Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

National Archives postpones release of secret CIA documents on JFK assasination

page: 1
12

log in

join

posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 04:36 AM
link   
Fifty years after President Kennedy's assassination, the US government is still holding out on its citizens:



Acquiescing to CIA demands for secrecy, the National Archives announced Wednesday that it will not release 1,171 top-secret Agency documents related to the assassination of President Kennedy in time for the 50th anniversary of JFK’s death in November 2013....Gary Stern, general counsel for the National Archives and Record Administration, said the Archives would not release the records as part of the Obama administration’s ongoing declassification campaign. Stern cited CIA claims that “substantial logistical requirements” prevented their disclosure next year.





The records, requested by the nonprofit Assassination Archives and Research Center (AARC), will remain secret until at least 2017, when the 1992 JFK Records Act mandates public release of all assassination files in the government’s possession.


salon.com

The excuse given is one of substantial logistical requirements. How hard is it to scan 1,171 documents and post them on-line in this day and age? Seems this excuse is being given at the CIA's behest (read the linked article for more on this particular matter). What's so important about US security to keep these records under wraps after 50 years, and why will it be OK then to release them in four more years? Somehow I don't think they will ever be released. Might they be lost before 2017?

The records include 600 pages on David Phillips, the chief of the Agency’s anti-Castro operations in 1963, who oversaw the surveillance of accused assassin Lee Harvey Oswald in Mexico City six weeks before Kennedy was killed. Phillips, as a senior CIA official in 1970, orchestrated the murder of a Chilean general on behalf of the Nixon White House, according to CIA records released via FOIA in 1999. Hmm.

Obama boasts about his supposed "transparent" presidency, which, of course, is anything but that, and now his administraton has kicked this can past his possible second term as War/Financial/Environmental Criminal in Chief. Go figure.

And what could the CIA possibly have to hide regarding the JFK assassination? (Crickets chirping)

In any case, I recommend you all read the article, yourselves, as you aren't going to hear or read about it in the lamestream media.

On a tangential note, why is the Political Conspiracies forum so hard to find? It is not listed (as far as I could ascertain) on the ATS homepage or under the Forums listings. Only found it via a search after I did a search on "JFK assassination" -- speaking of which, I hope this thread isn't redundant, but didn't find anything on this topic in said ATS thread search.




posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 04:45 AM
link   
Why does the CIA believe it has the authority to keep decades old material from the light of day? I guess all of us worker bees don't need to know I guess.



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 04:59 AM
link   
It's preposterous that they are keeping these records sealed so long after the fact. I can't imagine they contain anything that would be a threat to National security. Why the secrecy? What gives them the right to keep this information hidden from us? OP is right, not hard to scan those documents. I'm positive they could find some volunteers to do it.



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 05:06 AM
link   
Probably the same lame excuse as the CIA always uses: "It's in the interest of national security".. ;-)



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 05:22 AM
link   

“substantial logistical requirements” prevented their disclosure next year.
Wait.......What? Maybe I'm not understanding this correctly. Are they stating releasing around 1,200 documents is logistically difficult to do?Edit: The more I think about it, the more it's pissing me off. That's the best excuse the CIA could come up with? They're not even trying anymore. Substantial logistical requirements? Really? No...Really? The American taxpayer covered the losses of the banks in 2008. I'm pretty sure they're more than happy to cover the logistical requirements needed to release this information.
edit on 15-6-2012 by GD21D because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 05:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrInquisitive
The excuse given is one of substantial logistical requirements. How hard is it to scan 1,171 documents and post them on-line in this day and age?

In any case, I recommend you all read the article,



Oh I took the time to read the article, but unlike you I also took the time to read the source of the article - the letter by Gary Stern.

1. The 1171 documents were never part of the November 2013 release, they were always set for 2017 and will be released on that date.

2. The other previous documents have all been released on the previous appointed target dates, or even earlier.

3. The "logistical difficulties" only arose when documents were asked to be released out of the intended order ahead of schedule.

In other words, there is no new postponement of anything at all.
The headline is a sensationalist lie.

edit on 15-6-2012 by alfa1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 06:01 AM
link   
reply to post by alfa1
 
I get what you're saying. But, I don't care if it's '13 or '17 or 2050. I want to know what makes it logistically difficult to do. That was the excuse.EDIT: I also want to ensure we all have a clear understanding of logistics

1 : the aspect of military science dealing with the procurement, maintenance, and transportation of military matériel, facilities, and personnel 2 : the handling of the details of an operation


WEBSTER
edit on 15-6-2012 by GD21D because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 06:07 AM
link   
What if he wasn't really assassinated at all. Maybe he and Marylin Monroe were abducted by aliens and exiled to an area 34 time prison? Their bodies could have been replaced with wax effigies like Julius Caesar.



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 06:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Cauliflower
 


Surely all incriminating evidence has already disappeared. They will just hand over what they want us to see. This is just a smoke screen. Don't get too flustered, we will never know the whole truth.



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 10:14 AM
link   
You and i both know.......(despite the fact you are in denial).....that Kennedy was assassinated by his own goverment agencies, as the opening bid in a coup de etat in America.
The whole focus of American life changed with that shared trauma bond experience, which promted the shadow goverment to bigger and better trauma produced changes to law in this country.
The game is still ongoing, and they cannot afford to let the real information leak .....
I believe that the information will never be revealed until the completion of a revolution and change of goverment, (top to bottom) in the USA.



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Elexio
Probably the same lame excuse as the CIA always uses: "It's in the interest of national security".. ;-)


Gotta protect America from those time traveling terrorists.



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   
Its obvious why they're holding out til 2017, it's so any
important people mentioned in the documents will have been
dead by then, or at least reduced to some babbling invalid.

Generally, they set these really sensitive national security
things with far off dates as to allow those involved to die off
first.

I imagine any 911 material wouldn't be released until 2061
at the minimum if its the really damaging stuff.



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 07:19 PM
link   
Another stupid descision from tptb. It's been fifty years time to open up. This shouldn't be happening it's a blatant knife in the people's back. Don't make us come after you.
edit on 10-04-08 by Beach Bum because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 04:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by alfa1

Oh I took the time to read the article, but unlike you I also took the time to read the source of the article - the letter by Gary Stern.

1. The 1171 documents were never part of the November 2013 release, they were always set for 2017 and will be released on that date.

2. The other previous documents have all been released on the previous appointed target dates, or even earlier.

3. The "logistical difficulties" only arose when documents were asked to be released out of the intended order ahead of schedule.

In other words, there is no new postponement of anything at all.
The headline is a sensationalist lie.

edit on 15-6-2012 by alfa1 because: (no reason given)


I read the letter* in response to your supercilious reply.

*: There's a link to the letter at the original linked article

By law, these records are supposed to be released AT LATEST by 2017. That doesn't mean they can't be released earlier, and the 50th anniversary of the assassination seems like a good time to do so. In fact, these records have already been declassified. It is claimed by the letter writer (general counsel of the National Archives) that since these records have already been declassified, that they don't fit into the purview of a 2009 Presidential Order to complete a 400 million page backlog of declassifications, and thus claim, for logistical reasons, not to release them until 2017.

Well, why not release the 1,171 documents in question in early 2014 then, after the 400-million-page project is mandated to be finished, when they will have a logistical breather? Why wait until the very last minute when these documents are already declassified, particularly since it would be timely to release them now. Let's see: 1,171 documents is 0.0003 percent of the backlog. Seems they could make the effort to release them during this 50th anniversary year of the assassination. It is not that they will disrupt other records to be declassified (which won't even necessarily be released).

The letter also claims that an assistant archivist previously "misspoke" when he claimed in 2010 that these 1,171 documents would be released as part of the project to be completed by 2013. So because a government lawyer now claims a bureaucrat misspoke, we are supposed to believe the lawyer, rather than take the original word of a government official? A government official gave an earlier release date in 2010 and now another government official claims that was never the case, but rather the release date is actually four years later. That seems like government-speak for a postponement to me.

In addition, the letter says the release of these JFK assassination documents can be "postponed" until 2017, so they, in fact, are being postponed in their release. Hence, to claim the title of my post or the original linked article is a lie seems to be a rather mendacious statement itself. And to claim that they were always scheduled to be released in 2017 is a misinterpretation -- at best -- of the facts of the matter. That date is the latest they can be released, not their scheduled or intended release date necessarily.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:47 AM
link   
To be honest when they do release the documents on the JFK assasination whenever that maybe i'm not expecting them to be pointing fingers or reveal anything that would cause trouble for anybody.

When they come out they come out,the more people want these records released early the longer they will take.



posted on Jun, 23 2012 @ 04:46 AM
link   
Why would they not want the documents released?
- CIA may be shown to have been involved in, or perhaps directed, the assassination, or its coverup.
- CIA had a successful program to create cancers in people
- CIA efforts to assassinate Castro





new topics

top topics



 
12

log in

join