10 questions about the still-secret JFK records

JFK blogger Bill Kelly has ten questions about the still secret JFK files uncovered by Michael Ravnitsky and WhoWhatWhy, and reported by Politico.

Some can be answered but some can’t. See Number 4.

Bill Kelly’s questions:

1) How many records are still being withheld?

2) How many agencies are involved and how many are being withheld from each agency?

3) Why are there so many described as “illegible”? Why were they withheld and why did ARRB agree to withhold them?

4) How many Warren Commission records are still being withheld? The zero answer previously provided by NARA is clearly incorrect.

5) Why are MLK assassination records, race riots and the DNC 1968 records, clearly unrelated to the assassination included in the JFK Collection when they are clearly NBR?

6) Why are the Collins Radio records described as NBR when thev are relevant?

7) How come the ONI Defector and ONI Director Files are not listed among the still withheld records when they are still being withheld?

8) Why are there so many records listed as withheld when in fact they have been released and are available?

9) What about the records we know exist that are not among the JFK Collection – ONI 119 Reports, ONI Director Files, Richard Sprague’s HSCA records, the original Air Force One radio tapes and other such records? Is the NARA actively searching and seeking these records?

10) Will the AOTUS – Mr. Ferraro – ever get around to publishing an index and guide to the JFK Collection as the JFK Act law requires?

44 thoughts on “10 questions about the still-secret JFK records”

  1. Ramon F Herrera

    Jeff Morley asked:
    “How many records are still being withheld?”

    Anybody can find the number by themselves.

    (1) Go to the website that is not under the control of the National Archives:


    That site (fully owned by We The People) contains the exact same records as the official site, plus some features that make it more usable.

    (2) In the field “Current Status” type “POSTPONED IN FULL”

    (3) Click on “Submit Search”

    (4) The number will be displayed in red.

    Furthermore, if you want to know WHICH records are withheld, their RIF numbers are right here:


    Feel free to double check them in the official site:


  2. Not all of the records are being with held for reasons of national security.

    Many are being with held under the tax code privacy larw and others like Manchester and the Byrne records are being withheld because of donor request.


  3. The only question that matters is why are records made secret?

    “National Security” is a misnomer just like “Federal Reserve”. National Security is for a state that has something to hide. If that’s the case, maybe it shouldn’t be behaving in a way that it has to hide (i.e. cover-up) it’s history.

    1. I am sorry for answering off topic questions here Mr Kelly,

      And I would comment on these documents further, but I don’t have the expertise to pull them up and inspect them. So all I can do at this point is admire your efforts to get them released and sorted out.

    2. Bill,
      I appreciate you coming by, I really do. I think you may be barking up the wrong tree, here. This is more of a “mainstream” discussion venue, at least to hear some tell it.:

      Yep. This is how desperate these fruity people get. And that is the kind of stuff that those factoid oriented bufs post at what is erroneously called JFK Facts…..

      Edited by James DiEugenio, February 29, 2016, 07:28 PM.

      Bill, an excerpt from your blog post, currently under discussion in this thread.:


      …Whether the JFK Collection contains all of the official records as required is yet to be seen but one thing is for certain, there will be another data dump come that day, and the most precious of secrets will be made available to the public for all to see, but it will be up to the researchers, historians, journalists and reporters who will have to dig through the morass to find the real gems that are the final pieces to Mary Bancroft’s Mosaic, the total picture of what really happened at Dealey Plaza.

      Bancroft was also fond of quoting her uncle C.W. Barron, who often reminded her, “Remember that facts are not the truth. They only indicate where the truth may lie!” …

      But, wikipedia is even more “mainstream” than Jfkfacts.org. A few observations are noteworthy in
      the following examples of wikipedia biography articles.:

      No “partner” is both named and described in the wikipedia bios of either Dulles or Eisenhower, there are two “further reading” note entries in the Eisenhower bio article, one of a book title, “Summersby,” and the other, simply “Kay Summersby”. However, as you go further down in these examples, ….well, you get my point, it is as if Mary Bancroft never even met Allen Dulles.:

      Dwight D Eisenhower (aka, “the saint” as presented by wikipedia.org)

      Allen Dulles….
      ..According to his sister, Eleanor, Dulles had “at least a hundred” extramarital affairs, including some during his tenure with the CIA.[5]

      I guess “mainstream biography” details depend entirely on who you were, how popular you were, and where history positions you on the left/right, political spectrum.:

      Franklin D. Roosevelt
      1 Personal life

      1.1 Early life and education
      1.2 Marriage and affairs…

      John F. Kennedy
      9 Image, social life, and family

      9.1 Children
      9.2 Popular image
      9.3 “Camelot Era”
      9.4 Health
      9.5 Personal tragedies
      9.6 Affairs and extramarital relationships…

      Responding to your question specifically, Bill, I think I am positioned to advise you not to have high expectations of a discussion of your well researched, well presented, and quite reasonable blog post details related to the anticipated 2017 NARA “document dump” of withheld JFK assassination related information.

      I don’t see anywhere as much commitment to fact finding as I see to fine tuning and defending of
      belief systems. “Less new information, please,” seems to be the call I am hearing from the most
      unexpected sources, as well as from the expected ones.

      1. Regarding the DiEugenio quote from edu. I took it this way. “These fruity people” was part of his response to David Von Pein which his reply is in response to. “Factoid oriented buffs” is directed at McAdams and possibly Photon/Jean. That they post here so frequently would be reason to interpret this site as “erroneously called JFJ Facts”. Read the link Tom provided, the full post, the full thread (it’s interesting).

        BTW Tom, Jim called you redoubtable across the pond a week or two ago, which I took as a compliment. He was thanking you I think for digging up something from what he called the way back machine (?). I can’t remember the subject at the moment.

        1. Read the post below Jim’s on the link. David Von Pein has been kicked off Amazon.
          I have to ask though, which is sillier, arguing with McAdams and company or Von Pein? Yet Mr. D is right in a later post that the subject must be rebutted for the sake of “newbies”, and History itself.

    3. It would be a shame if this turned out to be a case of “The dog that didn’t bark.”

      Mr. Kelly, when these documents were first referred to in an earlier post, I responded. Of course, it was just to list the 5 I considered most important. I’m not exactly sure what you want.

      Tom, thank you for the insult.

      1. Ramon F Herrera

        Speaking of “unwarranted assumptions about wound ballistics”, let’s take a look at ALL the cases found in YouTube.


        Incidentally, the Jet Effect has been the object of so much derision and shame that not even the good professor supports it anymore. Since that was all they had on the early years, McAdams supported it.

        AFAIK, the only person who still desperately clings to it is our esteemed David Von Pein.

  4. “Dr. Perry pointed to the right front of his head to emphasize what he had seen.
    If you missed that you must take a look at the press conference.”~MDG

    You are mistaken MDG, the person who pointed to his head was not one of the doctors, he was White House Assistant Press Secretary Malcolm Kilduff.

  5. Willy I am a neophyte in regard to ballistic analysis. I don’t understand how a shot from the South would result in the back and to his left explosion.

  6. Dr. Perry pointed to the right front of his head to emphasize what he had seen.

    If you missed that you must take a look at the press conference.

    That press conference was only shown on local Dallas TV.

    It was never shown on national television.

    The Coverup had kicked in immediately.

    So chilling!

    Different doctors different interpretations. I m not buying it.

    1. Dr. Perry pointed to the right front of his head to emphasize what he had seen.

      I think you have him confused with Kilduff.

      Kilduff could not have known anything about bullet trajectories at that point. No autopsy had been done. His gesture was simply a way of saying “a shot in the head.”

  7. Why then did Dr. Crenshaw in his book and interviews say the wounds had been tampered with.

    Crenshaw said this to explain the differences in what he, Perry and the other doctors observed in the Dallas ER, and what the Bethseda doctors saw.

    Crenshaw saw a massive wound to the head caused by a shot from the front right.

    The Bethseda doctors had a different opinion on JFK’s wounds.

    I know it is goulish and horrible to contemplate a tampering with the wounds of President Kennedy but this is what Crenshaw came clean and talked about towards the end of his career.

    I believe Crenshaw.

    Dr. Malcolm Perry also said the massive wound in Kennedy’s head was caused by a shot from the right front at the press conference shortly after JFK’s death on Nov 22 /63.

    After the Ambush in Dealey Plaza it is not much of a stretch to believe Kennedy’s wounds were tampered with.

    How can one possibly explain the differences in what the Dallas ER doctors and the Bethseda doctors observed if you dont believe the wounds were tampered with.

    An Autopsy before the Official Autopsy is awso a possibility that presents itself in the partial Air force One Tapes.

    It doesnt matter whether the casket was flown by a helicopter or taken by ambulance into Bethseda.

    What Dr. Perry and Dr. Crenshaw had to say about JFK’s wounds is extremely significant.

    1. “Crenshaw saw a massive wound to the head caused by a shot from the front right.
      The Bethseda doctors had a different opinion on JFK’s wounds.”~MDG

      Same wounds, different interpretations.

      I do not buy Crenshaw’s opinion that the head wound had been tampered with.

      “Dr. Malcolm Perry also said the massive wound in Kennedy’s head was caused by a shot from the right front at the press conference shortly after JFK’s death on Nov 22 /63.”~MDG

      No Perry did not, he referred to another doctor present to discuss the head wound. Dr Perry addressed the throat wound; that he said entered from the front.

      The head wound according to the most up to date ballistic evidence proves a shot from the front. Not from the “Grassy knoll”,, however, but from the southwest end of Dealey Plaza just before the triple underpass. One shot from a high-powered rifle shooting a frangible bullet; striking Kennedy in the right temple above the ear at a tangential angle and plowing a trench from the temple to the right occipital-parietal.



    Please choose among your aliases and submit comments under only one of them, stop using ALL capital letters in your comments, refrain from submitting so many comments in a short period of time, and soon, some of your submitted comments will be approved to appear in JFKfacts.org comments threads.

  9. You have a problem with the link used for Bill Kelly’s 10 questions. I noticed it tis morning Sunday Feb 28, at 10:40 a.m.My computer thinks it’s a “phasing site” and it led to an article Editor at Foreign Policy.com

    Were you guys hacked, or did you make a mistake somewhere?

    1. Joe,
      I fixed the link, it resolves correctly to Bill Kelly’s blog entry now. I guess Jeff did not see your comment. Thank you for pointing out the problem.

      Bill, did you happen to read this comment before you wrote your blog
      article on the 2017 NARA document releases?

      (Never mind, Bill, I see now that you are aware of the discrepancy in the number of documents and topics to be released, but maybe other readers will find the details interesting, as well as what they show about the exacting approach you took in presenting this research.)

  10. 9 – It is unfathomable as to why the Original Air Force One Tapes were not preserved. Is it possible they were preserved but will not be found for a hundred years or more. It just makes no sense at all that such an historic record is missing in action. The partial recordings that have been found are fascinating.

    An Autopsy before the Official Autopsy at Bethseda is a possibility that presents itself in the partial tapes.

    1 & 2 – How many records & how many agencies involved just adds to the Kennedy Mystery. There were just so many people involved in the Coverup. You can definitely be a proud American to say you were not one of them!

    Meanwhile President John F. Kennedy has laid in his grave for 52+ years and Justice has not been served.

    It is just too sad!

    1. “An Autopsy before the Official Autopsy at Bethseda is a possibility that presents itself in the partial tapes.”~MDG

      We have been through this before MDG. You misread the information; there simply is no possibility of Kennedy’s body being stolen or a pre-autopsy being performed. Dr. Burkley was in attendance of JFK the entire time from Parkland to Bethesda. Your Liftonesque assertions are proven definitively wrong.

      The casket was NOT flown by helicopter to Bethesda, it was driven there in an ambulance. This is clear on the AF1 tapes themselves.

      1. Willy, doctors at Parkland all described the tracheotomy cut in the President’s throat as being less than 3cms long (Between 2 and 3 cms) and with sharp edges.

        Dr Humes described the throat wound he saw at Bethesda as some 7 to 8cms in length. Where, when, and how did a 3 cm cut become 7 to 8 cms with rough edges?

        1. “Willy, doctors at Parkland all described the tracheotomy cut in the President’s throat as being less than 3cms long (Between 2 and 3 cms) and with sharp edges.”~Ray Mitcham

          Yes that was the tracheotomy cut, but Perry went on to describe doing further exploratory incisions to see if there was internal bleeding – He felt that one of the thoracic vertebrae might have been nicked as well, so he cut the strap muscles on the right side of the neck in this procedure, and opened the entry wound further in doing so.
          I will search my docs for a link to the discussion by the Parkland doctors they had a couple years later, where Perry explains this. I may or may not find it.
          But I think I posted it on this forum at some point as well.

  11. 5) They are relevant to the JFK Assassination because some of the same people and organizations were involved?

    6) Because _______ was a neighbor of Tippit that worked at Collins, and the white car at el fenix or el chico that might have had a second Oswald in it with special communications equipment?

    7) The ONI developed Oswald for the CIA?

  12. 8) Why are there so many records listed as withheld when in fact they have been released and are available?

    Because government is typically incompetent.

    Conspiracists view government as very competent, and very evil. This if something is “out of line,” it is assumed to have a sinister purpose.

    But government is both less evil and less competent than conspiracists typically think.

    1. How can someone state all conspiracists are X ?

      I don’t consider myself a conspiracist , whatever that means . I just want the truth about who murdered our president .

      Im sorry but your imaginary label of people is sad . I’m not trying to start trouble but labeling people around a fake grouping just isn’t needed or called for. Let’s just stick to the facts and civil discussion

      1. Im sorry but your imaginary label of people is sad .

        Do you think there was a conspiracy or not?

        If you do, you are a conspiracist.

        Those of us who don’t are lone gunman theorists.

        You might be a “conspiracy agnostic.” Just what do you believe?

    2. “Because government is typically incompetent.”~McAdams

      So-called “government” is exceedingly competent when it comes to delivering for the Power Elite, and staggeringly inept (corrupt) in delivering for the serfs. The so-called “government” itself is for sinister purpose – it is a predator syndicate that squats in DC posing as “government”.

      Only those indoctrinated by this sinister system, such as statist trained “political scientists” are blind to the obvious.

        1. Better to execute a thousand innocents in error, than to let one guilty murderer die a natural death, or do I recall the principle incorrectly?

          What a bizarre statement on your part.

          Do you think you can just made stuff up and attribute it to me?

          1. What, on earth, do you expect the consequences of your conflicted belief system portend, if
            not that? On the one hand, you repeatedly express criticism of the precision, ability, or efficiency of government generally. On the other hand, you are an energetic supporter of state authority to take human lives. Do not attempt to put blame on me for the consequences of your own, often expressed, conflicting and extremist opinions. You declare contempt for
            the proficiency of government yet you’ve gone out of your way to insist it be authorized to
            mete out an irrevocable or relievable punishment, despite –

            http://www.innocenceproject.org/ 337 DNA Exonerations

            So how is my observation that your beliefs/advocacy turn this axiom on its ass, objectionable? (You proclaim both that government does not work and it should have the authority to mete out capital punishment.)

            “It is better and more satisfactory to acquit a thousand guilty persons than to put a single innocent one to death.”

            The color of a defendant and victim’s skin plays a crucial and unacceptable role in deciding who receives the death penalty in America. People of color have accounted for a disproportionate 43 % of total executions since 1976 and 55 % of those currently awaiting execution. A moratorium of the death penalty is necessary to address the blatant prejudice in our application of the death penalty.

            The jurisdictions with the highest percentages of minorities on its death row:

            U.S. Military (86%)
            Colorado (80%)
            U.S. Government (77%)
            Louisiana (72%)
            Pennsylvania (70%)

            While white victims account for approximately one-half of all murder victims, 80% of all Capital cases involve white victims. Furthermore, as of October 2002, 12 people have been executed where the defendant was white and the murder victim black, compared with 178 black defendants executed for murders with white victims.
            For many years reports from around the country have found that a pervasive racial prejudice in the application of the death penalty exists….

            Among countries around the world, almost all European and many Pacific Area states (including Australia, New Zealand and Timor Leste), and Canada have abolished capital punishment. In Latin America, most states have completely abolished the use of capital punishment while some countries, such as Brazil, allow for capital punishment only in exceptional situations, such as treason committed during wartime. The United States (the federal government and 31 of the states), Guatemala, most of the Caribbean and the majority of democracies in Asia (for example, Japan and India) and Africa (for example, Botswana and Zambia) retain it….

    3. John, give me a break. You’ve been saying for years that WC is *the* definitive answer to what happened on 11/22/63 – no questions asked – while at the same time you’re saying that government is “flawed.” If you think government is, in fact, flawed, then why can’t you see the many glaring weaknesses in the official JFK story? After all, it was a government-sanctioned [flawed] whitewash of what happened.

      1. John, give me a break. You’ve been saying for years that WC is *the* definitive answer to what happened on 11/22/63 – no questions asked –

        This is the second time somebody on this thread just made something up and attributed it to me.

        The WC was way better and more honest and more competent than virtually every conspiracy book.

        As for where they should have done better, see Shenon.

        The issue is not what the WC said, any more than what Mark Lane said. It’s what the evidence shows.

        You folks don’t seem to like to discuss actual evidence.

        That’s because you get your clock cleaned when you do.

    4. The why do you unquestionably support the WC? Do you really think the government incompetently stumbled upon the right answer? I do not understand the contradiction.

      1. The why do you unquestionably support the WC?

        It seems you buffs can’t honestly argue against what I actually post, so you attribute things to me I never said.

        Why do you unquestionably [sic] support conspiracy books?

        You folks don’t like to discuss evidence. You just like to bash the WC.

        That’s terribly revealing.

  13. It has become obvious over the half century since the JFK Presidency that John Kennedy was one of perhaps too few people who took Eisenhower’s farewell speech seriously. This is due to the fact that in many ways it was a message to the incoming President himself.

    John Kennedy did not trust the military. And the revelations over the years of his dealings with them prove that he had very good reasons not to trust them. The military leadership was (and still is) imbibed with hubris to the point of utter madness.

    That the 21st century has ended up in the dire situation of imposed “Full Spectrum Dominance” by the global military industrial complex is the big blank spot in the so-called “news” presented by mainstream media.
    Mainstream media as the propaganda service of the Global Military Industrial Complex is the missing factor in popular analysis of the political realities of the current era.

    And the proximate point of this situation is the defeat of Kennedy by covert means in the coup d’etat in Dallas, is the real meaning behind these ongoing debates here on this site.

    This in fact is a struggle against the totalitarian state, and the propagandists who support such a state. It is in fact a war, a mind-war, for freedom against slavery.

    Those who take the consequences of this lightly are doomed to relive those consequences. Only an awakening to the depth of this peril can assure a fighting chance to defeat this evil that has engulfed the planet.

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