Final_Judgment

[608] Final Judgment 706
the evidence actually points to high-ranking CIA official James J. Angleton
as having been the likely perpetrator, noting that Angleton also played a
major part in the leaking (around the same period) of what was purported to
be an in-house CIA memorandum suggesting that Hunt was in Dallas on the
day of the president's murder.
All of this perhaps explains why Andrew is so determined to suppress the
facts by targeting Mark Lane who singularly did so much to bring out the
truth about the CIA's complicity.
Andrew actually makes the flat-out allegation that Lane received
funding from the KGB at the time he was writing Rush to Judgment,
thereby leaving readers to conclude that Lane's own work was essentially
part of a KGB disinformation effort.
Yet, at the same time, buried in the massive footnote section of the book,
Andrew himself acknowledges that when Lane supposedly received a paltry
$1,500 from the KGB's New York office that "there is no evidence that
Lane did realize the source of the funding" although, in the text of the book
itself, Andrew contends that the KGB "suspected that he might have guessed
where it came from."
In fact, Lane never once received any substantial contribution of this
size from anyone at any time in relation to his work on the JFK
assassination. His largest contribution at the time was a one-time donation
of $50 from famed comic Woody Allen.
Andrew claims that "the same intermediary" paid $500 for a trip that
Lane made to Europe in 1964. This is not true.
In addition, Andrew claims that while in Europe Lane made an attempt
to visit Moscow to discuss his JFK findings. Again, not true. During that
trip Lane actually took an outspoken stand against Soviet censorship and
human rights violations during a visit to Bulgaria, where he had been
invited to speak at an international conference of attorneys. Lane so
offended his hosts by his anti-Soviet remarks that they advised him that his
best option was to get out of the country immediately—hardly advice
reserved for someone favored by the KGB.
What is most telling about the obvious disinformation campaign against
Lane by Andrew (worthy of the KGB's best) is the very fact that not a
single one of Lane's books (on the JFK assassination or any other subject)
was ever translated and published under Soviet sponsorship.
Literally dozens of American authors have received vast profits from
Soviet-sponsored publications of their books behind the former Iron
Curtain—but not Mark Lane. If the Soviets had genuinely been interested in
advancing Lane's efforts they could have openly published any of Lane's
seven books (two of which have been best-sellers) just as they have
published other books, without even an eyebrow raised.
Yet Christopher Andrew has made patently false allegations about
Lane's supposed "KGB connection." The allegations are a deliberate
attempt to sully Lane's reputation and an attempt to refute evidence of CIA
complicity in the assassination of President Kennedy.