https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/2022/10...
"In summary, and based on the above information, it is concluded that the letter was transmitted via normal Swedish postal channels. The letter is probably a "crank letter", most likely written by a Swede, using a Swedish-keyboard typewriter and Swedish stationary."
The mere thought of this kind of bureaucracy requiring this lengthy reply to a nonsense letter worries me.
And even with all that pushback it’s still true. They keep releasing 70%, making that last bit of the documents that’s unreleased ever smaller. But there’s always something unreleased!
Surely all the juicy stuff is held back.
https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/2022/10...
...was that really so secret 60 years ago that we had to keep the memo about the memo under wraps? And still so secret that even this revelation has so many redactions?
I believe at this point most of the world realises that the US intelligence has successfully infiltrated every nation ally or otherwise so quiet bizarre to redact.
Edit: I hadn't read the reply below I think he nailed it. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/23/gough-...
If Russia did it the information would have been released by now due to total collapse of diplomatic relations.
Sounds crazy reading the above, but as skeptical as I've been over the years of every theory, this is the closest to the truth based on the evidence that we have.
But Barbara Bush said in her memoirs that he was in Texas, near Dallas, at that time.
In the absence of the truth, there will ever only be theories.
Bush Sr was so important in 1963 (despite being officially just an oilman and a Senate candidate from Texas) that J. Edgar Hoover as head of the FBI sent Bush a memo right after JFK was killed briefing him about the effect this assassination was having on Cuban exiles. The CIA essentially claimed years later that it wasn't the same George Bush, but never offered an explanation of who this other George Bush was who was so important that Hoover would be briefing him on the developments.
So Bush was unofficially in the CIA in 1963 heading up field operations related to Cuba, but officially he was running Zapata Oil and he was running for the open US Senate seat in Texas. And yet years later when Kitty Kelly was interviewing him for his biography and she asked where he was when he first heard about the JFK Assassination, he said he didn't recall. Everybody alive when JFK was killed remembers exactly where they were when they heard the news, just like people who were alive on 9/11 remember it clear as day what they were doing when they saw the towers fall. And yet here is a guy doing work for the CIA which was very much in opposition to what Kennedy wanted done in Cuba, and who was running for US Senate and yet when JFK was killed he doesn't really remember it well enough to know what he was doing at the time.
Well thanks to the Kitchel memo[1], we now know that Bush Sr. was staying in the Dallas Sheraton Hotel, a block away from where JFK was killed, and checked out after the assassination.
Also in that memo it shows that he effectively called in a false flag on some other guy named James Parrot[1], for unknown reasons. It could be argued that it helped distract the Secret Service away from Oswald, who was already being at least passively surveilled due to his prior known associations regarding Cuba and political "activism" in general.
This is a lot of circumstantial evidence that is hard to explain away with a different explanation. As to why Trump wouldn't expose any of this information, that would assume Trump was more than just a conman grifter who tricked his way into the White House. Of that, I have not seen enough evidence.
[0] https://ia801304.us.archive.org/17/items/nsia-CIABushGeorgeH...
Some interesting stuff in there, just from browsing the overview .XLSX file.
What about the remaining percentage? Why is that not being released?
Will be interesting to see what all's been released, but I feel like at this point he (jfk) had so many enemies (Cuba/three letter agencies/mob) that short of someone coming forward with a confession and new solid evidence we'll never know much beyond Oswald.
I do think most likely though that Oswald was just off his rocker.
In the 2017 release, some files were shown to have been rereleased with fewer redactions, while others had added redactions. This is not likely nefarious but due to either a different/newer team working on them, or a mistake, or perhaps changing to a different document system.
Is this the new "70% of the time it works every time"? (I get that "in full" means "not redacted" but it's still a funny juxtaposition of words.)
