Talk:E. Howard Hunt/Archive 1

flight 553 crash
The article says that no suspicious material came out of the investigations.

It is known, that some White House source informed Lawrence O´Connor who took just that flight from Washington to Chicago, almost each week, not to join it that day.

Charles Colson, who was one of the "tricky Dick´s" personal staff, also for peculiar jobs, highly involved in Watergate, told a Time Magazin reporter in 1974, the following: "I think they killed Dorothy Hunt". Dorothy Hunt was the wife of E. Howard Hunt, one of the Watergate-"plumbers", who pleaded guilty, after his wife beeing killed in the crash.

Also on board was the CBS reporter Michelle Clark. She travelled with D. Hunt, doing an interview with her. One day before the flight, she anounced that the story [given to her by D. Hunt] would "destroy Nixon".

Survivor of the crash was Harold Metcalf, a DEA agent, who was seen climbing out the plane, dressed in a flight suit. How came that a passenger wore that type of clothing?

Michael Stevens of Stevens Research Labs in Chicago, who had prepared eavesdropping devices for the White House "plumbers", said that D. Hunt´s "death was a homicide", telling that he also was threatened, anonymously.

Even before arriving airport rescue team, a "battalion of plain clothes operatives" where seen taking controll of the planes wreck, said eyewitnesses from the neighbourhood. They´de been waiting there, even before the crash, showing up in cars "unmarked". Later FBI admited, that they came there, "arriving even before airport rescue personnel" - a fact tecnically imposible without having been there waiting.

The accident was provoced by a tripple error, absolutly impossible: 1.) All the planes cockpit tecnology failed, on the way down to the targeted airplane, 2.) the runway´s Visual Range Recorder shutted off, 3.) the outer marker system of the airport shutted down also. All that in the same moment and just for the minutes untill flight 553 had crashed - later on the systems did work again and without faults.

Not only possibly much larger sum of money, than the $ 10.000,- mentioned by FBI, did disapear from the wreck when FBI personal controlled the scene, but also a briefcase with highly explosive documents of Northern Natural Gas Co., carried by Carl Kruger, who also died on that plane. The papers were to reveal corruption by Nixon´s Attorney General, John Mitchell.

The article is right in saying that the investigation reports, by Egil Krogh, Nixon´s chief "plumber" who took controll of FAA and NTSB a few hours after the crash, said that there was no suspicious, but the article should tell the hereby listed facts (or more), to avoid, that 1972´s Nixon cover up of just another mayor crime of the US politician-inteligence-banker-oilmen-establishment still is hold up after more than 3 decades. Killing all progresive figures in our history, bombing out half of the world since WW II finished, just to asure our buiseness, at least we should be able to stand to our Mafia-like form of governing by threat and murder. --bushboy 16:00, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you for not adding this to this talk page's article. If you can document it (and don't get murdered for suspicion of being a progressive) it's not impossible for it to become a separate article.
 * --Jerzy·t 19:20, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * bushboy, you devote this much time & effort to COINTELPRO, the assassination of Fred Hampton, Óscar Romero and other such incidents? -- LamontCranston 22:19, 5 Oct 2006 (UTC)

Libel Suit
If there was a second trial, there has to have been an appeal in between. An appeal is not a second trial. Failure to mention appeal detracts from the clarity and credibility of the passage. --Jerzy·t 19:20, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Victor Marchetti was the author of the story in Spotlight, not Mark Lane. 66.245.12.99 22:15, 19 December 2006 (UTC) David Fox

texas?
Why on earth is is part of a project on Texas? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.55.141.119 (talk) 01:34, 24 January 2007 (UTC).

Fidel, Che Guevara, and Bay of Pigs
First, I believe Hunt's date of birth is well established as 10/9/1918. The article lists date of birth with a question mark.

Second, this article could be much improved by including a few additional facts. For one thing, they would make Hunt's importance in the Cold War made clearer. They are fact which also highlight his involvement in U.S. role in Latin America over the last 60 years.

Hunt was CIA station chief in Mexico City. His role in organizing the Bay of Pigs fiasco is pointed out as is reference to Watergate. However, the Watergate information should include some clearer reference to time (year, context). In addition, it is important to understand why Hunt says the break-in happened--again the Cuban obsession--to find out if rumors that McGovern's campaign had received contribution from Fidel Castro were true.

In addition, Hunt played a central role in the death of another Cuban figure of continuing global significance--Che Guevara. The CIA and Bolivian Army monitored Guevara's radio communications via radios that Hunt feed to the guerrillas through his CIA contacts.

With approval, I can provide references to these pieces of information for inclusion. 24.41.66.249 16:46, 27 January 2007 (UTC) Tayacan

Texas?
I would be curious to know why the Howard Hunt article would be part of a project on Texas. Editdroid 19:02, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * My guess is because of conspiracy theories about the JFK assassination. See information above removed from article for discussion. Pretty tenuous if you ask me. Jokestress 19:14, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * If that is the case I'd say it's tenuous to the point of absurdity. Editdroid 02:42, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Spotlight Magazine
Why isn't the trial against Spotlight Magazine mentioned ? You would think this was a major event in his life, considering that he lost the case. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 91.149.12.201 (talk) 01:46, 10 March 2007 (UTC).

Grassy knoll?
The article says that Newsweek said that a man resembling Hunt and a man resembling Sturgis were found on the grassy knoll after the assassination. I've always thought that the "three tramps," (including "Hunt" and "Sturgis") were found inside a boxcar in the railroad yard behind the grassy knoll fence. --Thomas Graves 05:50, 5 February 2006 (UTC)


 * As part of the Liable trial, and claims by Mike Canfield and A.J. Weberman that Hunt had been on the grassy knoll 11 22 63, hunt claimed to have been eating with his oldest son at a Chinese Diner. Canfield and Weberman proved in spite of Hunts testamony and that of his oldest son, that the chinese diner in question did not exist in 11 22 63. In the March 20 2007 Los Angeles times, pages A10-A11, Hunts oldest son, St. John, states that his father asked him to lie and provide Hunt with an alibi. And yes, the three tramps were found in the boxcar near the grassy knoll. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.191.144.152 (talk • contribs) 21:04, 20 March 2007
 * Article in question: Carol J. Williams (March 20, 2007). Watergate plotter may have a last tale. Los Angeles Times. The two Hunt brothers' version is disputed by other family members:
 * "It had always been suspected that Hunt shared his Cuban exile friends' hatred of Kennedy, who refused to provide air cover to rescue the 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion that Hunt helped organize. 'He told me in no uncertain terms about a plot originating in Miami, to take place in Miami,' said St. John. He said his father identified key players and speculated that then-Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson was responsible for moving the venue to Dallas, where the Texan could control the security scene. But the memoir's published passages about the assassination have an equivocal tone. Hunt provides only a hypothetical scenario of how events in Dallas might have unfolded, with Johnson atop a pyramid of rogue CIA plotters. The brothers insist their father related to them a detailed plot to assassinate Kennedy. Hunt told them he was approached by the conspirators to join them but declined, they say. That information was cut from the memoir, the brothers say, because Hunt's attorney warned he could face perjury charges if he recanted sworn testimony. Hunt also had assured Laura before they married in 1977 that he had nothing to do with the assassination."
 * The reporter adds, "The materials they offer to substantiate their story, examined by the Los Angeles Times, are inconclusive." Jokestress 22:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Americanspyjacket.jpg
Image:Americanspyjacket.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 19:27, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Rolling Stone article
I'm sure this article is going to get a lot of attention in the wake of the 5 April Rolling Stone piece. I just removed a response allegedly by the family until there is a published citation. Please watch this article for introduction of information that is poorly sourced. Jokestress 05:56, 6 April 2007 (UTC)


 * User:72.144.1.104 has removed info on the new RS article a couple of times, so let's discuss it here:


 * "The April 5, 2007 issue of Rolling Stone contained an extensive exposé on Mr. Hunt, based in large part on an interview with his eldest son St. John, and Hunt's alleged 'deathbed' confessions of his supposed knowledge and indirect complicity in the JFK assassination. Among other things, the article claims that Hunt, in hand-written notes and a voice recording to St. John, implicated Lyndon B. Johnson and CIA operator Cord Meyer as the key players in the JFK assassination conspiracy. Although naming Johnson and the other CIA conspirators Hunt indicated only that the other assassin was a French Gunman on the grassy knoll. This gunman is often named in other conspiracy theories as Lucien Sarti."
 * I'd like to include a published response from the family or others who have stated thiese claims are false. Does anyone have a source? Jokestress 17:08, 6 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I spent some time searching for the family response but only found it posted in forums by third parties so it's possibly not real. The confession may well have been "invented" by Hunts son but it still contains some claims that had been confirmed by a jury in a previous libel case as fact yet the family response denies these as well. The "confession" on the other hand is very widely spread on both liberal and conservative websites so it is strange that the mainstream media have not picked it up ..... unless there is no verifiable refutation available yet. Until something reliable comes up debunking the confession the current section is NPOV. Wayne 23:34, 6 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, it's not invented. There's video footage that just came out, see "Landmark E. Howard Hunt JFK Confession Video Tape Ignored" at www.infowarscom/?p=5541  Someone I know said he put that into the article with sources and refs but some wiki bot excluded it because the infowars site makes use of Youtube videos. If anyone versed in wiki arcanery wants to revert it back it looked fine. It's definitely E. Howard Hunt on the video and he's definitely saying the same things his son claimed. Why is it being ignored in mainstream and left and right media? Probably because Hunt has no credibility, people expect him to outright lie even on his deathbed. He lays the blame at LBJ's feet, which might be simplistic, but on the other hand there is a vested interest in the JFK conspiracy community to broaden the conspiracy to include all sorts of strange people and even aliens. I'm certain Hunt was telling the truth, but was it all the truth? Good luck. Fredolph (talk) 18:26, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

JFK conspiracy
Moved this to talk page:


 * The Rockefeller Commission of the U.S. Congress, in 1974, regarded Hunt and Watergate burglar Frank Sturgis as suspects in the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Support for this claim came from a figure from the 1960s counterculture, Kerry Thornley, who believed that on several occasions from 1961 to 1963 he had conversed with Hunt (whom Thornley claimed used the alias "Gary Kirstein") about plans to assassinate Kennedy, while Thornley was living in New Orleans. Newsweek magazine reported and printed photographs of two men similar in appearance to Hunt and Sturgis who were detained at the grassy knoll shortly after the assassination. The article stated the official reports that the men were released as "railroad bums" who had found shelter sleeping in the boxcars of the trains located near the grassy knoll. According to the article, the men were released without further inquiry; readers were invited to draw their own conclusions from the pictures published.


 * Many conspiracists thought two of the tramps to be Howard Hunt and Frank Sturgis, although several other men were also identified as tramps. The mystery was apparently solved in the early 1990s when researcher Mary LaFontaine discovered documents identifying the men as Harold Doyle, John Forester Gedney, and Gus W. Abrams.  Both the F.B.I. and independent researchers confirmed the identifications.

This needs better sourcing. According to the one source, this conspiracy theory was debunked. At best a footnote. Jokestress 02:10, 24 January 2007 (UTC)


 * The following is thoroughly sourced. Check the footnote.

"Many conspiracists thought two of the tramps to be Howard Hunt and Frank Sturgis, although several other men were also identified as tramps. The mystery was apparently solved in the early 1990s when researcher Mary LaFontaine discovered documents identifying the men as Harold Doyle, John Forester Gedney, and Gus W. Abrams. Both the F.B.I. and independent researchers confirmed the identifications."


 * he died, sumone needs to put that up —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.43.200 (talk • contribs)

Moving this to the talk page as well:


 * It is curious to note, that not only was Hunt a "Watergate Plumber," but almost a decade earlier he was accused, though never proved, of being one of the "Three Dealy Plaza Tramps" in the rail yard behind the grassy knoll. Additionally, years later when he was jailed for his watergate activities, Hunt demanded a one million dollar payoff to "keep his mouth shut" over what Nixon said was "the whole Bay of Pigs thing" - which many believe to be psuedo-speak for the "Kennedy assassination."  This has lead to the speculation that the crash of the plane which carried his wife, and the subsequent recovery of a large sum of cash in the wreckage, speaks to the possibility that it was not an accident but a "silencing."

Again, reliable sources required. Jokestress 01:21, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * No, that Hunt was one of the tramps was not never proved, it was explicitely disproved as all three tramps are accounted for - see the three names above - and none of them is Hunt or Sturgis or any other intelligence or Watergate guy. The last thing we need here is more unsourced nonsense from JFK conspiracy nutters. Str1977 (talk) 00:16, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure where to put this, probably with the "media" section of the article, There is an easter egg in the X-files (season 4 episode 7: Musings of a cigarette Smoking Man) where the infamous "Cancer Man" or "Smoking Man" is depicted speaking to Lee Harvey Oswald right before JFK's assassination, Oswald addresses him as "Mr. Hunt" implying the Smoking Man is based on E. Howard Hunt. probably worth mentioning? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.151.61.150 (talk) 17:41, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Give Us This Day quote
I have removed the following quote from the JFK allegations section:
 * Give Us This Day, Hunt's book on the Bay of Pigs Invasion, was published late in 1973. In the book's foreword, he commented on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy as follows:


 * "'Once again it became fashionable to hold the city of Dallas collectively responsible for his murder. Still, and let this not be forgotten, Lee Harvey Oswald was a partisan of Fidel Castro, and an admitted Marxist who made desperate efforts to join the Red Revolution in Havana. In the end, he was an activist for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. But for Castro and the Bay of Pigs disaster there would have been no such 'Committee.' And perhaps no assassin named Lee Harvey Oswald'."

The quotation without the context of analysis by secondary sources doesn't provide much information. Fringe, conspiracy sources seem to suggest that Hunt meant that Oswald's presence as an assassin was due to a plot by Castro to assassinate Kennedy. Others, as in Jim Rasenberger's The Brilliant Disaster: JFK, Castro, and America's Doomed Invasion of Cuba's Bay of Pigs (p.82), interpret the quote as meaning that the Bay of Pigs gave Oswald motivation to kill Kennedy. All of the sources seem to imply that he meant one thing or the other, but I really cannot find a source that takes a firm stance in stating what they think he meant. I have replaced this open-to-interpretation quote with a reliable source stating that Hunt believed Oswald acted alone. Location (talk) 18:08, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 one external links on E. Howard Hunt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/13893143/the_last_confessions_of_e_howard_hunt/1
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071126221509/http://nixon.archives.gov/forresearchers/find/tapes/watergate/trial/exhibit_02.pdf to http://nixon.archives.gov/forresearchers/find/tapes/watergate/trial/exhibit_02.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070620171338/http://amelia.db.erau.edu/reports/ntsb/aar/AAR73-16.pdf to http://amelia.db.erau.edu/reports/ntsb/aar/AAR73-16.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 02:34, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Dates that seem impossible
Under no.5 "Watergate and related scandals", the final paragraph states that Hunt was convicted and spent 33 months in prison arriving April 1975, but was fully pardoned in September 1974. Unless there was a strange circumstance that required him to be imprisoned for 33 months after being pardoned more than a year earlier, this is probably incorrect. Mentioned paragraph quoted below:

"Hunt eventually spent 33 months in prison at the low-security Federal Prison Camp at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, on a conspiracy charge, arriving there on April 25, 1975,[28] and said he was bitter that he was sent to jail while Nixon was allowed to resign while avoiding prosecution for any crimes he may have committed, and was later fully pardoned in September, 1974, by incoming President Gerald Ford." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.210.13.237 (talk) 19:55, 10 February 2016 (UTC)


 * It's a run-on sentence, I fixed it. Raquel Baranow (talk) 22:29, 10 February 2016 (UTC)


 * It was Nixon who was pardoned by Gerald Ford, not Hunt. There is no date conflict with that. Hunt applied for a pardon from Ronald Regan but was turned down in 1983. BuffaloBob (talk) 21:57, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on E. Howard Hunt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071106000444/http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/18/interviews/hunt/ to http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/18/interviews/hunt/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:33, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Attribution
Copied text & references from E. Howard Hunt to CIA Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory See former article's history for list of contributors. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 17:30, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * thanks. But why? — usernamekiran [talk]   17:43, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on E. Howard Hunt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927010257/http://www.uexpress.com/ontheright/index.html?uc_full_date=20070126 to http://www.uexpress.com/ontheright/index.html?uc_full_date=20070126
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120308121801/http://www.foia.cia.gov/browse_docs.asp?doc_no=0000904662&no_pages=0005&showPage=0001 to http://www.foia.cia.gov/browse_docs.asp?doc_no=0000904662&no_pages=0005&showPage=0001

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:05, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Edit-warring to add an irrelevant factoid into this article
First, an apparent COI account makes an edit where he adds some new information including the fact that E. Howard Hunt won the Guggenheim prize, which is notable enough, adding, however, the WP:PEACOCK detail that Hunt won the prize "ahead of Gore Vidal and Truman Capote". I reverted that part of the edit as original research, only to be reverted again because a source was found. However, this does not solve the problem. Why must the reader know the WP:PEACOCK detail that "E. Howard Hunt won the Guggenheim prize ahead of Gore Vidal and Truman Capote"? Was there an unspoken race to get first at the prize? What was so remarkable to get it ahead of Vidal and Capote? And why not report everyone else who got that prize after Hunt? Why limit our reporting to those two only? This is the problem with WP:SYNTH and WP:OR. The factoids created by synthesis and original research are confusing because their context is often manufactured and not clear. This is a clear case of OR and SYNTH. In addition, the source supplied, is written by Gore Vidal, who states: "Typical of the sort of novelist the Guggenheims preferred to Capote and me in 1946 was twenty-eight-year-old (practically middle-aged) Howard Hunt,...". We should not report this narrative by Vidal, as "E. Howard Hunt won the Guggenheim prize ahead of Gore Vidal and Truman Capote", because no third-party reliable source has made that connection. Dr.  K.  23:59, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Dr.K., Thank you for starting this discussion of Hunt's writing. I do not believe this has elevated to the level of an edit war, as you are the only editor with multiple reverts.
 * 1) Regarding the COI; even though Austin Hunt is the name of Hunt's son, we have no way of knowing the identity of.
 * 2) The Guggenheim "prize", as you refer to it, is actually the Guggenheim Fellowship, a grant that is awarded annually to deserving gifted and skilled recipients as determined by the Guggenheim Memorial Foundation. Hunt was one of 136 fellows in 1946.
 * 3) The mentioning of Vidal and Capote is not PEACOCK or PUFFERY, but rather a fact. The reason that this information is useful is because Vidal and Capote are notable writers. You asked why those two? Hunt having received this fellowship in the same year in which they applied shows that his writing skills are on the level of those two very successful writers. Gore and Vidal's names do not appear in any of the Guggenheim Fellow list.  Perhaps the term "ahead of" would better be described differently, such as "In 1946 Hunt was awarded the Guggenheim Fellowship.  That same year Gore Vidal and Truman Capote applied but were turned down."
 * 4) "No third party reliable source has made that connection"? The New York Review of Books is a reliable third party. While you might assume that Gore Vidal has a conflict of interest on this subject, his editors had the final approval of his article. In addition, another source, "The Guggenheims: An American Epic", by John H. David, published by William Morrow & Co. in 1978, on page 229 when referring rejected candidates, states: "Others were precocious young novelists Truman Capote and Gore Vidal, who were both turned down in 1945.  That year one of the writing fellowships coveted by Capote and Vidal wnet to future Watergate conspirator E. Howard Hunt.
 * I look forward to other editors input on this subject. BuffaloBob (talk) 02:29, 9 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Regarding the COI; even though Austin Hunt is the name of Hunt's son, we have no way of knowing the identity of AustinHunt. True, but the indications are strong that there is a COI.
 * I do not believe this has elevated to the level of an edit war, as you are the only editor with multiple reverts. "Multiple reverts" is not a requirement to be engaged in an edit-war. Once you undo the edit of an editor, it is considered edit-warring.
 * The Guggenheim "prize", as you refer to it, is actually the Guggenheim Fellowship,... Thank you for the details, but they are not needed. I made an edit to the List of Guggenheim Fellowships awarded in 1946 before your reply here, so I know exactly what it is.
 * I also believe that Gore is a WP:PRIMARYSOURCE and that the factoid is both irrelevant and WP:PEACOCKery. As I noted above, quote: "Was there an unspoken race to get first at the prize? What was so remarkable to get it ahead of Vidal and Capote?" Mentioning the factoid in the article, it is implied by WP:WEASEL insinuation that Hunt did something more remarkable than Vidal or Capote. This is typical of SYNTH and OR constructs. On the other hand, I agree that we need the input of more editors here, since it seems we are not about to agree any time soon. Dr.   K.  03:56, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

I agree with Dr. K. warshy (¥¥) 14:52, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support to Dr. K's proposal. I am not going to comment on COI. Whenever there is some prize, or fellowship, almost always there are competitors. We shouldn't add if "a person won it ahead of others" even if the other competitors were notable. However, we should add it if that event of "winning ahead of others" was notable in some form. — usernamekiran (talk)  17:11, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you . It turns out that the factoid that Hunt won the fellowship "ahead of Vidal and Capote" was factually wrong. There is no evidence that either Vidal or Capote ever applied for it again, or won it. The funny part is, I reverted the edit, not because it was factually wrong - I wasn't aware of it at the time - but because of its blatant peacock/SYNTH. The only other source, provided above, mentions: "Others were precocious young novelists Truman Capote and Gore Vidal, who were both turned down in 1945. That year one of the writing fellowships coveted by Capote and Vidal went to future Watergate conspirator E. Howard Hunt." This reference actually gets the year wrong; the fellowship was awarded to Hunt in 1946, not 1945. Dr.   K.  19:43, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on E. Howard Hunt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120722232539/http://www.nationalreview.com/nrd/article/?q=MDYzM2MyMDIwMjRiNWZlY2RlZjc3ZDY4YjAxMjBiM2Q= to http://www.nationalreview.com/nrd/article/?q=MDYzM2MyMDIwMjRiNWZlY2RlZjc3ZDY4YjAxMjBiM2Q=
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070524115830/http://news.independent.co.uk/people/obituaries/article2183811.ece to http://news.independent.co.uk/people/obituaries/article2183811.ece

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:48, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Anti-Castro Efforts?
The section title "Anti-Castro Efforts" contains no mention whatsoever of Castro. The extended quotation in the second paragraph is out of place in a Wikipedia article and, if kept, would be better suited in a section devoted to his character and personality — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:f1b0:7bd0:d9fc:deba:76b5:1663 (talk) 04:26, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I will leave expanding that section to others, but I removed the quote. The quote is an excerpt from David Talbot's book The Devil's Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA and the Rise of America's Secret Government that posits Allen Dulles orchestrated the assassination of JFK. Not a reliable source. -Location (talk) 18:48, 5 May 2023 (UTC)