Scott Kaiser

According to my father's date and time to appear and testify at the Watergate Hearings was on February 7, 1973, I'm looking for witlessness's testimonies, is it ironic that my father would be killed on February 7, 1977 just days before he was suppose to testify at the HSCA?

Scott, here are my replies to your question and your comment: (i) I've read rumors that he was medium height and rumors that he was shorter than average, but one way to know for certain is to obtain his Police mugshots and booking record from the Watergate break in. So, I've requested that; then I'll be able to tell you for sure how tall Frank (Fiorini) Sturgis really was. (ii) I believe that we had so many cooks in the kitchen (so many people contributing to any assassination plot against JFK that they heard about). But they weren't all contributing to the same ground-crew! Probably a lot of people believed that their hit squad killed JFK, and so their cash contribution was the deciding factor. But in reallity, it was only a fraction of that money that was successful, just as it was only a fraction of the hired 'mechanics' who actually killed JFK. Although the ground-crew that actually killed JFK was professional, and so they would not have talked, this would not prevent liars and boasters from claiming that they were the ones who killed JFK. It is almost a boast today - not really a confession - for somebody to say that his crew was the crew that killed JFK a half-century ago. Would somebody have talked? Actually, plenty of people talked -- but most of them are fake. For example, I don't believe the mob killed JFK, because, as Jim Garrison said, they did not have the means to cover it up, or the proper sniper's modus operandi. Yet Sam Giancana was going to testify, and Johnny Rosselli was going to testify, and others, also. Why? For prestige, probably. But the people who put up the cash for these hit-squads would never let them sing - so they were both murdered before they could testify to the HSCA. I think we agree, Scott -- the mob lacks the discipline of a long-term chain-of-command. That's why I believe the actual assassins were from a different school -- one with more discipline and more honor. The actual JFK assassins were probably trained marksmen with military discipline. Best regards, --Paul Trejo No need to go through the trouble, I'll tell you. My father stood at 5' 10". Frank was about four inches taller then my father. Frank would have stood at 6' 2", not short at all, by no means. Now, I have a question for those who are researchers, I have searched and searched, I cannot find any public record or open testimony from those in Watergate, my father was called twice to testify on Watergate, my question is, can anyone find any information on my father's testimony or what he said at the Watergate Hearings, I would even be willing to pay you for your time and any services at any amount if that what it takes to find my father's information, can anyone please help me? Like I said, I'm no researcher and I don't know where to begin. Scott Lots of stuff here... http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/Watergate_Documents David, Thank you so much brother, I'll look through this and see if I can find anything on my dad, it means so much to me because that would have been my father saying something or testifying about something, and I'm hoping I can find something anything, would be nice. Thanks again man!

Scott, if Frank Sturgis was 6'2" tall, then the man standing to his right in the videos you kindly shared in this thread must be 6'8" tall, since he's much taller than Frank. Is it possible Frank Sturgis wore high-heel boots in his later years? --Paul Paul, I'm not sure if you've been missing any of my pass posts or you're just trying to give me a hard time, I really don't know what it is, and I thought perhaps you would have just let it go by now, but it seems you want to drag this on and for what reason? I really don't know, you're a reseacher why don't you find out yourself how tall Frank is. I really don't care to argue the fact of Frank hight. Is it not enough that (you) don't want to believe me? I guess it wouldn't help telling you that I knew Frank for nine years either would it? In that film, I'm telling you, its Frank Sturgis, Lee Harvey Oswald, Marita Lorenz and Gerry Droller aka Frank Bender, so how hard is that to understand? Or should I say what part of that don't you understand? UGH! Sometimes we just need to except it when we're wrong and leave it alone, but not you! You want to drag this out and I'm okay with that, but in the end you're the one who is going to come out loosing on this one. When I'm wrong I except it and move on, I will go as far as saying I'm wrong. But that's not your intention, so what is? And Paul, you can easily tell by looking at that film that the terrain is uneven. And yes, that white guy standing next to Sturgis looks like a tall skinny white dude, I'm sorry I don't know how tall he is, but it appears he does look taller then Frank. Perhaps, someone can find how tall Frank was, maybe you could ask James Hunt Frank nephew, maybe he knows or ask his step daughter, maybe you'll find it somewhere, but I'm telling you he was taller then my dad, I do remember.

I found this to be very interesting, posted by Esther Howes in one of the Forums on Facebook. Esther Howes Excerpt from a letter from Billie Sol Estes' lawyer August 9, 1984 Mr. Stephen S. Trott Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division U.S. Department of Justice Washington, D. C. 20530 RE: Mr. Billie Sol Estes Dear Mr. Trott: My client, Mr. Estes, has authorized me to make this reply to your letter of May 29, 1984. Mr. Estes was a member of a four-member group, headed by Lyndon Johnson, which committed criminal acts in Texas in the 1960's. The other two, besides Mr. Estes and LBJ, were Cliff Carter and Mac Wallace. Mr. Estes is willing to disclose his knowledge concerning the following criminal offenses: I. Murders 1. The killing of Henry Marshall 2. The killing of George Krutilek 3. The killing of Ike Rogers and his secretary 4. The killing of Harold Orr 5. The killing of Coleman Wade 6. The killing of Josefa Johnson 7. The killing of John Kinser 8. The killing of President J. F. Kennedy. Mr. Estes is willing to testify that LBJ ordered these killings, and that he transmitted his orders through Cliff Carter to Mac Wallace, who executed the murders. In the cases of murders nos. 1-7, Mr. Estes' knowledge of the precise details concerning the way the murders were executed stems from conversations he had shortly after each event with Cliff Carter and Mac Wallace.

Scott, here are my replies to your question and your comment: (i) I've read rumors that he was medium height and rumors that he was shorter than average, but one way to know for certain is to obtain his Police mugshots and booking record from the Watergate break in. So, I've requested that; then I'll be able to tell you for sure how tall Frank (Fiorini) Sturgis really was. (ii) I believe that we had so many cooks in the kitchen (so many people contributing to any assassination plot against JFK that they heard about). But they weren't all contributing to the same ground-crew! Probably a lot of people believed that their hit squad killed JFK, and so their cash contribution was the deciding factor. But in reallity, it was only a fraction of that money that was successful, just as it was only a fraction of the hired 'mechanics' who actually killed JFK. Although the ground-crew that actually killed JFK was professional, and so they would not have talked, this would not prevent liars and boasters from claiming that they were the ones who killed JFK. It is almost a boast today - not really a confession - for somebody to say that his crew was the crew that killed JFK a half-century ago. Would somebody have talked? Actually, plenty of people talked -- but most of them are fake. For example, I don't believe the mob killed JFK, because, as Jim Garrison said, they did not have the means to cover it up, or the proper sniper's modus operandi. Yet Sam Giancana was going to testify, and Johnny Rosselli was going to testify, and others, also. Why? For prestige, probably. But the people who put up the cash for these hit-squads would never let them sing - so they were both murdered before they could testify to the HSCA. I think we agree, Scott -- the mob lacks the discipline of a long-term chain-of-command. That's why I believe the actual assassins were from a different school -- one with more discipline and more honor. The actual JFK assassins were probably trained marksmen with military discipline. Best regards, --Paul Trejo No need to go through the trouble, I'll tell you. My father stood at 5' 10". Frank was about four inches taller then my father. Frank would have stood at 6' 2", not short at all, by no means. Now, I have a question for those who are researchers, I have searched and searched, I cannot find any public record or open testimony from those in Watergate, my father was called twice to testify on Watergate, my question is, can anyone find any information on my father's testimony or what he said at the Watergate Hearings, I would even be willing to pay you for your time and any services at any amount if that what it takes to find my father's information, can anyone please help me? Like I said, I'm no researcher and I don't know where to begin. Scott Scott, You say your father was called twice to testify on Watergate. Did he testify both times? Thanks, --Tommy Yes he did, I'll attach the day and date he was called, here is some information you could go on, and Tommy if this is going to cost me anything or if someone is going to charge me please PM me at my private email at scott@kaiser-industries.com or this forum, and if we need to work something out or if I need to send you the money by Western Union I will, thank you for helping me in re-discovering who my father was, it means a lot. Scott http://dl.dropbox.com/u/20673422/watergate%205.jpg

Scott, here are my replies to your question and your comment: (i) I've read rumors that he was medium height and rumors that he was shorter than average, but one way to know for certain is to obtain his Police mugshots and booking record from the Watergate break in. So, I've requested that; then I'll be able to tell you for sure how tall Frank (Fiorini) Sturgis really was. (ii) I believe that we had so many cooks in the kitchen (so many people contributing to any assassination plot against JFK that they heard about). But they weren't all contributing to the same ground-crew! Probably a lot of people believed that their hit squad killed JFK, and so their cash contribution was the deciding factor. But in reallity, it was only a fraction of that money that was successful, just as it was only a fraction of the hired 'mechanics' who actually killed JFK. Although the ground-crew that actually killed JFK was professional, and so they would not have talked, this would not prevent liars and boasters from claiming that they were the ones who killed JFK. It is almost a boast today - not really a confession - for somebody to say that his crew was the crew that killed JFK a half-century ago. Would somebody have talked? Actually, plenty of people talked -- but most of them are fake. For example, I don't believe the mob killed JFK, because, as Jim Garrison said, they did not have the means to cover it up, or the proper sniper's modus operandi. Yet Sam Giancana was going to testify, and Johnny Rosselli was going to testify, and others, also. Why? For prestige, probably. But the people who put up the cash for these hit-squads would never let them sing - so they were both murdered before they could testify to the HSCA. I think we agree, Scott -- the mob lacks the discipline of a long-term chain-of-command. That's why I believe the actual assassins were from a different school -- one with more discipline and more honor. The actual JFK assassins were probably trained marksmen with military discipline. Best regards, --Paul Trejo No need to go through the trouble, I'll tell you. My father stood at 5' 10". Frank was about four inches taller then my father. Frank would have stood at 6' 2", not short at all, by no means. Now, I have a question for those who are researchers, I have searched and searched, I cannot find any public record or open testimony from those in Watergate, my father was called twice to testify on Watergate, my question is, can anyone find any information on my father's testimony or what he said at the Watergate Hearings, I would even be willing to pay you for your time and any services at any amount if that what it takes to find my father's information, can anyone please help me? Like I said, I'm no researcher and I don't know where to begin. Scott

The Rockefeller Commission of the U.S. Congress in 1974 investigated Sturgis and E. Howard Hunt in connection with the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Specifically, it investigated allegations that E. Howard Hunt and Frank Sturgis were CIA agents and were present in Dallas at the time of the assassination and could have fired the alleged shots from the grassy knoll. Some support for Hunt's involvement came from Kerry Wendell Thornley, who believed he had conversed with Hunt (who Thornley claimed used the alias "Gary Kirstein") on numerous occasions from 1961 to 1963 regarding plans to assassinate John F. Kennedy. Newsweek magazine reported and printed photographs of three men, including two supposedly resembling Hunt and Sturgis, who were detained at the grassy knoll shortly after the assassination. The Newsweek article stated the official reports that the men were released and were only "railroad bums" who would find shelter sleeping in the boxcars of the trains located near the grassy knoll. According to Newsweek, the men were released without further inquiry. According to the 1975 Rockefeller Commission report, Hunt testified that he had never met Sturgis before they were introduced by Bernard Barker in Miami in 1972. Sturgis testified to the same effect, except that he did not recall whether the introduction had taken place in late 1971 or early 1972. Sturgis further testified that while he had often heard of "Eduardo," a CIA political officer who had been active in the work of the Cuban Revolutionary Council in Miami prior to the Bay of Pigs operation in April 1961, he had never met him and did not know until 1971 or 1972 that "Eduardo" was E. Howard Hunt. In a deathbed statement released in 2007, Hunt named Sturgis as one of the participants in "The Big Event", which Hunt's son claims to be the code name for the assassination. However Hunt never mentions Kennedy, Oswald, Dallas, or the assassination in any way in the "confession".

I think everybody here has their own theory, and there is nothing wrong with that so long as no one is trying to shove their theory down my throat, like Mr. Von for example, I respect his work as I do everyone else's. I am not a reseacher, or a CTer what ever that means, or a lone nutter, or an Oswald did it kinda guy. I'm me, with a personal vendetta. But, that doesn't mean I can't express my thoughts, I beleive that if LBJ was the person behind the assassination he wouldn't have been so worried about who may be out to assassinate him. I beleive that LBJ created the cover-up hence the Warren Commission and wanted to put this to rest hoping that the American people would buy into what the Commission tried to sell in a short nine month period. That's my take on LBJ for JFK and I'm. Scott Kaiser

This is all interesting information, I know that Abraham Bolden touches on this subject quite a bit and blames the Secret Service for not doing their job, and for their late nite drunken stupors and dollar poppin strippers at the clubs they decided to visit the nite before giving Kennedy their full attention and protection allowing the unspeakable to happen. Mr Bolden makes it sound as though they were a bunch of thoughtless, reckless, irresponsible, negligent cast of characters. However, I'm sure that Gerald Blaine would say different.

Scott, here are my replies to your questions and remarks: (1) My measurements were relative: (i) Howard Hunt was very tall compared to Sturgis; and (ii) the tramp who looked like Sturgis was very tall compared to the tramp who looked like Howard Hunt. Therefore there was no match. (2) I agree with you that either Marita Lorentz or Gerry Hemming were lying about who was on the caravan. I don't know who was lying. When the late Gerry Hemming was on this Forum, he blatantly called Marita a xxxx. Yet in another context he softened his voice and admitted that he was invited to join the caravan. My point was that if (and only if) Marita was lying about Hemming, then she could have also been lying about Oswald. It is also possible that Marita was lying about Hemming and telling the truth about Oswald. (It is also possible that Marita was telling the truth about Hemming but lying about Oswald.) But if (and only if) Marita was telling the truth, then Hemming was lying. But please remember that Marita was not an eye-witness to the JFK assassination - she was only an eye-witness to an illegal weapons deal, which she claims was consummated by Howard Hunt (and Howard Hunt did not have a believable alibi for that day, according to a duly appointed jury). So, even if Marita was telling the truth, we are left to guess whether these weapons were the weapons used to assassinate JFK, and whether these sharpshooters were the sharpshooters that assassinated JFK. She had no eye-witness information about that. (3) While I am not an expert on the controversy over Oswald in Mexico, we have a Forum member (Harry Dean) who has also joined this thread, whose memoirs say that the famous war hero, Guy Gabaldon, was in Mexico at that time, working for the JBS, and that Gabaldon gave some money to Oswald in Mexico at that time. Oswald had no idea, according to Harry Dean, that the money came from the JBS, or that this money was buying Oswald's services as the patsy for a famous crime. (4) The money for the dozens of hit squads who promised to kill JFK for a price came from many different sources, according to my reading. Some money came from Carlos Marcello. Some came from Santos Trafficante. Some came from Sam Giancana. Some possibly came from Howard Hughes (since his accountant coordinated all the Mafia money). Some money came from Howard Milteer, some money came from Jimmy Hoffa, some money came from H.L. Hunt, and some money came from the JBS, according to sources. There were probably hundreds of rich individuals and groups that contributed whatever they could, because they truly, sincerely believed that JFK was a communist traitor to the USA. H.L. Hunt was particularly generous, according to reports. Best regards, --Paul Trejo You still didn't answer my question, I'm curious you say Sturgis was short, do you know how tall Sturgis was? When the late Gerry Hemming was on this Forum, he blatantly called Marita a xxxx. I certainly wouldn't believe everything that came out of Hemmings mouth, several people I know who knew Hemming personally would agree, most of his time was spent behind a computer talking a lot of crap, you don't have to beleive me, but I beleive those who knew Hemming well. Hell he got paid $65,000 for an interview by Noel Twyman who gave Twyman nothing but a whole lot of crap. The problem I have with that is when you have to many people involved wanting to or contributing to an assassination you have to many cooks in the kitchen, someone is about to spill the beans if you're not careful. What I mean is that someone would have talked, take the Mob for example, someone is always wanting to be the top man on the totem pole, king of the mountain, always willing to whack the top guy so he the next guy could be (in charge). Its easy for word to get out on who is trying to kill the top dog, so the top dog has the guy whacked himself. To many people involved only spoils the account if you know what I mean, you can't have that many people involved without someone talking about it. You have to keep a low profile, trust no one, there's a saying, those who are closest to you become your worst enemy, keep your friends close and your enemy closer.

That's another good question, Scott; how big a role did E. Howard Hunt play? On his deathbed he claimed to play a minor role, so that's fairly good evidence that he was at least involved. But how big was his role? A lot of our suspicions about E. Howard Hunt are centered in the landmark legal decision won by Mark Lane as described in his book, Plausible Denial (1992). Lane convinced a jury that E. Howard Hunt was involved in the JFK assassination to some degree, based mainly on the evidence of Marita Lorentz. Marita's story is to some degree documented in the videos you uploaded earlier today on this thread. She said that she joined Frank Sturgis and a number of rogue CIA operatives and stooges in a weapons smuggling operation in late November 1963, starting from Florida and ending in Dallas, Texas. Mark Lane made her sound believable. She further claimed that the purchaser of these weapons was none other than E. Howard Hunt, who went by the code-name, "Eduardo." Yet there are problems with her story. She also named Lee Harvey Oswald and Gerry Patrick Hemming as two of the men involved in that smuggling caravan. Yet Hemming (when he was a member of this Forum) denied that he was in that caravan! It is true that Hemming admitted that he was invited to join the caravan, and that he knew the caravan existed -- but he firmly denied riding in the car, as Marita claimed he did. So - if Marita lied about Hemming's participation, then she could have lied about Oswald's participation, too. (And for the record, that person standing behind Frank Sturgis in those videos you kindly shared -- that doesn't look like Oswald to me.) I'm not saying that Oswald wasn't in that caravan -- I have no proof for my theory yet -- but this is after all the week that Oswald should have been in Mexico with Nagell, trying to get into Cuba, wasn't it? Now, E. Howard Hunt claims to be a benchwarmer. I believe that is correct -- he was not one of the three tramps as some writers have claimed. (The two tramps that look a little like Howard Hunt and Frank Sturgis have a major difference -- the tramp who looked like Hunt was short, but Hunt was tall; and the tramp who looked like Sturgis was tall, but Sturgis was short. No match.) Because E. Howard Hunt knew so many of the conspirators, he was an accessory after the fact -- his main crime was his silence. (The same applies, also, to David Atlee Phillips, whose main role was to obtain lots of cash for Alpha 66 and similar counter-revolutionary groups. He knew what was going on, but he only offered minor help here and there, in response to rare requests from the major players, IMHO.) Yes - H.L. Hunt was far more involved. For one thing, when E.H. Hunt and D. Atlee Phillips wanted cash for their operations, they often got it from H.L. Hunt, anyway. Unlike the rogue CIA guys who were in the game for the money and the machismo, and who had no firm ideological beliefs of any kind, and whose loyalties could often go to the highest bidder, H.L. Hunt was totally committed to his ideology. For Hunt, and for all JBS extremists, JFK was a communist, a traitor, and worked for the aid and comfort of the USSR. The conspiracy was only the patriotic thing to do. What H.L. Hunt needed was somebody at the ground-level -- somebody with real military connections -- somebody with a real zeal to get the job done. Somebody who had nothing more to lose. (Remember, when Edwin Walker resigned from his post as Major General, he gave up his military pension! He was angry! He was penniless!) My current theory: It was General Edwin Walker -- financed by H.L. Hunt and supported by probably 100 field operatives, including violently anti-communist foreigners from Cuba, Germany and Russia, but mostly from the extreme right-wing in Dallas, USA. Best regards, --Paul Trejo I'm curious you say Sturgis was short, do you know how tall Sturgis was? That doesn't mean there is a problem with her story, just because Hemming said something else, the question is which one do you beleive, or should I say, which one is telling the truth? Do you have proof of Oswald in Mexico? Yes - H.L. Hunt was far more involved. For one thing, when E.H. Hunt and D. Atlee Phillips wanted cash for their operations, they often got it from H.L. Hunt, anyway So that's where the money came from, I should have known. My current theory: It was General Edwin Walker -- financed by H.L. Hunt and supported by probably 100 field operatives, including violently anti-communist foreigners from Cuba, Germany and Russia, but mostly from the extreme right-wing in Dallas, USA. Could be!

I don't know about any of that stuff, or what you're talking about, interesting nevertheless. Just as an Fyi: Felix Rodriguez (aka "Max Gomez") was the one trying to get Bill Clinton's favorite state trooper to assassinate Terry Reed down in Mexico. Bill Clinton had gotten L.D. Brown into the CIA. They, meaning Rodriguez, North and the Bush family, wanted to "dirty up" Bill Clinton, by having his favorite state trooper commit crimes. Clinton had talked Terry Reed into going to Mexico; I think he may have been knowingly or unknowingly setting up Reed to be assassinated (ironically by his own favorite state trooper L.D. Brown). They (meaning Rodriguez and the CIA) wanted to murder Terry Reed (I guess they thought he knew too much about Iran-contra and the drug smuggling) down in Mexico because it is easier to get away with murder out of the USA. L.D. Brown's book: "Crossfire: Witness in the Clinton Investigation" (1999) http://www.amazon.com/Crossfire-Investigation-L-D-Brown/dp/1582750033/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1329184641&sr=1-1 Terry Reed went on to write the epic underground blockbuster book: "Compromised: Bush, Clinton and the CIA" (1994) which sold 200,000 books purely by word of mouth. http://www.amazon.com/Compromised-Clinton-Bush-Terry-Reed/dp/1561712493/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1329184971&sr=1-1 There is no telling what Felix Rodriguez has done: assassinations, drug smuggling, a whole range of criminal activity for the CIA. I am sure if you ask Rodiguez why he hates Castro he would tell you because he is a crook who has killed people ... Here is Felix Rodriguez' book "Shadow Warrior: the CIA Hero of a Hundred Unknown Battles" (1989) He wrote that book just a few years after trying to murder Terry Reed. I want to know all the stories Rodriguez did NOT put in his book: http://www.amazon.com/Shadow-Warrior-Hero-Hundred-Battles/dp/0671667211/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1329185133&sr=1-1 I bet Rodriguez knew Gen. Ed Lansdale and David Morales personally. They may have all been working on murdering John Kennedy in Dallas. Ditto his relationship with George Herbert Walker Bush - ditto Dallas. Felix said that? I don't think Felix wrote that, I think someone else did, that seems to be to much information that Felix would say, I don't know about any of that sorry.

Scott, thanks for bringing up the doubts by Mark Lane, one of the great writers on this topic since the days of the Warren Commission. I tend to think that letter was a forgery, too, since it is a little too blatant. Why would the KGB want to forge evidence linking Oswald to HL Hunt? For one thing, as LBJ himself said to Senator Russell when twisting his arm to join the Warren Commission, some people were claiming that the USSR killed JFK, and wanted to lead the USA into an immediate showdown with the USSR. But LBJ said, "we know that Khrushchev didn't have a damn thing to do with it." Well, the USSR were terrified that the extreme right-wing in the USA would use the assassination of JFK as an excuse to drop the bomb on the USSR (Dr. Strangelove style). Also, the Soviet press already announced their guess - that the extreme right-wing in Dallas, led by HL Hunt, was behind the JFK assassination. Therefore, the motive for the KGB to forge this letter by Oswald, asking "Mr. Hunt" for some money or for a meeting, is not difficult to put together. If Mark Lane thinks it was a forgery, and it sounds like a forgery (and it didn't show up until months later), then I tend to think it was a forgery. However, handwriting analysts say the handwriting is too close to be a forgery. So, it might be authentic. Oswald was a money-grabber, I believe. (This is why he liked hanging out with George DeMohrenschildt, and also with Clay Shaw. He was hoping that being a mercenary would one day pay off big time.) So, if (and only if) the letter is authentic, then I still believe Oswald would have addressed E.H. Hunt by his CIA alias instead. It's an intriguing question. Best regards, --Paul Trejo You may very well be right, what am I thinking? Perhaps, Oswald did or did not write that letter, and there would be no reason for Oswald to write that to Howard Hunt. Howard Hunt only says he was a benchwarmer on the big event, I'm sure H.L. Hunt must have played a bigger roll. Scott

I don't know about any of that stuff, or what you're talking about, interesting nevertheless.

I have not completely ruled out Castro knowing something before hand of Kennedy's assassination, as my friend Jose Pujol puts it so passionately, he thinks Castro was involved, others who have fought Castro and plotted to assassinate him said, "I don't think Castro was involved directly, but he help by incorporating something". Scott, you can learn a lot from these people. Keep interviewing them. They will give you lots of information. They will reveal stuff that they don't know the significance of what they are revealing. People live in their fantasy worlds of propaganda - whether it is the anti-Castro Cubans hate Castro so much they can't think straight, the JFK groupies who can't come to terms with his sexual promiscuity, or Democrats who don't think Bill Clinton ever raped anybody, or Republicans who think the Bushes and Oliver North never ran huge amounts of cocaine in the 1980's, or people subject to only Cuban propaganda or people who think the New York Times would never lie to them, or people who think 9/11 was an "inside job" and all they consume is Alex Jones, or those poor, pitiful "lone nutters." Or white people from Alabama that think slavery was not that bad and segregation was okay. People's beliefs are a product of their environment. There is absolutely no way in hell - can I say that? - that Fidel Casto was behind the JFK assassination based on what we have known for decades. I give it a 1 in 100,000,000 chance. Conversely LBJ, CIA, elements of US military the American shadow government would be a 1 to 100 favorite. Meaning get $100 on them, you get a $1 pay off. Bet a $1 on Castro, get $100,000,000 if he killed JFK. Gen. Ed Lansdale was one of the major perps of the JFK assasssination. That photo of him at TSBD is extremely important. So, please, keep interviewing these anti-Castro Cubans and former intelligence operatives if they will talk to you. #1 on my list would be Felix Rodriguez - these guys are all goldmines of information and Rodriguez is the motherlode. He probably knows exactly who killed JFK. I don't know, I have only shared in what information I know and that's all I know, as for interviewing anyone, I'm not doing that, they don't know, and I doubt Felix would know anything, there is a fine line I walk and I don't cross that line.

Lee Oswald was planning to make another trip in October or December 1963, or in January of 1964. Dosen't sound like someone who is planning to assassinate the president.

Great post by the way Robert, good work! This of coarse was after the Bay of Pigs and the Cuban Missile Crisis, of coarse "they" felt (betrayed by Kennedy), not once, with the Bay of Pigs by not sending in U.S. Military. Not twice with the Cuban Missile Crisis by not sending in U.S. Military but three times by creating a "peace deal" with Castro and not sending in U.S. Military. "They" also felt betrayed by Kennedy when (he) Kennedy paid Castro 53 million dollars for the brigade members that were captured by Castro, "they" wanted to go in and forcefully remove those prisoners and kill Castro, but that too didn't happen.

I have not completely ruled out Castro knowing something before hand of Kennedy's assassination, as my friend Jose Pujol puts it so passionately, he thinks Castro was involved, others who have fought Castro and plotted to assassinate him said, "I don't think Castro was involved directly, but he help by incorporating something".

He was a dictator 40 years ago, as he is a dictator today 40 years later, its time for him, his brother, his cabinet to fall.

Not that I'm in anyway saying Oswald is guilty of killing the president, I'm the first to disagree and suggest he was in fact set up, but to assume of someones innocents because he was reading the paper and not getting down to business rarely means anything if you're conspiring to assassinate someone, it doesn't entirely mean you're off the hook. I mean if I were to whack someone. I'd want to make it look as inconspicuous as possible, and if it meant reading the paper, then completing my job at a latter time, then that's what I'm gonna do. I agree, Scott, that Oswald's reading the paper doesn't really tell us all that much. But there are a number of Oswald-did-it types who insist Oswald didn't really work that day, but only pretended to work while preparing for his moment. If Oswald spent the first part of the day calmly reading the paper, that cuts into their nonsense. I understand, isn't there anything indicating any time cards on those who worked that day, weren't they interviewed? I read somewhere about another employee named Frankie Kaiser was he there when Oswald was apparently at work?

Mark, IMHO, if (and only if) that letter is authentic, then Oswald would have addressed E.H. Hunt by his CIA Alias, "Eduardo," and not by his last name. So, since the writer used the name, "Hunt," he was almost certainly writing to H.L. Hunt. --Paul Trejo ^^ Not necessarily true, E.H Hunt was "Eduardo" to the anti-Castro groups and during the Bay of Pigs, in fact many knew him by his real name, even during the Bay of Pigs. In fact Sturgis knew E.H. Hunt since 1954 during the Guatemalan coup. He only adopted that name "Eduardo" while he was involved with the Cubans in South Florida. Scott, I agree that Oswald might not have used the name "Eduardo" when addressing E.H. Hunt in writing -- but Hunt had other aliases, too. Insofar as Oswald was accepted in the fringes of the rogue CIA underground, he would have known the appropriate alias, and he would have used the proper alias when writing to E.H. Hunt. He wouldn't have used his real name, IMHO. That's why I say it's better than 50/50 that Oswald was writing to H.L. Hunt (if the letter is authentic). Think of Oswald's situation in life; he did not like holding down regular jobs. He changed menial jobs so often that one gets the idea he took those jobs only to provide a cover for his lifestyle. He obtained cash from his many post office boxes, and also from the local Western Union (according to a clerk in the Dallas Western Union). He owned a Minolta spy camera; he was always looking for money. Clay Shaw was mainly a money source for Oswald (and Banister and Ferrie). Oswald saw the older spies go to very rich people to ask for money for right-wing adventures -- and get it. He was practicing for the day when he would call the shots, IMHO. Best regards, --Paul Trejo Sorry, I have edited my last post and added more information sense then, I meant to say, ^^ Not necessarily true, E.H Hunt was "Eduardo" to the anti-Castro groups and during the Bay of Pigs, in fact many knew him by his real name, even during the Bay of Pigs. In fact Sturgis knew E.H. Hunt since 1954 during the Guatemalan coup. He only adopted that name "Eduardo" while he was involved with the Cubans in South Florida. Mark Lane describes this letter as a possible forgery while being very skeptical, and in 1999, the note was revealed to be a "Soviet forgery" in a book by KGB defector Vasili Mitrokhin. perhaps written by the Russians. Why would any Russian write this? But should it be taken at face value? The House Select Committee on assassinations had three handwriting experts examine the note to determine its authenticity. I do beleive that someone in the KGB is seeking notoriety by adding one more book to the all ready long list. The writing and signature of that letter and the entire of Lee in my father's phone book are nearly identical, am I to beleive that because some Soviet KGB says its a "Soviet forgery" am I suppose to beleive him? If in fact this letter is authenticate and sense Lee was a Marxist who as an individual would develop his own capacities and talents. I say Oswald may have been swinging both ways, on one hand he was anti-Castro, but on the other he was pro-Cuba. So what does that say about a confused young man? I don't beleive that letter had anything to do with H.L. Hunt. There is ample information/evidence that Oswald visited South Miami where he may have encountered Howard Hunt, which makes sense, but I seriously doubt that Oswald and H.L. Hunt who calls himself the richest man in the world would be rubbing elbows. I do apologize for the several error, typo's and misspelled words, that's what happens when I'm usually in a hurry. Scott

Mark, IMHO, if (and only if) that letter is authentic, then Oswald would have addressed E.H. Hunt by his CIA Alias, "Eduardo," and not by his last name. So, since the writer used the name, "Hunt," he was almost certainly writing to H.L. Hunt. --Paul Trejo ^^ Not necessarily true, E.H Hunt was "Eduardo" to the anti-Castro groups and during the Bay of Pigs, in fact many knew him by his real name, even during the Bay of Pigs. In fact Sturgis knew E.H. Hunt since 1954 during the Guatemalan coup. He only adopted that name "Eduardo" while he was involved with the Cubans in South Florida. Mark Lane describes this letter as a possible forgery while being very skeptical, and in 1999, the note was revealed to be a "Soviet forgery" in a book by KGB defector Vasili Mitrokhin. perhaps written by the Russians. Why would any Russian write this? But should it be taken at face value? The House Select Committee on assassinations had three handwriting experts examine the note to determine its authenticity. I do beleive that someone in the KGB is seeking notoriety by adding one more book to the all ready long list. The writing and signature of that letter and the entire of Lee is my father's phone book are nearly identical, am I to beleive that because some Soviet KGB says its a "Soviet forgery" am I suppose to beleive him? If in fact this letter is authenticate and sense Lee was a Marxist who as an individual would develop his own capacities and talents. I say Oswald may have been swinging both ways, on one hand he was anti-Castro, but on the other he was pro-Cuba. So what does that say about a confused young man? I don't beleive that letter had anything to do with H.L. Hunt. There is ample information/evidence that Oswald visited South Miami where he may have encountered Howard Hunt, which makes sense, but I seriously doubt that Oswald and H.L. Hunt who calls himself the richest man in the world would be rubbing elbows.

Not that I'm in anyway saying Oswald is guilty of killing the president, I'm the first to disagree and suggest he was in fact set up, but to assume of someones innocents because he was reading the paper and not getting down to business rarely means anything if you're conspiring to assassinate someone, it doesn't entirely mean you're off the hook. I mean if I were to whack someone. I'd want to make it look as inconspicuous as possible, and if it meant reading the paper, then completing my job at a latter time, then that's what I'm gonna do.

H.L. Hunt was an oil tycoon, by 1957 his estimated fortune was approximately $400 to $700 million dollars. Hunts support of Barry Goldwater for the Republican party in 1964 led to smarting under that rebuff and disgusted with Johnson's liberal policies after assuming the presidency in 1963. Hunt supported Eisenhower in 1956, however, in 1960 pushed hard for the nomination of LBJ and because LBJ agreed to become JFK running mate Hunt contributed some $100,000 to Kennedy's administration. Hunt who is a successful business man out of Dallas TX lived in a relatively modest home in Dallas. Hunt was also often overheard while introducing himself to strangers by saying. "Hello, I am H.L. Hunt, the worlds richest man"... I do beleive that had Oswald contact H.L.Hunt rather then E.H. Hunt the writings of that letter would have reflected so. Although, LHO was living in Dallas after moving from New Orleans, LHO also visited Miami, and because there is no hard facts of LHO visiting Miami there has been reported sightings of Oswald who may or may not have had an encounter with Frank Sturgis. There also seems to be a tape of LHO hiding his face when the filming took place sometime in late 1962 or early part of 1963 in the South Florida Everglades, those who were present in that film were Marita Lorenz, Frank Sturgis and Frank Bender aka Gerry Doller. Howard Hunts early ties to the 1954 Guatemalan coup dubbed "Operation PBSUCCESS", which was also approved by president Eisenhower, many of the same players participated in their very own domestic coup called "Dealey Plaza". Because of Howard Hunts ties to Nixon's anti-Castro underworld and his assassins towards unfriendly foreign leaders, only leads me to beleive that Hunts roll as a "bench warmer" was in fact true. Hunts stayed in South Florida which allowed him to under go a much larger operation and covertly work with those in the organization while keeping it totally secret. The birth of setting up Oswald was well on its way. Hunt would latter bribe Nixon for two million dollars for hush money? In the meantime Nixon tries to blackmail CIA chief Richard Helms over the secrets that Hunt might blab regarding CIA's links to "the Bay of Pigs After all, Nixon said, "Of course, this Hunt, You open that scab, that will uncover a lot of things." "In fact, I was puzzled when he [Nixon] told me, 'Tell Ehrlichman this whole group of Cubans [Watergate burglars] is tied to the Bay of Pigs.' After a pause I said, 'The Bay of Pigs? What does that have to do with this [the Watergate burglary]?' But Nixon merely said, 'Ehrlichman will know what I mean,' and dropped the subject." Later in his book, Haldeman appears to answer his own question when he says, "It seems that in all of those Nixon references to the Bay of Pigs, he was actually referring to the Kennedy assassination." In short to answer your question as to whether Oswald was referring to H.L. Hunt or E.H. Hunt. I do beleive he was referring to the latter. http://mtracy9.tripod.com/kennedy_nixon.htm http://ajweberman.com/tape.htm Do you access to the tape of LHO hiding his face when the filming took place sometime in late 1962 or early part of 1963 in the South Florida Everglades, those who were present in that film were Marita Lorenz, Frank Sturgis and Frank Bender aka Gerry Doller. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The person standing behind Frank Sturgis just ten second into this film then quickly turns away when he notices he is being filmed has been identified as Lee Oswald. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In this second film, it is NOT Oswald, but someone else, Oswald was standing behind Sturgis, you can't see him in this film, who you can see are Frank Sturgis, the man holding the gun and Frank Bender aka Gerry Doller waring an army hat, fatigues and glasses. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Here is the FULL clip of everyone. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

H.L. Hunt was an oil tycoon, by 1957 his estimated fortune was approximately $400 to $700 million dollars. Hunts support of Barry Goldwater for the Republican party in 1964 led to smarting under that rebuff and disgusted with Johnson's liberal policies after assuming the presidency in 1963. Hunt supported Eisenhower in 1956, however, in 1960 pushed hard for the nomination of LBJ and because LBJ agreed to become JFK running mate Hunt contributed some $100,000 to Kennedy's administration. Hunt who is a successful business man out of Dallas TX lived in a relatively modest home in Dallas. Hunt was also often overheard while introducing himself to strangers by saying. "Hello, I am H.L. Hunt, the worlds richest man"... I do beleive that had Oswald contact H.L.Hunt rather then E.H. Hunt the writings of that letter would have reflected so. Although, LHO was living in Dallas after moving from New Orleans, LHO also visited Miami, and because there is no hard facts of LHO visiting Miami there has been reported sightings of Oswald who may or may not have had an encounter with Frank Sturgis. There also seems to be a tape of LHO hiding his face when the filming took place sometime in late 1962 or early part of 1963 in the South Florida Everglades, those who were present in that film were Marita Lorenz, Frank Sturgis and Frank Bender aka Gerry Doller. Howard Hunts early ties to the 1954 Guatemalan coup dubbed "Operation PBSUCCESS", which was also approved by president Eisenhower, many of the same players participated in their very own domestic coup called "Dealey Plaza". Because of Howard Hunts ties to Nixon's anti-Castro underworld and his assassins towards unfriendly foreign leaders, only leads me to beleive that Hunts roll as a "bench warmer" was in fact true. Hunts stayed in South Florida which allowed him to under go a much larger operation and covertly work with those in the organization while keeping it totally secret. The birth of setting up Oswald was well on its way. Hunt would latter bribe Nixon for two million dollars for hush money? In the meantime Nixon tries to blackmail CIA chief Richard Helms over the secrets that Hunt might blab regarding CIA's links to "the Bay of Pigs After all, Nixon said, "Of course, this Hunt, You open that scab, that will uncover a lot of things." "In fact, I was puzzled when he [Nixon] told me, 'Tell Ehrlichman this whole group of Cubans [Watergate burglars] is tied to the Bay of Pigs.' After a pause I said, 'The Bay of Pigs? What does that have to do with this [the Watergate burglary]?' But Nixon merely said, 'Ehrlichman will know what I mean,' and dropped the subject." Later in his book, Haldeman appears to answer his own question when he says, "It seems that in all of those Nixon references to the Bay of Pigs, he was actually referring to the Kennedy assassination." In short to answer your question as to whether Oswald was referring to H.L. Hunt or E.H. Hunt. I do beleive he was referring to the latter. http://mtracy9.tripod.com/kennedy_nixon.htm http://ajweberman.com/tape.htm