REOPENKENNEDYCASE
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
Search
Display results as :
Advanced Search
Latest topics
Living WitnessesToday at 8:51 pmVinny
BYP AnalysisYesterday at 9:45 pmVinny
The Pierce Allman Story Yesterday at 9:38 pmVinny
Bill Alexander Yesterday at 6:04 ambarto
Prayer ManYesterday at 12:09 amgreg_parker
Malcolm Blunt Archives TalksThu 01 Dec 2022, 7:13 pmbarto
new shumpcastWed 30 Nov 2022, 4:09 pmJake_Sykes
Dealey Plaza Re-developmentMon 28 Nov 2022, 9:17 pmVinny
Log in
Social bookmarking
Social bookmarking reddit      

Bookmark and share the address of REOPENKENNEDYCASE on your social bookmarking website

Bookmark and share the address of REOPENKENNEDYCASE on your social bookmarking website
Like/Tweet/+1
LOGLINE
Thinking of dumping Facebook? Join the new social media platform that is not weaponizing your private information or using it for profit https://logline.gregrparker.com
Twitter

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

+4
Roger Odisio
Vinny
JFK_FNG
Ed.Ledoux
8 posters
Go down
Ed.Ledoux
Ed.Ledoux
Posts : 3040
Join date : 2012-01-04

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Tue 25 Oct 2022, 6:56 pm
Regarding JFK Records "Release"

Sorry to all the Karens saying Trump broke the law by not releasing all the records.

First wheres your boy?
Biden been in office 2 years and you got 10 percent released.
So is he breaking 90 percent of the law?

NO!

The law gives the potus the right to not release.

See @ 1:43:00

https://www.c-span.org/video/?315655-3/kennedy-assassination-conspiracy-theories-robert-tanenbaum-james-lesar

"absent personal approval of the President"

Please understand the details before spouting MSNBC bullshit.
Why would you believe them jokers anyway.

PS
Not sorry.
Ed
Ed.Ledoux
Ed.Ledoux
Posts : 3040
Join date : 2012-01-04

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Tue 25 Oct 2022, 7:24 pm
For those with weak thoughts or memories:

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Zombod81
Ed.Ledoux
Ed.Ledoux
Posts : 3040
Join date : 2012-01-04

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Tue 25 Oct 2022, 7:32 pm
and the kicker/s

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Scree958
Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Scree959
Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Scree957




Sorry but the law did not limit or interfere with the powers of the potus.
Plus he is SOLELY responsible for declassification.
or its remaing so.
That bit about sending his excuse in writing was covered by the memo.
...again better check your boi's memo.

Not Sorry
Ed
avatar
JFK_FNG
Posts : 226
Join date : 2021-09-09

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Thu 27 Oct 2022, 4:26 pm
Ed.Ledoux wrote:and the kicker/s

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Scree958
Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Scree959
Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Scree957




Sorry but the law did not limit or interfere with the powers of the potus.
Plus he is SOLELY responsible for declassification.
or its remaing so.
That bit about sending his excuse in writing was covered by the memo.
...again better check your boi's memo.

Not Sorry
Ed

If I were a lawyer, I’d say that last bit only says that the Act does not limit or revoke the ability of the President or any other entity of the government to publicly disclose records in its possession - but it does limit postponement to the standards set forth in section 6. 

To my understanding, the alleged law breaking was Trump and Biden not providing an unclassified description of why each withheld record was being further postponed, which is a requirement of the Act apparently. If I recall, Biden specifically mentioned that requirement in last year’s memo, so we should get the descriptions in December - but I won’t hold my breath. 

I think the stuff about the President communicating with the Review Board is no longer relevant since the ARRB shut down, but IANAL so I have no idea. I need to read the MFF lawsuit to see how they phrased it and compare it with the Act. Schnapf and co. claim they are on firm legal ground, but I think we all know better than to get our hopes up about this sort of thing.
Ed.Ledoux
Ed.Ledoux
Posts : 3040
Join date : 2012-01-04

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Fri 28 Oct 2022, 5:59 pm
Sorry but preceeding sentences makes your point moot.

Potus has sole authority and it shall not be delegated.
The law can not tie the supreme executors hands nor interefere in his duties powers or authority.
That is SUPREME LAW.
...or else they would specify it. They did not.
The first three articles of the U.S. Constitution outlines the branches of the U.S. Government, the powers that they contain and the limitations to which they must adhere.
No act can interfere in those nor any law. If it does its unconstitutional.
Got it?

Continuing on the law says:
(B) All postponed assassination records determined to require continued postponement shall require an unclassified written description of the reason for such continued postponement. Such description shall be provided to the Archivist and published in the Federal Register upon determination.

IE the memos (to archivist) since the ARRB is no longer an entity.


Law is not broken.
Has not been broken.
That administrative section that is said to be broken was addressed in potus's memos which covered section subsection (B) above.

Section 6 is meaningless if Potus postpones, fore:
President shall have the sole authority to require the disclosure or postponement of such record or information under the standards set forth above.

Section 6. Grounds for Postponement of Public Disclosure of Records says if there is clear convincing evidence of any litany of excuses potus can withhold them.
Hardly an arm twist to a POTUS!!

It is really no requirement to release.

Only now is there a lawsuit by MF/Morley...
Where were they several years ago?

I re-read the law and the disclosure clause has an "UNLESS" in it.
That is the NO GUARANTEE CLAUSE.

Its great we are not lawyers. As this doesnt need one.


avatar
Vinny
Posts : 2820
Join date : 2013-08-27

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Fri 28 Oct 2022, 8:35 pm
A couple of years ago there was this great hype about a truth and reconciliation committee or something. It got a lot of publicity and then suddenly fizzled out. I do hope this lawsuit won't end the same way.

_________________
Out With Bill Shelley In Front.
avatar
Roger Odisio
Posts : 43
Join date : 2017-10-02

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Sat 29 Oct 2022, 8:31 am
The 1992 JFK Records Act carries a presumption of immediate disclosure of all records not yet released.  30 years after the assassination, it said "only in the rarest cases is there any legitimate need for continued protection".  This being the government, and given the large number (the exact amount unknown of course) of undisclosed records, the Act allowed 25 years, until 2017, for this immediate release to be accomplished.

The Act provides that it shall take precedence over any other law, judicial decision, or common law doctrine that would otherwise prohibit disclosure of a record.  (see MFF lawsuit, p.13,14)

A side note:  The Act focused on records held by government agencies, but it did not define what it meant by "record", leaving that job to the ARRB. The ARRB decided that in order for the JFK collection to be valuable to researchers (they said, really!) the definition of a record must be expanded to include information possessed not only by the federal government, but also state and local governments, (NARA retrieved what was left of the Garrison files), private institutions, and private individuals (NARA "took" the original of the Zapruder film from the family by giving them $16 million).  Next up, the Darnell film as a record. 

The Act strictly limits POTUS's discretion to stop or delay disclosure of a record.  He may do so only if certain conditions are met.  The MFF law suit describes the President's duty as ministerial and nondiscretionary.  I think that is correct.

To stop disclosure the President must explain, by clear and convincing evidence (a strict legal standard), that the identifiable harm of disclosure based on any on the 5 grounds specified in Section 6 outweighs the strong public interest for release.  This showing must be done for *each* record.

The grounds in the Act for stopping or even delaying release are typical Washington-speak:  harm to military defense, intelligence operations, law enforcement, and foreign relations.  Think about how narrow those grounds are.

Which is why both Trump and Biden ignored the statutory standards.  They followed none of them when they issued their decisions to further postpone disclosure:  (1) no review of individual records, (2) no identification of specific harms, (3) no explanation of how any harms they claimed outweighed the public interest in disclosure.  Further, Biden instructed agencies seeking to further postpone disclosure of records past the latest deadline of Dec 15 to only demonstrate *anticipated harm*  But the Act specifies that *identifiable harm* must be shown; speculative claims are specifically insufficient. 

Biden does *not* have the power to so blatantly violate the terms of the JFK Act.  Will that matter for the MFF suit?  The US courts are in bad shape at the moment, and the suit obviously faces powerful opposition.

One of the MFF complaints is that "the JFK Act provides for periodic review for additional assassination records"  (p.37) and NARA has failed "to request new searches for Assassination Records since 1998" (p.3).  Sure, they're talking about records possessed by government agencies, but, again, that was before the ARRB expanded the definition of "record" to include all kinds of nongovenmental information.  It would be a considerable victory by itself if the court would find that NARA must update its JFK Collection and seek additional records, as the Act requires.  I have made this point on EF to the lawyers who filed the suit.
Ed.Ledoux
Ed.Ledoux
Posts : 3040
Join date : 2012-01-04

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Sat 29 Oct 2022, 9:38 am
They were to review withheld records periodically... of course they would not need to do that if all records were to be released. Right???

Biden is following the law.
Law had the huge loophole of "UNLESS" language writen in it.

The Potus memos were in compliance since there is no ARRB... just the Archivist.
Didnt you get the memo? Haha

Would be a coup for us if the decision includes the new search for records and our favorite film.
avatar
JFK_FNG
Posts : 226
Join date : 2021-09-09

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Sat 29 Oct 2022, 3:37 pm
I think Ed is right that section 6(1)C gives the President a loophole to come up with basically whatever excuse he wants for postponing records, but the unclassified explanation being required by law looks pretty legitimate to me. 

The relevant section is 5(g)(2)(B) which states:

(B) All postponed assassination records determined to require continued postponement shall require an unclassified written description of the reason for such continued postponement. Such description shall be provided to the Archivist and published in the Federal Register upon determination.

This section is a subsection of section 5(g) which states: 

All postponed or redacted records shall be reviewed periodically by the originating agency and the Archivist consistent with the recommendations of the Review Board under section 9(c)(3)(B). 

Section 9(c)(3)(B) states that the ARRB will transmit to the Archivist: 

a statement, based on a review of the proceedings and in conformity with the decisions reflected therein, designating a recommended specified time at which or a specified occurrence following which the material may be appropriately disclosed to the public under this Act. 

That specified time was 25 years. Since the President has authority over continued postponement, the responsibility falls on him for providing the unclassified written description. Section 9(d)(1) refers to Presidential authority over Review Board determinations, and the requirement for an unclassified written description 30 days after ARRB determinations is a separate requirement to 5(g)(2)(b). 

Biden looks to have realized this, otherwise I can’t imagine why he’d include the following in his 2021 memo: 

(c)  For any record containing information that an agency proposes for continued postponement beyond December 15, 2022, the agency shall provide, no later than December 15, 2021:
(i)    an unclassified letter, to be signed by the head of the agency, providing a written description of the types of information for which the agency is proposing continued postponement and reasons for which the agency is proposing continued postponement of such information;
(ii)   an unclassified index identifying for each such record the reasons for which the agency is proposing continued postponement of information in such record;


The problem is that this should have been done in 2017. The MFF lawsuit will hopefully take advantage of this fuck up, and it It sure looks like Biden indirectly admitted to breaking the law by including the above in his 2021 memo.
Ed.Ledoux
Ed.Ledoux
Posts : 3040
Join date : 2012-01-04

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Sat 29 Oct 2022, 5:41 pm
A lawyer would argue thats already been done.

Lawyer will argue:

(D) Each assassination record shall be publicly disclosed in full, and available in the Collection no later than the date that is 25 years after the date of enactment of

enactment of this Act, unless the President certifies, as required by this Act, that --

(i) continued postponement is made necessary by an identifiable harm to military defense, intelligence operations, or conduct of foreign relations; and

(ii) the identifiable harm is of such gravity that it outweighs the public interest in disclosure.


The memos are the certifications.
And yes you have it right.
Joe sent it back to the agencies for the administrative excuses.
Hands are clean.

Sue the alphabet agencies for withholding the records.
Inclusion of the Potus whom is basically immune is not wise.
Congress needs to act (again) to see justice is served.


Way I saw it Trump punted it.
Within the 'rules'
He could have punted It to himself if relected and ran it back for touchdown (full release) or spiked it in his own endzone. (continued obfuscation by the agencies)
Joe instead of punting, did something different and lateraled
avatar
Vinny
Posts : 2820
Join date : 2013-08-27

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Sat 29 Oct 2022, 8:55 pm
Former FBI Analyst Weighs In On JFK Assassination Records
Farris Rookstool III is one of the few people who have read the JFK assassination files. He talks with LX News host Nik Z about the lawsuit, why the files haven’t been released, and what we could expect come December.

https://www.lx.com/community/former-fbi-analyst-weighs-in-on-jfk-assassination-records/58980/

_________________
Out With Bill Shelley In Front.
avatar
Roger Odisio
Posts : 43
Join date : 2017-10-02

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Sun 30 Oct 2022, 8:36 am
Ed quoted the JFK Act:  "(D) Each assassination record shall be publicly disclosed in full, and available in the Collection no later than the date that is 25 years after the date of enactment of

enactment of this Act, unless the President certifies, as required by this Act, that --

(i) continued postponement is made necessary by an identifiable harm to military defense, intelligence operations, or conduct of foreign relations; and

(ii) the identifiable harm is of such gravity that it outweighs the public interest in disclosure."


Yes, a good summary.  Let me add that a separate certification by the President allowing postponement must be done for each record. 


Further, right up front, the Act says:  Sec 2 (a) (2) all Government records concerning the assassination of President John F. Kennedy should carry a presumption of immediate disclosure, and all records should be eventually disclosed to enable the public to become fully informed about the history surrounding the assassination.

And:  Sec.2 (a)(7) most of the records related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy are almost 30 years old, and only in the rarest cases is there any legitimate need for continued protection of such records.

Sec. 2 (b) PURPOSES.—The purposes of this Act are— (1) to provide for the creation of the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection at the National Archives and Records Administration; and (2) to require the expeditious public transmission to the Archivist and public disclosure of such records.

With that we can see clearly what those twin assholes, Trump and Biden, have done to ignore the statute and try to replace its standards with their own.

Neither has done the public interest balancing required at all, let alone for each record where postponement is sought.  Biden has replaced the clear identifiable harm standards in the Act with a request that an agency simply offer him a reason for postponement.  Any reason, apparently.  Forget about the standards already in the law.

That's laughable.  Anyone seeking postponement is already required to give a reason--identifiable harm--under Sec. 6 and show how it outweighs the public's interest in disclosure.  No, Joe's hands are not clean.  No, Sec. 6(1)C does *not* give the President "a loophole to come up with basically whatever excuse he wants for postponing records".


We don't need another law.  We need the JFK Act to be enforced.  That's what the MFF suit seeks.
greg_parker
greg_parker
Admin
Posts : 7715
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 64
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia
http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Sun 30 Oct 2022, 11:12 am
Putting aside partisanship for a second, whether the POTUS has acted legally is moot. The larger point is that any POTUS claiming independence from... whatever you want to call it... the CIA, the MIC, the Deep State, or Donald Duck... can no longer claim such independence when buckling to bullshit requests for further withholding. Trump blinked. Biden blinked. Both get an F.

The only question is, is there anyone on either side who would not have blinked?  This is a real litmus test for who is truly independent from the "undue influence" warned of by Ike. And I don't see anyone passing.

_________________
Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
              Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me


"So what’s an independent-minded populist like me to do? I’ve had to grovel in promoting myself on social media, even begging for Amazon reviews and Goodreads ratings, to no avail." 
Don Jeffries

"I've been aware of Greg Parker's work for years, and strongly recommend it." Peter Dale Scott

https://gregrparker.com
Ed.Ledoux
Ed.Ledoux
Posts : 3040
Join date : 2012-01-04

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Sun 30 Oct 2022, 2:43 pm
Exactly.
As I said Not Guaranteed
avatar
Roger Odisio
Posts : 43
Join date : 2017-10-02

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Mon 31 Oct 2022, 4:41 am
No doubt true, Greg.  The JFKA was the centerpiece of his killers' rampage thru the public face of an emerging Left at the time--the Kennedy brothers, MLK, Malcolm, Hammarskjold, Lamumba, Allende, etc.  They tightened their control of the major media and probably were even a bit surprised how easy it was to get away with.  In the late 70s Carl Bernstein wrote an expose in Rolling Stone magazine about the extent to which the CIA had infiltrated the major media.  Now, it's there for all to see--all major media employ ex-war machine toadies to "explain" the news and they repeat as fact whatever these people tell them.

In the 1970s began a parallel effort to remake the courts, in part using Scalia's "originalist" hoakum to reject any thinking beyond that of the Founding Fathers.  The result is the current Supreme Court with 6 lunatics and 3 centrists.  You may have noticed that, unlike some other countries not as involved as the US, none of the crimes of the "war on terror" ever got adjudicated in US courts.  For example, the father of American citizen Anwar al Awlaki was said to lack standing to sue Obama and the government for the drone murder of his son and grandson, also a citizen.

So, even on the small chance that the MFF suit gets some lower court judge to agree with some of their points, the chance that it will be upheld up the line is smaller still.  The courts are going to tell Biden he has to follow the law in this one case??!?

Which is why I keep harping on using the suit to at least force NARA to do part of the job it took over when the ARRB closed in 1998--updating the JFK Collection, including adding records from non-governmental sources.  The lawyers at least mention that in the suit.

Chapter 7 of the ARRB's final report is entitled Pursuit of Records and Information from Non-Federal Sources.  It includes these introductory remarks from two Board members;

    I firmly believe that the Board has an obligation to seek out assassination records from all sources; public and private. The goal of Congress in passing S. 3006 was to ensure broadest possible disclosure of the records relating to the assassination. The fact that a document exists only in private hands should not deter the Board in any way from seeking to compel its transmission to the National Archives. Judge Tunheim at the Review Board nomination hearings.Through fair and impartial application of the criteria developed by the Review Board and keeping in mind always the express purposes of the enabling legislation, I believe that the Review Board should be as aggressive as it needs to be to achieve disclosure of relevant records. That also applies to records held by private citizens... --William Joyce at the Review Board nomination hearings.


If anyone here has any relationship with lawyers working on the suit now is the time to talk to them.
avatar
Roger Odisio
Posts : 43
Join date : 2017-10-02

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Fri 11 Nov 2022, 7:58 am
This is a shot in the dark, but does anyone know anything about the 45 minute film, by Roy Cooper Jr., a KTVT in Dallas photographer, who retrieved outtakes of the assassination from the trash and spliced them together?  Janet Veazey, the daughter of a friend of Cooper's donated it to NARA to be part of the JFK Collection (no kidding).  The film contains footage "of the aftermath of the assassination"  The Collection contains a first gen copy of the film.

It's a JFK record, but Darnell isn't.  Has anybody heard about it or run across it?

And while I'm at it, turns out that the ARRB "sought to identify [Sixth Floor] [M]useum records that should be part of the JFK Collection".  They got records like the Parkland Hospital treatment of JFK, information on Oswald and Ruby, etc., and "several home movies depicting the Presidential motorcade in Dallas".  The museum has the films of Zapruder, Nix, Towner, Dorman, and Hughes, 30 amateur home movies in all.

If I remember correctly, the museum also has what it has described as a first gen copy of Darnell, but says copyright concerns prevent it from making it available (whatever that term of obfuscation means).

So, did the ARRB initially identify Darnell as a JFK record and discuss getting it from the museum?  If so, were they turned down and instead they settled for the "home movies" rather than the work of a professional?  If films of the event and its aftermath were discussed how could Darnell not be in the conversation, since we know other amateur films were part of it?  Can anyone argue Darnell is *not* a JFK record under the ARRB's definition?

Does anyone else smell a rat?

Now for some conspiracy theory.  Over the years one or more of the key players, at NBC Universal, the ARRB, NARA, the museum, has taken a closer look at a better version of Darnell and seen Oswald. If so, the official version collapses.  If you think the coverup of other aspects of the case has been extensive and vicious, you ain't seen nothing yet when it comes to hiding Darnell.
avatar
Vinny
Posts : 2820
Join date : 2013-08-27

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Fri 11 Nov 2022, 2:34 pm
I have wondered about that too. Why is NBC so reluctant to release the film? Could it be they have checked it out themselves and noticed Oswald there? If PM is not Oswald why the hesitation in releasing the film?

_________________
Out With Bill Shelley In Front.
avatar
barto
Posts : 3251
Join date : 2015-07-21
http://www.prayer-man.com/

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Fri 11 Nov 2022, 10:14 pm
NBC simply does not cooperate on any aspect of the JFKA. Back in the 60s and now...no difference.

_________________
Prayer Man Website.     Prayer Man On FB.     Prayer Man On Twitter.     Prayer Man On YouTube
greg_parker
greg_parker
Admin
Posts : 7715
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 64
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia
http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Fri 11 Nov 2022, 11:02 pm
Roger Odisio wrote:This is a shot in the dark, but does anyone know anything about the 45 minute film, by Roy Cooper Jr., a KTVT in Dallas photographer, who retrieved outtakes of the assassination from the trash and spliced them together?  Janet Veazey, the daughter of a friend of Cooper's donated it to NARA to be part of the JFK Collection (no kidding).  The film contains footage "of the aftermath of the assassination"  The Collection contains a first gen copy of the film.

It's a JFK record, but Darnell isn't.  Has anybody heard about it or run across it?

And while I'm at it, turns out that the ARRB "sought to identify [Sixth Floor] [M]useum records that should be part of the JFK Collection".  They got records like the Parkland Hospital treatment of JFK, information on Oswald and Ruby, etc., and "several home movies depicting the Presidential motorcade in Dallas".  The museum has the films of Zapruder, Nix, Towner, Dorman, and Hughes, 30 amateur home movies in all.

If I remember correctly, the museum also has what it has described as a first gen copy of Darnell, but says copyright concerns prevent it from making it available (whatever that term of obfuscation means).

So, did the ARRB initially identify Darnell as a JFK record and discuss getting it from the museum?  If so, were they turned down and instead they settled for the "home movies" rather than the work of a professional?  If films of the event and its aftermath were discussed how could Darnell not be in the conversation, since we know other amateur films were part of it?  Can anyone argue Darnell is *not* a JFK record under the ARRB's definition?

Does anyone else smell a rat?

Now for some conspiracy theory.  Over the years one or more of the key players, at NBC Universal, the ARRB, NARA, the museum, has taken a closer look at a better version of Darnell and seen Oswald. If so, the official version collapses.  If you think the coverup of other aspects of the case has been extensive and vicious, you ain't seen nothing yet when it comes to hiding Darnell.
Nice job, Roger, though I agree with Bart that NBC is just being a typical corportate bastard rather than taking part in a deliberate cover-up.

The Sixth Floor Museum on the other hand,,, 

The copyright issue is surely bolox.

It would be covered by "fair use" under research and education. No permission needed to copy a frame. 

Apart from the phony excuse, I could smell the rattiness in all of my dealings with past and present 6FM gatekeepers.

_________________
Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
              Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me


"So what’s an independent-minded populist like me to do? I’ve had to grovel in promoting myself on social media, even begging for Amazon reviews and Goodreads ratings, to no avail." 
Don Jeffries

"I've been aware of Greg Parker's work for years, and strongly recommend it." Peter Dale Scott

https://gregrparker.com
avatar
Roger Odisio
Posts : 43
Join date : 2017-10-02

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Sat 12 Nov 2022, 8:55 am
But being typical corporate bastards required NBC, CBS, NY Times, Wash Post, indeed all who were, or aspired to be, major media, to be part of the coverup for "national security" reasons.  That is, to protect their way of life and all that underpins it, including government pronouncements.  Pushing the coverup was not a separate decision.  

Now things are worse.  Major media is the government.
Mick_Purdy
Mick_Purdy
Posts : 2275
Join date : 2013-07-26
Location : Melbourne Australia

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Sun 13 Nov 2022, 10:35 am
My two bobs worth on media and where it sits today. The privately owned media companies from around the world have for the past 20 or so years systematically all suffered from under resourcing from their respective owners and stake holders. So much so that they can no longer afford to spend the necessary time or have access to the required resources to publish well informed balanced content. That applies to all mainstream media platforms and outlets.

Greed is taking hold of our media in all its forms and denying the people a balanced view. Journalists and reporters are hamstrung, producers are now merely young kids...with an arts degree and quality research has all but vanished. There are no checks and balances (read sub editors) who fact check before content is published, the under resourcing and lack of funding  has seen to that - once upon a time a story would be checked - double checked and triple checked before release. That no longer happens. At every level there has been major cuts to staff and resources which limit and impact on the delivery of a truthful, balanced, well constructed story.

There seems no end in sight either. The media ownership laws around the globe need to be changed for our own safety. Far too many own far too much and have far too much sway in how we are Governed.
Make no mistake this stealthy like diminishing of some of our greatest assets is not as coincidental and as harmless as it might seem...

Some say it's the beginning of the end, the obliteration of these once noble outlets is a threat to democracy. That cannot be overstated.
A free and fair press is paramount to democracies around the world. 

End Rant!

_________________
I'm just a patsy!


Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Byp_211
Jake_Sykes
Jake_Sykes
Posts : 983
Join date : 2016-08-15

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Sun 13 Nov 2022, 3:28 pm
"A free and fair press is paramount to democracies around the world." Yes Mick, or we get totalitarianism and the pain that follows. Those forces are clear, present, and ready to pounce. Even if it's yellow journalism, or biased one way or the other, if it's free and profit motivated, it will do the job of protecting democracy, that and the vote of course.

_________________
Release clear scans. Reveal the truth about Prayer Man. Preserve the history of the assassination of JFK.
greg_parker
greg_parker
Admin
Posts : 7715
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 64
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia
http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Sun 20 Nov 2022, 11:18 am
I agree. Great work in getting that admission from NARA. Prompted me to look again for my correspendence with them.

Finally found it.
-------------------------
To: historyhub@nara.gov
Subject: history hub questions
 
Thank you for providing this valuable resource. and for giving me access to it.


However, the questions you posted for me, were not the questions asked.


You posted: 


NBC Cameramen Darnell and Weigman filmed scenes in Dealey Plaza at the time of the assassination. Should the films be designated as JFK records under the JFK Act? Are they still held by NBC?


The problem is, I already know the answer to both of those questions.


From Wikipedia
The definition of "assassination record" was left broad by the Act and determined in practice by the ARRB; a final definition was published in the Federal Register on June 28, 1995.[4] The basic definition was:


An assassination record includes, but is not limited to, all records, public and private, regardless of how labeled or identified, that document, describe, report on, analyze, or interpret activities, persons, or events reasonably related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and investigations of or inquiries into the assassination.


Both of those cameramen swept their cameras across the front steps of the Texas School Book Depository within seconds of the shooting.


Myself and a team of others have identified the majority of those on the steps using statements given by workers from that building to the police and FBI.


There is one person stubbornly unidentified. He is a young white male with thinning hair, dressed in workers clothes and standing in the back corner.


The tall person near him is Buell Frazier. Frazier has been asked if he knows who the person is, but he claims not to - despite telling the FBI during the initial investigation that he saw no strangers around the building that day. 


We also know those films are being held by NBC. We have tried in several ways over the years to talk them into allowing a scan of frames showing this individual. Cameramen with lengthy experience have advised that scans from the original films would have enough clarity to allow a proper identification. What we are stuck with are many generations removed from those originals.


So my original question is the one that needs to be answered - why haven't those films been deemed assassination records under the Act and placed in the archives where they can be examined?


One further thing: FBI Agent James Hosty made notes during the initial interrogation. In those notes, he states clearly the Lee Oswald told his interrogators that he had gone outside to watch the presidential parade.


I have attached a montage showing the person in question as seen in the Darnell film, along with the relevant section of Hosty's notes.


I am not trying to prove a conspiracy theory. I don't care if it is ever proven beyond doubt Oswald did it alone. I DO care that there is substantial evidence (including, but not limited to this), that Oswald's alibi was ignored and he was framed in the same, almost routine manner so many have been before and since. 


Please do the right thing. Obtain those films and make them available for study.


Yours sincerely,
Greg R. Parker
--------------

Here was the reply

Dear Mr. Paker,

Thank you for posting your request on History Hub!

The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) is the depository of the permanently valuable non-current records of the Federal Government.  Our mission is to preserve the records and make them available to the public. When The President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection was transferred to the legal custody of the National Archives, NARA staff may not add to, subtract from, or change in any way the contents of the Collection unless directed by law.

For access to the film, please contact the NBCUniversal Archives.

We hope this is helpful.
_____________

Yes. It was as helpful as an ashtray on a motorbike.

_________________
Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
              Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me


"So what’s an independent-minded populist like me to do? I’ve had to grovel in promoting myself on social media, even begging for Amazon reviews and Goodreads ratings, to no avail." 
Don Jeffries

"I've been aware of Greg Parker's work for years, and strongly recommend it." Peter Dale Scott

https://gregrparker.com
Sponsored content

Records Release Was Not Guaranteed Empty Re: Records Release Was Not Guaranteed

Back to top
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum