vidor 1 wrote:

"And Edward Kennedy is on record as saying he supports the conclusions of the Warren Commission"

Christ, what the hell did you expect him to freakin' say - especially after Chappequiddick? That he believed it was a conspiracy? Don't make me laugh! Had he done that, been that stupid, his political career would have gone on the shoals in very short order. So he played it smart. Said the politically correct thing - in return for which the assassination architects would permit him to continue- at least in the Senate where he wouldn't rock too many boats.

The fact is only a low grade moron or imbecile would support the "conclusions" of the Warren Commission - which weren't even proper conclusions at all, since the WC set out to support what it already believed as opposed to making the case it had to in order to convict Oswald. (And how convenient LHO wasn't alive to defend himself).

In the end, as a 1994 Mensa Bulletin article noted, the Warren Report fiction has about the same creds as modern day accounts purporting to show human virgin births.

Anyone who has studied the FOIA released documents (made available through the Assassinations Review Board) would see that, and even more if they were remotely au fait with the acoustic tests performed by the HSCA in 1979.

"Spreading poisonous disinformation about the Kennedys has long been one of the CIA's oldest family jewels"

If I wanted useful information on the CIA's role in the assassination, and especially its Oswald connections - I would not look into any of these newly released documents. They are clearly being manipulated in their release, including which content is disclosed about what.

A far better source is and remains Prof. John Newman's Oswald and the CIA (Carrol & Graf, 1993) which meticulously details (from actual Freedom of Information Act releases documents) the Agency's disinformation and subterfuge concerning its Oswald connections.

For those who may not know, Newman worked in Military Intelligence for 20 yrs. and is a Military Science professor at the University of Maryland.

Some of the choice nuggets Newman's research reveals:

-Oswald had an extensive CIA file: 201-289248 CI/SIG*, opened on December 9, 1960 more than one year after his defection to the USSR (Oct, 1959)

* CI/SIG - 'Counter Intelligence/ Special Interest Group'

- The CIA also had an OS-351-164 file (The 'OS' for Office of Security') (p57).

The 'OS'-file was assembled from the time of Oswald's defection, and included newspaper clippings and cables (ibid.). Ironically, however, it did not include the most damning document of all - a dispatch from Richard Snyder - then American Consul in Moscow, related to threats

made by Oswald to divulge security secrets.

This threat should have sounded warning bells all over the place- and indeed, if 201 files were ever indeed 'triggered' this would have been the singular occasion to do so. As already noted, defection per se is not illegal. However, espionage certainly is. (In Oswald's case it was

serious, since he knew the location of all bases on the west coast, all radio frequencies for all squadrons, all tactical call signs, strength of all squadrons, number and type of aircraft in each, names of commanding officers, and authentic codes of entering and exiting all ADIZ radar ranges).

-The CIA also kept a file on Oswald designated 74-500 where '74' is the country code for Russia.

- Newman clearly exposes a blatant CIA lie that "none of the Oswald files are classified 'confidential'. As Newman clearly observes (p. 51):

"The truth is that part of Oswald's pre-201 CIA files were classified SECRET EYES ONLY. This sort of mischief compromises not just the Agency's integrity on this issue, but also on the entire gamut of surrounding issues."

- The Warren Commission was "suspiciously 'quiet' on the subject of Oswald's CIA files"(p169): the OS-351-164, the 201-289248, and the 74-500. However, this should not befuddle anyone aware of the fact that a former CIA Director (Allen Dulles) sat on the Commission. The same guy JFK forced out after the Bay of Pigs debacle.

The upshot is that the CIA is not going to willingly disclose its links, connections to any event as explosive as a domestic political assassination - which means researchers are obliged to go to other authoritative and non-compromised sources.

Lastly, one must give hats off to Newman for exposing (p. 307) the many falsified documents (such as the FPCC handbills) that the Warren Commission used as "exhibits" in its Report.