"What Happened to JFK--and Why it Matters Today"

[James H. Fetzer]

Charlels,

1) I was not suggesting that CIA agents never used disguises but that none of those in Dealey Plaza appear to be in disguise;

Sorry, but we have yet to agree that any CIA agents were photographed in Dealey Plaza. You state as fact that which has yet to be established as fact.

Taking the "tramps" as examples, the person who looks like Charles Harrelson looks like Harrelson as I observed him in other interviews. The person who looks like Chauncey Holt looks like he did in person. The person who looks like Charles Rogers (aka Richard Montoya) also looks like the man in the pamphlet. The point being that there is no indication that any of them was disguishing his appearance, although, as you observe, none of this can be know with certainty. In discussions with Chauncey, he identified himself and also explained to me his role as a contract agent for the CIA, who was instructed to prepare fifteen sets of forged Secret Service credentials for use around Dealey Plaza. I have read his book manuscripts, discussed his story with him and his wife and daughter, watched many of his videotapes of his life story and listened to his radio interview in becoming convinced that he is the "real deal" -- even though that can only be known with high probability and not with certainty, since there is a miniscule chance that this might all be part of an elaborate charade.

2) calling three men, who appear to be normally dressed, "tramps" was the only form of distortion involved, not any disguises;

We cannot determine with existing technology if relatively sophisticated facial disguises were used by the "tramps." And while their shoes and facial grooming were indeed inconsistent with what we expect to find on your typical hobo, the condition of jackets, shirts, etc. are poorly described in the literature.

We can see how they were dressed in the photographs we have. Their appearance looked quite ordinary, although the first appeared better dressed than the second or the third. None of them looked like hobos.

3) I infer that you have not been reading my posts: I deny that Hunt is the eldest of the three, whom I believe is Chauncey Holt;

Point.

4) return to 1): my point was about the apparent lack of disguises by anyone who was in Dealey Plaza during the assassination.

Then again, a good disguise wouldn't be noticed, would it?

I reiterate: Harrelson looks just like he does in other inteviews, Chauncey like he did in real life --and in photos from the family album. There is no reason to think that either of them was in a disguise -- nor, indeed, is there any reason to think that the first of them, whom I am referring to as "Charles Rogers" in agreement with Lois Gibson, was in any kind of disguise. That the second looks like Harrleson and the third looks like Holt -- for those of us who have observed them in other contexts -- creates a presumption that those are their true identities, though none of this is known with certainty.