The April 5 issue of Rolling Stone features the deathbed confession of CIA operative and key Bay of Pigs/Watergate/Nixon administration figure E. Howard Hunt, The Last Confession of E. Howard Hunt by Erik Hedegaard. This piece is significant not only for its exploration of Hunt, but for breakthrough information that appears to thoroughly corroborate the work of key John F. Kennedy assassination researchers and historians. Who killed JFK? According to Hunt's confession, which was taken by his son, St. John ("Saint") Hunt, over the course of many personal and carefully planned father-son meetings, the following individuals were among the key participants: Lyndon B. Johnson: LBJ, whose own career was assisted by JFK nemesis J. Edgar Hoover (FBI), gave the orders to a CIA-led hit team, and helped guide the Warren Commission/lone gunman cover-up. Cord Meyer: CIA agent, architect of the Operation Mockingbird disinformation apparatus, and husband of Mary Meyer (who had an affair with JFK). David Atlee Philips: CIA and Bay of Pigs veteran. Recruited William Harvey (CIA) and Cuban exile militant Antonio Veciana. William Harvey: CIA and Bay of Pigs veteran. Connected to Mafia figures Santos Trafficante and Sam Giancana. Antonio Veciana: Cuban exile, founder of CIA-backed Alpha 66. Frank Sturgis: CIA operative, mercenary, Bay of Pigs veteran, and later Watergate figure. David Morales: CIA hit man, Bay of Pigs veteran. Morales was also a figure involved with the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy. Lucien Sarti: Corsican assassin and drug trafficker, possible "French gunman," Grassy Knoll (second) shooter. Would Hunt continue to tell lies on his deathbed? Perhaps. Would Hunt tell a final tall story or two, to protect himself, or perhaps deal one final slap in the face to the US government (which made him a fall guy for Watergate)? Yes. Would Hunt hide the involvement of certain individuals to whom he remained loyal, including people who are still alive? Certainly. Anything from an operative like Hunt can only be accepted with caution and healthy skepticism. Nevertheless, Hunt's scenario has the ring of truth. Each of the named names are well-known CIA and CIA-linked players exposed by many researchers and historians who have detailed the enduring connection from the Bay of Pigs and the Dallas hit to Watergate and Iran-Contra. The Hunt confession vindicates generations of historians, researchers and whistleblowers who have given their lives and careers to expose the truth about Dealey Plaza. While there are too many to name, they include, but are not limited to (and in no particular order): Jim Garrison, Mark Lane, Fletcher Prouty, Josiah Thompson, Carl Oglesby, Peter Dale Scott, Anthony Summers, Robert Groden, Victor Marchetti, David Lifton, Harrison Livingstone, Michael Canfield, A.J. Weberman, Sylvia Meagher, William Turner, Jim Marrs, Pete Brewton, John Newman, Philip Melanson, Hal Verb, Mae Brussell, Harold Weisberg, Oliver Stone, Mike Ruppert and Dan Hopsicker, Jim diEugenio and Linda Pease. Meanwhile, the criminal deceptions of the US government and its corporate media, the Warren Commission, and the dirty work of cover-up specialists such as Gerald Posner and Mark Fuhrman, and the legions of JFK assassination revisionist/theorists, deserve a final rebuke, and eternal scorn. Highlighting Hunt's role Although the Rolling Stone piece does not address it, the Hunt confession directly corroborates two classic investigations that previously exposed the role of Hunt. They are Mark Lane's Plausible Denial and Michael Canfield/A.J. Weberman's Coup D'Etat in America. Lane's book details how he took Hunt to court, and won a libel suit, essentially proving that the CIA murdered JFK, and that Hunt lied about his whereabouts. The investigation of Canfield and Weberman identified Hunt and Frank Sturgis as two of the three "tramps" arrested at Dealey Plaza. Time has only made these investigations more relevant. More than ever, their books, and those of the JFK historians and researchers above listed, deserve to be found, read and studied. Hunt to Nixon to Bush The Rolling Stone piece fails to go after the roles of Richard Nixon and George Herbert Walker Bush. But the Hunt confession, if accurate, leads directly to them, to their lifelong associates, and all the way to the present George W. Bush administration. The Dallas-Watergate-Iran-Contra connection has been thoroughly documented by the key JFK researchers, and in particular, in the work of Peter Dale Scott, one of the very first to show the deep political continuity across three decades. Daniel Hopsicker's Barry and the Boys goes into even more detail on the players. Consider the career of George H.W. Bush. He was a Texas oilman (Zapata Oil) and a CIA operative, involved with the Bay of Pigs. Bush's name was found in the papers of George DeMohrenschildt, one of Lee Harvey Oswald's CIA handlers. As documented by Pete Brewton, author of The Mafia, the CIA and George Bush, Bush was deeply connected with a small circle of Texas elites tied to the CIA and the Mafia, as well as the Florida-based CIA/anti-Casto Cuban exile/ Mafia milieu As Richard Nixon's hand-picked Republican National Committee chairman, and later as CIA director, Bush constantly covered-up and stonewalled for his boss about Watergate, which itself (by the admission of Frank Sturgis and others) was a cover-up of the JFK assassination. Tracking any of the individual CIA operatives involved with the Bay of Pigs, it is impossible to ignore or deny direct connections to George H.W. Bush and his crime family, across the Kennedy assassinations, covert operations in Indochina and, later, Latin America. Beyond any reasonable doubt, the US government murdered John F. Kennedy. There are people still alive today who were involved directly and indirectly implicated. Some are probably even serving in positions of high influence. Some still have never been identified or touched. All of these individuals still need to be pursued, exposed, and brought to justice. Copyright © 1998-2007 Online Journal editor@onlinejournal.com Email Online Journal Editor http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/printer_1918.shtml Comment

Hunt's Deathbed Confession

Hunt's JFK Murder Confession Ignored By Establishment Media

John Hankey

5-4-7 E. Howard Hunt's taped deathbed "confession" is not new news. In the days after Hunt died there were several articles covering the same material. Hunt is a profound liar of the highest rank. He planted forged memos in the National Archives blaming JFK for the Diem assassination, for example. The lies he told on the stand, under oath, in his slander trail (described by Mark Lane) are monuments to filth-as-truth. I consider his "confession" as perhaps the strongest evidence that Johnson was not involved in JFK's murder (though it seems, given his connections, that he may have been aware of the threat in general terms - but so were the FBI and Secret Service, in specific terms). Hunt gives us Sturgis and some other credible information merely as bait for that poisonous hook that Johnson was to blame. Given that, and the content of his "confession", I think Hunt should be seriously considered a likely candidate as one of the two grassy knoll gunmen: the one who delivered the final, fail-safe head shot, at the last possible moment, when it became clear that the mafia and Cuban gunmen in the rear, and also on the knoll, had failed. (James Files' description of events on the knoll clearly indicate that if he was actually there, as he claims, that he fired the throat shot, with stunning incompetence. Files also names Sturgis - so there is really nothing new in Hunt's tape) . I don't understand how could any reputable article could ignore all the evidence connecting Hunt to Bush? This evidence is collected in my DVD, JFK II, but it comes from well known and original sources like Mark Lane's Plausible Denial, and Webster Tarpley's Unauthorized Biography of George Bush (and from Hunt's own mouth). I don't get this at all. The Hoover memo, ignored? The memo naming George Bush as a CIA agent, and simultaneously and explicitly connecting him to both the assassination, and to the "misguided anti-Castro groups" of which Hunt was the well-known supervisor, ignored? . Instead the article offers us photographs claiming to be of Bush in front of the Depository. They are not at all persuasive, to my eyes. They don't look much like Bush, and certainly they could be thousands of other tall, thin, balding men. The article also raises the lame allegation that Hunt was one of the bums arrested in the train yard and photographed as they were led to the police station. There are much better pictures showing very clearly that it was Chauncey Holt, not Hunt, who was the bum in question. . I am embarrassed that Alex Jones, who does such essential work, and to whom I am very grateful, and to whom I always refer people, would post such stuff. The stealing of Kennedy's body, the control of the autopsy, and the monumental cover-up in the papers were NONE OF THEM Texas operations. The Secret Service standown was not a Texas operation. The CIA serves the Rockefellers, not Texas Oil. Period. As do the Bushes. This was a northeastern elite operation, not a Texas operation. Overwhelming evidence shows that. But if you perpetrate a crime as large as JFK's murder, you have to have a fall guy. Oswald is the fall guy for the inattentive and uninitiated. Johnson is the fall guy for the more sophisticated and experienced. . Bush and the CIA killed Kennedy for the Rockefellers. And they had done considerable work setting Oswald up to appear as a Castro operative. Oswalds staged attempts to appear to be a member of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee are well known. Less well known is that Dulles and the rest had the lists drawn up for the massive round-up of all members of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, a real organization with numerous, serious and honest members who wanted to stop CIA sponsored terrorism against Cuba. Johnson was presented with the following dilemma by the Rockefeller clique: "if you don't tell the world that Oswald acted alone, we'll show that he was killed by Castro's agents, we'll use our control of the media to demand an invasion, and we'll have war with the Soviets in no time." Certainly that was the argument made by Johnson to Earl Warren (i.e. that the Rockefellers were planning to provoke World War III if Oswald was not depicted as acting alone). . The icing on the cake is HR Haldeman's book, I think it's the Haldeman Diaries but it might be Ends of Power*. He describes how Nixon called Johnson during Watergate and told him, "call off your dogs, or I'll tell about how you tapped my phone in '68 during the election." Johnson replied, "If you tell that, I'll tell...." The end of that sentence was the only part of all of Haldeman's books that was censored on the basis of "national security." Of course he was talking about the Kennedy assassination. No other answer will serve. 10 days later Johnson was dead. But how could Johnson threaten to tell about Nixon's involvement if HE, Johnson, were involved? . Much more important than Hunt's calculated attempts to poison the historical well from the grave are recent revelations that all members of the House Assassinations Committee expressed an interest to pursue the anti-Castro Cuban connection. Why? The answer is found in the heart of Lane's Plausible Denial. The Committee came into possession of a memo between Richard Helms, head of CIA, and Jesus Angleton, his #2, discussing what course to follow when the Committee learned of Hunt's presence in Dallas, and his involvement in the assassination. The Committee, in closed session, doubtless saw far more evidence than just this memo, showing the connection of the anti-Castro CIA terrorists, of whom Hunt was a front-line supervisor, and the Kennedy assassination. They also heard testimony from Marita Lorenz, for example. But Colby, the CIA chief who doubtless provided the memo, was fired for being too-cooperative, and was replaced by George HW Bush. The Committee's investigation was shut down abruptly. But some member of the staff leaked the memo to the press, with the predictable result that only two small papers had the guts to publish it. Spotlight Magazine was one. All praise and glory etc.



