I agree about the 9/11 conspiracy, that's BS IMO, I know people that were there. A conspiracy is implausible, but it does appear some within the gov't were possibly aware of an impending attack, but even if this is true, I would view this as more of an incompetence issue rather than a deliberate criminal act unless more evidence is discovered - innocent before guilty.
JFK is one of the only conspiracy theories I believe and its entirely due to facts/evidence that has emerged. If someone honestly researches the gov't documents released in the 90's, I don't see how anybody can believe the WC findings.
The smoking gun document which occurred less than 2 months before the assassination was that someone "impersonated LHO" in his tapped phone call to the Russian Mexico City embassy. This is backed up by FBI memos, including a memo from Hoover himself that stated LHO was impersonated in his phone call to the Russian embassy and the supposed head of the KGB assassination team in the Western Hemisphere- Mexico city. Voice analysis was done by FBI agents who listened to the taped but ultra secret recordings and compared it to the voice of LHO during interrogation, resulting in a finding that LHO was impersonated. Not to mention the fact that the imposter spoke broken Russian and fluent Spanish where as LHO poke fluent Russian but broken Spanish.
This finding is absolutely incredible and its shocking how it is never discussed , as it is definitive proof that a conspiracy existed to murder JFK , then you have to ask who was aware of the secret embassy phone tapping system of these embassies and who would know how this event would result in a large mole hunt. Not many intelligence agents would know this, and it would really narrow down who was involved in the JFK assassination. An investigator could trace this to the limited number of individuals that had access to this information and then might be able to trace this back to who the actual sponsors were and break the case wide open.
Who understands how and when a molehunt is conducted is the ultimate key to the blackmail / cover up operations.
There is now a boatload of documents recently released that show how large a molehunt was commenced by James Angelton's SIG team within the CIA (which in itself should show that LHO was involved in intelligence activities as the SIG sole purpose was to "spy on spies", thus completely blowing up the official CIA statement that LHO had NO connection to the CIA as they clearly felt he did after this imposters phone call, the guy had a 201 file which also basically proves the SIG unit was aware of LHO's intelligence work for someone). It is this knowledge of the molehunt that cemented the blackmailing of the CIA as if it ever got out that LHO was being investigated by the CIA right before the assassination and was supposedly trying to contact the head of the KGB assassinations team in the western hemisphere, then Wow what a bombshell that could completely destroy the CIA's credibility and destroy senior level careers. Then add in the fact that this James Angleton was assigned the job of investigating the JFK assassination ands its a double Wow. Then add in the fact of the newly released CIA documents that details James Angeltons intention was "to wait out the Warren Commission" in terms of complying with their document requests, a CLEAR obstruction of justice to the murder of JFK, and it makes this a triple wow.
It takes some research to get to the some material facts of JFK assassination, but honestly after reading only several documents, any investigator can now get a decent sense of where at least the planning traces back to. Unfortunately not many people are willing to read these documents, which is fine, however if one has a definitive opinion on the assassination, I don't know how you can skip the research part and be vocal in your opinion on who killed the president.
The information is now there, the question is whether one is open minded enough to review previously top secret documents that the authors never felt would see the light of day, and develop an opinion solely due to evidence.
What's funny is authors like Gerald Posner that will only believe the WC findings, wont dare comment on or touch these formerly classified documents as they know there is no explaining them. Instead they simply use the human brain cant accept the lone nut and magic bullet theories, ignoring the evidence. I personally never understood the lone nut theory, if you believe the WC then LHO did this to be remembered and be a part of history, then how does one explain he strongly denied these charges even thru his last statements before death, makes no sense to me but then again the WC was not developed to make sense, but rather to make sure this case never reached a trial or jury.
As LBJ stated in a phone call with Hoover after the assassination that someone appears to have tried to erase, "Did THEY shoot at me", clearly he knew what was up.
What the Warren Commission Didn’t Know
A member of the panel that investigated JFK’s death now worries he was a victim of a “massive cover-up.”
Read more:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2...ml#.VR8oPdKUduAHalf a century after the Warren Commission concluded there was no conspiracy in John F. Kennedy’s assassination, the commission’s chief conspiracy hunter believes the investigation was the victim of a “massive cover-up” to hide evidence that might have shown that Lee Harvey Oswald was in fact part of a conspiracy. In new, exclusive material published today in the paperback edition of a bestselling history of the investigation, retired law professor David Slawson tells how he came to the conclusion, on the basis of long-secret documents and witness statements, that the commission might have gotten it wrong.
***
Fifty-one years ago this winter, working from a cramped, paper-strewn temporary office on Capitol Hill, a fresh-faced 33-year-old Denver lawyer named David Slawson was earning his place in modern American history.
It was President John F. Kennedy’s assassination that brought Slawson to Washington. In January 1964, two months after JFK’s murder in Dallas, Slawson was part of a small group of hotshot young lawyers recruited to the capital to join the hastily organized staff of the Warren Commission, the panel convened by President Lyndon B. Johnson to investigate his predecessor’s death.
The lawyers, most only a few years out of law school, would do the bulk of the commission’s detective work in determining how and why the president had been killed. And the Harvard-educated Slawson, in particular, had an extraordinary assignment on the staff. Although he had no background in foreign affairs or law enforcement, he was responsible—at times, single-handedly—for the search for evidence of a foreign conspiracy in the assassination. When the commission issued a final report, in September 1964, that identified Lee Harvey Oswald as the sole assassin and effectively ruled out any conspiracy, foreign or domestic, Slawson was satisfied. “I was convinced—then—that we had it right,” he told me last year.
For most of the next five decades, Slawson, who went on to a distinguished teaching career at the law school at the University of Southern California, tried to put his work on the commission behind him, even as the national debate about the Kennedy assassination and the legacy of the Warren Commission continued to rage. He was content mostly to keep his silence, continuing to believe that nothing had undermined the commission’s essential finding that Oswald was, in Slawson’s words, a “true lone wolf” who had acted without the knowledge or encouragement of others—that there was no conspiracy.
Today, however, Slawson’s silence has ended once and for all. Half a century after the commission issued an 888-page final report that was supposed to convince the American people that the investigation had uncovered the truth about the president’s murder, Slawson has come to believe that the full truth is still not known. Now 83, he says he has been shocked by the recent, belated discovery of how much evidence was withheld from the commission—from him, specifically—by the CIA and other government agencies, and how that rewrites the history of the Kennedy assassination.
Slawson is now wrestling with questions he hoped he would never have to confront: Was the commission’s final report, in fundamental ways, wrong? And might the assassination threat have been thwarted? The commission, he believes, was the victim of a “massive cover-up” by government officials who wanted to hide the fact that, had they simply acted on the evidence in front of them in November 1963, the assassination might have been prevented. “It’s amazing—it’s terrible—to discover all of this 50 years late,” says Slawson, whose health is still good and whose memories of his work on the commission remain sharp.
Slawson’s most startling conclusion: He now believes that other people probably knew about Oswald’s plans to kill the president and encouraged him, raising the possibility that there was a conspiracy in Kennedy’s death—at least according to the common legal definition of the word conspiracy, which requires simply that at least two people plot to do wrongdoing. “I now know that Oswald was almost certainly not a lone wolf,” Slawson says.
Slawson is not describing the sort of elaborate, far-fetched assassination plot that most conspiracy theorists like to claim occurred, with a roster of suspects including the Mafia, Texas oilmen, anti-Castro Cuban exiles, southern segregationists, elements of the CIA and FBI, and even President Johnson. Slawson did not believe in 1964, and does not believe now, that Fidel Castro or the leaders of the Soviet Union or of any other foreign government were involved in the president’s murder. And he is certain that Oswald was the only gunman in Dealey Plaza.
What Slawson does suspect is that Oswald, during a long-mysterious trip to Mexico City only weeks before the assassination, encountered Cuban diplomats and Mexican civilians who were supporters of Castro’s revolution and who urged Oswald to kill the American president if he had the chance. “I think it’s very likely that people in Mexico encouraged him to do this,” Slawson told me. “And if they later came to the United States, they could have been prosecuted under American law as accessories” in the conspiracy.
He has also come to believe—again, only recently—that the CIA knew about these meetings but hid the evidence of them from the Warren Commission.
What has changed Slawson’s mind so dramatically on questions that he thought were settled half a century ago? I interviewed him repeatedly, over several years, for my 2013 book on the Kennedy assassination, and Slawson says that our conversations, as well as material that I had gathered from declassified government archives and from other researchers, shook his confidence. “It never occurred to me until you interviewed me and I read your book that the commission’s investigation had been blocked like this.” It never occurred to him, he said, that the CIA and other agencies “tried to sabotage us like this.”
It was clear to me from the earliest days of my research on the book just how much I would want Slawson’s cooperation. It is hard to overstate his significance in the work on the commission—and in the investigation’s finding that Oswald acted alone. Although he had been the junior member of the two-lawyer team that focused on a possible foreign conspiracy, the work fell almost entirely to Slawson. His senior partner appeared in the commission’s offices only one day a week, according to the commission’s records, and Slawson finished up doing “90 percent of the work,” he told me.
In 2010, after two years of gathering up tens of thousands of once-classified documents from the National Archives and elsewhere, I made the first of several transcontinental reporting trips to meet with Slawson at his home in Washington State, where he moved after his retirement from USC. Each time, I brought with me the latest batch of documents that I had retrieved. And after each trip, Slawson grew more and more alarmed to discover how much evidence about the assassination—and specifically, about Oswald and the possibility of a conspiracy—had not been shared with him in 1964.
