J. Edgar Hoover: "Need To Convince Public That Oswald Is Real Assassin"

Amid the thousands of new files released yesterday - though less than expected - were two intriguing memos to, and from, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover on November 24th, 1963 - the day that Jack Ruby killed Lee Harvey Oswald as the gunman was being transported to the Dallas County Jail after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

In a memo issued by Hoover, he appeared to be particularly concerned that the public would have to be compelled to believe that Oswald was a lone actor - not part of a larger conspiracy.

"There is nothing further on the Oswald case except that he is dead."

In the 1964 Warren Report on Kennedy's assassination, NBC notes, Hoover was firm in stating that he hadn't seen "any scintilla of evidence" suggesting a conspiracy - a sentiment he expressed in other public forums, as well, but not in words as blunt as those he used the day Oswald was killed.

Referring to Nicholas Katzenbach, the deputy attorney general at the time, Hoover dictated:

"The thing I am concerned about, and so is Mr. Katzenbach, is having something issued so we can convince the public that Oswald is the real assassin."

It's not clear from the memo whether Hoover thought there might have been a conspiracy but didn't want it to be known or whether he sincerely believed Oswald acted alone and hoped to head off public fear and confusion. Hoover also indicated that his concern may have been influenced, in part, by diplomacy, dictating that there could be serious international complications if the public thought Oswald might have been part of a larger plot. Katzenbach is known from previously released documents to have shared Hoover's concern, writing in a memo the next day, on Nov. 25, 1963, that:

"the public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial."

Interstingly, Hoover was angry at Oswald's murder (especially after the police had been warned by The FBI that Osawld's life was in danger)...

"Oswald having been killed today after our warnings to the Dallas Police Department was inexcusable," Hoover dictated.


"It will allow, I am afraid, a lot of civil rights people to raise a lot of hell because he was handcuffed and had no weapon.


There are bound to be some elements of our society who will holler their heads off that his civil rights were violated — which they were."

Though hard to read, here is Hoover's full memo...

Then to top things off, in a memo sent back to FBI Director Hoover, it was confirmed that "no effort should be made to defend alleged assassin Lee H. Oswald or "scream frame-up."

Of course, we suspect there are plenty more interesting revelations within the files that were released and perhaps the ones that have not been released... Julian Assange's Wikileaks has offered a $100,000 reward for any evidence of wrongdoing...


Fireman Fri, 10/27/2017 - 12:24 Permalink

/* Style Definitions */
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
Harvey Lee whacked the Knight Of Come a lot all by himself. Patsy Paddock did Vegas too all by himself. Now get over it all you poor deluded Trump chumps. Just remember Donny loves ya!

SofaPapa loebster Fri, 10/27/2017 - 12:56 Permalink

The important part of this story is one level above this article.  Whether or not Oswald acted alone is a derivative of a significantly more important question: Do "We The People" believe he acted alone.  Power is in the end, whether explicitly or implicitly (subconsciously), derived from the people's acceptance and tolerance of that power.  Most power is implicit.  People accept that those in power do what they do even if we ourselves would not behave in such a way.  We then create a framework in our minds to normalize their acts and make our reality "make sense" to us.  This ability to "square the circle" of our relationship to those in power is breaking down:http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-10-26/most-americans-believe-jfk-con… the real story.  The connection between the population and those "leading" is breaking down.  The myths are no longer self-perpetuating.  Think about this.  This is how the church lost power.  People stopped believing that the "Christian worldview" represented the world around them.  This left open the field to our current secular "business uber alles" paradigm.  Now this paradigm too is breaking down, as a majority realizes that the "Hollywood" (including the MSM "news" reality) worldview does not reflect reality from our own direct experience.We live in interesting times.  What's next?  I don't claim to know.  But the current worldview in the US and western Europe is dying.  That much is self-evident.

In reply to by loebster

DownWithYogaPants BaBaBouy Fri, 10/27/2017 - 13:29 Permalink

I will use the same argument on the CIA that the NSA et al government uses on me in regards recording all my phone calls and internet browsing:YOU SHOULD NOT FEAR DOCUMENT RELEASE IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE.Some days I pray for destruction just so we can sterilize the place and start all over again.  We would all be better off with no intelligence services whatsoever.  They only serve the banking interests.

In reply to by BaBaBouy

beemasters JSBach1 Fri, 10/27/2017 - 16:08 Permalink

"It's not clear from the memo whether Hoover thought there might have been a conspiracy but didn't want it to be known or whether he sincerely believed Oswald acted alone and hoped to head off public fear and confusion."

Short answer? Between the two, the former.
The latter wouldn't make a lot of sense.

Well, at least now, more people know how evil the CIA is...also with their Miami false flag plan to blame Cuba.

This is why any official report of attacks by foreign entities or lone wolves must always be taken with a grain of salt... and that includes 9/11 and Vegas shooting.

In reply to by JSBach1

JSBach1 MillionDollarBonus_ Fri, 10/27/2017 - 17:46 Permalink

There are many people who have serious questions and who point to many inconsistencies in the official story. Here is one such recent article which contains sound analysis (first video), witness testimony, former FBI agent, Don Adams, stating that his own research was omitted and modified.https://www.activistpost.com/2017/10/jfks-assassination-not-conspiracy-… not not odd, to say the least, that JFK was struck in the neck cleanly, yet the hit to the head caused severe damage to his head exploding in essence (different bullet types), his Secret Service detail was signaled off and walked away from behind his vehicle were they would normally be stationed thereby giving an unobstructed view to his killer(s) and moments later JFK was shot, at least thirteen witnesses died in mysterious circumstances within three years of JFK's assassination, the Warren Committee, included as its head the former CIA director, Allen Dulles, whom JFK fired, not to mention all of the other circumstantial anomalies surrounding JFK's assassination?Yet people who question the authenticity and official narrative are labeled conspiracy theorists -- coincidentally this term was coined by this very agency in order to smear any and all dissent and paint, all using a single brush, into a singular category -- no matter how genuine their concerns are in opposition to the official narrative.  

In reply to by MillionDollarBonus_

Velocitor JSBach1 Fri, 10/27/2017 - 17:50 Permalink

"Conspiracy Theorist" is just a meaningless smear meant to shut down conversation. A priest in my hometown actually used that term in a sermon, during the early 1980's, to shame congregants who were asking about stories in the news suggesting that pedophilia in the Church was widespread, and that the Vatican knew about it and knowingly moved the offenders around instead of turning them in to justice. Yeah "crazy conspiracy theorists", not believing the authority figures...

In reply to by JSBach1

Velocitor MillionDollarBonus_ Fri, 10/27/2017 - 17:45 Permalink

You linked to that as a source?  A bunch of dismissive heckling and ad hominum attacks on anybody who disbelieves the official story? And you want to be taken seriously? Let me counter with a book: JFK vs. CIA - The Central Intelligence Agency's Assassination of the Presidentby Michael Calder  (c) 1998ISBN:  0-9660749-0-4 The book is extensively researched, and in effect peer reviewed, because the nucleus of the book was the author's PhD dissertation.  It is the most persuasive and objectively defensible position on the shooting. As the title suggests, the shooting was done by a team of CIA agents (i.e. the entire agency wasn't "in on it") and the public now knows such teams have conducted assassinations in other countries as well. Who ordered the CIA assassins is not definitively proven, although a preponderance of evidence suggests LBJ was part of it, if not the leader.

In reply to by MillionDollarBonus_

The Management Yes We Can. Bu… Fri, 10/27/2017 - 19:33 Permalink

I like to think sometimes that MDB is a paid shill account thats like - you know - the dude who drew the short straw that week @ SHILL INC. and his boss says - hey dude you gota make posts on ZH - and hes like naooooooooooOOOOOOO FML i hate ZH ... "why cant Frank be MDB this week" - and the boss is like you know Frank is sick this week, and John is is borderline retarded. So go on - go tell those assholes that gold rusts and theres nothing significant about releasing THE JFK FILES after 52 years.  But of course i am also 98.4% sure its real good satire because no one can be that retarded.

In reply to by Yes We Can. Bu…

Conscious Reviver FIAT CON Fri, 10/27/2017 - 21:53 Permalink

Here's my 2¢. JFK said that he was going to smash the CIA into a thousand pieces. He took the first step. In the Summer of '63 he fired CIA Director Alan Dulles. In November he was assassinated. The Warren Commission conducted an "investigation". Alan Dulles, the CIA Director, fired by Kennedy was invited to sit on the Warren Commission and help investigate the murder that he helped set up!!The young Rumsfeld and Cheney supported the Warren Commission as congressional aides to congressman Gerald Ford. Imagine the behind the scenes access to all the dirt that young Cheney and Rumsfeld were let in on. In effect, they were 'Made Men' at an early point in their carrers.Ford went on to become President. Cheney and Rumsfeld went on to create 9/11 and invade Iraq among other nefarious and dark deeds. So talk about continuation of government!! The bureaucratic decendants of the same crew that killed JFK are still in charge of government today.

In reply to by FIAT CON

DeadFred BaBaBouy Fri, 10/27/2017 - 19:52 Permalink

The real stuff is in the 5,000 ducuments that have never been logged and never will be. The only thing you can glean from this type of document dump is the occasional reference to some document that we have never had a clue about. They rarely get every last detail right so clue squeak through.

In reply to by BaBaBouy

TBT or not TBT Bigly Fri, 10/27/2017 - 20:35 Permalink

In Europe the Catholic Church was thoroughly aligned with the ancient regime. The French Revolution was anti-clerical. Napoleon later spread secularizarion across Europe by imposing his variation of revived Roman civil law. The sins were many back then probably, but the theme that remained was the Church’s role enabling the hereditary dictatorships and feudal system. And living well from it.

In reply to by Bigly

hola dos cola SofaPapa Fri, 10/27/2017 - 19:01 Permalink

After this: "The connection between the population and those "leading" is breaking down.", you go on a stray.- Myths aren't self-perputuating per definition.- People took what you call "the Christian Worldview" for granted and prioritised the time and energy the church demanded for other more material 'business' to the same effect but perceived as under their own control. (I'm sure you won't read the reply or possibly I won't see your reaction ~ I blame the website ~ but this is a very interesting subject  and undoubtedly rewarding if further discussed and explored)- 'Hollywood' never meant to reflect reality "from our own experience". If anything beside enrichment, it was meant to provide a temporarily escape "from our own experience".And I can tell you the, as you say, current worldview in Europe is anything but dying; that from my own experience.Besides the above an interesting reaction though.

In reply to by SofaPapa