TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

They claim that the execution of the president was ordered by the policy committee of the Bilderberg Group in The Hague in Geneva, Switzerland, and was carried out by agents of the secret government in Dallas. The man who actually administered the coup de grace was the driver of the car, William Greer. They assert that Greer turned with an assassination pistol in his left hand and shot the president point blank in the head over his right shoulder. They reference a film in beautiful living color that allegedly shows this with your own eyes. They assert that you can see in the film that Greer fired the shot. They claim it is the Zupruder film, and that it was incredible that the event had been hidden from the public for all these years, but that the same film has been shown on television for all these years, yet they say television has always zoomed in on Kennedy and cut the driver out so you can never see it. They state that the Zupruder film was never shown to the Warren Commission and that they never saw it. In summary, the assertion is that the assassination was ordered by a high-level policy group and executed by secret-government-backed agents, with William Greer as the shooter, captured in a living-color film that has been publicly broadcast in a distorted way, and that this critical footage was never presented to the Warren Commission.

The discussion centers on the Zapruder film, an amateur film taken by Abraham Zapruder, a Dallas dress manufacturer, which captured the assassination of President Kennedy. The film is described as a valuable historical document. The footage shows the presidential motorcade moving through Dealey Plaza. As the car passes, the president is shot. According to the speaker, the Warren Commission claimed Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone, fired all shots from behind. However, the film purportedly shows the president's head being thrown violently backwards, suggesting a shot from the front. The speaker claims this is consistent with witness accounts stating shots came from the grassy knoll in front of the president. The film also shows people running towards the area where the shots were believed to have originated.

They did an initial examination of JFK's body in Dallas and then flew it to Bethesda. David Lifton's book, "Best Evidence," documents many witnesses being murdered in astounding ways, like cars parked on railroad tracks, heart attacks at 30, shootings during robberies, and suicides. The odds of all these deaths being coincidental are millions to one. The Zapruder film clearly shows it wasn't a shot from the back. The tracheotomy and single bullet theory were contrived. Oliver Stone has been studying this forever. There's a wild connection between Jolly West and Jack Ruby. I learned about Jolly West after reading "Chaos," and after digging into MK Ultra, it seems highly unlikely that these connections are coincidences.

According to the speaker, JFK's assassination was a conspiracy involving the Italian mafia, the CIA, and Zionists. The CIA wanted JFK gone because he threatened to dismantle their rogue operations and disliked Director Alan Dulles. The mafia felt betrayed after JFK's father allegedly made a deal to rig the election, and then JFK's brother, RFK, targeted them as Attorney General. The FBI was allegedly neutered in investigating the mafia because Hoover was being blackmailed by Meyer Lansky of the Jewish mafia. Israel wanted JFK dead because he threatened their nuclear program, which they developed secretly after stealing uranium with the help of the French. The speaker claims politicians knew of Israel's involvement. Lyndon B. Johnson allegedly forced his way onto the ticket as VP by threatening to expose JFK's adultery. Lee Harvey Oswald was a patsy; there were multiple shooters, including Jack Valenti and David Ferry, CIA contractors. Jack Valenti allegedly fired the kill shot. Jack Ruby, real name Jacob Rubinstein, killed Oswald and confessed he did it for Israel and the Jewish people. The Zapruder film was filmed by Abraham Zapruder, a Jewish Zionist. Oliver Stone's movie JFK was funded by Arnaud Milchan, a Jewish Zionist billionaire involved in covering up Israel's nuclear program.

The speaker discusses the JFK assassination and presents a series of videos as evidence. They argue that JFK was not assassinated on November 22, 1963, but rather an escape plan was executed. They point to the chaos and confusion at the scene, the possibility of a US military operation, and the lack of blood and reaction from Jackie Kennedy as evidence. The speaker also mentions the presence of a small throat wound and a frontal head wound. They suggest that the Zapruder film was edited to hide the truth. The speaker concludes by mentioning the possibility of a prearranged cadaver at Parkland Hospital.

Speaker 0: Did you hear Trump's take on the JFK assassination, why he didn't release the files? Yeah. I know what Trump's take is. He said that if you knew what I know, you wouldn't tell people either, which is crazy. Well, and What does that mean? That's his position on the UAP thing as well Yeah. Actually. And that's a lot of people's position on it. I mean, you know, Trump is saying, of course, the CIA had knowledge of it. That is known. I mean, I mean, the whole it sounds like it's so funny. There's so many levels and there's so much I don't understand. But the whole JFK conspiracy industry, and it really is an industry, more books written on that than almost any historical topic, is is filled with wackos. Right? There are a lot of wackos in there. But it obscures that fact obscures the larger fact which is the facts themselves tell an unbelievable story. Yeah. And so whatever. I could get into it at great length. But yeah. Yeah. They're they're still classifying documents sixty one years later. Both Trump and Joe Biden have, in violation of my read of federal law, kept those documents secret. There's no living person connected to the Kennedy assassination. It was a couple generations ago. There's no one person whose whose secrets are being protected. It's an institution or maybe countries. There may have been countries involved too. I mean, don't know the answer, but there's clearly something worth protecting. And I know that when I I spoke to someone who'd seen the documents, okay, two years ago and I got I got one fact out of him, which is, yes, the CIA was involved. And by CIA, CIA is a huge organization, but James Jesus Angleton, the head of the operations directorate, had knowledge of this, which I think is well known. But that that's the view of someone who saw the documents. So I thought that was news, so I went on TV and said that. The next day, I'll never forget it, I went quail hunting, and I was driving back and I got a phone call from Mike Pompeo's lawyer. Mike Pompeo was the Secretary of State, but before then he was the Director of the CIA. And in that position, he plotted the murder of Julian Assange, so he is a criminal as far as I'm concerned. But his lawyer called me and said, you know, you should know that anyone who tells you the contents of classified documents has committed a crime. He's threatening me. It's in my car. I'll never with my dog sitting next to me. I'll never forget this. And I said, are you really saying that to reveal that the US government had a role in the murder of a democratically elected president to say that out loud, that's the crime? What about the actual crime which is murdering a president? Like, you're covering up for that, Mike Pompeo. He had no no response at all. And so Mike Pompeo is the one who pressed Trump to keep those documents secret. And so it's like, what's crazy to me is not just that Pompeo did that. I think Pompeo was a really sinister person and a and a criminal. I think that. I think that because the facts suggest that. He was caught. Yahoo News, Mike Issachoff wrote a long piece on this several years ago. His employees went to Mike Issachoff and said, hey. Mike Pompeo was plotting to murder Julian Assange who's never even been charged with a crime in The United States as CIA director. That's illegal. You're not allowed federal employees are not allowed to just kill people they don't like. Okay? Just to set the baseline here. So that's who Mike Pompeo is, but he somehow intimidated Trump into not releasing this. Well, okay. That's all bad. Right? I think it's criminal behavior. What's crazy is how Mike Pompeo is treated. He's treated as like a republican pooh bah in good standing. He fully expects to become the secretary of defense in a Trump administration, which is like completely insane. Why would you get criminal and give him nuclear weapons? Okay. That's my view. I think it's a common sense view. And like he goes to fundraisers and dinners and everyone's like, hey, Mike Pompeo. It's like, no. You're the guy who kept information the public has right to know secret. You're the guy who plotted the murder of someone who committed no crime. You are the outlaw. You are the bad guy. But no. He's treated as like, you know, like a pillar of republican Washington. I think that's I think it's mind bending to watch that.

The speaker discusses the Zapruder film, an amateur film capturing the Kennedy assassination. Abraham Zapruder, a Dallas dress manufacturer, filmed the motorcade in Dealey Plaza. The speaker warns viewers about the graphic nature of the footage, calling it the "execution of President Kennedy." The film shows the motorcade entering Dealey Plaza. As the car passes a sign, Kennedy is shot, followed by Governor Connolly. The speaker points out the backward motion of Kennedy's head upon impact. The Warren Commission concluded that Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone, fired all shots from behind. However, the speaker claims the backward head movement suggests a shot from the front. The speaker states that the film shows Kennedy being hit from the front.

The speaker watched a slowed-down version of the Zapruder tape showing Kennedy's assassination. In this version, the driver shot Kennedy, unlike the familiar one where he didn't react. The speaker was shown the original tape and a doctored one seen in the media, with a tree anomaly pointed out. The person showing the tapes emphasized that things are not always what they seem.

After a thorough investigation into the John F. Kennedy assassination, the initial congressional hearing was flawed regarding the single bullet theory. I believe there were two shooters. Hopefully, we can gain access to the SCIF before the files are released to the public to find more information.

Many JFK assassination conspiracy theories rely on false information or speculation. A House Select Committee report suggested a possible conspiracy, but it relied on flawed acoustical data. Despite this, many Americans don't believe Oswald acted alone. The claim of a shooter on the grassy knoll is false; shots came from the Texas Book Depository. Oswald's rifle was found there, matching prior photos, palm prints, and fibers. The Zapruder film was used in Oliver Stone's film JFK to suggest a shooter in front of the limousine because JFK's head snapped "back and to the left." However, physics explains this as a recoil effect. The "magic bullet" theory, where one bullet struck both JFK and Connolly, was replicated in a Discovery Channel experiment. Oswald, a former Marine, qualified as a sharpshooter. The distance to JFK was only 88 yards, making it an easy shot. Any theory exonerating Oswald is nonsense. He had motive, including a difficult childhood, psychiatric issues, and interest in Marxism.

Retired FBI agent Paul Landis, a former Secret Service agent on Jackie Kennedy's protection detail, claims to have found the "magic bullet" that was part of the JFK assassination. The bullet, known as Warren Commission exhibit 399, was found in almost pristine condition and was believed to have entered JFK's back, exited his throat, and then hit Texas governor John Connally. Landis argues that it would have been impossible for Lee Harvey Oswald, the supposed shooter, to fire two shots in less than a second with the rifle he had. Landis suggests that there was a second shooter in Dealey Plaza, contradicting the Warren Commission's conclusion that Oswald acted alone. Landis plans to discuss this further in a podcast or video with his partner, a retired Secret Service agent.

Speaker discusses Fed operations and JFK shooting, stating 'there are often decoys, even decoy sounds' and that 'it is totally plausible' there were multiple people who knew who would take the shot. They say 'a rifle was fired to muffle the sound of a smaller gun,' and, considering the trajectory, that the shot 'kinda had to come from the front of Charlie.' This is 'my well informed opinion' and suggests 'we are looking for a person that was a lot closer to Charlie and likely in the audience.' The speaker claims this explains why footage behind Charlie's head is hidden, calling it 'crucial first and foremost.' They claim 'the person who took the cameras down was absolutely not instructed to do so by law enforcement' Question 'why grab the one behind his head first?' They note a 'remarkable blind spot on the left of Charlie' and ask for footage accordingly.

The Kennedy family had a long-standing feud with the CIA. Joseph Kennedy, the family patriarch, called for an end to the CIA's operations, and John and Robert Kennedy criticized the CIA's role in Vietnam. Before his assassination, John Kennedy planned to remove the clandestine services from the CIA. There were many enemies, not just from the CIA, who opposed the family. It wasn't until recently that doubts arose about who killed John Kennedy. Paul Schrade, a close friend of Robert Kennedy, believes Sirhan Sirhan did not act alone. The autopsy report and ballistic evidence suggest that Sirhan couldn't have shot John Kennedy from behind. The speaker doesn't draw any conclusions but emphasizes the importance of facts, autopsy reports, ballistic evidence, and eyewitness accounts. The involvement of the CIA or another government agency remains uncertain.

Speaker 0 introduces the topic of Israel allegedly having influence over the US government and mentions that Israel assassinated JFK, pointing to William Cooper as the source who was also assassinated by Israel. Speaker 0 references Cooper’s book Behold a Pale Horse and notes that Cooper was the first to obtain original footage from a CIA whistleblower showing who shot Kennedy and how they shot Kennedy. He says the media’s clips started at a cropped frame, and that Cooper’s release prompted further questions. Speaker 1 explains that the assassin was the driver in the car with Kennedy, visible in a film with public help. He brings the film, saying it shows the motorcade on Elm Street in front of the Book Depository Building, Kennedy having been shot in the throat, Jacqueline pulling Kennedy toward him in shock, and the driver turning around with a pistol in his left hand, firing over his right shoulder and shooting the president in the head. Speaker 2 asks for a repeat and then the duo watches the film. Speaker 1 identifies the driver as William Greer, noting he was a secret service agent. He describes the weapon as an electrically operated gas-powered assassination pistol built especially for the Central Intelligence Agency, asserting there is no puff of smoke. Speaker 2 questions whether the weapon is indeed a pistol in the lower right corner of the frame. Speaker 1 confirms it is an air-operated pistol (pneumatic) and claims it fired an exploding pellet that injected shellfish toxin into the president’s brain, so that if the pellet’s explosion did not kill him, the toxin would. He states that he read all of this in the documents. Speaker 0 asks what type of weapon was used to assassinate JFK and references the 1963 time frame, saying that intelligence agencies would have such weapons. He then questions whether intelligence agencies could have used such weapons to assassinate Charlie Kirk. He suggests listening to Jack Posobiec and others who are “carrying water for this administration,” implying time will tell.

Speaker 0 admits to never believing that the CIA killed Kennedy. Speaker 1 claims to have read the entire JFK file, including the secret information and the 7 pages of the 911 report. Speaker 0 warns against sharing what they have seen, as they could be bribed. Speaker 1 mentions being bribed in Texas. Speaker 0 introduces themselves as Cash and mentions JFK and UFOs.

Rob was asked about his viral comments on the Piers Morgan show and the ongoing discussion around Charlie Kirk’s assassination. He says from the outset he smelled a rat and didn’t buy the official narrative being spun. He notes that when he first heard Kirk was shot and saw the video, an exit wound coming out of the neck and the movement of the shirt suggested an impact nearby, which didn’t fit what he’d expect from his experience with ballistics. Rob describes the sequence: the FBI announces they’ve got the shooter, a man on the roof “took it apart,” put a scope on, fired a cold bore shot, then jumped to a roof, wrapped it up, and sent texts that didn’t sound like a 22-year-old. He says he’s typically drawn to the simplest explanation, but asking questions leads to being torn down. He emphasizes he never claimed Israel was responsible, but says asking questions is met with accusations of antisemitism. He raises questions about security procedures after Kirk was down, asking what happened to the lapel mic, the SIM card, and who took the camera behind him, and whether crime-scene contamination occurred, whether the area was repaved or rebuilt, and whether the gravesite exists and how the stadium event was organized so quickly. Rob recounts how, when he asks questions, he’s labeled antisemitic or a conspiracy theorist, even though he says he’s “killed a bunch of people for the country” and wants to know why a great American was killed in front of everyone. He notes the FBI’s inconsistent statements, such as claiming the weapon was a 30-06 rifle, showing a gun image, and various excuses like a ricochet off body armor followed by later claims that there was no body armor, then again something else. He questions what would happen to a neck with a 30-06, suggests the autopsy report should be released, and asks why the chair and desk were moved, implying potential forensic implications. Speaker 1 (Rob) emphasizes uncertainty: he wasn’t there, so he can’t say for certain, but there are questions about whether a shot was taken or if a shaped charge or other device could have been involved. He asks where the gun, the bullets, and the ballistic evidence are, and why there isn’t clear video showing the moment the shot was fired. He notes that much of the official footage is “potato footage” from many cameras, while the supposed key video isn’t released. Towards the end, the host comments on common accusations and mislabeling when challenging the official narrative. Rob thanks the host, and they acknowledge continuing discussions, with Rob offering to provide “solid conspiracies.” They close with mutual well-wishes and a light joke about conspiracies.

The speaker discusses the conspiracy theories surrounding the assassination of John F. Kennedy. They mention Rob Reiner's claim that JFK was shot by four shooters and question the official investigation. They also mention a CIA agent who confirmed the CIA's involvement in the assassination. The speaker highlights the lack of trust in the government and the existence of powerful forces within the US government that are beyond democratic control. They mention a Secret Service agent's account that challenges the lone gunman theory. The speaker concludes by calling for truth and honesty in the matter.

The speaker, initially uninterested in the JFK assassination due to its association with conspiracy theories, has since learned enough to believe "there's something actually there." Trump issued an executive order to release files on the JFK, Bobby Kennedy, and MLK assassinations, but the files have not been released. The speaker believes the CIA was involved in some way, but doesn't think protecting the CIA is the reason for the delay, especially after the Church Committee hearings. The speaker questions who is being protected and if a foreign government is involved, stating there is active pressure on elected officials to stop the disclosure. The speaker questions who is powerful enough to scare people into slow-walking the disclosure, as slow-walking the disclosure is the same as not providing the disclosure. The speaker believes it's important to get to the bottom of the JFK assassination.

Our first investigation will thoroughly examine the John F. Kennedy assassination. Preliminary findings suggest flaws in the single bullet theory presented in the initial congressional hearing. We believe there were two shooters. We're working to access secure information, hopefully before public release, to uncover more evidence. We'll announce our findings soon.

We need to prove multiple people were involved in the assassination by analyzing the Zapruder film. The film shows inconsistencies with the single bullet theory proposed by the Warren Commission. The theory suggests one bullet caused multiple wounds in Kennedy and Conley, which is highly improbable. The film's time frame and the number of wounds do not align with the Commission's conclusion. The magic bullet theory, as it's known, is widely criticized for its implausibility.

From the outset, one of the speakers says there was a sense that the official narrative about the day didn’t add up, expressing that many Americans feel they were being lied to. The major problem they identify with the assassination narrative includes inconsistencies and unanswered questions rather than acceptance of the official story. Speaker 1 recalls being told Charlie Kirk was shot and initially in critical condition, but notes that the video shows an exit wound and movement of Kirk’s shirt that suggests an impact nearby. With extensive experience around gunshot wounds, they say what they saw didn’t make sense. They reference the FBI’s announcement of a shooter and describe a separate incident involving a person on the roof who allegedly disassembled and reassembled a firearm, aligned a scope, fired a cold bore shot, moved to the roof, and then wrapped the rifle up. They mention texts from the shooter that didn’t sound like a typical 22-year-old and state that these observations raise questions. They say asking questions leads to being torn down or accused of holding conspiracy views, and they specify they aren’t claiming “Israel did it,” but insisting the questions about the event “don’t look good.” They raise specific questions: did the security team remove Charlie Kirk’s lapel mic after the incident and give it to someone else; what happened to the SIM card; did someone take the camera behind him; why was the crime scene contaminated and rebuilt. They admit they don’t know what is true but insist the questions deserve answers. They note that once they question, they’re labeled antisemitic, and they say they didn’t even bring up Israel. They emphasize the personal and national significance of the incident. Speaker 0 mentions a claim that Charlie Kirk was portrayed as Superman, with his body supposedly stopping the 30-odd-six bullet, and asks what would have happened if a 30-06 round hit him. Speaker 1 says it would likely blow his head off and leave remnants of the bullet, arguing that they don’t think such remnants have been found yet. They question why the chair and desk were moved and contend that a forensic expert could determine the shot’s origin, insisting they are simply asking questions. If those questions can be refuted, they would stop asking; but they claim they’re not getting any answers beyond “this is what happened” and being told to “shut up.” Speaker 0 adds that telling someone to be quiet amounts to labeling them antisemitic, and that when the trial comes, they will look like a fool. Speaker 1 says that’s a tactic of the left—when you call them out, they label you a name—and that the right is now doing the same to them.

The JFK assassination spawned numerous conspiracy theories, fueled in part by the 1979 House Select Committee on Assassinations report suggesting a possible conspiracy, which contradicted the Warren Commission's findings. The committee's report was based on acoustical data that was later found to be flawed, as it misinterpreted an echo as an additional gunshot. Despite this, only a minority of Americans believe that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. One frequently debunked claim is the existence of a second shooter on the grassy knoll, alleging Kennedy was shot from the front.

The discussion centers on newly declassified CIA files and old JFK assassination records, with a key claim that Israel was involved in JFK’s assassination. The main points asserted are: - CIA files allegedly show that James Arlington, a top CIA officer, had connections to Israel intelligence and subverted President Kennedy’s policy to prevent Israel from acquiring nuclear weapons. Arlington was praised by Mossad head Emmett as “the biggest Zionist of them all.” - Arlington allegedly hid documents from the Warren Commission about the Kennedy assassination. Shortly before his death, Arlington purportedly stated, “the better you lied and the more you betrayed, the more likely you would have been promoted.” The file, previously released in 02/17/18 and 2022 in redacted form, is now unredacted. - The material is presented as proof that “Israel assassinated JFK,” and the speaker expresses disbelief about why Israel would act this way. - In a separate thread, Speaker 1 discusses anti-Semitism online, plans to battle it, and proposes creating a division within the State Department to handle technology and revamp the office to be highly prominent. - Speaker 2 questions how a US official could advocate censorship of citizens, arguing that it would be illegal and contrasting it with free speech. References are made to the Biden administration, the US government, and the potential firing of an official for statements. - Speaker 0 returns to a broader claim that American citizens are losing their First Amendment rights to expose truths about Israel. The argument is that exposing such truths would provoke a countrywide revolt, and a critique is leveled at those who would silence speech. The speaker urges compliance as a way to avoid tyranny, suggesting that “you’re gonna pass this burden … onto your children,” and concludes with “Trust me. You can comply your way out of tyranny.” Overall, the transcript juxtaposes declassified material and theories about Israel’s involvement in JFK’s assassination with discussions about censorship, speech rights, and governmental efforts to regulate or revamp technology-related oversight in the State Department, all framed by a provocative stance on silencing discourse about Israel.

Our first investigation will be announced soon and will cover a thorough investigation into the John F. Kennedy assassination. Based on what I've seen so far, the initial hearing held in Congress was faulty regarding the single bullet theory. I believe that there were two shooters, and we should find more information as we gain access to the SCIF, hopefully before the files are released to the public.

Remember John and Jackie Kennedy. That head movement you see in the Zapruder film was caused by a bullet. It looks like it's coming from up here. But Oswald's gun went off, echoing through Dealey Plaza. The echo traveled by the limo, up to the grassy knoll, hitting leaves and causing dust. 56 witnesses testified it was a gunshot because Kennedy's head immediately went over. The reason his head went over is because the echo went by the motorcade on the left, and he went, what was that? I heard on the news there was an echo, and Kennedy was asking Jackie what it was.