CIA Killed JFK
An edited repost (and updates), by Carol Dearborn from "Google Group alt assassination jfk",
January 2002

An indictment of Watergate burglars, buddies and CIA Operatives E. Howard Hunt & Frank Sturgis for the
Assassination of President John F. Kennedy
I believe there WAS enough evidence to convict Hunt & Sturgis (they're both dead) but this would
take another Jim Garrison and an "expert" to rebut the HSCA testimony of forensic anthropologist
Dr. Clyde Snow.

More evidence about Hunt & Sturgis in Coup d'Etat in America (free download) and Mark Lane's Plausible
Why didn't Edward Kennedy do anything?! Think of the implications on the American psyche
knowing that there was a coup d'etat in America. When I found out about it I was shocked,
disillusioned. The public is likely to become hysterical and riot. This was the reason President
Lyndon Johnson wanted Chief Justice Earl Warren to whitewash the assassination: he was
worried that if some innocuous conclusion wasn't reached, there would be WWIII (or the
above-mentioned disillusionment and hysteria).
Trento testified that he saw the memo with his own eyes. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,
especially given the way the HSCA functioned. For everyone's information, RE: Trento - the following is
excerpted from Lisa Pease's article
James Jesus Angleton and the Kennedy Assassination (part 2 Probe
v7, #6)

    The case [Hunt v. Liberty Lobby] at first appeared to be lost when Marchetti confessed he had never
    seen the memo described in his article. But Lane found another writer who not only had written a
    similar story about the same memo, but also had actually viewed it. Joseph Trento, a man who often
    talked to James Angleton and their mutual friend, William Corson, confirmed under oath that he had
    indeed seen the memo, and that, in his significant experience with intelligence documents, he felt it
    was genuine. Trento refused to tell Lane who had shown him the copy of the memo. At the time of the
    trial, Angleton was still alive and well. But several years after Angleton's death, Trento told author Dick
    Russell that his source for the document had been Angleton himself. "In 1978, Angleton called and
    asked me to come down for lunch at the Army-Navy Club," Russell recorded Trento as saying. "Did
    you know Howard Hunt was in Dallas on the day of the assassination?" Angleton asked Trento.
    Angleton said Hunt had possibly been sent there by a high-level Soviet mole inside the CIA. According
    to Trento, Angleton arranged to have the memo delivered both to him and to the HSCA through
    Howard Baker. Trento told Russell, I later came to conclude that the mole-sent-Hunt idea was, to use
    his phrase, disinformation; that Angleton was trying to protect his own connections to Hunt's being in
    Dallas. My guess is, it was Angleton himself who sent Hunt to Dallas because he didn't want to use
    anybody from his own shop. Hunt was still considered a hand-holder for the Cuban exiles, sort of
    Helm's unbroken pet.

Pease cites Dick Russell, The Man Who Knew Too Much (New York: Carroll & Graf, 1992) pp. 476 for the
Trento interview.
Posted by Trento on alt.assassination.JFK in response to the following post by  "Jerry"
The Last Investigation, Gaeton Fonzi, 1993
Gaeton Fonzi was an investigator for the HSCA
What follows is a prarphrased excerpt from their book, Oswald Talked, and FBI interviews showing that the
LaFontaine tramps are not the same ones photographed in Dealy Plaza. Gedney, 38, was the Sturgis
Tramp; Abrams, 53, the Hunt Tramp and Doyle, 32, the Carswell / "Frenchy" Tramp.

    When shown the tramp photos, no one at the hotel recognized Doyle as the tramp but when asked,
    they all knew who Doyle was and they said they didn't think the tramp was him. However, one person
    after being clued said that the tramp was Doyle and she fetched a photo she had of Doyle taken thirty
    years later. "Jowly, 30 years older, but with the same scar on his forehead, the same glowering eyes,
    as the 'Frenchy' tramp."

Canfield and Weberman reproduce the photo in the second edition (1992) of their book, Coup d'Etat in
America and the photo does not look anything like the "Frenchy" tramp. LaFontain or police did not provide
comparable photos from 1960s!
See arrest records
FBI 180-10112-10154 BASS INTERVIEW: Three men [Hunt/Sturgis/Carswell] ran down and got into a
grain car. ... [Officer Ray] Vaughn climbed up the ladder on one of the cars and saw three men huddled in
corner of the freight [grain] car. ... Vaughn ordered the men out
and they cussed at him. Vaughn then
jacked a shell into his shotgun and ordered them out. H/S/C had no money when arrested. Everyone
in the LaFontains' book refers to Doyle as being kind, gentle, quaint, sweet natured, i.e., would not curse
the cops. The hobos had money because Doyle was getting a check (see below).

FBI 124-10179-10312 CHAMBERS INTERVIEW: Capt. Jones assigned Chambers to watch three hobos
[H/S/C] he described as "dirty." Jones asked Chambers to take them into his office to "
find out which one
shot the President."
Since they were all together, he chose to only elicit general information. Their
answers were confusing and not consistent. Their stories as to where they were and where they were
headed differed. Grinell came into the office and discussed the possibility of
conducting a gunpowder
test on the hands of the hobos.
Later, Jones advised Chambers thay arrested the individual who shot
officer Tippit and that he was the one who had also shot the President. Chambers then advised the three
individuals, "you're free to go."

FBI 124-10151-10221 DOYLE INTERVIEW: Arrived from Houston (took one day to get from Houston to
Dallas) on 11/22/63. Went to Irving Street Mission, showered, cleaned up and received noon meal. After
leaving Mission, someone told them JFK was shot. They asked railroad employees if this was true, they
said yes. Got into a gondola (coal car) and were headed to Fort Worth when train stopped and they were

FBI 124-10273-10380 is basically the same interview but adds this conflicting information: after getting out
of jail they went back to Houston and then split up.

FBI 10151-10214 GEDNEY INTERVIEW: Says arrived Nov. 21, spent night at Salvation Army, had
breakfast and lunch there on Nov 22 and after hearing of the shooting, went to railroad yard where they
on a
flatbed car with large sheets of steel and were arrested by swarms of cops. After getting out of jail
they traveled to Fort Worth, Arizona and Los Angeles and then split up.

FBI #10151-10224: Downing, a Dallas cop, said: Doyle told him they were in railroad yard waiting to catch
out, heard sirens and did not know Kennedy was shot until the Dallas police took him in for questioning.

FBI 124-10151-10224 GEDNEY INTERVIEW: Gedney said he and Doyle went all over the southwest and
worked in labor camps and slept in hobo camps. In November they ended up in Houston. Doyle was getting
unemployment checks from California.
After getting a check, they went to Dallas. Arrived Nov. 21, went to
Salvation Army, spent night, went to catch freight going north. (Fort Worth is west of Dallas.) [H/S/C had no

FBI 10273-10381: Gedney said he did not remember any of the arresting officers having any rifles or
shotguns. Said they were clean, had socks and did not appear dirty. [How could you not remember cops
"jacking a shotgun shell"?]
SUMMARY OF FBI INTERVIEWS:  If you read all the reports (even the ones I didn't cite, above) and what
the LaFontaines wrote in their book, you would see many contradictions. Such as: if they were given new
clothes then why did the H/S/C "stink"? Hunt was a master of disguise. I wouldn't doubt that he doused
himself with wine. Hunt was carrying a new pocketknife in a paper sack. The cop thought that was
suspicious -- that he stole it. Why would he carry it in a paper bag? If the bag got wet, he would lose the
knife. Bums always carry a jug of water and blankets.

Kennedy was shot at 12:30; H/S/C arrested at about 2pm and were released shortly after Oswald was
arrested at about 2pm; Real tramps were arrested right after assassination and held 4 days.

Gedney et al had contradictory stories of where they were headed: one said North, the other said Fort
Worth. I'd like to know if the railyard was a major yard or just a city holding yard, and do trains go
north/south there and east/west.

The cops seriously thought H/S/C shot JFK, they were about to give them gunpowder tests when they were
told Oswald was arrested and then let them go. I don't think the cops would believe winos/bums like
Gedney et. al. were capable of shooting.

When Hunt and Sturgis were arrested in a "freight car", the reports say they cursed the cops so one of the
cops "jacked a shell into the shotgun...." Gedney at. al. were arrested in another type of railroad car (flatcar
with sheets of steel). One report says Hunt's bag had a shirt, towel/rag, can of Spam, bar of soap, knife...
the bag in the photo doesn't look that large.

You have to remember, some of these reports were written long after the fact so the reports could have
been compromised. So there you can see that the La Fontaine tramps are not the same ones arrested and
photographed in Dealy Plaza.
From Final Report of Select Committee on Assassinations, read pages 25-35:
A False Flag plan by General Lyman Lemnitzer, to kill Americans and blame it on Cuba to get US
into war to overthrow Castro.
Lemnitzer served on Rockefeller Committee to cover up assassination by Hunt and Sturgis.
ABC News, By David Ruppe, May 1, 2001
August 19, 2003, Communist Cuba's Granma News Service
CIA Killed JFK
When will Posada confess to complicity in Kennedy's  assassination?
New testimonies place Luis  Posada Carriles, with several other Cuban-American conspirators [including
HOWARD HUNT & FRANK STURGIS], in Dealey  Square when the U.S. President was fatally shot
BY JEAN-GUY ALLARD -Special for Granma  International-(Cuba)
Nixon, Hunt & CIA Linked to Coup d'Etat in Dallas
By Don Fulsom 10/15/03
WASHINGTON, DC – Former United Press International White House correspondent Don Fulsom, a
longtime official researcher at the Nixon Project at the National Archives, has written an article exploring
Richard Nixon’s connections to the murder of President John F. Kennedy. The article,
Richard Nixon’s
Greatest Cover-up
, is featured in the current edition of Crime Magazine. It offers a compelling new look into
Nixon’s Mob-CIA connections and into widespread suspicions that the Mafia and the spy agency were
involved in Kennedy’s slaying.

Relying on the author’s own exhaustive research into recently declassified government documents and
tape recordings, as well as on previously published accounts and little-known historical facts, Fulsom’s
piece articulates a startling new perspective on the events that left America stunned 40 years ago.

In the article, Fulsom covers Nixon’s hidden ties to the Mafia; his little-known association with Jack Ruby,
the Dallas mobster who killed alleged Kennedy assassin Lee Harvey Oswald; and Nixon’s close secret
connections to CIA agent E. Howard Hunt, who was implicated in the JFK assassination in a 1985 court

The author also cites a newly released 1972 tape of President Nixon confiding to two top aides that the
Warren Commission pulled off "the greatest hoax that has ever been perpetuated." In 1964, however, just
before the commission concluded that Oswald alone was responsible for Kennedy’s murder, Nixon publicly
portrayed Oswald as the sole assassin and implied that Cuban leader Fidel Castro, "a hero in the warped
mind" of Oswald, was behind the JFK assassination.

Don Fulsom was a White House correspondent during the Johnson, Nixon, Ford, and Clinton
presidencies and a UPI bureau chief in Washington for seven years. He has written about Nixon for The
Washington Post, The Chicago Tribune, Esquire, Los Angeles, and Regardie's. In recent years, he has
been interviewed about political events on CNN, C-SPAN, USA TODAY.COM, Voice of America, Fox
News Channel and the BBC.

Crime Magazine Article:,1014.htm

I contacted Fulsom, 2/06/04 and he told me he believes the "Tramps" have been identified as Tramps. I
sent him my information and will follow up with anything new.
Other JFK Researchers Believe these Guys are the "Tramps"
. . . One evening in Eureka, over a barbecue meal, St. John explains how he first came to suspect that his
father might somehow be involved in the Kennedy assassination. "Around 1975, I was in a phone booth in
Maryland somewhere, when I saw a poster on a telephone pole about who killed JFK and it had a picture of
the three tramps. I saw that picture and I fucking -- like a cartoon character, my jaw dropped, my eyes
popped out of my head, and smoke came out of my ears. It looks like my dad. There's nobody that has all
those same facial features. People say it's not him. He's said it's not him. But I'm his son, and I've got a gut

He chews his sandwich. "And then, like an epiphany, I remember '63, and my dad being gone, and my mom
telling me that he was on a business trip to Dallas. I've tried to convince myself that's some kind of false
memory, that I'm just nuts, that it's something I heard years later. But, I mean, his alibi for that day is that he
was at home with his family. I remember I was in the fifth grade. We were at recess. I was playing on the
merry-go-round. We were called in and told to go home, because the president had been killed. And I
remember going home but I don't remember my dad being there, I have no recollection of him being there.
And then he has this whole thing about shopping for Chinese food with my mother that day, so that they
could cook a meal together."

St. John pauses and leans forward. "Well," he says, "I can tell you that's just the biggest load of crap in the
fucking world. He was always looking at things like he was writing a novel; everything had to be just so
glamorous and so exciting. He couldn't even be bothered with his children. That's not glamorous. James
Bond doesn't have children. So my dad in the kitchen? Chopping vegetables with his wife? I'm so sorry, but
that would never happen. Ever. That fucker never did jack-squat like that. Ever."  . . .

"After seeing that poster of the three tramps," he says, "I read two dozen books on the JFK assassination,
and the more I read, the more I was unsure about what happened. I had all these questions and
uncertainties. I mean, I was trying to sort out things that had touched me in a big way."

Later that week, E. Howard also gave Saint two sheets of paper that contained a fuller narrative. It starts
out with LBJ, connecting him to Cord Meyer: "

    Meyer discusses a plot with [David Atlee] Phillips who brings in Wm. Harvey and Antonio Veciana. He
    meets with Oswald in Mexico City. . . . Then Veciana meets with Frank Sturgis in Miami and enlists
    David Morales in anticipation of killing JFK there. But LBJ changes itinerary to Dallas, citing personal

David Atlee Phillips, the CIA's Cuban operations chief in Miami at the time of JFK's death, knew E. Howard
from the Guatemala-coup days. Veciana is a member of the Cuban exile community. Sturgis, like Saint's
father, is supposed to have been one of the three tramps photographed in Dealey Plaza.

Sturgis was also one of the Watergate plotters, and he is a man whom E. Howard, under oath, has
repeatedly sworn to have not met until Watergate, so to Saint the mention of his name was big news.

In the next few paragraphs, E. Howard goes on to describe the extent of his own involvement. It revolves
around a meeting he claims he attended in 1963 with Morales and Sturgis. It takes place in a Miami hotel

    Morales leaves the room, at which point Sturgis makes reference to a "Big Event" and asks E. Howard,
    "Are you with us?"

    E. Howard asks Sturgis what he's talking about.

    Sturgis says, "Killing JFK."

    E. Howard, "incredulous," says to Sturgis, "You seem to have everything you need. Why do you need
    me?" In the handwritten narrative, Sturgis' response is unclear, though what E. Howard says to Sturgis
    next isn't: He says he won't "get involved in anything involving Bill Harvey, who is an alcoholic psycho."

    The meeting ends, E. Howard goes back to his "normal" life and, "like the rest of the country, is
    stunned by JFK's death and realizes how lucky he is not to have had a direct role."
Bruce A. Friedemann passing out leaflets on the SW corner of Stone & Pennington,
Tucson AZ. Note the signs pasted (by Bruce) on the building's windows across the
street. The building was torn down,  a Library & plaza exists there now. (Photographer,
Bruce A. Friedemann chillin' at the U, reading a book in front of the old Gallagher
Theater. (Photographer, unknown.)
Jack recorded (in his diary) that the Russian soldiers, on entering Berlin, had spent their first seventy-two-
hour passes largely “raping and looting” and were now stripping the land of everything of value, from
factories to manpower.

    You can easily understand how that within a few years Hitler will emerge from the hatred that
    surrounds him now as one of the most significant figures who ever lived. He had boundless ambition
    for his country which rendered him a menace to the peace of the world, but he had a mystery about
    him in the way that he lived and in the manner of his death that will live and grow after him. He had in
    him the stuff of which legends are made.

He watched German girls selling themselves for a lipstick.

The Kennedy Men, By Laurence Leamer, 2002, Page 228-9.
JFK on Hitler
1. Consider the 8/20/78 article in the Wilmington, Delaware Sunday News Journal by Joe Trento & Jacquie
Powers about the CIA memo, leaked to the House Select Committee on Assassinations that says Hunt was
in Dallas on the day Kennedy was assassinated.

2. Consider Victor Marchetti's articles in the Spotlight regarding the Memo (8/14/78) and in his newsletter,
New American View (2/1/92) that "Hunt had nothing to do with JFK's assassination [but] Hunt was in Dallas
that day by accident."

3. Consider the testimony under oath of Marita Lorenz before the HSCA and at Hunt's trial (by deposition)
that she met with Hunt (and Jack Ruby) in Dallas the day before the assassination.

Some say Lorenz is a liar. Why would she risk her life (knowing what has happened to so many witnesses)
and reputation going to jail for perjury? Lorenz wrote in her book that Sturgis threatened her and, Lorenz's
daughter was so scared that when Sturgis came to their apartment, she went after Sturgis with a gun and
they both were arrested!

4. Consider the contradictory stories Hunt gave about his whereabouts on the day of the assassination.
This was a major issue in the libel trial in Miami. And: how could anyone not know where they were on the
day of the assassination!?

5. Consider the "coincidence" of Hunt / Sturgis look-a-likes turning up behind the Grassy Knoll. I don't care
what Time Magazine (without showing the pictures) or anyone else says about these photographs: they are
dead ringers to me! Time magazine (11/24/75): "Even to non-experts it appeared that there was, at best,
only a superficial resemblance between the [pictures of the] Dallas 'derelicts' and Hunt and Sturgis." See

6. Consider Nixon and Haldeman worried about Hunt "spilling the whole Bay of Pigs thing". Could the "Bay
of Pigs thing" have to do with the assassination of JFK? I'll quote from H.R. Haldeman's book,
The Ends of
, page 38-39:

    Years later, former CBS correspondent Dan Schorr called me. He was seeking information concerning
    the FBI investigation Nixon had mounted against him in August, 1971. Schorr later sent me his
    fascinating book Clearing the Air. In it I was interested to find that evidence he had gleaned while
    investigating the CIA finally cleared up for me the mystery of the Bay of Pigs connection in those
    dealings between Nixon and Helms.

    It's intriguing when I put Schorr's facts together with mine. It seems that in all those Nixon references to
    the Bay of Pigs, he was actually referring to the Kennedy assassination. (Interestingly, an investigation
    of the Kennedy assassination was a project I suggested when I first entered the White House. I had
    always been intrigued with the conflicting theories of the assassination.

    Now I felt we would be in a position to get all the facts. But Nixon turned me down. . . .In a chilling
    parallel to their cover-up at Watergate, the CIA literally erased any connection between Kennedy's
    assassination and the CIA. No mention of the Castro assassination attempts was made to the Warren
    Commission by CIA representatives. In fact, Counter-intelligence Chief James Angleton of the CIA
    called Bill Sullivan of the FBI and rehearsed the questions and answers they would give to the Warren
    Commission investigators, such as these samples:

    Q. Was Oswald an agent of the CIA?
    A. No.
    Q. Does the CIA have any evidence showing that a conspiracy existed to assassinate Kennedy?
    A. No.

7. Remember Jim Garrison on the Jonny Carson show with the "Tramp" photos? How Carson didn't want
the photos shown? He could have done an "America's Most Wanted" thing and we could have nailed Hunt
and Sturgis!
Regarding Hunt's Whereabouts on the Day of the Assassination
At the HSCA hearings Rep. Fithian said, "From just a quick glance at that picture of Sturgis and Tramp B,
from here, there doesn't seem to be all that much difference." (Volume 4, Page 383, cf., Volume 6,
Paragraph 716.)

The anthropologists had to come to the conclusion that Hunt and Sturgis were not the Tramps. Imagine
how you would feel knowing that the CIA was involved in the assassination of JFK! (It makes me feel angry.
It has changed my whole outlook on the government.) There would be mass hysteria, disillusionment.
America would be just another non-democratic state (bullets not ballots).

All the anthropologists did was measure Hunt and Sturgis' facial features from photographs. Canfield and
Weberman provided an acetate overlay blown up to the same size as the photographs of the Tramps and
you can see for yourself that they are dead ringers! I think the overlay is a better method than the
anthropologists used!

Also at the HSCA, one of the anthropologists, Dr. Clyde Collins Snow (who I wouldn't be surprised to find
out was a 33 degree Mason) testified:

    "It is apparent that Hunt underwent surgery to correct his rather protruding ears. "The date of this
    operation was not determined but from the photographs it would appear to have been within a few
    years before or after the assassination. In degree of progression, the tramp's ears appear to more
    closely match Hunt's pre-surgical condition." (See HSCA Volume 4, Page 383)

Snow is often featured on TV in regards to his forensic anthropologic investigations.

Critics say the "Tramps" have been identified as DOYLE, ABRAMS and GEDNEY but provide no pictures.
And the police reports for DOYLE etc. don't jive with the police reports for the three tramps, HUNT,
STURGIS and ?Carswell(?).

One of the Dallas cops told FBI investigators: "Captain Jones told [Officer] Chambers 'find out which one [of
the tramps] shot the president.' "They were about to conduct a gunpowder test on the hands of the hobos
when they were notified that Oswald had been arrested and they let the hobos go."
The Rockefeller Report concluded: "It can not be determined with certainty where Hunt and Sturgis were on
the day of the assassination. "Contacts with relatives, friends, neighbors or fellow employees, who might
have known of the whereabouts of Hunt and Sturgis on that particular day could not be recalled [by Hunt]."
And, "Hunt could not recall whether he was on duty with the CIA on the morning of the assassination."

2.   Mark Lane, a Warren Commission critic and attorney for Liberty Lobby wrote in his book (pages
271-285) about the contradictions in Hunt's testimony of his whereabouts but consider this: Hunt's children
were age 14, 13 and 10 at the time. Hunt alleged that he was at home with his children watching the TV for
at least the next 48 hours. At the first Liberty Lobby trial Hunt testified that his children were really upset
about the allegations that he was in Dallas 11/22/63 [tramp photos etc.] and that he had to reassure them
that he was not in Texas that day. Why would his children need reassurance that Hunt was not in Dallas if
he was with his children watching TV?

3.   Hunt's list of alibi witnesses at the various venues kept changing (at the Rockefeller Commission he
apparently had no alibi witnesses!). At the Miami trial Hunt's TWO (only two, 2) alibi witnesses, Kuzmuk and
Mazerov were very unreliable, contradictory and unconvincing (p.287).

4.   There's a contradiction on how he got to work that day and who drove him.

5. We have the Rockefeller Commission stating that Hunt could not recall whether or not he was on duty
with the CIA that day and Hunt testifying in other venues both that he had been there that morning and that
he had not been there.

6. Hunt submitted an affidavit to the Rockefeller Commission stating that he first heard of the assassination
on the car radio while driving with his wife to a Chinese grocery store. From the grocery store he picked up
his 13 year old daughter from school and drove directly home. I was in the 4th grade (7 years old) at the
time and remember teachers crying, we were all herded out into the hall to watch TV and being let out of
school early. Don't you think a 13 year old would remember being picked up by her parents and watching
TV with them at home?
The Lee Harvey Oswald she claims to have driven with was obviously a doppelganger or she was
mistaken? Many people reported seeing LHO in places around Dallas: at a rifle range, test driving a car
(Oswald didn't drive) and stating "leftist" and incriminating evidence to make an impression that he was
planning a murder. A set-up for a patsy.

Then there was the issue of an "Oswald" making a big impression at the Cuban and Russian embassies in
Mexico City.

Lorenz was an expert marksman. If she was in contact with the real Oswald she would have noted his

SOME HAVE SLANDERED LORENZ: You're accusing Lorenz of the worst kind of lie there is: SLANDER.
The people who wrote the Bible were not stupid (but the people who believe it literally and historically are),
they classified slander, "bearing false witness" as a sin on the same level as murder, adultery and theft.
Slander is so satanic that the devil himself was named after the Greek word for slander (see the etymology
of "devil").

In my opinion, only a psychopath would knowingly and intentionally slander someone. In legal terms there's
a difference between knowing and intentionally lying and believing that a lie is true, there's different levels
of perjury. And Lorenz would be a fool to make up such a story knowing how many witnesses to the
assassination have mysteriously or "coincidentally" died. As I recall, Lorenz said Sturgis was threatening
her before she testified before the HSCA.

But with all evidence, we have to "weigh" it. How much weight do I give Lorenz's evidence? I can't really
say because it has been awhile since I researched the assassination and concluded Hunt & Sturgis were
involved and were hiding in a rail-car in back of the Grassy Knoll, November 22, 1963.
1.   We have the "Tramp" photos, which are dead ringers of Hunt and Sturgis. What are the odds of Hunt
and Sturgis look-alikes turning up in a boxcar behind the grassy knoll on the day of the assassination?

2.   We have the Joe Trento Memo: Here's more on the Memo from
The Man Who Knew Too Much, Dick
Russell, 1992:

    On August 20, 1978, in the midst of the House Assassinations Committee's probe, an article appeared
    in the Wilmington (Del.) Sunday News Journal. It described a secret CIA memorandum of 1966 that
    stated that Hunt had been in Dallas on the day of the assassination. Said to have been initialed by
    Angelton and Helms, the memo was about keeping Hunt's presence there a secret. A cover story
    providing Hunt an alibi for being elsewhere "ought to be considered," it reportedly said. [The article is
    reprinted in Plausible Denial.] The memo's date of origin was some years before Hunt became
    infamous as one of the Watergate burglars in 1972.

    In 1966 Hunt was little known outside the CIA -- having worked undercover in Mexico City and Tokyo
    and as the station chief in Uruguay during the 1950s, authoring more than forty novels about the spy
    trade under various pseudonyms, even helping Allen Dulles prepare his own memoir, The Craft of
    Intelligence. Joseph J. Trento, who wrote the Wilmington news story, says that his source was none
    other than Angleton. "In 1978, Angleton called and asked me to come down for lunch at the Army-Navy
    Club," Trento recalls. [Russel's source for this is a phone call with Trento.] "He said he wanted me to
    talk to me about something. "This was as the House Committee's investigation was winding up, and he
    told me a number of things concerning the Kennedy assassination and its aftermath. "Then he
    explained some very complicated counter intelligence operations. "Did you know Howard Hunt was in
    Dallas on the day of the assassination?" he said. I said, "So what? So was Richard Nixon, for a Pepsi-
    Cola convention."

    "Angleton said, 'What I'm trying to tell you is, some very odd things were going on that were out of our
    control.' Then he added the possibility that Hunt was there on orders from a high-level KGB mole
    inside the agency and that this should have been looked into at the time. "If that was true, it seemed
    plausible that any 'orders' given to Howard Hunt might have come from his boss at Domestic
    Operations, Tracy Barnes." Hunt has denied under oath that he was in Dallas on the fateful day.

    According to Trento, after his conversation with Angleton, the ex-CIA chief then arranged for the
    internal CIA memo to be delivered to him. Angleton simultaneously alerted the House Assassinations
    Committee, using Tennessee Senator Howard Baker as his intermediary, and the committee also
    received a copy. "It was all handled in such a way that Angleton was not the source," Trento adds. I
    later came to conclude that the mole-sent-Hunt idea was, to use his phrase, disinformation; that
    Angleton was trying to protect his own connections to Hunt's being in Dallas.

    You see, Angleton was aware of a serious counterintelligence problem with the Cubans. They were
    making these crazy movements all over Texas and New Orleans. You couldn't tell who was who, and
    he knew the exiles were heavily penetrated by Castro's intelligence. Things were getting out of hand,
    and Angleton was trying to find out what was going on at the time of the assassination. My guess is, it
    was Angleton himself who sent Hunt to Dallas, because he didn't want to use anybody from his own
    shop. Hunt was still considered a hand-holder for the Cuban exiles, sort of Helms's unhousebroken
    pet. The godfather of Hunt's youngest son was Manual Artime, the Cuban exiles' invasion leader for
    the Bay of Pigs....

Trento was no dummy. The HSCA was given a copy of the memo but the memo conveniently "disappeared"
like so many of the witnesses and evidence did.

To digress: "Firing Line" moderator and columnist William F. Buckley, Jr. was the godfather of another of
Hunt's kids. When Buckley came to speak at the University of Arizona 15? years ago, before a crowd of
3000. I heckled him from the very back of the stadium to the effect that Hunt was responsible for the
assassination of JFK. Buckley replied: "Hunt just won a defamation lawsuit proving that he wasn't in Dallas."
(This was the first Liberty Lobby trial.)

I wrote Senator Edward Kennedy telling him exactly what happened. I got a nice "thank you for the
information" from one of his aides. So I like to imagine that I may have had some part in overturning the
verdict in the first Liberty Lobby trial i.e., maybe Kennedy pressured the Judge to find some way to overturn
the verdict in the first trial?

JOE BONANNO retired to Tucson, Arizona, where I live. His son, Bill Bonanno wrote a book about his life
as a gangster and was on a local radio talk show. I called up and asked him, "Was E. Howard Hunt and
Frank Sturgis involved in the assassination?"

Bonanno gave a nervous little laugh and said, "You know a lot about the assassination."

I didn't read Bonanno's book and didn't want to nail him specifically about Hunt and Sturgis who were still
alive so I asked, "Was the CIA involved?" He said, "YES."

Eventually, I did read his book. He wrote that immediately after the assassination he suspected it was a
Mafia hit. He sent out queries to find out who was involved. He was informed that the CIA and anti-Castro
Cubans were involved with the Mafia. He says that Roselli told him that he hid in the storm sewer and fired
the fatal shot. Although Roselli was an expert marksman, according to posts I've read, the storm sewer may
have been too small for Roselli.

3.   We have Nixon offering Hunt hush money -- afraid of him exposing the whole "Bay of Pigs thing and a
whole lot of hanky panky."

Haldeman's Memoir,
The Ends of Power. This is funny, Haldeman not yet knowing what "the Bay of Pigs
thing" refers to confronting Richard (Dick) Helms, the head of the CIA:

    Then I played Nixon's trump card. The President asked me to tell you this entire affair may be
    connected to the Bay of Pigs and if it opens up, the Bay of Pigs may be blown. Turmoil in the room,
    Helms gripping the arms of his chair leaning forward and shouting, "The Bay of Pigs had nothing to do
    with this, I have no concern about the Bay of Pigs." Silence. I just sat there. I was absolutely shocked
    by Helms' violent reaction.

    Again, I wondered what was such dynamite in the Bay of Pigs story? Finally, I said, I'm just following
    my instructions, Dick, this is what the President told me to relay to you.

4.   We have the "Dear Mr. Hunt" letter allegedly sent by Oswald asking what his "position" was. A copy of
this letter, dated 11/8/63 was sent to assassination researcher Penn Jones, 8/18/75 with a Mexico City
postmark. I don't give much weight to this but imagine if Howard Hunt had a collection of these letters from
LHO and he was using them to acquire more hush money and he gave them to his wife to take to someone
in Chicago for safe-keeping.

5. We have two of Hunts children providing testimony (probably by affidavit) to the Rockefeller Commission
that Hunt was with them on the day of the assassination and, we have Hunt testifying at the first Liberty
Lobby trial that his children were frightened and upset about the allegations he was in Dallas and that he
had to reassure them that he was not in Dallas that day. [See
Plausible Denial, pages 282-283]

At the second trial, Lane confronts Hunt with these conflicting statements, which Hunt admits are true: "Mr.
Hunt, why did you have to convince your children that you were not in Dallas on November 22, 1963 if, as
you say, a fourteen-year-old daughter, a thirteen-year-old daughter, and a ten-year-old son were with you
in the Washington, D.C., area on November 22, and were with you at least for the next forty-eight hours, as
you all stayed glued to the TV set?"
Plausible Denial:

    If someone had struck Hunt in the face his reaction would not have been more physical. His head
    jerked back. He stared at his attorneys. His lawyers, apparently thunderstruck, began to speak to each
    other in whispers. The delay before Hunt responded seemed interminable. In absolute time it probably
    was not more than half a minute. Finally Hunt spoke, looking away from the jurors: "May I reply?" I
    answered, "Please. It's a question."

    He spoke quickly, as if he hoped the subject would soon be forgotten. "These were unformed minds,
    and I felt that it was absolutely imperative that I remind them of the circumstances attendant upon our
    family that day. "Yet, my other son, Howard St. John, had read in the Berkeley Barb and in other
    papers these constant reiterations of my involvement in the Kennedy assassination. "So, it was less a
    question of my convincing them that I was in Washington, D.C., with them -- rather, reminding them
    that I was, that it was to assure them that none of the charges and allegations that had been made,
    particularly those of the tramp in Dealey Plaza, had any substance to them at all."

    Q. How could they believe, Mr. Hunt, that the tramp photographs, as they have been called, which
    purport to show you in Dealey Plaza, Dallas, Texas, on November 22, 1963, could be authentic, when
    they were with you at that time in the Washington, D.C., area and were with you for forty-eight hours,
    in front of a TV set?

    A. Because of the constant reiteration of the charges. The appearance of people like Dick Gregory at
    news conferences. Dick Gregory call-in radio shows. The prevalence of the theories that Hunt or the
    CIA somehow had something to do with it. Of course they were well aware that I worked for the CIA My
    name was linked with it and usually linked in connection with the Kennedy assassination. It was a very
    difficult problem that I had with my children.

    Q. One can see where they might be disturbed that you were being charged with this. But weren't they
    of the opinion that there were three people who could prove to the whole world that these charges
    were a tissue of lies, that "I was with my father during that whole time period?" What I want to know is
    since they knew how outrageous the lies were, why did they have to be convinced by you that you
    weren't in Texas?

    A. Reminded, reminded.

    Q. They didn't remember that themselves? Hunt paused again. He wiped his forehead with a

    A. The constant reiteration of these charges, in one form or another, had an extremely deleterious
    effect on my children. I conferred with them, I answered their questions. I gave them every assurance
    that I was never in Dealy Plaza at any time in my life -- not only on the fatal day, but the day before, the
    day after. In short, never. That was the type of assurance I was forced to give to my family.

    Q. Were all of these children with you on the day after the assassination of President Kennedy? The
    witness reached for a glass of water and drank it slowly. Then he spoke:

    A. They were, as during the day of the assassination; that is correct.

    Q. You testified, Mr. Hunt, that your adult children came to you after it was alleged that you were in
    Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963, and said to you, "Is there any truth in this?" Have you testified
    that was what they said?

    A. I have. That is correct.

    Hunt's explanations only exacerbated the matter. If the three children had been exposed to the false
    allegations over a period of time, does it not seem likely that they would remember where they had
    spent one of the most traumatic moments of their lives and who was with them? Why did they not
    shout out that their father was innocent? Failing that, why did they require constant reminders from
    their father that they had all been together that day?

In other words, Hunt is alleging that the media brainwashed his kids!

6. We have Victor Marchetti's article in his newsletter alleging that Hunt was in Dallas "by accident" on
November 22, 1963.

7. We have Hunt giving all kinds of contradictory statements as to his whereabouts and his not being able
to recall if he was at work that day.
[Jerry wrote:] Joe Trento testified by deposition at the 2nd Hunt - Spotlight trial that he had been shown -
briefly - a CIA memo supposedly written by Angleton to Helms in 1966 stating that E. Howard Hunt had
been in Dallas on 11/22/63. He refused to say who showed him the memo.

Let's fast-forward to an interview he gave Richard Russell in which he embellished his tale about a secret
memo and made statements which are either demonstrably false or at sharp variance with the record.
Trento told Russell:

    a. James Angleton lunched with him at the Army And Navy Club and there showed him the memo in
    question. At this luncheon he supposedly gave Trento the information that was the basis for his article.
    This was in 1978 - after Angleton was dead and thus not able to correct his claims. In 1975, Angleton
    had testified to the Rockefeller Commission on this topic. He said that following the publication of his
    article he telephoned Angleton from William Corson's office in the Penthouse Corp offices. The call
    was put through to Angleton where he was lunching at the Army And Navy Club. Angleton said he had
    not seen Trento's article and replied that he had not heard from Howard Hunt. Then, he rang off as his
    lunch was getting cold.

    b. Joe Trento claimed to Russell that Angleton gave him a copy of the memo and had one forwarded
    to the HSCA. However, in sworn testimony at the 2nd Hunt trial he stated that he was not given a copy
    of the memo. Nor had the HSCA ever received a copy of the article as Mark Lane found out when he
    asked Gaeton Fonzi and Eddie Lopez if they had.

    c. Joe Trento claimed that he and William Corson and James Angleton were friends and indeed
    confidants. In fact, Angleton testified that he knew Trento only as somebody who had written articles
    that were critical of Richard Helms. Indeed, Joe Trento is a sensational and anti-CIA journalist who is
    the last person that CIA officials such as Helms and Angleton would share secret documents with! The
    claims that Joe Trento made to Richard Russell about - 1. Lunching with Angleton, 2. Being given a
    copy of the memo by Angleton, 3. The HSCA being given a copy of the memo, 4. Angleton being good
    friends with Trento and Corson - are demonstrably false and destroy Joe Trento's credibility. Jerry

From: Joseph Trento
Subject: Re: Joe Trento's Credibility Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk, alt.assassination.jfk
View this article only Date: 2001-09-30 19:18:43 PST

    I was amused to see "Jerry's" posting making blanket statements about my credibility based on false
    and incomplete information.

    The Howard Hunt memo story is in the archives of the Wilmington News Journal and speaks for itself.

    My deposition in the Hunt Case and comments to Dick Russell do not diverge in fact. The questions
    asked were different. Mark Lane was more interested in collecting chapters for his book then winning
    a lawsuit. "Jerry's" implication, is not based on fact.

    But facts are not important to "Jerry."

    By the way "Jerry" James Angleton did not die in 1978. He died in 1986.

    Angleton, William Corson and Bob Crowley were not only sources but complicated men I came to
    know very well.

    "Jerry's" ignorance about the circumstances of Angleton's departure from the CIA is amazing
    considering what is available on the public record. Angleton kept coming to his office for months after
    his firing and removed file after file from the building - including the Kennedy material.

    By the way you are right about one thing "Jerry" -- Richard Helms does not speak to me. Considering
    his problems with telling the truth about Chile, The Kronthal case and fifty years of other events I wear
    this non-communication "as a badge of honor."

    My relationship with Angleton is detailed in my new book The Secret History of The CIA which will be
    released by Prima/Random House next month.

    I am sorry "Jerry" thinks I am "anti-CIA." Some of my closest friends have worked at the CIA. They
    don't believe in perpetuating the myth that the CIA was effective as an intelligence gathering arm of
    the government. The evidence does not support that contention. The hundreds of interviews I did with
    real CIA officials and case officers demonstrate that many of them came to the same view: All of
    "Jerry's" cheerleading, personal attacks and creative writing will not change the history. Tragically on
    September 11 most of America discovered just how bad the CIA is at the task it was created to do.
    Jerry" can face the CIA's real problems or attack those who write about them. Now that blowback has
    brought mass murder to our shores I think it is time we all pay attention to getting an agency that does
    more then make excuses. Joe Trento
From my experience with the HSCA, the science of photo comparison and analysis is an exceptionally
inconclusive technique. The Assassinations Committee wound up spending $83,154 on it and came up with
results which in some instances are totally worthless! .... Hunt had obtained disguises from the CIA's
technical services bureau and used them on more than one job. ... If the tramps were in disguise there
would be no way the analysts could tell who they really are [.] ... In my own mind, I've never resolved the
question of whether or not Frank Sturgis looked like one of the tramps in Dealy Plaza. There are a couple of
photos which have strong similarities, others with few. The same could be said of the Hunt comparison.
Sturgis is a lot more polished and sophisticated than the obscenity-prone, rough-hewn and undereducated
character he sometimes projects. [Fonzi and Sturgis had many long, sociable conversations.] On the day of
the assassination, Sturgis said, "I had FBI agents all over my house, they told me I was one person they felt
had the capabilities to do it. They said, 'Frank, if there's anybody capable of killing the President of the
United States, you're the guy that can do it'."

Sturgis said he thought the Kennedy assassination was definitely a conspiracy, (he spoke of the possible
motivations of the anti-Castro groups ... agents in the KGB, Cuban Intelligence and the CIA), that Oswald
was a patsy and that the Government agencies -- the FBI, Secret Service and the CIA -- were all involved in
a cover-up.

Fonzi ends chapter 9 with a funny story where he meets Sturgis in a restaurant in Miami's Little Havana.
With Sturgis is a man named "Paul" who spent seven years in Castro's prisons. Sturgis wanted "Paul" to
think the meeting was coincidence because "Paul" would probably not voluntarily agree to meet Fonzi.
Sturgis introduces Fonzi as "a friend of mine who is with the, uh, whattaya callit, you know, the Government
Committee that's looking into the assassination of John F. Kennedy."

Paul didn't miss a beat, "Oh, he said, "you mean the guy you killed"? Sturgis' face suddenly froze for a split
second. The smile was gone. Then he shook his head and smiled again. "Oh, yeah, sure," he said
laughing. I looked at Sturgis and started laughing also. (This concluded Chapter 9.)
ALWAYS ready and willing to act as a self-apologist in front of  the Miami, Panamanian and Salvadoran
reporters who besiege his cell in El  Renacer prison, international terrorist Luis Posada Carriles also
displays  impressive skill in omitting to mention the murkiest chapters of his  autobiography. One of them is
particularly shady: there are many researchers who  link him, either directly or indirectly, with the
assassination of President  John Kennedy, a subject on which he continues to maintain silence.

In a recent interview with the website, Fabián Escalante, former head of Cuban
intelligence, revealed how  Posada Carriles and Guillermo Novo Sampoll, both currently detained in
Panama,  as well as Orlando Bosch - released by President George Bush Snr. on July 20,  1990 - appear
on the list established by Cuban state security.

Escalante explains Posada’s connection with the conspiracy by  recalling the complex history of a plot that
brings together leaders of the  Cuban émigré community, U.S. mafiosi and CIA officials.

He describes how in April 1963, Cuban-American bosses from  Florida and New Jersey created an
organization that was to disappear strangely  and suddenly, following Kennedy's death.

Named the Junta of the Cuban Government in Exile (JCGE), this  group was led by Carlos Prio Socarrás,
Felipe Rivero - a known terrorist - and  Paulino Sierra González, a representative of the U.S. mafia.

The following month the group held a meeting in Bimini, in the  Bahamas (very close to Miami), attended by
Carlos Prío, mafia boss John  Rosselli, William Carr (Colonel King's assistant and head of the CIA's
Western  Hemispheric Division and Robert Rogers, the official in charge of the plot.  Information obtained
by Cuban intelligence agents shows that they then held  meetings for the same purpose attended by
terrorists such as Frank Sturgis,  Howard Hunt, Orlando Piedra, Antonio "Tony" Cuesta, Eladio de Valle,
Joaquin  Sanjenis, Manuel Artime, Orlando Bosch, Antonio Vencina and Luis Posada  Carriles.

According to the former state security chief, by March or April  1963 Kennedy's assassination had been
decided and a plan was underway to execute  the crime.

Marita Laurens [Lorenz], a German woman and former lover of Frank  Sturgis, has given an important
testimony regarding the activities of this cell  of conspirators. She recalls how she met Lee Harvey Oswald -
Kennedy's  "acknowledged" assassin - in Dallas, whilst in the company of Sturgis, Bosch,  Guillermo Novo
Sampoll, his brother Ignacio and other individuals.

U.S. researchers investigating the Kennedy case, among them  (and perhaps the most important) Miami
journalist Gaeton Fonzi, agree that this  group of CIA operatives were present in Dallas on the day of the
assassination;  a group who were always conspiring together in the wake of the failed invasion  Bay of Pigs
invasion. Members of Operation 40 - established by the U.S. intelligence agency and trained in Fort
Benning to carry out terrorist  operations in Cuba - these mercenaries maintained constant contact with
each  other in order to engage in acts of terrorism against Cuba, not just on the  island but in the United
States and other countries.

It is important to note that this dangerous group included  several former collaborators of Batista's police
force and old buddies of the  Havana mafia, who had already moved to the United States with their
notorious  bosses, including Santos Trafficante.

In his luxurious cell in the Panamanian prison of El Renacer,  Luis Posada Carriles constitutes one of the
last living "examples" of this  CIA-linked mafia fauna; an individual who found himself in Dallas on that  
fateful day when the President of the United States was murdered.

When will terrorist Carriles finally confess his complicity in  that tragic event, as well as the horrific sabotage
of a Cubana passenger plane  over Barbados and other crimes that mark 40 years of terrorist activities?
The only reasons I can imagine for Lane to ridicule the Tramps as Hunt and Sturgis theory is:

1. He's afraid of being sued.
2. He's afraid that if he's sued, he'll lose and set back assassination research.
3. He's afraid if he wins, America would be in crisis having to admit there was a coup d'etat in Dalles
4. He knows he can't win if he's sued because the consequences are too high.

Typically, a Court would take "Judicial Notice" of Dr. Snow's testimony as an "expert witness" and who
could Lane find to refute that?! Also, Lane, to my knowledge has never said who he thinks the Tramps
really are. I don't believe they are who the LaFontaines say they are. (Note that the Fontaines' bogus theory
about the Tramps was published in an unusually long article in the
Washington Post.)
Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban
emigres, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and
even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities. The plans were developed as ways to trick the American
public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist
Fidel Castro.

America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up
a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a
helpful wave of national indignation." Details of the plans are described in Body of Secrets (Doubleday), a
new book by investigative reporter James Bamford about the history of America's largest spy agency, the
National Security Agency. However, the plans were not connected to the agency, he notes. The plans had
the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense
secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership
and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years. "These were Joint Chiefs of Staff documents. The reason
these were held secret for so long is the Joint Chiefs never wanted to give these up because they were so
embarrassing," Bamford told

The whole point of a democracy is to have leaders responding to the public will, and here this is the
complete reverse, the military trying to trick the American people into a war that they want but that nobody
else wants. The documents show the Joint Chiefs of Staff drew up and approved plans for what may be the
most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government, writes Bamford. The Joint Chiefs even proposed
using the potential death of astronaut John Glenn during the first attempt to put an American into orbit as a
false pretext for war with Cuba, the documents show. Should the rocket explode and kill Glenn, they wrote,
the objective is to provide irrevocable proof that the fault lies with the Communists et all Cuba [sic]. The
plans were motivated by an intense desire among senior military leaders to depose Castro, who seized
power in 1959 -- only 90 miles from U.S. shores.

The earlier CIA-backed Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba by Cuban exiles had been a disastrous failure in
which the military was not allowed to provide firepower. "The military leaders now wanted a shot at it. The
whole thing was so bizarre," says Bamford, noting public and international support would be needed for an
invasion, but apparently neither the American public, nor the Cuban public, wanted to see U.S. troops
deployed to drive out Castro. Reflecting this, the U.S. plan called for establishing prolonged military not
democratic control over the island nation after the invasion. "That's what we're supposed to be freeing them
from," Bamford says. The only way we would have succeeded is by doing exactly what the Russians were
doing all over the world, by imposing a government by tyranny, basically what we were accusing Castro
himself of doing.

The Joint Chiefs at the time were headed by Eisenhower appointee Army Gen. Lyman L. Lemnitzer, who,
with the signed plans in hand made a pitch to McNamara on March 13, 1962, recommending Operation
Northwoods be run by the military. Whether the Chiefs' plans were rejected by McNamara in the meeting is
not clear. But three days later, President Kennedy told Lemnitzer directly there was virtually no possibility of
ever using overt force to take Cuba, Bamford reports. Within months, Lemnitzer would be denied another
term as chairman and transferred to another job.

The secret plans came at a time when there was distrust in the military leadership about their civilian
leadership, with leaders in the Kennedy administration viewed as too liberal, insufficiently experienced and
soft on communism. At the same time, however, there real were concerns in American society about their
military overstepping its bounds. There were reports U.S. military leaders had encouraged their
subordinates to vote conservative during the election. And at least two popular books were published
focusing on a right-wing military leadership pushing the limits against government policy of the day.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee published its own report on right-wing extremism in the military,
warning a "considerable danger" in the "education and propaganda activities of military personnel" had
been uncovered. The committee even called for an examination of any ties between Lemnitzer and
right-wing groups but Congress didn't get wind of Northwoods, says Bamford. "Although no one in
Congress could have known at the time," he writes, "Lemnitzer and the Joint Chiefs had quietly slipped over
the edge."

Even after Lemnitzer was gone, he writes, the Joint Chiefs continued to plan "pretext" operations at least
through 1963. One idea was to create a war between Cuba and another Latin American country so that the
United States could intervene. Another was to pay someone in the Castro government to attack U.S. forces
at the Guantanamo naval base -- an act, which Bamford notes, would have amounted to treason. And
another was to fly low level U-2 flights over Cuba, with the intention of having one shot down as a pretext
for a war."

There really was a worry at the time about the military going off crazy and they did, but they never
succeeded, but it wasn't for lack of trying," he says.
Ironically, the documents came to light, says Bamford, in part because of the 1992 Oliver Stone film "JFK,"
which examined the possibility of a conspiracy behind the assassination of President Kennedy. As public
interest in the assassination swelled after "JFK's" release, Congress passed a law designed to increase the
public's access to government records related to the assassination. The author says a friend on the board
tipped him off to the documents. Afraid of a congressional investigation, Lemnitzer had ordered all Joint
Chiefs documents related to the Bay of Pigs destroyed, says Bamford. But somehow, these remained. "The
scary thing is none of this stuff comes out until 40 years after," says Bamford.

More on
(Abrams, Gedney & Doyle)