One SHOCKING Paragraph In New JFK Files CHANGES EVERYTHING, SPREAD THIS EVERYWHERE

[rangerrebew]

 October 28, 2017 by Sean Brown
One SHOCKING Paragraph In New JFK Files CHANGES EVERYTHING, SPREAD THIS EVERYWHERE
 

Sean Brown AMERICA’S FREEDOM FIGHTERS –

It’s been 50 years since John F. Kennedy was assassinated, and there’s still more questions than answers surrounding the ordeal.

As many are aware, the “official narrative” has been that Lee Harvey Oswald was a lone gunman who took out JFK on his own. Ever since his murder, that’s what we’ve been told by politicians, pundits, and federal law enforcement officials alike, however, that narrative has been completely ripped to shreds with the release of 3,000 never before seen documents about the killing.

https://www.americasfreedomfighters.com/2017/10/28/shocking-paragraph/

[rangerrebew]

IF this is accurate, it explains why the media doesn't seem to be overly interested the revelations and why the documents were closed for 50 years.  I never felt the Warren Commission was overly honest.

[Applewood]

Screaming headlines = another conspiracy theory website. 

How does any of what is cited in this article proves a conspiracy? 

[KingsX]

Was Lying Ted's Communist Cuban revolutionary father in the photo ??

[TomSea]

Potito from the doc was a member of the NSRP, something akin to the Klan, do we really want to listen to his word.

The National States' Rights Party was a far right, white supremacist[1] party that briefly played a minor role in the politics of the United States.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_States%27_Rights_Party

There was no SG report, Surgeon General, I don't know when the autopsy report came out, this speech Potito gave was in Jan. 1964. Perhaps, the government got the initial autopsy report out pronto. The motorcade route part can be debunked as well.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/

Looks like Potito made some remarks that got the FBI interested. They were checking out all leads. There was one States Rights party guy who said he had heard of a plot to kill the prez. using a sniper.

This is no smoking gun imho. One could go over it with a fine-toothed comb.
 

[TomSea]

The document the article was based on: https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32144493.pdf

I have never heard Jack Ruby (Rubenstein) was a member of the communist party back in these days of the Red Scare. More talk, nothing backing it up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Ruby

There really was a real "Red Scare" back then, paranoia but at the same time, we did need to worry about them, the Reds very much but not to an irrational degree.

[TomSea]

When John F. Kennedy was shot on 22nd November, 1963, he was taken to Parkland Hospital and was treated by Dr. Malcolm Perry. He performed a tracheotomy over the small wound in Kennedy's throat, therefore inadvertently destroying crucial evidence concerning the direction of the bullet that hit the president. At the press conference that followed the death of Kennedy, Perry stated that he thought the throat hole looked like an entrance wound.

Charles Crenshaw also treated Kennedy at Parkland Hospital. He later stated: "Two wounds were visible. There was a small, round opening in the front of the midline of the throat. This became the site of Dr. Malcolm Perry's tracheostomy incision. In the occipito-parietal region at the right rear of the head, there was an avulsive wound nearly as large as a fist.... I considered the throat wound to be an entrance wound and the large head wound to be an exit wound. Along with many of my Parkland colleagues, I believed at the time that President Kennedy had been hit twice from the front."

http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKSautopsy.htm

Okay, doctors spoke about the wound probably initially from Parkland Hospital; so this, "Potito" could have learned from as well. <---- Of course, a lot of people have always questioned a lot about the case, especially the autopsy.  Some may have reasonable suspicions.

[TomSea]

There was the "fake document" that has been around a decade too, that has been posted, flogged about. It's sad, people can get in a tizzy with some of the info coming out.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.assassination.jfk/sEtBKqPOW1U

http://mccone-rowley.blogspot.com/

[Applewood]

@TomSea

Thanks for doing the research. 

The release of these documents will only fuel existing conspiracy theories and maybe even create a few new ones.

So when is Alex Jones going to weigh in?

[Applewood]

Was Lying Ted's Communist Cuban revolutionary father in the photo ??

 

[KingsX]

We all know about the Cuban missile crisis in 1962.

But what many may not know... Kennedy made a lot of Americans angry. The last straw may have been June 1963, just months before the assassination.

One wonders if blaming the Communists was a convenient way to defuse a domestic situation.

[Emjay]

Screaming headlines = another conspiracy theory website. 

How does any of what is cited in this article proves a conspiracy?

It doesn't.  There is nothing people love more than a Kennedy assassination conspiracy.

It did not happen.

[musiclady]

I figure any article with a headline including the word "SHOCKING" is a bunch of hooey, and I don't waste my time reading it.

[ABX]

The document the article was based on: https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32144493.pdf

I have never heard Jack Ruby (Rubenstein) was a member of the communist party back in these days of the Red Scare. More talk, nothing backing it up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Ruby

There really was a real "Red Scare" back then, paranoia but at the same time, we did need to worry about them, the Reds very much but not to an irrational degree.

Thanks for the source document.

So basically, the headline/source is clickbait bullscat. They weren't referring to what the actual report was, but what this Potito group was telling people what they believed was in the report, ie, they were just reporting on conspiracy theories that were going around.

No wonder the source article just took a small cutout of the paragraph without adding context to it.

[TomSea]

Thanks for the source document.

So basically, the headline/source is clickbait bullscat. They weren't referring to what the actual report was, but what this Potito group was telling people what they believed was in the report, ie, they were just reporting on conspiracy theories that were going around.

No wonder the source article just took a small cutout of the paragraph without adding context to it.

I've heard some younger journalists may not be that aware of the JFK assassination and this was from a non-mainstream website.

There was a story this week about concerning the documents being released, be careful of how they are interpreted and reported on.

To me, it strikes me as though that maybe some thirty-something guy went through the documents and said "oh look at this" without much further deliberation.

There is a website called 100 errors in the JFK movie, I enjoy the JFK movie very much but I know a lot of it is just conjecture. In my opinion, looking at that movie with a critical eye isn't too bad of a primer on the JFK assassination and then, maybe read the web for more.  So are a number of books helpful, I won't recommend any, everyone can research it for themselves and there is a lot on the web about it.

jfkassassinationforum.com has the same kind of forum format as this website is. It's okay.

[Emjay]

I figure any article with a headline including the word "SHOCKING" is a bunch of hooey, and I don't waste my time reading it.

I know.  I hate those gotcha headlines.

[Chosen Daughter]

I figure any article with a headline including the word "SHOCKING" is a bunch of hooey, and I don't waste my time reading it.

I was expecting National Enquirer with another hit against Cruz' father.

[berdie]

It doesn't.  There is nothing people love more than a Kennedy assassination conspiracy.

It did not happen.

I find it difficult that people believe that Oswald couldn't have pulled the deed off by himself. It seems pretty easy. Motivation...who knows? No one ever will.

[ABX]

I find it difficult that people believe that Oswald couldn't have pulled the deed off by himself. It seems pretty easy. Motivation...who knows? No one ever will.

The more complicated a plan gets, the harder it is to pull off. More pieces in the chain to break.

Complicated makes great stories for movies and books, but it isn't so great for actually executing action.