The 7 JFK files Obama should have asked for

Obama told GQ’s Bill Simmons that the government’s JFK files are “disappointing.”

He just didn’t know which ones to ask for. Obama should tell CIA Director John Brennan he wants to take a peek the agency’s still-secret files on these seven people.

Then he should share. We won’t be disappointed.

 

9 comments

  1. Charles says:

    I did not read the interview that way. I just saw it as a Watergate style non-denial denial. Was the “it” POTUS was refering to specifically JFK files or just all the “secret stuff” in general?

    “it turns out the stuff going on that’s top secret isn’t nearly as exciting as you expect. In this day and age, it’s not as top secret as you’d think.” I think he is clearly referencing current activities as opposed to history.

    “Disappointing” and is a strange word, if he found certainty one way or another regarding a conspiracy. It should either be good or bad news. I would think he simply does not have the backround expertise to read the JFK files even if he had his hands them.

    POTUS should let Malcolm Blunt have a look, that would be a reply I could trust.

  2. Bill Clarke says:

    For the CIA (and military) to receive such attacks on their integrity, reliability and loyalty on this group I can’t understand how anyone here thinks a smoking gun will come out of anything to be released.

    They have had a very long time to get rid of any smoking gun. I don’t think it is right and I’m all for a total release of all records but in the real world I don’t see it happening.

    • Tom S. says:

      “Integrity”? Organizations must act with integrity, as trust is earned. Does “one bad apple”, not reflect badly on the entire organization, as is drummed into the heads of military recruits?
      Individuals who were members of the organizations you refer to who
      upheld integrity and earned trust fell victim, as the American people did, to the few who had other priorities. Upholding the priorities and interests of the top tenth of one percent gets messy, as Smedley Butler and a pathetically small number of others since, have reminded us. Did military “in the loop” about the USS Maddox “incident” uphold their oaths to protect and to defend? Did CIA with knowledge of rendering and off the books “black sites” or those with knowledge of waterboarding a prisoner 83 times, or the assistant director who destroyed the tapes of that OP and emerged from the sham investigation of that
      obstruction, escape unscathed? Look up Kyle Dusty Foggo and his friend, Brett Wilkes and how they distinguished themselves after 9/11. Bush ’43 and Obama both swore solemn oaths to “protect” something, but they changed the words to “the country”. The founders predicted such chicanery and they deliberately worded the oath differently. Did our last two “CICs” civilian politicians commanding the military follow their oaths of office, or cynically manipulate them to enhance their control and diminish their accountability. The DOJ avoided charging Al-awaki out of concern criminal charge would afford that person of interest with “more rights”. So, he remained uncharged as the CIC ordered his droning and the order was duly, and likely enthusiastically followed. I read your comment and I was struck by its similarity to something Jack Nicholson might have uttered when playing the role of a USMC commander at Gitmo. We have a sorry history of not holding accountable ourselves, or the political, military, and intelligence “leaders” as deficient in character and ethics as ours have been. Lauding them and holding them somehow above criticism only encourages more of the same. I see the media now egging on political talking heads with the “keep us safe” at the expense of our Bill of Rights protections…. Snowden diminished our safety….blah…blah, in the wake of French RESIDENTS attacking French civilian targets, and I wonder why all talk of lessening second amendment rights in the wake of a constant parade of multiple shootings of innocents, right in our midst, is marginalized even as it is also a justification of a Bill of Rights “reduction” to “keep us safe”. If your POV is in lockstep with the DCI’s, the Joint Chiefs’, and of the CIC’s, given their actual records, since Smedley Butler spoke, do you ever take stock, ever reconsider? Dick Cheney never has and never does….I guess he is a great American. He indicated that the Constitution was just a piece of paper when he named himself V.P. candidate and flew from his Dallas home to change his Texas driver’s license to a Wyoming license.

      • Bill Clarke says:

        Bc. Glad to see that you are familiar with good ole Smedley Butler, Tom. Smedley told it like it was and today that will get you fired by close of business. I’m not sure we have a decent fighting general in the Army anymore.

        “Organizations must act with integrity, as trust is earned. Does “one bad apple”, not reflect badly on the entire organization, as is drummed into the heads of military recruits?”

        Bc. Of course it does. The My Lai tragedy occurred in my division, the Americal. It put the darkness of shame on every one of us in the division. But that doesn’t mean many of the rest of us were without integrity and honor and compassion.

        Bc. I’m sure you are familiar with the fact that the Maddox was actually attacked. The Turner Joy; not so much. Bush 43 and Obama are not the kind of men I’d want with me when it all hit the fan. I don’t think their oath really meant much to them. A long time ago I swore an oath to defend the Constitution “from all enemies, both foreign and domestic”. I swore the oath, I did it and I’d do it again if necessary.

        We have a sorry history of not holding accountable ourselves, or the political, military, and intelligence “leaders” as deficient in character and ethics as ours have been.

        Bc. I agree 100%. Especially the political; it seems they always get away with it. Every once in a while they will fire a General or CIA man but the politician seems to slide on by..

        Bc. I have several times expressed my disgust and utter contempt for Dick Cheney. He never met a war he didn’t like except the one he dodged (Vietnam).

  3. leslie sharp says:

    Simmons set the stage for the general tone of the interview opening with (for a more delicate description) ‘guy talk’, so the interview questions and responses can hardly be analyzed as serious statements on Obama’s views on any topic … not his daughters (he has made similar comments in other interviews revealing – surprise surprise at their age – they consider him boring) and certainly not the assassination of a president and the related security questions. Taken in context, I think his reaction was casual, knee jerk scripted, and should not be taken seriously let alone translated as a key into his presidential responsibility for disclosing or withholding CIA files on the assassination. I think the interview is a non-starter; that doesn’t mean that Obama’ role in the lead up to the 50th is not worth considering, visiting Ireland the very month of the anniversary of Kennedy’s ’63 visit to Ireland in June prior to his murder in November.

  4. Ronnie Wayne says:

    Bill, I started to post before Tom responded, then I hesitated. I believe 98% of our Military, and the CIA serve with the greatest of patriotism. I like to think my Dad did. I’ve always supported our men and women in the field, on the ground or the seas or in the air even if if I strongly disagree with their mission (E.G. Vietnam, Iraq). I know the military requires unquestioned response to orders, and that is essential in battle. However it is also our responsibility to question the decisions and actions of our leaders in a Democracy. Without the ability to do so we are not truly free. Unfortunately they serve that 1% Tom mentioned. It has become a plutocracy and our only way to believe in Democracy is to question it.

    • Bill Clarke says:

      I agree with every thing you say here, Ronnie. I especially appreciate your support of our young troops today as they are poorly led and foolishly used by the current crop of CIC, politicians and brown nosing Generals.

      I don’t think anyone in our government is above being questioned. I think they should be kept with a close eye on them and I believe in firing anyone that needs it.

      • Bill Clarke says:

        Kennedy63
        November 19, 2015 at 12:53 pm

        I support the human beings serving in our military, but I despise war; and, the politicians and military leaders who “push” for military excursions, when other avenues are available for conflict resolution.

        bc. I certainly agree with that. No better example than Iraq.

        The CIA was a “thug” organization that overthrew
        democratically elected governments in favor of right-wing dictatorships favorable to US corporate interests.

        bc. Here it is again and I simply don’t understand it. Do you really believe that the CIA overthrew these countries on their own; without orders from the president? Lets see now; Bay of Pigs was approved by Kennedy. The overthrow of Ngo Dinh Diem was approved by Kennedy. I’ve heard all this Jack was going to help the 3rd world but he certainly didn’t act like it at times.

        JFK became a victim of these campaigns, in part, because of his (unreported) support of emerging third world nations/leaders.

        bc. Perhaps JFK became a victim because he was neck deep in these campaigns. Could you really blame Castro for shooting JFK after all they had done to Castro? The mob helps get JFK elected and then Bobby goes after them. Not the boys I’d play with.

  5. Kennedy63 says:

    I support the human beings serving in our military, but I despise war; and, the politicians and military leaders who “push” for military excursions, when other avenues are available for conflict resolution.

    Now, on another important topic populating this forum:

    The focus on release of JFK related files is a “distraction” devised for the specific intent of diverting attention from looking at CIA activity on a global scale. This link (http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/CIAtimeline.html)provides ample evidence of what the CIA wrought in the world in defense of its mission to “make the world safe for US Corportacracy” under what I term the “Dulles Principles.” The CIA was a “thug” organization that overthrew democratically elected governments in favor of right-wing dictatorships favorable to US corporate interests. JFK became a victim of these campaigns, in part, because of his (unreported) support of emerging third world nations/leaders.
    The organization responsible for “domestic affairs” was the FBI, the chief “non-investigative” body in the JFK murder. Both the CIA and FBI conspired to participate in the murder cover-up, more likely because the FBI figured out the CIA was also using Oswald (or his name) in covert intelligence operations (Remember Oswald asked to see FBI agent in New Orleans in summer of 1963 following his arrest for public disturbance with the CIA backed DRE). This inter-agency conflict probably got Oswald killed because he did know too much. DRE members suspected him of being an infiltrator and an intelligence asset of some US agency. Also, it was the FBI that initially concluded Oswald was the lone deranged assassin. Despite what “talking heads” say about Jack Ruby, he has enough mob connections that indicate the mob was assigned the hit on Oswald. (Remember also that the Mob and CIA [Roselli/Harvey] were conspirators in plots to assassinate Castro). The unspoken “underworld illegalities” of gun running, gambling, drugs, and prostitution, were part of the “activities” of many of the characters who emerge on the JFK assassination landscape. The CIA and FBI looked the other way when their agents/assets/contractors/informants were engaged in these activities. Nevertheless, this criminal element was a rich source of intelligence because this “subterranean umbrella” encompassed many persons with multiple connections to many right-wing organizations. One reporter wrote (based on info from high government official – JFK?)that, if a coup took place in the US, it would come from the CIA. Indeed, that coup did take place shortly after this article was published. Someone stated that we already know the truth about JFK’s murder…there is no paper trail; no “smoking gun” and no proof as to who approved and initiated the plot. This does not mean we don’t know. Common sense tells us that the CIA’s assets/clients were responsible. When you look at the extant record following the JFK coup, clearly the acts of the CIA in foreign countries reflects more executive approval to interfere in the affairs of foreign governments. 2017 will be an exercise in dispensing more CIA crumbs.

Leave a Reply

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

In seeking to expand the range of informed debate about the events of 1963 and its aftermath, JFKFacts.org welcomes comments that are factual, engaging, and civil. more

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