Michaleen Kilroy

And thank you Michael Clark for transcribing! Looks even more damning when the words are clear and digital.

Yeah, I've always felt that way as well. To my recollection, the two ladies and their kids transported LHO's rifle "in a blanket" in the Paine family station wagon without ever knowing there was a rifle in the blanket? Does everyone carry a blanket so gingerly when they're just moving "stuff." My guess - it wasn't in there. This entire document is Exhibit A to anyone with a lick of sense that the WR was just a prosecutor's brief and a whitewash, just as Mark Lane and others charged it was. What a terrible disservice to the American people. This was my favorite, Jim: It seems to me that the most honest and the most sensible thing to do given the present state of the record on Oswald's rifle capability would be to write a very short section indicating that there is testimony on both sides of several issues.The commission could then conclude that the best evidence that Oswald could fire his rifle as fast as he did and hit the target is the fact that he did so. LHO doing the shooting is proof he could do the shooting. WTH?!? Goes back to what the Katzenberger memo and what Hoover said: We need to convince the American people of Oswald's sole guilt. Why's that? Shouldn't the first order of business be to determine the truth no matter what the outcome? Infriggincredible.

Reads like fiction from a CTer rather than the musings of a WR lawyer. Wow. Behind the scenes of the cover-up. Essentially if just one of his assertions is true, LHO is exonerated.

It’s actually reassuring to me that a homicide detective still sees the JFK case as open. For someone to pull something off this audacious, I believe they would have to have a lot knowledge in deceiving the authorities and entire populations in political assassinations. That’s one of the reasons the CIA tops the list for me as suspects. Bill Harvey in particular not only hated the Kennedys but studied Russian assassinations throughout the world and knew how they worked. The mob obviously did this as well with local police, judiciary and witnesses as well politicians on occasion. They were less interested in the con staying but knew how to use an assassin in a police uniform, for instance, to fool people during the crime. Didn’t the CIA use a similar scenario to JFK’s murder to kill a Phillipine leader through a Commie patsy who was killed himself quickly following the assassination? And it should be noted that every single CIA agent was given a copy of this book when they came on board: https://www.amazon.com/Big-Story-Confidence-Man/dp/0385495382 This book was also the basis for the movie ‘The Sting.’

Working at the Southern California Community Publishing Group covering Southeast LA actually. I was asked to talk to city luminaries as opposed to average folk. FYI, many represented the last white residents in what had become predominately Latino communities.

When I was 20 I skipped my boring college math class and went to the school library. There I happened upon a book that highlighted the things JFK had said and his proclamations on each of his 1,000 days or so. It was more of a picture book, with a photo from each day and quotes underneath on every page. I didn't know much about JFK other than my Irish Catholic parents loved him, he was assassinated, and he seemed to have been a smart, witty guy - like a lot of my Irish family, actually Reading that book in that library (I read it over the next 3 hours or so), I found that I essentially agreed with every statement and sentiment JFK had made during his administration that was represented. From his first act as president, which I recall was releasing stockpiles of food to the poor, to his comments about the environment and women's rights, JFK seemed to a man ahead of his time whose thoughts foreshadowed many of the issues that would come to the fore in the 1970s. As I started reading more, I realized JFK seemed like one of those leaders in Russia or other autocratic nations whose true history and actions had been "disappeared." He didn't at all fit the narrative the MSM tried to tell about him. The majority of the American public still doesn't have a clue but I think they appreciate his reason and search for peaceful solutions in dangerous times. I've realized that it's not a sentimental cliche to believe the world did change when he died. And today, after doing a fairly intensive study of the assassination literature with a critical eye, I do believe there is a better than 50/50 chance someone engineered a very clever trick in Dealey that day. There was enough Cold War paranoia, naivete, absence of questioning authority, cunning among the intel community and general unity among other factions against Kennedy to pull it off IMO. And the reasons appear to be related to JFK's approach to key foreign policy issues. I do recall conducting interviews with people a few years after reading that book as a local journalist covering the 25th anniversary of the assassination and finding that many people had hated JFK. They wouldn't say it directly but I got many answers like, "Well, I didn't like his policies but I felt sorry for his family." So if there was animus at the citizen level you have to know that it was magnified exponentially in the halls of power. In any case, the reason I come to these forums is to essentially find new information that may help me get to the full truth of the assassination and JFK's presidency. I appreciate anyone else who is on this quest 50+ years later and approaches the subject with honesty and critical thought. I also appreciate anyone who has the time to dig deep into research because I unfortunately do not.

To be honest, the details always seem a bit fuzzy every time I’ve tried to understand it. It seemed like he supported the coup - the Diem bros were terrible leaders - but not the violence. Hard to believe JFK would be that naive though.

As I understand it, Whiitten was removed from the internal investigation by Helms and replaced by Angleton when he felt they had lied to him about LHO and started exploring the Cuban/JMWAVE nexus. He was the only one of the bunch whose career didn’t rise after the assassination and eventually left the agency. So he has my vote as a patriot seeking the truth.

Whitten and Sprauge - the two honest investigators who would’ve got to the bottom of this whole charade if allowed to proceed.

JFK was a reckless rogue with women -and his behavior risked compromising his responsibilities as President, especially sharing a mistress with a mobster. He made a huge mistake with the BoP but that has got a bit more understandable with more context in recent years. And his presidential fitness program is still the most difficult athletic endeavor I ever participated in, and I was a pretty good athlete. So I hold that against him as well. Am I still a cultist/fan man?

I thought the same thing - significant news. I’d like to know who wasn’t connected with US intelligence among LHO’s interactions in ‘63?

‘“It is at a very strategic point in the parade route. Whoever pulled this devious act knew he was picking a key location for his attempt on the president’s life.” Hmmm.... Thanks for posting this, DVP.

I always felt the CIA created the circumstances for Lumumba’s death, like they so often did, before JFK could have a say.

Thanks, Jim. I’ll be checking out the references you provided. Appreciate it. One point I like to make is that I think JFK’s Irish heritage informed his world view. It was pretty obvious which side he was on when you’re talking nationalist rights vs colonialism with regards to Britain and Ireland, IMO. Plus he loved the Irish rebel tunes! But I’m probably revealing too much of my JFK cult perspective.

It gets stranger... from Spartacus: “[Gibson] stated that it was his personal opinion that it would be much more effective to use the FPCC as a cover for intelligence and counter-intelligence purposes...” http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKfairplay.htm Isn’t that what CTers have maintained all along regarding Oswald’s interaction with the ‘subversive grassroots group’ - the FPCC was more like a CIA and FBI front group and commie honey pot? And somehow the future alleged assassin walks across the FPCC’s path and also the CIA-backed DRE within weeks of each other. But of course nobody knew him or paid him any mind. Just another former Marine defector/traitor interacting with groups secretly guided/infiltrated by US intel agencies completely by chance and yet also completely unmolested. Waiting for MSM to put this on the nightly news.... jk

The FPCC was co-founded by a future CIA agent? We already know the FBI had an informant at the top of the organization in ‘63. Were there any actual Castro supporters running it? And the supposed pro-Castro leftist turned spook, Richard Gibson, is still alive at 87. Jefferson Morley has the goods here: http://www.newsweek.com/richard-gibson-cia-spies-james-baldwin-amiri-baraka-richard-wright-cuba-926428?amp=1&__twitter_impression=true

Jim, curious how the above about JFK’s foreign policy and relationship with the security agencies is wrong.

I’m under the impression Mervyn that you are actually hiding you’re own political bias towards the Kennedys and are unable to have a clear view of the political context of their murders, IMHO. I could be wrong.

Thanks for the photos, Dave. l don’t believe everything every CTer ever said, but I do know this - much of the accusations they originally made have turned out to be true, e.g.: - JFK was at odds with his national security agencies on a variety of issues, from a ‘winnable’ nuclear war against Russia to Cuba, Laos and Vietnam. He was not a ‘normal’ war-mongering president on communism. And there was venom against him by some for that. - The CIA was involved with Oswald through their agents in the DRE. We don’t know how closely because the CIA lied and continues to obstruct on the evidence and won’t come clean on it. - The WC and to some degree the HSCA were not thorough, honest investigations, hampered by intel agencies lying and obstructing justice. Not to mention Cold War tensions the WC faced and the sabotage of Sprague - a truly independent prosecutor - with the HSCA. - The highest echelons of the CIA - Helms and Angleton - were lying about what they knew about the DRE and Oswald before the assassination, and kept quiet when Joannides fooled Congress. - Not that I think he was involved but Clay Shaw did lie about being connected with the CIA. Not absolute proof of conspiracy but plenty to keep an open mind on the case.

Well, you got the last part right i dissgree about your assessment of JFK. I think the Camelot crap actually trivializes and distracts from what a unique president he was in modern times. For instance, he understood nationalist movements for what they were - people yearning for freedom and self-determination not simply places to stop communist influence. Also, his attempts to end the Cold War a good 25 years before it did are obvious. The test ban treaty was a huge first step in lessening nuclear tension while his call for a joint mission to the Moon with the Russians was out and out radical even to this day. Not sure what you mean by the bimbos and American justice unless you’re talking about Trump’s issues which go far beyond his affairs, IMO.

Contradictions undermining his no conspiracy conclusion abound. For instance, Thomas claims distrust in govt happened because they were ‘covering up’ anything to assure the public Oswald acted alone and the communists didn’t do it. But RFK INSTANTLY suspected the Cuban/CIA nexus, and he was better informed than most on that front.. Then Thomas admits JFK did separate himself from his national security state following the BoP, and the fact that gap only grew is now clearer than ever and could’ve served as a motive behind the assasination with govt plotters using the very real fear of nuclear war to avoid investigation. Also what Thomas doesn’t address is if the intel agencies covered their tracks in the interest of calming the citizenry why the CIA continued to lie and obstruct justice in the case for decades leading up to the present day. Sorry, ain’t buying it. More blinders and ignorance from a MSM journalist on the assassination. He even trots out the condescending and insulting ‘a little man killed a big man’ theory on why thinking adults don’t believe the official story. BTW the reason the American people still love JFK isn’t based on some myth Jackie made up. It comes from the fact that he was a helluva smart guy who had the American people’s best interests at heart and was committed to a creating a peaceful world in a very dangerous time.

Apparently there is ‘stylometry’ software that may be able to help. It’s so strange this was kept secret with no author identified or other context. JFK had been talking disarmament since he became president, just not at this level of detail. Whoever wrote it knew geo-politics well which was JFK’s forte.

No doubt. Interesting that the title resembles JFK’s title for his American University speech, ‘Toward a Strategy of Peace.’

Helluva find, Michael.

Quite a document, Michael. Do you have any background on the context of its creation and purpose? The writing does sound like JFK to me. Explosive really to anyone who understands how radical these ideas are. I can recall supporting a nuclear freeze initiative in the 80s that was considered radical. Can’t imagine how the security state felt about this in the fall of 1963. Was this part of the most recent release of docs? Obviously no national security interest to keep this secret like you say. This was purely to hide JFK‘s intention to end the nuclear arms race.