FOIA: CIA Did JFK
grarpamp at gmail.com
Mon Nov 22 01:17:34 PST 2021
Will The CIA's JFK Assassinated-Related Records Ever Get Released?
Authored by Jacob Hornberger
By this time, it should be sinking into everyone’s consciousness that
the American people are never going to be permitted to see the rest of
the CIA’s 60-year-old secret records relating to the JFK
Yes, I know, President Biden says that the new deadline for disclosure
is December 22, 2022, which just happens to fall after the November
2022 congressional elections. But that’s just like the mechanical
rabbit that is used in dog races — the dogs are never going to catch
that rabbit. And the American people are never going to see those
Don’t forget, after all, that this isn’t the first deadline that has
been set for disclosure. There was the 25-year deadline that was set
back in the 1990s. That deadline came due during the Trump
What happened when that deadline came? It got extended of course.
Trump surrendered to the CIA’s demands for continued secrecy, just as
Biden now has. Every president will do so. The CIA will demand it.
National security depends on it!
Ever since Kennedy was assassinated, there has been a segment of
society that has fallen for the official story — that a lone nut
communist former U.S. Marine shot and killed the president. This
segment has also bought into what has become known as the magic-bullet
theory, which holds that a bullet hit Kennedy in the back of the neck,
exited his throat, broke ribs and a wrist bone in Governor Connally,
lodged in Connally’s thigh, and ended up in virtually pristine,
What this segment of society has never been able to explain is why it
was therefore necessary to shroud the investigation of the
assassination in national-security-state secrecy. In other words, if
the assassination really happened because a lone-nut communist former
U.S. Marine suddenly, without any motive, decided to kill the
president, what in the world would that have to do with “national
security,” no matter was definition is put to that nebulous,
Let’s consider the other alternative, the one set forth in the best
book that has ever been written about the assassination: JFK and the
Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters by James W. Douglass.
Let’s assume that the assassination was a highly sophisticated
regime-change operation to oust a president from office whose
policies, it had been determined, posed a grave threat to national
In other words, consider the principles that led to the U.S.
regime-change operations on both sides of the Kennedy assassination:
Iraq (1953), Guatemala (1954), Cuba (1959-2021), and Chile (1973), and
simply apply them to Kennedy. Ousting the leaders of those countries
was necessary, we are told, because such leaders posed a grave threat
to national security. Let’s assume that that was the case with
Kennedy. (See my article “What If a President Is a Threat to National
Such being the case, wouldn’t the malefactors want to hide any
semblance of incriminating evidence? That just makes sense.
Now, I’m not suggesting that anyone would ever find a written
confession within those still-secret CIA records. Including such a
confession would have been stupid, and the people within the CIA in
1963 were not only not stupid, they were actually very brilliant
people. Many of them were Ivy League graduates who were putting their
brilliant minds toward the study of assassination and cover-up.
Moreover, from the very beginning of the CIA, when it adopted the
power of assassination, there was a strict rule against ever putting
anything about an assassination into writing. That rule would
especially apply to the assassination of a president or prime
But there are so many moving parts to an assassination and its cover
up that it becomes imperative to keep all records secret so that
sharp-minded researchers and investigative reporters are unable to put
individual pieces of the puzzle together.
That’s why national-security state secrecy on what was purported to be
a lone-nut assassination was imperative from the very moment of the
The Kennedy assassination took place in November 1963. In 1991 —
almost 30 years later — Oliver Stone came out with his movie JFK,
which, not surprisingly, created all sorts of controversy. The movie
rejected the official lone-nut/magic-bullet theories of the
assassination and instead posited that the assassination was a highly
sophisticated regime-change operation on the part of the U.S.
What shocked — and actually outraged — a large segment of the American
people was Stone’s disclosure that the national-security establishment
was still keeping its assassination-related records secret.
Why would they do that? It had been 30 years — 3 decades! — since the
assassination. That’s a long time for secrecy in what is purported to
be a lone-nut assassination.
So, a large number of Americans were naturally suspicious. They
demanded that Congress mandate a release of those records. It was one
of those rare instances where the public is able to force Congress to
do something that Congress doesn’t want to do.
The fact that the national-security establishment fiercely opposed
disclosing their assassination-related records to the public makes it
even more remarkable that the JFK Records Act of 1992 was enacted.
Why did President George H.W. Bush, who had served as CIA director,
sign the bill into law? Because Bill Clinton, against whom he was
running for president, came out publicly in favor of the law. Bush was
trapped, politically. He decided he’d better sign the bill into law to
avoid letting Clinton turn it into a campaign issue.
Thousands of records were released, some over the fierce objections of
the Pentagon and the CIA. No, there were no confessions. But there was
a mountain of evidence establishing that the national-security
establishment had conducted a fraudulent autopsy on the president’s
body on the very evening of the assassination. See my two books The
Kennedy Autopsy and The Kennedy Autopsy 2.
There were three unusual aspects of the JFK Records Act.
One was that the Assassination Records Review Board, which was called
into existence to enforce the law, was absolutely prohibited from
investigating any aspect of the Kennedy assassination.
Thus, when the ARRB uncovered the evidence establishing the fraudulent
autopsy, it was not permitted to conduct an extensive investigation
into what it had uncovered.
The other unusual provision was that the CIA and other federal
agencies had the prerogative of keeping some of their records secret
for another 25 years, on grounds of “national security.”
Now, I ask you: If you have committed a criminal act and you know that
the ARRB has already uncovered what you did to commit a fraudulent
autopsy, what evidence are you going to keep secret for another 25
years? Aren’t you going to keep the most incriminating evidence secret
for as long as you can, hopefully forever? Isn’t that just logical?
No, not a confession, but other pieces to the assassination puzzle
that fill in more portions of the regime-change mosaic, such as Lee
Harvey Oswald’s purported trip to Mexico City just before the
assassination, which is still shrouded in mystery and cover-up almost
60 years later.
Another unusual aspect of the JFK Records Act was that it failed to
automatically call the ARRB back into existence when that 25-year
deadline came due. That’s what has enabled the national-security
establishment, especially the CIA, to secure forever extensions for
What are the chances the balance of the records will ever be released
to the American people. Nil. That’s because there is virtually no
chance that Congress will call the ARRB back into existence to enforce
the JFK Records Act. And even if it did, it is a virtual certainty
that the CIA would require any president to veto it.
Only a large public outcry against continued secrecy, similar to what
happened after Oliver Stone’s movie, could change that. Unfortunately,
there is little indication that that is going to happen.
One thing is clear though — the CIA’s need for continued secrecy of
its assassination-related records on the ridiculous ground of
“national security” is about as close to an implicit admission of
guilt as one can get. After all, there is no Fifth Amendment right to
remain silent for the CIA and the rest of the national-security
More information about the cypherpunks