to do this stuff was because JFK didn’t trust the military, or the intelligence agencies after the Bay of Pigs. “Kennedy biographer Larry Tye said “the documents show that long after the Bay of Pigs and missile crisis Bobby continued playing CIA chief, counterinsurgency boss, and chief provocateur.” Well, D’uh, new wunderkind Larry Tye. We don’t need new documents to tell us this. Actual historians knew this and know why. Now, let’s look at this story that’s gotten a lot of play: “A CIA document outlining a Mafia-connected plan to assassinate Cuban leader Fidel Castro for $150,000 is among thousands of Robert F. Kennedy documents made public Thursday, just days before the 50th anniversary of the Cuban missile crisis. “In the 1964 plan, the mob and "patriotic Cuban exiles" eventually settled on a payment of $100,000 for assassinating Castro, $20,000 for his brother Raúl and $20,000 for revolutionary Ernesto "Che" Guevara, plus $2,500 for expenses.” Now there’s a lot to be suspicious of here. First of all, what’s going on with the price? Was the Mob having a sale on murder-for-hire hits that week? If you say ‘Pauley sent me,’ you get $50,000 off the retail price? And the date, 1964, 1964! After JFK’s assassination RFK, I want to repeat that, RFK, not the CIA, no, RFK is promoting screwball schemes of using the Mob, actually hiring and paying them to whack Castro. And who is RFK supposed to be pitching these ideas too? LBJ? Does this make any sense at all? RFK and LBJ hated each other. This document was not reproduced along with the article, nor is it given a hotlink on the web. You want to guess why? Joe

"Several days too late?" Excuse me? Is that all an Education forum can do? Is the purpose of this forum merely to facilitate a race to see who can copy and paste a link to a news story the fastest? These RFK papers deserve better than that. It's a shame they were kept hidden and away from the public, and it's even worse that they are released on a Thursday when the JFK Library was planning a conference on the 50th anniversary of the Cuban Missile Crisis for the following Sunday. This gives the public 3 days to look at them before this conference. Mr. Kornbluh and Mr. Tye may have had early access to them. And the media may be bored with the Cuban Missile Crisis or these papers, or RFK, or the Kennedys in general. But, I'm not. I was disappointed that it was a one day conference. And no one from the audience got to ask anyone on any panel any question. There really was no way to properly incorporate these new documents into our understanding of the Cuban Missile Crisis. I was hoping they would all be on a CD or DVD scanned in .pdf and given away with a proper program. But, they are scanned and online. And they scanned them in color too! Now, the thing to do is fight the redactions and pink Withdrawal Sheets and get them really and truly declassified.

I'm inclined to agree with you Jim. There's a thing at the JFK Library tomorrow on the 50th anniversary of the Cuban Missile Crisis. If Kornbluh is there I'll ask him about this. I'm wondering which document, or documents in this release makes him think Operation Mongoose, or something like it, was going on in 1963. Apparently, it's this, The Boston Globe article mentioned "...the documents show that months after the United States vowed publicly it would not try to remove Castro, RFK presided over a secret meeting on May 14, 1963, in the White House Situation Room to discuss potential opportunities to take stronger action in Cuba. One possibility involved exposing US spy planes to enemy fire in an attempt to provoke an incident for political purposes." It's not exactly Mongoose but something seems to have been going on.

In an article in the Boston Globe entitled "In RFK's Cuba papers a new glimpse of power and pitfalls, which is also on my blog, Peter Kornbluh, of the National Security Archive said, "... the initial covert efforts Kennedy oversaw to remove Castro — collectively called Operation Mongoose — were halted after the missile crisis but were revived in 1963. “The Cuban exiles are in some way reporting to Robert Kennedy,” he said. Love to get folks opinion on this. Joe Backes