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 Denial
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
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
(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

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 arrested.

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
got 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
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 money.]

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

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 case.

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 feeling."

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 reasons.

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 room:

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

    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, unknown.)
Bruce A. Friedemann chillin' at the U, reading a book in
front of the old Gallagher Theater. (Photographer,
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
JFK warns of "secret societies" controlling the news
& censorship.
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 photos

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 Power, 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 marksmanship.

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

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 handkerchief.

    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

    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.

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  

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

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

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 11/23/63.
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

More on