Lamar Waldron

After spending several years looking at the evidence behind every theory about JFK's murder, Thom and I eventually started approaching people who had worked closely with John and Robert Kennedy in 1963. They told us about the JFK-Almeida coup plan and how close it was to implementation at the time of JFK's death, indicating that it was central to the secrecy surrounding JFK's assassination. Some of those Kennedy associates pointed to Marcello, Trafficante, and Rosselli--and their associates--as being behind JFK's murder. In the ensuing years, much evidence documentation has emerged, and continues to emerge, to support what those Kennedy associates said. Dean Rusk told me--and confirmed for "Vanity Fair," in their December 1904 issue--that he was told about an active coup plan to overthrow Fidel, but only after JFK's death. As we explained in "Ultimate," and delve into more in "Legacy," there was no way for JFK and Bobby Kennedy to tell officials like Rusk (or McNamara)--who had numerous subordinates, headed massive departments, and were constantly meeting with the press--about Almeida and the coup well in advance, without the whole operation becoming an open secret like the Bay of Pigs fiasco. As we showed in both "Legacy" and "Ultimate," the Kennedys got the input (and "buy-in") of Rusk, McNamara, and their key subordinates by having much planning done in the summer and fall of 1963 on a "what if" basis, just in case a very high official could be found to lead a coup against Castro. While some planning had gone on prior to Almeida contacting the Kennedys through Harry Williams in May 1963, the coup planning accelerated greatly after that contact. As to why the JFK-Almeida coup plan is significant, I also refer you to this unedited 11-23-06 e-mail from Peter Dale Scott, after he read the updated trade paperback of "Ultimate," that added the material regarding Commander Juan Almeida: "When the hard cover edition of Ultimate Sacrifice appeared in 2005, I had too many problems with the book's central thesis to read very much of the book. The new 2006 edition, with much added information about the role of Che Guevara and Cuban Army chief Juan Almeida in Washington's anti-Castro plotting, resolves most of those problems. Above all I now see for the first time how plans leading to a possible U.S. invasion could be both grandiose and tightly held. I also understand for the first time the difference between the two operations known inside the CIA as AMTRUNK and AMWORLD (or, if you prefer, the distinction between the Cubela and the Harry Ruiz Williams coup plans). The book's value and credibility are further enhanced by a twenty-page appendix of important documents pertaining to the latter. Although I will still wish to take issue with the book about particular facts and interpretations, I have no difficulty in declaring that Ultimate Sacrifice must now be taken seriously by all researchers in this field, both for its argument, and for its 73 pages of supporting footnotes." Sure. "Legacy of Secrecy" was written to show that all the secrecy surrounding JFK's murder had tragic effects in the years and decades that followed, most especially the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King. It also impacted Robert Kennedy's murder, Watergate, and its effects continue to harm America today.

I look forward to answering questions about "Legacy of Secrecy," which will also let me address any remaining questions about the trade paperback edition of "Ultimate Sacrifice" (which had over 200 updates and additions from the hardback edition, primarily relating to Commander Almeida). Links to several excerpts of "Legacy," and the first round of supporting documentation, can be found at: http://www.legacyofsecrecy.com/ and I've also listed them below: The first portion of "Legacy's" Introduction is available at: http://buzzflash.com/articles/node/7136 Chapter 1 and the Epilogue of "Legacy," and their endnotes, can be found at: http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/Legacy_of_Secrecy Keep in mind that these early--and final--chapters often have sweeping summary sentences about matters that are delved into, and extensively documented, in depth in other parts of the book. That's why "Legacy" has more than 2000 endnotes, even more than "Ultimate Sacrifice." I've also answered some general questions about "Legacy" at: http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/interviews/137 Almost all of the files cited in "Legacy" can be found at the National Archives or, much more easily, by searching the website of the Mary Ferrell Foundation. The first round of key documents has been posted at the following link, which also contains a video overview of "Legacy of Secrecy." http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/Legacy_of_Secrecy More will be added later, and this first round focuses primarily on JFK. They also illuminate some of the additions to the trade paperback of "Ultimate." Note that the one Marcello confession document currently on that site is the redacted version (missing an entire paragraph) that has been available for several years. "Legacy" quotes many pages from the unredacted FBI files about Marcello's confession. As you read the excerpts and documents, please keep in mind a major theme of "Legacy," which is how many files are still being withheld, including the "one million CIA records" related to the assassination that OMB Watch found had not yet been released. I'm sure reading the above excerpts and documentation will raise questions that I'll be happy to answer (short of identifying confidential sources).

I think these questions may have been written by someone who hasn't read the entire book, but I'm happy to answer them. Have you found any witnesses to confirm the top secret Kennedy plan to overthrow Cuba? Several documented Kennedy associates, starting with Dean Rusk in 1990, as we detailed in the hardback of Ultimate Sacrifice. Keep in mind that Rusk confirmed the coup plan "on the record" to Vanity Fair, shortly before his death. Also, we were told all the main information--and we talked about it on the record and on tape--before all the document releases of the mid to late 1990s (and documents are still trickling out). We talked about it in our ASK JFK conference presentations in 1993 and 1994 (both taped; anyone who has copies is welcome to circulate them for research purposes), to Vanity Fair 1994, on the History Channel in 1994, and in my written submission to the Review Board in November 1994. In that submission, I talked about a "Plan for a Coup in Cuba" in the Fall of 1963 and it was (I believe) two or three years before any documents from 1963 with that title where released. Also in that November 1994 submission, I told them for the first time about the Tampa assassination plot of November 18, 1994. As detailed in their Final Report, in January 1995, the Secret Service admitted at that time that they had just destroyed records for motorcades (which would include Tampa) in the weeks before Dallas. After those publicity presentations in 1993 and 1994, Commander Almeida (Chief of the Cuban Army in Nov. 1963) resurfaced after having disappeared for several years (since 1990). Our sources had thought he was dead. Hence, Thom and had to pull back on our public efforts at that point. "The Plan for a Coup in Cuba" (as it was titled in a memo for the Joint Chiefs of Staff) would include a "palace coup" to eliminate Castro, allowing a new Cuban "Provisional Government" to step into the power vacuum, and would be supported by a "full-scale invasion" of Cuba by the US military, if necessary." If they were planning an all out invasion within a month, how could only a dozen people know about the plan? As the book explains, and the documents show, many of those doing the planning (like Rusk) in the summer and fall of 1963 were told the planning was just in case a high Cuban official was found who could stage the coup. Those official were also aware of efforts to try to locate a high official like that (AMTRUNK, CIA-DIA Task Force, Cubela, etc.). As Rusk told me in 1990, he only learned soon after JFK's death that the planning had been for real, that the Kennedys already had a very high Cuban official lined up, far more powerful than Cubela. Rusk said he wasn't angry that JFK and RFK had kept that from him, because it would have been impossible to keep secret otherwise. Rusk would have probably had to tell his subordinates; Rusk--like McNamara--was a high profile public official at the time, constantly talking to the press. If an official like Rusk had been told months or even weeks earlier about Commander Almeida, he would have been in a difficult position with the press or his subordinates or even other Cabinet officials who hadn't been told, if one of them had asked about rumors that might have surfaced. Plus, as I document in the book (a bit more fully in the new trade paperback, but it's also on the Mary Ferrell website), it appears that Rusk, McNamara, and some other Cabinet level officials would have been told just a few days prior to the coup. They likely would have been told that the US efforts to find someone to stage a coup had paid off, and all the plans they had all already signed off on were ready to be put to use. Finally, keep in mind this was always supposed to appear to be a "palace coup" by Commander Almeida and his allies, with US forces being "invited" to help prevent a Soviet take-over. It was never supposed to be known the Kennedys had been working with Commander Almeida since May 1963 and were behind the whole thing. That would also protect the Kennedys if the coup had failed. Who were these people besides the Kennedy brothers? Some are named in the book. They would include Cyrus Vance, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Maxwell Taylor, CIA DIA Chief Carroll, McCone, Helms, FitzGerald, Enrique "Harry" Ruiz-Williams, and others. Who orchestrated the cover-up / Warren Commission and why? Again, as the book explains and documents prove, RFK was directing a secret committee in the weeks before Dallas (since September 1963), making plans for what to do if an American official was assassinated. Those plans weren't complete--and those doing the planning never imagined the "American official" might be JFK--but the thinking behind those plans no doubt influenced the actions of key officials after JFK's death. Starting with RFK, who was calling the shots at the autopsy. Remember, with RFK at Bethesda in the family suite (I believe on the 17th floor) were JFK aides Powers and O'Donnell, who had witnessed the shots from the grassy knoll. McCone and Helms withheld info from the Warren Commission, as did RFK. Hoover wasn't officially part of the coup planning, but had no doubt picked up information about it from informants. LBJ had been out of the loop, and had to be quickly brought up to speed on the real coup plan, Cubela, AMTRUNK, and the CIA-Mafia plots. All knew that if the coup plan leaked, not only would in cost the life of America's ally, Commander Almeida, but just a year after the Cuban Missile Crisis, could have triggered another nuclear confrontation with the Soviets. What is your opinion on Chauncey Holt and Charles Harrelson? Do you agree Harrelson worked for Marcello and Giancana? I think court testimony and other evidence shows at least that Harrelson worked for an associate of Marcello, and knew an associate of Jack Ruby. Why did your partner Thom Hartmann interview Holt once and never published anything about it? We did not find his claims about being one of the tramps to be credible. And, he admitted forging documents to back up his claim. What little he knew that wasn't widely available in various books, he could have obtained from obscure sources or other associates, like Col. Robert Bayard or Aldo Vera Serafin. There is no evidence Bayard or Serafin was involved in JFK's assassination, but each man did know someone who did have some knowledge (like Artime). Holt put himself at the scene of each of those murders, both of which I believe are still unsolved (Bayard's slaying was in Atlanta). But I take anything Holt ever said with a huge grain of salt. If you implicate Rosselli, do you agree that Giancana was involved too? I don't just implicate Rosselli, but I think he was one of the three main Mafia bosses behind the assassination. However, Giancana--like Hoffa--was under heavily federal surveillance in the fall of 1963, and thus could have no active role. That would fall to Rosselli, who would neutralize surveillance while working on the CIA-Mafia plots with Morales and--as documents withheld from Congress show--Artime. Regarding Giancana, despite the heavy surveillance, the FBI appears not to have known that the #2 man in the Cook County/Chicago sheriff's office--Richard Cain--was a "made" member of the Mafia actually working for Giancana. Cain was also a CIA asset, and had learned about the coup plan. Cain was also in position to frame Secret Service agent Abraham Bolden, to keep him from telling Warren Commission staff about Secret Service laxity, the Chicago attempt, and (most importantly) the Tampa attempt (which the Warren Commission had heard nothing). Are in your scenario Marcello, Rosselli and Trafficante the puppetmasters who pulled all the strings on the operation? Sure, for all the reasons I document in Section II of the hardback (and trade paperback); and they used the people I document in the book. In the CIA that went at least as high as David Morales, though there were others below his level. For those higher, the evidence is not nearly as clear and their is exculpatory evidence as well for those officials. For example, while it's clear McCone, FitzGerald, Helms, and Angleton were involved in the cover-up, so was RFK. Plus, Helms had withheld so much (ongoing CIA-Mafia plots, trying to use Cubela as an assassin, etc.) from McCone, he had to cover that up as well. And, as I note in the book, it soon became clear to Helms that one or more of his people had been involved in the assassination, and he did take some action to deal with that. On the other hand, I don't think Helms would have allowed all the incriminating documents that have been released to survive (especially after he became CIA Director) if he had been an active participant in JFK's assassination. As I note in the book, Helms was meeting with RFK as late as 1967 to discuss withholdinbg information from LBJ. Remember, there are a million CIA files related to the JFK assassination that have been identified, but that are still secret. No matter what anyone believes about the assassination, I think we should all join together in demanding the release of those one million files as soon as possible, now that Almeida's identity no longer has to be protected. I'm certainly willing to follow the evidence wherever it leads. And I'm confident the files will continue to support what Kennedy associates started telling me back in 1990, before any of the military or CIA or State Department files about the 1963 coup plans were released. Likewise, I'm confident those files will contain additional information corroborating the innocence of Abraham Bolden.

I think these questions may have been written by someone who hasn't read the entire book, but I'm happy to answer them. Have you found any witnesses to confirm the top secret Kennedy plan to overthrow Cuba? Several documented Kennedy associates, starting with Dean Rusk in 1990, as we detailed in the hardback of Ultimate Sacrifice. Keep in mind that Rusk confirmed the coup plan "on the record" to Vanity Fair, shortly before his death. Also, we were told all the main information--and we talked about it on the record and on tape--before all the document releases of the mid to late 1990s (and documents are still trickling out). We talked about it in our ASK JFK conference presentations in 1993 and 1994 (both taped; anyone who has copies is welcome to circulate them for research purposes), to Vanity Fair 1994, on the History Channel in 1994, and in my written submission to the Review Board in November 1994. In that submission, I talked about a "Plan for a Coup in Cuba" in the Fall of 1963 and it was (I believe) two or three years before any documents from 1963 with that title where released. Also in that November 1994 submission, I told them for the first time about the Tampa assassination plot of November 18, 1994. As detailed in their Final Report, in January 1995, the Secret Service admitted at that time that they had just destroyed records for motorcades (which would include Tampa) in the weeks before Dallas. After those publicity presentations in 1993 and 1994, Commander Almeida (Chief of the Cuban Army in Nov. 1963) resurfaced after having disappeared for several years (since 1990). Our sources had thought he was dead. Hence, Thom and had to pull back on our public efforts at that point. "The Plan for a Coup in Cuba" (as it was titled in a memo for the Joint Chiefs of Staff) would include a "palace coup" to eliminate Castro, allowing a new Cuban "Provisional Government" to step into the power vacuum, and would be supported by a "full-scale invasion" of Cuba by the US military, if necessary." If they were planning an all out invasion within a month, how could only a dozen people know about the plan? As the book explains, and the documents show, many of those doing the planning (like Rusk) in the summer and fall of 1963 were told the planning was just in case a high Cuban official was found who could stage the coup. Those official were also aware of efforts to try to locate a high official like that (AMTRUNK, CIA-DIA Task Force, Cubela, etc.). As Rusk told me in 1990, he only learned soon after JFK's death that the planning had been for real, that the Kennedys already had a very high Cuban official lined up, far more powerful than Cubela. Rusk said he wasn't angry that JFK and RFK had kept that from him, because it would have been impossible to keep secret otherwise. Rusk would have probably had to tell his subordinates; Rusk--like McNamara--was a high profile public official at the time, constantly talking to the press. If an official like Rusk had been told months or even weeks earlier about Commander Almeida, he would have been in a difficult position with the press or his subordinates or even other Cabinet officials who hadn't been told, if one of them had asked about rumors that might have surfaced. Plus, as I document in the book (a bit more fully in the new trade paperback, but it's also on the Mary Ferrell website), it appears that Rusk, McNamara, and some other Cabinet level officials would have been told just a few days prior to the coup. They likely would have been told that the US efforts to find someone to stage a coup had paid off, and all the plans they had all already signed off on were ready to be put to use. Finally, keep in mind this was always supposed to appear to be a "palace coup" by Commander Almeida and his allies, with US forces being "invited" to help prevent a Soviet take-over. It was never supposed to be known the Kennedys had been working with Commander Almeida since May 1963 and were behind the whole thing. That would also protect the Kennedys if the coup had failed. Who were these people besides the Kennedy brothers? Some are named in the book. They would include Cyrus Vance, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Maxwell Taylor, CIA DIA Chief Carroll, McCone, Helms, FitzGerald, Enrique "Harry" Ruiz-Williams, and others. Who orchestrated the cover-up / Warren Commission and why? Again, as the book explains and documents prove, RFK was directing a secret committee in the weeks before Dallas (since September 1963), making plans for what to do if an American official was assassinated. Those plans weren't complete--and those doing the planning never imagined the "American official" might be JFK--but the thinking behind those plans no doubt influenced the actions of key officials after JFK's death. Starting with RFK, who was calling the shots at the autopsy. Remember, with RFK at Bethesda in the family suite (I believe on the 17th floor) were JFK aides Powers and O'Donnell, who had witnessed the shots from the grassy knoll. McCone and Helms withheld info from the Warren Commission, as did RFK. Hoover wasn't officially part of the coup planning, but had no doubt picked up information about it from informants. LBJ had been out of the loop, and had to be quickly brought up to speed on the real coup plan, Cubela, AMTRUNK, and the CIA-Mafia plots. All knew that if the coup plan leaked, not only would in cost the life of America's ally, Commander Almeida, but just a year after the Cuban Missile Crisis, could have triggered another nuclear confrontation with the Soviets. What is your opinion on Chauncey Holt and Charles Harrelson? Do you agree Harrelson worked for Marcello and Giancana? I think court testimony and other evidence shows at least that Harrelson worked for an associate of Marcello, and knew an associate of Jack Ruby. Why did your partner Thom Hartmann interview Holt once and never published anything about it? We did not find his claims about being one of the tramps to be credible. And, he admitted forging documents to back up his claim. What little he knew that wasn't widely available in various books, he could have obtained from obscure sources or other associates, like Col. Robert Bayard or Aldo Vera Serafin. There is no evidence Bayard or Serafin was involved in JFK's assassination, but each man did know someone who did have some knowledge (like Artime). Holt put himself at the scene of each of those murders, both of which I believe are still unsolved (Bayard's slaying was in Atlanta). But I take anything Holt ever said with a huge grain of salt. If you implicate Rosselli, do you agree that Giancana was involved too? I don't just implicate Rosselli, but I think he was one of the three main Mafia bosses behind the assassination. However, Giancana--like Hoffa--was under heavily federal surveillance in the fall of 1963, and thus could have no active role. That would fall to Rosselli, who would neutralize surveillance while working on the CIA-Mafia plots with Morales and--as documents withheld from Congress show--Artime. Regarding Giancana, despite the heavy surveillance, the FBI appears not to have known that the #2 man in the Cook County/Chicago sheriff's office--Richard Cain--was a "made" member of the Mafia actually working for Giancana. Cain was also a CIA asset, and had learned about the coup plan. Cain was also in position to frame Secret Service agent Abraham Bolden, to keep him from telling Warren Commission staff about Secret Service laxity, the Chicago attempt, and (most importantly) the Tampa attempt (which the Warren Commission had heard nothing). Are in your scenario Marcello, Rosselli and Trafficante the puppetmasters who pulled all the strings on the operation? Sure, for all the reasons I document in Section II of the hardback (and trade paperback); and they used the people I document in the book. In the CIA that went at least as high as David Morales, though there were others below his level. For those higher, the evidence is not nearly as clear and their is exculpatory evidence as well for those officials. For example, while it's clear McCone, FitzGerald, Helms, and Angleton were involved in the cover-up, so was RFK. Plus, Helms had withheld so much (ongoing CIA-Mafia plots, trying to use Cubela as an assassin, etc.) from McCone, he had to cover that up as well. And, as I note in the book, it soon became clear to Helms that one or more of his people had been involved in the assassination, and he did take some action to deal with that. On the other hand, I don't think Helms would have allowed all the incriminating documents that have been released to survive (especially after he became CIA Director) if he had been an active participant in JFK's assassination. As I note in the book, Helms was meeting with RFK as late as 1967 to discuss withholdinbg information from LBJ. Remember, there are a million CIA files related to the JFK assassination that have been identified, but that are still secret. No matter what anyone believes about the assassination, I think we should all join together in demanding the release of those one million files as soon as possible, now that Almeida's identity no longer has to be protected. I'm certainly willing to follow the evidence wherever it leads. And I'm confident the files will continue to support what Kennedy associates started telling me back in 1990, before any of the military or CIA or State Department files about the 1963 coup plans were released. Likewise, I'm confident those files will contain additional information corroborating the innocence of Abraham Bolden.

1. More than one government agency was involved in the decision to make Commander Almeida's identity and work for JFK available to the public. So rather than focus on just the CIA (who was involved) or the ARRB, it would be more accurate for now to say that it was the decision of the US government. It is explained in more depth in the book's last chapter. 2. The US government's decision to make his identity known was make independent of - and before - publication of the hardback edition of Ultimate Sacrifice. Obviously, at the time the hardback was written and published, I assumed the US government wouldn't reveal it until 2017, which is why I worked so hard to not reveal his identity. 3. It was confirmed to me in writing in late November 2005 - just days after the hardback hit the stores - that his identity would remain available to the public. But it was March before it was clear there was no chance the decision would be reversed. That's when I decided to tell the full story in the trade paperback, and fully and as accurately as possible. 4. Castro has known about the official since 1990, when he disappeared for several years. That's when Kennedy associates first told us about the coup invasion plan (Dean Rusk, 1990) and all the details about the official's identity and work for the Kennedys (1992), because they thought he was dead. It surprised everyone when he turned out alive and back in the government in 1995. That's why - after Thom and I appeared on the History Channel and Vanity Fair in Nov. 1994 talking about the coup (and I wrote to the Review Board about it that same month) - we had to back off public appearances for years. 5. Apparently hoping his disappearance was for some other reason, the CIA tried an outreach to the official and his old allies in the Cuban military, in order to try to get them to stage a coup against Castro. This attempt even involved some AMWORLD veterans from 1963. However, it finally became clear to the CIA in 2001 that Fidel knew about Commander Almeida's work for JFK in 1963, and he was no longer in a position to help them even if he still wanted to. 6. So, it wasn't our decision to reveal his identity, and in fact, we argued against it. But once their decision was made, we felt the best thing we could do was to tell the whole story as accurately and fully as possible. As readers will see, the framework is already there in Ultimate Sacrifice. As a noted historian told me recently, at this point, wide publicity is Commander Almeida's best protection, so Fidel cannot take action against him in secret, as he did in 1990.

1. More than one government agency was involved in the decision to make Commander Almeida's identity and work for JFK available to the public. So rather than focus on just the CIA (who was involved) or the ARRB, it would be more accurate for now to say that it was the decision of the US government. It is explained in more depth in the book's last chapter. 2. The US government's decision to make his identity known was make independent of - and before - publication of the hardback edition of Ultimate Sacrifice. Obviously, at the time the hardback was written and published, I assumed the US government wouldn't reveal it until 2017, which is why I worked so hard to not reveal his identity. 3. It was confirmed to me in writing in late November 2005 - just days after the hardback hit the stores - that his identity would remain available to the public. But it was March before it was clear there was no chance the decision would be reversed. That's when I decided to tell the full story in the trade paperback, and fully and as accurately as possible. 4. Castro has known about the official since 1990, when he disappeared for several years. That's when Kennedy associates first told us about the coup invasion plan (Dean Rusk, 1990) and all the details about the official's identity and work for the Kennedys (1992), because they thought he was dead. It surprised everyone when he turned out alive and back in the government in 1995. That's why - after Thom and I appeared on the History Channel and Vanity Fair in Nov. 1994 talking about the coup (and I wrote to the Review Board about it that same month) - we had to back off public appearances for years. 5. Apparently hoping his disappearance was for some other reason, the CIA tried an outreach to the official and his old allies in the Cuban military, in order to try to get them to stage a coup against Castro. This attempt even involved some AMWORLD veterans from 1963. However, it finally became clear to the CIA in 2001 that Fidel knew about Commander Almeida's work for JFK in 1963, and he was no longer in a position to help them even if he still wanted to. 6. So, it wasn't our decision to reveal his identity, and in fact, we argued against it. But once their decision was made, we felt the best thing we could do was to tell the whole story as accurately and fully as possible. As readers will see, the framework is already there in Ultimate Sacrifice. As a noted historian told me recently, at this point, wide publicity is Commander Almeida's best protection, so Fidel cannot take action against him in secret, as he did in 1990.

1. More than one government agency was involved in the decision to make Commander Almeida's identity and work for JFK available to the public. So rather than focus on just the CIA (who was involved) or the ARRB, it would be more accurate for now to say that it was the decision of the US government. It is explained in more depth in the book's last chapter. 2. The US government's decision to make his identity known was make independent of - and before - publication of the hardback edition of Ultimate Sacrifice. Obviously, at the time the hardback was written and published, I assumed the US government wouldn't reveal it until 2017, which is why I worked so hard to not reveal his identity. 3. It was confirmed to me in writing in late November 2005 - just days after the hardback hit the stores - that his identity would remain available to the public. But it was March before it was clear there was no chance the decision would be reversed. That's when I decided to tell the full story in the trade paperback, and fully and as accurately as possible. 4. Castro has known about the official since 1990, when he disappeared for several years. That's when Kennedy associates first told us about the coup invasion plan (Dean Rusk, 1990) and all the details about the official's identity and work for the Kennedys (1992), because they thought he was dead. It surprised everyone when he turned out alive and back in the government in 1995. That's why - after Thom and I appeared on the History Channel and Vanity Fair in Nov. 1994 talking about the coup (and I wrote to the Review Board about it that same month) - we had to back off public appearances for years. 5. Apparently hoping his disappearance was for some other reason, the CIA tried an outreach to the official and his old allies in the Cuban military, in order to try to get them to stage a coup against Castro. This attempt even involved some AMWORLD veterans from 1963. However, it finally became clear to the CIA in 2001 that Fidel knew about Commander Almeida's work for JFK in 1963, and he was no longer in a position to help them even if he still wanted to. 6. So, it wasn't our decision to reveal his identity, and in fact, we argued against it. But once their decision was made, we felt the best thing we could do was to tell the whole story as accurately and fully as possible. As readers will see, the framework is already there in Ultimate Sacrifice. As a noted historian told me recently, at this point, wide publicity is Commander Almeida's best protection, so Fidel cannot take action against him in secret, as he did in 1990.

A few things caught my eye: "You will note that this was written while the autopsy was ongoing; many persons that night have reported that Federal agents were on the telephone in the morgue all night long." I'm sure that was the case. As I say in the book, some in the autopsy room were on the phone with RFK, who was on an upper floor, relaying instructions to Burkley in the autopsy room. I've spoken to one of the intermediaries that was used that night. And, his good friends Powers and O'Donnell were up there with RFK, so he knew by then there were shots from the front. So, the autopsy--and whatever coverup happened there and immediately after--was due to RFK, not someone like LBJ. The "LBJ" did it documument should be viewed from the perspective of the Cold War. First, they say that it was elements of the extreme right, and that one of the goals was an invasion of Cuba. Given the involvement of people like Guy Baniser and the knowledge of people like Milteer, it's clear some far-right extremists were involved. And, much evidence was planted pointing to Castro, hoping to prod along the invasion that Banister, Ferrie, and those controlling the conspiracy like Rosselli, Marcello, and Trafficante knew had already been planned by JFK and RFK. Later in the same document, however, they say the KBG thinks LBJ was behind it. But few in America at the time would have said that LBJ was part of the extreme right. Recall that he soundly defeated a candidate of the extreme right in 1964. However, I'm sure in Moscow, all powerful US politicians looked the same. But that would have a big impact on how the KGB would have interpreted any "evidence" they might have had. Which, considering how much has been--and continues to be--withheld from Congress and the American public, couldn't have been very much.

This article appeared in Common Dreams: http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0217-20.htm After 40 Years, the First National Security Whistleblower Still Seeks Justice by Lamar Waldron and Thom Hartmann After an outstanding career in law enforcement, Abraham Bolden was appointed by John F. Kennedy to be the first African American presidential Secret Service agent, where he served with distinction. But you haven't heard about Abraham Bolden during Black History month, because after helping to prevent JFK's assassination in the weeks before Dallas, Bolden was arrested on the very day he went to Washington to tell the Warren Commission about those attempts. Caught in a maze of National Security concerns that only became clear after four million pages of JFK files were released in the 1990s, Bolden was sentenced to six years in prison, becoming America's first National Security Whistleblower. The files released after Congress passed the JFK Act unanimously in 1992 show the massive amount of information that had been withheld from at least five Congressional investigations. Even worse, the Final Report of the JFK Board created by Congress shows that crucial files about attempts against JFK--the cases Bolden worked on--were destroyed by the Secret Service in 1995. And, a report by the government oversight group OMB Watch says that "well over one million CIA records" related to JFK's era remain unreleased, perhaps until the mandatory release date of 2017. Bolden, now 71, can't wait that long. Plus, the long-secret files that have been released show how keeping millions of documents secret for decades have negatively impacted US actions in dealing with Iraq, Central America, and Cuba, as well as preventing crucial intelligence failures from coming to light prior to 9/11. On February 14, 2006, Congress held hearings about National Security Whistleblowers, aimed at improving laws to protect them from retaliation for trying to tell the truth. The witnesses who testified revealed a litany of workers being attacked by their own agencies, of documents destroyed or withheld--even from Congress--and of years of struggle to get fair hearings. This pattern began in the case of Abraham Bolden in 1964, yet most in Congress are unaware of his case. Likewise, Congress doesn't realize that not only did the Secret Service admit destroying crucial JFK documents in 1995, but that the Secret Service then failed to confirm their compliance with the JFK Act under oath, as did other agencies. The JFK Board's Final Report detailing that was released 1998, amidst the aftermath of the Monica Lewinsky affair, which may explain why it received little attention at the time. The OMB Watch report in which an official who worked with the JFK Board admitted that "well over one million CIA records" are still secret was released in the hotly contested election year of 2000, which may be why that escaped the notice of journalists and those in Congress. In addition, the major revelations in the four million JFK documents that were released in the 1990s--and continued to trickle out today--are only just now coming to light. In today's world of instant e-mail and 24-hour news channels, many were recently amazed that Vice President Cheney was able to keep news of his shooting of another man secret for almost 24 hours. Yet in November 1963, John and Robert Kennedy were able to keep two assassination plots against JFK that month out of the media at the time. The first was in Chicago, on November 2, 1963--when JFK had to cancel his trip and motorcade at the last minute--and the second was during JFK's long motorcade through Tampa, Florida on November 18, 1963, just four days before Dallas. Both the Chicago and Tampa plots had many similarities to Dallas, yet they were withheld from the news media and most investigators. Bolden was involved in investigating the Chicago plot and was informed about the similar Tampa attempt. Bolden's own testimony to a Congressional Committee about the Chicago plot was kept secret for over fifteen years, but when finally released in the 1990s, it supported other information that had emerged about the plot over the years. Unknown to Bolden until recently, the crux of all this secrecy about the attempts to assassinate JFK in Chicago, Tampa, and Dallas were John and Robert Kennedys' "Plan for a Coup in Cuba" to overthrow Fidel Castro on December 1, 1963. The most secret operation of the Kennedy years, the CIA side of the operation was code-named AMWORLD, a term withheld from five Congressional investigations (and the Warren Commission) and declassified only in the 1990s. It appeared in print for the first time just three months ago. Using declassified files from the National Archives, we found that in the days, weeks, and months before Dallas, Robert Kennedy had a secret government committee looking at how the US could deal with the "assassination of American officials" if Castro found out about the Kennedys' coup plan, and tried to retaliate. The thinking behind such plans--and worries that the revelation of the Kennedy coup plan could trigger another nuclear confrontation with the Soviets just a year after the Cuban Missile Crisis--was behind most of the secrecy surrounding JFK's assassination. However, key officials in agencies like the FBI, the CIA, and the Secret Service also used the excuse of National Security to withheld information that could have been embarrassing to them. We only uncovered the Kennedys' plan with the help of almost two dozen people who worked with John and Robert Kennedy on the coup plan, their war against the Mafia, and their tragic aftermath. One of them told us that Robert Kennedy was aware of Bolden's plight, but "couldn't" do anything about it at the time--and in the context of the coup plan and the plans to protect it we had just been discussing, it was clear why. Any intervention on Bobby's part could have unraveled a veil of National Security secrecy that could have led to World War III. Our sources and all the new documents don't show any vast conspiracy to kill JFK--they confirm what Bobby Kennedy himself came to believe, after several secret investigations by his trusted associates: that the Mafia had been behind his brother's assassination. Those Mafioso had infiltrated the Kennedys' coup plan through AMWORLD, and used the secrecy surrounding it to prevent a thorough investigation into JFK's death by pointing the blame toward Castro. Bolden went to Washington in the Spring of 1964 to tell Warren Commission staff about the Chicago and Tampa attempts, and other Secret Service laxity, such as late night drinking bouts by the agents. News reports of the late-night drinking of Secret Service agents the night before JFK's assassination were threatening to become a major scandal, but the Secret Service couldn't reveal that the agents were blowing off steam after the stress of the recent plots against JFK in Chicago and Tampa. While Warren Commission staff had heard vague rumors of the Chicago plot, they had been told nothing about the Tampa attempt (which would continued to be withheld from the later Congressional investigations into JFK's assassination). Bolden was arrested the day he arrived in Washington to talk to Warren Commission staff. Bolden himself had previously arrested both of his accusers, one of whom later admitted committing perjury against Bolden. But the Chicago judge told the jury he felt Bolden was guilty, and Bolden was convicted and sentenced to six years in jail. Former Senate investigator and top Freedom of Information attorney Bud Fensterwald looked into Bolden's case and concluded that Bolden had been framed. After reviewing Fensterwald's files, we tracked down additional information about the Chicago mobster that Bolden's accusers worked for, whose gangster associate had infiltrated AMWORLD. The Mafia knew the Secret Service wouldn't defend Bolden because of his accusations of laxity, and that others in the government couldn't come to Bolden's aide because of National Security concerns. After over forty years, Abraham Bolden is still trying to clear his name, but National Security concerns that date from 1963 still stymie his efforts. Along with another researcher, we provided written testimony about the Tampa attempt against JFK to the JFK Board in November of 1994. But about six weeks later, in January 1995, the Board's Final Report states that the Secret Service told them they had just destroyed records covering the time of the Tampa (and Chicago) attempts. This was despite the 1992 JFK Act which required those records be preserved and released. The Secret Service also told the Board it had earlier destroyed other crucial records. And as we noted earlier, "well over one million CIA records" related to JFK's assassination still remain secret today, despite passage of the 1992 JFK Act. Abraham Bolden paid a heavy price for trying to tell the truth about events involving the man he was sworn to protect--JFK--that became mired in National Security concerns. Bolden still lives in Chicago, and has never given up trying to clear his name. Two days after Christmas, his wife passed away unexpectedly just three days before their 49th wedding anniversary. She had remained with Bolden through it all, always sure of his innocence. Will Abraham Bolden live to finally see the justice so long denied to him? As Congress looks into much-needed legislation to protect today's National Security Whistleblowers, we urge to them to consider those like Bolden who risked their careers and lives to tell the truth decades ago. It's in the interest of Congress to do so, since the four million JFK files released in the 1990s show the massive amount of information that was withheld from Congress in the 1970s and 1980s. Will no one be held responsible--or even investigated--for that? Or for the Secret Service document destruction in 1995? And how can Congress expect agencies like the CIA to keep them fully informed today, when so much has been--and continues to be--withheld? After languishing for several years, Congress finally funded the Public Interest Declassification Board, which is scheduled to be held on February 25, 2006, which is one opportunity for some of these matters to be explored. All this secrecy has harmed--and continues to impact--American foreign policy and actions in countries ranging from Iraq to Cuba. Each of us has a member of Congress and two Senators who can be contacted to let them know we care about these matters. Even those outside of the US can make journalists and others aware of Bolden's plight and the ongoing secrecy of this government and the harm it brings to democracy. It's the least we can do for ourselves, for history, and for a brave whistleblower like Abraham Bolden.

News reports, CIA files, and Bobby Kennedy's phone logs show that in 1963 Bobby was working closely with a Cuban exile veteran from the Bay of Pigs, in plans to overthrow Castro. This Cuban exile had been wounded at the Bay of Pigs and after being released because of his injuries, he worked with Bobby to get all of the Bay of Pigs prisoners released. Most exiles knew him as Enrique Ruiz-Williams, though Bobby called him "Enrico" Williams. Americans often called him "Harry Williams" or "Harry Ruiz-Williams." Though he tried to work behind the scenes and stay out of the news, do you recall hearing about this man? Do you recall if you - or your subordinates or associates - talked to him?

I do not know Harry Ruiz-Williams, nor his affiliation. In Cuba I knew a guy with a latin name, that I do not remember, but don’t sound as Harry Ruiz, who’s war name was “Captain Willams”. Since then I lost his whereabouts. I doubt he is the person you refer to. But as curiosity this is the background about the person I know: i) Before 1959, he was a “26th July” member. His participation in the kidnapping of Fangio was very remarkable, he was the driver of the jeep used for the abduction. ii) In 1960, he enrolled in MRP and then worked directly with me. He was dependable and very skilled in explosives and detonation devices. As I quote several times in my book, in his most detailed account of the incident (Washington Post 11-20-83), Haynes Johnson himself wrote that Bobby Kennedy said that to him (Haynes) NOT to Harry. That's extremely important, because the way the question is worded, it makes it sound like Bobby suspected Harry - a key Cuban exile coordinator - was involved in the assassination, which was simply not the case.

We go out of our way repeatedly in the book to give credit to earlier researchers, whether in regard to the myth of the no-invasion pledge or to the plan for a coup in Cuba. With the no-invasion pledge, our point is that it’s still commonly believed and repeated in almost every documentary and book. In fact, I believed it until Dean Rusk told me it wasn’t true. I then looked for other support for what Rusk had said, and found some in Beschloss (which I quote in the book) and a massively documented case in Chang and Kornbluh’s book, "The Cuban Missile Crisis." (For my presentation at JFK/Lancer in 2004, I even lugged their huge book to Dallas to show during my talk.) Likewise, we quote and cite them extensively by name in the book. We’re telling people not to take our word for the pledge being myth - here is what others (and the documentation) have been saying since the early 1990s. The same goes for the coup plan, with one key difference. Our book uses more quotes than probably any other book ever in the field, and we go out of our way to show that people like Al Burt and Tad Szulc and William Turner had written about aspects of the coup plan in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. We want people to look at what they wrote years ago, long before any of the documents had been released, since they all had key inside sources. However, both Burt and Szulc put most of the action in 1964 (and 1965), after the real coup plan had been cancelled, and when the CIA had combined the remnants of AMWORLD with AMTRUNK and AMLASH. As such, they were somewhat vague about what exactly was supposed to happen, and how it would be different from a Bay of Pigs-style invasion after an assassination attempt. William Turner’s 1973 interview with Harry Williams was not published - even in part - until "The Fish is Red" in 1981. And even then, Harry had not fully revealed to Turner what was supposed to happen or everyone who was involved. (Though I was so impressed with what Turner had uncovered that when I finally read a copy of "Fish" in the late 1980s , I was determined to see that it became available again, and brought it to the attention of the publisher who eventually reissued the updated edition as "Deadly Secrets.") As I say in "Ultimate Sacrifice," Turner provided us with the complete notes of his Harry Williams interview, so we were able to hit the ground running and soon got Harry to reveal the entire plan for a coup in Cuba. This included all the key exile leaders involved, the Cuban-American troops, the "palace coup," and the Provisional government. All of which we talked about in public (1993 ASK, 1994 ASK, History Channel, Vanity Fair) before the documentation was released. So, we didn’t piece our story together from accounts from Burt, Szulc, etc., as helpful as their accounts were, after the fact. We got the full story from key people who worked with Robert Kennedy, then we showed in the book that parts of it had been written about for years, and can now be documented from declassified files.

We go out of our way repeatedly in the book to give credit to earlier researchers, whether in regard to the myth of the no-invasion pledge or to the plan for a coup in Cuba. With the no-invasion pledge, our point is that it’s still commonly believed and repeated in almost every documentary and book. In fact, I believed it until Dean Rusk told me it wasn’t true. I then looked for other support for what Rusk had said, and found some in Beschloss (which I quote in the book) and a massively documented case in Chang and Kornbluh’s book, "The Cuban Missile Crisis." (For my presentation at JFK/Lancer in 2004, I even lugged their huge book to Dallas to show during my talk.) Likewise, we quote and cite them extensively by name in the book. We’re telling people not to take our word for the pledge being myth - here is what others (and the documentation) have been saying since the early 1990s. The same goes for the coup plan, with one key difference. Our book uses more quotes than probably any other book ever in the field, and we go out of our way to show that people like Al Burt and Tad Szulc and William Turner had written about aspects of the coup plan in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. We want people to look at what they wrote years ago, long before any of the documents had been released, since they all had key inside sources. However, both Burt and Szulc put most of the action in 1964 (and 1965), after the real coup plan had been cancelled, and when the CIA had combined the remnants of AMWORLD with AMTRUNK and AMLASH. As such, they were somewhat vague about what exactly was supposed to happen, and how it would be different from a Bay of Pigs-style invasion after an assassination attempt. William Turner’s 1973 interview with Harry Williams was not published - even in part - until "The Fish is Red" in 1981. And even then, Harry had not fully revealed to Turner what was supposed to happen or everyone who was involved. (Though I was so impressed with what Turner had uncovered that when I finally read a copy of "Fish" in the late 1980s , I was determined to see that it became available again, and brought it to the attention of the publisher who eventually reissued the updated edition as "Deadly Secrets.") As I say in "Ultimate Sacrifice," Turner provided us with the complete notes of his Harry Williams interview, so we were able to hit the ground running and soon got Harry to reveal the entire plan for a coup in Cuba. This included all the key exile leaders involved, the Cuban-American troops, the "palace coup," and the Provisional government. All of which we talked about in public (1993 ASK, 1994 ASK, History Channel, Vanity Fair) before the documentation was released. So, we didn’t piece our story together from accounts from Burt, Szulc, etc., as helpful as their accounts were, after the fact. We got the full story from key people who worked with Robert Kennedy, then we showed in the book that parts of it had been written about for years, and can now be documented from declassified files. There’s no compelling evidence that RFK (and JFK) knew about the assassination aspect of Cubela, but that doesn’t mean they were unaware of him entirely. As we note, we talked to an official (outside the CIA) who served on one of Bobby’s secretive subcommittees who did know about Cubela in the Fall of 1963, prior to the assassination. He knew Cubela as someone the CIA was in contact with, who was looking for someone powerful enough to stage a coup. That’s something the CIA was trying to do with AMTRUNK, and there was also a joint CIA-DIA task force looking for the same thing. So, people outside the CIA working with RFK knew about those efforts to find someone powerful enough to stage a coup. So, it’s possible - even likely - that RFK knew about Cubela (generally, if not by name) as part of those efforts. But that’s very different from knowing the CIA is trying to get Cubela to assassinate Castro. I wish I’d had room in the book for a lot of things, and I would have liked to speculate on JFK’s feelings about the Cuba coup plan after the assassination of Diem. (But I didn’t include that, in favor of including more factual material.) Most historians agree that the Kennedys backed the coup, but didn’t think Diem would be assassinated (only forced into exile). I think Diem’s death (on the same day of the Chicago plot against JFK) would have driven the point home to JFK just how deadly the whole business of coups was, and how the unexpected could happen. Hence, the efforts at a peaceful solution with Attwood continued (and JFK had already asked Jean Daniel to help). Yet, the plans for a coup in Cuba continued, and by November 18 (with JFK’s speech) and November 22, 1963, it was clear it was pretty much a "go." Once Harry was inside Castro’s Cuba (by 11/24) to await the coup, it would have been difficult to call things off, though I have no doubt that if Jean Daniel had reached some sort of breakthrough with Castro on 11/22, the Kennedys would given a peaceful solution one last shot. However, as Dean Rusk told Vanity Fair when he confirmed the coup to them in 1994, the Kennedys were "playing with fire" in pursuing both peace and a coup at the same time. Since it took me so long to answers this first batch of questions, here are some answers to questions others have mentioned (not necessarily from the Forum, but also places like Amazon): 1. Thom Hartmann is not, and never has been a CIA agent or asset. He’s been a volunteer for decades with Salem International, a relief organization, and his work for them takes him all over the world (at his own expense). Anyone who listens to Thom’s radio show, syndicated by Air America - or read Thom’s many books - knows he’s taken the CIA to task many times. I’m not a CIA agent either. The only government agency I’ve ever worked for was as Director of an outpatient counseling center for juvenile delinquents and their families, for the State of Georgia, in the 1970s and early 1980s. 2. As I say in the book, I’m not related to a New York Times reporter named Martin Waldron, whose November 1966 letter to the New Orleans Police Department about Ferrie and Marcello may have sparked the Garrison investigation (and the December 1966 questioning of David Ferrie). I’ve never even met or talked to Martin Waldron, and I found the copy of the letter at Jim Lesar’s AARC, in a Garrison file (apparently, the New Orleans Police gave a copy of the letter to Garrison or one of his men.) I look forward to answering more questions, and I’d like to thank John Simkin for the opportunity. And, I’d like to encourage everyone to pull together to get the over one million CIA files released, and help get justice for ex-Secret Service Agent Abraham Bolden.

We believe it is most likely Lopez was an unknowing patsy based on reading all the declassified documents about him and his associates (including the Tampa FBI files, with wire tap transcripts of people who knew Lopez), and talking to both his ex-wife and a high Florida law enforcement official who was aware of Lopez - and knew other officials and informants who were aware of Lopez. Also, Lopez was extensively investigated by the FBI and CIA after the assassination, but the more they investigated, the more information turned up that made him seem like an easily-manipulated patsy. Remember that the Tampa attempt was kept completely out of the press at the time, so Lopez (as a patsy) may have been completely unaware of what had almost gone down. And, would have attached no special significance in being asked to accompany someone to Texas, in preparation for going to Mexico City and then on to Cuba, where he wanted to return (for a variety of reasons). If Lopez had knowingly been part of the Tampa conspiracy, he would have known going to Texas (or Dallas) would draw suspicion to him, and - since he didn’t drive or own a car - he would have been in a difficult position, with few options if problems developed. Lopez appears to be someone who - like Oswald - on the surface looks suspicious. But the more you dig into their background, they don’t seem like someone who would either kill JFK for unknown reasons or whom the Mafia would use for anything but a patsy (since the Mafia would want to use a trusted professional to fire the actual shots, someone with a proven track record who was not only a good shot, but who wouldn’t hesitate to fire). And the many parallels between Oswald and Lopez outlined in the book (moving to a new city, leaving their wives, contact with FPCC, etc.) indicates they were being manipulated by the same person or persons, for the same reason. As for whether Lopez would have had some asset or informant role for some US agency, that’s a possibility that’s explored in the book.

In addition to the answers below, I’d encourage people to read the other material on the web about the book. We’ve added several key documents to the "Documentation" part of our web site (more to come): http://www.ultimatesacrificethebook.com/ The book’s entire Introduction (really an overview of the whole book) is available on buzzflash, complete with extensive endnotes. http://www.buzzflash.com/ Salon.com has our response to their review, as well as the chapter on the Tampa assassination attempt (with endnotes). Our website also has a chapter on Marcello, Trafficante, and Rosselli. We’re so confident in our sources and documentation that we want to make as much available as possible. Some points raised in the Forum will influence what we put on the website in the future. As for the Provisional Government after the coup, keep in mind several things: Many of the people involved had worked together during the Revolution, despite their disparate backgrounds and political beliefs. Some had worked together during the early days of the Revolutionary government. In the same way, the Kennedys hoped these same men would once again be able to work together for the good of Cuba after the coup, in the new Provisional government. Their common enemy would be both Castro and the Russians in Cuba. The presence of US troops in Cuba whether a few hundred Cuban-American troops or up to the "full-scale invasion" the documents discuss - would help to ensure the Cuban faction didn’t completely dominate, after the coup. However, the book also makes it clear that even the exile leaders, there were already sginificant strains, with leaders like Ray and Menoyo being reluctant to sign on to the plan because of various concerns, and Artime wanting to take a leading role. They’re confusing the plans against Castro after JFK’s death, with the plans against Castro before JFK’s death. As we say in the book, the Plan for a Coup in Cuba changed drastically after JFK died. Before JFK’s death, the CIA’s supporting role in the Coup Plan was called AMWORLD and started in June 1963. AMTRUNK had been going since January 1963 (looking for someone powerful enough to stage a coup against Castro without much success). AMLASH had been going in fits and starts since late 1960, but would start ramping up significantly in September 1963. RFK was basically calling the shots on the Coup Plan/AMWORLD and AMTRUNK, and with the US military (Vance, Carroll, Taylor). There’s no credible evidence RFK knew about the assassination component of AMLASH, though as we say, some Administration officials outside the CIA did know abut Cubela, and saw him as someone trying to find someone powerful enough to stage a coup against Castro (the same goal as AMTRUNK). AMLASH Case Officer testimony also shows that Cubela was being used to provide intelligence about those who would stage the coup. (While Cubela was not very close to Castro, or considered part of his inner circle by most experts, the Case Officer did admit Cubela was very close to one very high Cuba official, saying - if I recall correctly - Cubela "was intimate with Che Guevara.") So, before JFK’s death, AMWORLD, AMTRUNK, and AMLASH were separate operations. After JFK’s death, RFK was out of the picture, as were other key individuals, like Harry Williams. So, the CIA combined the remnants of AMWORLD - including Artime - with AMTRUNK and AMLASH, and kept things going through 1964 and part of 1965. (Tad Szulc - who helped to create AMTRUNK, and met with Che Guevara in New York City in December 1965 - named the Artime side of this operation "Second Naval Guerilla," in later articles.) That’s what causes confusion for some researchers, since the CIA kept using the AMWORLD code name on documents into 1964 and 1965, even though things were radically different after JFK died. We believe it is most likely Lopez was an unknowing patsy based on reading all the declassified documents about him and his associates (including the Tampa FBI files, with wire tap transcripts of people who knew Lopez), and talking to both his ex-wife and a high Florida law enforcement official who was aware of Lopez - and knew other officials and informants who were aware of Lopez. Also, Lopez was extensively investigated by the FBI and CIA after the assassination, but the more they investigated, the more information turned up that made him seem like an easily-manipulated patsy. Remember that the Tampa attempt was kept completely out of the press at the time, so Lopez (as a patsy) may have been completely unaware of what had almost gone down. And, would have attached no special significance in being asked to accompany someone to Texas, in preparation for going to Mexico City and then on to Cuba, where he wanted to return (for a variety of reasons). If Lopez had knowingly been part of the Tampa conspiracy, he would have known going to Texas (or Dallas) would draw suspicion to him, and - since he didn’t drive or own a car - he would have been in a difficult position, with few options if problems developed. Lopez appears to be someone who - like Oswald - on the surface looks suspicious. But the more you dig into their background, they don’t seem like someone who would either kill JFK for unknown reasons or whom the Mafia would use for anything but a patsy (since the Mafia would want to use a trusted professional to fire the actual shots, someone with a proven track record who was not only a good shot, but who wouldn’t hesitate to fire). And the many parallels between Oswald and Lopez outlined in the book (moving to a new city, leaving their wives, contact with FPCC, etc.) indicates they were being manipulated by the same person or persons, for the same reason. As for whether Lopez would have had some asset or informant role for some US agency, that’s a possibility that’s explored in the book.