Live data from Hacker News

JFK Assassination Records – 2025 Documents Release

archives.gov

41–50 of 51 posts

Re: JFK Assassination Records – 2025 Documents Release

#43
Found a possibly interesting one, either because it's not clear why it was ever classified, or perhaps because it has some previously undisclosed diplomatic procedures. It describes the 201 dossier system, and circumstances under which one is automatically opened, categorized by known persons of various other regions and states.

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/2025/03...

Anyone have a sense of whether any of this is new?

Re: JFK Assassination Records – 2025 Documents Release

#44
This one seems interesting, though I don't see any connection to the assassination.

It describes an agent, AMCARBON-1, who remained an agent during a career in journalism. It describes a couple of news stories that were apparently cultivated under the supervision of the CIA, including one about a stolen shrimp boat.

Is this perhaps one of many similar documents describing what came to be known as Operation Mockingbird?

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/2025/03...

Re: JFK Assassination Records – 2025 Documents Release

#46

The one about Gary Underhill seems to be interesting. Guy supposedly took his own life in 1964.

You're referring to this document [1] which has been declassified in 2017 [2] but this 2025 release comes up with some redaction removed - but essentially not providing more information. There's nothing interesting. The document opens up with a quote from a magazine (which people are mistaking for a statement of a document itself) and then goes over into detail of the work that guy has been doing - which is pretty mild. The whole document seems to fact-check the quoted magazine.

[1] https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-101...

[2] https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/release-2017-2018?sear...

Re: JFK Assassination Records – 2025 Documents Release

#48

The one about Gary Underhill seems to be interesting. Guy supposedly took his own life in 1964.

You're referring to this document [1] which has been declassified in 2017 [2] but this 2025 release comes up with some redaction removed - but essentially not providing more information. There's nothing interesting. The document opens up with a quote from a magazine (which people are mistaking for a statement of a document itself) and then goes over into detail of the work that guy has been doing - which is pretty mi…

Is there an easy way to see which of these documents are new and to diff the redactions for those that were already released in a redacted form?

Re: JFK Assassination Records – 2025 Documents Release

#49
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're referring to this document [1] which has been declassified in 2017 [2] but this 2025 release comes up with some redaction removed - but essentially not providing more information. There's nothing interesting. The document opens up with a quote from a magazine (which people are mistaking for a statement of a document itself) and then goes over into detail of the work that guy has been doing - which is pretty mi…

Is there an easy way to see which of these documents are new and to diff the redactions for those that were already released in a redacted form?

Not without downloading both of the archives and doing some analysis. This guy [1..6] did some manual analysis.

[1] https://x.com/EdKrassen/status/1902140293794951311

[2] https://x.com/EdKrassen/status/1902142521175683387

[3] https://x.com/EdKrassen/status/1902144127107527034

[4] https://x.com/EdKrassen/status/1902144967197237429

[5] https://x.com/EdKrassen/status/1902148606355800472

[6] https://x.com/EdKrassen/status/1902150408996319335

Re: JFK Assassination Records – 2025 Documents Release

#50

The one about Gary Underhill seems to be interesting. Guy supposedly took his own life in 1964.

You're referring to this document [1] which has been declassified in 2017 [2] but this 2025 release comes up with some redaction removed - but essentially not providing more information. There's nothing interesting. The document opens up with a quote from a magazine (which people are mistaking for a statement of a document itself) and then goes over into detail of the work that guy has been doing - which is pretty mi…

Yeah you are probably right, nothing concrete :/
Post reply on HN