The Guardian:
A reporter on the UK’s Cambridge Evening News received an anonymous call telling him to ring the US embassy for some big news, 25 minutes before the murder of John F Kennedy in Dallas, newly released documents say.
I realize this is off topic for me, but this hits me deep. The call was local, meaning someone in Cambridge knew of the assassination before the shots were fired. And in all the years since, this significant detail was kept under wraps.
Conspiracy theory? Perhaps. But this comes from MI-5, and is a startlingly new and major development in a story that has been scraped to the bone in the press for many years.
UPDATE: Of course, this was a big leap in logic, from “big news” to “the assassination”, no doubt. Just hits a nerve for me.
Colonel Mustard with a candlestick in the dining room.
“Big news” is not the same as “assassination”. “Big news” is palm-reading level of information: generic enough to fit almost anything. So, no, a British reporter didn’t get a “call about the assassination.” He got a call about generic “big news.”
Which means this isn’t big news, either. I’m not saying it can’t eventually be big news (see Watergate), but it’s not yet.
Maybe all of this was a big UK conspiracy to take down the US? James Earl Ray fled to the UK after killing MLK. The pieces are coming together! 😉
There is no logic behind this call unless they have the timing off, and the big news is the assassination. They “calculated” the time? People will believe what they choose to believe. The real coverup was most likely CIA CYA and the incompetence displayed handling Ruby’s security.
You mean Jack, the former famous football player? Notice how the suspects all got new identities? Very mysterious…
Read JFK: The Smoking Gun. A retired Australian detective spent 4 years combing the original evidence – ignoring the conspiracy theories and provides a pretty convincing argument Kennedy was shot by accident by one of his own agents in the heat of the moment after the initial shots by Oswald.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/australian-ex-cop-colin-mclaren-has-new-john-f-kennedy-death-theory/news-story/1a8664ccd972300594a964eeb4a2e573
You (and we) have no idea the logic behind the call, because you don’t know who the caller was or what the call was about. As I said, the “big news” could have been anything, up to and including a prank call. What are the odds of “big news” happening in an embassy on any given day? Relatively, probably pretty good.
IMO there’s no logic to the call if it WAS about the assassination. What was accomplished by the call? Nothing. What could they have hoped to accomplish by the call? Nothing. They didn’t identify themselves, so they don’t get “credit” for knowing about the “big news” beforehand. They didn’t provide ANY information to the reporter, so he/she couldn’t follow up on anything. If it was about the assassination, it was a pointless call.
Or, alternatively, the Cambridge Evening News ( a local paper, and a truly bizarre one to get such a “tip”) got the time difference wrong and they got the call 35 minutes AFTER, in the days when news actually took a while to spread.
That was my point. However, if the timing is off, it could have been about the assassination, but the caller may not have yet known that’s what it was, just that there was something big happening at that moment. In any event, seems unlikely to be someone calling with advance knowledge of an assassination attempt. Call make zero sense in that scenario.
I don’t see anything unusual about this.
That could have been anything or nothing. I would bet newspapers receive tips like this regularly. Major news organizations even more so. 99 times out of a hundred the news is nothing or of little consequence. This could have referred to anything on any topic of interest to the United States, the United Kingdom, or world affairs. What it could not refer to was the pending assassination of the president, since only one person had knowledge of that, and he was busy at the time and would have no reason to call England.
With this guy’s methods, one could promulgate a theory that JFK committed suicide.
I suppose a career spanning decades investigating crime accounts for nothing in your eyes. Please – tell me where he gets it wrong. I’ll wait for you to unwrap your tin foil hat too