The "Whole Bay Of Pigs Thing"

[Tim Carroll]

In 1975 a person living in Mexico City sent researchers a copy of a letter purportedly written by Oswald. It is dated 8th November, 1963:

Dear Mr. Hunt,

I would like information concerding (sic) my position. I am asking only for information. I am asking that we discuss the matter fully before any steps are taken by me or anyone else.  Thank you,

Lee Harvey Oswald

The House Select Committee on Assassinations expressed doubts about the letter. They pointed out that even if it was written by Oswald, it is not known who the letter was sent to. There are two possibilities: H. L. Hunt and Howard Hunt.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Of course, it could have been Nelson Bunker Hunt, a participant in the "Wanted for Treason" flyer, and a nutburger from the git go.

Tim Carroll

[Tim Gratz]

THE "WHOLE BAY OF PIGS THING": FROM DALLAS TO WATERGATE

[Nixon] and the CIA director [Richard Helms]  had a more current mutuality of interests. Helms wanted to suppress the CIA-Hunt relationship because it violated the Agency's charter regarding domestic spying. Nixon wanted to suppress the White House-Hunt relationship because it would reveal precisely for whom the chief Watergate burglar was working. E. Howard Hunt clearly represented a problem for more than one major Washington power center. Nine months after the smoking gun conversation, when Hunt was about to be sentenced, Nixon was told that Hunt had issued a blackmail demand in lieu of revealing some of the "seamy things" he had done for the President. Nixon's response was unequivocal: "Well, for Christ's sakes...get it."[25

*****************

We are all familiar with the theory that certain witnesses and possibly participants in the Kennedy assassination died either under "mysterious circumstances" or of supposedly natural causes at unusually young ages. Most Forum members are familiar, I suspect, with the fact that on December 8, 1972, Howard Hunt's wide, a former CIA employee, died, along with 44 others, in the crash of a United Airlines flight approaching Midway Airport in Chicago. Mrs. Hunt had with her $100,000 in cash. A day after the plane crash, White House Aide Emil Krogh, Jr., who headed the "plumbers" for the WH, was named undersecretary of transporation. On Dec 11, 1972, Nixon appointed Alexander Butterfield as head of the FAA. (It was Butterfield, of course, who revealed the existence of the White House taping system.)

Both the National Transportation Safety Board and the Cook County Coroner's office concluded the plane crash was the result of pilot error. The Deputy Cook County Coroner called it the "most investigated plane crash in history."

http://www.chipublib.org/004chicago/disast...t553_crash.html

Others suspect there may have been sinister forces at work. One theory is that the crash was intended to secure the silence of the Watergate defendants.

Here is an interesting article from Fair Play magazine about the "Hunt plane crash":

http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_...ssue/dhunt.html

The question I want to raise here is: were there other "mysterious deaths" related to the Watergate investigation?

(I know two deaths that have been suggested as being "mysterious" and I will mention those tomorrow unless someone beats me to it. But please post your thoughts. There may be more than the two I have read about.)

Edited December 18, 2004 by Tim Gratz

[Tim Gratz]

In 1975 a person living in Mexico City sent researchers a copy of a letter purportedly written by Oswald. It is dated 8th November, 1963:

Dear Mr. Hunt,

I would like information concerding (sic) my position. I am asking only for information. I am asking that we discuss the matter fully before any steps are taken by me or anyone else.  Thank you,

Lee Harvey Oswald

The House Select Committee on Assassinations expressed doubts about the letter. They pointed out that even if it was written by Oswald, it is not known who the letter was sent to. There are two possibilities: H. L. Hunt and Howard Hunt.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Of course, it could have been Nelson Bunker Hunt, a participant in the "Wanted for Treason" flyer, and a nutburger from the git go.

Tim Carroll

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Gentlemen, please!

Has it not been established that this document was forged by the KGB in its effort to attempt to link the CIA to the Kennedy assassination (makes one wonder why the KGB would want to do that).

The true story of the "Hunt letter" was first told in "The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB" by Christopher Andrew and Vasil Mitrokhin. Andrew is the well-respected professor of History at Cambridge University and Mitrokhin was the former KGB archivist who defected to England in 1992, carrying with him thousands of pages of top-secret KGB documents.

http://www.jfk-online.com/mitrokhin.html

http://www.ladlass.com/intel/archives/2004_01.html

Edited December 18, 2004 by Tim Gratz

[Tim Carroll]

Gentlemen, please!

Has it not been established that this document was forged by the KGB in its effort to attempt to link the CIA to the Kennedy assassination (makes one wonder why the KGB would want to do that).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I actually agree with Tim Gratz on this one: the Dear Mr. Hunt note is fake; but that still leaves the destruction of the valid Oswald note by the Dallas FBI a matter of serious inquiry, not that there's any hope of solving that one now. But the fact that they did it and at such a local level raises the question of why the Dallas FBI would cover for the KGB.

Tim Carroll

[Tim Gratz]

Gentlemen, please!

Has it not been established that this document was forged by the KGB in its effort to attempt to link the CIA to the Kennedy assassination (makes one wonder why the KGB would want to do that).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I actually agree with Tim Gratz on this one: the Dear Mr. Hunt note is fake; but that still leaves the destruction of the valid Oswald note by the Dallas FBI a matter of serious inquiry, not that there's any hope of solving that one now. But the fact that they did it and at such a local level raises the question of why the Dallas FBI would cover for the KGB.

Tim Carroll

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tim, from your postings, I think there are several things upon which we agree!

For instance, in a post (somewhere) you stated you believed that in 1963 there was a divergence of opinion on several matters between JFK and RFK. I think you are probably correct in that interpretation. (In our discussion about the Diem coup, I pointed out that RFK argued (wisely, I believe) against US involvement in overthrowing the Diem government and apparently JFK did not heed his advise on that matter. ) You stated, in a post on the "Books" section, that you believed that RFK was "continuing support for anti-Castro efforts to a degree that would not have been approved by JFK." Query whether you believe this has anything to do with the "peace feelures" to Cuba going on at the same time the proposed Cubela operation was unfolding?

Re the KGB creation of this fake letter, it is of course only one of many times in the JFK case that evidence was destroyed or fabricated by someone. Whenever this happens, one must ask "Why?' In some cases, such as the destruction of the Hosty note, it may be a question of a bureacrat trying to prevent embarrassment at his bureau's malfeasance. In other cases, the reason may be more sinister.

Edited December 18, 2004 by Tim Gratz

[Nancy Eldreth]

Yes, Tim there is. Also far more recent then that far back.

Nixon told Kathern Graham that she better have protection with her when she gets out onto the streets. That was many many years back.

I still have the newspaper article that is about her accidental death. She slipped and fell and hit her head on the pavement.

What was strange is that Kissinger was with her two weeks before and he knew she was fine. Also strange the way Nixon stated that she sould have protection once she gets out onto the streets. I have felt that she was pushed for some time and wonder about it, or someone hit her on the head once she exited a building. She died with head injury on her own fall is what was written. Most people when they fall try hard to protect their heads and it is ususally the one are we are able to pull away from impact.

Why would Nixon know to tell her she better have protection?

Nixon and her were hostile at the time of Deep Throat doing his speeches but later on Mrs. Graham and Nixon did talk and for full length times and became friends.

What ever Nixon did tell Mrs. Graham is now laying very low and hidden.

Someone didn't want what was told to her to come out very bad is what I do feel to this day.

At the time of her fall I was about to contact Bob Woodward.

I did right after the fall. I had already met with Kissinger and talked to him briefly on something about Watergate. It took only minutes for Kissinger to know something that he so over looked for some time. It hit him hard and he broke down crying in front of me. This was only about three weeks before her fall.

Ever see Bob Woodward turn white over the fact that there isn't any crimes over Watergate but look rather gray? I have. He really isn't sure either to this day and I did write to him about those crimes and in high question, also it is mentioned about Mrs. Graham. I was thinking about contacting Bob Woodward prior to this happening after meeting with Mr. Kissinger.

I don't know if someone impacted her made her fall and was in question about her accident?

I do have those emails that went to Bob Woodward.

I do have that newspaper article about her death and what happened and to what Nxion told her to this day.

For me this has been distrubing and it is deep down felt it is also to Bob Woodward but dismissed by them at Washington Post.

What Mr. Kissinger question to me was WHO WHO WHO WAS THAT PERSON WHO WAS IT?

I gave him a lead and he thought for a second and then realized something and I could see that in his face and then he started to cry hard in front of me with a great deal of reactions that came deep from inside of himself. He shook his head and said NO NO NO I DIDN'T KNOW THIS, NO NO NO. I felt so sorry for him at that moment. Mr. Kissinger it is all right sir, it is all right. Is what I told him.

From what I saw of Kissinger's reactions in NO WAY OF GOD GIVEN HEAVEN IS DR. KISSINGER DEEP THROAT.

I saw his hurts and deep loyality towards Nixon first hand and at a deep expressions from himself that I would never forget as long as I live and have my full mental capabilities.

[John Simkin]

The true story of the "Hunt letter" was first told in "The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB" by Christopher Andrew and Vasil Mitrokhin.  Andrew is the well-respected professor of History at Cambridge University and Mitrokhin was the former KGB archivist who defected to England in 1992, carrying with him thousands of pages of top-secret KGB documents.

http://www.jfk-online.com/mitrokhin.html

http://www.ladlass.com/intel/archives/2004_01.html

It may be true that the letter is a fake. However, Christopher Andrew is not respected by everyone as an independent researcher. Over the years he has been responsible for publishing some very dubious accounts of the past via his contacts in MI5. Andrew is in the UK what Jack Anderson is in the US. The recent set-up of George Golloway concerning his relationship with Iraq is an example of how MI5 use favoured academics and journalists to plant disinformation stories.

[Nancy Eldreth]

John Simkin,Dec 18 2004, 12:29 PM]

Tim Gratz,Dec 18 2004, 06:37 AM]The true story of the "Hunt letter" was first told in "The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB" by Christopher Andrew and Vasil Mitrokhin.  Andrew is the well-respected professor of History at Cambridge University and Mitrokhin was the former KGB archivist who defected to England in 1992, carrying with him thousands of pages of top-secret KGB documents.

http://www.jfk-online.com/mitrokhin.html

____________________________________________________________________

According to Judyth Baker Lee H. Oswald did not write that letter. I think she could add more to this about how she knows this isn't. She should be the one to state this not me.

I am fearful of saying something wrong and I don't wish to do that.

Edited December 18, 2004 by Nancy Eldreth

[Tim Carroll]

Yes, Tim there is.  Also far more recent then that far back.

Nixon told Kathern Graham that she better have protection with her when she gets out onto the streets.  That was many many years back. 

I still have the newspaper article that is about her accidental death.  She slipped and fell and hit her head on the pavement....

I have felt that she was pushed for some time and wondered about it, or someone hit her on the head once she exited a building.  She died with head injury on her own fall is what was written.  Most people when they fall try hard to protect their heads ... away from impact. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nixon's Attorney General, John Mitchell, referring to the early Watergate disclosures, told Ben Bradlee that "Katie Graham's going to get her tit caught in a big fat ringer if tht's published. Good Christ! That's the most sickening thing I've ever heard." Amazing that a Washington Post story was the "most sickening thing" Mitchell ever heard, given the Oval Office conversations we can now listen to at the National Archives.

Tim Carroll

[Tim Carroll]

Tim, from your postings, I think there are several things upon which we agree!

For instance, in a post (somewhere) you stated you believed that in 1963 there was a divergence of opinion on several matters between JFK and RFK.  I think you are probably correct in that interpretation.  (In our discussion about the Diem coup, I pointed out that RFK argued (wisely, I believe) against US involvement in overthrowing the Diem government and apparently JFK did not heed his advise on that matter. )  You stated, in a post on the "Books" section, that you believed that RFK was "continuing support for anti-Castro efforts to a degree that would not have been approved by JFK."  Query whether you believe this has anything to do with the "peace feelures" to Cuba going on at the same time the proposed Cubela operation was unfolding?

Re the KGB creation of this fake letter, it is of course only one of many times in the JFK case that evidence was destroyed or fabricated by someone.  Whenever this happens, one must ask "Why?'  In some cases, such as the destruction of the Hosty note, it may be a question of a bureacrat trying to prevent embarrassment at his bureau's malfeasance.  In other cases, the reason may be more sinister.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I do believe that the Kennedy brothers had diverged, as Bobby felt a personal obligation toward anti-Castroites which JFK did not. It becomes very complicated, and any overcertainty would be misplaced, but there is no question that unlike Wild Bill Harvey, who hated Bobby with a "purple passion," Desmond FitzGerald was Bobby's man. The Cubela story is precisely the most representative of the division between the brothers of something Bobby may have encouraged that backfired.

Diem is another similar example, but with that one, it's important not to take the August 24th cable to be necessarily consistent with JFK's expressed view in a Walter Cronkite interview in September that, "in the final analysis, it's their war." And then the October NSAM 263 beginning a withdrawal of troops. The times they were a changin', rapidly. It is a remarkable comment for JFK to have said, "My God, my government is coming apart over this!"

Tim Carroll

[Tim Gratz]

THE "WHOLE BAY OF PIGS THING": FROM DALLAS TO WATERGATE

[Nixon] and the CIA director [Richard Helms]  had a more current mutuality of interests. Helms wanted to suppress the CIA-Hunt relationship because it violated the Agency's charter regarding domestic spying. Nixon wanted to suppress the White House-Hunt relationship because it would reveal precisely for whom the chief Watergate burglar was working. E. Howard Hunt clearly represented a problem for more than one major Washington power center. Nine months after the smoking gun conversation, when Hunt was about to be sentenced, Nixon was told that Hunt had issued a blackmail demand in lieu of revealing some of the "seamy things" he had done for the President. Nixon's response was unequivocal: "Well, for Christ's sakes...get it."[25

*****************

We are all familiar with the theory that certain witnesses and possibly participants in the Kennedy assassination died either under "mysterious circumstances" or of supposedly natural causes at unusually young ages. Most Forum members are familiar, I suspect, with the fact that on December 8, 1972, Howard Hunt's wide, a former CIA employee, died, along with 44 others, in the crash of a United Airlines flight approaching Midway Airport in Chicago. Mrs. Hunt had with her $100,000 in cash. A day after the plane crash, White House Aide Emil Krogh, Jr., who headed the "plumbers" for the WH, was named undersecretary of transporation. On Dec 11, 1972, Nixon appointed Alexander Butterfield as head of the FAA. (It was Butterfield, of course, who revealed the existence of the White House taping system.)

Both the National Transportation Safety Board and the Cook County Coroner's office concluded the plane crash was the result of pilot error. The Deputy Cook County Coroner called it the "most investigated plane crash in history."

http://www.chipublib.org/004chicago/disast...t553_crash.html

Others suspect there may have been sinister forces at work. One theory is that the crash was intended to secure the silence of the Watergate defendants.

Here is an interesting article from Fair Play magazine about the "Hunt plane crash":

http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_...ssue/dhunt.html

The question I want to raise here is: were there other "mysterious deaths" related to the Watergate investigation?

(I know two deaths that have been suggested as being "mysterious" and I will mention those tomorrow unless someone beats me to it. But please post your thoughts. There may be more than the two I have read about.)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

NEW AS OF DECEBER 18, 2004

The more cynical among us believe that even a heart attack could be in fact a murder perpetrated by a clever conspirator. (Or that death certificates may not always be accurate.) If you are among such people, you may find the curious the timing and circumstances of the deaths of Lou Russell and John Leon.

The following information comes from Ch 14 of Peter Dale Scott's book "Deep Politics and the Death of JFK" and Jim Hougan's "Secret Agenda".

Lou Russell was a former FBI agent who had helped Nixon with the Alger Hiss case. In 1963 he was an employee of James McCord. He was also, per Scott, close to the Heidi Rikan call girl ring.

Quoting Hougan:

"Russell had been involved in the June [1972 Watergate] break-in; he had almost certainly planted false evidence at the DNC; and throughout the fall he had been instrumental in McCord's defense, helping him to secure bail and to switch attorneys."

Scott states that Russell was present at the scene of the break-in on June 16, 1972, and may have warned the Democrats about it the previous April.

In early May, he Russell "declined a [senate Watergate] Committee subpoena foor his records. [Tim Gratz: I don't know how one "declines" a subpoena.] On May 18, Russell suffered but survived a massive heart attack. On July 2, 1973, after he was again approached about his knowledge, Russell had a second, fatal heart attack.

THe person who approached Russell in July was a Republican investigator named John Leon. Leon was convinced that Watergate "was a set-uo, that prostitution was at the heart of the affair, and that the . . . burglary had been sabotaged from within." Leon had scheduled a press conference for July 13, 1972, but he was unable to have it. On the day of his scheduled press conference he too died of a heart attack.

Mysterious deaths? Probably not. But then again . . .

Edited December 18, 2004 by Tim Gratz

[Tim Carroll]

Mysterious deaths?  Probably not.  But then again . . .

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Off the top of my head, I would add Paisley and Sullivan to a list of Watergate deaths, but given the rash of "mysterious deaths" in the post-Watergate period, it can be difficult to make distinctions between those involving the JFK assassination and Watergate, thus, the thesis of the connection between these events as the topic of this seminar.

Tim

[Tim Gratz]

Mysterious deaths?  Probably not.   But then again . . .

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Off the top of my head, I would add Paisley and Sullivan to a list of Watergate deaths, but given the rash of "mysterious deaths" in the post-Watergate period, it can be difficult to make distinctions between those involving the JFK assassination and Watergate, thus, the thesis of the connection between these events as the topic of this seminar.

Tim

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Could not agree more. It is interesting that many people whose politics is left of center and to whom Nixon's politics was anathama nevertheless agree with the "conspiratorial" view of the Watergate burglary adopted by Hougan and Colody and others. (And I have no idea of the politics of Hougan or Colodny.) (Of course, one can also argue that many of Nixon's domestic programs were in fact "liberal-oriented", e.g. his support for the adoption of the EPA, his advocacy of the "Family Assistance Plan", etc.)

I had tried to convince you earlier, however, that as the term Watergate is commonly used, it relates to a whole panopoly of the "sins" of the Nixon Administration, e.g., the break-in to Ellsberg's psychiatrist's office; the "dirty tricks" campaign, etc. The Hougan/Colody thesis (if we can lump them together) refer to the Watergate burglary and bugging, to the exclusion of the other activities.

For instance, assume the Watergate bugging was initiated by Dean to protect his fiance (who had become his wife) and that Dean also orchestrated the cover-up (as Colody argues). That has no relationship to the other matters. It was, however, the discovery of the Watergate burglary that led to the discovery of the other abuses of the Nixon White House.

And, of course, both Hougan and Colody believe that the June 1972 Watergate burglary was deliberately sabotaged for whatever reason. I don't think anyone has ever provided a satisfactory explanation of why McCord taped the lock on the door so the taping would be easily observed by an alert security guard.

Edited December 21, 2004 by Tim Gratz

[Tim Carroll]

Mysterious deaths?  Probably not.   But then again . . .

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Off the top of my head, I would add Paisley and Sullivan to a list of Watergate deaths, but given the rash of "mysterious deaths" in the post-Watergate period, it can be difficult to make distinctions between those involving the JFK assassination and Watergate, thus, the thesis of the connection between these events as the topic of this seminar.

Tim

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Could not agree more. It is interesting that many people whose politics is left of center and to whom Nixon's politics was anathama nevertheless agree with the "conspiratorial" view of the Watergate burglary adopted by Hougan and Colody and others....

I had tried to convince you earlier, however, that as the term Watergate is commonly used, it relates to a whole panopoly of the "sins" of the Nixon Administration, e.g., the break-in to Ellsberg's psychiatrist's office; the "dirty tricks" campaign, etc.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tim Gratz:

I thought it was I that tried to convince you that "as the term Watergate is commonly used, it relates to a whole panopoly of the "sins" of the Nixon Administration, e.g., the break-in to Ellsberg's psychiatrist's office; the "dirty tricks" campaign, etc." That is why I took exception to the declaration that Segretti was irrelevant to this seminar.

Since the Watergate era, I have had nothing but increasing admiration for Nixon's leadership and intelligence. I'll never forget a line he wrote in one of his books, regarding Reagan's exploding of the budget, that the Soviets had lost the Cold War, but the U.S. had not yet won it. Nixon's dilemma with the far right was not completely unlike Kennedy's.

Tim Carroll

[Tim Gratz]

[Tim Gratz:

I thought it was I that tried to convince you that "as the term Watergate is commonly used, it relates to a whole panopoly of the "sins" of the Nixon Administration, e.g., the break-in to Ellsberg's psychiatrist's office; the "dirty tricks" campaign, etc."  That is why I took exception to the declaration that Segretti was irrelevant to this seminar. 

Since the Watergate era, I have had nothing but increasing admiration for Nixon's leadership and intelligence.  I'll never forget a line he wrote in one of his books, regarding Reagan's exploding of the budget, that the Soviets had lost the Cold War, but the U.S. had not yet won it.  Nixon's dilemma with the far right was not completely unlike Kennedy's. 

Tim Carroll

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My point was that Watergate, if limited to the break-in, could be relevant to an investigation of the Kennedy assassination because of the reasonable possibility that there was a hidden CIA agenda behind the break-in and behind the possible sabotage thereof by MccCord who, we all know, had CIA ties. These reasons do not, however, apply to the other abuses by the Nixon White House. For instance, I don't think anyone suggests that some "hidden hand" helped organize the Segretti dirty tricks campaign so it could be sabotaged and therefore lead to the destruction of the Nixon presidency. I believe the Segretti operation was discovered only as a result of the investigation of the Watergate break-in, and it became just one more nail in the Nixon coffin.

As you know, Segretti (using an alias) had approached me and solicited my involvement in his operation. I considered his ideas as ill-conceived and dangerous, and tried (unsuccessfully, of course) to stop him (I did, however, stop his planned operations in Wisconsin). As the Segretti operations were disclosed in the press, I remember suspecting that Segretti was the same man who had approached me using the name Don Simmons. Shortly therafter, my suspicions were confirmed when I saw Segretti's photo in Time or Newsweek. At that point I started to consider whether I had an obligation to report Segretti's approach to me. The decision whether or not to go forward was mooted when I was, within a week or so thereafter as I recall, approached and interviewed by FBI agents. This is really not relevant to the Kennedy case, but I remember wondering when the Segretti stuff started to unfold whether I had any reason to fear for my physical safety. There was, of course, no reason for any such fear, and the fact that it even crossed my mind was probably due to my reading about the alleged mysterious deaths in the JFK case. Perhaps this might, however, indicate why some people with knowledge of events contrary to the official "lone nut" theory of the WC were reluctant to come forward.

Finally, although it is not my theory, there are those, of course, who believe that JFK was killed because of his peace initiatives with the Soviet Union. If indeed the CIA manuevered to destroy the Nixon presidency, the motivation therefor might have been Nixon's attempt to reach detente with the Soviet Union. Even if the CIA did manuever to destroy Nixon's presidency, however, that does not mean that the CIA, or elements thereof, were behind the violent destruction of the Kennedy presidency.

But if the people who support the "Watergate as a CIA conspiracy" are correct, the fact that elements within the CIA would attempt to subvert an elected U.S. President is chilling. Ironically (if the CIA was indeed behind the botched Watergate burglary), the investigation of the Watergate break-in led to the formation of the Church Committee and its revelation of all of the abuses of the CIA, including its plots to kill Castro and other foreign leaders. So the CIA's grand plan to sabotage Nixon may very well have backfired.

Edited December 21, 2004 by Tim Gratz