JFK assassination documents offer surprising lessons about government secrecy -- and Obama's presidency.
Next year will be a half-century since the death of JFK. And the Obama Administration thinks we need to keep secret the records on the matter … a little longer yet.
Believe it or not, more than 50,000 pages of JFK assassination–related documents are being withheld in full. And an untold number of documents have been partially withheld or released with everything interesting blacked out. But why?
Since the government and the big media keep telling us there was no conspiracy and that it was all Lee Harvey Oswald acting on his own, why continue to keep the wraps on?
We don’t have an answer, but in understanding this and any number of other mysteries, we can begin looking for patterns in the way the administration handles information policy.
We Want to Hear from You (But That’s It — We Just Want to Hear from You)
Earlier this year, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) asked, on its online Open Government Forum, for suggestions from the public about what it could do to create greater transparency. The #1 most popular idea? Get those Kennedy records out — before Nov. 22, 2013, the fiftieth anniversary of the Dallas tragedy.
More
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
They're waiting for someone to die off to avoid prosecution.
ReplyDeleteYeah that I think is true. But there were two shooters. I think the driver was the first shooter. If you look at the video, she is going up and to the back of the car as well as the head and sholder of jfk
ReplyDeleteWithholding documents because they will expose the lengths the military complex will take to control the country just like 9/11
ReplyDeleteThey don't want the public to know it was a suicide! Watch the president's left hand carefully.
ReplyDeleteThe truth has never even been contemplated & is not known by anyone involved in the case,past or present.Some have been closer than others,but none have stumbled on to it yet.By definition,full disclosure would suggest the identity of the killer(s).Because the investigators involved,pro or freelance don't have the answers,anything they say has no relevance.
ReplyDeleteI was in Dealey Plaza on Nov. 22, 1963 and distinctly heard three shots from the schoolbook depository which was behind me. The arrangement of the buildings made for some weird echos so I can see why some think there were more shots. I was never interviewed because I was only eleven years old and the detectives told my mother that anyone under twelve was an "unreliable" witness. My mother was interviewed but she can't add more to this now because she died in 2001.
ReplyDeleteThe Gov. knocked him off b/c he exposed that the President's seat was being used to overthrow the United States People. Those Politicians were exposed so they took him out!
ReplyDeleteJim Garrison tried to prove that Clay Shaw was a CIA operative, the evidence was denied by the judge, that Clay Shaw also used the AKA Clay Bertrand, because he had not been read his rights before questioning. After the fact, many years later the governement admitted that Clay Shaw was a CIA operative. Lot of holes in the government version of events.
ReplyDeleteStill close but no cigar.Think disgruntled Secret Service agent who was fired for excessive alcoholism 6 months prior.Use that as your starting point.
ReplyDelete