JFK Assassination Bombshell! If True, This Changes Everything! By Charles Taylor
Recent articles by Modernity News and ZeroHedge, both dated late March 2025, reporting on an assertion by Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL). https://modernity.news/2025/03/29/is-nbc-news-hiding-an-earth-shattering-video-of-jfk-assassination/
Luna, who chairs the Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets, alleged during a March 29, 2025, Fox News interview with Jesse Watters that NBC News possesses a previously unseen video showing Lee Harvey Oswald near JFK's limousine at the time of the assassination on November 22, 1963. If true, this would contradict the official narrative—established by the 1964 Warren Commission—that Oswald fired the fatal shots from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository, acting alone. Luna claims filmmaker Oliver Stone told her task force he saw a "secondary copy" of this tape, which NBC has allegedly guarded closely, and that it could "blow open" the JFK investigation. Let's chase this to the truth as best we can with available evidence.
Luna's assertion hinges on two points: the video's existence and its content. She suggests it places Oswald in the crowd near JFK's vehicle during the shooting, implying he couldn't have been in the sniper's perch. This aligns with long-standing conspiracy theories questioning the lone-gunman conclusion, including ideas of a second shooter or Oswald as a "patsy." The Modernity News piece frames it as a potential cover-up by NBC, while ZeroHedge emphasizes Luna's intent to demand the tape's release, citing Stone's involvement for credibility. Both articles lean on Luna's interview, where she said her task force would send a letter to NBC requesting the footage, urging public pressure to force transparency.
No direct evidence of this video's existence has surfaced as of April 2, 2025. Neither NBC nor Oliver Stone has publicly confirmed Luna's claim. Searches of NBC's archives, historical JFK footage collections (e.g., the Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza), and Stone's documented works—like his 1991 film JFK—reveal no mention of such a tape. The Zapruder film, the most famous recording of the assassination, shows the motorcade from a bystander's perspective but doesn't depict Oswald in the crowd. Other known footage, like the Muchmore and Nix films, similarly focuses on the event itself, not Oswald's whereabouts.
Luna's reference to Stone is intriguing but shaky. Stone's JFK dramatized conspiracy theories, drawing on Jim Garrison's investigation and suggesting CIA involvement, but it didn't present video evidence of Oswald in the crowd. Stone has long criticised the official narrative, and Luna says he told her task force about this tape. Yet, without Stone corroborating this publicly, or specifying when, where, or how he saw it, it's hearsay at best. Stone's reputation as a filmmaker, not a primary source, further weakens his role as a linchpin here.
The recent release of over 63,000 pages of JFK-related documents, ordered by President Trump in early 2025, offers another angle. Historians and researchers are still combing through them, but initial reports (e.g., from BBC, USA Today, and Al Jazeera, mid-March 2025) highlight CIA surveillance of Oswald, his Mexico City trip, and KGB assessments of him as a "poor shot"—not a smoking-gun video. If NBC had such footage, you'd expect some hint in these files, especially given Luna's task force role. So far, nothing.
The Warren Commission concluded Oswald fired three shots from the Book Depository, supported by ballistic evidence, witness accounts (e.g., Howard Brennan seeing a shooter in the window), and Oswald's rifle ownership. The timeline—shots at 12:30 p.m., Oswald seen on the second floor by 12:33 p.m.—is tight but feasible. Critics, including the 1979 House Select Committee on Assassinations, suggested a probable conspiracy based on acoustic evidence of a fourth shot from the grassy knoll, though this remains disputed. Luna's claim revives this debate: if Oswald was near the car, someone else fired from above—or elsewhere.
But the logistics strain credulity. Oswald would've needed to sprint from the sixth floor to the street in under two minutes, unnoticed amid chaos, while another shooter took his place. No eyewitnesses reported seeing him in the crowd, and photos from Dealey Plaza (e.g., the "Badge Man" or "Umbrella Man" theories) don't conclusively show Oswald. The video's alleged content thus clashes with the physical and temporal constraints of the event.
NBC hasn't responded to Luna's claim as of now, which fuels speculation but proves nothing. If they had this tape, why hide it for 62 years? Possible motives—protecting sources, avoiding controversy, or government pressure—don't hold up easily. The network aired live coverage of Oswald's murder by Jack Ruby in 1963, showing willingness to engage with the story. A tape exonerating Oswald would've been a journalistic coup, not a liability, unless it implicated powerful entities (e.g., CIA, FBI) in a way NBC feared to touch. Without a leak or insider confirmation, this is conjecture.
Luna's claim is explosive but unsubstantiated. No video has emerged, no credible witness has backed it, and the latest document dumps don't mention it. Stone's alleged sighting lacks detail or independent verification, and NBC's silence could mean they're ignoring a baseless accusation, or sitting on something huge. The Warren Commission's findings, while flawed (e.g., the "magic bullet" theory's improbability), still align better with known evidence than a theory requiring Oswald to teleport streetside.
That said, the claim's timing, amid fresh JFK file releases and Luna's declassification push, suggests political theatre. She's hinted at believing in two shooters since February 2025, and this fits her narrative of challenging "rinsed and repeated" media stories. Without the tape, it's a tantalising lead, not truth. If it exists, NBC should release it, and Luna's letter might force their hand. Until then, scepticism rules: extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence, and we've got none yet.
Whether Oliver Stone should be trusted as a source for Rep. Anna Paulina Luna's claim about an NBC video of the JFK assassination depends on assessing his background, credibility, and motives.
Stone is a filmmaker, not a historian or journalist, best known for JFK (1991), a dramatised take on the assassination that blended fact, speculation, and Jim Garrison's conspiracy theories. He's an Oscar winner (Platoon, Born on the Fourth of July) with a knack for provocative storytelling, often rooted in anti-establishment views. His interest in JFK spans decades, he's interviewed figures like Vladimir Putin and Fidel Castro for other projects, showing a pattern of digging into controversial narratives. Luna says Stone told her task force he saw a "secondary copy" of this alleged tape, tying his claim to his long-standing obsession with the case.
Stone's track record raises red flags. JFK took liberties with evidence—mixing real testimony with fictional composites (e.g., the "X" character)—to push a CIA-led conspiracy. Critics, including historians like David Wrone, slammed it for distorting facts, like exaggerating the "magic bullet" theory's implausibility or the grassy knoll shooter idea. He's not a primary source; he interprets and amplifies others' claims. If he saw this tape, why didn't he reveal it earlier, given his platform? His silence until now—assuming Luna's report is accurate—suggests either recent discovery or strategic timing, both questionable for a man who's built a career on this topic.
Stone's bias is clear: he's spent 30+ years arguing the Warren Commission lied. That agenda could colour what he "saw" or lead him to overhype shaky evidence. Memory's fallible too, decades after 1963, could he misrecall a blurry figure as Oswald? And where's the chain of custody? A "secondary copy" implies he didn't see the original, so how does he know it's legit? Without corroboration, say, from NBC or another witness, his word alone is thin, especially given his flair for drama over precision.
But Stone's not a random crank. His deep dive into JFK lore means he's likely tapped sources, researchers, insiders, archivists, beyond public reach. His claim to Luna's task force, a formal body, suggests he's staking some credibility, not just spinning yarns on a podcast. If he saw this tape, it could stem from his extensive network; he's interviewed ex-CIA types and dug into declassified files for years. The 2025 JFK document dump (63,000+ pages) might've jogged his memory or surfaced a lead he'd buried, Luna's timing aligns with that.
He's also consistent. His scepticism of the lone-gunman story predates Luna's claim by decades, and elements he's pushed, like multiple shooters, echo the 1979 House Select Committee's findings, not just wild fiction. If NBC has suppressed footage, Stone's outsider status makes him a plausible whistle-blower; he's got no love for mainstream media or government narratives. His involvement with Luna's April 1, 2025, hearing adds weight, he's risking scrutiny under oath.
So, Stone's untrustworthy if you demand hard evidence. He's a storyteller, not a scientist, prone to embellishment, driven by ideology, and light on specifics. No video, no paper trail, no named source beyond "I saw it" makes his claim flimsy. His background screams bias; he's got every incentive to see conspiracy where there's coincidence. A filmmaker claiming earth-shattering proof 62 years later, only now.
But he's not dismissible. His persistence and access suggest he might've stumbled onto something real, even if exaggerated. If he's lying to Luna's task force, it's a bold, provable bluff—why risk it? The lack of contradiction from NBC (so far) and his alignment with broader JFK doubts keep the door ajar. He's not authoritative, but he's not irrelevant. Push him to testify, demand specifics, and check his story against the new files.
Comments