Documentation on killing of Diem and Nhu?

From: Dan Duffy <dduffy@email.unc.edu>

Date: Sep 19, 2006 2:19 AM

Subject: [Vsg] documentation on killing of Diem and Nhu?

Hi all,

I was gratified this summer to hear on the radio a tape of Tim Naftali

playing a tape, at the JFK Library conference last year, of LBJ

referring to "us" killing Ngo Dinh Diem.

One thing that has kept me out of a history department is having

listened to historians dance around this obvious fact, fiddling with the

paper trail of the kind of events that people don't document.

We aren't going to find a memo of a joint meeting of the mob, Castro and

the CIA to kill JFK, or a thank-you note from Nixon to Bremer for

shooting Wallace, or Hoover's credit card receipts for Ray's expenses in

shooting MLK.

Still, every now and then they do turn up something. We've got the

apartment map the Chicago police used to shoot Hampton in bed through

the walls of his apartment.

So, does Nafatali or anyone else have any documentation? All LBJ's

admission does is to show that he, like me, is one of those people who

has a face-to-face relationship both with the men who pull the triggers

and with those who wave their hands and wonder aloud who will rid them

of a nuisance.

It's not the cynicism of those remote from power or its workings, it's

an episteme, a sense of truth that has to do with daily experience of

policy and operations. Washington is full of people who have picked

cotton or tobacco and now pull the levers of power. Johnson was just

the one who got to be president.

So there he was, speaking what is to our kind the obvious truth about

the death of a US client with a USA MAAG and a CIA station down the

street. Has an historian found any documentation he had that the rest

of us didn't, or was LBJ just speaking the apparent truth?

Dan

From: Ed Miller <Edward.G.Miller@dartmouth.edu>

Date: Sep 19, 2006 7:09 AM

Subject: RE: [Vsg] documentation on killing of Diem and Nhu?

Dear Dan and list:

I do not believe that the referenced tape is terribly significant in

unravelling the precise circumstances surrounding the killings of Diem and

Nhu, or the tricky question of the degree of US involvement. Here's why:

1. LBJ made the remarks in question during a 1966 phone conversation with

Eugene McCarthy, of all people. LBJ's main objective in talking to McCarthy

was to get him to tone down or drop the public criticism that McCarthy had

recently voiced of the US bombings in Vietnam. Key excerpts from the tape

can be listened to on-line:

http://www.whitehousetapes.org/clips/1966_0201_lbj_mccarthy_vietnam.html

Note that LBJ's "We killed him" remark (meaning "the US killed Diem") is

delivered in the context of LBJ's overall plea to McCarthy, which is couched

in the logic of

I-know-a-lot-of-super-secret-info-that-I-can't-talk-about-so-you-need-to-tru

st-me-on-this. (Sound familiar?) So I think LBJ's primary goal here was to

try to reassure McCarthy by letting on that he understood his concerns, and

that in fact he (LBJ) really did want to get out of Vietnam, but that he had

been trapped by circumstances beyond his control, since the killings took

place before LBJ took office. The implicit charge in this statement is that

LBJ is cleaning up a mess that JFK had made. The upshot is that this

"admission" should be analyzed critically.

2. That said, it is pretty clear that LBJ believed that the US had been

heavily involved in the deaths of Diem and Nhu. LBJ definitely believed

before and after the coup that ousting Diem was a big mistake. LBJ had not

been privvy to most of the discussions between JFK and his advisors

regarding South Vietnam during the weeks before the coup, but he did come

out against the pro-coup position taken by officials in the State Department

and other agencies. LBJ definitely blamed these officials after the fact

for the coup and for the Ngo brothers' deaths. National Security advisor

McGeorge Bundy later reported that one of the first things LBJ said to him

after JFK's assassination was: "I want you to fire the bastard who killed

Diem," or words to that effect. According to Bundy, LBJ was referring to

Roger Hilsman, a State Department official and a member of the pro-coup

faction during summer/fall 1963. (Hilsman did leave the government in early

1964, I believe.)

3. Of course, none of this directly answers one of the big questions

lurking in all this: did US officials (either JFK or his subordinates)

actually ORDER the deaths of Diem and Nhu? In my view, LBJ's remarks do not

really answer this definitively, since they could be read as assiging

indirect responsibility for the deaths (i.e. encouraging the coup that led

to the killings) rather than direct responsibility (i.e. inciting/ordering

the CIA or someone else to commit the murders, as when agency operatives

murdered Congolese leader Patrice Lumumba in 1961). Also, its still not

clear exactly how much LBJ knew about what actually transpired in Saigon on

Nov. 1-2, so he might have been drawing a conclusion from sketchy or

incomplete evidence.

4. Based on the available evidence, I think the most likely explanation is

that no Americans were involved in the decision to kill Diem and Nhu (even

though the US had been heavily involved in encouraging the generals to move

against Diem). I based this on the following:

a. although the US had been in touch with the coup plotters and knew that

preparations for a putsch were in the works, US officials did not have

anything close to operational control over the coup. Indeed, US documents

make clear that up to the moment that the coup began, US officials were far

from certain that the coup would actually be attempted. In the days leading

up to the coup, General Tran Van Don had promised to give the US advance

notice of the coup--he promised at various times to give the US between 4

and 48 hours notice--but in the end, the Americans had no notice at all.

b. There was a CIA agent named Lucien Conein who was the main contact

between the generals and the US embassy prior to the coup, and who was

summoned by the generals to their command post as the coup began. But there

is no evidence that Conein knew anything about the decision to kill Diem and

Nhu after they were picked up on the morning of Nov. 2. I never met Conein

(he died about eight years ago, I think) but I did interview an American

colleague of his who was in Saigon during the coup and who saw Conein later

during the day of Nov. 2. According to this source, Conein had just found

out that the brothers were dead, and was surprised and angry that they had

not been given safe passage out of the country. (Conein knew both Diem and

Nhu quite well, having worked with them while a member of Edward Lansdale's

CIA team in Saigon during 1954-1956.)

c. Finally, it seems pretty clear that JFK, despite having allowed his

subordinates to encourage the coup, was shocked and dismayed by the deaths

of Diem and Nhu. The clearest evidence of this is a private dictaphone

recording that JFK made a couple days after the coup, in which he discussed

his revulsion at the news:

http://www.whitehousetapes.org/clips/1963_1104_jfk_vietnam_memoir.html

Of course, none of this is offered by way of suggesting that the US was

somehow innocent of involvement in the coup. US officials (especially

ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge) obviously pushed the generals to overthrow

Diem. Kennedy himself bears a great deal of responsibility, since he was

clearly aware of this encouragement, and he chose not to squelch it. At the

same time, the US was not soley responsible for the coup and for everything

that happened in connection with it. On the specific question of the deaths

of Diem and Nhu, the biggest chunk of responsibility seems to lie with the

generals, and with the subordinates who carried out their orders.

Cheers,

Ed

From: Tuan Hoang <thoang1@nd.edu>

Date: Sep 20, 2006 5:36 AM

Subject: RE: [Vsg] documentation on killing of Diem and Nhu?

Thanks to Ed Miller for the detailed response. Goodness knows that there are numerous things one could be

critical of LBJ, but there are no evidences against him when it comes to his own involvement in the coup

against Diem. Shortly after Kennedy's death, he privately said that JFK's death was divine retribution for

American complicity in Diem's death. (Does anyone know the source of this comment?) The fact that it's LBJ

who said it, has always struck me as ironic. It is something far more likely uttered by a Vietnamese

ingrained on the concept "qua? ba'o" than by an American typically taught early on to believe in the

afterlife and to regard these things as no more than tragic or ugly coincidences.

As for the JFK tape that Ed provided, I first heard it when it was played to us by no other than Tim Naftali

at a GWU worshop. The discrepancy between JFK's brooding on diplomacy the one hand and the interruption of

his children on the other, shows a kind of pathos that is eerie as it is unexpected to hear. To shift away

from history to the arts, it is surprising that no fiction or drama has been penned about this episode. In

the hand of a capable dramatist, it could be an excellent morality tale to see on screen or stage, maybe even

a commercial success as well.

~Tuan

From: sophie qj <sophie_qj@yahoo.com>

Date: Sep 20, 2006 7:02 AM

Subject: RE: [Vsg] documentation on killing of Diem and Nhu?

This is an interesting discussion, but I think we are in danger of slipping into Amero-centrism if we don't look more closely at the Vietnamese roots of the coup against Diem. We have to remember that this was an event which was cause for celebration in Saigon and was briefly seen as the start of a revolution in its own right.

Sophie Quinn-Judge

From: Elise DeVido <aldi_tw@yahoo.com>

Date: Sep 20, 2006 7:33 AM

Subject: RE: [Vsg] documentation on killing of Diem and Nhu?

Yes and dont forget the Buddhists

Elise DeVido

From: Chung Nguyen <Chung.Nguyen@umb.edu>

Subject: Re: [Vsg] documentation on killing of Diem and Nhu?

An absolute good point SQ makes. Yes, there was American involvement but it was mostly to make sure that once the coup succeeded, it would be supported. The coup plotters could not trust the US at the time because they knew there were those in Saigon who opposed to it - CIA chief Richardson, General Hawkins, etc. That's why they would not tell ambassador Lodge when the coup would begin, until it'd be too late for Nhu to react even if he found out.

How NDD & NDN were killed has never been officially investigated or convincingly resolved. The general Radio Catinat belief is that it was Nguyen Van Nhung, a Big Minh's aide, who shot them when the convoy was temporarily delayed at a railroad crossing. Plus the oft-told story, recounted in General Don's memoir, of General Mai Huu Xuan saluting Big Minh with the words "Mission accomplished." General Xuan commanded the convoy to pick up NDD & NDN at Father Tam Church. Almost all the known tales point the finger at Big Minh.

A book by a former ARVN officer, Vo van Sau, "Hay Tra Lai Su Thuc Cho Lich Su" (Let's Return The Truth to History), has a few chapters specifically addressing this mystery. It goes over all the current theories, highlights all the inner contradictions, and finally comes up with the most logical answer. According to his theory:

1) NDD & NDN were killed at the General Directorate of the National Police when it was under the control of the Fifth Division, commanded by General Nguyen Van Thieu. How General Thieu ended up at this location instead of leading the charge to take over Gia Long Palace is an interesting story in itself.

2) Nhung did shoot them from the top of the M113 when the convoy waited at the railroad intersection but he was unaware that by that time both NDD and NDN had already been dead. This appears to be well proven, for we have pictures both NDD & NDN with multiple knife wounds with their hands bound behind their back. There was no way Nhung could have time to tie or stab them.

3)He identified, based on the analysis of evidences available, General Nguyen Van Thieu and General Tran Thien Khiem as the two principal plotters who were behind the killing.

Of all the different versions of this story, he gives high credence to three sources - Robert Shaplen in "Lost Revolution" (1966) who was the first to mention the location where the two were killed (National Police Headquarter), Do Tho in "Do Tho Diary" (Do Tho was NDD's personal assistant. He was present when NDD & NDN were forced into the M113, and had a mysterious fatal auto accident after his diary was published in 1970), and the recollection of the M113 driver which carried NDN & NDN). All three sources agree that the National Police Headquaters were the location where NDD & NDN were killed.

The later part of the story, related to the involvement of the local CIA, is more speculative, for, naturally, there is no hard evidence. The argument basically is that when NDD & NDN decided to go to the home of Chinese merchant Ma Tuyen, that raised all sort of tremors for the location was known as a place NDNhu made contact with the communists. Most coup plotters, except Big Minh, wanted to get rid of them for fear of their eventual return, as in the case of Nguyen Chanh Thi's failed coup. Now, with evidence of their apparent attempt to make contact with the communist side, the CIA could not afford to take that chance.

I wonder if anyone has come across this kind of analysis or conclusion?

(Other parts of of the book deal with typical internal exile politics which is much less tightly argued and beyond the topic here)

From: Tuan Hoang <thoang1@nd.edu>

Date: Sep 20, 2006 2:57 PM

Subject: Re: [Vsg] documentation on killing of Diem and Nhu?

I think the direction of the issue was American-centric because the source in Dan Duffy's email has to do with

the US side. But I totally agree with Chung, Sophie, etc. that the Vietnamese side figured a lot more in the

coup. For one, it was hardly the first coup against Diem, only that this time it occurred with American

blessing. For another, after the coup, people were on the streets celebrating the deposed regime and

knocking down its signs and symbols; the words "cach mang" were on their lips and banners; high hopes and

long optimism permeating the air and pages of newspapers. When Lodge visited a pagoda in Saigon not long

after, he was feted by the Buddhists for his hand in the coup. By all appearances, early November 1963

looked to carry long-suppressed revolutionary momentum - and was a high point of American-Vietnamese

relations to boot.

Of course, it didn't take long for tension to unravel again. But yes, native anti-Diem sentiments were long

in the making - and deep.

From: David Marr <dgm405@coombs.anu.edu.au>

Date: Sep 20, 2006 6:53 PM

Subject: Re: [Vsg] documentation on killing of Diem and Nhu?

By coincidence, this morning I was reading a detailed account of the 1960

attempted coup against Diem, in Pham Van Lieu, Tra ta song nui, vol.1

(Austin, Texas, 2002). He conveys vividly the amateur multiplicity of coup

sub-groups, mostly led by majors and Lt.colonels, with colonels and

generals being approached late in the game and having to decide quickly

which way to jump. Probably the generals played a more direct role in

1963, but it's well to remember that there were 3 or 4 different coup

groups plotting in prior months, not just Big Minh and crew.

There certainly was excitement and enthusiasm on the streets of Saigon

following the coup, which the new leaders failed to take advantage of. I

don't think they had much interest in popular politics. Then came the 30

January counter-coup, in which Americans probably played a more direct role

than 1 November.

David Marr

From: Chung Nguyen <Chung.Nguyen@umb.edu>

Date: Sep 20, 2006 8:22 PM

Subject: RE: [Vsg] documentation on killing of Diem and Nhu?

I certainly agree with Tuan Hoang. Now that I have VVS's book at hand, let me correct some typos/errors and add some more details to do justice to his arguments.

Let us recall that at the time there wasn't just one coup attempt but literally a dozen - from the Minh-Don group to Tran Kim Tuyen, to Do Mau, to Tran Duc Thao, etc. There was just no way the CIA could have their eyes and ears into all of them, let alone any semblance of control. But the Minh-Don group stood one level above all the others because of their longest years of service in the army and their reputation. The coup plotters could not trust the US authority at the time because they knew there were those in Saigon who opposed it - CIA station chief Richardson (who was recalled to Washington), General Harkins, etc. That's why they would not tell ambassador Lodge when the coup would begin, until it'd be too late for Nhu to react even if he found out.

How NDD & NDN were killed has never been officially investigated or convincingly resolved (that's an interesting fact in itself: those involved *did not* wanted that to be cleared up). The general Radio Catinat belief is that it was Nguyen Van Nhung, a Big Minh's aide, who shot them when the convoy taking them back to the General Staff Headquarter was delayed at a railroad crossing. Plus the oft-told story, recounted in General Don's memoir, of General Mai Huu Xuan saluting Big Minh with the French words "Mission accompli." General Xuan commanded the convoy to pick up NDD & NDN at Father Tam church. This version, however, as VVS pointed out, is contradicted by the personal account of another eyewitness of the event - Major Duong Hieu Nghia, commander of the

convoy's two M113s. Almost all the tales, however, point the finger at Big Minh.

A book by a former ARVN officer, Vo Van Sau, "Hay Tra Lai Su Thuc Cho Lich Su" (Let's Return the Truth to History) (reprint by Gop Gio, 2004), has a few chapters specifically address this mystery. It goes over all the current versions, highlights all their inner and outer contradictions, and reaches the conclusion that most were just cover stories, not to reveal, but to hide the real facts.

The facts, according to VVS:

1) NDD & NDN were killed at the National Police Headquarter when it was under the control of the Fifth Division, whose commander at the time was General (then Colonel) Nguyen Van Thieu. Colonel Thieu was assigned the task of attacking Gia Long Palace and to capture NDD & NDN alive. How he ended up taking control of the National Police Headquarter instead was an interesting story in itself (explanation on p. 84-85/VVS)

2) Nhung did shoot them from the top of the M113 when the convoy waited at the railroad intersection but unbeknown to him, NDD & NDN had already been dead by that time. This appears to be well proven, for we have pictures of both NDD & NDN with multiple stab wounds and their hands tied behind their back. The pause was no longer than 10 minutes; there was no way Nhung could have the time both to tie them up, and then to stab them. And what's the point of tying them up if he's going to shoot them with the powerful Colt 12?

3) According to the Sergeant-Major who commanded the M113 that carried the two brothers, he was surprised that his vehicle was placed at the very end of the convoy. The 2nd M113 was placed in the middle. When the convoy passed by the National Police Headquarter, his M113 was ordered to take a detour there. There was another vehicle, not part of the convoy and with many people on it, also entered the headquarter. Everybody else on the M113 except the driver and the two brothers had to disembark while the M113 disappeared into the Headquarter. After about 20 minutes, the M113 re-appeared, and after a little while met the convoy again, and rejoined it without anyone noticing. There was another vehicle, not part of the convoy and with many people on it,

4) According to Robert Shaplen in "Lost Revolution" (1966), it was a police major who killed NDD. VVSau believed he was part of Mai Huu Xuan's subordinates who entered on the second vehicle. They interrogated NDD & NDN, esp. NDN, to find out where he had all his accounts and financial holdings.

5. VVS identified the major players in this drama: chief was General Tran Thien Khiem, then General Nguyen Van Thieu, and General Mai Huu Xuan.

Although the supreme coup plotters were Big Minh, Don, and Kim but none of them actually commanded troops. It was General Khiem who actually co-

ordinated all the troop movements. That's how he could place Thieu at the right location, and let NDD & NDN escaped. Minh's original order was for Thieu

to attack the Gia Long Palace and captured NDD & NDN. But inexplicably Thieu was *5* hours late (see pp. 84-85), and a Marine unit was sent to

do the

job instead. By that time Dien & Nhu had already left. Khiem was informed of their escape earlier but did not share the information with the high command.

He knew they went to Ma Tuyen, the Chinese merchant, in Cho Lon, because, according to VVS, Khiem and Cao Xuan Vy were very close. It was Cao

Xuan Vy who drove with them to Ma Tuyen. But Vy mysteriously left there, not to be seen again.

6. There is then, a subplot within the coup. Both Thieu and Khiem, although Can Lao party members, were still part of Dai Viet, a party severely persecuted by

NDNhu. And since they were both NDD's "adopted sons," public knowledge of their subplot would render them politically finished. Hence all the elaborate

cover stories, the Nhung setup, and all the tales pointing the finger at Big Minh. With both Thieu & Khiem in the pinnacle of their power soon afterwards, all

the cover stories had held.

Of all the different versions of the story, VVS gives high credence to three sources - (1) Robert Shaplen in "Lost Revolution" (1966) who was the first to identify the location of the killing, the National Police Headquarter, and the person who actually did the killing - a police major; (2) Do Tho in "Nhay Ky Do Tho" (Do Tho Diary". He was NDD's personal assistant and was present when NDD & NDN were forced into the M113. After he published his diary in 1970, which gave a brutally honest account of the regime, he met with a fatal auto accident soon after; (3) The recollection of the Sergeant-Major who commanded the M113 which carried NDD & NDN. All three sources agree that it was at the National Police Headquarter that NDD & NDN were killed.

The later part of the story, related to the involvement of the CIA, is more speculative, because, naturally, there is no hard evidence. The argument basically is that when NDD & NDN decide to go to the home of Ma Tuyen, it raised all sorts of tremors for the location was known as the place where NNDN made contact with the communists. Most coup plotters, except Big Minh, wanted to get rid of them for fear of their eventual return, as in the case of Nguyen Chanh Thi's initially successful, then quickly failed coup. Now, with evidence of their apparent attempt to make contact with the other side, the CIA could not afford to take the chance. By this time, however, the subplot to kill NDD & NDN had already proceeded apace, and the CIA input, if there were any, acted more as an assurance rather than the cause.

Do Tho's diary also refers to a secrete vote taken by the coup high command re: NDD & NDN's fate. The result was 9 Kill, 1 Hold. This story was also repeated in other versions later, but no one every figures out whose "Hold" vote it was. VVSau reasonably shows that it was Big Minh's. Do Tho, a devoted assistant to NDD, praised Big Minh highly for his integrity and kindness in his diary.

Now, there are two other elements that reinforce the above purely factual analysis. VVSau had a friend, Lieutenant Pham Van Tuc. They were both imprisoned at Long Khanh camp, Vung Tau province on May 1, 1975. There Lieutenant Tuc, a former manager of a club at the General Staff headquarter (he resigned from the army before 1975), told VVS about the death of NDD & NDN. He said that he was there when the bodies of NDD & NDN were left lying on the ground, hands bound behind the back, next to the M113. A corporal was standing nearby whom he believed to be the M113 driver. He asked the corporal to go with him to the clubhouse about 100 meters away. The corporal told him the story of his trip in the convoy as VVS documented here, 27 years later (1975-2002).

Pham Van Tuc was allowed to emigrate to the US in 1991, and currently resides in San Jose, CA. Veterans who came from Vung Tau all know him (p. 8).

Second, the main elements of the subplot were revealed to him by an officer who was in a position to be privy to it but would like to remain unnaned.

This is a remarkable story. It was initially published in Tien Phong magazine in Jan 2002. He receives many comments to which he responded and reprinted in the book.

I wonder what the list makes of this.

(Note: There is only one thing in the book which I believe VVS might have made an error: he includes Lucien Conein when he lists the subplot group (p. 34). The whole subplot proceeds without any reference to Conein, except when VVS lists the names of the principals. This is certainly VVS's prerogative to speculate, but because he does not provide any confirmation or proof, I think it's better to stick to the known facts.)

From: Ed Miller <Edward.G.Miller@dartmouth.edu>

Date: Sep 21, 2006 6:57 AM

Subject: RE: [Vsg] documentation on killing of Diem and Nhu?

Dear Chung:

Thanks for the fascinating recap of the Vo Van Sau book. Since I haven't

yet read this, I'm wondering if you can comment on how any of the following

might be relevant to an assessment of VVS' theory about where and how the

brothers were killed:

1. The information about the killings of Diem and Nhu taking place at

National Police HQ appeared in the 1966 edition of Shaplen's "Lost

Revolution." However, it does NOT apper in the edition published the

previous year. So presumably this was something that Shaplen learned about

only after the fact, circa 1965. Since Shaplen does not indicate his

source, it is hard to assess the reliability of this information.

(Certainly, other parts of Shaplen's account of the coup--such as his claim

that NDD and NDN escaped from Gia Long palace through a secret tunnel--have

been disproved, so we shouldn't presume that everything he wrote is

necessarily true.)

2. In his memoir, Do Tho seems to indicate that his source for the

information about the killings taking place at police HQ is Shaplen himself.

In fact, on p. 264, DT quotes the relevant passage of "Lost Revolution" and

states that it is "reasonable" to believe that it is true. In light of

this, and in light of the fact that DT was not (by his own account) a

witness to the killings, his memoir hardly seems to count as a corroboration

of Shaplen's claims.

3. The part of the story in which Major Nhung shoots the already dead

bodies of the brothers has always struck me as implausible. If they had in

fact just been stabbed to death, how could Nhung not have noticed that?

Even if he did fire at them "from the top" (i.e. the turret) of the M113, he

would still have needed to look into the interior of the vehicle to aim his

weapon--at which point, he would presumably have seen the bodies, the blood

and the wounds. So this particular part of the story does not ring true to

me. (I also don't see how the photographic evidence of the stab wounds and

the bindings on the brothers' hands somehow proves that they were dead

before Nhung shot them. The account of Nguyen Ngoc Huy--also purportedly

based on eyewitness testimony--states that Nhung's subordinates bound the

brothers' hands immediately after they got into the vehicle. En route back

to Saigon, according to Huy, the brothers were shot dead by Nhung and the

corpses were then stabbed by the other soldiers. Huy is not clear if the

stabbings were a gesture of contempt, or if they were Nhung's way of

ensuring that the responsibility for the deed would be shared. But either

way, this latter version of the story has always seemed to me to be more

plausible than the notion that Nhung did not know that NDD and NDN were dead

when he shot them.)

Clearly, one of the driving issues in this debate is the role of Big Minh.

As you point out, the initial accounts all seemed intended to prove that he

had ordered the killings. The Shaplen/Do Tho version, in contrast, seems

almost deliberately crafted to exonerate Big Minh (and also to transfer a

big chunk of the blame to Thieu, which is interesting). Since Minh and

Thieu were obviously key players in Saigon politics after 1963, such claims

had big contemporary implications. I have to believe that those immediate

political imperatives should be relevant when analyzing these stories.

As you pointed out, Chung, there are lots of conflicting versions floating

around, so definitive answers will probably remain elusive. Still, I'd be

interested to know whether or not you think the above has any impact on the

validity of VVS' theory.

Cheers,

Ed

From: Judith Stowe <judy@stowe43.fsnet.co.uk>

Date: Sep 21, 2006 10:51 AM

Hi Tuan, There was a work of fiction or rather a thriller published in the

1980's linking the deaths of NND & JFK as an act of retribution. It was

called 'The Tears of Autumn' in deference to Mme Nhu. Unfortunately I have

lost my copy & can't recall who the author was but apparently ex-CIA,

Saigon. Regards Judy Sowe

From: Joe Hannah <jhannah@u.washington.edu>

Date: Sep 21, 2006 11:09 AM

Subject: Re: [Vsg] documentation on killing of Diem and Nhu?

FYI: Tears of Autumn was written by Charles McCarry...

Return to top of page