Who Killed Chuckie Nicoletti & Why?

Charles "Chuckie" Nicoletti,also known as "The Typewriter" with a gold front tooth as a young boy killed his own father,Philip Nicoletti,comming from Santa Caterina Villarmosa,Sicily.He's father was a drunk,who beat his own wife,forcing his son to step in the fight,the young Nicoletti was found not guilty of justifiable homicide.
Nicoletti was a close friend with Felix Alderisio they had their famous car later named "the hitmobile" by reporters.Theres also a rumour that he took part in the infamous torture case of Billy McCarthy.

In the 1960s, Nicoletti was harassed all the time by FBI agents,and there were some rumours(probably invented by the agents)that Nicoletti was a stool pigeon.

On March 29, 1977, Nicoletti got shot 3 times to the back of his head while waiting in his car in a suburban Northlake, Illinois,on a parking lot near a restaurant.He was brought to a hospital where he died six hours later.When they found and took Nicoletti to the hospital the car was forgotten,still runnin,overheated and started on fire.He was 60 years old when he died.

Theres a rumour that the Outfit's day-to-day boss,"Joey Doves" Aiuppa,believed that Nicoletti had become an informant and ordered the hit. But the real reason for Nicoletti's murder remains unclear.

Another rumour or a myth is that Nicoletti was involved in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.Theres one source,a guy named James E. Files who was a driver for Nicoletti,said that Nicoletti told him "We are going to do Kennedy."That happend in June 1963.One week prior to the assassination, Files says he drove a 1963 Chevrolet loaded with weapons to a motel in Mesquite, Texas.Theres a rumour that Nicoletti was one of the shooters that day.Coincidence that both Charles Nicoletti and George De Mohrenschildt(a professor who was connected to Dallas and had some connections with Oswald also)were killed on the same day,March 29, 1977.The two of them were due to appear before the Select House Committee on Assassinations and to be asked about their involvement in the assassination of John F. Kennedy.Sam Giancana and John Roselli also died violent death's before being able to testify before House committees.

My opinion is that since he was Giancana's "hit man" and his ally so he was killed after Riccas death as all Riccas underlings with the changing of the guard.

I wanna ask yall about your opinion on the Nicoletti situation?

In Romer's book Accardo I believe it was said Nicoletti was hit for going up to Milwaukee and killing a guy from that family. Or maybe im thinking of a different guy idk

Yes your right,it was said that Nicoletti did a hit on some guy in Milwaukee but i doubt that he would do that without the OK.

On September 11, 1975 gambling operator August Maniaci, a suspected informer, was murdered by several gun shots outside his Milwaukee home.Another suspected informer,August Palmisano, was slain by a car bomb on June 30, 1978. A witness claimed to have seen Chicago Outfit member and a suspected hit man, Charles Nicoletti, near Manaci’s home moments after his murder. Nicoletti, who was believed to have been a close associate of Balistrieri.

The JFK Assassination has always been a fascination for me. I do believe that the Outfit was in some way involved and that we will live to see the day when what truly happened will be made known. In 1963, The Outfit most CERTAINLY had the means, the motive, the opportunity, AND the connections in the CIA to have had a hand in this. Whether or not Chuckie Nicoletti was a part of it, I don't know. He most certainly could have been, though. I don't think the CIA killed Nicoletti though, I think it was Aiuppa's guys. Nicoletti would have never talked to the House Assassinations Committee I think Aiuppa just used the timing of that to his advantage so that the cops and the media would never know really where to place the blame. In reality, Nicoletti's days were probably numbered from the time Giancana was killed 2 years before. It was a continuation of the purge of Mooney's old Taylor Street guys by the alliance of Cicero/Elmwood Park.

Yes,i share the same opinion,Aiuppa used the right situation in the right time.

Nicoletti's name came up frequently during numerous articles I read. Also during the FS trial. The man really looked like a movie star, but was apparently a stone-cold killer.

I recall several stories about him being shot in the head and his car burning, but never heard an explanation about why he was killed.

Heard the conspiracy stories about Nicoletti, Roselli and others relative to the Kennedy assassination.

States att.Bernard Carey was asked if the Harry Aleman was the shooter,he said "Aleman is now out on bond and his quite proficient".Aleman was tied to the new guard.

The police theorized that the shooter was sitting in the back seat while an accomplice sat on the passengers seat next to Nicoletti.He was shot by a very close range.

With the Italians, it's ALWAYS people you know who kill you. Aleman was from Taylor Street too and am sure Nicoletti knew Aleman from when Aleman was a kid and certainly let his guard down.

There's another theory told by Bill Bonanno that Johnny Roselli was one of the shooters and that he took the shot from a sewer hole

There's another story, TooDoped, portrayed in the BBC Documentary "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" which is FASCINATING. In it basically there are the usual Mafia suspects in New Orleans and Tampa but it states that The Outfit here in Chicago brought in Corsican Heroin smugglers to do the hit on JFK. The reasoning is 1. it was Dallas 1963 so the shooters had to be white, 2. They couldn't be Italians as it would be traced back to the Mafia and there would have been such an outcry against them by the American people in light of RFK's efforts against the Mafia, and 3. they were Corsicans as the Corsicans have a code of Omerta and silence in that if anyone was caught it was trusted they would not talk. Whether you believe it or not, it is one hell of an interesting documentary. I think at that time Roselli and Nicoletti were too close to Giancana and too valuable to him to be involved as shooters. If either would have been caught it would have been the end for The Outfit as the Government probably would have used the military to crush them.

Well i gotta admit that this story sounds more reasonable,btw good thinkin about Rosellis and Nicolettis involvment.The corsicans and the mob had been tied together in the drug business for some time.

Is this the documentary your talkin about?There r many parts...

Yes that's it....It's really an in-depth and intriguing documentary. I have it on old VHS somewhere. You would really enjoy it.

I think Jack Ruby is a key too...Who was he? Where was he from? He was from Chicago and was linked up with Lenny Patrick. He had the connections with the cops in Dallas to get into the police station and then killed Oswald before he could talk. That scenario is as old as the hills in Sicily. I don't think Oswald even pulled the trigger or knew much of anything other than he realized afterwatd that he was going to be the patsy as he stated

Cuban exiles killed Kennedy, they reversed there hit on Castro and eliminated Kennedy..There were no mob shooters, James Files story is a fraud. And Oswald was involved, just not how he people think he was..He was set up nice and neat by two exiles using war names Angel and Leopoldo..

This is what happen after the bay of pigs job there was a CIA blowback by Cuban exiles because they had been set up, Oswald was involved very true.

Nixon bay of pigs watergate tapes were Nixon says tell the CIA if they do not help this could blow the whole bay of pigs thing or something like that.

Nixon was up to his eyes in operation 40 were he new this group was part of the hit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_40

Very good abc, that's close,a couple members from OP40 were utilized but this wasn't a OP40 hit..I will mention one name, David Sanchez Morales aka El Indio, he wasn't the top dog, but he was the dog that contacted 2 para military CIA men (who were involved HEAVY in the BOP training) to put together 2 teams..

In Dallas,Ruby was also connected to mob enforcer and convicted murderer Paul Roland Jones.He was also arrested for violating Federal narcotics statutes.Rumours were that Ruby was sellin narcotics together with Jones.One day a member of Jones crew got arrested with 48 pounds of raw opium in his possession,he implicated Jones and another person,both of whom were convicted, but he did not implicate Jack Ruby.Ruby probably was not involved.Jones and Ruby in the past were introduced to each other by Paul "Needle Nose" Labriola.

David Sanchez Morales was CIA i think he was at the Bobby Kennedy hit as well. E Howard Hunt was at JFK hit he was OP40 member.

Yes Morales was CIA, Hunt was CIA but not part of this, he provided disinfo though..The CIA works because they have plausible deniability lol, they can also lie under oath and will NOT face consequences for it...There is a ton of disinformation out there, I was asked over 10 years ago to look at the shooting aspect of the case, people who think the mob was pulling triggers are chasing dis info..

Yeah the mob part is bull they were in on a hit on Fidel Castro and other matters but not JFK, The cover up on JFK was because the CIA did train people to kill Castro but the plan they put in place to kill Castro was used to kill JFK instead, this is why the cover up has went on so long CIA black OP went rogue.

Chuckie Nick got killed for the same reason Sammy DeStefano got killed, he was too dangerous to keep around after Ricca Died. Auippa/Cerone ordered it.
It had nothing to do with Milwaukee or the C.I.A. or anything else. Nobody from Milwakee WOULD EVER go into Chicago and kill a made guy.
It would be suicidal.

Chuckie lived in Melrose Park. He was also very well Dressed and was a good looking guy. You would never know he was that rough by talking to him. He actually was kind of soft spoken. He ran his own crew like most all Made guys do in Chicago. He and Alderisio worked together many times on murders.

At the risk of stirring up a hornet's nest,let me throw my two cents in. When you consider the actual evidence,not speculation,hearsay,or out of context quotes,but evidence,there is no doubt that Oswald was a lone nut,and the sole assassin of JFK.
Much of what is out there as far as conspiracy theory,is the result of people repeating,not researching. When you actually look into what is documented as opposed to what is exaggerated,the guilt of Oswald is indisputable,as is the absolute lack of any credible conspiracy evidence.

The Mob could never have successfully pulled this off and kept it quiet,not in a million years,and no one else had a motive that would necessitate the public murder of the President.

If they were so powerful and able to infiltrate the highest levels of our government and intelligence community,JFK would have just died in his sleep,or from a swift and fatal disease. There is no purpose to be served by killing him in front of the nation.
Bottom line,look at each of the main elements of the "conspiracy" with an open mind,examining both sides,and the conclusion is inescapable. Lone nut,lone shooter.

Back in the real world as regards Oswald anyone who thinks he had no part is a fool he could have shot JFK but that does not prove jack shit in regard to a conspiracy in this regard you look for independent evidence. magic bullet theory ?

Dr. Cyril Wecht describes the Single Bullet Theory and explains its importance to the single shooter conclusion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ci1oCEXP3pk

+1 Lou Para.

I heard an interesting perspective regards conspiracy theorists (9/11, Diana, JFK, moon landing etc): that is people need an extra ordinary explanation for extra ordinary occurrences. IE Human psychology dictates that people have trouble accepting simple explanations for complicated, large scale events. It is preferable that the reason is equal to event in complicity.

So people reject the lone gunman in favour of CIA/mob conspiracy, 12 hijackers in favour of CIA involvement etc etc.

Oswald killed Kennedy. Diana died from a car crash. 12 hijackers with Al Qaida support destroyed te twin towers. We landed on the moon in 69.

Though I'm pretty sure aliens did give the nazis UFO technology. That's not conspiracy. It's the truth!

Lou_Para you always have some good info's and opinions on many things,but i have to disagree with you on this one.I dont belive that Oswald was actin alone,yes he was a nut but not alone( plus now way he could do the shots with that shitty rifle that was found).And yes the mob was able to infiltrate the highest levels of the government and intelligence community,escpecialy the Chicago outfit in the Giancana era.Dont get me worng i aint sayin that the mob was the main player in the conspiracy,but had its own part in it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXxZjoXf6eU

Dr. Cyril Wecht reviews the results of the test firing of the ammunition allegedly used by Lee Harvey Oswald. The degree of deformity sustained by the test bullets after hitting just ONE bone is obviously greater than CE 399, the "Magic Bullet" that was supposed to hit TWO bones. This fact, along with the fact that the bullet contained no blood on it from either victim, PROVES that CE 399 did not strike anyone and disproves the Commission's Single Bullet Theory

Let's say the Cubans did kill Kennedy. They didn't have the pull to get both the FBI and Congress to cover for them. I say it was a Mafia/government conspiracy.

Lou Para, I don't know if Oswald was the lone shooter. I doubt it. However, I agree with you that the Outfit did not kill Kennedy. Chuckie Nicoletti was not in some underground drainage system and shot Kennedy. LOL.

The Outfit guys themselves were surprised, but happy that Kennedy was dead, including Mooney. They even hated his brother Robert even more than the President.

The Outfit was powerful in 1963, real powerful, but they never could have pulled off something of that nature and no one would know about it.
Everything about the Mafia always starts to become way exaggerated the more people talk about it.

It reminds me of when I was in school and kids would be impressed with someone and would continually talk about it.
A week later, the stories being told were so exaggerated beyond the original facts, that I couldn't listen to it anymore and would just laugh at it.
That's generally the way people are when they are impressed with something they don't know anything about. After awhile it becomes bigger than life.

The real truth is that we will never know the real truth.

Back on topic,do you think that Nicoletti was killed by Cerone and Auippa cuz of fear of retalation?And was Harry Almean the shooter?

I already stated above the reason. YES, Nicoletti was killed on orders of Auippa/Cerone because he was very loyal to Mooney and was a very dangerous man.
I have no idea who was the shooter, but I can tell you it was more than one guy involved.

I do not know but when senate investigations came up people was killed alot. Nicoletti was killed in 1977 that would have gave him a lot of time for retalation and no Boss would give a person with capability to kill like Nicoletti that much time.

Yes youre right,a lot of ppl were killed before their testimony on the senate committees,as i stated above,some of em were even killed on the same day.Coincidence?I dont think so...ppl forget that men like Marcello,Trafficante or Ricca/Giancana were runnin business enterprises equal to general motors,so they wouldnt accept interruption very easily.But ill say it again that this is only speculation nothing more

Yes the police also theorized that there was more than one person in the car with Nicoletti.Thanx again

I would say almost with certainty that Aiuppa signed off on Chuckie to go.

abc123, The Government had nothing to do with Nicoletti being killed. They didn't care about Nicoletti at all.

Auippa/ Cerone killed Giancana in 1975. They couldn't kill Nicoletti right away. Everyone was on guard. Besides, in 1975, they may not have decided for sure if they were going to kill Nicoletti.

Sometimes, people change their attitude or loyalty for different reasons. Dominic Blasi, Turk Torello, Joey Lombardo all had a different way of looking at it in 1975, compared to 1963.

Also, it was a little bit a time to test him and see his reaction and hear what he had to say about it from other men.

They then decided Nicoletti had to go. You really can't understand the street dynamics that went on during this time, unless you were there and know the people involved. You'll never understand all the dynamics reading it in a book. Anyway, that's the reason he was killed in 1977 and not 1975.

The mob could have killed people before senate committees just in case they was ratted out at the senate on other matters other then JFK RFK assassinations i mean conspiracy to kill charges mob men could have got on Fidel Castro alone but the cut out men to the mob Sam Giancana, Johnny Roselli was killed.

Chicago,

Was Roselli killed for the same reasons? being a Giancana loyalist?

Would be very interested to hear about the dynamics that you speak of.

Roselli was killed for a multitude of reasons. Not only was he a Giancana supporter but many suspected (correctly) that he had ratted out the Detroit and St. Louis families' Vegas operations. What's more is he had been slowly losing prestige ever since the Capone days, even. In my opinion, just speculation, Accardo disliked his high profile. There was an incident a decade or so before his death when Roselli told Murray Humphreys wife a story of a murder he committed. Very distasteful but also flashily distasteful. Humphreys made sure Accardo knew, and I doubt Accardo forgot in the years later.

No matter what factors there were in his death, I don't believe someone who schmoozed with celebrities and talked Cosa Nostra affairs to other mobster's life could be trusted to keep a low enough profile to co exist with the post Giancana, low profile regime. If he hadn't been killed the way he was he just would have been killed a year later. The Outfit had no use for people like that. I also doubt the Outfit appreciated the fact that Roselli got them involved with the CIA at all, and now that investigations were being prepared, why give him the chance to tell the government anything? IMO that was Aiuppa's thought process. And Santo Trafficante's thinking was obvious. Regardless of if you believe in a JFK conspiracy, there were still questions about mafia involvement in a Castro assassination plot, and Roselli could expose Santo as a conspirator. Of course he wouldn't want to be questioned.

Basically I believe the two main factors were the high profile Roselli had in the era where a high profile was intolerable. The second was Roselli's involvement with the CIA, a link that didn't need to be uncovered Bevause it would only lead to scandal and media attention. Rosella also ratted out Detroit and St. Louis. Take your pick..

Irelands32, No, Roselli was killed for completely different reasons. He was not really a Giancana loyalist so to speak.
In other words, he was NOT a Taylor St. man.

He was direct with Giancana because Giancana INHERITED him from the previous years.

He had been the Outfit's man in Los Angeles. He had a couple of soldier/associates who worked directly under him out there.

He mainly would oversee the Union /Hollywood situation. He also relayed orders to the Los Angeles family. When Chicago said jump, Los Angeles said 'How High'.

Both the Warren Commission and the House Select Committee on Assassinations have accepted the fact that the rifle found in the Depository was in fact the rifle from which the three shots were fired. That aside,there is a great deal of chain of custody evidence that puts the rifle in Oswald's hands from the time of purchase to the JFK shooting.
As far as the quality of the weapon,Ron Simmons,chief of the Army's Infantry Weapons Evaluation Branch fired Oswald's rifle and found it "quite accurate"(his words).Also at that time,the exact same type of rifle was being used by the Italian Nato rifle team in competition.As far as the other stuff,I have to stick by my premise that I have yet to see any actual evidence of Mob involvement.
And by the way,permit me to return the compliment. You also have some pretty cool info and insights.

I gotta say that i agree with you on that.Theres still no hard evidence...

Heres a documentary,im not sayin its 100% accurate,but its interesting to watch

The House Select Committee on Assassinations came to the conclusion that JFK was killed by a group of men who had conspired against him. However, they couldn´t (and perhaps wouldn´t) prove who these men were.

Didint know that he ratted out Detriot,cool info thanx.Heres a convo from a wiretap between Giancana and Roselli that i posted while ago...

Giancana, Roselli criticizes CIA bugging devices and indicates a preference for the more compact,FBI version:

Giancana: You can't take a big mike like that and put it in a flat.

Roselli: Sure, if you can take it apart.

Giancana: If you take it apart, you might not get the volume as clear as...

Roselli: Well, you play with it, you get an electronics guy... One thing, let me tell you what it is. The CIA has it...

Giancana: Like a cigarette.

Roselli: The FBI out there... has got a portable, it takes conversations way out... I told them, for Christ's sakes report on that thing.. ...... .1 got another kind you.. A guy in LA who's got an electronic cap kind of thing, and he showed me that... so I got to find out what the smallest thing is. If you put it in there, you got a receiver? And receive it when you are set up?

Giancana: Maybe a block, two blocks, three blocks...

Roselli: How big was your receiver?

Giancana: Like a... the box was only this big, maybe three inches by three inches. We were talking "blah, blah, blah." It picked it up. Think about it.

Roselli: Yeah. I'll work on it. Bobby is in Washington .

John Roselli testified shortly after Giancana's death.He told of some CIA plots, but led congressional investigators on a merry-go-round by insisting he had no recollection of the key events.Unfortunately,Roselli talked differently in private with gangland friends. He told them of Giancana's words to him when he had gotten his subpoena:"Santo's shitting in his pants, but you can't keep his name out of it.I introduced the guy to the CIA. . . .This Santo's crazy to think we can stop his name from surfacing." Roselli was also known to be dropping around the office of columnist Jack Anderson, sometimes having lunch or dinner with him.It was not an activity to inspire confidence in Tampa (Trafficante's bailiwick), in Chicago, or for that matter in Langley,Virginia, CIA headquarters.

I feel like my heads about to explode

I am going to jump out of this thread, an old saying going around in circles.

you guys r right,we had the pleasure of many opinions on the Nicoletti hit so theres no need for an ongoin convo on other topics....thanx again.cheers

There is no doubt that there was multiple men involved in this conspiracy

Anyone that really examines the bullets, wounds , angles etc. prove definitively that there was more than one shooter . Shoot watch where all the people in Attendance ran after the firings ( they all ran to pocket fence - 50 + people )

The assasination team likely was a rouge group of CIA guys that were supposed to kill Castro but instead flipped the plan on JFK . RFK knew this and his son has just started talking about it .

Some of the top dogs at CIA were in the loop somehow - Angleton , Meyer , Harvey , Morales , Phillips and another top guy who name I forget
Financing likely came from Texas oil man

my guess accardo/auippa/cerone killed anybody that would be upset about giancana

those smart enough to shut up lived, those who didn't shut up got killed

Cook County, You've finally got the right idea! What you said is basically correct.

It doesn't just operate that way in Chicago, but in all the crime families. There was a story in a file about a boss who killed another member's brother. The surviving brother was asked how he felt about it and he said something like, "That's just the way it is." Nothing happened to him. In another case a surviving brother threatened revenge. He was found with a bullet in his head about a week later.

jimmy the weasel fratianno's book the last Mafioso written by ovid demaris fleshed out his connections with rosella. they were tight and though rosella a high level capo and fratianno a soldari there was concern that roselli had talked to much about the cia-castro plots that could get him whacked by trafficanti.

the cia man you forgot to name was e howard hunt who on his deathbed admitted he was involved in the jfk hit. when bobby kennedy had carlos Marcello literally thrown out and dropped in guatamala the only way a mafia boss could react was set in motion. to Marcello it was survival and guys like Marcello didn't get to be boss for being a chump.

The only nutjob conspiracy theory is that Oswald and his magic bullet killed Kennedy and mobster Jack Ruby out of a sense pateriotism got into DPD HQ and killed Oswald. The guilt of Oswald is indisputable because you said so? Was there a trial?

Any ballistics expert could tell you the entrance wound was from the front and the exit would was through the back of the head. The entrance wound is always smaller and the exit wound bbiger as the tip of the bullet mushrooms after contact. Now go look at the autopsy photo of Kennedy where the back of his skull is blown out. Look at the video where his head snaps backwards. A bullet hitting the top back of his head would throw it forward. You really have to be a complete fool to believe that Kennedy was shot from behind by Oswald. That's as laughable as the inescapable conclusion that the North Vietnamese attacked on US forces at the Gulf of Tonkin.

The hard evidence is in front of your face but you don't want to look at it. It's as simple as the entrance and exit wounds. Look at the picture of Kennedy on the autopsy table. The back of his head is blown out. Now go do some reading on entrance and exit wounds.

That doesn't tell you who did it or who was involved, but it tells you who didn't fire the shot that killed Kennedy.

You're great at beating up the strawman. Just because the mob didn't do it doesn't mean that Oswald did it.

If the Warren Commission and House Commissions were so honest and straightforward, why did they seal up the workpapers and documents until 2029?

Why did Earl Warren say:


Why haven't the files been released? What matters of national security from 50 years ago could jeopardize us now?

Do you know why there's no hard evidence who of really did it? They still haven't released the evidence. The truth will come out when all of the evidence is released to the public.

As far as we know, Oswald was never convicted at trial. An investigation held in secret, behind closed doors, where the source documents and work papers are not released, would be laughed out of even a kangaroo court. It's been fifty years since the assassination. The excuse of national security is a joke.

Actually the cia man I forgot was Richard Helms but Hunt had some type of role.

It's on tape that Ruby knew Oswald as during an early press conference , Ruby corrected the name of the Cuban group he belonged to when DA Wade was announcing it ( the name Wade announced sounded like it was anti Castro which was a big No No as the story was being crafted that LHO was pro Castro ). Not to mention all the confessions Ruby tried to make . Not too mention this pro Castro Cuban group that LHO was a member was run by a CIA men George Joaniddes? Who the CIA used as a liaison with the 1978 house assasination group and lied bout this direct link to LHO to Blakely ( blakely later said that he now does not believe one thing the cia told him )

Hard evidence - how about the Dallas doctors who told of the entry wound thru the neck and huge exit wound at back of the head. The Govt autopsy person had never done an autopsy with bullet wounds while the Dallas doctors had plenty of expierence so ill side with them.

The wound trajectories were simply impossible , Ford had to change the entry wound from the back to the neck just so it passed the sniff test ( this fraud was discovered in 1997). Also te bullet fragments taken from the victims when added to the magic bullet resulted in a weigh more than a new bullet which shows how sloppy this theory was and that it was impossible .

Even funnier is LHO tested negative for a rifle parafin test so he likely never fired a rifle that day.

There is sworn testimony from several cia guys that Howard hunt was in Dallas that day despite his lie that he was in DC . His involvement in the assasination was basically proven in civil court in 1986 ( liberty vs hunt )

There are at least 2 cia men that have admitted their involvement on the assanitaion to credible witnesses ( Moralez , Hunt ) . There is a credible witness that saw LHO meet with a cia man Maurice Bishop aka David Atlee Phillips in Dallas who ran the disinformation aspect of the plot .

There were over 30 witnesses that said a shot came from the picket fence.

There was LHO whole Mexico City trip that the WC smartly didn't go into but which in the House Assasination Committe investigator ( Lopez ) felt was an intelligence mission , parts of this report are still declassified.

Also LHO tax records and the Paines are still declassified . The Paine family has direct CIA connections , you got to ask yourself why the public still can't see these.

Also the rifle scope was not sighted. The only way testers could match LHO 6 seconds was by not aiming as there wasn't enough time , gues LHO just got lucky lol.

The amount of hard evidence is ridiculous , we have cia men admitting to it , we have a handicapped house investigation group admitting there was a conspiracy. The fact that the house committee recomended justice dept to re open the case and they didnt tells you about all you need to know . Anyone that still believes
The warren Commission really needs to do more research

I have a news article from the day after his was hit. According to witnesses 2 cars were chasing Chuck Nicoletti's car and they ended up in a strip mall parking lot where the gunman got out and shot Chuckie. It mentioned that his car was left on and overheated while paramedics took him away. He didn't immediatly die. I think he died 6 hours later. My theory is that he was loyal to Mooney and the new faction of Aiuppa/Cerone had not use for a aging hitman.

I always thought that there was another person in the car with Chuck and did the job,but i never knew about two cars chasing him down.Thanks for the info

Last telephone call Nicoletti received was from Jimmy Marcello.

Where did you hear that?

In a newspaper article dated April 3, 1977, the Chicago Crime Commission indicated that Nicoletti MAY have been killed because he had terminal cancer and MIGHT have been prepared to say the wrong things to the right people.

Apparently he may also have been deep in narcotics.

Nicoletti had no cancer although the street thought he did because he was in the hospital for a couple of weeks in July. The word was the new faction used his possible ID in the Milwaukee thing as a reason to make him look weak combined with the Cancer rumor.

Plain and simple, he was in the way of bigger expansion by the young Turks, he was still dangerous, he lost his power and he was one of a few last true threats to Joe Batters if he flipped.

They looked at Louie the Mooch and Marcello as one of the shooters.

Last seen alive at Aurie's in Melrose.

Yeah, the purging was a given that I didn't mention. No doubt some of these guys were simply taken out because of their allegiance to a prior regime.

Appreciate the info about not having cancer. This one newspaper article was the only place I recall seeing anything about Nicoletti having a terminal illness.

Also about Louie "The Mooch" and Marcello.

Never heard of this before,thanks GaryMartin.Giancana and his underlings were known for distributing narcotics....

Also thanks to realnoname for the additional info

Here's the newspaper article. Hope you can get it to open.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1955&dat=19770403&id=nN8hAAAAIBAJ&sjid=DKEFAAAAIBAJ&pg=6226,869906

Thanks for the article

If the cancer was on his brain....maybe....if not i realy dont think that he was killed becase of that

hicago was involved in the kennedy plot by the way of jack ruby. he was told by Chicago to use his police connections to have Oswald killed. that way the police could frame him as the killer,tippit was going to kill Oswald, Oswald killed him instead. therefore ruby had to do it himself.carlos marcelllo,santos trafficante,moe giancana had kennedy murdered.

Who knows ?

http://archives.chicagotribune.com/1977/...-of-mob-kingpin

I saw something on AHC about JFK that I hadn't seen. They had "evidence" that they had the hit in Chicago and he cancelled on the SS recommendation, then it was in Tampa and Trafficante called it off, and then Marcello got it done.

They showed basically the same setup as Dallas in downtown Chicaago on the route with the unattended open windows and I think the guy bolted and they found his weapons (4 hit man team).

Sorry I was 1/2 asleep. But it was something new.

I saw that show as well. It was very interesting.

The thing is that the FBI had bugs on the Mafia all over the country and not a single one even hinted at a connection to the JFK assassination. Most were shocked. Ralph Salerno went over this either before the Warren Commission or the HSCA. I went over to the National Archives in College Park around 2003 (years before Mary Ferrell put them up -- and are still incomplete) and went thru this material and more. The support for the Mafia conspiracy just wasn't there. A prisoner named James Files (real name Sutton) claimed to have been Nicoletti's driver. I've seen no evidence that he was, and I have maybe two hundred FBI files beside what's on the Mary Ferrell site. The guy's a hoaxer.

Bill Bonanno claimed that an attorney he knew named Roy Cohn, who was the investigator for the McCarthy hearings and later a criminal defense attorney for Carmine Galante, had incriminating photos of J. Edgar Hoover, and that's what kept him quiet. Ronald Kessler went thru all that and showed it was bogus and there were no photos. There was even a interview with Jimmy "Blue Eyes" Alo in a Miami paper and he was asked about that. He said if Lansky had photos (that's the other claim), then why did the FBI investigate and harass him so much? He said there were no photos.

Another source for all this is "Double Deal" by Sam and Chuck Giancana. Sam is the son of the late Chuck Giancana, and Chuck was the Outfit boss's brother. Chuck WAS a made member, but I think that Sam the nephew probably embellished what his father told him. Or else Chuck was a story teller, or Sam the boss told his younger brother embellished stories. The book is vague where it should be clear and sometimes the timelines are off. Most of it consists of Chuck's claims, but Sam didn't write the book as a question and answer dialogue, he changed his father's telling into an exciting story meant to sell books, and I'm not sure if any facts got lost in the process. It's a very different style than what Ovid Demaris did with Jimmy Fratianno. Demaris put Fratianno's words in quotes and when he needed to provide background it was clear it was separate. That wasn't the case in Sam Giancana's book.

faithful 1 the house assinations committee in 1979 said there was clear evidence of organized crime involvent in the killing of jfk. now that you can check on, there were fbi wiretaps that concluded that o.c. was involved. namely Marcello, trafficante, and giancana. oswalds uncle worked for Marcello, his name was I think dutz. Marcello was deeply involved.

as far as hoover denying there was a mafia, of course they had something on him. he gave them all a pass. the fbi only went after lansky after hoover was dead. in died in 1972.hoover was responsible for the growth of the mob,he refused to investigate them , and he never bothered the klan in the south either, as long as he was the head of the fbi. under hoover the fbi was a political organization not a crime fighting organization. all the time and energy was spent going after a handful of commies, j. edgar hoover was the biggest fraud in American history.

I looked into the actual House Assassinations Committee evidences at the National Archives. I looked at the wiretaps. The evidence isn't there.

As for Hoover, you're wrong on both points. The FBI under Hoover did an investigation in the 1940s called "Re-Investigation of the Capone Gang" until it was shut down by the attorney general. There was limited investigation until Apalachin in December 1957, then he believed that the Mafia was a national problem and authorized all those bugs. Who do you think handled Joe Valachi and Greg Scarpa? The FBI. The FBI under Hoover also investigated the Mississippi Burning case (the one where they used Scarpa to put the fear of God into a Klansman).

Ok,so what about all the politicans that were murdered by the mob throughout the years and other state officals?What about all of the CIA connections and plots?What about all of the corruption?What aboout all of the voting frauds?In the past special prosecutors reported details of voter intimidation,murder,kidnappings.After all of these examples of mob violence,murder,frauds,secret plots and corruption over government officals,i think that the entire mob in general,took a part in the JFK election and also assassination.

The same tactics were used even before,with the Cermak situation.Zangara was an anarchist and had mental problems,blah,blah,blah and thats why he wanted to kill the president but instead he killed Cermak?!I mean common,thats bollocks.It was written "MAFIA" all over it.After that Zangara was executed after 10 days without any real investigation.(Does this remind you of some1?)Corrupt politicans usually get killed by the mob and Cermak was corrupt.I have the same opnion about JFk but later he changed his mind(or maybe his brother became the problem) and that was the end of him and Oswald was publicly executed in a very fast time period

All of Hoovers operations were bollocks.He didnt go after the mob for real.Bobby Kennedy went after the mob for real.

I dont belive in national archives so much,they provide you with the informations that they think you should be provided with.I look at the examples throughout the history and i form my own opinion.Why do you think that they will provide you with the real infos and all of the wiretaps?Maybe a lot of government people would be implicated in the situation right?!Think outside the box

If you belive your government,than"there was no voting frauds","there was no conspiracy in the assassination","Oswald acted alone" and "Ruby killed Oswald out of patriotism"

Sorry but i dont belive in any government.And thats because street criminals,and organized crime in general,are the governments heritage and they use them for many favours and own greedy purposes.The government,the secret intelegence agencies know that with control over organized crime,they also control the lives of countless people around the countries.So the criminals expect something in return and if they dont get it,than theres a problem.

Okay, so your an anarchist. You can believe in what you want about the government. I'm about seeking out the best evidence without jumping to conclusions, especially about some tin-foil hat conspiracy. Sometimes conspiracies are real, like the conspiracy to assassinate Lincoln, but there has to be evidence for them.

Yes, the Outfit has murdered all kinds of politicians and state officials. The Outfit has engaged in voter fraud...and murder...and bribery...and corruption. Nevertheless it's quite a leap from that to killing a President.

Hoover did go after the Mob for real starting in 1958. Convictions were hard to come by until the application of RICO laws in the 1980s and the Witness Protection Program. Why testify if they're going to kill you or your family? Even newspapers were part of the problem because they used to give out the names and addresses of jurors, leaving them vulnerable.

It has nothing to do with whether or not I believe in the government, it has to do with evidence. Until you visit the National Archives and go through their materials, and other archives around the country, you shouldn't be so quick to criticize. I already stated I know voter fraud exists, so don't put words in my mouth. If you want to convince people, show them the evidence and present a logical, reasonable case, just like they do in courts across the world everyday. I've gone out of my way to look at as much original evidence as possible and I've got an open mind, I suggest you do the same.

Im not an anarchist...or maybe i am i dunno know.Just because i dont belive in some governments that doesnt make me an anarchist.And belive me i dont jump to conclusions.I grew up with the idea that there was no conspiracy but when i started to research the mob i had to change my mind.Because "where there's smoke there's fire" and to refresh your memory it means that if something looks wrong then it probably is wrong.



There,you just gave yourself an answer and belive me its not a "quite a leap".Just see what happend before JFK.Hisotry repeats its self quite often.



Sorry if i offended your opinion but what the hell i disagree with you on this one and im not tryin to put words in your mouth.I dont criticize you because i respect you as a decent researcher but you dont have an opened mind because you need a document paper wich has to be written by a government offical.What if the government was invloved in the hit?You think that they will give you an honest answer? So untill theres a strong evidence about your claims,my opnion stays closer to the truth.For example,its like you know that the guy next to you is a criminal but you dont have a real evidence,but you just know it that hes the one...you feeling me?!

EDIT:But in the end,as Jack Ruby once said in front of the cameras,"The world will never know the true facts...."

Yet even after RICO was introduced, people like Gambino, Lombardo, Accardo, Magaddino were never hit by it. The government and law enforcement waited until the really powerful figures died out a natural death. They started to fight the mafia only after most of the characters with really gigantic connections were dead.

But why do you say Toodoped is an anarchist?

It wasn't like the entire mafia would have been informed about it. If they did kill Kennedy, only a few bosses who were involved would have known. The FBI didn't bug every conversation and if there were conspirators, they wouldn't be sitting at their regular hangout chatting about it.

James Files being a liar doesn't prove anything. Tony the Greek Frankos claimed to have killed Jimmy Hoffa and buried him under Giants Stadium. That was a hoax. Does that mean the mafia didn't kill Hoffa?

It's still a mystery what happened. The files are still sealed. Ruby wasn't a fan of Kennedy, so why would he kill Oswald? Why did Oswald claim to be a patsy? Why would Ruby accept the hit on Oswald and end up dying in prison for the mob? Why did 12 policemen storm a movie theater to arrest a man for sneaking into a show when the president was just murdered? Wouldn't they be out looking for the person who just killed the president? At the time, he wasn't a suspect in the murder of either the cop or the president. Lots of things don't make sense.

Because he doesn't believe every story the government tells us. We all know the government would never lie, magic bullets and all. LOL

No, it's because he wrote this:


It's one thing to say that you have reasons not to trust your government, or that you're skeptical of it, it's quite another to say "I don't believe in ANY government." That's anarchism, unless he didn't pick the best words to express what he really meant.

You're right that the FBI didn't bug every boss, but they did place several strategically placed bugs in Chicago which is relevant since most of the conspiracy theorists believe that Chicago was the group behind it (along with Marcello and Trafficante). That's how the FBI found out about the Commission, through a bug that recorded a conversation between Accardo and Giancana.

BTW, have any of you read Vincent Bugliosi's book on the JFK assassination? It deals with just about every possible question about it.

Now whos putting words in other poeples mouths?I showed you respect and now you r the one being disrespectful.Just because i didnt agreed with your opinion that doesnt give you the right to offend me.@mulberry gave you a good sarcastic answer and that was,i dont believe in every story that the government tells us.In other words im not like you.THere you prooved yourself to us again.You are talking about a Deputy District Attorney who wrote total bullshit.A guy who defends the findings of the Warren Commission and states that Oswald acted alone...just another government puppet who jerks it off in the national archives...or in other words someone just like you.

Im goin to say it again,im not an anarchist,becase i do belive in some forms of government.I always vote and i also went in the army.But sorry for not beliveing in your government and opinions.I bet you feel pride when being able to say that you once shook a senators hand or saw the president in person and than you become shocked when the occasional sane person states that the political crooks and government puppets wrote something down and declared it as the truth.So dont try to poison our minds,please.

Oh and also please stay away from the Outfit's history because when i asked you about some early infos on Paul Ricca,you quoted wikkipedia.THats so shameful because it came from an alleged writer about the early mafia.Stick to your research about the early NY mob because you r realy good at it.Im not being sarcastic,im showing you respect because you r really good about the early NY mob...ofcourse with the help of few other guys.

And yeah...if you wanna learn about whats anarchism go and read a book from Peter Kropotkin for example.Expand your mind a little bit peace!

Don't get mad because I quoted your own words to you. I copied and pasted what you wrote, and you wrote that you don't believe in ANY government. Now you say you believe in SOME governments.

The rest of your attack screed just makes up stuff I don't believe. You said I believe everything the government tells us. I don't and never did. Maybe it makes you feel better to create straw man arguments, but I might be just a little less skeptical than you are. I said I didn't see the evidence for a Mafia committed JFK assassination conspiracy. It doesn't mean I said it's not possible for there to have been one, just that it has to be proven. Big claims require Big proof. Because I said that you get all crazy and write stuff about me shaking hands with a senator or something (which I've never done). You go from a JFK conspiracy to a conspiracy about ME!! LOL!!! I almost feel privileged to be the source of a conspiracy. I can join the ranks of the Illuminati, the Freemasons, the British monarchy, uh, who else...the Rothschilds...hmm...the JEWS! And I thought I was just a rank and file state employee and former union rep and part-time researcher and writer. What little did I know.

Thanks for the half-compliment about my writings. It seems your only familiar with the most recent article. I suggest you read some of the previous issues. Did a lengthy one on Lucky Luciano (actually about a hoax book on him) in a previous issue that I'm quite proud of. You might also like some of my articles on early Boston or Los Angeles.

On Ricca, I didn't get my info from Wikipedia. I've done a few Wikipedia contributions before, but too many people who know little about anything can mess up accurate articles. Some of the Wiki articles have plagiarized material from my articles without attribution. I know you like to write about Chicago. The thing is, I'm working on something on Chicago and I can't give away the farm. You might even like it once it comes out, but I'm kind of OCD about it and it is already quite thick and detailed. Plus I cite my sources. I'm doing it with a published author and we're working as a team.

Finally, who go through all the trouble of denying that you're an anarchist then recommend I read Peter Kropotkin -- the famous Russian anarchist? You're trying to mess with my head, right? I think he assumes an altruism in human nature that isn't real. I think selfishness is more natural and to overcome that natural instinct we have to yield to a Higher Power. Murray Rothbard is considered a right-anarchist as opposed to Kropotkin's being a left-anarchist, but I wonder if they meet in the middle somewhere. Peace be to you too, Toodoped. Goodnight, Gracie.

I dont know what you dont undertsand when i say "ANY government"?!I thought i gave you an explenation and yes it means i belive in some governments but not the one that you belive in.Every government around the world has its own politics.Are you tryin to confuse me or your just playin stupid i dont know?!




Ahhh you little devil you You say that "I said I didn't see the evidence for a Mafia committed JFK assassination conspiracy. It doesn't mean I said it's not possible for there to have been one, just that it has to be proven." oh really?and after that you recomend a book that clearly says that theres no mob involvment...geeshhh



I hope you r not in a situation by making DNA tests on your kids just to see if they are yours



Now you are changing the subject again buddy.Just by calling be an anarchist,for nothing,it makes you a government puppet.JUst because i said something anti-government and objected on your opinion that doesnt give you the right to give me names and stuff.And if you feel privileged to be in a government conspiracy and involved in murder...well than you are not a good person.But you can dream about what ever you want



It was not a half-comliment,it was a full compliment and i really mean it.I know who you work with and if you got offended just by mentioning the guys,well than fuck it



Cant wait to read your Chicago article.Good luck on your work and i hope youll show some new and unknown infos.



I recomended Kropotkin because you obviosly dont know what anarchism is and belive me im not tryin to mess with your head.That statement is just another changing of the subject or as you say"putting words in my mouth".And sorry but i dont think that selfishness is a natural way of life(are you going to fight with me about this also?).But fuck this dick measuring contest,lets agree to disagree,ok buddy?!Goodnight to you 2 and i hope someday youll wake up from your "dream" cheers

@toodoped: Let's do the agree to disagree thing. You get a little too sensitive at my humor. Maybe you need some better dope. They got all kinds of dispensaries here in California and I think Berkeley just passed a law making it free to all who can't afford weed. Might want to check it out.

Humor???What humor??? If thats humor than you r the most unfunny clown in the world.

Now you are again getting out of line by calling me a dope head.Thats personal.Shame on you man and you proved again that you r a very disrespectful person and a egoistic maniac.So ill act calmly and you can check your private messages in few min. so the other posters wont see what im about to say to you and ill wait untill you apologise publicly like a normal adult person.

Calling you a dope head? Then why do you call yourself "Toodoped" as in "Too doped"? Sounds like it means that you are saying you are too doped up. If I got the wrong impression from the nickname you gave yourself, I'm sorry I hurt your feelings. Didn't realize you were so thin-skinned. In the meantime please explain the meaning of your nickname so I don't make the same mistake in the future.

Im not thin-skinned but you r too much of a hotheaded person.Ok ill take that almost as your apology.But i dont think that i have to explain to you anything.ciao

As I made clear with your verbally abusive pms, I'm done with you. I won't comment on your posts and you don't comment on mine. Do not send me anymore pms. I'm writing this here so it is clear that you are not to communicate to me. End of discussion.

Im cool with that.THE END

well, let me get my two cents in here,this is going to be simple I believe in o.c. involvement for two very good reasons.the book written by trafficantes attorney frank ragano,and the book "contract on America about carlos Marcello.written by david scheim.also, the man who wrote the rico laws believes there was o.c. involvement.his name is William blakely,and he is a law professer at notre dame.

This is a cite from Wikipedia that explains how Ragano is not credible:

On January 14, 1992, Ragano told Jack Newfield of the New York Post that he relayed a request from Hoffa to Trafficante and Marcello asking that the two Mafia bosses kill Kennedy.[33] He repeated the claim two days later on ABC's Good Morning America,[34] in Newfield's Frontline report entitled JFK, Hoffa and Mob broadcast in November 1992,[35] and again in his 1994 autobiography Mob Lawyer.[28]

According to Ragano, he met Hoffa at the Teamsters' headquarters in Washington D.C. then delivered the message to Trafficante and Marcello a few days later in a meeting at the Royal Orleans Hotel in New Orleans.[33][34] He stated he was chosen by Hoffa because, as both Hoffa and Trafficante's lawyer, he could be assured of attorney–client privilege.[33] Ragano said that Jim Garrison served as a patsy for the New Orleans mob by disseminating theories that served to distract attention from mafia figures who were involved in the plot.[36]

Although Ragano believed he had received a few hints from both Trafficante and Marcello that they had somehow been involved in the Kennedy assassination, it was not until just before he died in 1987 that Trafficante, according to Ragano, made a direct confession to him. Ragano wrote that on March 13, 1987, a dying Trafficante (he died four days later) asked to meet him in Tampa for a hurried meeting. While riding in Ragano's car, Trafficante allegedly told Ragano in Sicilian: "Carlos e' futtutu. Non duvevamu ammazzari a Giovanni. Duvevamu ammazzari a Bobby," which Ragano translated as: "Carlos screwed up. We shouldn't have killed John. We should have killed Bobby."[37]

This was later found to be a complete fabrication by Ragano, because hospital records proved that Trafficante was in Miami receiving dialysis several times that week. The day that Ragano claimed to have talked to him was one of the days he was actually receiving dialysis. Hospital personnel, neighbors, and friends who all visited the afternoon before he left for Houston from Miami could also confirm this. The evening before leaving for Houston, because of his weakened condition, Mr. Trafficante was driven to the Miami airport by his goddaughter, so that she could help Mrs. Trafficante with securing a wheelchair and other boarding procedures.

This claim by Ragano, seemingly pointing to a successful mob plot to assassinate JFK, has come under much criticism. In his book Reclaiming History: the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Vincent Bugliosi has pointed out many flaws in Ragano's claims, including the fact that Trafficante was most likely not in Tampa on the day in question, but was rather in North Miami Beach receiving dialysis treatments.[38]

Bugliosi based much of his conclusions on the research of author Anthony Summers. Summers reviewed medical records and talked to Trafficante's family, neighbors and friends, and discounted the idea that Trafficante could have been in Tampa on the day in question. When Summers talked to Ragano about these problems, Ragano told Summers that he could produce three witnesses who could prove his story, but never did so.[39]

Both Trafficante and Marcello were very private individuals. The House Select Committee on Assassinations in its 1978 Final Report noted specifically that Trafficante was a very "discreet" individual who was unlikely to have made such an admission.[40] Bugliosi argues that it is absurd to think that Marcello and Trafficante would get involved in plotting to assassinate a president, particularly as nothing more than a supposed favor to Jimmy Hoffa.[41] Bugliosi also points out that by allegedly conveying a message in 1963 to that effect, and by relating this confession from an alleged conspirator, Ragano would himself be admitting to having been a part of a murder conspiracy.[42]

Shortly after the intial allegations, Jeffrey Hart compared Ragano's account with that presented in Oliver Stone's recently released film JFK.[43] According to Hart, Ragano presented an "earthy motive, vastly more plausible than the movie theory."[43] Hart quoted G. Robert Blakey as stating that he believed Ragano and that his testimony "would have strengthened the conclusions" of the HSCA.[43] Hart also quoted Frank Mankiewicz, Robert Kennedy's press secretary, as finding Ragano's scenario as "the most plausible (assassination) theory".[43]

When Ragano was questioned by the Assassination Records Review Board, created in 1992 to reexamine JFK conspiracy theories after the release of Stone's film, he claimed to have contemporaneous notes of his conversations regarding the JFK plot, but when they were produced, "he could not definitively state whether the notes were taken during the meetings [with mob figures]... or later when he was working on his book." His notes were subjected to Secret Service tests to determine when they were actually prepared, but the results were inconclusive.[44]

great piece of research, very well put together, im sure your aware of a few books recently written claiming lbj,had involvement in the asassination. these make great reading, thought I might pass this info on to you.

I didn't write the Wiki article, but it explained the Ragano situation well. Was surprised that it was Anthony Summers who did the investigation on Ragano since Summers has a reputation of including in his books every piece of gossip and innuendo as if they are true. I myself believed Ragano until I learned how he lied. That's why it's so important to verify all claims and assertions as much as one can.

G. Robert Blakey is a very credible person. He's the law professor who created the RICO law. Blakey is also the one who wrote the law that allowed researchers to have access to the FBI files connected with the JFK assassination, most of which are now up in the Mary Ferrell site.

Here's a great interview of Blakey from 1993 with updates from 2003. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/biographies/oswald/interview-g-robert-blakey/

Here is an interview from 2012 where he said he believed the Mob set up Oswald to kill JFK. Again, he believes that JFK was the shooter and no one else, but that somehow the Mafia set him up. He does go into detail about this and at the time of the interview may still have believed in Ragano. http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2012/nov/22/49-years-have-passed-kennedy-assassination-still/

Here's an interview from ABC News which is very good and he gives details. He thinks that Oswald was somehow convinced by Marcello's people to kill Kennedy and links David Ferrie and his uncle. While Blakey believes the entire Mafia was not complicit with the JFK assassination, he believes Marcello was and that he was not bugged. Here's the link: http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=131462&page=1&singlePage=true

The Frontline interview was BEFORE Summers exposed Ragano as a fraud. Also, Blakey is clear that Oswald was the one who killed Kennedy, but he thinks there could have been some sort of conspiracy involving people around Oswald. These other people didn't kill JFK, but could have influenced Oswald. That's what Blakey allows for, but states that he didn't get access to all the evidence he should have had from the CIA. Other agencies (like the FBI) were cooperative.

What he says about Ruby killing Oswald for the Mob is problematic. Killing Oswald in a police station in front of everyone? By doing that he knew it was an automatic life sentence. What was in it for him? On the other hand, since we knew that the CIA has kept out info from Blakey and other investigators, MAYBE the CIA convinced Ruby that it would be a patriotic thing for him to do. Ruby was a patriot. He was also connected to the Outfit for a fact, but not to Al Capone like Blakey said elsewhere. He was connected to guys like Romeo Nappi, Ralph Pierce and Murray Humphreys. Blakey said that Ruby killed Oswald so that he'd get his "button" (I'm paraphrasing). Uh, Ruby wasn't Italian so never could get made and I'm surprised Blakey wasn't aware of that. I could imagine an offer for the Outfit to take care of Ruby's family if he killed Oswald, but there's no evidence for this. He may have known the Civellos of Dallas -- and they were connected to Marcello -- but again, it's all just speculation. If he did it for the Mafia then there had to be some benefit in it for Ruby as a counter for spending the rest of his life in prison. It's just as possible that Ruby killed Oswald because he liked JFK and hated Oswald for killing Kennedy.

Finally, here's a previously secret CIA connection that only came to light in 2013: http://www.dallasnews.com/news/jfk50/exp...till-sealed.ece

One important thing the article says is that almost all the records will be released in 2017. ON a side note, from memory, a few years ago Caroline Kennedy ordered that the archive on her grandfather Joseph P. Kennedy (which I think are in Harvard) be kept closed to the public until around 2050 (don't quote me on the year). I wonder, could that archive include evidence that he was a major bootlegger who worked with Frank Costello, Joe Bonanno and other mobsters? The family is denying that he was a bootlegger and a recent book by Daniel Okrent asserts that he wasn't either, so that's the party line. I think there's good evidence that he was. This archive may tie the bow in the reasons behind the Kennedy assassination, but many of us probably won't be around then.

By the way, this bio of Joseph P. Kennedy is from a writer who says he got complete access to all of his papers. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/30/books/...ed=all&_r=0

This is the finding aid at the JFK Library: http://www.jfklibrary.org/Asset-Viewer/Archives/JPKPP.aspx?f=1

The author, like Okrent, claimed that J.P. Kennedy was no bootlegger, so maybe there wasn't anything incriminating in the material he had access to (assuming he really did have access to everything), but it's interesting that as soon as Prohibition ended in 1933, Kennedy went to England and obtained a contract to import alcohol from Somerset Importers. Funny that all of a sudden he had the necessary knowledge to do all this. Maybe we won't ever find Kennedy's signature on orders for booze during Prohibition as most bootleggers covered their tracks and we don't know about them until they were caught. If he was never caught, then no contemporary evidence. I think historian Stephen Fox in his book "Blood and Power" gathered some good evidence from what was available. Would really need an accountant to figure out if Kennedy amassed sudden unexplained wealth during Prohibition; after all, that's how they got Capone.

This review of the J.P. Kennedy book says it's a whitewash. He makes a lot of sense: http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/155961

again excellent research. the article on the cia withholding evidence leads me to belive Oswald was a cia agent, and I think the Russians knew it.where did he learn Russian,in language school in marine intelligence. he was a radio operator in the marine corp tracking u2 flights over Russian., he was indeed set up, the dallas cop tippit was supposed to kill him, this was set up by ruby. on orders from Chicago.oswald killed him instead,now ruby had to kill Oswald himself. Oswald was indeed a pigeon. like he said to reporters: "im just a patsy"

I don't think theres any doubt about j.p. kennedy being a bootlegger, of course he was.costello is on record as saying such himself.he was in many ways worse than any mobster. he was a shameless rapist. 'sins of the father' is a no nonsence book aabout the old crook, written by Ronald Kessler.also franklin Roosevelt hated his guts. elonore Roosevelt spells that out in her book. he was a despicable human being.

I think in the article it cites David Ferrie as claiming that Oswald was more of a wanna-be agent rather than a real one. That doesn't mean that the CIA wouldn't use someone like that in certain circumstances, but he doesn't seem stable enough to have been a real agent. For now I'm going to remain open-minded on what happened. I can't say "It happened this way," but I can say, "It MAY have happened this way." As for Ruby, not everyone needs orders to do things. People can be influenced and convinced. Everything I've read is clear that Ruby was very patriotic. The people who wanted Oswald dead could have appealed to that patriotism for him to do what they wanted, but again, it seems like there has to be more to the story because he knew that he was going to prison. 2017 isn't that far away, so I suggest we just wait and see.

On J.P. Kennedy, there are many doubts that he was bootlegger, doubts brought up by Okrent and Nasaw. I think they're both wrong, but they are convinced that he wasn't one and their books have convinced many others to agree with them. I do like Kessler's books a lot. Here's his review of the Nasaw book:
http://www.newsmax.com/US/Joseph-Kennedy-book-Nasaw/2012/12/04/id/466448/