Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ford Told FBI About Panel's Doubts on JFK Murder
Houston Chronicle ^ | Aug. 9, 2008 | MICHAEL J. SNIFFEN

Posted on 08/09/2008 11:11:36 PM PDT by kellynla

WASHINGTON — Former President Ford secretly advised the FBI that two of his fellow members on the Warren Commission doubted the FBI's conclusion that John F. Kennedy was shot from the sixth floor of the Texas Book Depository in Dallas, according to newly released records from Ford's FBI files.

Ford, still a congressman at the time, also told a senior FBI official about internal panel disputes over hiring staff, Chief Justice Earl Warren's timetable for completing the final report on the assassination and what panel members said about the FBI.

In turn, Assistant FBI Director Cartha "Deke" DeLoach confidentially advised Ford of FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover's position on panel disputes; discussed where leaks were coming from; and, with Hoover's personal approval, loaned him a bureau briefcase with a lock so he could securely take the FBI report on the 1963 assassination with him on a ski trip.

The new details were included in 500 pages of the FBI's large file on Ford, released in part this past week in response to requests under the Freedom of Information Act that The Associated Press and others made on the day Ford died in December 2006. The FBI intends to release additional documents about Ford in several batches, all with parts censored for law enforcement and privacy reasons.

That Ford served as the FBI's eyes and ears inside the commission has been known for years. Long ago, the government released a 1963 FBI memo that said Ford, then a Republican congressman from Michigan, had volunteered to keep the FBI informed about the panel's private deliberations, but only if that relationship remained confidential. The bureau agreed.

It was also well-known Ford was an outspoken proponent of the bureau's conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald killed Kennedy acting alone.

(Excerpt) Read more at chron.com ...


TOPICS: Conspiracy
KEYWORDS: assassination; ford; geraldford; jfk; jfkassassination; lbj; presidents; warren
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-94 next last

1 posted on 08/09/2008 11:11:36 PM PDT by kellynla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kellynla

Don’t they still have secret files on the JFK assassination? We’ve all heard about conspiracy theories and others besides Oswald being involved. I’ve heard that there were pressures brought to bear on the Warren Commission to conclude that Oswald acted alone, because the truth would have been hard on the country. Organized crime involvement, and a Cuban/Soviet connection to the assassination are two popular theories. And some say that reporting such involvement to the public back in those days would have been unthinkable. They say it was easier and cleaner to just conclude that a crazed gunman acted alone in killing the president.


2 posted on 08/09/2008 11:46:04 PM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

Wow, there was actually dissention in the Commission? And here I thought the Commission memebers agreed, by consensus, to perform whitewash at breakneck speed. As for Ford colluding with the FBI, wasn’t the FBI the largest criminal info-gathering organization in the U.S.? Didn’t the FBI aid the Commission, as it would be expected to do? Why not discuss things with Jerry?

Something tells me that this little flake of dubiousness will be shuffled onto the towering pile of non-evidence that conspiracy theorists have ammassed against common sense. There is one thing I wish the buffs would think about—between cursory dismissals of the Commission as “a joke.” No credible evidence (naturally not including uncorroborated witness testimony gathered years after the fact) has ever surfaced pointing to Oswald or anyone else that did not originate with the Commission’s investigation!

Take the article’s mention of Ford’s mistaken placement of the rear-entry wound to Kennedy’s back. Forgetting for a moment that going back to the autopsy report would correct the error immediately, this is not evidence of anyone else’s guilt. It is only a dent in the already overwhelming evidence against Oswald. Same goes for criticism of the Commission in general. Forgetting for a moment that the 26 volumes of evidence gathered was one of the largest criminal investigation in all of history, an absolute corruption of the Commissioners’ ability to use proper discretion in organizing the evidence would not be evidence of anyone else’s guilt. In fact, the opinions of the Commissioners pertaining to all of the hard evidence gathered has been held up by every single reputable body that ever studied them, excepting those who believe (without evidence) that the evidence was tampered with or fabricated.

Put briefly, basically everything you and I ever hear the skeptics raise their doubts about—after 45 years and 1,000’s of books—derives from the very body that they decry embodiments of everything from laziness to evil.


3 posted on 08/09/2008 11:56:01 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane; kellynla
I've commented on the absolutely stone-lock on Oswald's guilt so many times in this forum, I'm going to just give this kind of stuff the dignity it deserves from now on, and stop wasting my time.


4 posted on 08/10/2008 12:12:18 AM PDT by FredZarguna (Triage doesn't deal with people who successfully defend themselves with guns.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

The protection of the public’s sensibilities has always seemed to me an paltry argument. It would be absolutely criminal for LBJ or anyone else in the government to willfully ignore evidence of an international conspiracy. Luckily, no such evidence existed, nor has any ever been found. If that were not enough, common-sense dictates that the Soviets and Cubans had little motive (given that Kennedy’s successor was not theirs to choose) to try so reckless a move.

As to the notion that a foregone conclusion would quiet things down, there is no evidence that LBJ ordered the Commissioners to adopt any particular finding. There is only evidence to the contrary; evidence that everyone who worked for the Commission was advised to seek the truth. Now, I’m not naive enough to ignore that men have their prejudices, and entrenched powers have their mega-prejudices. But the notion that men without any known history of deceit, and no known personal incentive to lie on behalf of anyone would suddnely change tack and start to lie to the public is outrageous. And even if all the Commissioners themselves were in on the con, what motive did the men who did the real investigative work, the hungry young lawyers, have to participate in a cover-up? Revealing a conspiracy would have made their careers, and maybe put them in the history books.

To believe that the Commission rushed to quell the public’s anti-communist fears, one must believe that otherwise decent men lied and lied to hide a theory that was not very plausible in the first place.


5 posted on 08/10/2008 12:14:55 AM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

I’ve never believed in the lone gunman theory. Oswald wasn’t anything near a crack shot. His rifle wasn’t known for accuracy either. Usually people with Oswald’s temperment get as close as they can and shoot at close range. It was all too lethal, too precise and single-handedly led us into Vietnam with the rise of LBJ.


6 posted on 08/10/2008 12:21:53 AM PDT by TheThinker (Capitalism is the natural result of a democratic government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

“And even if all the Commissioners themselves were in on the con, what motive did the men who did the real investigative work, the hungry young lawyers, have to participate in a cover-up?”

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Just making observations here:

- Gerald Ford the only man to serve as president who was never elected to that office nor the vice-presidency.

- One of those “hungry young lawyers”, the originator of the “single bullet theory”, Arlen Specter has been a Senator from Pennsylvania for years now.


7 posted on 08/10/2008 12:28:22 AM PDT by hotshu (My eye hurts dammit!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: TheThinker

“Oswald wasn’t anything near a crack shot?”

Have you ever qualified on a military firing range?

That’s what I thought. LOL


8 posted on 08/10/2008 12:35:37 AM PDT by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

He failed to assassinate General Edwin Walker even though he was at close range and on foot. He was drunk on the day he decided to try to assassinate Nixon but his wife locked him in the house. Bet he wasn’t drunk when he qualified on a military firing range, though.


9 posted on 08/10/2008 1:01:13 AM PDT by TheThinker (Capitalism is the natural result of a democratic government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

While I have no doubt that Oswald was up in the book depository taking shots at Kennedy, I’ve watched the Zagruder film numeorus times and can’t help but conclude that the bullet that actually killed Kennedy was fired from a position in front of and to the right of his motorcade, with the bullet striking him in the right part of his forehead and blowing out the back of his skull, just like a watermelon.


10 posted on 08/10/2008 4:13:16 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner ("We must not forget that there is a war on and our troops are in the thick of it!"--Duncan Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FredZarguna

nicely played


11 posted on 08/10/2008 4:31:37 AM PDT by Ahithophel (Padron@Anniversario)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

Ford was the FBI’s stooge on the commission, he was there to report to them....these doubts were a heads up, not a concern....


12 posted on 08/10/2008 4:47:15 AM PDT by The Wizard (DemonRATS: enemies of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FredZarguna

your comment tells us we should ignore everything you say...Oswald shot no one and that cats out of the bag....


13 posted on 08/10/2008 4:49:43 AM PDT by The Wizard (DemonRATS: enemies of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

you guys still are around aren’t you....so is the truth, Thank God.


14 posted on 08/10/2008 4:50:33 AM PDT by The Wizard (DemonRATS: enemies of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

I’ve watched the Zagruder film

Try watching the Zapruder film instead. You might change your mind...


15 posted on 08/10/2008 5:11:55 AM PDT by Paisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

Didn’t Ford come to the ultimate conclusion that Dubya did in JFK.


16 posted on 08/10/2008 5:28:19 AM PDT by Carley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheThinker

Sorry, but Oswald was a “Marksman” in the Marines. That is shooting at 200 yards over open sights. The distance Oswald shot Kennedy was at about 70 yards with a scoped rifle. Hell, I hit a beer can at 90 yards the first time I ever shot a rifle.


17 posted on 08/10/2008 5:35:10 AM PDT by mfish13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner
If the shot came from the right and to the front of the motorcade, then Zapruder would have seen the assailant. Did you ever stand where Zaparuder and his secretary stood? No way anyone was behind that fence on the grassy knoll. Also part of the fence and an empty space behind is on the Zapruder film.
18 posted on 08/10/2008 5:38:45 AM PDT by mfish13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: mfish13

Any shot from that area would’ve caused the camera to shake violently since he was right there. The muzzle blast would have been seen.. Not to mention reported.

It just didn’t happen that way.

I’ve been to the museum on the 6th floor and you can look out the window. I think I could make the shot with iron sights, it’s really not as far as it looks on TV.


19 posted on 08/10/2008 5:42:57 AM PDT by MartinStyles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
FYI, when I worked for an automotive company during the JFK assasination I had visit with the President of the folks who did the Armour Plating for the Limo. He informed me that when the Vehicle arrived from Texas that their inspection uncovered a two inch scratch in the windshield on the passenger and he indicated that the only thing that can cause that on bullet proof glass is a ballistic hit.
20 posted on 08/10/2008 5:57:32 AM PDT by Rappini ("Pro deo et Patria.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

No they don’t. Freedom of Information Act took care of that.


21 posted on 08/10/2008 6:17:27 AM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (NRA - Vote against the dem party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TheThinker

That’s because you don’t know anything about ballistics, trajectories or firearms.


22 posted on 08/10/2008 6:18:41 AM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (NRA - Vote against the dem party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

The Zapruder film doesn’t show any such thing. Your making all that up.


23 posted on 08/10/2008 6:19:51 AM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (NRA - Vote against the dem party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Shooter 2.5

You’re wrong, dude! Go back and watch it yourself, in slow motion. The bullet clearly hits JFK in the front, throws his head back, and the pressure wave from the bullet blows his brain out the back of his skull.


24 posted on 08/10/2008 6:22:53 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner ("We must not forget that there is a war on and our troops are in the thick of it!"--Duncan Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: MartinStyles; mfish13

Exactly. There’s no way Zapruder wouldn’t have noticed a rifle firing in his direction at that short of range.

Anyone even thinking of a shot from there has never been there to see it for themselves.

Kennedy even had his head at a right angle to the fence at that point. He would have been hit at the right side of his head if there was a shooter there.

This thread is nonsense.


25 posted on 08/10/2008 6:24:26 AM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (NRA - Vote against the dem party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Comment #26 Removed by Moderator

To: Shooter 2.5
Zapruder Film-stabilized and enhanced


27 posted on 08/10/2008 6:33:09 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner ("We must not forget that there is a war on and our troops are in the thick of it!"--Duncan Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Shooter 2.5
Here you go. Here's the photo of Kennedy seconds before the third and final shot showing any bullet from the knoll is impossible. Kennedy would have been shot on the right side of his head and out the left possible hitting Jackie.

This thread in nonsense.

28 posted on 08/10/2008 6:34:07 AM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (NRA - Vote against the dem party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

Comment #29 Removed by Moderator

Comment #30 Removed by Moderator

To: Shooter 2.5

What frame?


31 posted on 08/10/2008 6:38:37 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner ("We must not forget that there is a war on and our troops are in the thick of it!"--Duncan Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: hotshu
"- One of those “hungry young lawyers”, the originator of the “single bullet theory”, Arlen Specter has been a Senator from Pennsylvania for years now."

For a classic example of leading and brow-beating witnesses -- and of putting words in witnesses' mouths -- look up Specter's depositions of witnesses at Parkland Hospital re his "magic bullet"...

IMHO, Specter is one of the most dangerous people in the USA...

32 posted on 08/10/2008 6:41:21 AM PDT by TXnMA ("Allah": Satan's current alias...!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: mfish13
Hell, I hit a beer can at 90 yards the first time I ever shot a rifle.

Was the beer can a moving target and did you have sweaty palms and a case of the nerves because you were about to change history?

33 posted on 08/10/2008 6:41:31 AM PDT by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: TheThinker
It was all too lethal, too precise and single-handedly led us into Vietnam with the rise of LBJ.

We had already been in Vietnam under Eisenhower and Kennedy.

34 posted on 08/10/2008 6:42:19 AM PDT by Grizzled Bear ("Does not play well with others.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Comment #35 Removed by Moderator

To: Labyrinthos

That’s handgun range for a Marine. 44 yards and 88 yards.

When you learn about rifles, tragectories and ballistics, the grassy knoll lies are just that. Lies.


36 posted on 08/10/2008 6:45:52 AM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (NRA - Vote against the dem party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

Comment #37 Removed by Moderator

To: TXnMA

Let me take a canned ham and put it front of you so you can hide behind it. I’ll take a military rifle and shoot the ham. You can even leave it in the can. According to your theory, you should be perfectly safe.

Arlen Spector was right once in his life. The Kennedy Assassination was that one time.


38 posted on 08/10/2008 6:49:23 AM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (NRA - Vote against the dem party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego
Hell..if you're going with conspiracy theories....EO 11110 still makes sense in light of todays bankrupt “fiat money” system....The proof still remains in collectible currency.... http://www.321gold.com/fed/greenspan/1966.html not to mention Greenspams confirmation of the shabby little secret... http://www.321gold.com/fed/greenspan/1966.html
39 posted on 08/10/2008 6:50:33 AM PDT by M-cubed (Why is "Greshams Law" a law?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #40 Removed by Moderator

To: Shooter 2.5

If nothing came out the back of his head, then what was Jackie climbing over the seat and reaching for after his head expldoed? Hmmmm?


41 posted on 08/10/2008 6:52:07 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner ("We must not forget that there is a war on and our troops are in the thick of it!"--Duncan Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: M-cubed
whoops...the currency http://www.prolognet.qc.ca/clyde/kennedy.html
42 posted on 08/10/2008 6:53:10 AM PDT by M-cubed (Why is "Greshams Law" a law?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Shooter 2.5

Your understanding of ballistics and bullet behavior, not to mention bio-physics, is laughable.


43 posted on 08/10/2008 6:54:34 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner ("We must not forget that there is a war on and our troops are in the thick of it!"--Duncan Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

The Warren Commission worked backwards from their predetermined conclusion.

They were lucky enough to be correct.


44 posted on 08/10/2008 7:00:14 AM PDT by Zman516 (socialists & muslims -- satan's useful idiots.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MartinStyles
I’ve been to the museum on the 6th floor and you can look out the window. I think I could make the shot with iron sights, it’s really not as far as it looks on TV.

I recently spent almost an entire day at the museum and the surrounding area and even stood on the "X's" on the road that marks the spots where Kennedy was hit. The distance to the sixth floor is not nearly as far as it looks on film or on television and when I looked down from the window area, I was convinced that I could have hit Kennedy with a rock. Nevertheless, after studying all the exhibits, watching all of the unedited news videos and home movies that were shot that morning, reading and listening to the accounts of eye-witnesses, and making my own observations from various vantage points, I am absolutely convinced that Oswald was not the lone gunman, although I have no reason to doubt that he took a couple of shots from the sixth floor window. In several videos, numerous witnesses look to the grassy knoll as the shots are fired, and I saw no one looking up to the sixth floor.

45 posted on 08/10/2008 7:05:51 AM PDT by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Labyrinthos

Good post! Thank you!


46 posted on 08/10/2008 7:06:56 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner ("We must not forget that there is a war on and our troops are in the thick of it!"--Duncan Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: kalee

placemarker


47 posted on 08/10/2008 7:18:56 AM PDT by kalee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

So your reaction when someone is shooting at you is to gather up body parts?

Is that how you handle someone shooting at you?


48 posted on 08/10/2008 7:23:03 AM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (NRA - Vote against the dem party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Labyrinthos

The problem is that any shots from the knoll would’ve been within 15-30 feet firing over Zapruder’s shoulders. Unless they had some real high tech subsonic/supressed guns, I just don’t think it happened that way.

The camera would’ve at least moved, and he probably would’ve hit the deck. There were several people over there and they would’ve been deafened from any rifle blast.


49 posted on 08/10/2008 7:26:54 AM PDT by MartinStyles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: TheThinker
Oswald wasn’t anything near a crack shot.

Yes you must believe that people who score sharpshooter in the Marines are lousy shots. In December of 1956 Oswald scored Sharpshooter qualifying with the M1 rifle during basic training.

Oswald was a radar operator in the Marine Corp. On his annual rifle qualifications after basic training he only qualified as a marksman. This is often given by the unknowing as evidence that Oswald was not all that great a shot.

But anyone who was in the service in that era knows that those with jobs that do not require the use of a rifle often shot their required annual rifle quailification with what they called back then an M1 Pencil. Tests were often faked. There were rarely enough workers available to give people such as radar operators requiring security clearance time off to go shoot annual qualifications. There were rarely enough range staff or enough ranges to test them and no one to do their job while they would take the test. So the Military routinely faked the rifle qualification tests for such people. It was SOP to give the trooper whose test was faked a low but qualifying score. And that appears to be the case with Oswald.

It was common back then to give troops who actually fired the test and only scored a 191, a 193 or 194 score so people would know they actually shot the test and were not too good.. But those whose annual firing was faked were given a 191 score so supperiors would know know the firing test was faked.

Shooting is a skill that is retained for life. Once one has mastered it, it can be repeated again and again. It just takes a bit of practice to get it back. Annual qualifications always allowed for pre qualification practice. Oswald scored sharp shooter once. That says to me he could score sharpshooter as long as eyesight remained good.

Plus the distance from the sixth floor in Dallas to the car beneath him was no more than 120 feet. A rifleman who can hit targets at 100 to 250 yards with Sharpshooter skill has little trouble hitting a target at 30 to 80 yards.

I was no great shooter in the military, but I would bet a bundle I could, even at my advanced age, hit slow moving target the size of Kennedys exposed body 2 out of 3 times from that distance. They were not particularly hard or difficult shots. It would have been very long pistol shots, but very close rifle shots. Any average guy with a even a low grade military rifle could do it.

And Oswald was the sharpshooter who did just that.

50 posted on 08/10/2008 7:28:03 AM PDT by Common Tator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-94 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson