
How to Read the JFK Assassination Files - wslh
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/10/26/jfk-secret-assassination-files-how-to-read-them-215749
======
clarkmoody
One of the best Radiolab episodes I've heard was _Mau Mau_ [1], which
chronicled the uncovering of thousands of documents pertaining to the British
Empire in Kenya. The extent to which history must be rewritten is stunning,
only to be surpassed by the brutality of the English.

Not that releasing the JFK assassination files would rewrite an extensive
period of history, but the precedent remains: the grim truth of history often
lies forever buried in the archives of state.

[1] [http://www.radiolab.org/story/mau-
mau/](http://www.radiolab.org/story/mau-mau/)

~~~
agumonkey
off-topic opportunity: should history be taught in school ? it's a weird blend
of nationalist myth, folklore, ignorant (or not) lies and revisionnism.

ps: people I didn't mean to stay ignorant, but hinting at rethinking what
we're teaching. History is extremely subtle and trimmed far too much for kids
(hence the bad blend I described above).

~~~
domparise
It may be biased, but the alternative, having no formal history lessons, is
far worse. At the very least it provides a shared cultural identity, and
presents lessons learned from the past.

Hopefully moving forward we won't have to worry so much about the revisionism.
With everything being documented the internet, we most likely will just have
to content with sifting through it all to find the truth.

~~~
dfsegoat
>> It may be biased, but the alternative, having no formal history lessons, is
far worse.

110%. In America, I would say we ought to be teaching history as fast as
possible: We are a Republic of immigrants, fighting for the preservation of an
idea - The Constitution of the United States of America. By the way, that
constitution happens to make us all equal by default. That's a pretty
important lesson for us here to remember in these divisive political times.

------
wallace_f
Hypothetically, if a group of people was willing to go to all the trouble of
breaking laws to assassinate a President, what's forcing them to be honorable
in producing and releasing information implicating themselves?

It seems any excitement is contingent on believing not just in the conspiracy,
but also in extreme incompetence, no?

~~~
indubitable
I would be surprised if the releases containing anything especially new, but
the government most certainly maintains incriminating information on
themselves. For instance we now know that the FBI discovered compromising
information on MLK and tried to black mail him into suicide. [1] They also
discovered his infidelity through surveillance and contacted his wife again
trying to damage his character. This was all well documented and maintained
for decades after it had happened. If you want death and murder, there's
things like US involvement in Operation Condor [2] which was long speculated
but finally fully verified by documents declassified under Clinton. And there
are countless other examples.

Releases staggered by decades come with great plausible deniability. Is the
FBI today responsible for what the FBI of the past did to MLK? _If_ anything
relevant was revealed, I'd expect the modern versions of the involved agencies
to be the first condemn those actions. Whether that's genuine or not is
practically impossible to know. But it's almost certainly sufficient to ensure
they'll never face any meaningful consequences for their actions.

[1] - [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/11/fbis-suicide-letter-
dr...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/11/fbis-suicide-letter-dr-martin-
luther-king-jr-and-dangers-unchecked-surveillance)

[2] -
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Condor#U.S._involvem...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Condor#U.S._involvement)

~~~
kelukelugames
If King's affairs are real then why are they not more widely known? I haven't
seen any conclusive evidence other than Hoover's letter.

~~~
indubitable
I'd imagine mostly because it's not really relevant, and the media at the time
wasn't the tabloid circus that it is today.

Among King's lovers was Georgia Davis Powers, first black senator of Kentucky,
who wrote about their affair. According to her for instance she slept with him
the night before he was assassinated at the Lorraine Motel. She was climbing
into the ambulance to go with him until another individual reminded her of how
inappropriate it would be. These are some pretty specific claims coming from a
reputable source with 0 motivation to lie, that could be easily falsified.

The letter also mentions another lover by name and implies there was an
attached audio recording of King with the classy phrasing, "Lend your sexually
psychotic ear to the enclosure..." That audiotape is set to be publicly
released in 2027. And then there is the bio of Ralph Abernathy, King's
successor at the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and the man King
described as "the best friend I have in the world." Within his bio he
discussed King's (and his own) regular infidelities.

------
gravy
Usually I'm opposed to "read these documents the way we tell you to" articles
a la CNN but this was a case of judging a book by its cover on my part, with
little mention of Trump. Kudos Politico.

------
adventurer
2,800 of the 3,100 documents have been released. April 26, 2018 is apparently
the new date for the remainder of the documents to be reviewed by the
President and potentially released.

~~~
dayaz36
Haven't they had several decades to review it?...

~~~
harryf
He wanted a chance to Tweet about it first ?

~~~
lostlogin
I wonder how many of the documents Trump read?

------
Yizahi
I stumbled recently on this improved video of the assassination -
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sqk3sdfXFkc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sqk3sdfXFkc)

------
sharpercoder
I saw a documentary which analyzed footage found around 2000 iirc (discovered
old footage) of the murder. The conclusion was that due to the wound exit, the
shooter could never have been Oswald. It convinced me.

Who does the American public currently believe to be the shooter? Is there
consensus for some theory?

~~~
lstyls
> Who does the American public currently believe to be the shooter?

What does this have to do with anything? Reality isn't a democracy.

It's absolutely possible the shot came from Oswald. Tastelessness aside, try
playing JFK Reloaded
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JFK_Reloaded](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JFK_Reloaded)).
Claiming the ballistics don't make sense is as debunked as claiming jet fuel
can't melt steel beams.

~~~
dragontamer
> claiming jet fuel can't melt steel beams

Just note: Jet Fuel probably can't _melt_ steel beams, because steel has a
significantly higher melting point than the temperature of jet fuel.

Of course, Steel Beams are about as strong as a wet-noodle at Jet-fuel
temperatures:
[https://youtu.be/FzF1KySHmUA?t=1m55s](https://youtu.be/FzF1KySHmUA?t=1m55s)

Which of course, would cause the towers to collapse.

But seriously, Jet Fuel doesn't "melt" steel beams. It just weakens them tot
he point where they break easily. You can't make ANY mistakes when talking to
a conspiracy theorist. They are right about the melting point of steel, but
that doesn't help their argument at all.

~~~
tzakrajs
Also there were documented hotspots that were in excess of steel melting
temperature. This was due to regular office debris being burnt quickly, thanks
to the jet fuel that had catalyzed it when it sprayed out into the center and
floors above and below the crash site. I read about this in the excellent 9/11
debunk series by Popular Mechanics.

~~~
dragontamer
Conspiracy theorists will come up with anything to prove themselves correct.

For example:

> Also there were documented hotspots that were in excess of steel melting
> temperature.

This will be evidence for the Thermite that the "Big Bad Government" planted
in the towers to make it an inside job.

\--------

When talking to a conspiracy theorist, do NOT challenge them to a facts
battle. You take their facts that they tell you, and you debunk what they're
saying individually. The vast majority of 9/11 Truthers believe in "Jet fuel
doesn't melt steel beams", so you must FOCUS on this argument.

A conspiracy theorist will always, always, ALWAYS "out fact" you. Because
their community is making up bull----, they have way more "facts" than you
ever will have. You can't win by "breadth" of argument, you can only win with
"depth" of argument.

NEVER broaden an argument against a conspiracy theorist. That's how they win.

~~~
tzakrajs
I get it now, I will practice that more. But won't you be breadthening the
argument by saying the steel was weakened and not melted and then they will
ask about how beads of steel were reportedly seen or recorded?

~~~
dragontamer
> But won't you be breadthening the argument by saying the steel was weakened
> and not melted and then they will ask about how beads of steel were
> reportedly seen or recorded?

But I didn't say that "The steel didn't melt". All that I said was "Jet Fuel
probably can't melt steel beams".

This has two effects:

1\. It makes the Conspiracy Theorist more willing to listen to you because you
agree to their premise. You have to learn to "pick your battles" so to speak,
and "giving your opponent a bone" so that they continue the discussion is
rather important.

2\. If higher temperatures WERE documented, that doesn't disprove the premise:
that the Towers _could_ have collapsed under lower temperatures.

------
ekianjo
> The single bullet theory, while almost certainly true, was ridiculed in the
> film, as was Specter, by name.

What about the Zapruder film?

~~~
blowski
What about it? Genuine question, I don’t know what you mean.

~~~
stevewillows
It's basically the best footage.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iU83R7rpXQY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iU83R7rpXQY)
(as expected, its gory)

Frame 225 has JFK's throat wound, with the headshot at 313.

You've most likely seen this footage many times over the years.

------
jakeogh
Other thread:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15564292](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15564292)

------
jayess
Hijacking this thread to repeat my comments from another thread:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15565134](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15565134)

------
minademian
Such a solid article. Refreshing to read this.

