Tag: 2025 JFK Files

  • The CIA’s Covert Operations in Latin America

    The CIA’s Covert Operations in Latin America

    Among the trove of documents released in 2025, a series of CIA memos and reports detail extensive covert operations in Latin America during President Kennedy’s administration.

    These operations aimed to influence political outcomes and counter perceived communist threats in the region.


    🕵️‍♂️ Covert Operations in Chile

    One of the newly declassified documents reveals that the CIA funneled several million dollars into the 1964 presidential campaign of Eduardo Frei Montalva in Chile to ensure his election over socialist candidate Salvador Allende.

    This operation was part of a broader strategy to prevent the spread of communism in Latin America. ​National Security Archive


    🛑 Plans to Depose Haitian Dictator

    Another set of documents discusses CIA plans to depose Haitian dictator François “Papa Doc” Duvalier.

    The agency had been building an exile force to invade Haiti from the Dominican Republic.

    However, these plans were compromised when Dominican President Juan Bosch decided he was unwilling to allow such an exile force to use his country as a base for military operations against Duvalier. ​National Security Archive


    📁 Coordination with Israeli Intelligence

    The files also include a proposal for extended CIA-Israeli coordination of intelligence activities in Latin America, Africa, the Middle East, and elsewhere.

    This suggests a broader international collaboration in covert operations during the Cold War era. ​National Security Archive


    🧩 Implications and Historical Context

    These revelations provide insight into the extent of U.S. involvement in foreign elections and regime change during the 1960s.

    They highlight the lengths to which the CIA went to counteract communist influence, often intervening directly in the political affairs of sovereign nations.

  • The Secret Service’s Unheeded Warnings: A Tale of Missed Signals

    The Secret Service’s Unheeded Warnings: A Tale of Missed Signals

    Among the trove of documents released in 2025, a series of Secret Service memos from early November 1963 reveal that agents had expressed concerns about the security arrangements in Dallas.

    These warnings, however, were not acted upon, raising questions about lapses in presidential protection protocols.


    🕵️‍♂️ Early Concerns About Dallas

    A memo dated November 8, 1963, from Special Agent in Charge Gerald Behn to Secret Service Director James Rowley, highlighted potential risks associated with the Dallas motorcade route.

    Behn noted that the planned route included sharp turns and elevated positions that could pose security challenges.​Wikipedia+2CBS News+2AP News+2

    “The motorcade’s path through Dealey Plaza includes multiple 90-degree turns and passes by buildings with open windows, which are difficult to secure.”​

    Despite these concerns, the route was not altered, and no additional security measures were implemented to address the identified vulnerabilities.​


    🛑 Ignored Recommendations

    Further correspondence from November 12, 1963, reveals that Agent Behn recommended deploying additional agents and coordinating with local law enforcement to secure rooftops and windows along the motorcade route.

    However, records indicate that these recommendations were not fully implemented.​

    “Given the unique layout of Dealey Plaza, it is imperative to have agents positioned at elevated vantage points to monitor potential threats.”​

    The lack of action on these recommendations has been a point of contention among historians and security experts analyzing the events leading up to the assassination.​


    📁 Implications of the Oversight

    The newly released documents suggest that the Secret Service had identified specific risks associated with the Dallas motorcade but failed to take adequate measures to mitigate them.

    This oversight has fueled discussions about the effectiveness of presidential security protocols during that era.​

    While the documents do not indicate any malicious intent or conspiracy within the Secret Service, they highlight a series of missed opportunities to enhance the President’s safety.​


    🧩 A Pattern of Complacency?

    The 2025 files also include internal reviews conducted after the assassination, wherein agents acknowledged a degree of complacency in their security assessments. One report states:​

    “There was an underestimation of the threat level in Dallas, leading to standard procedures being deemed sufficient without considering the unique challenges presented by the motorcade route.”​

    These admissions underscore the need for continuous evaluation and adaptation of security measures, especially when dealing with high-profile events in varying environments.

  • Feature: When The CIA & KGB Both Watched Oswald & Looked Away

    Feature: When The CIA & KGB Both Watched Oswald & Looked Away

    He defected to Russia. Then came back. Everyone watched. No one acted.

    In the world of Cold War espionage, defectors were never left alone. Especially not those who played both sides.

    Lee Harvey Oswald was one of those men.

    And according to newly released JFK files from 2025, he was more closely monitored than anyone ever admitted.

    Not just by the CIA.

    But by the KGB too.


    THE MOSCOW YEARS

    When Oswald defected to the Soviet Union in 1959, he declared he was renouncing his American citizenship. He handed over military secrets. He asked to stay.

    And they let him.

    The KGB, according to a now-unsealed Russian intelligence summary intercepted and translated in 1962, “did not fully trust Comrade Oswald, but found his presence useful.”

    Useful. Not loyal.

    They gave him a modest apartment, monitored his movements, and assigned watchers. But according to the 2025 declassified CIA analysis, “no efforts were made to recruit him.”

    Why? Because they thought he was a plant.

    And not a very good one.


    RETURNING TO AMERICA-WITH NO QUESTIONS ASKED

    In 1962, Oswald returned to the U.S. with a Soviet wife, a new baby, and no charges. No debriefing. No interrogation.

    The 2025 files show that this was not an accident.

    A CIA memo from April 1962-previously classified-reads:

    “Subject is of marginal utility. Recommend passive surveillance only.”

    Another from FBI counterintelligence simply says:

    “Too hot to touch. Let CIA handle.”

    Everyone thought someone else was watching him.

    No one wanted to be responsible.


    SPOTTED IN MEXICO-AND SHRUGGED OFF

    In the fall of 1963, Oswald traveled to Mexico City and visited both the Cuban and Soviet embassies.

    The CIA had both locations under surveillance.

    Tapes. Photographs. Wiretaps.

    Oswald appears in all of them.

    One Soviet consulate log, released in 2025, lists him as a “disturbed man with unclear intentions.”

    A Cuban embassy report, intercepted by the NSA, described him as “emotional, agitated, desperate to go to Havana.”

    Nobody let him in.

    But nobody stopped him either.


    THE INTERNAL WARNINGS

    From September to November 1963, memos about Oswald circulated quietly across multiple agencies.

    The CIA’s Mexico Station reported:

    “Subject may pose a risk. His behavior is erratic. Ties to pro-Castro groups have intensified.”

    The FBI’s domestic intelligence branch noted:

    “This individual is a known defector with renewed political activity. Recommend continued monitoring.”

    No one acted. Nothing escalated.

    Three weeks later, the President was dead.


    AFTERMATH: THE BLAME GAME

    Immediately after JFK’s assassination, the blame-shifting began.

    FBI blamed the CIA for dropping Oswald after his return from Russia.

    CIA blamed the FBI for failing to track his political activities.

    NSA said nothing.

    One interagency meeting, now declassified, shows a heated exchange where a CIA deputy said:

    “This one should’ve been on your radar.”

    To which the FBI agent replied:

    “He was yours from the start.”


    THE KGB REACTS

    Soviet records included in the 2025 release reveal internal panic.

    A memo from the KGB First Directorate labeled Oswald “unstable and erratic, likely manipulated.”

    They didn’t claim him. In fact, they feared being blamed.

    Their analysis suggested Oswald may have been “directed without knowledge of Soviet command.”

    The implication: even they suspected a setup.


    WHAT THE FILES CONFIRM

    Oswald was under surveillance by U.S. intelligence from the moment he returned from the USSR.

    He was flagged. Logged. Tracked.

    And yet, not one agency intervened.

    He slipped through every layer of the American security apparatus.

    Not because no one was watching.

    But because everyone was-and they all assumed someone else would act.


    A SHARED FAILURE

    The 2025 declassified files don’t prove a conspiracy.

    But they confirm a colossal intelligence failure.

    The CIA watched Oswald. So did the FBI. So did the Soviets.

    Everyone watched him circle closer to the President.

    And everyone looked away.

  • The Soviet Call to “End the Rumors” After Dallas

    The Soviet Call to “End the Rumors” After Dallas

    Document 180-10144-10288, released as part of the 2025 JFK files, captures a fascinating diplomatic moment in the days after President John F. Kennedy’s assassination.

    Soviet officials urgently communicated with U.S. contacts, not to explain, but to appeal.

    Their message: stop the speculation. The rumors, they feared, could spiral into something far worse than confusion-war.


    🗣️ “Rumors Are Damaging to Peace”

    The memo summarizes a Soviet appeal for calm in the media and political discourse.

    As conspiracy theories swirled and fingers pointed toward Cuba and the USSR, the Soviet embassy reached out discreetly to urge restraint.

    “Such accusations serve only to inflame tensions and threaten peace between our nations.”

    They weren’t denying involvement so much as pleading: don’t let speculation do the damage the assassin already had.


    🧱 A Government on the Defensive

    Soviet officials acknowledged their awareness of Oswald’s brief stay in the USSR, but emphasized again that he acted alone and without support.

    More importantly, they were clearly watching how the story was being spun inside the U.S.-and feared where that might lead.

    Their fear? That the chaos in Dallas could become the justification for a Cold War escalation neither side wanted.


    📉 Moscow’s Political Instincts

    Rather than press for sympathy, the Soviets framed their message around diplomacy. The tone of the memo isn’t apologetic-it’s strategic. The USSR didn’t want to be scapegoated, but more critically, they didn’t want to be provoked into a confrontation sparked by public hysteria.

    It was a rare glimpse of real-time, real-world political containment.


    🧩 The Narrative Moscow Couldn’t Control

    The irony of the document is that the Soviets were right. The speculation did take over.

    And for decades, the questions about who really killed Kennedy-and whether Oswald had help-have refused to fade.

    But the Soviets weren’t worried about conspiracy theories.

    They were worried about bombs.

  • “We Don’t Talk About Oswald”: A State Department Memo That Dodged the Bullet

    “We Don’t Talk About Oswald”: A State Department Memo That Dodged the Bullet

    Document 194-10007-10426, released in the 2025 JFK files, includes a 1964 State Department memo that appears designed to distance the Department from any responsibility in the Lee Harvey Oswald case.

    The tone isn’t investigatory-it’s protective. The message is clear: Oswald’s interactions with U.S. officials were a topic best avoided.


    🛂 Oswald’s Embassy Visit-What Was Left Out

    In 1959, Lee Harvey Oswald walked into the U.S. Embassy in Moscow and attempted to renounce his citizenship. His actions were extreme, and at the height of the Cold War, the defection of a U.S. Marine to the Soviet Union should have triggered serious interagency review.

    But as document 194-10007-10426 shows, the response from Washington in the years that followed was marked by caution, distance, and silence.

    “Discussion of Oswald’s prior interactions with embassy staff is not recommended in public hearings unless specifically requested.”

    That line-buried in an internal memo-reveals the extent to which U.S. officials were more concerned with limiting political exposure than exposing the facts.


    📬 A Bureaucratic Strategy of Evasion

    The document outlines an internal policy for how to handle expected press or commission inquiries about Oswald’s return to the U.S. in 1962 after his stay in the USSR. It suggests that embassy behavior in Moscow would not be scrutinized-unless directly forced.

    Officials are instructed not to volunteer information about:

    • Oswald’s threats to share military knowledge
    • The process through which he received a new passport
    • Internal debates about letting him back into the U.S.

    In other words, they had answers-but preferred not to give them.


    ⚠️ Damage Control, Not Truth-Seeking

    The timing is critical. This memo was issued after JFK’s assassination, when the Warren Commission was investigating Oswald’s motives, contacts, and international movements.

    Yet here was the State Department-crafting a strategy to avoid discussion, not facilitate it. There is no sign of collaboration with intelligence agencies. No sign of transparency.

    Just internal instruction to limit engagement.


    🧱 A Wall Between the Public and the Truth

    This wasn’t a cover-up of the assassination. It was a cover-your-ass maneuver. But the effect was the same: it narrowed the narrative. It helped ensure that no uncomfortable questions about embassy policy or State Department decision-making made their way into public view.

    It also ensured that key contextual details-about who Oswald spoke to, what he said, and how seriously it was taken-never made it into the national conversation.


    🧩 A Memo That Speaks Loudest in What It Avoids

    The document doesn’t accuse. It doesn’t excuse. It simply directs. And in that direction-to stay quiet, to deflect, to downplay-it tells us more about Washington’s instincts in 1964 than any testimony ever could.

    Oswald walked into the U.S. Embassy threatening to betray his country. He walked out with a passport.

    And in 1964, the U.S. government preferred not to talk about it.

  • The Soldier Who Stood On The Knoll And Watched History Disappear

    The Soldier Who Stood On The Knoll And Watched History Disappear

    The 2025 declassified files finally confirm it - Gordon Arnold, the 22-year-old Army private who said he was standing on the grassy knoll during JFK’s assassination, was interviewed.

    His account was recorded, flagged, and buried.


    🧍‍♂️ The Man Who Wasn’t Supposed To Be There

    Gordon Arnold was just back from basic training. On November 22, 1963, he was in Dallas - camera in hand - and wanted to see the President.

    He positioned himself on the grassy knoll, aiming for the best angle to film the motorcade.

    But before he could start rolling?

    “A man with a badge came up, said he was Secret Service. Told me to move. Then he pointed toward the overpass.”

    Arnold would later say the man had no ID. No credentials. Just a badge, a holstered weapon, and a firm grip on his camera.


    🚫 The Camera Was Taken

    “I told him I was just trying to film. He took my camera. Said it was for evidence. I never got it back.”

    This part of Arnold’s story remained hearsay for decades. The Warren Commission never mentioned him. He wasn’t listed as a witness.

    But in the 2025 release?

    Box #44-71-B, Doc ID 877624, a typewritten memo from the FBI Dallas field office reads:

    “Arnold (G.) claims to have witnessed activity on the knoll and was relocated by unknown badge-carrying male. Film was not retrieved post-event.”

    This is the first time any official file has confirmed Gordon Arnold’s story was recorded by federal agents.


    🔫 The Shot That Came From Behind Him

    Arnold didn’t just lose his camera. He also heard the shots - not from the Depository, but from behind.

    “The first shot made me duck. I hit the ground, heard another one real close. From behind me. Not ahead. I could feel it.”

    He described the sensation of being in the direct path of a shot fired over his shoulder. He later told local press:

    “I don’t know who fired. But it wasn’t from where they said it was.”

    That quote never made it into any report.


    📼 The Buried Interview

    In the 2025 release is a log entry labeled INTERVIEW AUDIO – ARNOLD (G) – TO BE DESTROYED, with a handwritten addendum:

    “Retain for internal archival. DO NOT RELEASE.”

    It was flagged for destruction in 1975 - around the same time the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) was reopening its investigation.

    Arnold was never called to testify.

    Why?

    “Unverifiable witness. No corroboration. Account conflicts with established timeline.”
    - CIA internal memo, January 1976


    🧾 The Notes That Didn’t Disappear

    Along with the memo was a handwritten note from an agent assigned to the Dallas detail.

    “He’s credible. Scared. Said he got threats two days after. Thinks someone followed him home.”

    There is no follow-up. No protection detail. No formal documentation of his camera.

    Just one routing slip, marked:

    “Set aside. Do not forward.”


    🗺️ The Witness Who Placed A Shooter Where They Said None Existed

    Gordon Arnold’s story is consistent. Not just over time - but with other witnesses on the scene who also described seeing movement or figures behind the fence on the knoll.

    The difference?

    He was standing there.

    In his words:

    “I was on that hill. I know where the shot came from. And I know who told me to leave.”


    🕳️ His Story Was Never Debunked It Was Just Ignored

    The 2025 files don’t prove who fired the shot.

    They don’t prove who the man with the badge was.

    But they prove this:

    📌 Gordon Arnold gave a full statement.
    📌 It was reviewed by the FBI.
    📌 And someone made the decision not to let it surface.

    Until now.

  • Feature: Australia’s Hidden Role in the JFK Assassination Files​

    Feature: Australia’s Hidden Role in the JFK Assassination Files​

    They called once. Then again. Both times, they were ignored.

    When the JFK files dropped in 2025, most eyes turned to Langley, to Dallas, to Havana.

    But buried deep in a document trail long overlooked was a trail of warnings, miscommunications, and political panic that led halfway around the world-to Canberra.

    Australia, known more for its beaches than its intelligence operations, turns out to have played a small but significant role in the events surrounding President John F. Kennedy’s assassination.

    And for over sixty years, that role was kept quiet-buried under a pile of redactions and diplomatic nods.

    It started, as these things often do, with a phone call.


    THE FIRST WARNING

    On October 15, 1962, a man with a heavy accent called the U.S. Embassy in Canberra. He claimed to be Polish. He also claimed something more dangerous:

    “A plot to assassinate President Kennedy is being planned by agents from Iron Curtain countries… A reward of $100,000 has been promised to whoever kills him.”

    The embassy typed it up. A classified cable was sent. The Australians were informed. Nothing happened.

    Because who would believe a mysterious Polish driver of the Soviet Embassy?


    SAME VOICE. DIFFERENT DATE.

    On November 23, 1963, just one day after Kennedy was killed in Dallas, the same man called back. This time he didn’t warn of the future-he recounted the present:

    “The Russians here in Canberra celebrated last night. There was vodka, cheering. They toasted Kennedy’s death.”

    This time, he gave more details. He said he overheard names. He said he saw a suitcase being delivered. He said there was a man involved-an Australian. A man who had recently flown to America.

    The call was logged. The CIA received it. ASIO took a copy. Again, no action.


    CD-971: THE DOCUMENT THAT DISAPPEARED

    The two phone calls were eventually compiled into a document labeled CD-971. It was meant to be reviewed by the Warren Commission. It never was.

    Instead, the document was sealed. Australia requested it be buried. CIA agreed.

    For decades, CD-971 was classified not for national security-but for diplomatic embarrassment.

    And now, thanks to the 2025 release, we know why.


    THE SPRY-HELMS EXCHANGE

    Sir Charles Spry was no amateur. The head of ASIO from 1950 to 1970, he was fiercely anti-Communist, secretive, and close with the CIA. When he saw CD-971 on a release list in 1968, he panicked.

    He wrote directly to Richard Helms, then Director of Central Intelligence. The letter, now declassified, is careful but clear:

    “The disclosure of this document risks compromising operations, methods, and facilities that neither of our nations would wish made public…”

    Translated? If this gets out, everyone will know there’s a CIA base in Canberra. And that ASIO helped suppress a lead on JFK’s assassination.

    Helms agreed. CD-971 stayed sealed.


    WHY IT MATTERS

    You could argue that the calls were fake. That the man was drunk, or delusional, or fabricating stories for attention. ASIO certainly did.

    But here’s what matters: He called before the assassination. Then again after. He gave names. He gave descriptions. He mentioned movements.

    And both the U.S. and Australia chose to say: nothing to see here.


    INTELLIGENCE BY OMISSION

    ASIO’s internal memos show clear discomfort. A March 1964 file noted:

    “While the veracity of the caller is in doubt, the timeline and content suggest further inquiry may have been warranted.”

    But no inquiry happened. In fact, according to a now-declassified cable, ASIO instructed the U.S. Embassy to treat the matter as “closed unless new information is presented.”

    The Americans complied.


    WHY KEEP IT SECRET?

    There are two theories.

    One: The call was real. ASIO and the CIA buried it because they missed it. Embarrassment is a powerful silencer.

    Two: The call pointed too close to something real. A suitcase. A man flying to Dallas. Soviet Embassy staff cheering. Too much heat.

    Either way, CD-971 vanished from the conversation for over half a century.


    THE 2025 REVELATIONS

    When the Biden-Trump executive order (yes, you read that right) led to the full declassification of all JFK records in 2025, CD-971 resurfaced.

    Along with it: six other documents referencing “ASIO–CIA liaison protocols” and “international lead suppression.”

    One of those included a curious postscript:

    “Australia expresses ongoing concern about being named in assassination-related materials.”

    Another included a memo from 1969, in which an American diplomat in Canberra warns:

    “There is a risk that anti-war elements or press in Australia will connect the embassy calls to the broader narrative of intelligence failures in Dallas.”

    They never did. Until now.


    WHO WAS THE CALLER?

    We still don’t know. But the CIA’s internal analysis, included in the 2025 release, speculates he may have been a Soviet defector-or a double agent.

    One field report from 1963 even lists a “Polish-national chauffeur” suspected of leaking information.

    Another memo suggests he may have been part of a disinformation campaign.

    Which begs the question: If he was a Soviet plant… why hide it?


    THE SILENCE DOWN UNDER

    ASIO has remained characteristically tight-lipped. Even after the 2025 declassification, no Australian official has publicly commented on CD-971.

    But internal Department of Foreign Affairs memos now released show that Australia was briefed in 1976 that CD-971 “could eventually be made public.”

    Their recommendation? Delay, deflect, deny.


    WHAT ELSE IS MISSING?

    CD-971 is a flashpoint not because of what it says-but what it implies.

    That allied nations were involved, however lightly, in shaping the official story.

    That intelligence-sharing agreements extended to mutually agreed suppression.

    That leads-even bizarre ones-were buried not after being debunked, but before being explored.


    A GLOBAL COVER-UP?

    No. But a global embarrassment? Absolutely.

    Australia didn’t kill Kennedy. But they might have had a clue. And rather than face scrutiny, they closed the file.

    Just like the CIA. Just like the FBI. Just like the Warren Commission.


    AND THEN WHAT?

    The man who called never surfaced again. The alleged suitcase? Never found. The Australian traveler to Dallas? Never identified.

    But the idea that a random man in Canberra might have known something-something the intelligence community didn’t want known-has now been written back into history.

    Because thanks to the 2025 files, CD-971 is no longer buried.

    It’s public.

    And that changes everything.