Rolling Stone: CIA spymaster says JFK assassination was gov't conspiracy

[AdD 1]

In a deathbed confession, E. Howard Hunt told his son members of the gov't conspired to have JFK killed. A small except:

"In some ways we turned out similarly," he says. "He was a spy, into secrets and covert activity. I became a drug dealer. What has to be more covert and secret than that? It's the same mind-set. We were just on opposite sides of the -- well, actually, in our case, I guess we weren't even on opposite sides of the law, were we?" That time in miami, with saint by his bed and disease eating away at him and him thinking he's six months away from death, E. Howard finally put pen to paper and started writing. Saint had been working toward this moment for a long while, and now it was going to happen. He got his father an A&W diet root beer, then sat down in the old man's wheelchair and waited.

E. Howard scribbled the initials "LBJ," standing for Kennedy's ambitious vice president, Lyndon Johnson. Under "LBJ," connected by a line, he wrote the name Cord Meyer. Meyer was a CIA agent whose wife had an affair with JFK; later she was murdered, a case that's never been solved. Next his father connected to Meyer's name the name Bill Harvey, another CIA agent; also connected to Meyer's name was the name David Morales, yet another CIA man and a well-known, particularly vicious black-op specialist. And then his father connected to Morales' name, with a line, the framed words "French Gunman Grassy Knoll."

So there it was, according to E. Howard Hunt. LBJ had Kennedy killed. It had long been speculated upon. But now E. Howard was saying that's the way it was. And that Lee Harvey Oswald wasn't the only shooter in Dallas. There was also, on the grassy knoll, a French gunman, presumably the Corsican Mafia assassin Lucien Sarti, who has figured prominently in other assassination theories.

"By the time he handed me the paper, I was in a state of shock," Saint says. "His whole life, to me and everybody else, he'd always professed to not know anything about any of it. But I knew this had to be the truth. If my dad was going to make anything up, he would have made something up about the Mafia, or Castro, or Khrushchev. He didn't like Johnson. But you don't falsely implicate your own country, for Christ's sake. My father is old-school, a dyed-in-the-wool patriot, and that's the last thing he would do."

Later that week, E. Howard also gave Saint two sheets of paper that contained a fuller narrative. It starts out with LBJ again, connecting him to Cord Meyer, then goes on: "Cord 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 w/ 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. Here's what happens:

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."

After that, 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."

After reading what his father had written, St. John was stunned too. His father had not only implicated LBJ, he'd also, with a few swift marks of a pen, put the lie to almost everything he'd sworn to, under oath, about his knowledge of the assassination. Saint had a million more questions. But his father was exhausted and needed to sleep, and then Saint had to leave town without finishing their talk, though a few weeks later he did receive in the mail a tape recording from his dad. E. Howard's voice on the cassette is weak and grasping, and he sometimes wanders down unrelated pathways. But he essentially remakes the same points he made in his handwritten narrative.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/13893143/the_last_confessions_of_e_howard_hunt/7

Life is ez
On the dz
Every jumper's dream
3 rigs and an airstream

[tbrown 26]

Hmmm, innerestin'.... A few years back one of the cable channels, I don't remember if it was the History, or Discovery, or A&E Channel, ran a pruported expose claiming that LBJ was behind the Kennedy assasination. They produced an interview with a woman who had been a maid, working the night of 11/22/63 at a big socialite gathering around Dallas. She claimed that LBJ made an appearance, in high spirits and was roundly congratulated over what had just happened.

I had a couple problems with that right off the bat. For one thing, it's a fact that LBJ flew back to DC with Mrs. Kennedy and the President's body onboard Air Force One and that he took the oath of office onboard the plane. The other thing that REALLY bothered me was the way this network just leapt out of the blue and accused a former President of the United States, who has since died and cannot defend himself, of complicity in the murder of a sitting U.S. President. That's a VERY serious charge to make. We're not talking about UFO abductions or Anna Nicole Smith communing with Marilyn Monroe's ghost here, this is much more serious stuff.

That's not to say it couldn't have happened. I've never believed that Oswald acted alone. And Oswald's killing by Jack Ruby was an obvious setup, just watch the film sometime. It's a joke to think anybody could've got away with that unless it had been planned in advance. But as more and more of the key witnesses - and players - have died off, the truth gets harder and harder to discover. I still have to question the motivations and interpretations given this story by the people involved. Right now it stands as somebody's report of what they believe E. Howard Hunt made as a deathbed confession. As such, that's worth reporting. Whether it's true or not, or whether the facts can even be established anymore after 44 years, we may never know. But I'd still be VERY careful about accusing a deceased former President - however unpopular - of something so heinous as bumping off his predecessor. After all, Johnson was cagey enough to know that if he could do it to JFK, others cold just as well do it to him.

Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity !

[dorbie 0]

Quote

Hmmm, innerestin'.... A few years back one of the cable channels, I don't remember if it was the History, or Discovery, or A&E Channel, ran a pruported expose claiming that LBJ was behind the Kennedy assasination. They produced an interview with a woman who had been a maid, working the night of 11/22/63 at a big socialite gathering around Dallas. She claimed that LBJ made an appearance, in high spirits and was roundly congratulated over what had just happened.

Did you ever consider doing some reading to discover where LBJ actually was?

[Andy9o8 0]

I used to be a bit of a Kennedy assassination buff. Read a whole lot about it, everything from the ridiculous to the credible to the sublime. I eventually lost interest, and grew weary of all the tinfoil hat claimants coming out of the woodwork. Frankly, at this point, 43+ years after the fact, I'd be surprised if a whole lot more credible, verifiable hard evidence comes to light that ain't already been figgered out.

But - LBJ had Jack bumped off? Absolute horseshit.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

I've never believed that Oswald acted alone.

I used to believe that. For the past several years, however, I just cannot bring myself to thinking that after reading so much about it. My thought is that nobody wants to believe some moron cracker like Oswald can kill a president just because he wanted to - especially one like JFK.

Quote

And Oswald's killing by Jack Ruby was an obvious setup

One that Oswald would have had to be in on. Ruby was in that underground parking lot for less thana minute before he shot Oswald. Oswald would have been out of the lot before Ruby left the Western Union office had Oswald not asked for a change of clothing. Wouldn't it have made more sense for Oswald to have just offed himself as he was about to be arrested in the Aztec Theater?

Quote

It's a joke to think anybody could've got away with that unless it had been planned in advance.

I think it's a joke to suggest that someone hired the biggest loudmouth in Dallas to shoot a guy like Oswald to cover up a conspiracy. Get to know abotu Jack Ruby and you'll figure out that he was a guy who didn't think anyone would jail him for offing the guy who killed the President that he so loved.

Why don't people find a conspiracy with John Hinckley, Jr?

How many hundreds of conspiracy theories are out there? They are actually competing with each other.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Hmmm, innerestin'.... A few years back one of the cable channels, I don't remember if it was the History, or Discovery, or A&E Channel, ran a pruported expose claiming that LBJ was behind the Kennedy assasination. They produced an interview with a woman who had been a maid, working the night of 11/22/63 at a big socialite gathering around Dallas. She claimed that LBJ made an appearance, in high spirits and was roundly congratulated over what had just happened.

I had a couple problems with that right off the bat. For one thing, it's a fact that LBJ flew back to DC with Mrs. Kennedy and the President's body onboard Air Force One and that he took the oath of office onboard the plane. The other thing that REALLY bothered me was the way this network just leapt out of the blue and accused a former President of the United States, who has since died and cannot defend himself, of complicity in the murder of a sitting U.S. President. That's a VERY serious charge to make. We're not talking about UFO abductions or Anna Nicole Smith communing with Marilyn Monroe's ghost here, this is much more serious stuff.

That's not to say it couldn't have happened. I've never believed that Oswald acted alone. And Oswald's killing by Jack Ruby was an obvious setup, just watch the film sometime. It's a joke to think anybody could've got away with that unless it had been planned in advance. But as more and more of the key witnesses - and players - have died off, the truth gets harder and harder to discover. I still have to question the motivations and interpretations given this story by the people involved. Right now it stands as somebody's report of what they believe E. Howard Hunt made as a deathbed confession. As such, that's worth reporting. Whether it's true or not, or whether the facts can even be established anymore after 44 years, we may never know. But I'd still be VERY careful about accusing a deceased former President - however unpopular - of something so heinous as bumping off his predecessor. After all, Johnson was cagey enough to know that if he could do it to JFK, others cold just as well do it to him.

______________________________________

It may have been the same program you saw but, on either the History channel or Discovery, I saw something similar. In the program, a letter was shown, written in LBJ's hand, stated (in so many words) that no troops were to be withdrawn from Viet Nam and that if anything, more troops would be sent there. The letter was signed: 'Lyndon B. Johnson President of the United States and dated, the day prior to John Kennedy's assanination!
That has left me with a lot of questions about the assination of JFK.


Chuck

[dorbie 0]

Do you know what one of the biggest problems/fears of the national archives is?

Not people stealing documents, but people sneaking forgeries in to support a case. I'm not saying your cited doc was in there or was forged, but it is interesting to note what length some "historians" will go to to support their arguments. They have actually caught people smuggling forged documents in there trying to contaminate the record.

Very sad.

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Do you know what one of the biggest problems/fears of the national archives is?

Not people stealing documents, but people sneaking forgeries in to support a case. I'm not saying your cited doc was in there or was forged, but it is interesting to note what length some "historians" will go to to support their arguments. They have actually caught people smuggling forged documents in there trying to contaminate the record.

Very sad.

_____________________________________

That's interesting to know yet, not surprising. Thanks for the in-put.


Chuck

[tbrown 26]

Good answers all. I don't live or die by what happened to JFK by any means, it's just that too many people around the periphery of the case died so soon after, or so they say.

I'd still like to see some real proff before people go off the deep end and blame a former US President (LBJ) for masterminding the whole thing.

As for Joh Hinkley Jr., we all KNOW he did it for Jody...

Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity !

[cumplidor 0]

Has anyone seen the video where the Secret Servicemen are obviously told to stand down immediately after the motorcade started?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XY02Qkuc_f8

It certainly would support the assassination 'conspiracy' theory

[Hipwrddude 0]

Interesting story, but from all that I've read, not plausible. Check out the book "Case Closed" by Gerald Posner. He discredits many of the conspiracy theories off the bat. For a more in-depth view, consider Vincent Bugliosi's (Helter Skelter) recent book, "Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy." He devotes a chapter to the mob and the CIA. There were a lot of murky things going on at the time, but none of them, rumors aside, stand next to the truth-- Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone, shot and killed JFK. Somehow even the conspiracists forget to mention three things: 1.) A witness looked up and saw Oswald fire from the 6th floor of the schoolbook depository building; and 2.) A witness saw Oswald throw his jacket under a car while running away from the murder of Dallas police officer J.D. Tippett. 3.) Marina Oswald admittedly took the photo in the backyard of Lee holding a rifle and the newspaper--it wasn't fabricated. Regarding the grassy knoll, acoustics research determined it echoed the shots from the depository building--there was no shooter there as the trajectory of the shots do not coincide with the impact wounds of the victims (Kennedy and Connolly.) Kennedy's murder resulted in the largest homicide investigation in history. What maybe new are rumors, but no physical evidence shows otherwise (i.e. FBI neutron activation tests showed all rounds came from Oswalds stock of ammo.)

You're always the starter in your own life!

[SpeedRacer 1]

oh, you're no fun anymore.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[no7rosman 0]

http://www.john-f-kennedy.net/thefederalreserve.htm

On June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential decree, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the authority to basically strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the United States Federal Government at interest. With the stroke of a pen, President Kennedy declared that the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank would soon be out of business.

President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 and the United States Notes he had issued were immediately taken out of circulation. Federal Reserve Notes continued to serve as the legal currency of the nation. According to the United States Secret Service, 99% of all U.S. paper "currency" circulating in 1999 are Federal Reserve Notes.

Kennedy knew that if the silver-backed United States Notes were widely circulated, they would have eliminated the demand for Federal Reserve Notes. This is a very simple matter of economics. The USN was backed by silver and the FRN was not backed by anything of intrinsic value. Executive Order 11110 should have prevented the national debt from reaching its current level (virtually all of the nearly $9 trillion in federal debt has been created since 1963) if LBJ or any subsequent President were to enforce it. It would have almost immediately given the U.S. Government the ability to repay its debt without going to the private Federal Reserve Banks and being charged interest to create new "money". Executive Order 11110 gave the U.S.A. the ability to, once again, create its own money backed by silver and realm value worth something.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

It would have almost immediately given the U.S. Government the ability to repay its debt without going to the private Federal Reserve Banks and being charged interest to create new "money".

It would have just created a different standard. Silver certificates were like bearer bonds - entitling the bearer to receive silver in exchange for the certificate, which had to be removed from circulation once the note was exchanged.

So, when the price of silver rose, people would exchange these notes for a silver dollar (now worth more than a dollar) and melt them down for bullion.

The problem with the system is that it depends on the amount of silver in the treasury. No silver in the treasury, no silver certificates will be issued, which is the brilliance of the Federal Reserve System that is fiat money backed by the strength of the economy.

I don't see how a causal link between reauthorizing the reissuance of silver certificates would be cause for assassination. This is yet another new theory I hadn't heard of.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[no7rosman 0]

The main reason as I understand it is, that it takes away the power of the Federal Reserve.

Currently the owners of the Federal Reserve are making billions of dollars loaning money to the USA (Federal Government). Which in turn is being paid back with taxpayers money.

The Constitution of the United States gives to Congress the power to coin money. If our government was controlling this, we would have no need for the Federal Reserve. Nor the billions of dollars in interest payments.

In reference to the "Gold Standard"...I liked it much more when our currency was backed by something. Now the Federal Reserve System prints $100 bills at a cost of 6¢. So who pockets the $99.94 profit? Where does it go? The piece of paper is backed by nothing more than "faith".

So to try and answer your question about how this could cause his assasination, I would say the "owners" of the FED would not be happy to see this income go away.