Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

Still waiting for Paul Trejo to substantiate his very serious accusation. 

WILL PAUL QUOTE VERBATIM something which I have EVER written ANYWHERE which stated that (as Paul claims I wrote):

1.  "Harry Dean HAD NO FBI Records at all..."   

[Notice Paul's emphasis on "HAD NO" -- as if he is absolutely certain that I made such a definitive claim)

2.  "...because Harry had no FBI Number."

IN SUMMARY

There are two separate elements contained in Paul's nasty accusation.  Let's see if Paul can substantiate EITHER ONE of his two accusations OR will he admit he deliberately misrepresented what I have written REPEATEDLY??

If Paul has not responded within 3 hours -- I will post verbatim my two original messages (one in 2010 and one in 2013) and everybody can decide for themselves if Paul is a chronic, habitual, pathological l-i-a-r

 

 

Edited by Ernie Lazar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

I would point out that about 4 years ago, Ernie Lazar said publicly that Harry Dean HAD NO FBI Records at all, and that Ernie knew this for a FACT because Harry had no FBI Number.

I presented this as a question to Dr. Jeffrey Caufield, knowing he was working on the book which is the topic of this thread.   Dr. Caufield immediately sent me the FBI Number for Harry Dean.    (I'm very busy at work today, so I'll find the details later for this thread.   For now, I'll go by memory).

In any case, Ernie Lazar immediately changed his tune, and found dozens of FBI files on Harry Dean, and claimed that he always knew this.   He never gave Jeff Caufield or myself any credit for this knowledge.

This is the sort of person we're dealing with here.   Lazar always knows what he knows AS A FACT -- until he gets more facts.

US Navy sailor, Harry Dean, is important to US History and to the JFK Assassination saga, because of these connections in his life: 

1.  Fidel Castro (1961)
2.  The FPCC in Chicago (1961)
3.  The FBI in Chicago (1961)
4.  Gabby Gabaldon in Southern California (1962)
5.  The John Birch Society in Southern California (1962)
6.  The Minutemen in Southern California (1963)
7.  Loran Hall in Southern California (1963)
8.  Larry Howard in Southern California (1963)
9.  General Walker, visitor to Southern California (9/1963)

Insofar as these persons were involved in the JFK Assassination, the claims of Harry Dean since 1965 on the Joe Pyne Show, remain vital to this very day.   (Add to this list the FBI in SoCal)

Skeptical dogmatists like Ernie Lazar, in the final analysis, are JUST JEALOUS that such a humble guy as Harry Dean could have lived such a colorful and exciting life.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Well, Paul Trejo never bothered to respond to my challenge so I will now demonstrate why Paul can never be believed. 

Let's break down Paul's message point-by-point

PREFACE: 

As you read what follows, keep in mind that this discussion occurred PRIOR TO my acquisition of Harry Dean's FBI and CIA files.  It also occurred PRIOR TO my research into Mary Ferrell's website where I discovered Dean-related FBI documents that appeared on that website.

1.   Paul claims that I have previously written that HARRY DEAN HAD "NO FBI NUMBER" AND THAT IS WHY I ALLEGEDLY KNEW FOR A "FACT" THAT THERE WERE "NO FBI RECORDS AT ALL" PERTAINING TO HARRY DEAN

In just this one sentence by Paul, we see how profoundly confused Paul is mentally.

(A)  What Paul is referring to is an email which he sent to me on October 24, 2013.  In that email, Paul attached some documents which he obtained from Dr. Caufield.  One of those documents contained Harry Dean's FBI identification number which is a reference to Harry's rap sheet (i.e. his record of contacts with law enforcement agencies both in the United States and in Canada).  I then told Paul that:  "I am intrigued by the reference in the first memo to Harry's FBI number (i.e. 4657880).  I usually only see that when somebody has been fingerprinted and/or they have an arrest record."

HOWEVER, AT NO TIME DID I WRITE WHAT PAUL CLAIMS I WROTE.  I never wrote a single word about Harry NOT having FBI files.  In fact, I knew Harry DID have FBI files because YEARS EARLIER (in 2007) I had received the section of the Los Angeles field office file on the John Birch Society which contains a document which includes a reference to Harry's Los Angeles file number.

(B)  Knowing a person's FBI identification number is not even relevant to this discussion because since Harry was a living person there is no way for anybody to submit an FOIA request to the FBI (or CIA) to obtain whatever records they created on Harry UNLESS Harry agreed to provide that person with a signed, notarized affidavit authorizing release of his records.

(C)  I thanked Paul for the Caufield documents which he sent to me and I specifically mentioned that I had not seen the 94-series file on John Rousselot which was discussed in one serial which Paul sent to me. I did have other FBI files on Rousselot  [I subsequently obtained that 94-series file].

(D)  What is particularly galling about Paul's entirely false narrative is that the ONLY reason he, or Harry Dean, or anybody else even knows exactly what was contained in Harry's FBI and CIA files is because I paid over $300 to acquire them and share them with everybody.

(E)  The most important information which Dr. Caufield's documents revealed was an FOIA number on the FBI documents, i.e. (#211,326)

Once I saw that FOIA number, I knew that Harry's records had already been released to somebody -- and I specifically told Paul in my email reply to his message that FOIA number meant Harry's records must have been released circa 1985.  Why?  Because I submitted FOIA requests in June 1981 which were assigned numbers in the 211,000-series and those requests produced documents that were released in May 1985.

(F)  LATER---I discovered the name of the person who actually had made FOIA request #211326.  That FOIA request was made by Mark A. Allen.  Mark confirmed that he made his request circa 1981. Mark asked the FBI for all FBI records pertaining to the murders of JFK, RFK, and MLK Jr. which the FBI submitted to the House Select Committee on Assassinations and those records ultimately were released in 1985 -- and those records INCLUDED Harry's FBI files.

(G)  In January 2014, I posted messages in EF summarizing what Mark Allen obtained.  I also pointed out that SOME of those FBI (and CIA) records about Harry were available on the Mary Ferrell website AND I periodically included links to pdf copies of FBI documents on Harry in my subsequent EF messages.

2.  SO--Let's summarize briefly:

(A)  TOTALLY CONTRARY to what Paul Trejo claims, I NEVER ONCE declared that there were no FBI records pertaining to Harry Dean.  NOBODY could make any such claim UNLESS they had submitted an FOIA request to the FBI which I had NEVER done about Harry up to that time.  Nor did I ever cite Harry's FBI i.d. number as proof of anything other than he had a FBI rap sheet.

3.  So WHAT did I ACTUALLY write about Harry Dean and his FBI records?

Fortunately, we do NOT have to rely upon Paul Trejo's dishonest accusations. 

The VERY first message I ever posted on this website (in June 2010) clearly addressed this subject.  I copy that message below.  THEN, three years later, Paul Brancato asked me to clarify what I was saying about Harry Dean --- probably because of Paul Trejo's incessant dishonest accusations about what I have clearly stated repeatedly on this website.  I also copy my reply to Paul Brancato below.

AFTER YOU READ both messages -- compare their substantive content to Paul Trejo's dishonesty. 

Notice that in MY VERY FIRST MESSAGE on EF I referred to an FBI file document ABOUT HARRY DEAN!!!!!  [I underline the key portion of my message]

(1)  MY VERY FIRST MESSAGE ON EF – ON JUNE 8, 2010

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/4269-harry-dean-memoirs/?page=9

A while back I was asked for information concerning Harry Dean who claims that he infiltrated the John Birch Society from 1962-1964 and that he was an informant for the FBI.  During my research into FBI HQ and field office files pertaining to the John Birch Society I received an FBI document which pertains to an inquiry about a column by James Horwitz on page 2 of the 3/16/77 issue of the Las Virgenes (CA) Independent Valley News.

The Horwitz column reported upon an "exclusive interview" with Harry Dean during which Dean repeated his claims about his alleged association with the FBI as an undercover operative or informant from 1960-1965 (notice that in this interview, Dean changed the years to include 1965).  The Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles field office (Robert E. Gebhardt) saw a copy of the Horwitz column because of an inquiry which he received about it. Gebhardt responded to the inquiry about Dean’s assertions and he forwarded a copy of his 4/1/77 reply to James K. Coffin, the Publisher of the Las Virgenes Independent Valley News.

You may obtain a copy of the column, the inquiry, and the reply by requesting Los Angeles FBI field office file #100-59001, serial #1258.

Here is the pertinent excerpt:

In the interest of accuracy, I must advise you that Harry Dean has never been an undercover operative of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, has never been an informant of this Bureau, and has never been instructed to perform any act on behalf of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Furthermore, I can tell you that the FBI has never investigated the John Birch Society. I am bringing the above information your attention. You might consider furnishing this information to the readers of your column.”

Since I have obtained the entire FBI HQ file on the John Birch Society (12,000 pages), as well as almost all of the FBI field office files on the JBS -- it seems very odd that there is no mention whatsoever of anybody who "infiltrated" the JBS at the request of the FBI.

More significantly, there is the matter of standard Bureau procedure regarding ALL prospective informants:

1. Standard Bureau procedure regarding field office interest in using informants of any kind was that the field office had to submit a detailed investigative report about the proposed informant.

2. In addition, the informant was placed in probationary status until it could be determined whether or not the informant was providing useful and reliable information. Field offices prepared periodic summaries of the information which every informant provided.

3. Furthermore, any expenses incurred by informants (such as travel, purchasing literature, attending conferences etc) were itemized and requests for reimbursement were routinely submitted to HQ for approval (or rejection).

4. Any other monies paid to an informant also had to be explicitly approved by HQ.

5. Any verbal reports by informants were converted into typewritten memoranda summarizing what information they provided. Those written reports were placed into the files of the subjects they discussed (along with cross-referenced copies in other pertinent files).

6. I might also add that standard Bureau procedure regarding its informants was to provide a factual summary of their status. For example, here is the summary which the Bureau routinely sent out when people inquired about Julia Brown, an FBI informant within the Communist Party who subsequently became a Birch Society member and paid speaker under the auspices of its American Opinion Speakers Bureau:

"Concerning Mrs. Julia Brown, she furnished information on subversive activities to the FBI on a confidential basis from 1951 to 1960. Although she was not an employee of this Bureau, she was compensated for her services. Her current views are strictly her own and do not represent the FBI in any way." [HQ 62-104401-2499, 4/24/65].

THERE IS NO COMPARABLE BUREAU STATEMENT REGARDING HARRY J DEAN!

Given everything I have mentioned above, I would bring everyone's attention to the following facts:

1. There is no record of any kind whatsoever in any FBI HQ or field office file that Harry Dean ever was even considered as an informant much less accepted as one.

2. No official investigation of the JBS was ever opened by the FBI. There was a preliminary inquiry during 1959 and 1960 -- but once it was established that the JBS was an anti-communist organization which did not advocate or participate in criminal or subversive activities, there was no reason to "infiltrate" it.

3. There are no documents of any kind whatsoever concerning payments made to any "informant" within the JBS for expenses of any kind.

4. There are no documents of any kind whatsoever reflecting continuing periodic reports (verbal or written) by a specific "informant" whom the FBI authorized to "infiltrate" the JBS

Since I have acquired numerous FBI files on actual informants it authorized to infiltrate both legitimate and subversive organizations -- and I am, therefore, intimately familiar with the type of data contained in such files -- it is 100% certain that Harry Dean is misrepresenting his "FBI" association in order to inflate his credentials.

Furthermore, Harry Dean is on record stating that former FBI Special Agents Dan Smoot and W. Cleon Skousen were "members" of the Birch Society. But that is a total falsehood. Neither Smoot or Skousen joined the JBS. They did, however, support the JBS and both spoke at JBS functions or wrote for JBS publications.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: ernie1241@aol.com

(2)  MY REPLY TO PAUL BRANCATO'S INQUIRY -- IN NOVEMBER 2013

 

Paul -- let me clarify this so there is no misunderstanding. There ARE FBI documents which discuss Harry Dean -- but only in the context of denying that he had any relationship with the FBI.

In fact, I posted one of those documents online https://sites.google.com/site/ernie124102/dean --- it appears in the FBI-Los Angeles field file on the Birch Society. (Los Angeles 100-59001). The document is a copy of the 4/1/77 letter which FBI Assistant Director Robert Gebhardt sent to the publisher (James Kim Coffin) of a Los Angeles area newspaper regarding an article published in that newspaper which reported their interview of Harry Dean.

When I write that there are no FBI documents on Dean -- I am referring to FBI memos and reports during the period when Harry claims he was an FBI informant in Los Angeles and he was supposedly regularly providing the FBI in Los Angeles with information about individual JBS members such as John Rousselot and Guy Galbadon.

For example, see the new eBook where Harry claims that:

(1) In September 1963, FBI Special Agent Wesley G. Grapp dropped by Harry's house in Rowland Heights CA and (quoting Harry), "I told him all about the Rousselot-Walker plan. I outlined the role of the Birchers, Robert Welch, and Guy Galbadon and everyone."

(2) In January 1964 "...the FBI finally called me to recount what I'd seen in Southern California in 1963. FBI Agent Wesley Grapp drove out to my place and invited me into his car. He had reviewed his notes from last September and he recounted my story as well as he could....So Grapp and I drove around to cover the locations that I'd spoken about...We visited the JBS meeting places in El Monte, Pasadena, Monterey Park, and so on, and Minutemen gathering places in Temecula and so on...We drove for hours and we stopped only a few times for coffee and so that Grapp could jot down a few notes."

HOWEVER......

_A_ There are NO documents of any kind in the JBS-Los Angeles field file to support Harry's recollections -- nor documents that refer to anybody who matches Harry's description.

_B_ There are also no documents in John Rousselot's file that mention any reports by Harry.

_C_ There are no documents in Robert Welch's file that mention any reports by Harry.

_D_ There are no documents in the FBI HQ main file on the Birch Society which mention any reports by Harry.

_E_ There are no documents in the FBI files I have obtained on Edwin Walker which mention any reports by Harry.

_F_ In the near future, I should receive Wesley Grapp's FBI file -- and I will be able to see if there are any references in his file to his alleged meetings with Harry. Normally, something as important as a plot to murder our President would be mentioned in the personnel files of the people who worked on such a matter. I also submitted a request on Guy Galbadon.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ernie,

The reason there is no way to quote what you posted about 4 years ago, is because it was deleted from the Internet - probably at your request.

The claims you made were on a web site called, "The Strange Love of Billy James Hargis" by Lee Roy Chapman.   He was in the process of writing his page, and about 4 years ago you and I had a spirited debate on the topic of Harry Dean.  

When a reader goes to that web page now, all the Q&A was DELETED (probably at your request) and Mr. Chapman only has a "thank you to Ernie Lazar and Paul Trejo," in the ending credits.

Anyway, Ernie, that's where you claimed that Harry Dean had no FBI Number and so you knew as a FACT that he had no FBI Records.   I proved you wrong.   You have always failed to admit that -- to this very day.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ernie,

The reason there is no way to quote what you posted about 4 years ago, is because it was deleted from the Internet - probably at your request.

The claims you made were on a web site called, "The Strange Love of Billy James Hargis" by Lee Roy Chapman.   He was in the process of writing his page, and about 4 years ago you and I had a spirited debate on the topic of Harry Dean.  

When a reader goes to that web page now, all the Q&A was DELETED (probably at your request) and Mr. Chapman only has a "thank you to Ernie Lazar and Paul Trejo," in the ending credits.

Anyway, Ernie, that's where you claimed that Harry Dean had no FBI Number and so you knew as a FACT that he had no FBI Records.   I proved you wrong.   You have always failed to admit that -- to this very day.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

(1)  Totally FALSE and LIBELOUS Paul. 

I previously addressed your malicious FALSEHOODS on page 105 of this thread – and I INCLUDED a link to the entire comments section which the owner of that website sent to me.

(2)  See page 105 of this thread for the same information below

Here (AGAIN) is the 08-06-14 email which the owner of the “ThisIslandPress” website (Michael Mason) sent to me when I asked him to explain why they deleted their comments section AND whether or not he could send me a pdf copy of that comments section:

From: Michael Mason <mmason@thislandpress.com> To: ernie1241 <ernie1241@aol.com> Date: Wed, Aug 6, 2014 5:45 am  Attachment HargisComments.docx

Hi Ernie, nice to hear from you--and sorry to learn that you are being pestered. As to your questions:

1) Yes, I do, and they are in the attached document. I retracted email addresses to avoid privacy complaints, but all the comments should be there.

2) No, there is no truth that we removed any of your comments because of your tone, or anything having to do with you, or any individual. We made the decision several months ago to disable all comments on our entire website, as moderation of the comment board was becoming too time consuming for our small operation.

Please let me know if you have any new information to share regarding your research.

Best,  Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ernie,

The reason there is no way to quote what you posted about 4 years ago, is because it was deleted from the Internet - probably at your request.

The claims you made were on a web site called, "The Strange Love of Billy James Hargis" by Lee Roy Chapman.   He was in the process of writing his page, and about 4 years ago you and I had a spirited debate on the topic of Harry Dean.  

When a reader goes to that web page now, all the Q&A was DELETED (probably at your request) and Mr. Chapman only has a "thank you to Ernie Lazar and Paul Trejo," in the ending credits.

Anyway, Ernie, that's where you claimed that Harry Dean had no FBI Number and so you knew as a FACT that he had no FBI Records.   I proved you wrong.   You have always failed to admit that -- to this very day.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

The link which Michael Mason sent to me (in my previous message) is a Word document.  However, I converted it into a PDF file and I have now created a webpage which contains the entire comments section.  https://sites.google.com/site/aboutxr/home/hargis

(1)  CHECK THE COMMENTS SECTION FOR YOURSELF TO SEE HOW TOTALLY DISHONEST PAUL TREJO IS

(2)  IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR DOUBT THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE WEBPAGE I CREATED -- THEN CONTACT THE OWNER OF THE WEBSITE WHICH PAUL MENTIONS (notice that Paul NEVER contacted him).  His email is mmason@thisislandpress.com 

Edited by Ernie Lazar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PERHAPS PAUL TREJO CAN EXPLAIN THIS?

1.  How can you possibly accuse me of EVER writing that there were "NO FBI records at all" about Harry Dean when, in the VERY FIRST message which I ever posted on the Education Forum website (June 8, 2010) I began my message by referring to a specific FBI document that discussed Harry Dean AND

2.  In that very first message, I provided a specific Los Angeles FBI file number and serial number which contained the discussion of Harry Dean?

See page 9 of the Harry Dean "Memoirs" thread for my very first message ever posted on this website.

Edited by Ernie Lazar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ernie,

IIRC, this was BEFORE you joined the Forum.   

In my opinion, for some bizarre reason, you chose to come to this Forum with the express purpose of persecuting Harry Dean.

My defense of Harry Dean has occupied your time for YEARS.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HUH? 

(1)  I never heard of you before April 2012.   We had no contacts of any kind whatsoever before you replied to my first message here in EF in June 2010.  BTW--your FIRST message to me was dated April 2, 2012 (see page 10 of Harry Dean Memoirs thread).

(2)  I never posted ANY message online about Harry until AFTER I was contacted by several individuals who had seen Harry's comments here on EF and they asked me for my evaluation of his "recollections".  My first message re: Harry was posted here June 8, 2010.

(3)  So what are you referring to as "BEFORE YOU JOINED THE FORUM" ??

(4)  In the Hargis article comments section, YOU made these comments about me on October 13, 2013

Ernie,  First I should clarify that I respect your research, and that I believe you are raising excellent questions.

As I’ve already admitted, you make some excellent points

(5)  You constantly speak out of both sides of your mouth AND, more often than not, your comments are 100% falsehoods.

Edited by Ernie Lazar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ernie,

When it comes to FBI research (and only FBI research) I am not alone in respecting your work.   You've collected a lot of material and organized it for faculty and students alike.     I do respect that, still.

But when it comes to JFK research, you appear to me to be a fish out of water.

You're out of your element, Ernie.   You know the least about JFK CT literature than perhaps anybody on this Forum -- ever.

That's not speaking with a forked tongue -- that's just saying it like it really is.    You have some strengths, and you have some weaknesses.  You're human.

What I REALLY object to, however, is your incessant, unrelenting, almost obsessive attacks on Harry Dean, year after year after year.

To keep this post on topic, I'd add that Jeff Caufield, unlike yourself, was willing to take an objective look at Harry Dean's account.

Sincerely,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ernie,

When it comes to FBI research (and only FBI research) I am not alone in respecting your work.   You've collected a lot of material and organized it for faculty and students alike.     I do respect that, still.

But when it comes to JFK research, you appear to me to be a fish out of water.

You're out of your element, Ernie.   You know the least about JFK CT literature than perhaps anybody on this Forum -- ever.

That's not speaking with a forked tongue -- that's just saying it like it really is.    You have some strengths, and you have some weaknesses.  You're human.

What I REALLY object to, however, is your incessant, unrelenting, almost obsessive attacks on Harry Dean, year after year after year.

To keep this post on topic, I'd add that Jeff Caufield, unlike yourself, was willing to take an objective look at Harry Dean's account.

Sincerely,
--Paul Trejo

And, yet, Paul it was MY research that revealed your (and Harry Dean's) totally bogus argument about how the FBI supposedly "forged" Harry Dean's letter to J. Edgar Hoover AND it was MY research which clearly falsified other aspects of Harry's story such as his claim to be giving information about the "JBS plot" to Wesley Grapp in September 1963 even though Grapp was still SAC of the FBI office in Miami at that time AND he was attending training sessions in Washington DC during some of that time period.  AND I have repeatedly refuted many of your other claims regarding the JBS or other subjects which came up during the debate over Harry Dean's "recollections".

Incidentally, I suspect that Dr. Caufield may NOW have a much different evaluation of Harry Dean's narrative than when he published his book.

JFK RESEARCH:  I have never in my lifetime claimed to have significant expertise regarding JFK's assassination.  However, perhaps unlike yourself, I have SCORES of relevant FBI documents pertaining to the assassination -- and, in fact, I have the ENTIRE FBI HQ main file on the assassination (62-109060).  Do you?

In addition, I have accumulated a huge amount of information concerning Edwin Walker -- including documents which you never saw prior to me sharing them with you.

LASTLY:  Despite YOUR pretense to expertise about JFK's assassination, it is significant that NOBODY quotes you as an authority about ANYTHING.  Furthermore, even though you CLAIM to have reviewed Walker's papers archived at the University of Texas -- you have NEVER found ANYTHING which links Walker to Harry Dean or to any JBS plot.  In fact, you cannot even establish where Walker was in September 1963 (the key month in Harry Dean's narrative).

Consequently, I don't think anybody really regards you as any sort of "expert" on JFK's assassination despite whatever number of books or articles you have read.  Plus---so much of what you post online is based upon outright falsehoods or misrepresentations that it is no wonder that even Harry Dean apparently no longer trusts you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ernie,

Your statements now just boil down to being mean, don't they?

Your incessant and virtually obsessive attacks on Harry Dean over more than a decade, is a spectacle all in itself.

As for Harry Dean and I, we remain good friends, even though we are no longer business partners.

As for Jeff Caufield, he is ten times the scholar you'll ever be -- despite your achievements in FBI record dissemination -- because Jeff knows how to be objective.

My statements are, aside from a few errors here and there, based on careful scholarship in the works of SCHOLARS.   I read lots of material, and I combine their writings to form my opinions.   I don't make stuff up like many CTers do.

Your irrational attacks on me and on Harry Dean -- for many years -- are disturbing on this thread and in this Forum.

As for Harry Dean -- I maintain that his account of the JFK Assassination has more truth that any CT in the CIA-did-it universe, and that Harry is a welcome support for the Walker-did-it CT of Jeff Caufield and myself.   

I also say that Harry Dean is a great American, and I'm proud to know him.   His exploits for and against Fidel Castro are exciting to read about.   I would remind the reader that Harry Dean's manuscript, Crosstrails (1990) is available from Harry Dean and nobody else.   Harry is over 90 now.   Consider that.

Sincerely,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ernie,

Your statements now just boil down to being mean, don't they?

Your incessant and virtually obsessive attacks on Harry Dean over more than a decade, is a spectacle all in itself.

As for Harry Dean and I, we remain good friends, even though we are no longer business partners.

As for Jeff Caufield, he is ten times the scholar you'll ever be -- despite your achievements in FBI record dissemination -- because Jeff knows how to be objective.

My statements are, aside from a few errors here and there, based on careful scholarship in the works of SCHOLARS.   I read lots of material, and I combine their writings to form my opinions.   I don't make stuff up like many CTers do.

Your irrational attacks on me and on Harry Dean -- for many years -- are disturbing on this thread and in this Forum.

As for Harry Dean -- I maintain that his account of the JFK Assassination has more truth that any CT in the CIA-did-it universe, and that Harry is a welcome support for the Walker-did-it CT of Jeff Caufield and myself.   

I also say that Harry Dean is a great American, and I'm proud to know him.   His exploits for and against Fidel Castro are exciting to read about.   I would remind the reader that Harry Dean's manuscript, Crosstrails (1990) is available from Harry Dean and nobody else.   Harry is over 90 now.   Consider that.

Sincerely,
--Paul Trejo

Paul, perhaps you are not aware of this but you have posted more messages about Harry Dean than I have (in many different EF threads) but, of course, you never describe your own postings as "obsessive".  My messages have mostly been in reply to yours.  [Incidentally, in your typical sloppy fashion, you refer to my "attacks on Harry Dean over more than a decade" -- when, in reality, I have only been engaged in this debate for less than 8 years!].  You can't even perform basic math correctly.

Why do I bother responding? 

Because truth and facts are important.  Very often conspiracy theories become plausible to intelligent, decent, honorable people because they are not taken seriously and nobody bothers to refute them AND CT's can produce great damage --especially to a free society.  Just look at how Donald Trump has normalized behavior and ideas which were unthinkable just a couple years ago.  Maybe that has something to do with his father (Fred Trump) since Fred was a financial contributor to the John Birch Society and a friend of Robert Welch.  And guess who is among Trump's most loyal supporters and admirers?  Birchers!!

There is one more reason why I have spent time, money, and effort responding to claims made by Harry Dean -- namely that before I entered this discussion in 2010 nobody had even seen any primary source documents about Harry.  Everybody just accepted every syllable that came out of his mouth -- and, then, you wrote an Ebook to update and expand upon his narrative -- which he originally self-published in "Crosstrails" (which, incidentally, I have never read).

I believe that serious discussion must separate fact from fiction.  Jim DiEugenio has done a much better job than I could do with respect to refuting the specific conspiracy-related allegations made by Dr. Caufield (whom, BTW, nobody ever heard of, before or since this debate started).  As I pointed out a long time ago, all the standard library databases which summarize newspaper and magazine articles, academic journals and scholarly conference papers, doctoral dissertations and books --- don't even mention Caufield's book.  Zero.  Zilch.  Not even a book review AND when I checked many of the most frequently cited JFK CT websites, they also don't mention Caufield or Harry Dean.

Consequently,  you can take me out of this equation altogether because your credulousness about "scholarship" is self-evidently nothing more than an echo chamber where (like Birchers) you indoctrinate yourself with whatever "information" you think re-inforces what you already believe.

Lastly, just FYI,  -- I started out in life to become an American history teacher -- but I was never able to complete college.  Nevertheless, I have always felt an obligation to refute falsehoods presented by people like Harry and yourself.  It makes no difference how old Harry is.  He still posts messages here in EF and on other websites where he spreads his poison about the LDS church and about the "conspiracy" he has hallucinated and, especially, about his alleged role as a "witness" to, or participant in, that conspiracy AND he still attempts on various occasions to pretend that he was "recruited by" American intelligence agencies to assist them in some manner. 

Fortunately, there are only a small number of people who served as genuine informants for the FBI (or for other agencies) who have chosen to capitalize upon their relationship with our intel agencies to present absurd CT's.

I close with these apt thoughts:

 
"Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices."

---- Voltaire

"The best lack all conviction, While the worst are full of passionate intensity"

—W.B. Yeats
 

 

Edited by Ernie Lazar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ernie Lazar said:

...Why do I bother responding? 

Because truth and facts are important...   

Well, Ernie, that door swings both ways.    

For the past 53 years, Harry Dean has given the JFK CT community facts and truths that are IMPORTANT.

The fact that some unethical forces distorted Harry's story in the early 60's through the early 70's, must be reviewed seriously, for a change.   The nonsense that Harry Dean was an both an FBI agent and a CIA agent is patent fiction, written by a well-known fiction writer of the time, W.R. Morris.

This sort of nonsense even infected the FBI perception of Harry Dean in the early 1960's, and of course during J. Edger Hoover's obsession to push his "Lone Nut" theory of Lee Harvey Oswald, the FBI would stomp down irrationally on any "Conspiracy Theory" in the USA -- especially any that wanted to focus attention on General Walker and his Minutemen in Dallas, along with the rest of the Radical Right in Dallas, in the South, and in Southern California.

Harry Dean is one of the most persecuted eye-witnesses in the entire JFK saga.   One must look to Ruth Paine and Marina Oswald to find witnesses who were even more persecuted in the past half-century.

Sincerely,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said:

Well, Ernie, that door swings both ways.    

For the past 53 years, Harry Dean has given the JFK CT community facts and truths that are IMPORTANT.

The fact that some unethical forces distorted Harry's story in the early 60's through the early 70's, must be reviewed seriously, for a change.   The nonsense that Harry Dean was an both an FBI agent and a CIA agent is patent fiction, written by a well-known fiction writer of the time, W.R. Morris.

This sort of nonsense even infected the FBI perception of Harry Dean in the early 1960's, and of course during J. Edger Hoover's obsession to push his "Lone Nut" theory of Lee Harvey Oswald, the FBI would stomp down irrationally on any "Conspiracy Theory" in the USA -- especially any that wanted to focus attention on General Walker and his Minutemen in Dallas, along with the rest of the Radical Right in Dallas, in the South, and in Southern California.

Harry Dean is one of the most persecuted eye-witnesses in the entire JFK saga.   One must look to Ruth Paine and Marina Oswald to find witnesses who were even more persecuted in the past half-century.

Sincerely,
--Paul Trejo

I'm sorry Paul but you do NOT understand the actual meaning of the word "facts". 

And please stop blaming W.R. Morris.  As I have told you 100 times, I only am interested in what Harry has written himself which has been posted online on various websites.  You constantly attempt to use mis-direction by bringing up W.R. Morris.

The FBI perception of Harry was based exclusively upon their DIRECT PERSONAL CONTACTS with him (by phone, by mail, and by interviews) and those perceptions were shared by MANY other people -- including neighbors of Harry.

Harry has NEVER been "persecuted".  Yes--his story has been challenged because it contains so many falsehoods or non-provable assertions but he has NEVER been "persecuted".

Edited by Ernie Lazar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Incidentally, I will not be able to respond to Paul Trejo's messages for several days (or perhaps even a week or longer) because I am presently engaged in research for a major critique of an article recently published on the JBS magazine website.  

That JBS article discusses assertions made in a recent article posted on the website of "The Federalist" -- which the Birch Society interpreted as a defamatory narrative which unfairly and dishonestly linked the JBS to racism and hate.

Many years ago, I decided to postpone what I thought would become the final chapter of my JBS Report.  My anticipated final chapter was going to be devoted to discussing the hypersensitive subject of racism/anti-semitism within the JBS. 

However, I've never been able (up to now) to formulate in my mind the best or most effective method for making such a discussion credible and useful. 

Fortunately, I now have organized my thoughts because of numerous recent attacks upon me by JBS members because of my replies to absurdities which they have posted online.  In addition, the recent JBS website article in rebuttal to what was published by The Federalist, offers me another way to structure a comprehensive review of JBS arguments and assertions.

PART ONE of my discussion is here:  https://sites.google.com/site/aboutxr/

PART TWO -- should be finished in 7-10 days.

What is striking about the fallacious arguments used by Birchers -- is how similar their defective mental processes are when compared to debate tactics used by Paul Trejo.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...