Gerry P. Hemming

[Tim Carroll]

I repeatedly testified under oath [and submitted sworn statements] that ONLY two persons known to me were in, or near Dealey Plaza, that afternoon. One was Loran "Skip" Hall, and the other remains in U.S. Government service today, and is thereby under the protection and jurisdiction of: "The Intelligence Identities Act of 1982".

It's laughable for Gerry Hemming to hide behind a statute that's never been applied (e.g. Scooter) to evade identifying a government agent whose presence in Dealey Plaza signifies foreknowledge of some event related to the Kennedy assassination. To charge Gerry Hemming with that crime would constitute an admission the government will never make. But's it a convenient way to claim the kind of knowledge for which he wants credit, but not accountability.

T.C.

[Lynne Foster]

I repeatedly testified under oath [and submitted sworn statements] that ONLY two persons known to me were in, or near Dealey Plaza, that afternoon. One was Loran "Skip" Hall, and the other remains in U.S. Government service today, and is thereby under the protection and jurisdiction of: "The Intelligence Identities Act of 1982".

It's laughable for Gerry Hemming to hide behind a statute that's never been applied (e.g. Scooter) to evade identifying a government agent whose presence in Dealey Plaza signifies foreknowledge of some event related to the Kennedy assassination. To charge Gerry Hemming with that crime would constitute an admission the government will never make. But's it a convenient way to claim the kind of knowledge for which he wants credit, but not accountability.

T.C.

I'm not vouching for the credibility of Gerry Hemming, but I do think that US Intelligence acts are extremely intimidating and whether the are applied or not, they produce a chilling effect, especially when the 'Poindexter' types evidently dominate the Bush administration.

[Gerry Hemming]

I repeatedly testified under oath [and submitted sworn statements] that ONLY two persons known to me were in, or near Dealey Plaza, that afternoon. One was Loran "Skip" Hall, and the other remains in U.S. Government service today, and is thereby under the protection and jurisdiction of: "The Intelligence Identities Act of 1982".

It's laughable for Gerry Hemming to hide behind a statute that's never been applied (e.g. Scooter) to evade identifying a government agent whose presence in Dealey Plaza signifies foreknowledge of some event related to the Kennedy assassination. To charge Gerry Hemming with that crime would constitute an admission the government will never make. But's it a convenient way to claim the kind of knowledge for which he wants credit, but not accountability.

T.C.

------------------------------

For most WIMPS of the "sheltered life" persuasion, I would guess that it might be hilarious. During the 1964 federal trial [u.S. vs. Arms & Munitions of War] the Asst. U.S. Attorney, one Robert Josefsberg, attempted to have me indicted for making reference to my testimony, wherein I stated the circumstances of my having been debriefed by the CIA upon leaving Cuba. [1960]

However, CIA immediately informed him that indeed I had a "PAO", was an asset -- and gave multiple debriefings. The federal judge required him to not only deliver said CIA cables over to our [Plaintiff's] attorney, but further forced him to read aloud said "rebuttals" rather than our lawyer having to so. This so infuriated the jury, that they refused to look at Bob during the remainder of that trial.

Thereupon, for the first time in 137 years, the U.S. Government lost an arms case, and was ordered to return all of our weapons, and munitions of war. [seized by Diosdado and Co. on Sombrero key, December 2nd, 1962 -- as we were about to enter Cuba and prove that most of the "Nuke" warheads & "Luna" missiles remained in place.]

I later recommended to Hernandez Cartaya [World Finance Corp.} that he hire Bob Josefsberg, who by then had entered into private practice [mid-1970s]. Hernandez Cartaya was acquitted !! Two of my daughters went to school with Bob's kids at the time.

During 1976, and due to my refusal to abandon assistance to the defense attorneys for the "Marijuana Watergate" trial [ US v. WerBell, et al., Miami - 1976] -- I was indicted twice, and taken to trial on one of the cases. It cost me three years and more than $100,000 in costs to beat both cases. So who won. They left me bankrupted for two years.

I won't go into the 8 years imprisonment in the chain-gang as a result of my serving with the "Drug Interdiction Task Force" [1982 thru 1990] !!

Every time WerBell was subpoenaed to Congressional hearings, he or one of his sons was quickly indicted. Under the "Canons of the Bar" -- no defense attorney would permit his testimony without a grant of immunity -- and this thereby shut him up.

However, in this day and age, there are zealous "simple-servants" who are chomping at the bit !! That they might "force" somebody" to speak-out on specific matters, rather than continue a cover-up is now more likely than it was in the past. This was Garrison's strategy -- especially where implemented against Hall, Howard, and Seymour !! All to cover Marcello's ass, while getting his "15-minutes of fame"!!

And to answer the other question. Why would Mellen "Lie" about things that I allegedly "revealed" to her.

We may find out sooner than you think !!

Chairs,

GPH

______________________

[Gerry Hemming]

Gerry,

Thanks and welcome. "They" say everyone has at least on book in them. By my estimate, I figure you've got at least 10 books! I look forward to more of our hidden history.

Dave

-------------------------------------------

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/.../printstory.jsp

Posted on Mon, Sep. 19, 2005

THE COLD WAR

Castro Requested Soviet Missiles in 1981, Book Says

The late Chilean President Salvador Allende received help from the Soviet intelligence agency KGB, according to newly released records.

BY JUAN O. TAMAYO

jtamayo@herald.com

Nineteen years after the Cuban missile crisis nearly sparked a nuclear war, Fidel Castro asked the Soviet Union to redeploy atomic weapons to his island, says a new book based on reports by Moscow's KGB intelligence agency.

The book, based on documents revealed by KGB archivist Vasili Mitrokhin when he defected in 1992, makes other bombshell allegations as it tracks KGB operations around the Third World in the 1960s and '70s:

• The KGB documents record actual and proposed payments to Chile's Salvador Allende totaling $420,000 both before and after his election as president in 1970.

• Costa Rica's José ''Pepe'' Figueres received $300,000 from the KGB for his 1970 presidential campaign and $10,000 afterward.

• Carlos Fonseca, founder of Nicaragua's Sandinista National Liberation Front, was ''a trusted KGB agent'' code-named GIDROLOG.

• Nicaraguan Manuel Andara y Ubeda was a KGB agent who led a group of Sandinistas tasked by Moscow in the late 1960s to scope out the U.S. border with Mexico for possible targets for KGB sabotage teams.

• The KGB ''trained and financed'' the Sandinistas who seized the National Palace in Managua and dozens of hostages in 1978. A senior KGB official was briefed on the plan on the eve of the raid, led by Edén Pastora, also known as Commander Zero.

Pastora could not be reached for comment. The book does not refer to him as a KGB agent. All the agents identified by name in the book are now dead.

Mitrokhin and respected British historian Christopher Andrew first collaborated on a 1999 book about KGB operations against the United States and Europe. That book is now regarded by intelligence experts as the definitive work on the topic.

Their new book, The World Was Going Our Way: The KGB and the Battle for the Third World, covers KGB operations in Latin America, the Middle East, Asia and Africa -- the Third World that Moscow believed it could come to dominate after Cuban President Castro embraced communism and became a beacon for leftists worldwide.

Its most startling revelation about Cuba is that Castro, concerned that President Ronald Reagan was planning to attack Cuba in 1981, urged a senior Soviet army general visiting Havana to counter the deployment of U.S. cruise missiles to Europe.

''Castro made the extraordinary proposal that, if the deployment went ahead, Moscow should seriously reconsider reestablishing the nuclear missile bases in Cuba dismantled after the missile crisis 19 years earlier,'' it says. The book does not elaborate or record the Soviet reaction.

`SEIZE THE INITIATIVE'

''Classic Castro,'' said Brian Latell, a retired CIA analyst on Cuba. ``Always seize the initiative. Always go on the offensive to surprise the enemy -- never mind that the Soviets were never ever going to consider that.''

But not surprising, Latell added, because Fidel's brother Raúl has said publicly that in the early 1980s, Moscow told Havana that it would not protect Cuba in case of hostilities with the United States.

Mitrokhin's archives show that the KGB provided virtually no support to Castro before his guerrillas seized power in 1959. But just three months later, it gave Cuba the code name AVANPOST -- bridgehead -- and cemented better relations with Havana than the Soviet diplomats stationed there had.

Even then, the KGB never stopped snooping. Besides its official presence in Havana, it ran a secret branch to spy on Cuba that in 1974 alone sent 269 reports to Moscow, the book adds.

Other KGB reports describe Raúl Castro, on a 1960 arms-buying trip to Czechoslovakia, as `` sleeping with his boots on and demanding the services of blonde prostitutes.''

'IMPORTANT' CONTACT

The book describes Allende as ''by far the most important of the KGB's confidential contacts in South America,'' because he was a democratically elected Marxist and Castro's ally. In KGB lexicon, a confidential contact is more like a friendly source, not an agent.

But Allende's KGB file says the agency maintained ''systematic contact'' with him since 1961, the book adds. One report says, ``He stated his willingness to cooperate on a confidential basis . . . since he considered himself a friend of the Soviet Union.''

So while the Nixon administration and CIA were working diligently to prevent his election in 1970, and to oust him afterward, the KGB also was working hard to put him and keep him in power, the book says.

Mitrokhin and Andrew also wrote that while president, Allende offered a KGB officer to send his trusted aides around the region to investigate and report on issues to the KGB. Allende died in the 1973 coup that toppled him.

Only about 130 of the book's 677 pages are devoted to Latin America -- from more innocent KGB contacts with other Latin American leaders to previously known Soviet weapons shipments to Salvadoran guerrillas.

On Costa Rica's Pepe Figueres, the book says that after his election he met regularly with the KGB chief in San José, rather than the Soviet ambassador, and agreed to a deal involving a small newspaper he ran.

A 1974 KGB report to Soviet President Leonid Brezhnev said this: ``In view of the fact that Figueres has agreed to publish materials advantageous to the KGB, he has been given 10,000 U.S. dollars under the guise of stock purchases in his newspaper.''

DID THEY KNOW?

Although the book does not say explicitly whether Allende and Figueres knew that their money was coming from the KGB, Andrew argued in an e-mail to The Herald that they surely knew.

''Allende knew well before he became president, and Figueres by 1970 at the latest, that they were dealing with a KGB officer rather than someone they assumed to be a Soviet diplomat or journalist,'' Andrew wrote in the e-mail.

``Allende's KGB case officer, Svyatoslav Kuznetsov, reported to Moscow that Allende reacted positively to his suggestions for reorganizing Chilean intelligence and establishing liaison with the KGB. Figueres took elaborate precautions to preserve the secrecy of his regular meetings with the KGB resident.''

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

© 2005 Herald.com and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.

http://www.miami.com

________________________________________________________________________

[Mark Knight]

Interesting material, Gerry.

But if, as you've previously contended, there were missiles left in Cuba after 1962, why would Castro want them reinstalled in 1981...if they were indeed still there?

Or have I misunderstood [or misremembered] what you previously said?

Of course, I also realize that it wasn't YOU who said Castro wanted the missiles reinstalled in '81; you're just quoting an article here.

So...can you elaborate on this topic, and the apparent contradiction?

Or is this something that I should just leave alone?

[John Simkin]

• The KGB documents record actual and proposed payments to Chile's Salvador Allende totaling $420,000 both before and after his election as president in 1970.

Much larger sums were paid by the CIA to British Labour Party politicians and the leaders of the trade union movement in the 1950s. It was highly successful is pushing the labour movement to the right. I daresay the same thing happened to the Labour Party under Tony Blair. For example, we know that a group of businessmen gave £7 million to Blair soon after he was elected as leader of the Labour Party. It is possible that these businessmen were passing this money on behalf of the CIA. This money was used to run his "office". Blair also got £3.5 million from Rupert Murdoch (HarperCollins) as an advance on his memoirs at the time he was trying to decide if he should invade Iraq. Everyone of Murdoch's 270 newspapers also supported the war (Murdoch himself argued that an invasion would result in lower oil prices).

[Gerry Hemming]

Interesting material, Gerry.

But if, as you've previously contended, there were missiles left in Cuba after 1962, why would Castro want them reinstalled in 1981...if they were indeed still there?

+

Or have I misunderstood [or misremembered] what you previously said?

Of course, I also realize that it wasn't YOU who said Castro wanted the missiles reinstalled in '81; you're just quoting an article here.

So...can you elaborate on this topic, and the apparent contradiction?

Or is this something that I should just leave alone?

--------------------------------------

Mark:

The short-range anti-maritime [Nuke-tipped] missile WARHEADS -- which were later removed from the Banes base, and shipped to the Bejucal [southwest of Havana] elect/storage facility. The "Luna" nuke warheads later were shipped out to the USSR -- and along with the Soviet Mech/Inf. Brigade. -- which continued to hold the responsibility for guarding them.

[NOTE:] The Bejucal facility now has ALL of the electronic "Jamming & Monitoring (i.e., your local and international telephone calls, and Internet activities) equipment which was once in place at the Lourdes Base. Currently, Intel agents from Iran are there -- jamming and blocking the UK/US satellite which beams propaganda down on the area -- in the Farsi, Arabic, Urdu, Pashtu, and Dari languages.]

What Fidel & Company requested (and more than once, BTW) was: A "Full Re-Installation" of the "Mobile" (MMRBM-MRBM) Intercontinental "Nuke-Tipped" missiles !!

USSR Premier Yuri Andropov [ex-KGB "Boss"] laughed in his face, as did Breshnev. He didn't even bother Gorbachov with his psychotic "wet-dreams" !!

Fidel also made attempts at making similar acquisition from other "rogue" states, some of whom, already had the nuclear components, but NOT the delivery "vehicles". And Fidel hadn't worried about said "vehicles", because he intended to "Do-Us-In" with a 9/11 style "Kamikaze", or merchant vessel "dirty" or "quasi-nuke" bomb !!

[Detailed schematic/design-plans for the "shotgun" type (late 1940s Nuke) components (fission device) remain on the Internet as we "speak" !!]

Four of the former Cuban MiG, pilots who had defected a few years back, gave classified testimony as to:

Specific "training missions" along those lines. In fact, one of them opted to defect because he had been selected to target the south Miami nuclear facility at Turkey Point !! What delayed further training was the scarcity of both jet fuel and spare parts; and the lack of "Night Instrument Flying Qualifications" throughout the F.A.R. !!

I am glad to see how many folks are still in love with this NAZI, and would-be Hitler imitator -- because he is after all of your asses -- along with his own folks. Just like his idol/author of "Mein Kamph"; when he sat in the Berlin "Fuhrer-Bunker" at the end.

When he finally arrived at the point where: He believed that his own countrymen had abandoned him, he wants to take them down with him, and preferrably before either nature or one of his cohorts takes him out first !! To state that "El Mximo Barbudo" wanted to go out with a "Big Bang" is an inane understatement !!

I wasn't a "tourist" or "groupie" in Cuba, I lived and worked alongside all of these characters !!

Chairs,

GPH

___________________________

[Pat Speer]

Gerry, you certainly are in a better position to understand Castro than most. While on the surface it would seem your comparing him to Hitler is a gross overstatement, I'm sure you have reasons for feeling this way. I'd be interested if you care to tell how you first came to know of Castro, what attracted you to him, and how you came to doubt his true intentions. I believe you've said his killing William Morgan was the last straw. Was there a progressive degeneration in Castro's personality? Or do you think he always was what he became? What about Guevara? Is it possible Guevara was gonna betray Fidel, as some have suggested?

Edited December 9, 2005 by Pat Speer

[Mark Knight]

Mea culpa.

I failed to differentiate between "missiles" and "warheads." Thanks for clearing that up for me, Gerry.

[Joan Mellen]

In her book Professor Mellen writes:

Gerry Patrick Hemming concurs: "Helms is [was?] behind the entire operation to kill JFK." (Ch. 10.)

I can find no cite to this statement, and Mr. Hemming vigorously denies making it to Professor Mellen (or anyone else, for that matter).

So my question for Professor Mellen is what is your support for Hemming ever blaming the assassination on Richard Helms?

I have Gerald Patrick Hemming on tape to the tune of boxes and boxes of tapes from our conversations. Yes, he cited Helms as behind the assassination - on tape with me in Fayetteville, North Carolina. He also cited Lawrence Howard as being in Dealey Plaza, and as a crackerjack shooter and sniper, although more recently he has denied that. This is a individual who has contradicted himself, as many authors and historians have noted. Note that I do not call him a witness.

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

From Gerry Hemming's post of December 8:

And to answer the other question. Why would Mellen "Lie" about things that I allegedly "revealed" to her.

We may find out sooner than you think !!

From Joan Mellen's post of today:

I have Gerald Patrick Hemming on tape to the tune of boxes and boxes of tapes from our conversations. Yes, he cited Helms as behind the assassination - on tape with me in Fayetteville, North Carolina. He also cited Lawrence Howard as being in Dealey Plaza, and as a crackerjack shooter and sniper, although more recently he has denied that. This is a individual who has contradicted himself, as many authors and historians have noted. Note that I do not call him a witness.

Yes, Gerry, it seems that we are about to definitively ascertain whose habit it is to "lie" about things, "sooner than you think!!" Given your despicable misogyny on display here on the Forum, one finds it rich that your unmasking will come at the hands of a mere slip of a woman, using your own words to demonstrate what many of us have long suspected about you.

It appears that for some of us, one of our Christmas wishes is about to be granted.

[Dawn Meredith]

In her book Professor Mellen writes:

Gerry Patrick Hemming concurs: "Helms is [was?] behind the entire operation to kill JFK." (Ch. 10.)

I can find no cite to this statement, and Mr. Hemming vigorously denies making it to Professor Mellen (or anyone else, for that matter).

So my question for Professor Mellen is what is your support for Hemming ever blaming the assassination on Richard Helms?

I have Gerald Patrick Hemming on tape to the tune of boxes and boxes of tapes from our conversations. Yes, he cited Helms as behind the assassination - on tape with me in Fayetteville, North Carolina. He also cited Lawrence Howard as being in Dealey Plaza, and as a crackerjack shooter and sniper, although more recently he has denied that. This is a individual who has contradicted himself, as many authors and historians have noted. Note that I do not call him a witness.

Ms Mellen,

It's an honor to have you here. I asked Gerry about this also and he became quite rattled and even talked of lawsuits. I suspected -(and hoped)- that anything he told you would be on tape.

Some of us wonder why you included anything Hemming told you in AF2J?

Dawn

[Robert Howard]

In her book Professor Mellen writes:

Gerry Patrick Hemming concurs: "Helms is [was?] behind the entire operation to kill JFK." (Ch. 10.)

I can find no cite to this statement, and Mr. Hemming vigorously denies making it to Professor Mellen (or anyone else, for that matter).

So my question for Professor Mellen is what is your support for Hemming ever blaming the assassination on Richard Helms?

I have Gerald Patrick Hemming on tape to the tune of boxes and boxes of tapes from our conversations. Yes, he cited Helms as behind the assassination - on tape with me in Fayetteville, North Carolina. He also cited Lawrence Howard as being in Dealey Plaza, and as a crackerjack shooter and sniper, although more recently he has denied that. This is a individual who has contradicted himself, as many authors and historians have noted. Note that I do not call him a witness.

Ms Mellen,

It's an honor to have you here. I asked Gerry about this also and he became quite rattled and even talked of lawsuits. I suspected -(and hoped)- that anything he told you would be on tape.

Some of us wonder why you included anything Hemming told you in AF2J?

Dawn

Gerry, for all your apparent anger towards the US Government for their B.S., (and I would be the last one to disagree with you) some of us out in the same 'real world' you live in, would wonder why you don't tell all, it wouldn't even have to be on the Forum, there is the print media, and certainly no shortage of 'inquirin minds". Whats up with that?

P.S. I may not be a member of 'Fearless Leader's 2% of black voters trust me camp', but Feedel Castro has never been a big fav of mine either.

Edited December 21, 2005 by Robert Howard

[Gerry Hemming]

In her book Professor Mellen writes:

Gerry Patrick Hemming concurs: "Helms is [was?] behind the entire operation to kill JFK." (Ch. 10.)

I can find no cite to this statement, and Mr. Hemming vigorously denies making it to Professor Mellen (or anyone else, for that matter).

So my question for Professor Mellen is what is your support for Hemming ever blaming the assassination on Richard Helms?

I have Gerald Patrick Hemming on tape to the tune of boxes and boxes of tapes from our conversations. Yes, he cited Helms as behind the assassination - on tape with me in Fayetteville, North Carolina. He also cited Lawrence Howard as being in Dealey Plaza, and as a crackerjack shooter and sniper, although more recently he has denied that. This is a individual who has contradicted himself, as many authors and historians have noted. Note that I do not call him a witness.

Ms Mellen,

It's an honor to have you here. I asked Gerry about this also and he became quite rattled and even talked of lawsuits. I suspected -(and hoped)- that anything he told you would be on tape.

Some of us wonder why you included anything Hemming told you in AF2J?

Dawn

--------------------------------------

Let me see now. I became "rattled" and even talked of "lawsuits" ?! How does one discern one's being "rattled" over the Internet ??!! Apparently, you, like Mellen, have profound difficulties in the interpretation of even short, and to the point, written statements ??!!

I don't have to repeat what I wrote in that post, as some very simple movements of one finger on your "mouse" -- will return you to said posting. Even in paraphrasing, it comes out with the same intent.

["...It will be up to the law firm's decision as to whether anything "untoward" has been written in Mellen's book..."]

As it was explained to me -- by those more practised in the field of lawthan I am: "Malice" is oft construed as "what a reasonable person" might discern as the "real purpose" behind the writing of any single [or composite] quotes being ascribed ?! More importantly; are these quotes purporting to be "direct", or from some other entity's and/or scrivener's material -- whether it had been published or not ??!!

It may well come down to the what indeed these "boxes and boxes" of purported "tapes" actually reveal.

I expect, as usual, and down the road -- it will be a case of ascribing ALL blame to either the editor, and/or publisher of said tome.

I still have great difficulty in grasping the "WHY" of any mention as to ex-DCI Helms; or is he "One-of-the-Usual-Suspects" NOW ??!!

Moreover, what would be ANYBODY'S purpose in making ANY reference to Helms, vis-a-vis "The JFK Murder", even if done in a joking manner. During 1963, Helm's was a 4th floor "flunky" -- with a pretentious title !! Not only did he lack any authority over specific clandestine service operations. He wasn't even in the loop !! [just like the Clinton/Reno "WACO" whackers; getting their "promotions?", which is not an undesirable method for quickly removing a "stooge" from the mainstream !!]

Moreover, when it came time to "revise or reveal", with reference to even the inconsequential episodes/events, Helms blundered quite grotesquely. Why? Because he didn't have the slightest "clue" as to what he was supposed to "conceal" !!

The "BIG" question remains -- how the hell would I know anything at all about Helm's activities during the 1960s, and why would I even care ?? Mellen has an "obsession" -- and it is obviously one that grew out of her "gullible-girly-groupie" experience with "Big Jimbo/Gumbo". NOT that I haven't seen that weird behavior repeated time-and-again, over the last 40+ years.

Lawrence J. Howard is still around and breathing. During Larry's years of work as an undercover agent for the A.T.T.U. [i.R.S.], and later for that outfit, when it was reorganized as B.A.T.F. [directly under Treasury] -- he diligently practiced the most important of job skills: Keep an accurate record of all activities and locales associated within every report. [see: Title 18, section 1001, et seq. -- "The Martha Stewart Charges"]

Whether Mellen ascribes her "scribbling" errors to Weberman, Posner, Russo, Larry Hancock, or even Weisberg -- I know exactly where Larry Howard was on 11/22/1963; and so do the agents who closely monitored [and protected] him during those specific periods in question.

I hired Larry Howard during 1977, to act as a co-investigator [and bodyguard] -- and this was while resolving issues as to "Death Squad/Kidnap" activities in Central America. My brother and Larry returned to Central America for that task, and successfully completed said investigation.

During early 1980, when I was again called upon to conduct similar work in Puerto Rico, I hired Larry as a bodyguard to my wife and family. Never once, during all of those years, did we ever have a serious discussion about the JFK matter.

[The one instance was: When, during 1981, while enroute to the Los Angeles BATF field office -- he turned to me and asked who it was, that I had instructed him to "get rid of" -- while our No Name Key crew was being TV interviewed [December 1962] at the Congress Airport Inn motel ?? I had hesitated, and he quickly stated: "...That guy was Oswald..wasn't it..??"!!]

The Los Angeles BATF field office supervisors advised Larry [during 1967] to voluntarily travel to New Orleans -- and thereafter present himself to Garrison for further inquiries.

The only matters that disturbed him were: Government files, which clearly showed that Garrison was a child molester, and that he had serious mental problems. Moreover, those files showed that Garrison was operating under severe strains, most of which were the result of his unfulfilled obligations to Carlos marcello.

However, the government agents didn't think that Garrison would act in a retaliatory manner against Howard, and this was due to the fact that they had informed the NODA that Howard remained an active SSCI (UC) operative for BATF.

Mellen DOES NOT want to hear any of this, as it doesn't comport with her "fantasy-land" agenda; which centers on idolizing her big "Hero". My former spouse is sitting on the couch, right next to my computer desk at this moment, and she has great difficulty grasping the "WHY" of Mellen's claims ?? Especially those where she suddenly purports having tapings of any interviews here in Fayetteville.

This is somewhat upsetting to her, because a family member has recently disposed of a nasty lawsuit, and has now reluctantly agreed to testify against said adversary. That party had made illegal tape recordings during the course of several encounters. Which will, without a doubt result in prison time !!

Here in North Carolina, as is the case in Florida, and most other states -- ALL tapings must begin with the voice of the machine operator stating that: "..This is (name & title)..and I am here in the presence of (name of subject)..for the following purposes.."!! The place, date and time must be included with the foregoing and preserved on all voice recording "events/episodes"; and including any changes to a fresh tape spool.

[see: State vs. Lynda Tripp, MD -- RE: The Monica Lewinsky tapings.]

[The only exemptions apply to the recordations & transcriptions of matters connected to law enforcement activities. Even then, the law requires that each spool be prefaced with the above mentioned inclusions, but a "case number" must be recorded in all "prefaces" !!

Recording by concealed devices is a 5 year felony for each event/incident, which translates to each spool, or where considerable time had intervened; that multiple counts might be filed per each spool !!]

All matters admitted & adjudged in even a civil matter in Federal District Court [including transcripts & exhibits] are later admissable in any criminal proceedings held in a state trial court.

Weberman's strategy was to "force" a libel suit, in order that he might arm himself with a stack of subpoenas from the clerk of the court !! He schemed to thereafter serve, "in persona" and "duces tecum" subpoenas, directed against a vast number of irrelevant VIPs !!

Unfortunately for a defendant in an A.D. 2005 libel lawsuit, those very same "Nodules" will now serve to operate "against interest"; and especially in the case where Weberman is joined as a 2nd or 3rd "Party". The proper venue is here in Cumberland County, NC. [see: Digests, "Venue in Internet Cases"]

I am now prepared to serve a "Notice of Intent", coupled with several sworn statements [Notarized Affidavits] -- and specifically with reference to ALL matters concerning mine , and others', interactions with Ms. Mellen. I am prepared to "FAX" said documents to any parties of interest, but only if Mellen's counsel advises (in writing, and on law firm stationary) that she will submit similar sworn statements as a matter of course !!

I do believe that the time has arrived, in that several scriveners will be called to account for their reckless allegations against a multitude of personages. More important, is that they will finally be called to task for bald allegations -- against specific governmental entities and/or employees !!

I would remind all parties: It is of great interest to all -- that a close scrutiny of Forum member Mike Kelly's reference to the "Sheehan-Tactic" is in order. That is: Using the Civil R.I.C.O. Statutes as the correct/proper device, especially where the forum (Tribunal) and venue are quite advantageous. [see: Title 18, US Code, section 1961 et seq.]

I await Ms. Mellen's production of any "consensual" recordations, especially those reduced to a transcribed format.

Most interesting is the allegation that: I described Lawrence Howard as a "Crackerjack" -- said term I have NEVER used in entire my life. Over the last 60+ years, I have deliberately eschewed the use of hundreds of "current & cool" metaphors. I have always been satisfied by focusing my verbal/oral expressions identical to that of the military. and especially those select "Nautical" terms, which are oft used by Marines and Sailors -- and frequently profane !!

Lawrence J. Howard never received, training, nor ever qualified as a "Sniper". As for "...Many authors and Historians" stating that I have "..contradicted myself". Please, Ms. Mellen, don't hesitate to cite just ONE "author/historian" who, after "personally" interviewing me; has made such allegations.

That some "scribbler' plagiarizes some other "scribbler', who cited to some tabloid trash article, is all too commonplace. But where Mellen, like all of the other reckless "scribblers" fail -- NO "authoritive cites" to the original document or article. Ms. Mellen has opted to NOT explain any reasons why: That she NEVER attempted to personally clarify any sticky issues, much less make mention of same, at an opportune time, prior to publication ??!!

I confronted Garrison with his scheming on more than just one occasion. He admitted to same, but claimed that he was forced into doing this because of "pressing matters at hand" !! Even an amatuer viewer of the Perry Mason TV series, would gag when reviewing his modus operandi during the Orleans Parish Grand Jury sessions.

[Harry Connick, Sr. privately stated that he wanted to dispose of "all that trash" because it was a severe embarassment to the N.O. District Attorney's office, and the legacy thereof.]

The worst news is yet to come. The very few "knowledgeable folks", who are currently involved in the JFK matter -- are agreement in the singular point. That is: To date, EVERY name foisted upon the public as either a "suspect" [or even a "subject of interest"] is absolutely, and totally WRONG. NOT EVEN CLOSE !!

The one person who had 90% of the real facts assembled in a rational form, died during 1974. His death seemingly opened the door, for the then DCI Bill Colby, to terminate Angleton. However, Colby had made a gross mistake, in thinking that this "Possessor-of-Family-Jewels" was JJA's ONLY "Ace-in-the-Hole" !! Which was the genuine reason that Angleton remained active at his office for the next several months.

This "Person", has only been mentioned by name once, during the last 40+ years !! However, and due to the "infamous character" of the writer, said reference was totally ignored. TOO BAD FOLKS, you've NOT been played ["Like-a-Violin"] by professionals -- you played yourselves, ab initio, into a ridiculous and seemingly endless, quandry.

The best displays may well come, if Mike Kelly, et al. initiate a "forum" under some, as yet unknown, legal theory [or priniciple] !! At that time, his "qualified" legal associates might be encouraged to seek out some sworn statements. Especially those "volunteered" by any member who might be selected as a prospective "witnesse". Which is exactly what the A.R.R.B. failed to do !! This is the reason why, when reading their "wit" transcripts, the educated amongst us are dismayed by the tendency towards comic relief

I am prepared right now, to enlarge upon what was quickly redacted from my H.S.C.A. testimony. An ordeal I submitted to -- despite knowing full well that, those proceedings would result in yet another "cover-up".

I really don't expect that the "Qualified Wits" list will be very long. This is because that: When it comes time to swear under oath, as to "personal knowledge" -- the majority of "Village Idiot" type bookreaders will be summarily excluded. "Book Reading" doesn't count in ANY legal forum. However, depositions under oath [such as from Ms. Mellen, and subsequent to subpoena service] would routinely be admitted by most forums and/or tribunals.

I would expect that those attorneys, who have been retained by authors/historian/scriveners, would caution their clients to make DAMN SURE that they will verify all allegations, and/or supportive commentaries. The only thing akin to "taking the 5th amendment" when called upon to speak the truth, is the lame excuse that: "..My attorney advises me that I shouldn't speak upon these matters..!!"

ONE SHOULD HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT THAT EVEN BEFORE THE SCRIBBLING BEGAN !!

Chairs,

GPH

_____________________________

[Pat Speer]

The worst news is yet to come. The very few "knowledgeable folks", who are currently involved in the JFK matter -- are agreement in the singular point. That is: To date, EVERY name foisted upon the public as either a "suspect" [or even a "subject of interest"] is absolutely, and totally WRONG. NOT EVEN CLOSE !!

The one person who had 90% of the real facts assembled in a rational form, died during 1974. His death seemingly opened the door, for the then DCI Bill Colby, to terminate Angleton. However, Colby had made a gross mistake, in thinking that this "Possessor-of-Family-Jewels" was JJA's ONLY "Ace-in-the-Hole" !! Which was the genuine reason that Angleton remained active at his office for the next several months.

This "Person", has only been mentioned by name once, during the last 40+ years !! However, and due to the "infamous character" of the writer, said reference was totally ignored. TOO BAD FOLKS, you've NOT been played ["Like-a-Violin"] by professionals -- you played yourselves, ab initio, into a ridiculous and seemingly endless, quandry.

The best displays may well come, if Mike Kelly, et al. initiate a "forum" under some, as yet unknown, legal theory [or priniciple] !! At that time, his "qualified" legal associates might be encouraged to seek out some sworn statements. Especially those "volunteered" by any member who might be selected as a prospective "witnesse". Which is exactly what the A.R.R.B. failed to do !! This is the reason why, when reading their "wit" transcripts, the educated amongst us are dismayed by the tendency towards comic relief

I am prepared right now, to enlarge upon what was quickly redacted from my H.S.C.A. testimony. An ordeal I submitted to -- despite knowing full well that, those proceedings would result in yet another "cover-up".y don't expect that the "Qualified Wits" list will be very long. This is because that: When it comes time to swear under oath, as to "personal knowledge" -- the majority of "Village Idiot" type bookreaders will be summarily excluded. "Book Reading" doesn't count in ANY legal forum. However, depositions under oath [such as from Ms. Mell

Chairs,

GPH

_____________________________

Gerry, excuse me if I'm reading this wrong, but it seems to me that if you're asserting that someone had 90% of the facts assembled, then you're admitting that you know 100% of the facts. You can't judge a percentage without seeing the whole pie. Are you merely overstating your knowledge of this person's knowledge? Or are you admitting that you know what happened, and that you've just been toying with us all this time? What is going on here?

And if you know of any instances where an author or newsman received jail time for secretly taping a conversation with a source, I'd appreciate hearing about it. I once taped someone while they were trying to involve me in a criminal conspiracy, and a lawyer friend of mine told me to destroy the recording for MY own protection. You've obviously looked into it. How real is that threat?