E Howard Hunt's Deathbed Confession:Who Killed JFK (1 Viewer)

[mvtrucking]

I did a search and could find no posts on this. I found this very interesting
as I remember the JFK assasination(Like 5 yrs old and remember everyone being upset)

The Last Confessions of E. Howard Hunt

He was the ultimate keeper of secrets, lurking in the shadows of American history. He toppled banana republics, planned the Bay of Pigs invasion and led the Watergate break-in. Now he would reveal what he'd always kept hidden: who killed JFK


http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/13893143/the_last_confessions_of_e_howard_hunt/2

 

[superchuck500]

Here, I'll cut to the chase. (The article is 8 pages long and a good deal of it is about Hunt's son)

That time in miami, with saint by his bed and disease eating away at him and him thinking he's six months away from death, E. Howard finally put pen to paper and started writing. Saint had been working toward this moment for a long while, and now it was going to happen. He got his father an A&W diet root beer, then sat down in the old man's wheelchair and waited.

E. Howard scribbled the initials "LBJ," standing for Kennedy's ambitious vice president, Lyndon Johnson. Under "LBJ," connected by a line, he wrote the name Cord Meyer. Meyer was a CIA agent whose wife had an affair with JFK; later she was murdered, a case that's never been solved. Next his father connected to Meyer's name the name Bill Harvey, another CIA agent; also connected to Meyer's name was the name David Morales, yet another CIA man and a well-known, particularly vicious black-op specialist. And then his father connected to Morales' name, with a line, the framed words "French Gunman Grassy Knoll."

So there it was, according to E. Howard Hunt. LBJ had Kennedy killed. It had long been speculated upon. But now E. Howard was saying that's the way it was. And that Lee Harvey Oswald wasn't the only shooter in Dallas. There was also, on the grassy knoll, a French gunman, presumably the Corsican Mafia assassin Lucien Sarti, who has figured prominently in other assassination theories.

"By the time he handed me the paper, I was in a state of shock," Saint says. "His whole life, to me and everybody else, he'd always professed to not know anything about any of it. But I knew this had to be the truth. If my dad was going to make anything up, he would have made something up about the Mafia, or Castro, or Khrushchev. He didn't like Johnson. But you don't falsely implicate your own country, for Christ's sake. My father is old-school, a dyed-in-the-wool patriot, and that's the last thing he would do."

Later that week, E. Howard also gave Saint two sheets of paper that contained a fuller narrative. It starts out with LBJ again, connecting him to Cord Meyer, then goes on: "Cord Meyer discusses a plot with [David Atlee] Phillips who brings in Wm. Harvey and Antonio Veciana. He meets with Oswald in Mexico City. . . . Then Veciana meets w/ Frank Sturgis in Miami and enlists David Morales in anticipation of killing JFK there. But LBJ changes itinerary to Dallas, citing personal reasons."

David Atlee Phillips, the CIA's Cuban operations chief in Miami at the time of JFK's death, knew E. Howard from the Guatemala-coup days. Veciana is a member of the Cuban exile community. Sturgis, like Saint's father, is supposed to have been one of the three tramps photographed in Dealey Plaza. Sturgis was also one of the Watergate plotters, and he is a man whom E. Howard, under oath, has repeatedly sworn to have not met until Watergate, so to Saint the mention of his name was big news.

In the next few paragraphs, E. Howard goes on to describe the extent of his own involvement. It revolves around a meeting he claims he attended, in 1963, with Morales and Sturgis. It takes place in a Miami hotel room. Here's what happens:

Morales leaves the room, at which point Sturgis makes reference to a "Big Event" and asks E. Howard, "Are you with us?"

E. Howard asks Sturgis what he's talking about.

Sturgis says, "Killing JFK."

E. Howard, "incredulous," says to Sturgis, "You seem to have everything you need. Why do you need me?" In the handwritten narrative, Sturgis' response is unclear, though what E. Howard says to Sturgis next isn't: He says he won't "get involved in anything involving Bill Harvey, who is an alcoholic psycho."

After that, the meeting ends. E. Howard goes back to his "normal" life and "like the rest of the country . . . is stunned by JFK's death and realizes how lucky he is not to have had a direct role."

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/13893143/the_last_confessions_of_e_howard_hunt/7

 

[daybreaker]

i read that article a while ago. It really sounds like a big scam by this guy to sell his book.

the JFK museum in dallas is pretty cool, because they show one exhibit, and after it, youre like "Wow, there's so much evidence here, there couldnt have been any conspiracy." then the very next exhibit has you thinking "wow... there's so much evidence supporting a second gunmen, how could they not have followed up on it? It has to be a conspiracy!"

So I left the JFK museum with more information on the JFK assassination than most normal people have, and even less of an idea of what actually happened.

 

[superchuck500]

I agree that it is dubious.

Confessions of guilt are one thing- but "confessions" that someone else did something awful but the "confessor" was strong enough to tell them no are a little more questionable.

And book selling would be a great motive. Supposed "inside" information about one of the biggest questions of our time would no doubt make millions. And the son is a bit of a tramp himself.

I really just question the whole "they asked my Dad to be in on it but he was too much of a patriot to kill the President" bit. I'm not saying it isn't true. I'm just saying that I'm very very suspect.

 

[Mamba]

I've studied the JFK assassination a great deal and have read many books on the subject, and I come away agreeing with this guys statement (from the article):

"I read two dozen books on the JFK assassination, and the more I read, the more I was unsure about what happened. I had all these questions and uncertainties."

I think any conspiracy theorist would do well to read Gerald Posner's book "Case Closed." This article about E. Howard Hunt, while intriguing, is not unlike several other books/articles written by authors who claim to have "inside info" and they all contradict one another. Posner's book does a great job of debunking most of the claims out there.

 

[TPS]

Of course this post will self destruct in the near future. :rock:

TPS

 

[SaintNELA]

Somebody call Oliver Stone.

 

[blackadder]

I've studied the JFK assassination a great deal and have read many books on the subject, and I come away agreeing with this guys statement (from the article):

"I read two dozen books on the JFK assassination, and the more I read, the more I was unsure about what happened. I had all these questions and uncertainties."

I think any conspiracy theorist would do well to read Gerald Posner's book "Case Closed." This article about E. Howard Hunt, while intriguing, is not unlike several other books/articles written by authors who claim to have "inside info" and they all contradict one another. Posner's book does a great job of debunking most of the claims out there.

I read the Posner book. It did a good job a making the case that Lee Harvey Oswald was more than just a "patsy." But I wasn't completely convinced that he was simply the "angry lone nut" as claimed.

We'll never know for sure if there was anybody else involved.

 

[CT Saints Fan]

I've been saying this for months.

 

[DadsDream]

My ex-brother-in-law is a brilliant man, but he's also a recovering paranoid schizophrenic taking lithium treatments.

He wrote a book on the assassination and made a tidy living at Deaily Plaza, hawking his book on the street and finally getting his book put in the various stores around the site.

Last I heard, he's living in the Virgin Islands, selling cheap jewelry to the tourists and drawing a monthly royalty check from the book.

He pinned the whole thing on the mob, working concert with the C.I.A.

The man is an absolute loon and a scam artist.

 

[Mamba]

I read the Posner book. It did a good job a making the case that Lee Harvey Oswald was more than just a "patsy." But I wasn't completely convinced that he was simply the "angry lone nut" as claimed.

We'll never know for sure if there was anybody else involved.

I'm pretty convinced Oswald acted alone, but at one time, I also was a conspiracy theorist (only because the only books I ever read were books written by fellow conspiracy theorists--and I'm talking about dozens of books/documentaries). Finally, when I had the guts to read Posner's book, my perspective totally changed. I'm not saying I'm positive Oswald acted alone, but it would take a lot of convincing to persuade me to believe it was an inside job at this point.

One thing I have learned is that the 'evidence' presented from both sides has been twisted around so much, that it's hard to distinguish between fact and fiction in this case. The more you read about it, the more confused you get. If you only read one book by a conspiracy theorist, you won't get a full picture of what I'm talking about. There are books out there on the Castro conspiracy, the Marcello conspiracy, the Giancana conspiracy, the LBJ/Texas oilmen conspiracy, the CIA conspiracy, and ALL of them will have you pretty darn convinced that their story is the right one...and they ALL contradict one another (it's ludicrous). It's the most confusing subject in American history, and you're right, we'll never know 100% what happened.

 

[HouDat]

The fact that many records on the entire JFK fiasco remain sealed is pretty much all the proof I need that there was/is some sort of cover-up involved.

 

[Mamba]

The fact that many records on the entire JFK fiasco remain sealed is pretty much all the proof I need that there was/is some sort of cover-up involved.

That was actually at Jackie O's request. She wanted to spare John-John and Caroline any more pain than they'd have to go through, so she arranged it to be put under wraps as long as possible. Those who have seen the records have said there's nothing earth-shattering about them. If a cover-up existed (especially one involving the CIA), there would be no incriminating "records." To me, the fact that it's been over 40 years, and it still hasn't been proven that a conspiracy occurred, that tells me something.

 

[mvtrucking]

The fact that many records on the entire JFK fiasco remain sealed is pretty much all the proof I need that there was/is some sort of cover-up involved.

That and and it being IMPOSSIBLE that Lee Harvey could have fired the shots from that weapon in the time and accuracy needed. (I am ex-military and a expert with a rifle and I could not have done it, not even close. Many have tried and failed) Whoever was responsible had not counted on the Zapruder film becoming involved.(To me that was indisputable evidence of a kill shot from the front or side)

 

[Mamba]

That and and it being IMPOSSIBLE that Lee Harvey could have fired the shots from that weapon in the time and accuracy needed. (I am ex-military and a expert with a rifle and I could not have done it, not even close. Many have tried and failed) Whoever was responsible had not counted on the Zapruder film becoming involved.(To me that was indisputable evidence of a kill shot from the front or side)

That's what I thought too before I took the time to read Posner's book and watch the Zapruder film myself (I own a couple copies). It all depends on where the limosuine was when the shots were fired. Posner claims that they were more spaced out than what is claimed by the conspiracy theorists. He also gives a logical explanation for why Kennedy's head went "back and to the left" after the fatal head shot. If you slow it down, his head actually goes forward right after impact and then his head bounces back like a rocket taking off as the exit wound explodes out of the front of his skull(that's why it appears to come from the front and to his right). After watching the Zapruder film frame by frame according to Posner's explanation, I think the Zapruder film actually works for the lone gunman theory. I would really encourage you to pick up a copy of "Case Closed." At the very least, it'll give you a new perspective that you won't hear from the conspiracy theorists.