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 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
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 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 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 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 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

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 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, unknown.)
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
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 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,

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, page 283:

    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

    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 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  

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

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 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 Bamford.

More on