RFK & Jackie: ‘He [Oswald] did not act alone’

“Perhaps there was only one assassin, but he did not act alone …. Dallas was the ideal location for such a crime.”

— William Walton, a friend of the Kennedys’, speaking on behalf of Robert and Jacqueline Kennedy. Walton delivered his message in Moscow to Georgi Bolshakov, who had been a backchannel to the Soviet leadership and was asked to repeat it to Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev. This incident occurred a week after the assassination.

The story was told first in Timothy Naftali and Alexsandr Furskenko’s “One Hell of a Gamble.” Naftali was later the director of the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum in Yorba Linda, California.

The story is also recounted in David Talbot’s “Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years.”



From a 5-Star Amazon review of Jefferson Morley’s new ebook, CIA and JFK: The Secret Assassination Files,

Suspicions about the CIA’s involvement in the JFK assassination have been circulatingCIA & JFK for decades, but Jeff Morley has more than suspicions. He has dug through countless sheaves of once-secret documents and interviewed so many spooks I’m surprised he’s not haunted.

Morley’s  new ebook CIA and JFK: The Secret Assassination Files, available on Amazon, provides the fullest account of the role of certain CIA operations officers in the events leading to the death of JFK.

CIA and JFK: The Secret Assassination Files

56 thoughts on “RFK & Jackie: ‘He [Oswald] did not act alone’”

  1. Why has the assassination of RFK never gotten the attention that his brother’s did? Surely they are related, and investigation of it would shed light on the JFK killing.

  2. Michael McDonald

    My question goes to the point of who, singular or plural, could have ordered the murder of the American President? In the same way, what power was so far reaching to make sure of a cover up to include for starters murdering the only suspect? Diligent study and reflection by researchers leads us to persons in the national security apparatus and organized crime. Who the actual shooters were that day in Dallas and even the higher ups who would have organized, compartmentalized and executed the crime are of interest to us but fall short of the sort of questioning which may lead to the intellectual authors of the crime. The names of those men, surely dead by now, need to be revealed. Complicity of Lyndon Johnson and CIA counter intelligence figures may not be the end and source of the whole sordid chain of criminality, but these too may have acted upon authorization of others higher yet.

  3. Thank you, Ramon. Agreed. Magnicides are excluded; but, in JFK’s case, when the high ranking official disclosed his estimations, to a reporter, that “if a coup occurred, it would not come from the Pentagon, but from the CIA.” , We have to look at the motive the CIA would have to stage a coup. As President, JFK knew the officials of the CIA and the Military. It is almost like Ceaser and Brutus. Anyone care to make such analogies?

    1. Is there any history of the American military staging foreign coups d’etat, all the ones I know about in the relevant time frame were done by cia? They were doing regime changes all over central and south America up to November of 63, it’s not difficult at all to see who actually had the most experience and willingness. The ‘day that should never have ended’ plagues us even now as regards Iran, courtesy of Kim Roosevelt, cia.

    2. Bill Kelly’s work on the CIA analysis of the Valkyrie plan are key here (the CIA has said they can’t find it). All five elements of that plan were in place in Dallas, which includes the use of identifying and exploiting disgruntled and willing military officers and use of the “home guard” (national guard in US). Tom Cruise could play any number of roles in the American version of Valkyrie if Hollywood attempted it.

  4. The assassination and cover-up of JFK simply couldn’t have succeeded without the direction and total involvement of Lyndon Johnson; From blackmailing his way onto the 1960 Democratic ticket right through to the killing of Robert Kennedy in Los Angeles, 8 years later – Lying Lyndon was calling the shots. LBJ was a paranoid sociopath who suffered from manic depression and a wagon load of dangerous, conflicting complexes. Jackie, Bobby, the Irish Mafia, the children and siblings and even Jack Kennedy’s most rapid supporters were simply scared witless of the maniacal Lyndon Johnson. Even the vile, disgusting public execution of their President, husband, brother or best friend, wasn’t enough to overcome the total fear they had of Johnson and the murderous, monstrous power that he wielded. When a voice on the phone tells a witness that their daughter will have acid thrown in her face unless said witness keeps their mouth shut – witnesses tend to dummy up! An outrageous number of those threats (and murders when the threats didn’t work) took place. To “Kennedy 63’s” point – Yes, the Chiefs of Staff, Hoover, Allen Dulles and their ilk most certainly did use JFK’s communist appeasement, womanizing, drug addiction, father’s sins and wealthy background to rationalize their participation in “the big event”. For LBJ – whose crimes, corruption and human failures far exceeded anything JFK may have done – His participation had much more to do with an obsession to attain the Presidency, avoid prison and further enrich himself and his long-time cronies and supporters. The evidence is out and it’s very clear; Unfortunately, 52 years after the murder – few, besides ourselves, give a tinker’s dam. Peace to all. Be well.

    1. If there is any solace in LBJ’s Presidency, I’d say it is the fact that he won his first election by a landslide, then chose not to accept re-nomination four years later(after his disaster in the NH Primary). Kennedy would have been easily re-elected, and maybe without LBJ as his Veep.

    2. That’s exactly the reason why we’ll never know the whole truth….nobody gives a damn anymore! The whole sordid, disgusting scenario of our coup d’etat could be exposed tomorrow and no more than a handful of Americans would care. They’re more interested in knowing who’s going to be on next season’s Dancing With the Stars.
      Here’s a man who wanted to get out of Vietnam, basically wanted to end the Cold War and was killed in the street in broad daylight because there was too much money to be made in perpetuating war.
      Rest In Peace, JFK

  5. “After all, they saved the world from Hilter ”

    And then gave it to Reinhard Gehlen, Hitler’s Eastern Front, anti-Soviet, intelligence man. Probably himself responsible for the treatment (see, death) of 3 million Soviet POWs.

    The real dangerous nexus here, to me, are the American fascists who were always fighting for power under the surface during the interwar years, men who tried to keep America out of the war against Germany, those same who helped finance the creation of the Third Reich. We’re talking about men like Allen Dulles and Prescott Bush.

    1. Exactly Don! It galled me when I found out that Allen Dulles took Galen to, I think, the 1951 World Series. Most of the sheen is gone now from the concept that the Allies won WWII when people like Galen (cia), Dornberger (Bell Helicopter) and von Braun (NASA) never faced inquiry and prosecution at Nuremberg but instead became integrated into US defense and intelligence. If you haven’t, I suggest David Talbot’s book, “The Devil’s Chessboard” on how Allen Dulles and cia undermined FDR and Truman in America’s determination for ‘unconditional axis surrender’. There’s another entry in this field too, tracked by Richard Rashke, in “Useful Enemies”. He’s a lot more even tempered about this stuff than I am, it all brings me to a rapid boil.

  6. When military “leaders” spoke to the Commander-in-Chief the way some of these pompous asses did to JFK, they should have been summarily fired and replaced, or demoted for insubordination – even mutinous sedition. I do not believe they sat around and wrung their hands wishing for 1968. Some of these Joint Chiefs were rabid killers and JFK was a spinless obstacle – an appeaser of communists. He had to go for the sake of these venerable men’s consciences. After all, they saved the world from Hilter – who the hell was Kennedy? In their estimation, a chip off the ‘ol man’s (Joseph P Kennedy, Sr) block, a two-bit politician. The Chiefs preferred “Lying Lyndon” Johnson to this Ivy League, trust account sonuvabitch, Kennedy. Thus, JFK was assassinated on November 22, 1963 in Johnson Territory.

  7. Experts say that most homicides are committed by people known to the victim. If Kennedy knew that the threat would come from the CIA, then why hadn’t anyone looked at this Leviathan?
    There are three things that really bug me about the Kennedy Assassination:
    1). The CIA developed the Executive Action Program specifically to kill people opposed to the dictates of US foreign policy as dictated by American client-corporations of the CIA;
    2). The military had this same in-house capability to specifically kill military and civilian enemies during wartime (anywhere in the world) using whatever trained personnel available;
    3). The nexus of CIA/Military/Mafia/Cubans seems not to extend to Oswald until New Orleans, when he was being sheep-dipped; however, Jack Ruby is documented to be eyeball deep in these associations.
    If we ever think the military will admit, or announce, any personnel were involved, then we haven’t learned what coup d’états really are or how the professional pull them off. The military watched Robert Kennedy very closely during the weekend of the assassination and RFK had to know he was a target, should he not hew the “official” line. When RFK revealed he would re-open JFK’s murder investigation, then Bang! He’s assassinated. Ted got the message, as did Jackie. She took her children and left the country. A power that fells the US President, a US senator and other heads of states, without reprisal, apparently is a force no individual can reckon with, and live. We falsely assume that the civilian authorities killed JFK – I say treasonous mutiny, a military coup d’état.
    When military “leaders” speak to the Commander-in-Chief the way some of these pompous asses did to JFK, they should have been summarily fired and replaced, or demoted for insubordination – even mutinous

    1. As per #3, What does the picture of 15 year old LHO and D Ferrie together in Civil Air Patrol tell us? D H Byrd created the C.A.P. and who was it that owned the Sexton Building where the TSBD was in 63? And who removed the “sniper’s nest” window frame and installed in his home? Think for a moment not so much about a window, instead about a ‘frame’, as in ‘frame up’.

      The FBI evidently went and got all school records for not one, but two kids, one named Lee Oswald and the other named Harvey Oswald who apparently looked so very similar that there may never have been an actual ‘Lee Harvey Oswald’ who is probably another creation of cia by melting two individuals into one for specific intelligence purposes.

      So, it looks like the dipping of the sheep started much earlier and followed multiple tracks with people who have since proved to be cia assets.

  8. I dont think Ted Kennedy or RFK would go to their graves knowing President Kennedy’s body might be disinterred & disturbed at a later date.

    I’ve read President Kennedy’s remains may have been cremated at the time JFK’s gravesite was moved slightly prior to 1968. This was when RFK was still alive.

    RFK and EMK were both present at the disinterrment.

    This would have been what Jackie wanted in the first place but also thought to be best for Caroline, John Jr. and future members of the Kennedy immediate family.

    I think it makes sense for the Kennedy family to settle this in their lifetime if that is what they wanted. I believe they most likely did do that.

    No further autopsies on President John F. Kennedy’s remains however we may disagree with it.

    I remember reading that at the time of the disinterrment in the 60’s a small box was given by RFK to be put into the coffin.

    It was likely the cremated remains.

  9. A documentary that shares the stories of former KGB officials on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy…English actor Roger Moore, famous for his roles as secret agent James Bond, hosts “The Secret KGB JFK Assassination Files.” The film explores film, photos, and declassified information through the lens of KGB officials who were active during the Cold War era.

    The Secret KGB JFK Assassination Files https://youtu.be/WB-Li6jztPA via @YouTube

  10. QUESTION: Does the Kennedy family have the authority to have JFK exhumed and do a private autopsy on his body? And if they do, would they? I know the Army has jurisdiction over the grave, but do the Kennedy’s have jurisdiction over the body?

    1. “Does the Kennedy family have the authority to have JFK exhumed and do a private autopsy on his body?”


      Of course they do!! Furthermore, see how the family was given an exceptional control -unheard of- over the evidence:

      Minute 3:12′

      The problem is that the Kennedys themselves participated in the cover-up, with the best of intentions. They had their own secrets, which are in the public domain nowadays.

  11. we can only speculate why the Kennedy family did not publicly share the private doubts they had on the WC conclusion. It could have been to protect the children, to preserve RFK’s viability to run for president or to prevent disclosures of the Castro assassination attempts and our government’s association with mobsters. The Kennedy family could have helped the country learn the truth but they had no obligation to do so. The government covered up the truth–why should they put more family members at risk in the face of such opposition?

    1. A couple days before his own assassination, RFK did indeed say words to that effect. Sadly, we know he never got the chance to do that.

  12. RFK and Jackie should have said something at the time. To remain silent was a disservice to the American people and the nation as a whole. Jackie HAD to know there were many gunmen firing from many directions since she chased a piece of her husband’s skull that was blown out over the rear of the limousine.

    RFK was more knowledgeable as an insider that there were threats against his brother’s life and he knew who the real enemies of JFK were even as JFK himself knew that if a coup occurred it would come from the CIA as he stated to Arthur Krock in an October 3, 1963 New York Times article.

    Even Arthur Schlesinger, in later years, stated cryptically “we were at war with the national security people” when asked who he thought killed JFK. The people around Kennedy knew what really happened and kept quiet about it. David Powers and Kenneth O’Donnell in the follow-up car knew what happened but were urged to tow the government line by the FBI.

    Now look at the abysmal mess this country is in. If the traitors that killed the President had been brought to trial instead of protected, would the country be better off today? I say yes.

    1. I was heartened by the RFK Jr. comments last year, but I don’t understand why the Kennedy clan is still so passive about this. Most of us would be enraged to the point of insanity if this happened to our family. And with the resources they have, they at one time at least might have been able to get to the bottom of it. I just don’t get it.

      1. I think I know why the Kennedy family is silent. Probably there were enough Kennedy political skeletons in the closet that they were blackmailed into silence at the time (the sixties). But add to that the fact that they couldn’t prove anything until RFK became president and had the power to force the issue. We’ve seen how badly the US Congress handled the case in the seventies. They were led by Joannides and others at CIA into only digging so far. Finally, I think when you have a tragedy as large as this in your family and you realize how powerful the forces of denial are, it’s like trying to change the global warming situation on the planet—-people recognize the problem but don’t want to give up their convenient oil and coal way of life, despite the tragic consequences. I think the USA gets many benefits of power from CIA and the military, and most Americans don’t want to weaken that in any way, so they compromise and let the military-intelligence complex have what they want. Buried in that is the JFK coup silence/denial.

    2. Harry, the picture of Jackie climbing onto the trunk (back) of the limo to retrieve the skull fragments has always been proof positive of a shot from the front in my book.

      1. Except there were no skull fragments to recover.None are visible on the Zapruder film . She started to exit the limo before she even saw the trunk and kicked JFK’ head in the process of trying to get out. She was almost to the point of sliding off of the trunk when Clint Hill reached the trunk and pushed her back into the seat. She was reacting in an instinctive way to seeing her husband’s head explode inches away from her own-an attempt at self-preservation.She herself stated later that she had no recollection of climbing onto the trunk. Hill’s comments were a chivalrous attempt to explain why Jackie tried to get out of the firing line. His own state of mind at the time should also be noted-he threw out everything that he was instructed about concerning confidentiality when in the driveway at Parkland as they were wheeling JFK into the building he unequivocally told Merriman Smith “He’s dead, Smitty”- which was reported with some of the first dispatches.

        1. ‘She was reacting in an instinctive way to seeing her husband’s head explode inches away from her own-an attempt at self-preservation.’ — photon

          Did you add psychiatry to your repertoire during your recent hiatus? This is pure conjecture and you know it.

          ‘ . . . seeing her husband’s head explode inches away . . ‘ — photon

          Does it occur to you that she “felt” the matter flying past her own head? We have (at least) five senses. You studied those, right?

          “She herself stated later that she had no recollection of climbing onto the trunk.” — photon

          That is indicative of trauma induced amnesia is it not, Dr. photon? How does it prove she was not reaching for ‘matter’ (skull fragments or not) she felt or ‘sensed’ flying past her head seconds before?

          ‘Hill’s comments were a chivalrous attempt to explain why Jackie tried to get out of the firing line.’ — photon

          More conjecture.

          Your added touch – that she kicked her husband in the head – doesn’t go unnoticed.

          A recent article in the Smithsonian: Ron Rosenbaum interviews director Erroll Morris:

          ‘So one recent morning over breakfast in the dining room of the hotel in New York’s SoHo where Morris was staying, I sat down in front of his computer to watch the Zapruder film with him. . . . Jackie frantically crawls over the rear seat of the open car and climbs onto its rear deck grasping at something that has been described as a piece of her husband’s shattered skull.’

          ‘grasping at something’. Would a seasoned journalist in 2013 dare report he saw ‘something’ on the trunk if it wasn’t in the film he was viewing? If ‘something’ was on the trunk, and Jackie appears in the film to be reaching, it is reasonable to consider she is reaching for the matter that had splattered from her husband’s head? Conjecture, but no more so than yours.

          1. Evidently, people are reaching their conclusions about the Z-film based on having seen a poor quality copy. Greer as a shooter is one. I find Doug Horne (ARRB) most convincing when it comes to his interview with Dino Bruggioni (Kodak/NY/Hawkeye/cia) that the film went there in a big hurry to be sanitized, and in the long run was most disappointing because the job was so poorly done. This necessitated cia asset Life magazine editor to purchase and lock it up, I think they thought forever. The digitally enhanced Z-film is an enhanced version of the film that was sanitized on Kodak’s copy equipment early morning 11/23/63. There are things that cannot be seen even on the enhanced version, like SS-100-X coming to a stop in front of the guy raising his fist high in the air overhead (paramilitary’stop command’) by excising frames. But there are important things to be seen there anyway! Mainly really crude attempts at blacking out the huge hole in the back of poor Jack’s head, seen by all sorts of people, like all the doctors at Parkland. What Jackie was reaching for and took with her to hospital, carrying it in her hand, was some brain matter that she was to then hand to one of the attending doctors in hopes (?) it would help her husband. The enhanced version is pretty clear that Hill did not push her back into the car, that she wasn’t attempting to get away but was already in a deep state of horrified shock. No wonder at all she didn’t remember everything.

        2. Photon – apparently you are not aware of Dr. Jenkins taped interview. He stated that while he was in Trauma Room 1 – Jackie elbowed Jenkins & she gave the doctor part of JFK’s brains/skull.

          How can you prove “there were no skull fragments to recover” – we have consistent photographic proof that she went on the trunk to grab “something” right after the fatal head shot.

          The Zapruder film shows that Hill never touched Jackie while on the trunk – the Nix film shows that Hill “might” have been close enough to help Jackie into the back seat.

          Do your homework – study the two films & the interaction between Hill & Jackie & watch the Jenkins interview (You Yube) & get back to me.

  13. D. Jon Davies asks whether Oswald was set up. A fair question.

    Yes, hes was set up. Somewhat crudely. But professionally.

    The rifle and C.E. 399 and the backyard photos: steak and baked potato for any skilled, unbiased defense attorney. Given the reasonable doubt standard.

    The nitrate tests. Negative on the cheek; negative for a rifle shot.

    The Walker shooting: just give the facts to a competent defense attorney, and Oswald walks.

    But the story he shot at Walker, killed Tippit and killed JFK was promoted by our government and the MSM. Promoted but never cross-examined for the benefit of the American people.

    Like Jeff, I embrace dissent. But I hew to the facts. The facts tell me Oswald was a patsy.

    1. Jonathan….the most credible source for the backyard photos and the Walker shooting is Marina Oswald herself…she has always said SHE in fact took those backyard photos…and she also said Lee told her he shot at Walker….and the ballistics tied his rifle to that shooting also…

      1. Doug, the testimony of Marina Oswald was so inconsistent and unreliable on many fronts to the point that WC attorneys accused her of lying and providing misleading facts. http://22november1963.org.uk/did-lee-oswald-shoot-general-edwin-walker

        With Oswald dead and buried, the WC had free reign to print circumstantial evidence unchallenged that never would have seen the light of day in a court room.

        The ballistics in the Walker shooting were far from being conclusive and in terms of the backyard photos, Marina Oswald’s testimony has been inconsistent. She has given two different versions as to where the pictures were taken and testified that she took only one picture but later she said it was two when, in fact, four eventually surfaced. http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol6/html/HSCA_Vol6_0074a.htm

      2. In her most recent interview, Marina insists the backyard photos are phony and she vehemently refutes any contention that her husband participated in the assassination. The weekend after the assassination, of course, the FBI had Marina so frightened that she would have testified to Lee actually being Amelia Earhardt (post-op) if that’s what the Feds demanded she say. The number of witnesses who testified that the FBI threatened violence – if they didn’t “tow the line”, is legion. Marina has flip flopped continuously. Write her a check and she’ll support any theory you present to her. That doesn’t mean that I don’t have tremendous empathy for her and great respect for her perseverance in surviving the framing of her husband – But a single woman with no friends and no support, put into that position – was red meat to Hoover’s hungry canines.

      3. “Ballistics tied his rifle to that (Gen. Walker) shooting also.”

        Please provide documentation for this claim.
        My understanding is that a slug was removed from the window frame of Gen. Walker’s house, but it was too badly deformed to determine its caliber, much less its weapon of origin.

      4. I saw Marina on a special hour TV show in 1990s. She stated that the ‘government men’ threatened her with a deportation back to the Soviet Union unless she would ‘cooperate’ with them. They scripted her testimony, they told her what to say and warned her she would be watched. She had stuck to the script for many years and decades later she found courage to open up and tell truth. She said L.H. Oswald liked president Kennedy. That testimony from 1963 is worthless.

        1. “…just as a point of interest: back in the ’70’s, I was watching the Dick Cavett Show, and he had both Ruth Paine and Marina Oswald both on his show. It was the only time I can remember Cavett ever losing his cool on TV! It ended with an abrupt departure of both Paine and Marina Oswald.
          Jeff; you’ve got a “juice card,” perhaps you could find a copy of that broadcast, because i’ve looked everywhere and cannot find it. Anyone out there know about that show or episode?”
          I must admit; after watching Ruth Paine in action with Marina Oswald, i’ve no doubt that Ruth Paine was her handler!”-DM

  14. My post was deleted yet you leave these kooks posts up…Jackie really loved rfk not jfk ? Jefferson you’re a kook too. Sayonara.

    1. Your post was not deleted. Your comment that other commenters are “kooks” is violation of JFK Facts Comment policy, which bans ad hominem attacks. I’m only publishing this message to disabuse you and everybody of the false notion that dissent is not welcome here.

      Dissent is welcome. Witness Bill Kelly’s respectful treatment of Jean Davison, with whom he disagrees profoundly. If you show such respect, you will always be welcome here. If you don’t, please stay away.

    2. Correct. Jackie Kennedy was infatuated with Robert Kennedy who was emotionally there for her in ways that JFK never was. For example, when Jackie had her first stillborn child in the mid 1950’s, JFK was partying with George Smathers and a bevy of beauties on a sailboat in the Mediterranean. RFK was at the hospital comforting Jackie, much in the same way he rushed on Air Force One on 11/22/63 when it landed in DC and hurried to her side. He said “I’m here.”

      David Heymann wrote a book entitled “Bobby and Jackie: A Love Story.” He convinced me.


      Re: D jon Davies, maybe other folks aren’t “kooks.” Maybe you are just ignornant. Btw read the comments sections of my Amazon review of Heymann’s book. I put a lot of his documentation in there of the RFK-Jackie affair.

      1. Robert, is the same C David Heymann who was a plagiarist and who used the most tendentious hearsay sources he could find to smear the Kennedys? Is this the person you find so credible?

        You simply don’t care. If it involves a sex angle – you’ll believe anyone.

  15. I have another question, related to Robert Kennedy’s private thoughts about the assassination in Dallas and how he told the entire family (according to sources listed in David Talbot’s book, Brothers) that he thought the President was killed by a larger domestic conspiracy. Here’s my question: Why did Edward Kennedy, in his final memoir, True Compass, published just around the time of his death, say that he thought that the Warren Commission was mostly correct in its findings and that he had no problems with supporting their conclusions? Was he playing a “public consumption” card a la his brother Robert, who publicly stated in 1964/65 that he supported the Warren Commission’s findings? Why would he do this in his final book, and why wouldn’t speak out at the end of his life?

    I think it’s great what RFK, Jr. did to put the media on watch about the JFK assassination in a year of attention on its 50th anniversary. And from everything I’ve read so far, from David Lifton’s phenomenal book 30 years ago (Best Evidence) through many others, including Brothers and Dr. Charles Crenshaw’s books, I have to think that Oswald was set up and that the assassination was a domestic coup. Still, I wonder why Ted Kennedy said what he did in his final book?

    Anyone care to make a hypothesis?

    1. Oswald was set up ? The Real killers allowed Oswald to roam freely and possibly creating an alibi ? While they killed the president then got away unseen ?

      You think it’s a smart move to shoot the president from the front but leave evidence behind and just alter the presidents wounds to make it all fit ?

      This is just too easy.

      1. “Oswald was set up ? The Real killers allowed Oswald to roam freely and possibly creating an alibi ? While they killed the president then got away unseen ?”

        Oswald had no need to “create” an alibi – whatever you may mean by that. He had an alibi by virtue of following his normal routine. Unfortunately, there was no recording of the interrogations which resulted in the only interrogator to accurately record his alibi was the only non-law enforcement person there – Harry Holmes. The others made subtle changes to it in order to void its ability to exonerate him. We know Holmes recorded it accurately because the first day newspaper accounts confirm it – via police sources. Unless Oswald was psychic and “knew” what the newspapers would report, there should be no doubt that those reports corroborate him.

        In any case, why would he give an alibi that in fact left the door open to the possibility he was the sniper? Because if you believe Fritz’ and other versions of the alibi – that is what Oswald did – gave an alibi that did not exonerate him at all.

        1. In Fritz’s case, his own handwritten notes provide a more compelling alibi for Oswald – eating lunch in the lunchroom and “two negr. came in…..one Jr. & short negro.” – than what Fritz told the Warren Commission Oswald had said (that he had eaten lunch with two negros). Indeed black employees Junior Jarman and the shorter Harold Normal did enter the lunchroom as Oswald told Fritz, though they did not each lunch with him. Fritz donated his notes to the National Archives in the 1990s. See this page for more details, including scanned copies of the notes:

          1. You’re correct, Rex. He saw them come in at abt 12:25. Soon after that, he went to the 2nd floor for a coke (as was his normal routine). He came back down just as all the commotion started and was standing just outside the little store-room near the stairs sipping his coke when Truly and Baker came in (see stories in the DMN and NY Herald Tribune using Truly and Occhus Campbell as sources respectively). He was not questioned by them as he obviously could not be the shooter. Truly however would recall at least seeing him there.

            He then attempts to leave and is stopped at the front door by Welcome Barnett and asked to step aside while they get his details. After that, he was allowed to go. That his details were taken as per Harry Holmes’ and early news accounts, tells us exactly why his name appears at the top of Revill’s list – the first out is at the top. And it was not the first time Oswald had given a slightly incorrect address. He did it at least once before on PO Box application.

            Unless I missed it, Fritz’ notes do not include anything from the last session where Holmes’ attended. There is a good reason for that.

            The first floor sighting was switched to the second floor and combined with an encounter the Dynamic Duo actually did have on the 4th floor (see Baker affidavit). Truly didn’t come up with the second floor story until the next day. On his affidavit, you’ll see handwritten at the bottom, Mrs Reid’s name. It was given to the cops as someone who could “corroborate” Oswald being on the second floor. She was needed to put Oswald there AFTER The assassination – not at the time of it. In reality, she never saw him at all.

    2. Ted Kennedy? A coward. After JFK and RFK were killed, Ted got the Kennedy family together and asked/told them not to make public comments about the JFK & RFK assassination.

      As for Jackie, she would often tell her friends it doesn’t matter, talking about it is not going to bring Jack back, or RFK (who she really loved the most) back to life.

      I once called Ted Kennedy’s office before he died and spoke with a lower level aide. I got the distinct impression that Ted Kennedy believed that a high level domestic political conspiracy murdered JFK. (I wonder if Ted thought GHW Bush had involvement in the JFK assassination.)

      Ted, like RFK, would never publicly comment on what he really thought. Much like Caroline Kennedy, a member of the CFR, who cherishes her establishment bona fides. The JFK Library is controlled by Caroline Kennedy and it is time for that group to start approaching the JFK assassination in a realistic fashion.

  16. Russian newspaper propaganda very soon focused on pinning the blame (accurately) on Dallas, TX oil executives who hated JFK. By 1965, the KGB had concluded that Lyndon Johnson was behind the JFK assassination. As as been posted here, the Russians also concluded that Cuba policy was a big factor in the JFK assassination and that it was an anti-Soviet coup.

    All of those things are not mutually exclusive. I think they were all factors and players in the JFK assassination. As mentioned before Evelyn Lincoln had both LBJ and CIA angry over Bay of Pigs on her list of JFK murder suspects. Richard Nixon’s code for the JFK assassination was “the whole Bay of Pigs thing.”


    By September 16, 1965, the Soviet KGB had concluded that Lyndon Johnson was responsible for the JFK assassination. On 12/1/66 J. Edgar Hoover sent a memo to LBJ which stated:

    “On September 16, 1965, this same source reported that the KGB Residency in New York City received instructions approximately September 16, 1965, from KGB headquarters in Moscow to develop all possible information concerning President Lyndon B. Johnson’s character, background, personal friends, family, and from which quarters he derives his support in his position as President of the United States. Our source added that in the instructions from Moscow, it was indicated that “now” the KGB was in possession of data purporting to indicate President Johnson was responsible for the assassination of the late President John F. Kennedy. KGB headquarters indicated that in view of this information, it was necessary for the Soviet Government to know the existing personal relationship between President Johnson and the Kennedy family, particularly between President Johnson and Robert and “Ted” Kennedy.”

    1. It makes absolute sense, if you follow Soviet thinking about such things, that they would use a Marxist class analysis to – correctly – decipher the culprits. The CIA hasn’t been known as “Capitalism’s Invisible Army” for nothing.

    2. “…as an addendum: People have always looked past the possibility of Howard Hughes(whom resided in La Costa, CA at the time of JFK’s murder)involvement. Hughes had a long history/connection with both the LCN and CIA(Robert Maheu), and was a known contributor to both the Nixon and Johnson camps.
      No doubt, Johnson was most likely a conspirator; but I personally believe Nixon to be suspect also(Hunt/Sturgis/Connally). Why would a man like Nixon bring people like Howard Hunt into his WhiteHouse?”-DM

  17. Might things have turned out differently if Robert Kennedy had publicly challenged the Warren Commission as others were?
    If people like Mark Lane, Harold Weisberg, Sylvia Meagher and Josiah Thompson had Robert Kennedy on their side would the corporate, mainstream media have been more skeptical of the official theory (and it is a theory)?
    These researcher/writers had more than amply documented that the Warren Report was in need of it’s own autopsy. The files of the Commission disprove the Report.
    Would the media have played the role of watch dog instead of their usual role as lap dog if Robert Kennedy had joined scholarly attack on the Commission?
    As David Wrone, Harold Weisberg and Howard Roffman and others have documented, the major institutions of this country failed during the Warren investigation and the periods of major criticism of it. Does it take the comments of a major public personality to get these institutions to do their job? Or, is there another explanation of how institutions should work in a democracy?

    1. “…Brian; in a Democracy? Yes. In a Plutocracy or other? No. Looking back, it is much easier to see now than immediately following the assassination, that a “coup d’etat” had more than likely occurred; thus the behavior of both the Govt. and the press, both then, and especially now.
      Besides that Brian, we’re a Republic…or, at least we were!”-DM

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Scroll to Top