New Book!

[Paul Trejo]

39 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

Harry is a member here. Do you have his blessing to speak for him, and tell HIS tale? Is he OK with your marriage of your exploits with his?

Cheers,

Michael

Michael,

As you say, Harry Dean is a member here.  Why not ask HIM?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

16 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ernie,

Did you omit to mention that you were once a member of the JBS?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Have you totally lost your mind?

[Ernie Lazar]

18 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

Harry is a member here. Do you have his blessing to speak for him, and tell HIS tale? Is he OK with your marriage of your exploits with his?

Cheers,

Michael

Michael:  

Paul has always claimed to speak for Harry but it should be noted that Paul never conducted any independent research into Harry's background.  Instead, Paul just repeats what he claims Harry has told him.  Every single thing Paul has ever written about Harry could be totally false.  None of us can ever know the actual truth because Harry never answers obvious questions.

There have been studies done concerning why people become receptive to political extremist arguments and organizations (both left and right).  What is particularly relevant about the story which Paul has published concerning Harry (but seldom discussed here) is that within a very brief period of time, we are told that Harry went from being a pro-Castro partisan (i.e. left wing sentiments) to then swallowing the extreme right conspiracy theories of our nation's largest and most successful right-wing extremist group (the JBS) along with becoming a Minutemen member.

What explains the mental gymnastics required to go from extreme left to extreme right over a very brief period of time (approx 3-4 years?)

If one thinks of political extremism in general as the product of an intellectual fever, then one can more easily understand why it is that individuals who started out as political extremists on the left-side of the political spectrum, subsequently jump across the ideological street to become political extremists on the right-side of the political spectrum.

Most of us probably think of a political spectrum only as a straight line with polar opposites at the far end of the right and left sides of the line, i.e. a very long distance. 

Instead, it may be more appropriate to think of a political spectrum as a horseshoe. At the top left side of the horseshoe is communism and other radical left revolutionary ideologies and at the top right side of the horseshoe is fascism/nazism. And the bottom middle of the horseshoe is liberalism/conservatism with variations extending outward from each....To the left there is socialism. To the right...there is libertarianism. 

If you use this device, the two extremes almost touch each other (because they share many similarities, since, obviously, they are both authoritarian or totalitarian belief systems).

AND this also explains why so many radicals on the left later became radicals on the right -- because it is NOT a long arduous journey as would be suggested by the old straight-line showing polar opposites. Instead, on the horseshoe, it is a small jump across the street at the top of the shoe. 

If we think of radicalism as an intellectual fever which is contagious--it suddenly makes more sense (using the horseshoe concept) why it is that radicals (of the left and right) often have the same intellectual "infection" which (even when they change sides) continues when they migrate over to the other side. 

Taking two aspirin (i.e. exposing oneself to contradictory data) is not a remedy for this fever because the underlying intellectual problems or defects which originally made persons susceptible to extremist ideology and its thought patterns have not been addressed.

However, there is one consistent thread for both extreme left and extreme right, i.e. hatred of the prevailing government along with many of society's institutions.

We will never know the final ultimate truth about Harry Dean -- but we do know the following:

1.  Harry was arrested by Windsor, Ontario, Canada Police Dept in March 1948 for theft

2.  Harry was arrested in Chatham, Ontario, Canada on October 22, 1948 for "housebreaking by day" (aka breaking and entering).  

3.  In October 1948, Harry was "certified insane" and committed to a mental institution for an unknown period of time until charges were withdrawn against him on February 2, 1950.

4.  In March 1950, Harry was again arrested in Canada for breaking and entering and theft and sentenced to one year

5.  Subsequently, Harry was arrested by the Detroit Police Dept -- once for disturbing a religious meeting and twice for using indecent and obscene language

6.  In late 1964, Harry sent a letter to the FBI-Los Angeles.  His letter contained what Harry claimed was information concerning Cuban-related matters.  The FBI Agent in Los Angeles who handled all Cuban-related matters for southern California reviewed Harry's letter and wrote on it:  "Is this fellow a mental case somewhere?  No acknowledgement needed.”

7.  In November 1964, Harry made a phone call to the FBI-Los Angeles office.  The Agent who spoke to Harry described Harry as "incoherent"

8.  In July 1965, one of Harry's neighbors (William M. Hill) in La Puente CA contacted the FBI office in Los Angeles to report the following:

"Several weeks ago, Dean’s wife, Millie, was employed by my wife’s employer, Leach Corp., San Marino, Calif., phone 799-0831.  Millie was in need of transportation and my wife has been driving her to and from work since she started.  I have had several conversations with Millie Dean in the interim, and upon meeting her husband (when he comes to pick her up in the evening at my home), the first thing he said to me ‘I hate all people—black, white, red, yellow and all’.  I replied ‘that’s a hell of a way to live’ and haven’t had anything to do with him since, figuring he was some kind of nut.”

Mr. Hill's wife also mentioned that Harry Dean's wife (Millie) was considering having Harry committed to a mental institution.

Significantly, Mr. Hill also told the FBI that based upon a recent interview of Harry published in his local newspaper, he thought Harry claimed to be an FBI Agent!  As Hill wrote:

“Of course, if he is indeed an Agent from your offices, then his hate attitude would be fake, and there would be no need for any service from me.  However, he strikes me as a nut and if he is active Communist, I will be proud to do whatever I can to aid in our fight against this evil.”

9.  In November 1966, Harry made another phone call to the FBI office in Los Angeles and the Agent who spoke to Harry at that time characterized Harry as "rambling and disconnected in his narration"

You can decide for yourself if Harry is the type of person you think is credible.

 

Edited March 26, 2017 by Ernie Lazar

[Ernie Lazar]

On 3/24/2017 at 3:28 PM, Ernie Lazar said:

Whom, specifically, are you referring to as the "FBI agents" (plural) "in the 1960's" who have "accepted much of what [Harry] said?

And what "FBI records" are you referring to?

Still waiting for your answer Paul.

[Paul Trejo]

11 hours ago, Ernie Lazar said:

Still waiting for your answer Paul.

Ernie,

This is quite simple.  There are many, many FBI records that admit that Harry Dean supplied information about Communists.

Now...

SOME of those FBI records include negative remarks that say: (1) Harry Dean's information was unwanted; and (2) Harry Dean is wonky.

Therefore by the rules of logic:

A.  Not ALL of those FBI records include negative remarks about Harry Dean.

B.  Therefore, SOME of those FBI records can be logically deduced to have been accepted gladly.

So simple.  Yet your bizarre bias against Harry Dean will never let you admit it.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

11 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ernie,

This is quite simple.  There are many, many FBI records that admit that Harry Dean supplied information about Communists.

Now...

SOME of those FBI records include negative remarks that say: (1) Harry Dean's information was unwanted; and (2) Harry Dean is wonky.

Therefore by the rules of logic:

A.  Not ALL of those FBI records include negative remarks about Harry Dean.

B.  Therefore, SOME of those FBI records can be logically deduced to have been accepted gladly.

So simple.  Yet your bizarre bias against Harry Dean will never let you admit it.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Nice play on words Paul.  Your original comment was

"This thread is about the New Book by Dr. Jeff Caufield, who has interviewed Harry Dean, and has accepted much of what Harry Dean has said -- just like several FBI agents in the 1960's listened to Harry Dean, and accepted much of what he said.  Actual FBI records will attest to that."

(1) You wrote that Caufield interviewed Harry and he "accepted much of what Harry Dean has said" - but then you conflate Caufield with YOUR WHOPPER, "just like several FBI agents in the 1960's listened to Harry Dean and accepted much of what he said."

(2)  The first example (Caufield's "acceptance") refers to a portion of Harry's narrative which fits into what Caufield already believes whereas

(3)  the other example is entirely passive, i.e. FBI Agents "listen" to EVERYBODY (even mental cases and chronic habitual liars) and then record whatever they say (during phone calls, in-person visits, interrogations etc) on their standard intake form (FD-71).

ACCEPTANCE DEFINED:  

The FBI merely consenting to receive some information offered (i.e. acceptance) is NOT the same thing as Caufield approving or believing some assertion(s) made by Harry.

Your conflation is comparable to me writing:  Paul Trejo has accepted much of what Ernie Lazar has written in Education Forum  and the "proof" for that statement is the fact that you respond to most of my messages.

Typical of the way you present or interpret evidence, i.e. always leaving out the most substantive and/or intended meaning.

 

[Paul Trejo]

Ernie,

Don't forget that some of those FBI agents actually gave Harry Dean a few dollars cash for his trouble and gas from time to time.

It's not just that Harry Dean claimed that -- it's that FBI agent Wesley Swearingen admitted that local FBI agents would dip into petty cash for just such occasions.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

1 minute ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ernie,

Don't forget that some of those FBI agents actually gave Harry Dean a few dollars cash for his trouble and gas from time to time.

It's not just that Harry Dean claimed that -- it's that FBI agent Wesley Swearingen admitted that local FBI agents would dip into petty cash for just such occasions.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

I'm not "forgetting" anything Paul.  The point remains that we have no proof whatsoever (i.e. independent confirmation) of what you claim.  EVEN IF one wanted to accept your assertion, one or two agents taking money from their own pocket to give some troubled person gas money to get home is not evidence of anything with respect to a "relationship" with the FBI.  

A relative of mine who was a police officer often gave money from his own pocket to people he met on the street.  Those instances did not make those people "assets" or "undercover operatives" of that Police Dept

[Paul Trejo]

35 minutes ago, Ernie Lazar said:

I'm not "forgetting" anything Paul.  The point remains that we have no proof whatsoever (i.e. independent confirmation) of what you claim.  EVEN IF one wanted to accept your assertion, one or two agents taking money from their own pocket to give some troubled person gas money to get home is not evidence of anything with respect to a "relationship" with the FBI.  

A relative of mine who was a police officer often gave money from his own pocket to people he met on the street.  Those instances did not make those people "assets" or "undercover operatives" of that Police Dept

Ernie,

As for proof -- all in due time.   Harry Dean Research is really in its starting phases, because the past 50 years of JFK research were wasted in CIA-did-it CT's.

The Radical Right CT of the JFK assassination is relatively new.  We have had very little help in gathering and sorting the vast historical materials.

As for your policeman-to-panhandler analogy -- that is vastly different from what Wesley Swearingen was talking about -- and you know it.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited March 27, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

2 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ernie,

As for proof -- all in due time.   Harry Dean Research is really in its starting phases, because the past 50 years of JFK research were wasted in CIA-did-it CT's.

The Radical Right CT of the JFK assassination is relatively new.  We have had very little help in gathering and sorting the vast historical materials.

As for your policeman-to-panhandler analogy -- that is vastly different from what Wesley Swearingen was talking about -- and you know it.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

I was not referring to "panhandlers".  I am referring to people whom my relative got to know from walking his beat.  In fact, one elderly woman who he helped out, left him about $10,000 in her will when she died.

With respect to "all in due time" -- There is no such thing as "Harry Dean Research" because there are no avenues to research.  

(1) There are no living persons who can confirm anything which Harry has said or written.  

(2) There are no archives which contain new previously unknown Harry Dean-related material.  

(3)  There are no remaining FBI or CIA files which have Dean-related material

(4)  There are no researchers who are chomping at the bit to ask Harry anything because nobody believes his story---not even WITHIN the JFK-conspiracy community.

[Ernie Lazar]

As merely one example of the disbelief of Harry's story within the JFK research community, when I contacted Joan Mellen, I asked her if she had found anything during her research to support any of Harry's assertions regarding a "JBS plot" to murder JFK.  Joan replied as follows:

-----Original Message-----
From: joanmellen <joanmellen@aol.com>
To: ernie1241 <ernie1241@aol.com>
Sent: Sun, Aug 10, 2014 12:56 pm
Subject: Re: Question re: Your Research
 

Ernie:  I checked my Garrison filing system and there is a Harry Dean file in the Oswald /Fair Play for Cuba drawer. ..Dean did interact with the Garrison investigation, but nothing came of it, to my knowledge. Maybe you've seen those records, they're in the National Archives. No one among all the people I interviewed mentioned Harry Dean.

Regards, Joan"

[Ernie Lazar]

With respect to former FBI Special Agent Wesley Swearingen:

Paul loves to use Swearingen as a confirming source for whatever Paul wants to allege.  BUT ONLY if Swearingen presents something that Paul already agrees with.  In other words, as is Paul's custom, he reverse engineers ALL of his arguments.  

WHAT IS REVERSE-ENGINEERING?

Reverse engineering BEGINS with a pre-determined conclusion and then selects or believes ONLY that data which supports/confirms the pre-existing conclusion.

Paul reverse-engineers EVERYTHING.  The ONLY evidence which Paul accepts is whatever conforms to his pre-existing conclusions.  The ONLY persons whom Paul acknowledges to be credible "experts" are those people whom provide some fragment of information which Paul needs in order to promote his pre-existing conclusion.

WESLEY SWEARINGEN:

I sent the following email to former Agent Swearingen after I read his book, "FBI Secrets".  I know it is lengthy and probably not something which many EF readers want to consider -- but it clearly shows the problem one confronts when you rely exclusively or primarily upon persons whose expertise is very limited -- to time, scope and location. [I also sent Paul Trejo a copy of this message in 2014.  At that time, Paul had not completely lost his mind so even he recognized the problem with relying upon Swearingen.]

-----Original Message-----
From: ernie1241 <ernie1241@aol.com>
To: wesswear <wesswear@aol.com>
Sent: Sat, Jun 7, 2014 4:05 pm
Subject: Your Book "FBI Secrets"

Mr. Swearingen:

In your book, "FBI Secrets: An Agent's Expose" you state that during your assignment to the Security Squad of the Chicago field office you became very familiar with the Security Index (and related FBI indexes such as Reserve Index and Communist Index).

However, I cannot corroborate the statistical information which you provide in your book with anything in my possession or which I have read from knowledgeable FBI history researchers and scholars such as Dr. Athan Theoharis.

After you read my summary of some of the anomalies I found in your book (below) -- I would be very interested in your comments.

When I reviewed the FBI HQ main file on "Security Investigations" (and this main file includes the Security Index and DETCOM and Reserve Index files=HQ file 100-358086), I discovered statistical information which does not correspond to your assertions.  Let me summarize just a few examples:

(1)  NUMBER OF SECURITY INDEX and RESERVE INDEX NAMES

On page 41 of your book, you "estimate" the number of Security Index and Communist Index names which were in Chicago field office file cabinets. 

You wrote "Together, the Security Index and the Communist Index totaled approximately 50,000 names in Chicago...The Security Index consisted of approximately 5000 names.  The Communist Index or Reserve Index, consisted of approximately 45,000 names."

The first problem I see here is your combination of Communist Index and Reserve Index.  The Reserve Index was not started until many years after the Communist Index (and it used different criteria for listings) so it is unclear if your statistical summary above refers to any one specific year when you worked in Chicago OR if you are just estimating the aggregate peak number of names which you think were listed in various Chicago Indexes over time?

The total nationwide statistics for the Communist Index and Reserve Index and Security Index make it appear unlikely that Chicago ever had  "50,000 names" on any index or on any combination of indexes.  

At its inception, the Communist Index had a total of 17,783 names nationwide but 4768 names were removed within the first year, leaving 13,015.  At its inception, the Reserve Index listed approximately 1053 names but it quickly expanded. By June 1966 it had 1720 names.

As you know, the New York field office territory had almost 50% of all Communist Party members and sympathizers in our country.  Significantly, New York typically averaged only approximately 4500 names on its Communist Index which would make it seem unlikely that Chicago was significantly higher or lower than New York.

According to statistical reports compiled at FBI HQ (from field office reports), the following are the number of CP members reported by Chicago and New York field offices for their territories:

12/52 = Chicago 1373;  NYC = 11,502

12/55 = Chicago 1030;  NYC = 10,626

12/56 = Chicago 915;    NYC =   8,432

So it is difficult to understand how you came up with your "50,000 names" in your Chicago estimate -- particularly when you consider the number of individuals listed on the Security Index (discussed below).

(2) CHICAGO FIELD OFFICE CASES

On page 27 of your book, you state that the Chicago field office "was unable to keep up with 85% of its caseload of Communist Party members in Chicago.  The office had thousands of cases on CP members who had never been or never were investigated."

I presume you are referring to the time period when you were working in the Chicago Security Squad?

However, the statistical reports on pending cases which each field office SAC was required to submit to HQ and the annual Inspection Reports written about the Domestic Intelligence Division which contain sections devoted to discussing caseloads at each field office do not support what you have written.  

I don't want to bore you with endless statistical information so I am selecting just two reports which are representative of all the other reports which I reviewed covering the period from 1952 thru 1956.

As of 12/31/53:  Chicago had 967 pending cases in the 65, 100, and 105 classifications (espionage, domestic security, internal security and foreign counterintelligence classifications).  Of that 967 cases, 25% were delinquent (i.e. 242).

As of 7/31/54:  Chicago had 1175 pending cases in the 65, 100, and 105 classifications.  Of those, 31% were delinquent (i.e. 364).   

And this was the typical pattern (or range) of delinquent security cases which I found in each statistical report---so I don't know how you came up with "85%" OR "thousands of cases" on CP members who had never been investigated--particularly since the number of Communist Party members and sympathizers in Chicago was so low (as shown in my chart above).  

The delinquent cases report for all FBI field offices ranged from a low percentage of about 5% to a high percentage of about 64% (for New York in 1952 when they had 9000 delinquent matters in 65, 100 and 105 classifications) but Chicago never remotely approached "thousands" of delinquent cases nor any percentage even remotely close to "85%". In fact, I suspect a SAC with an 85% delinquency rate would have been immediately fired unless he had some incredibly good reason for such horrible performance.

(3)  SECURITY INDEX

You claim that the Chicago field office had about "5000 names" on its Security Index.  However, when I checked every issue of the monthly Security Index summary reports produced at HQ, I could not find ANY month between 1951 and 1956 when Chicago reported more than anything other than about 600-750 names on its Security Index.  For example, in its May 1956 report to HQ, Chicago identified 311 names on its Security Index broken down into six categories (CPUSA=266; ISL=10; MISC=1; NPR=1; SUA=4 and SWP=29).

The total number of Security Index subjects nationwide varied over time (especially as criteria changed) but below is a chart which I started to compile (eventually I will update it to include everything from 1954 through 1964).

Given these nationwide statistics, it is difficult to understand how you developed your "estimate".   

DC = Detcom (Detention of Communists)                      KF = Key Figure              TF = Top Functionary
HQ file section 100-358086	Serial number	Data date	Communists	Negro	U.S. Govt Employees	DC	KF	TF
27	1605	01-15-54	22,640	2,251	17	10181	1174	50
27	1635	02-15-54	22,971	2,280	19	10294	1165	50
28	1642	03-15-54	23,228	2,295	20	10393	1163	49
28	1652	04-15-54	23,411	2,304	14	10463	1157	49
28	1679	05-14-54	23,599	2,324	15	10552	1160	49

 

(4)  ATTORNEY GENERAL NOTIFICATION RE: SECURITY INDEX

On page 26 of your book (footnote), you wrote that "The Security Index was a secret FBI list of subversives who were to be arrested in the event of a national emergency.  For many years, not even the Attorney General knew of the Security Index."

Once again, this does not correspond to what I have discovered in various FBI files -- especially the "Security Investigations" file (HQ 100-358086) which, incidentally, comprises more than 30,000 pages.

I suspect what you meant to write is that the AG did not initially know about the "Custodial Detention Index" (which preceded the Security Index).  

HQ file 100-358086 has copies of numerous memos to/from Hoover and the AG or an AAG which discuss the criteria being used for the Security Index -- and Hoover received explicit approval from the AG during the 1940's for those SI criteria. The New York Times published an article by Tim Weiner in its 12/23/07 issue (page 40) regarding the DETCOM program and AG approval in 1948 for creating the Security Index list.

I have arranged to post almost the entire Security Investigations file online on Internet Archive in case you want to review the memos between Hoover and his superiors within the Justice Department.  The first section is at link below.

https://archive.org/details/foia_CUSTODIAL_DETENTION_SECURITY_INDEX_SECT._1.PDF

The other sections of the Security Index and Communist Index may be accessed here: https://archive.org/details/lazarfoia

Best regards, Ernie Lazar

Edited March 27, 2017 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

9 hours ago, Ernie Lazar said:

I was not referring to "panhandlers".  I am referring to people whom my relative got to know from walking his beat.  In fact, one elderly woman who he helped out, left him about $10,000 in her will when she died.

With respect to "all in due time" -- There is no such thing as "Harry Dean Research" because there are no avenues to research.  

(1) There are no living persons who can confirm anything which Harry has said or written.  

(2) There are no archives which contain new previously unknown Harry Dean-related material.  

(3)  There are no remaining FBI or CIA files which have Dean-related material

(4)  There are no researchers who are chomping at the bit to ask Harry anything because nobody believes his story---not even WITHIN the JFK-conspiracy community.

Ernie,

You didn't make it clear whether you were referring to panhandlers or not.  This lack of clarify it common in your writing (much like the useless bulk in your huge posts).

As for Harry Dean Research -- it is one of my newest projects.  I am considering applying for an academic Grant to study the biography of Harry Dean as a World War Two Veteran, as a member of Fidel Castro's 26th of July Movement, and as an ordinary American Republican citizen who was caught between the twin pinchers of American Communism on the Left and the John Birch Society on the Right.   I anticipate worldwide academic interest.

1.  While it is true that Harry Dean is already in his late 80's, and has outlived most of his contemporaries of that period, nevertheless, modern historiography can work wonders in uncovering clues and facts in arcane documents so far lost to self-proclaimed experts like Ernie Lazar.

2, 3.  FBI records will reveal further documents about Harry Dean on Thursday, October 26, 2017, I predict, when the JFK Records Act comes to maturity.

4.  There are few JFK researchers today interested in Harry Dean, because most (even on his FORUM) are still wondering why the CIA-did-it CT earth beneath their feet is quaking, and worrying about how to make it stop.

The answer is, of course, the New Book by Jeff Caufield: General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: the Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015).   This has made the CIA-did-it CT earth tremble.  There is no way to make it stop. 

Everything will change after 10/26/2017, when I expect to receive a Grant to begin Harry Dean Research.   It will be HUGE.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited March 28, 2017 by Paul Trejo
Thursday

[Ernie Lazar]

2 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ernie,

You didn't make it clear whether you were referring to panhandlers or not.  This lack of clarify it common in your writing (much like the useless bulk in your huge posts).

As for Harry Dean Research -- it is one of my newest projects.  I am considering applying for an academic Grant to study the biography of Harry Dean as a World War Two Veteran, as a member of Fidel Castro's 26th of July Movement, and as an ordinary American Republican citizen who was caught between the twin pinchers of American Communism on the Left and the John Birch Society on the Right.   I anticipate worldwide academic interest.

1.  While it is true that Harry Dean is already in his late 80's, and has outlived most of his contemporaries of that period, nevertheless, modern historiography can work wonders in uncovering clues and facts in arcane documents so far lost to self-proclaimed experts like Ernie Lazar.

2, 3.  FBI records will reveal further documents about Harry Dean in October 26, 2017, I predict, when the JFK Records Act comes to maturity.

4.  There are few JFK researchers today interested in Harry Dean, because most (even on his FORUM) are still wondering why the CIA-did-it CT earth beneath their feet is quaking, and worrying about how to make it stop.

The answer is, of course, the New Book by Jeff Caufield: General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: the Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015).   This has made the CIA-did-it CT earth tremble.  There is no way to make it stop. 

Everything will change after 10/26/2017, when I expect to receive a Grant to begin Harry Dean Research.   It will be HUGE.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

1.  Worldwide academic interest?  You really do need professional help.

2.  October 17th:   Apparently, you never bothered to review the final NARA list of documents which remain to be released.

3.  Academic Grant?  There is no academic institution in this country that would ever even consider funding a dead-end research project.  

Typically, this is what a funding proposal requires

(1)  A subject title which captures the interest of the funding source(s), i.e. something proposed of wide general interest

(2)  A summary of what research has already been done on your subject

(3)  A summary of the NEW avenues for research which you are proposing to pursue (such as archives of personal papers at institutions never previously visited; contacts with people who have specific pertinent knowledge but who have never been previously interviewed; or obtaining documentary evidence never previously available--such as thru FOIA requests or through contacting friends, family members, or business associates pertaining to your subject who have such documentary evidence

(4)  Some explanation of what gap in existing knowledge your research will remedy

(5)  The details of your specific proposal: (i.e. what methodology you will employ and what travel, what interviews, what new sources of relevant data you expect to uncover)

(6)  A timeline for your research (i.e. a month-by-month summary of what you expect to be doing) and the cost (a specific itemized budget)

Everything summarized above COULD potentially result in a research grant if the general subject was "New Research into the JFK Assassination" but if you propose anything whose focus is primarily or exclusively on Harry Dean -- nobody will even consider "Harry Dean Research" -- because there is NOTHING to research!

 

[Ernie Lazar]

2 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ernie,

You didn't make it clear whether you were referring to panhandlers or not.  This lack of clarify it common in your writing (much like the useless bulk in your huge posts).

As for Harry Dean Research -- it is one of my newest projects.  I am considering applying for an academic Grant to study the biography of Harry Dean as a World War Two Veteran, as a member of Fidel Castro's 26th of July Movement, and as an ordinary American Republican citizen who was caught between the twin pinchers of American Communism on the Left and the John Birch Society on the Right.   I anticipate worldwide academic interest.

1.  While it is true that Harry Dean is already in his late 80's, and has outlived most of his contemporaries of that period, nevertheless, modern historiography can work wonders in uncovering clues and facts in arcane documents so far lost to self-proclaimed experts like Ernie Lazar.

2, 3.  FBI records will reveal further documents about Harry Dean in October 26, 2017, I predict, when the JFK Records Act comes to maturity.

4.  There are few JFK researchers today interested in Harry Dean, because most (even on his FORUM) are still wondering why the CIA-did-it CT earth beneath their feet is quaking, and worrying about how to make it stop.

The answer is, of course, the New Book by Jeff Caufield: General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: the Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015).   This has made the CIA-did-it CT earth tremble.  There is no way to make it stop. 

Everything will change after 10/26/2017, when I expect to receive a Grant to begin Harry Dean Research.   It will be HUGE.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Incidentally, there is absolutely nothing about Harry Dean's story which qualifies as "an ordinary American Republican citizen".

95% of Republicans and particularly GOP politicians (local, state, national) and conservative publications rejected and denounced the JBS.

99.9% of Republicans and particularly GOP politicians never joined or praised the Minutemen

99.98% of "ordinary American Republican citizens" never considered assassinating JFK nor hung out with people who discussed such criminal activity.

Edited March 27, 2017 by Ernie Lazar