Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'demohrenschield'.
Found 1 result
I just finished reading a book of eulogies by William F. Buckley Jr., edited by James Rosen. It is - unfortunately - titled A Torch Kept Lit which wouldn't normally grab my interest. However, I have long admired Mr. Buckley's style and I attended the service at Manhattan's Central Synagogue in 1980 for Allard Lowenstein, when he delivered one of his superb eulogies. Ted Kennedy - himself no slouch when it came to eulogies - also delivered one that day. (I left the synagogue thinking to myself, 'well, it's the end of the sixties' and got on the subway.( Less than 9 months later, John Lennon would be killed a bit uptown.) I read and liked a book written earlier about John Mitchell and Watergate by the editor Rosen, but I bought the Kindle because it was Buckley related. Rosen received a grant from the Buckley Foundation to write it. Whatever one's political ideas might be, I'd suggest it difficult not to be impressed and moved emotionally and intellectually by some of Buckley's writings. He wrote of sailing and religion and friends; and he wrote beautifully. As many of the readers of this forum know, Howard Hunt and Buckley shared, at a young age, a year of employment, in Mexico City, with the CIA. As many may not know, George de Mohrenschield - the buddy of the then 24 year old Lee Oswald, worked for Buckley's Dad's oil company. He had Buckley's phone number, as he had that of George H.W. Bush, in his phone book , the day he was found dead with a shot to the head.(via bruce adamson--but that's for another thread) After that, Buckley went his way and Hunt stayed put. Each had a lot more to do during their lifetimes. Each authored spy fictions. Hunt was nearing death, and was writing about what he wanted history to know. He wanted the godfather of his kid and his best friend to write an intro to this last book. Best buddy Buckley replied to this request, according to Rosen, that he'd do so, after Howard removed some "grassy knoll" stuff. Now Rosen blithely skates over the details of Buckley's editorial excision, but my curiosity was piqued. Less than a dozen years after JFK's murder, Hunt was widowed by a questionable death of his wife - who also was employed by the CIA - in a plane crash while carrying a large amount of cash during the Watergate crisis. He told His. Only. Son. - whose mother died in this crash, that his employer was involved in executing a plan to eliminate JFK and that the same group - more or less- wanted to do the same to Castro. Hunt filmed himself while he told this to his son. John Rosselli told a similar story to Jack Anderson and ended up dismembered in a Florida Bay not long afterwards. In the the same decade, a memo - or a fabrication of a memo, or a disinformation memo - surfaced that said the CIA had to Cover-Their-A- about Hunt being in Dallas. In the 1980's, Hunt was unable to explain his whereabouts on November 22,1963 during a libel trial described in Mark Lane's Plausible Denial. So which is it: a) Hunt - facing death, started feeling that the same people who put him in prison, who didn't get funds to their families right away and who likely killed his wife, were set to throw him under the bus if Congress ever really looked into the JFK murder. He wanted and needed to confess. He knew that forgiveness might be delayed, but repentance was imperative. Repentance required facing and acknowledging the truth. Buckley didn't believe him; takes it as a version of what he heard Hunt told attorney (and active member here) Douglas Caddy -- that it was a UFO thing. WFB thinks this is yet another piece of disinformation, and doesn't want to be associated with such a topic. b)Buckley saw this as a confession - and as an attempt at redemption - and didn't feel qualified to comment on either. c) Buckley saw this as the result of senility on the part of his friend, and spared him the embarrassment of publication. d ) Buckley and he had an understanding that national security propaganda depended on contradiction and deception.The loyalty they shared with their one time employer, trumped loyalty to their shared God and Church; their families and Country. Hunt, at it far longer than Bill, can't keep mum about some of the acts he was part of; Bill, at it only a year, doesn't want to know, or doesn't think it right, even if true, to publish it since they promised to keep mum. e) Rosen is unreliable as a source. Any other alternatives? ( fwiw: I think b; I think Rosen suggested c)