There a is a hushed debate going in in Italy about the extent of the United States' influence in internal politics, especially as the consensus is that the political system makes the country ungovernable without a common enemy (i.e. Communists). Recently, Renzi's government declassified certain documents relative to the "Strategy of Tension", however, although the documents are declassified, the archives where they are stored are both spread out around the country and under lock and key. Hopefully, when these documents are eventually released, we will be able to learn more about events such as the kidnapping and murder of former prime minister Aldo Moro (and what actions were or were not taken to rescue him), the Bologna Station Bombing in 1980, which was immediately blamed on left-wing radicals, but is now known to have been carried out by right-wing extremists, or the Ustica Massacre, where Italvia Flight 870 was shot down in the middle of the Tyrrhenian Sea. The consensus is that there was significant covert CIA activity going on in Italy during the cold war (codenamed Operation Gladio), and the CIA performed or facilitated terrorism. The ruling Christian Democrat party then blamed every terrorist action on the left, thereby facilitating their democratically-elected one party rule.

edit: Italvia Flight 870 was downed in the Tyrrhenian Sea, not the Adriatic Sea as originally stated.

The JFK assassination documents are scheduled go be released in 2017. Not to throw conspiracy theroy's into the thread but it will be very interesting to see what was released. But a vast majority of people dont believe the official story. It was the cold war of course and alot of sneaky stuff did happen so it will be interesting to say the least.

I think it will be interesting to see what exactly gets released, what is missing because it was lost, What documents are blacked out still. How the newly released information effects the offical story. Does it support it, does it contradict it? How does it effect the on going debate.

The most interesting will be how the conspiracy theorist react to new information. What if it says they were right; the offical story was false. <plug in what ever theory you want>. Do they sit back and say "Yes we were right." Or do they say "Wait, why would they release this information. This muat be a trick to hide the real documents proving the offical story."

Recently Pope Francis spoke about Pius XII. In his comments he said the following:

They (the Vatican archives on the Holocaust) will bring a lot of light.

The Vatican generally waits 75 years to release documents on a given issue or pontiff. That 75 year wait would now theoretically allow documents from 1939--the year Pius XII was elected and obviously the beginning of WWII in Europe. Now, after The Deputy began the controversy about Pius XII in 1963 the Vatican broke its own rules and got four scholars to go through the archives and release some documents early. The result was the Acts and Documents of the Holy See Relative to the Second World War. This is an eleven volume set of primary documents (with a bit of analysis at the beginning of each book) that outline much of what we currently know about Pius XII during WWII. There have been allegations that the documents released were not complete enough and hid evidence, particularly about Croatia.

But there hasn't been much chatter about the documents not including all of the evidence that is positive about Pius XII.

So there are a number of possibilities. Has Francis seen an early version of what's going to be released? "A lot of light"? He certainly doesn't seem too worried about the idea; he seems eager to get the documents out. I guess we'll find out what he means soon.

Of course, this is the Vatican definition of "soon," which is quite different from the standard English language definition.

The rest of the Israeli archives and the Arab archives that are left on the 1948 war. But that's not likely, from my understanding, to happen in this lifetime.

This submission has been removed because it violates the rule on poll-type questions. These poll-type questions do not lend themselves to answers with a firm foundation in sources and research, and the resulting threads usually turn into monsters with enormous speculation and little focussed discussion. “Most”, “least”, "best" and "worst" questions usually lead to vague, subjective, and speculative answers.