• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

‘An outrage against democracy’: JFK's nephews urge Biden to reveal assassination records

Should all documents pertaining to the JFK assassination be released to the public?

  • Yes

    Votes: 16 100.0%
  • No

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Don't Know/Undecided

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    16

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
‘An outrage against democracy’: JFK's nephews urge Biden to reveal assassination records (msn.com)

Two nephews of John F. Kennedy are calling on the Biden administration to release the final trove of secret documents on the 1963 assassination of the former president.

The records were scheduled to be made public Tuesday, but the White House announced late Friday night that it would delay their publication until at least Dec. 15 — and perhaps longer if President Joe Biden determines it’s in the nation’s best interest to keep them confidential.

“It’s an outrage. It’s an outrage against American democracy. We’re not supposed to have secret governments within the government,” Robert F. Kennedy Jr. told POLITICO. “How the hell is it 58 years later, and what in the world could justify not releasing these documents?”

His cousin, former Rhode Island Rep. Patrick Kennedy, said the records should be released not because of his family, but because American citizens have a right to know about “something that left such a scar in this nation’s soul that lost not only a president but a promise of a brighter future.”

“I think for the good of the country, everything has to be put out there so there’s greater understanding of our history,” Patrick Kennedy said.

The documents were set to be declassified in 2017, but President Donald Trump postponed the release for four years.

Biden’s decision to continue Trump’s policy of shielding the records came as a surprise to historians and experts on the assassination because he had served in the U.S. Senate when the John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992 passed unanimously in Congress. That act, passed in response to questions raised by the 1991 Oliver Stone film “JFK,” set up an independent review board to collect all government files that might have bearing on the assassination and make them public. Most records were released between 1994 and 1998. Only the most se nsitive classified documents remain confidential.

Biden was first elected to the Senate nearly a decade after Kennedy’s assassination and campaigned with former Sen. Ted Kennedy, the late president’s brother and the father of Patrick Kennedy, as a youthful Irish-American kindred spirit to the political dynasty.

The White House declined to comment on the record, issuing a background statement saying that “the National Archives advised that their review of classified material was severely hampered by COVID-19 since classified material cannot be reviewed remotely and asked for more time.” The coronavirus first hit the U.S. in early 2020, more than 27 years after the JFK Records Act passed and more than 56 years after Kennedy was shot on Nov. 22, 1963, in Dallas.

Pointing to the presidential memorandum it released late Friday, the White House promised in a written statement that the “public will have access to a tranche of previously withheld records and redacted information withheld in previously released records” and that the “Biden Administration is setting up a whole-of government effort to ensure the maximum possible disclosure of information by the end of 2022.” The president’s memo also directs the National Archives to come up with a plan to digitize the entire collection of documents, more than 300,000 records.

A spokesperson for Trump declined to comment about why he delayed the full release of the records in 2017 after indicating he intended to make them public.

Among other unanswered questions, the records could shed light on whether a Central Intelligence Agency operative named Bill Harvey mysteriously traveled from Rome to Dallas before the assassination as well as the agency’s role in plots to kill Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, its surveillance techniques.

An overwhelming majority of the 15,000 records in question are from the CIA and, to a lesser extent, the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Portions of them have been released with single words or entire pages blacked out, according to the National Archives.

If the records are ever released, they probably would not reveal the identity of other potential killers of Kennedy. Robert F. Kennedy Sr., brother of the president and namesake of the son who spoke with POLITICO, did not believe the official narrative of the assassination, said historian David Talbot, author of “Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years” and “The Devil’s Chessboard.”

“RFK was the first JFK ‘conspiracy theorist,’ the attorney general of the United States,” Talbot said. “Any serious journalist or historian who looks at this seriously comes to the same conclusion: that Lee Harvey Oswald was what he said he was, ‘a patsy,’ and that the Warren Commission was an effort to cover up the crime, not investigate the crime in an honest way.”

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. concurred with his father’s belief that his uncle was assassinated as part of a broader conspiracy. Kennedy, a controversial figure in his family because of his anti-vaccine advocacy, also said he did not believe that Sirhan Sirhan killed his father, putting him at odds with his siblings and other relatives.

Both he and Patrick Kennedy said their family had shied away from discussing the JFK assassination and related matters because it was too painful, even to this day.

Patrick Kennedy declined to comment on whether he believed the official story of the assassination. He said he wasn’t sure the documents would be released Dec. 15, but he ultimately hopes that Biden will do the right thing and make them public. He also described the president as someone “who loves my family, and this country, and has a heart that’s full of compassion and love.”

“We’re living in a time of a lot of conspiracy theories. There is a tendency to distrust government in general,” he said. “There’s a whole lot of bureaucratic obfuscation. Every agency needs to exercise their own right to redact certain portions [of the records] which you know is what fuels the whole conspiracy theory.”

I think the documents should be released.

But even then, the last few times they released a bunch of documents, many were redacted with whole pages blacked out.

The Church Committee in 1978 suggested the possibility of a conspiracy.
 

SomeRandom

Still learning to be wise
Staff member
Premium Member
In all honesty I guess I had assumed the documents were already available. But now that I think of it, I remember in High School during my modern history class one assessment was to try to “solve” the assassination of JFK
(more about teaching research techniques and how to properly use primary/secondary sources than anything else.)
Naive young me was flabbergasted that there was so little resources available. Given how infamous the event is.

Though iirc I managed to get a B+ lol
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.

exchemist

Veteran Member
‘An outrage against democracy’: JFK's nephews urge Biden to reveal assassination records (msn.com)









I think the documents should be released.

But even then, the last few times they released a bunch of documents, many were redacted with whole pages blacked out.

The Church Committee in 1978 suggested the possibility of a conspiracy.
We don't know what the reasons are for proceeding carefully. It could be that the records throw unsubstantiated - libellous? - suspicion upon people or organisations. Or it could be that aspects of the personal behaviour of JFK might be revealed which would be embarrassing. Or that certain methods of state security would be compromised. Or something else. It seems rather unlikely that Biden, of all people, would seek to hide anything about this improperly. If we've waited this long, a few more months is neither here nor there, surely?
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
If we've waited this long, a few more months is neither here nor there, surely?
That would be an argument if it were the first delay or the second. But when it seems that the delays are going to be eternal ...
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
That's a slippery slope. Next you'd call on revealing who really was behind 9/11.

Well, I'm a big believer in government transparency. Many people speak of having "freedom" and "democracy," yet certain elements of our government have a culture of top secrecy and bureaucratic obfuscation, which seems to be strangely accepted by large segments of the population.

We've had such things exposed by people like Ellsberg and Snowden, along with other whistleblowers who have revealed government malfeasance. Some people call them "heroes," while others call them "traitors."
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
No, it was the Jews.
(I have just as much proof as you do.)

Oh...wait...was it both?
Are they the same?
The info must be released!
Enquiring minds need to know.
It's a valid theory.

Both Kennedy's posed a threat to the federal reserve and bankers in general. A common theme.

I think its the most likely out of all the theories so far.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
We don't know what the reasons are for proceeding carefully. It could be that the records throw unsubstantiated - libellous? - suspicion upon people or organisations. Or it could be that aspects of the personal behaviour of JFK might be revealed which would be embarrassing. Or that certain methods of state security would be compromised. Or something else. It seems rather unlikely that Biden, of all people, would seek to hide anything about this improperly. If we've waited this long, a few more months is neither here nor there, surely?

Well, sure, waiting a few more months isn't really a huge deal, assuming that they actually do end up releasing the documents. They've already released many documents, some of which were redacted and had sections blacked out anyway.

There's already been a great deal of suspicion upon the U.S. government and various agencies within it, and yet, they still seem to endure and continue unabated. The underside of JFK's character (womanizing, alleged mob ties) has already been exposed and laid bare to some extent, which is plenty embarrassing enough. Not sure how much more embarrassed he could be at this point.

As for methods of state security being compromised, that might be a practical reason for keeping some things secret. I'm not advocating that the government release everything. If there's a legitimate national security reason, then that's one thing. But if it's just politicians trying to avoid embarrassment, that's yet another thing.

I've always been somewhat agnostic about the conspiracy theories, although there are a lot of people who have put a lot of time and energy into studying and researching this event. JFK almost seems like the Granddaddy of conspiracy theories in a way. Prior to that, especially in the late 1940s and into the 50s, there was a lot more naiveite and trust in the government, as we had faith in the idea that we were the heroes and the good guys fighting against the evil communists who were trying to take over the world. That faith started to erode and break down during the 60s and into the 70s. Conspiracy theories started to become more and more prevalent and given consideration by wider audiences.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
Well, sure, waiting a few more months isn't really a huge deal, assuming that they actually do end up releasing the documents. They've already released many documents, some of which were redacted and had sections blacked out anyway.

There's already been a great deal of suspicion upon the U.S. government and various agencies within it, and yet, they still seem to endure and continue unabated. The underside of JFK's character (womanizing, alleged mob ties) has already been exposed and laid bare to some extent, which is plenty embarrassing enough. Not sure how much more embarrassed he could be at this point.

As for methods of state security being compromised, that might be a practical reason for keeping some things secret. I'm not advocating that the government release everything. If there's a legitimate national security reason, then that's one thing. But if it's just politicians trying to avoid embarrassment, that's yet another thing.

I've always been somewhat agnostic about the conspiracy theories, although there are a lot of people who have put a lot of time and energy into studying and researching this event. JFK almost seems like the Granddaddy of conspiracy theories in a way. Prior to that, especially in the late 1940s and into the 50s, there was a lot more naiveite and trust in the government, as we had faith in the idea that we were the heroes and the good guys fighting against the evil communists who were trying to take over the world. That faith started to erode and break down during the 60s and into the 70s. Conspiracy theories started to become more and more prevalent and given consideration by wider audiences.
The US seems always to have had a predilection for conspiracy theories. McCarthy? Salem witches?
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
It's a valid theory.

Both Kennedy's posed a threat to the federal reserve and bankers in general. A common theme.

I think its the most likely out of all the theories so far.

I've heard all kinds of theories, and there were plenty of those who apparently had reason to hate Kennedy.

The KKK was still around back then, and Kennedy's stance on civil rights clearly irritated them to a great degree.

Kennedy was rumored to have Mob ties, so there's a theory that the Mob might have done it.

The militarists and war hawks thought he was too soft on the communists.

I've also heard the theory that Kennedy wanted to break up the CIA, which would undermine the power they currently held, so that could have been a motive for the CIA wanting to get rid of him.

Another theory is that it was either the Soviets or Cubans behind the assassination, coupled with the idea that the U.S. authorities covered it up because they feared it would lead to a war. With the Cuban Missile Crisis still fresh in most people's minds, I can see where people might be persuaded to keep silent if the alternative was an all-out nuclear war. Less than a year later, Khrushchev was removed from power and put out to pasture.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
The US seems always to have had a predilection for conspiracy theories. McCarthy? Salem witches?

Well, the Salem witch trials were what we brought over from the Mother Country, so it's not something we invented here.

McCarthy? Yes, he's more of the homegrown Red Scare variety, but since McCarthy was a functionary of government and viewed as a devout lover of America, he was trusted on that basis, which gave him the power he so wantonly abused.

Some conspiracy theories tend to go way overboard, although there are others who may point out instances where it can be explained through the idea that they may have done the wrong things for the right reasons. When people saw and heard revelations about MK Ultra, radiation experiments on servicemen, Bay of Pigs, COINTELPRO, Vietnam, Pentagon Papers, Watergate, and other questionable activities, some apologists believed that they had to do that to protect America from its enemies. A "necessary evil," so to speak. These activities seem reflective of and quite likely motivated by the xenophobic paranoia exhibited by men such as McCarthy. McCarthy was a drunken buffoon who went out like a clown, but his fellow travelers like Nixon and Hoover had a bit more finesse and political savvy (even though they would also be ultimately exposed as paranoid and morally compromised).

I've heard a lot of conspiracy theories over the course of my life, although what started off as a healthy skepticism of government and an honest desire to question authority has turned into a morass of strange absurdities. I remember someone saying that JFK's assassination was the work of Satan.

It's kind of bizarre, in a way. The ultra-paranoia of our government over the course of generations has seemingly had an effect on the public, which has also become somewhat paranoid as well. Fear is a powerful weapon which politicians are able to use. But fear, like fire, can be misused or get out of control. I think that's what we're seeing today.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
I've heard all kinds of theories, and there were plenty of those who apparently had reason to hate Kennedy.

The KKK was still around back then, and Kennedy's stance on civil rights clearly irritated them to a great degree.

Kennedy was rumored to have Mob ties, so there's a theory that the Mob might have done it.

The militarists and war hawks thought he was too soft on the communists.

I've also heard the theory that Kennedy wanted to break up the CIA, which would undermine the power they currently held, so that could have been a motive for the CIA wanting to get rid of him.

Another theory is that it was either the Soviets or Cubans behind the assassination, coupled with the idea that the U.S. authorities covered it up because they feared it would lead to a war. With the Cuban Missile Crisis still fresh in most people's minds, I can see where people might be persuaded to keep silent if the alternative was an all-out nuclear war. Less than a year later, Khrushchev was removed from power and put out to pasture.
With that number of powerful enemies it was almost inevitable that he was removed from office. The real question is still which combination of those were participants in the events.
My money is on the bankster in the background and the CIA as the executive and LBJ was in it to control the aftermath.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
No, it was the Jews.
(I have just as much proof as you do.)

Oh...wait...was it both?
Are they the same?
The info must be released!
Enquiring minds need to know.

It was Gidney and Cloyd, the Moon Men. Kennedy stepped into it when he said he wanted to send a man to the Moon, and that did not suit the Moon Men or their government.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
With that number of powerful enemies it was almost inevitable that he was removed from office. The real question is still which combination of those were participants in the events.
My money is on the bankster in the background and the CIA as the executive and LBJ was in it to control the aftermath.
You're part of the continued cover-up.
Trying to distract us with one conspiracy
in order to hide the other. It's obvious.
 

Bodie

Member
I voted yes but I assume that whatever they release, if they ever release it will be whatever they want us to see and not the truth if it implicates our own agencies, it's the C.I.A. who are professional liars (at least to the general population). We already know the Kennedy family were knee deep and in bed with organized crime figures as well as that the CIA hired them out to do their dirty work at times.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
With that number of powerful enemies it was almost inevitable that he was removed from office. The real question is still which combination of those were participants in the events.
My money is on the bankster in the background and the CIA as the executive and LBJ was in it to control the aftermath.

At this point, I would say that any of the above might be possible, but there's a lot of gaps and unanswered questions.

It could have been some kind of rogue operation, that the real "Powers That Be" didn't actually want Kennedy dead, but they may have been in a position where they were politically compromised and had to go along with a cover up.

The story of Oswald has always been kind of an enigma, begging the question why a supposed leftist/communist would want to assassinate a US president who was considered soft on communism. Castro should have been thankful Kennedy was elected. If Nixon was elected in 1960, the Bay of Pigs might have had a different result. Communists were the least likely suspects and had less of a reason to want Kennedy dead than any of the other aforementioned factions.

And we're supposed to believe that a mobbed-up nightclub owner was so heartbroken and devastated by JFK's assassination that he just had to go down and shoot the presumed assassin? What Jack Ruby believed to be a "noble act" was actually a grave disservice to the American public and to the cause of justice.
 
Top