Gerry Hemming

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Robert, I've always wanted to be witty, too. Do you think it would help if I wore my "trenchent" coat? Just kidding. FWIW, Thomas xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---------------------------------------- I have searched high and low for ANY of "The Village Idiot's" posts, and wherein he might have asked a relevant question. Maybe John has moved them elsewhere. He is now heard to allege that I "ordered" Larry Howard to kill Oswald ??!!. I suspect that he has imbibed [or smoked] some "bad product" whilst hitting the keyboard. Or maybe he is being distracted by some young lad, who is sitting on his lap -- as he lets his fingers wander to and fro ??!! Any fool can find the short narratives referencing when LHO showed up at the Congress Airport Inn !! And it clearly states that he had expressed a desire to join the "revolution". Steve Wilson had been initially approached by LHO, and he thereupon strolled over to me, and while boldly interrupting lawyer Chuck Ashman -- imparted the "weird news" about our "fresh" volunteer. Lawyer Ashmann had been explaining to me exactly how and why TV reporter Silverman had discover our intended lodging, and then "ambushed us" with his TV camerman. I had given specific instructions that NO interviews, or even photos -- would be permitted for the next few weeks, if even then !! Being quite annoyed with Ashman at that time, I dismissed Wilson rather abruptly. I then instructed Larry Howard to: Tell LHO to get his ass on out of the area. Here in the South, we call that: "politely blowing somebody off "!! I haven't a clue as to why LHO was there, and I really didn't know who he was, but instinct told me that I had encountered him before, and because that gave me added aggravation beyond the TV interview bullxxxx, I was in no mood to suffer any more fools gladly. It was only after a few days of swimming back at No Name key, did I recall that this was the same clown that I had dealt with in Monterey Park [Jan. 1959]; at the main gate at MCAF Santa Ana (LTA) [Feb. 1959]; and had been told inside Cuba that he was looking for me [March/April 1959]. All in all, it means zip to me, and I could really give a rat's ass, as I am completely bored with the details any of these minor encounters !! We were not "beer-drinking buddies" [a-la Kerry Thornley's trash]!! The last time I spoke to LHO was during the 20+ minutes at MCAF Santa Ana (LTA). I have never heard of any FBI S/A Bob Dwyer "memos?" referring to some Augustinovich clown. Are you having trouble finding the posting ?? You know, where I explained that: The guy in the right-hand corner of the group photo [Key West] was a U.S. Marshal ?? I'm not about to re-type that explanation a second time. There was NO Augustinovich around us, or even around Miami. He has been proven to be somebody of the same ilk as James Files; that is: If he ever existed at all ??!! When somebody cites to genuine authorities, and not some tabloid trash scribbler, I "might" respond. I await some "proof" of anything from any member who has either sworn statements, or video recordings with reference to this whole business. I don't have to prove a damn thing to any wannabe bookreaders, especially those who are here for entertainment purposes. I NEVER sought out a scrivener/reporter/author in my life, and most of the time those "freebie" giveaways irritated the hell out of my family and associates. As for "wild goose chases"?? When some scribbler showed up on my doorstep, I asked what the hell might they FIRST do FOR ME ?! They had the connections and support needed to scout out interviews. Especially with those people who I could NOT safely approach. And IF they delivered the goods, I gave them some of the insider scoop they sought. During 1992, while we were in D.C. for the "JFK Act" hearings, we visited with Harold Weisberg [1992]. One of the first things he did, was to apologize for having supported and aided "Pervert" Garrison in his phony finger-pointing at my crew !! While I was going about my business over the years, it was the writers/reporters who called me with loads of questions -- I NEVER had any reason to initiate contact with them. The list is quite long !! Bonafede; Buchanan; Buchanan (Ft. Laud.); Burt; Fabricio; Tamayo; Russell; Fonzi; Twyman; Brewton; Hopsicker; Piper; Marchetti; St. George; Ostroff; Oltman; Summers; Swan; Marquis; Koethe; Hendrix; Wilkerson; Newman; Cummings; Ford; Volkmann; Dunkin; Anderson; Pearson; Hume; Rather; Rudd; Siegel; Cronkite; Nickless; Jennings; Hersh; Russo; Waldron; Turner; O'Shanan; Chase; Ward; Coates; Stuckey; Wallace; Vernon; Weberman; Kluge; Salah; Talbot; Brown; Armstrong, Malone; Bohning; Buell; Hancock; Frank; Dorschner; and a few dozen others from ABC; NBC; CBS; CBC; Westinghouse; Shinbun; Hsinhua; Prensa Latina; Excelsior; Hoy; Granma; Univision; Tageblatt; DeutshePublik; Der Spiegle; Reuters; FrancePresse; CorreadelaSerra; and, Those dozens of others that went on to mention and cite, and always without ever having contacted me !! Garrison got the "inside" on the "west-window" shooter from me [1967]. Oliver Stone thought it only fitting that I play that character in the movie. Does the "Village Idiot" have ANYTHING cogent on the phony "Sniper's nest" ?? Or will he claim that he is above and beyond all of that ?? Does he have anything to add to why the "phony LHO window" can't have been used ?? Nawh, he falls for "authors" who claim personal quotes and conversations that never happened. He just takes there word for it, just like a sucker. Or just like some snitch trying to get a "Weberman-style-Freebie" by jerking my chain !! NOT. How about some "inside" on the Mannlicher Carcano, and without plagiarizing Purvis or me ?? Want to tell me about what the "non-existant training camps" were all about ?? Or are you awaiting my solid insights into that bit of scoop ?? How about just give us an "ADIOS" and go back to playing with your punk rockers, cause you don't know xxxx about weapopns, Intel, ballistics, shooting skills, much less how to interpret bullxxxx grand jury games by a "psycho-pervert" NODA !! So Ms. CANUCK -- take a number, and keep it short and to the point !! If I don't know, or haven't heard from a reliable witness and/or source; I will say so. Do you own "Googling"; you can get more there than from me !! And Thomas Graves, you just keep up the good work !! ___________________________

Liddy's thesis is not the thesis of Hougan's book, Secret Agenda. Secret Agenda's thesis is that Watergate was a CIA operation with Hunt and McCord at the helm. It also presents some pretty irrefutable evidence that the standard story of the wiretapping isn't true, which may be why Mr. Baldwin dislikes it so much. If you are permitted, is it your (or other parties currently unknown) agenda to drive Mr. Baldwin off of this Forum. Do your "associates" fear that he might make some untoward remarks as to the realities of the "Watergate Affair"??

There is/was a book by W.R. Morris {1985}, and other Morris writings I have never read, discovered by me in 1999/2000. It is reported Morris used me at great length in this book titled ALIAS OSWALD. It is possible Ms. Joan is quoting from that, or others by Morris. I did meet with Rapp, he wanted confirmation on previous info. given to other Bureau agents before the Nov 22,63 sad event. {there will be much more to Rapp's report than what Hall said} Larry Howard was an anti-Castro ally of I and several others, he was an alright likeable person but into the anti-Kennedy activitity with the group { as outlined in my manuscript book }. Did W.R. Morris put the word " crumb " and other statements into my mouth in reference to Howard et al.? It is so that Howard and others of the group were attempting to involve me {timely discovered} via Mexico City, in the Kennedy affair. Harry Thanks Harry, And can you say, "You no, good, lousy rotten crumb" like James Cagney? BK ------------------------------- Maybe Harry can supply us with the names of Larry Howard's wife and children, and specifically what there ultimate careers centered upon. Also, would he like to respond directly to e-mails from the Howards -- and spell out a little more clearly as to why they have never heard of him ??!! ___________________________

Gerry, This is the second time that I recall you mentioning Augustinovich as falsely claiming that he was with you on No Name Key. In the photo of you and other No Name Key men linked to below, the man standing in the right corner is identified as Ronald Augustinovich. Can you tell us who he is for the record? Thanks. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/PHOTOinterpen16.htm Ron ---------------------------------- Just like the "Eddy Bayo" name screw-ups, and which remain today "uncorrected" on Spartacus, and continues within many other personal postings -- nothing ever changes. I can only guess that: Some folks either have difficulty with reading English, or that ego prevents them from admitting error, and thereafter opt to make corrections ??!! That particular photo is all over the web, and specifically on Gordon Winslow's "Cuban-Exile.Com" website. That photo had a very concise caption, and identified only those of us who had been arrest the night before at Sombrero Key, near Marathon. The caption didn't include the names of law enforcement folks, nor jailers. Also absent from the caption were the names of those NOT arrested, amongst whom were Dick Whatley, Bobby Willis, et al. !! The man in the right-hand corner is wearing a U.S. Marshal's badge on his left-hand shirt pocket, as the Marshal's had "primary custody" of us all, since is had been a federal arrest. The Marshal's name is Kenneth McDole, and he was later a member of my Green Beret team [O.D.A. / C/3/20thSFRGrp(Abn)], and dropped out of his fiirst "Jump School" class at Fort Benning [1964], and due to a broken ankle -- leaving me alone to finish the parachute course. Ken was then a full-time firefighter, and a "part-time" US Marshal in Miami. He was at the Noriega trial during 1990 while I was there. He remains a part-time U.S. Marshal today !! Malcolm Blunt [Expert UK NARA researcher] threw his hands up in disgust upon learning that he had wasted hundreds of hours on this phony "Augustinovich Story"!! Moreover, for someone who researches at NARA about every two months, and is respected by Mellen as the foremost expert on these matters, I had expected that he would have taken me at my word as to the "limited few" vagabonds "paint-balling" at No Name !! I was somewhat chagrined to receive an e-mail, wherein he described this very Forum as a total waste of time, considering that the most frequent posters have absolutely NO clue as to the realities of these matters. However, he does indeed track the anti-Bush, phony WMD, neo-CON aspects with regularity, and is a Socialist by conviction. Enroute to the meeting with Mellen [June 27, 2005], we stopped at a specially called meeting of the S.F.R.G. [at West Palm Beach]. Malcolm, et al., was there to see the screening of the Ralph Rennick TV interview footage (InterPen No Name Key team, returning from Key West - Dec. '62), the JFK MIA (18th Nov. '63) footage, etc., and etc. !! He later assisted mellen in some matters as to "newly released" NARA files !! _____________________________

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 ??!! Gerry, your written statements are rarely short, let alone to the point. If you were to edit out all the invective and unbecoming barracks-boy potty mouth, they might be short and to the point. 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 ??!! The case in point seems to revolve around what was said by you into a microphone, which is about as direct as you can get. If those recorded statements contradict what you've told others, it is fair game of Ms. Mellen to point it out to her readers, just to let them know that your record for consistency and veracity may be open to reasonable question. In the event that Ms. Mellen has quoted your words from other sources, and those sources quoted you incorrectly, then your beef is with those sources, not Ms. Mellen. And, from a strictly legal point of view, if you didn't sue those who misquoted you, then you have no recourse against Ms. Mellen if those alleged "misquotes" appear in her work. It may well come down to the what indeed these "boxes and boxes" of purported "tapes" actually reveal. Which is what seems to have you "rattled" to the point of threatening legal action, albeit not on the basis of being misquoted, just allegedly being taped without your knowledge, as per your comments below. 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. This presumes, of course, that there is any "blame" to ascribe, a point that is pure smoke and mirrors until demonstrated. If you have said on tape what Ms. Mellen quotes you as having said, there is no "blame" to ascribe, save perhaps your inability to zip your lips when you ought to have done. 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 ??!! If Ms. Mellen has you on tape making that allegation, then even asking the above question is disingenuous on your part. 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. Actually, Gerry, knowing nothing about a topic has never seemed to stop you from spouting off in the past, so why would your self-aggrandizing behaviour stop with Ms. Mellen? You have in this very thread made statements, as though factual, about a person or persons having developed 90% of the data needed to solve this crime, and when challenged, cited what you'd been told by others. In essence, you backed away from claiming sufficient personal knowledge to render such a judgement, and deferred to those who informed you of this. This is not fact; it is gossip, unless and until demonstrated. You make similar assertions all the time, likely on similarly questionable bases, and when called on them, resort to virtriol and poor manners... this forum is chock full of examples. Perhaps what has you irritated with Ms. Mellen is that her "gullible-girly-groupie obsession" is with Jim Garrison, rather than with you, since you keep insisting that all forum members, irrespective of gender, are simply angling to get a "date" with you. 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. First, there are no "errors" to misattribute until they are demonstrated to be errors, which is where certain tapes will no doubt come in very handy for Ms. Mellen. Second, irrespective of what you know about Larry Howard's whereabouts on that date, what matters is what you told Ms. Mellen; what you claimed to be true, not what you now say you know to be true. 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. And you have those files? Or have seen those files? Or have taken the word of others - whether Howard or anyone else - that these are legitimate files? 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. Presumably, Ms. Mellen would have asked to see those files, if you possessed them. If you don't, then you're just peddling more gossip, second or third hand, which is not exactly convincing to anyone, whether or not they suffer from "gullible-girly-groupie" syndrome. Moreover, it is no secret that Garrison has been the subject of a decades-long campaign of slander and character assassination. You're simply one of the several lads who was sent to trip Garrison up, and having screwed the pooch on that score, will not rest until his legacy is dirt. How does it feel, Gerry, knowing that this alleged half-wit child-molesting Mafia-fronting scumbag commands a level of respect today that you never will? Is that what put the burr under your saddle? 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. So, rather than repudiate your allegedly misquoted comments to Ms. Mellen, which is how you began, you now wish to sue her for having taped your conversations without your permission, presuming that is what happened [and not simply more of your endless bafflegab.] Interesting. You see, this is not simply a case of a person being caught on tape during an involuntary exchange, or being blind-sided. You have admitted here that such conversations took place of your own volition, even in your own abode, and the statements you made were uttered freely and of your own will. If they are captured on tape, it is a testament to Ms. Mellen's professionalism and her desire to ensure that nobody would be misquoted on so important a topic. Whereas your present, baseless fall-back position seems to be akin to the man who voluntarily appears on camera for an interview, but then squawks because he didn't sign a "release" for its use. You granted Ms. Mellen interviews. You said things you now regret having uttered, as they don't portray you in a light sufficiently flattering to comport with your self-image. So you've taken a page from Tim Gratz's disused legal playbook and begun barking about legal action against the author you willingly confided to. You know, Gerry, for a putative man's man, you're behaving like a petulant teenaged girl. Do get a grip, dear boy. Your current behaviour is unbecoming any man, let alone a self-proclaimed man's man. 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. Oh, for God's sake, Gerry.... you granted the woman interviews, and said things you now regret. You cannot get far claiming that your comments weren't made "consensually," unless someone has been granted power of attorney over you because you're claiming diminished mental capacity or summut similar. Is that your next grand legal strategy? 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 !! No xxxx. Lawrence J. Howard never received, training, nor ever qualified as a "Sniper". That may be a fact, but it is immaterial. What is material is what you told Ms. Mellen, and if it was a lie, then it is you who must account, not she. 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. Why did you drop in the qualifier "after personally interviewing me?" That is not included in her statement, nor need it be. Your record for consistency is not good, Gerry, as anyone who's read the Weberman site already knows. Whether you just can't keep your story straight, or you play different roles for different audiences is really secondary to the fact that your story wobbles from point to point without payoff. You claim that this is the direct result of endless clueless brainless scribblers misquoting you. Makes one wonder why you're always so anxious to make yourself available to them, the very same question you claim your family keeps asking you. Why do you do it, Gerry, in light of your consistent disappointment with the results? On the one hand, you offer little of substance and mutter your chagrin about being misquoted or misinterpreted, but on the other hand, you refuse to just shut your mouth and fade into obscurity. Do you suffer from some kind of compulsion, Gerry, or are you just still "on the job?" [Assuming that you ever were, that is.] 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 ??!! And where bigmouths fail is to spout off to all and sundry and then feel bitter disappointment with the result. Just sue her, Gerry, and we'll soon see who is credible and who is the buffoon. 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 !! Then, presumably, all of your previous preamble for the past nigh-on 40 years hasn't been of much use to us, has it, Gerry? Could you get any closer to admitting that you've got nothing substantive to offer, without actually coming out and saying it? 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. Not without some help from the professionally slippery, and the mentally questionable. 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 !! AND PERHAPS ONE SHOULD ASK THE SCRIBBLERS IF THEY'RE TAPE RECORDING A CONVERSATION BEFORE THEY OPEN THEIR BIG MOUTH !! Chairs, GPH _____________________________ -------------------------------------- Once again the "Music Biz - Village Idiot" desireth that I cease and desist from commenting upon matters which are apparently disturbing to her, and to whomever she is snitching for ?! Is CSIS' Judd putting pressure on your little pink behind? As for my having trusted a few authors and investigative reporters ? In the majority of cases, I insisted that they credit the original sources, rather than naming me. It is quite obvious that in your "Weberman agenda" , that you persist in NOT contributing anything of consequence. Nor do you contribute any credible reponses which might assist some of the experts, authors and investigators on this forum. I get a considerable amount of private e-mails every day. Those correspndents routinely make direct, and to the point inquiries. If I can answer to their interests, I do so. Moreover, most concur with my reasoning which seems to explain your activities: That you, like the others of the "Weberman ilk" have one goal in mind -- to nag and criticize ALL "direct sources". I was invited to this forum, and I joined with great reluctance. Having "lurked" on dozens of "blogs" and "forums", I found most to be a mockery of true jounalism, investigative reporting, etc. !! It is NOT my fault that you appear absolutely nowhere in anybody's tomes, or even an index, nor with Danny Brandt's "Namebase.org". Your are a "bookreader", and your erroneous opinions are the result of your soaking up "loads" of bullxxxx, which you frequently attempt to purvey onto this forum !! As for my language, I have found it a total waste of time to treat "mouthy wannabes" with any respect whatsoever. And this is especially so when their first actions are blatantly antagonistic. Moreover, they always insist upon arguing with people, especially those (now few) -- who were amongst the "actors" and "subjects-of-interest". If this gives you more "hardcopy" with which to exhibit to your boyfriends & "The 3 Stooges", so be it. Just try not to get the pages stuck together. As for trusting Ms. Mellen, that was a tremendous "Weberman-style" mistake. I had insisted of her, at the outset, that I didn't want to be a "character" in her writings. She agreed to that, and this got the family off of my back during 2001. It did take some time, before I suspected that: She was obsessed with an idolatry of "pervert" Garrison. Yet, I believeed that once she had examined the facts of the matter, then she would write "the real truth" !! The "WHY" of Garrison's moves, especially against some of the most useless "non-entities" I have ever encountered. That Mellen will be exposed as a charlatan matters not to me, but it will come. Unfortunately, it might cost her more than can be imagined. I have been cursed with total recall since childhood, and that is why I have opted to eschew diaries and/or journals. Any reports which I have been required to make over the years, I did correctly, and always without even rare references to notes !! During 1966, Garrison was involved in a scheme to protect Carlos Marcello, et al.!! This involved primarily the blackmailers who had set him up as yet another "patsy"!! However, there arose more serious threats, and this resulted in efforts at thwarting Walter Sheridan's in his investigations. Marcello indeed believed, that he was "owed" -- by the Kennedys, and that for having orchestrated the assassination of Trujillo. But, the realization that Ramfis Trujillo was after his ass, caused panic. Norman LeBlanc, and Arturo Espaillat were the first to warn him [during 1966] that: Trujillo's son (a multi-millionaire) was out for revenge. I don't have to cite to any authorities, as most are available to anyone not too ignorant, lazy, or stupid !! I am not going to do some strange fool's research for them. If responsible folks have a legitimate inquiry, I will attempt to respond. But, I am not going to write anybody's book or pamphlet for them. You, like Weberman, have long ago been categorized as prevaricators. Neither one of you have ever done anything of consequence during the whole of your miserable lives. Weberman's goal was to sucker buck$ out of gullible folks, especially those ignorant of the fact that he was just another Bob Dylan stalker. For years he has been doing somebody's disinformation job , and that it duplicates "Dame" Hoover's cronies' efforts, engenders no surprise. That I ramble ? Nobody has invited you to read any of my postings, and I am sure as hell not going to give-up 'insider" information to any weirdo wannabes, nor disinformation agents. You lucked out in your sparring with Gratz, and that, because he spent more time on the keyboard, instead of in a local library. I had advised long ago: Take counsel, even from an antagonist, and check out his dictates before hitting the keyboard. His "Christian bible-thumping" and focus upon abortion matters, was probably more irritating to me, than it was to our left-wing ("progressive") clique !! Especially with those who use this forum as a juvenile chat room !! That you have consistently opted NOT to ask any serious questions -- long ago confirmed that: You are here to xxxxx !! That you might cite Weberman, Mellen, or other propagandists -- reveals your limited abilities at rebuttal. The majority of qualified authors & writers, having perused thousands of NARA files, some of which refer to me, have little difficulty in forming queries. Frequently, they want to qualify or expand upon specific items of interest. Many are NOT surprised at governmental scribblers' efforts at evasion in all serious inquiry into even that which is a matter of history. But, that is what their political bosses continue to mandate. What are the parameters mandated by your bosses, and pray tell, who is calling your shots ?? Chairs, GPH _______________ --------------------------------- Oliver Stone had paid Bud Fensterwald's corporate entity [not sure whether it was then a 501(3)©] about $87,000, and part of the package included loads of declassified files. After the big group dinner at the Italian restaurant [December 1990] , which was located just down from "The West End Market Place", Stone asked that I bring a few boxes of my personal FOIA/PA files, so that Rusconi, et al. might sort out that which Bud didn't have in his collection. Ronald Von Klaussen, who still lives one floor below the Condo where Stone's mother lived [NYC], saw the boxes of documents, and expressed surprise. He had never heard of Title 5 US Code, sections 552, et seq. [FOIA/PA] and loudly warned us about "possession of classified material"!! However, he quickly grasped the realities of the matter, and thereafter spent hours studying loads of files, especially the CIA stuff. Ron had been a "CIA Assassin" for years, and in Guatemala was known as "El Tigre". He already had appeared in some of Stone's work, such as playing the mechanic {"Wall Street"] who tips Charlie Sheen as to the destination of the aircraft carrying Mike Douglas' character. At that time he had held an "S.A.G. Card" for over 25 years, and had worked on TV series such as "Flipper", "Everglades", etc. !! During February 1991, Von Klaussen approached me, and asked about the correct procedures for getting his own CIA, FBI, etc. files released. I gave him my latest copy of the approved "FOIA/PA Manual" and invited his questions as to exactly how I had gone about said activities, and moreover, recommended that he consult both Bud and Jim Lesar for any future "advice". [exercising a bit of caution, as I was on parole at that time]. Once again: while were in the process [in Miami] of signing the contracts with "Camelot Productions", Von Klaussen had called Davy "out-of-the-blue" [the two hadn't spoken in over 30+ years], and wherein Ron stated that he had it on good information that we were being hired by Stone to do a "JFK Assassination Movie". In an ominous voice, he advised Davis that a whole lot of "Company Folks" were still outraged at the "Platoon" flick, the "Born on the 4th" business, etc., and etc.!! -- and that our participation in "anything" with Stone might cause severe repercussions in the future. Davy, Hargraves, and I then spent about 12 seconds "worrying about it", and agreed upon a future response to Ron, should he call back: "... SO, what else is new ??!!" After Bob Groden's "Heroic Briefing" at Stone's Stoneleigh Hotel headquarters [production crew], we retired to the small auditorium at Larry Howard's "JFK Museum". Stone wanted US to give a "Real Briefing" on ALL aspects of the Cuban business. Towards the end, and after a long recitation/questioning as to names of specific CIA, FBI, Customs, BA2506, JM/WAVE, et al. personalities, he asked: "... What was the true name of the CIA assassin who was known as "El Tigre" in Guatemala, Miami, and elsewhere..."?! We hesitated for a moment, and then explained to him that: Tthere might be some problems with the "1982 Intelligence identities Act", specifically should this person remain categorized as a "covert operative" within the Agency. Stone then said: "... Well then...just give us his initials...if you can do that...!" I responded: "..R.V.K...". A few hours later Stone, Von Klaussen, Rick, Kitman Ho, et al. had a big laugh at our expense as Oliver introduced "his CIA assassin" -- as the guy who had practically raised him from childhood !! Yuck, Yuck, and we slithered away in total disgrace. As for "lawyering" and "J.D.s", even under current Florida statutes [and Bar Canons] a person is permitted to "Intern" with a law firm for three years, and upon that law firm's certification, take the "State Bar Exam". Moreover, said "intern" is given the same privileges [after the 2nd year] as a law student, in that he may represent clients in a courtroom, give legal advice, etc., but under the "ongoing supervision" of one of that law firm's lawyers. The courts have held that this DOES NOT required that said lawyer be present at all times during said intern's practise, but be informed regularly as to same. --------------------------------------- http://www.sptimes.com/2005/09/22/Worldand...yers_need.shtml Who Says Lawyers Need to go to Law School ? In Some States, Apprentice "Law Readers" can become Lawyers if they pass Bar Exams. By Associated Press Published September 22, 2005 WASHINGTON - Rebecca Valois is working to become a lawyer - without setting foot in a law school. She's studied for three years at the private Virginia practice of her mother-in-law, Judith Valois, who was admitted to the state bar in 1986 after getting her legal education from her husband. They are "law readers" - people who study law in offices or judges' chambers rather than classrooms. California, Vermont, Virginia and Washington allow law readers to take bar exams after three or four years in apprenticeships registered with the state. Three other states - New York, Maine and Wyoming - let people who didn't graduate from law school take bar exams if they have a combination of office study and law school exper-ience. Fewer than 150 aspiring lawyers are getting their legal educations in programs that require no law school what-soever, according to the bars of the states that allow the practice. By comparison, more than 140,000 students attend law schools approved by the American Bar Association, and thousands more attend schools not approved by the ABA. Despite some challenges, law readers can achieve big things. Marilyn Skoglund, for instance, sits on the Verm-ont Supreme Court, and Gary Blasi is a professor at the University of California at Los Angeles. "I'm really sort of a bizarre case," Blasi said. "The first time I was ever in a law classroom I was teaching law." As the only law reader he knows who ended up a professor, Blasi doesn't recommend his route for others inter-ested in teaching law in a university. However, he said there are benefits. "If I were redesigning the entire legal education system, it would definitely provide more of a real-world, mentored experience," Blasi said. The next hurdle for Rebecca Valois (pronounced val-WAH), a 30-year-old mother of two in Centreville, Va., will come in February, when she gives the bar a try. It won't be easy. Only one law reader passed the Virginia bar last year out of nine attempts. In July 2003, seven law readers took the bar, but the only one to pass was Margaret Valois - Rebecca's sister-in-law. Judith Valois, who supervised the studies of both her daughters-in-law, said friends tease her about being the "Valois School of Law." She said a big benefit to law reading is that students get one-on-one instruction from someone who cares about them. Indeed, the supervising lawyers cannot take money for the significant time they put into training their app-rentices. Barbara Macri-Ortiz in Oxnard, Calif., supervises the education of apprentice Jessica Arciniega because she wants to give something back. "I didn't have to pay for law school - I should be able to help somebody else do the same thing," she said. Macri-Ortiz - who has some college but no bachelor's degree, which isn't a requirement for California's bar - got her legal education through an apprenticeship at the United Farm Workers of America, where she worked for the union's founder, Cesar Chavez. Now she mostly represents the poor, and about a third of her work is pro bono. A downside to skipping law school is that a degree can be a job requirement. The elder Valois began working for the Veterans Affairs Department as a staff attorney in 1991. She worked her way through the ranks and in 1998 was set to become a senior Equal Employment Opportunity Commission attorney when she learned that the job required a law degree. The VA ended up giving her a waiver and she got the job - two years later. Although the ABA maintains rigorous standards for approved law schools, it doesn't advise against law reading. Related groups see it as a state's right to allow an alternative to law school. "The highest court of each state owns the decision about how to meet the need for consumer protection," said Erica Moeser, president of the National Conference of Bar Examiners in Madison, Wis. "For some people, it's probably the only way that they can combine working and studying." Even law-reading advocates caution that there is more to learn these days and it can be tough for a supervising lawyer to provide guidance in legal areas outside his or her specialty. "For most people - the great majority of people - it's not the best way to try to get a legal education," said Scott Street, secretary treasurer of the Virginia Board of Bar Examiners. "Just putting in the time doesn't come anywhere close to assuring that you've got an education." Washington is the only state where law readers pass the bar at a higher rate than traditional students. Sheryl Phillabaum, chair of Washington's Law Clerk Committee, can't explain the success. "But anyone who has devoted so much time to getting through the program is mightily motivated," she said in e-mail. Law readers don't qualify for federal student loans, and in Virginia - unlike other states - they can't get paid by the law firm training them. "When you don't have loans, and you can't get paid for what you're doing, you are sacrificing a lot," Rebecca Valois said. "But you're getting a lot in return." [Last modified September 22, 2005, 01:04:14] ________________________________________

-------------------------- Well, I guess I might as well shred the FOIA/PA documents, along with my 1977 federal trial "discovery" files -- which show me and Davis; not just visiting Walker, but also naming Welch, his secretary, and her 16 year old daughter. Miami fed. judge Hoeveler forced the prosecution to give up a bundle, and when they "side-bared" as to "security & law enforcement" exclusions -- he remarked as to the "T-1 & T-2 Informants" on several FBI "302s". I stated that we had met "privately" with Walker !! SO, with July 5th dates on the "T" snitches, I quickly declared that they were either, "inhouse-bugs", "wiretaps"; or BOTH. I can't believe I gotz da whole files !! Said files even comment on the "N" number of the aircraft we borrowed from "Embry Riddle Aviation" at Opa-Locka Airport, and with note margins directing a little pressure to be put on that outfit. Didn't work though, Jack McKay was a big time JBS member, quite wealthy and friendly with Nixon, LBJ, and Hoover !! Have you got the RIF numbers and cover sheets, I knew they were holding out on me sometimes. Might help to cover my ass with the ex-wife; who also wondered about our flying to Dallas and missing a promised holiday with our kiddies !! Chairs, GPH ______________________

----------------------------------- Lt. Carrier: My references to "Tooshee" as a snitch are backed up by my stack of U.S. Government files, which focus mainly on his repeated attempts at getting felonies off of his back by volunteering to snitch-out fellow miscreants !! [Not to mention some private correspondence from folks that think they have been had !!] In most cases he was rejected, and this was because he had absolutely nothing to offer !! Not even something with which a grand jury [listening to hearsay] might swallow. And just like James Files [who Nancy says has "..always liked me..!!"] -- he claims to have been more "everywhere" than "Chickenman" sings in the commercial. I give him credit for not copping files claim [a-la Augustinovich] that he was with us on No Name Key. Talk about a "Forrest Gump"??!! Everybody who was anybody [Miami 1960s] either has NEVER heard of him, or they still claim that they blew him off as a government [or other entity ?] snitch. NOT ONE N.A.R.A. file even mentions his name in a serious vein. You have Scott Armstrong's telephone number [NSArchive founder], give him a call and ask him about "Tooshee" !! And while you are at it, ask him about one Gerry Patrick Hemming, the same guy that worked with him and Bob Fink on the "Letelier Assassination Case" during 1977. As for so-called "classified files" secreted away somewhere in D.C. ? Congress maybe ? That is total horsexxxx, and he knows it. The guy is a pathetic waistrel, and like Files, has spent too much time reading books. He even repeats the (since corrected) errors made in first editions of those books. He reads Sheehan's "fantasy-land" affidavit ?? -- and then adopts it as his own. Not that many years ago, he tried to con Dick Clark's production people into swallowing his tabloid tales. I worked the "Mother Ship" operations from 1976 thru 1978, and gladly returned to the air interdiction ops during 1978 thru 1982. I flew out of various airstrips in Panama, but only refueled in Puerto Limon, Costa Rica twice. I haven't a clue as to said "Anglo", as the only folks I dealt with in Puerto Limon, were Roger Redondo, and other ex-S.F.N.E. guys. at that time they were importing (6 cylinder only) automobiles from Miami. They bought impounds, and auction block vehicles, and then shipped them down to C.R. !! Which "Major Lopez" are we talking about. This name is as common as Smith & Jones in Latin America. Was he a "Comandante" Lopez?, or a U.S. Armed Forces Lopez? -- or even a "Mayor" Lopez? Have you even looked at that "gas station" map, with all of the illiterate scribbling on it. Where are his "W.A.C. Sectionals", the "USAF Topographicals", or at least the "1:25,000 Mil. Maps"?? I've still got mine from when I set up the labs in "Tranquilandia" [Putamayo, Amazonas, Colombia]. And just when did he give all of these "secret' insider tips to the authorities, Wow, like years after the xxxx had long gone public. My brother, who worked the "Death Squads" in Guatemala, El Salvador, etc. was curious as to how you couldn't have known that Mario Sandoval Alarcon was a serial mass murderer, when any whore on the streets of "Guat-City" could have gushed out plenty of C.V. on that killer ??!! When I told Mario about the movie "Wild Bunch" -- and that his old buddy, Emilio "El Indio" Hernandez was a star in it -- he almost choked while laughing through his "Trache-Hole" He asked what part did his buddy play, and I told him that we had nicknamed him [sandoval] after that character, "General Mapache" (which means Racoon)!! He almost fell out of his throne. We had to get him a copy of the flick, but when we got back two weeks later, he had already ordered the theaters all over town to immediately schedule the flick. A couple of years later, "El Indio" blew a Mexican extra's head off on a movie set, and quickly fled to Guat-City, where Mario hid him out. He surendered a year later, and died in prison. I am at a loss with grasping this comical "Jack & Jill" bit, as I didn't ever find any humor with what we encountered in Central America during 1971 thru 1982, NOT at all !! I was quite happy to spend my flying hours mostly in the eastern Caribbean by that time, but duties forced me back into that muck & mire all too frequently. Why am I here, and why did I start as early as December 1963 looking into the JFK matter ?? When it became obvious that seemingly honest people, including those closely related to the Kennedy family, wanted everone to back off -- that is what we did !! That is: Until Garrison started his "Cover Marcello's Ass Scheme" by pointing the finger at US !! 99% of the names disclosed, and later cited by Danny Brandt in "Namebase.org" came from books whose authors got them from me. While 99% of the names cited in the Warren Comm. Report, HSCA, etc. originated as disinformation from "Dame" Hoover. I testified before the "Church Committee", the HSCA, etc. -- where is "Tooshee's" name in any of those files, hell even wing-nut whackos testi-lied before the A.R.R.B.; where the hell is "Tooshee's" script ??!!. Classified my ass. Weberman twisted around everything that he got from me and my brother [nobody else, including Sturgis would give him xxxx]. So what does he do, inserts phrases totally out of context, and spices it all up with "Over-Profanity" to make it appear more credible. I have yet to see anything on this Forum to date, that is first hand, or comes from a well researched "active" source. Just a whole lot of book-reader speculations, and arguments about some of the silliest crap imaginable. I have no compunctions about revealing "covert" operations, and especially with regard to those which should have been surfaced years ago. The very fact that they have remained classified this long; just further encourages all of the fantasy-land/wet-dreaming by people with too much time on their hands -- or are driven by some weird political agenda. NOBODY is going to get famous scribbling on this forum, so give it up -- and let's get real about some of the serious matters under discussion. Then, maybe some of the "never-were-there" characters will fade into the sunset ??!! I had expected that, with your background, you might have discerned who is who by now, that is: Unless you are cultivating somebody for some other purpose. If somebody is mentally unstable, and you are concerned as to his reactions to a dose of reality -- let me know by private e-mail, and I will back off !! Chairs, GPH _______________________

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 ??!! Gerry, your written statements are rarely short, let alone to the point. If you were to edit out all the invective and unbecoming barracks-boy potty mouth, they might be short and to the point. 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 ??!! The case in point seems to revolve around what was said by you into a microphone, which is about as direct as you can get. If those recorded statements contradict what you've told others, it is fair game of Ms. Mellen to point it out to her readers, just to let them know that your record for consistency and veracity may be open to reasonable question. In the event that Ms. Mellen has quoted your words from other sources, and those sources quoted you incorrectly, then your beef is with those sources, not Ms. Mellen. And, from a strictly legal point of view, if you didn't sue those who misquoted you, then you have no recourse against Ms. Mellen if those alleged "misquotes" appear in her work. It may well come down to the what indeed these "boxes and boxes" of purported "tapes" actually reveal. Which is what seems to have you "rattled" to the point of threatening legal action, albeit not on the basis of being misquoted, just allegedly being taped without your knowledge, as per your comments below. 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. This presumes, of course, that there is any "blame" to ascribe, a point that is pure smoke and mirrors until demonstrated. If you have said on tape what Ms. Mellen quotes you as having said, there is no "blame" to ascribe, save perhaps your inability to zip your lips when you ought to have done. 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 ??!! If Ms. Mellen has you on tape making that allegation, then even asking the above question is disingenuous on your part. 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. Actually, Gerry, knowing nothing about a topic has never seemed to stop you from spouting off in the past, so why would your self-aggrandizing behaviour stop with Ms. Mellen? You have in this very thread made statements, as though factual, about a person or persons having developed 90% of the data needed to solve this crime, and when challenged, cited what you'd been told by others. In essence, you backed away from claiming sufficient personal knowledge to render such a judgement, and deferred to those who informed you of this. This is not fact; it is gossip, unless and until demonstrated. You make similar assertions all the time, likely on similarly questionable bases, and when called on them, resort to virtriol and poor manners... this forum is chock full of examples. Perhaps what has you irritated with Ms. Mellen is that her "gullible-girly-groupie obsession" is with Jim Garrison, rather than with you, since you keep insisting that all forum members, irrespective of gender, are simply angling to get a "date" with you. 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. First, there are no "errors" to misattribute until they are demonstrated to be errors, which is where certain tapes will no doubt come in very handy for Ms. Mellen. Second, irrespective of what you know about Larry Howard's whereabouts on that date, what matters is what you told Ms. Mellen; what you claimed to be true, not what you now say you know to be true. 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. And you have those files? Or have seen those files? Or have taken the word of others - whether Howard or anyone else - that these are legitimate files? 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. Presumably, Ms. Mellen would have asked to see those files, if you possessed them. If you don't, then you're just peddling more gossip, second or third hand, which is not exactly convincing to anyone, whether or not they suffer from "gullible-girly-groupie" syndrome. Moreover, it is no secret that Garrison has been the subject of a decades-long campaign of slander and character assassination. You're simply one of the several lads who was sent to trip Garrison up, and having screwed the pooch on that score, will not rest until his legacy is dirt. How does it feel, Gerry, knowing that this alleged half-wit child-molesting Mafia-fronting scumbag commands a level of respect today that you never will? Is that what put the burr under your saddle? 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. So, rather than repudiate your allegedly misquoted comments to Ms. Mellen, which is how you began, you now wish to sue her for having taped your conversations without your permission, presuming that is what happened [and not simply more of your endless bafflegab.] Interesting. You see, this is not simply a case of a person being caught on tape during an involuntary exchange, or being blind-sided. You have admitted here that such conversations took place of your own volition, even in your own abode, and the statements you made were uttered freely and of your own will. If they are captured on tape, it is a testament to Ms. Mellen's professionalism and her desire to ensure that nobody would be misquoted on so important a topic. Whereas your present, baseless fall-back position seems to be akin to the man who voluntarily appears on camera for an interview, but then squawks because he didn't sign a "release" for its use. You granted Ms. Mellen interviews. You said things you now regret having uttered, as they don't portray you in a light sufficiently flattering to comport with your self-image. So you've taken a page from Tim Gratz's disused legal playbook and begun barking about legal action against the author you willingly confided to. You know, Gerry, for a putative man's man, you're behaving like a petulant teenaged girl. Do get a grip, dear boy. Your current behaviour is unbecoming any man, let alone a self-proclaimed man's man. 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. Oh, for God's sake, Gerry.... you granted the woman interviews, and said things you now regret. You cannot get far claiming that your comments weren't made "consensually," unless someone has been granted power of attorney over you because you're claiming diminished mental capacity or summut similar. Is that your next grand legal strategy? 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 !! No xxxx. Lawrence J. Howard never received, training, nor ever qualified as a "Sniper". That may be a fact, but it is immaterial. What is material is what you told Ms. Mellen, and if it was a lie, then it is you who must account, not she. 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. Why did you drop in the qualifier "after personally interviewing me?" That is not included in her statement, nor need it be. Your record for consistency is not good, Gerry, as anyone who's read the Weberman site already knows. Whether you just can't keep your story straight, or you play different roles for different audiences is really secondary to the fact that your story wobbles from point to point without payoff. You claim that this is the direct result of endless clueless brainless scribblers misquoting you. Makes one wonder why you're always so anxious to make yourself available to them, the very same question you claim your family keeps asking you. Why do you do it, Gerry, in light of your consistent disappointment with the results? On the one hand, you offer little of substance and mutter your chagrin about being misquoted or misinterpreted, but on the other hand, you refuse to just shut your mouth and fade into obscurity. Do you suffer from some kind of compulsion, Gerry, or are you just still "on the job?" [Assuming that you ever were, that is.] 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 ??!! And where bigmouths fail is to spout off to all and sundry and then feel bitter disappointment with the result. Just sue her, Gerry, and we'll soon see who is credible and who is the buffoon. 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 !! Then, presumably, all of your previous preamble for the past nigh-on 40 years hasn't been of much use to us, has it, Gerry? Could you get any closer to admitting that you've got nothing substantive to offer, without actually coming out and saying it? 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. Not without some help from the professionally slippery, and the mentally questionable. 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 !! AND PERHAPS ONE SHOULD ASK THE SCRIBBLERS IF THEY'RE TAPE RECORDING A CONVERSATION BEFORE THEY OPEN THEIR BIG MOUTH !! Chairs, GPH _____________________________ -------------------------------------- Once again the "Music Biz - Village Idiot" desireth that I cease and desist from commenting upon matters which are apparently disturbing to her, and to whomever she is snitching for ?! Is CSIS' Judd putting pressure on your little pink behind? As for my having trusted a few authors and investigative reporters ? In the majority of cases, I insisted that they credit the original sources, rather than naming me. It is quite obvious that in your "Weberman agenda" , that you persist in NOT contributing anything of consequence. Nor do you contribute any credible reponses which might assist some of the experts, authors and investigators on this forum. I get a considerable amount of private e-mails every day. Those correspndents routinely make direct, and to the point inquiries. If I can answer to their interests, I do so. Moreover, most concur with my reasoning which seems to explain your activities: That you, like the others of the "Weberman ilk" have one goal in mind -- to nag and criticize ALL "direct sources". I was invited to this forum, and I joined with great reluctance. Having "lurked" on dozens of "blogs" and "forums", I found most to be a mockery of true jounalism, investigative reporting, etc. !! It is NOT my fault that you appear absolutely nowhere in anybody's tomes, or even an index, nor with Danny Brandt's "Namebase.org". Your are a "bookreader", and your erroneous opinions are the result of your soaking up "loads" of bullxxxx, which you frequently attempt to purvey onto this forum !! As for my language, I have found it a total waste of time to treat "mouthy wannabes" with any respect whatsoever. And this is especially so when their first actions are blatantly antagonistic. Moreover, they always insist upon arguing with people, especially those (now few) -- who were amongst the "actors" and "subjects-of-interest". If this gives you more "hardcopy" with which to exhibit to your boyfriends & "The 3 Stooges", so be it. Just try not to get the pages stuck together. As for trusting Ms. Mellen, that was a tremendous "Weberman-style" mistake. I had insisted of her, at the outset, that I didn't want to be a "character" in her writings. She agreed to that, and this got the family off of my back during 2001. It did take some time, before I suspected that: She was obsessed with an idolatry of "pervert" Garrison. Yet, I believeed that once she had examined the facts of the matter, then she would write "the real truth" !! The "WHY" of Garrison's moves, especially against some of the most useless "non-entities" I have ever encountered. That Mellen will be exposed as a charlatan matters not to me, but it will come. Unfortunately, it might cost her more than can be imagined. I have been cursed with total recall since childhood, and that is why I have opted to eschew diaries and/or journals. Any reports which I have been required to make over the years, I did correctly, and always without even rare references to notes !! During 1966, Garrison was involved in a scheme to protect Carlos Marcello, et al.!! This involved primarily the blackmailers who had set him up as yet another "patsy"!! However, there arose more serious threats, and this resulted in efforts at thwarting Walter Sheridan's in his investigations. Marcello indeed believed, that he was "owed" -- by the Kennedys, and that for having orchestrated the assassination of Trujillo. But, the realization that Ramfis Trujillo was after his ass, caused panic. Norman LeBlanc, and Arturo Espaillat were the first to warn him [during 1966] that: Trujillo's son (a multi-millionaire) was out for revenge. I don't have to cite to any authorities, as most are available to anyone not too ignorant, lazy, or stupid !! I am not going to do some strange fool's research for them. If responsible folks have a legitimate inquiry, I will attempt to respond. But, I am not going to write anybody's book or pamphlet for them. You, like Weberman, have long ago been categorized as prevaricators. Neither one of you have ever done anything of consequence during the whole of your miserable lives. Weberman's goal was to sucker buck$ out of gullible folks, especially those ignorant of the fact that he was just another Bob Dylan stalker. For years he has been doing somebody's disinformation job , and that it duplicates "Dame" Hoover's cronies' efforts, engenders no surprise. That I ramble ? Nobody has invited you to read any of my postings, and I am sure as hell not going to give-up 'insider" information to any weirdo wannabes, nor disinformation agents. You lucked out in your sparring with Gratz, and that, because he spent more time on the keyboard, instead of in a local library. I had advised long ago: Take counsel, even from an antagonist, and check out his dictates before hitting the keyboard. His "Christian bible-thumping" and focus upon abortion matters, was probably more irritating to me, than it was to our left-wing ("progressive") clique !! Especially with those who use this forum as a juvenile chat room !! That you have consistently opted NOT to ask any serious questions -- long ago confirmed that: You are here to xxxxx !! That you might cite Weberman, Mellen, or other propagandists -- reveals your limited abilities at rebuttal. The majority of qualified authors & writers, having perused thousands of NARA files, some of which refer to me, have little difficulty in forming queries. Frequently, they want to qualify or expand upon specific items of interest. Many are NOT surprised at governmental scribblers' efforts at evasion in all serious inquiry into even that which is a matter of history. But, that is what their political bosses continue to mandate. What are the parameters mandated by your bosses, and pray tell, who is calling your shots ?? Chairs, GPH _______________

------------------------------- Jim: I just posted this on Gerald McKnight's thread. GPH _______________________________ Mr. McKnight: As you know, Howard K. Davis ["Davy"] and I, visited with Gen. Walker during the late evening hours of July 4th, and continued through the late morning hours, of July 5th, 1963. You might recall that upon leaving Walker's home on Turtle Creek Drive, and returning to rest at the apartment of Wally Welch's secretary [Welch had been a Fiorini/Sturgis operative]; we both had some rather serious exchanges regarding current report, and those that made reference to Walker's future plans. [We were especially concerned about exactly which Miami Cuban exile entities he might align his organization with, and thereby tend to dominate the Miami scene -- just as Paulino Sierra was attempting to accomplish at that very moment !!] We also disussed the fact that: Despite Walker having been shot at, less than 3 months previous, we were much chagrined that; throughout the night [and early morning hours] Walker had permitted us to sit just underneath where the bullet had struck his wall !! We both concluded that he was either some kind of nut -- for wilfully exposing all three of us to an ongoing sniper threat; or that the shooting had been a "set-up" by him !! And/or. that he had acquiesced to same by other parties. Moreover, we did notice that he continued to have a small crew of "Gay" men still residing at his home. [of course, the term "Gay" was not used during that Era]. What we both wondered, and even after our return to Miami: Why didn't the extant "official?" law enforcement reports contain any quotes ["statements"] by said "house guests" ??!! They most certainly would fall under that category defined as being routiine "material witnesses"??!! Are you aware of the report that: When the shooting occured, Walker was NOT seated alone; but was speaking with a rather notorious "visitor" that night ?! Another report identifies the bullet as a .38 calibre, but doesn't discuss the notable disimilarities (which still exist) between those used in automatic pistols, from those fired by revolvers ??!! Chairs, GPH __________________________

Gee, I dunno Gerry. You seem to know everything about everyone else, why stop with Helms? ----------------------------- Gee, you "curly-headed" little cutie, just tell me why should I even be stopping by to respond to just another sissy-xxxxx ??!! [roll-your-cutie-pie eyes, you still won't get a date with me] Just go back to schmoozing more of Mellen's now totally discredited "gullible-groupie-tome"!! Do you really believe that any of the members are dumb enough NOT to spot a xxxxx who joined-in just to trash one specific target ??!!. But, don't swish-off to burn you library & hardrives yet, I could be wrong about EVERYTHING. Happier NOW ?? ______________________________

Tosh, here is a link to the article unfortunately the map itself is not very clear but I'm sure someone of the forum members can produce a better one. www.phoenixarchives.com/express/1991/0591/13-06.pdf (don't know why its not working here but if you copy and past into goggle it does) George Fm Plumlee Thank You George for the link. As you know that article has been hidden for over a decade. The map is a very important link in understanding the operations down there. I might add that this map was marked before the public firestorm hit in the mid eighties and the Iran/Contra matter became public knowledge (as noted in the Letter from then Senator Gary Hart, Dem of Colorado, to the Senate Foriegn Relations Committee in 1983) Do you have a copy of that letter. I think it has been posted on this forum a few months ago. Thanks again. Good Research Tosh ---------------------------- And once again, here is "Tooshee" posting an exact description of his "snitch-self" !! This is the clown who heroically tells some San Diego trash-tabloid scribbler about "waving" a white hanky out the window as a signal to the nasty-ass dopers. Then, our hero, SITTING IN THE RIGHT SEAT of a DC-3, starts the left engine first. Hey dumb-ass !! Ever heard of "Google" ??!! Crank in "DC-3/C-47" and then tell us how you reached across the whole overhead panel to "start an engine". The left-seater starts the engines, "pseudo-zoomie"; and you always start the RIGHT ENGINE first, because that's the one which has both the electric generator and the hydraulic pump !! What a phony !! And then, amidst .50 calibre "Ma Duece" tracers, the dumb-ass pilot "turns into the wind??" Any comic-book reader knows that you ALWAYS TAXI BACK to the landing end of the strip -- and if the dumb-ass beaners have the Trucks/Toyotas at the wrong end -- tough titty, they follow as you taxi back. And shutting down even one engine, when it's NOT a refueling site ?? "WHAFOO YOU SO DUMB ??" And that gas station "MAP" -- with a bunch of stupid scribbling on it ??!! WHAT ?? exactly is that supposed to prove. Yeah, about the same as your 2 page PDF "file?". And of course there is everybody on the planet who fails to grasp the insider scoop on Kiki Camera's demise ??!! Give us a break. What is it, you got another gullible fish on the hook again. Sue a homeless skid-row snitch ?? You gotta be kidding. But, tell you what I will do, I've got 8 lbs. of snitch files on YOU, which somebody forgot to "Klassy-Lie" (LOL) -- and I think it is time for some of the members to do some interesting reading about "Tooshee-san" !! When "Googling" turns up two pages of worthless crap, I can see why you feing ignorance of that search-engine. Please guys, gals, and gullibles -- find my "map" and my phony "I ran dope for the big Uncle" crap-story -- Huh, pretty please !! Get a life, and go bug "Wimp-Drank-to-much-Beer". ________________________________

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 _____________________________ Mr. Hemming. You are a sick man and should seek professinal help. You have done more damage to history with your wild unsupported claims than any person on the face of the earth. You quote dead people and incert yourself in their lives and expect us to except your tales and embrace your visions of grander. If you must sue someone... start with me. from a previous post on this forum. GPH was never CIA or MI. He "shadows" information for personal gratification. He sponges up information and speculation and throws it out in disjointed fragments as facts and adds to that over time. The real CIA file on GPH is they in "no way" wanted anything to do with him or "his boys".., even some of the Cubans who are now dead and gone wanted nothing to do with him, but he now quotes them as buddies in arms. He has never been a CIA operative or a MI covert operative in spite of what he claims. His stories and disinformation is of his own making. He does not work within the protocol of the jargon of CIA. He thinks he knows how operations come together and who and why they were formed. This is his fantasy. He drops names in tight circles and picks up jargon then uses it to influence others with his knowledge It works on the ill informed who want to know the workings of the covert world. For some to say he is or was CIA is a dis service to the CIA and our government. People want to believe what they want to believe and GPH is there to provide the color they so much desire. A real operative works in the shadows and lives in a world of cut outs and no man lands. Its his job to protect the operation at all cost as it is being played out. Liver Lips like GPH who see others, (who really know what a bag of wind he is) as "Snitches" could never keep the secrets because he wants everyone to see him as a big operative and planner that clears all operations and tells the CIA Director how to play the game. Covert Ops is a very small world a dangerous world of which the likes of GPH could never have survived. Do what you like with the GPH's material. I have wasted to much time on this whatever person. ------------------------------- And once again, here is "Tooshee" posting an exact description of his "snitch-self" !! This is the clown who heroically tells some San Diego trash-tabloid scribbler about "waving" a white hanky out the window as a signal to the nasty-ass dopers. Then, our hero, SITTING IN THE RIGHT SEAT of a DC-3, starts the left engine first. Hey dumb-ass !! Ever heard of "Google" ??!! Crank in "DC-3/C-47" and then tell us how you reached across the whole overhead panel to "start an engine". The left-seater starts the engines, "pseudo-zoomie"; and you always start the RIGHT ENGINE first, because that's the one which has both the electric generator and the hydraulic pump !! What a phony !! And then, amidst .50 calibre "Ma Duece" tracers, the dumb-ass pilot "turns into the wind??" Any comic-book reader knows that you ALWAYS TAXI BACK to the landing end of the strip -- and if the dumb-ass beaners have the Trucks/Toyotas at the wrong end -- tough titty, they follow as you taxi back. And shutting down even one engine, when it's NOT a refueling site ?? "WHAFOO YOU SO DUMB ??" And that gas station "MAP" -- with a bunch of stupid scribbling on it ??!! WHAT ?? exactly is that supposed to prove. Yeah, about the same as your 2 page PDF "file?". And of course there is everybody on the planet who fails to grasp the insider scoop on Kiki Camera's demise ??!! Give us a break. What is it, you got another gullible fish on the hook again. Sue a homeless skid-row snitch ?? You gotta be kidding. But, tell you what I will do, I've got 8 lbs. of snitch files on YOU, which somebody forgot to "Klassy-Lie" (LOL) -- and I think it is time for some of the members to do some interesting reading about "Tooshee-san" !! When "Googling" turns up two pages of worthless crap, I can see why you feing ignorance of that search-engine. Please guys, gals, and gullibles -- find my "map" and my phony "I ran dope for the big Uncle" crap-story -- Huh, pretty please !! Get a life, and go bug "Wimp-Drank-to-much-Beer". ________________________________

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? ----------------------------- One member of a knowledgable GROUP, and one who knows a certain percentage of this matter's relevance and realities to the JFK matter, is Oliver Stone !! Stone has been associated with an individual who worked alongside a subordinate of the person with whom SOME have described as: Having acquired 90% of the "inside track" !! Stone's long-time associate sought out my legal advice on how to have someone, other than he, obtain non-specific FOIA files on his activites, and to do so without linking the requests to him. I suggested Bud Fensterwald during that period, and months later, I recommended Jim Lesar. It was quite obvious that Stone was aware of this person's anxieties, and since there existed the possibility of revelations as to a capital offense, he was passed on to me. I further advised him that: Should the government discover that Lesar was never in possession of specific files, then he would run the risk of being identified directly as the "original" source of said inquiries !! Fensterwald himself once reflected on the whereabouts and Bio of a this specific person, and he referred to him as one "holding the 90%". I don't have a clue as to what 90% of anything is, but when respected parties anonymously refer to a "single" party -- as a person who has more than just "connected-the-dots"; I suspected that he would have to be either a principal, or an accessory to the crime(s). I have no clue as to your reference to "TOYING"!! This forum [and the other groupings of scribblers & scriveners] is not a GRAND JURY. Moreover, if those same dozens of so-called "professionals" failed to even guess at this persons identity; then I must agree with Fensterwald's 1990 statement: "....Knowing almost everything gets you nowhere.....especially when the only authorities sworn to conduct investigations...and are fully equipped to launch an attempt at prosecution...but refuse to do so...and spend most of their time covering their asses..."!! I was asked repeatedly, during the course of this year, to delve into specific matters, most of which remain highly classified. This was initiated because certain parties feel that my health situation may leave them "holding-the-bag", and therefor, without even a chance at connecting just those dots which are very personal to them. These are NOT crusaders, nor are they amongst the "usual suspects". Especially NOT those whose names seem to"crop-up" on a regular basis. They want to know the WHYs and WHEREFOREs of specific realities of today. Did they fail in their duties and/or efforts at defending this country against foreign despots, only to "witness?" it being handed over to domestic traitors ??!! I spent most of my youth avoiding even limited contact with those, who today, are styled as "inside-the-beltway-VIPs". My greatest dread during the 1960s was: Ending up behind a desk somewhere in the D.C. area, or inside some embassy, flying a desk. I resigned from the Naval Academy during 1958, because it was quite obvious that I would shortly face what I considered to be a "dead-end" career. During May of 1967, I took the Foreign Service Reserve Officer's oath at the Armed Forces Recruiting Station, Coral Gables, Florida. Dick Billings approached me shortly thereafter, urging me to work for LIFE on the Garrison matter. As I've related a hundred times already, I recommended that he check with Mike Acoca, and hire Bob Brown, as Bob had rejected a USAID Vietnam offer, and was in "Limbo" awaiting a Special Forces slot in the RVN. Enroute to California, where I planned to leave my wife and two daughters living close to my family, whilst I did my 'nam tour. Enroute, I stopped by Hargrave's residence in Baton Rouge. He filled me in on some of the "insider-Garrison-information" he had acquired from Grady Partin. It was only then, that I realized that Garrison was out to frame a whole bunch of people, ourselves included. Amidst working on a storm drain construction job held by Hargraves' newly formed company, I opted to shake any surveillance by disappearing off of the job [with Hargraves] and thereupon, quickly drive to new Orleans, so as to confront Garrison. [FBI snitch Tom Bethel describes how we walked into the NODA office wearing "fatigues" and "jungle boots". He wrote later scribbled same in his "snitch-journal" that we appeared to be showing up to "play war" !! How could a "Limey Snitch" be expected to grasp that: We weren't about to pay high prices for construction pants and boots, which together with gloves, exceeded $60+ at that time. Anybody with a brain would opt for surplus store items instead, especially when the total cost was a mere $14 !!] In short order, Garrison's "Game" became quite obvious. Moreover, he actually expected that we would remain on his payroll and "play-along" with his phony schemes. I called certain parties in D.C., asked if there was any need for me to remain in N.O., and the answers were all in the negative. I thereupon called the bossman at USAID, and resigned my FSRO-7 paygrade position. Later that week, and after a few more "intimate' conversations with Garrison, we left for California. I have spent some months now, trying to trace down the fate of a specific subordinate of what I will style as "The 90% Person". Typically, I had formed a "mental block" on an important name, and I continue reaching out quietly to folks who worked in the same ordinary-life occupation as this individual, and who had infrequent contact with him years ago. One major stumbling point is that when I made a social call on this man's family, I was told that he had died months before. This shocked me profoundly, as I had been with him just a couple of weeks previous. The family was genuinely aggrieved, almost to the point of depression. I suspected that he had "ditched" his family, and had taken off for parts unknown. However, a family member indicated that he had once again taken up some risky work, and that there had been an accident -- and his body was never recovered. At that point in time [some 30+ years ago] I opted to bow-out of any further inquirie, as I didn't know then what I know now. At that time, I just thought of how often we experienced the "Bayo/Rorke/Sullivan, et al." type disappearances, and just filed it into that mental slot, which holds "case-closed" memories !! As I see it, a whole bunch of dots have been connected, but most of the "information" remains worthless without several briefings of previously compartmented persons, who are now open to specific inquiries. However, these folks are definitely not interested in seeing any of this material in any book, and they certainly don't want to be publicly connected to anything even vaguely "sensational" !! This is exactly the kind of "information" which I am inclined to treat with a "jaundiced view". Today, there is NO "Rosetta Stone", and as far as I'm concerned, this remains just another "subject of interest". However, it is the best data that I have seen in 40+ years, and it so extremely logical, that it virtually "glows-in-the-dark" !! That a few, then highly-placed folks, dug around in this same "greenhouse" -- sparks more than just curiousity !! Those characters are [or were] a 100% smarter than I could ever even hope to be. We shall see. Chairs, GPH ________________________

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 _____________________________

------------------------------------- Jack Anderson served with O.S.S. Detachment # 202 in China. He served under Col. Paul Helliwell, who as a CIA asset attorney, helped set up the "Castle Bank Operation" in Nassau, The Bahamas. [One of my assets, Norman Casper, Key Biscayne, FL -- penetrated this operation for the I.R.S. Intelligence Division, which was the agency I worked under, while liaising with the So. Fla. Drug Interdiction Task Force. The title was changed to the "Vice Prez's TF" when Bush #41 opted to take cxontrol !! (Drug Interdiction Ops - 1970s - 1980s)] While the O.S.S. "Europe" teams were recruited into Wisner's O.P.C., the WWII veterans who later became ("in the the majority") the CIA's "Clandestine Service" -- were recruited from O.S.S. Detachment # 101 ("Behind the Burma Road"). The JM/ATE "BOP" boss, Jake Esterline was a Captain in Det. #101 for 2+ years. Jack Anderson served alongside Capt. John Birch, Capt. Mitchell L. WerBell III, S/Sgt. Robert Emmett Johnson, USMC, Major John Singlaub, Lt. Roger Hillsman, et al. !! Chairs, GPH ____________________________

Gerry: YOu sure turn up at the strangest of places. What possessed you to visit the home of Sirhan's mother? (If I may be so bold as to ask). Gerry's visit to Sirhan's mother's house is interesting. On this thread, Gerry has described being in a black & white on the way to the Ambassador Hotel when the report of the shooting came over the radio. I believe that he mentioned elsewhere being in a safe house at the time of RFK's murder. T.C. -------------------------------- Maybe you can point me in the direction where I "mentioned" that I was "...in a safe house at the time of RFK's murder..."! And please spare me from some "quote?" from the Khazar Weberman's bullxxxx scribblings !! Or anybody else's misrepresentations and wet-dreams !! GPH _____________________

------------------------------ Maybe you've missed what I posted elsewhere !! Virgilio Gonzales NEVER even talked to Martino, NOT even on the telephone, much less in person. I introduced Felipe to Martino just after Christmas 1962, and since early 1962, Gonzalez was estranged from Felipe -- due to a nasty dispute with Felipe's brother Ivan Vidal Santiago. Gonzalez was pushing the "Go-along-with-the-CIA-crap" and neither of the two Santiago brothers wanted to here that xxxx !! The pictures you claim as those of Gonzalez on the "Bayo/Pawley" operation are of one of "Bayo's" guys who died inside Cuba during June 1963. Gonzalez was NEVER a part of ANY "Maritime Operation", whether with JM/ATE or JM/WAVE !! GPH _______________________

Doesn't look like any of his Tampa guys, nor Norman Rothman. Col picture. Santo looks liek he's planning something ------------------------- Might be lawyer Ragano ??!! GPH _______________

I recently ran across one of those raw FBI files in which the memo said that there had been allegations that Jack Ruby was running drugs through the training camp near Lake Ponchatrain in the summer of 1963. In the same memo I think it was, it was also alleged that Lee Harvey Oswald sometimes used the alias, Tom Kane. Have you ever heard of these allegations before? Steve Thomas --------------------------- There NEVER was a "Training Camp" near Lake Ponchartrain. We traveled to NO during early 1962, [in combination with CIA assassin Larry laBorde - ex-CIA subchaser "Tejana II" engineer] we did do a survey of the "operational area"; which included the use of a "Seminary" as a base of Ops, and the local mental Hospital as an "Isolation" briefing/debriefing and prepping of "Operators". CIA Stuckey [who had recently been transferred by Philipps up from Chile] blew this operation with a bunch of "fantasy-land stories" -- about PT-Boat raiders, and commando training camps. Jim Buchanan called me just after we had set up our operations at No Name Key [June 1962] -- and queried me on the Times Picayune or States Item stories -- which I explained was total horsexxxx. Jim then stated that his editor at the Miami Herald was ordering him to "run-the-story" anyway !! I have repeatedly explained [in other postings] that the McLaney site was NOT a training camp, and that nobody in his brother Mike's element even considered any type of training. They already had a sufficient number of combat veterans dedicated to the "task-at-hand" !! Chairs, GPH __________________

--------------------------------- Duke: If the killing of Tippit was the key to cause a stampede into the Oak Cliff area, where "somebody?" knew exactly where LHO sat "awaiting?" for s sceduled "Treff?" [R/V] with a "handler" or "cut-out" -- then it succeeded beyond expectations. My most serious questions to Oliver Stone [1991] with reference to Johnny Brewer were these: [1] The majority of the DPD patrol/detective cars speeding across the "Viaduct" would have taken the most "direct" route to 10th & Patton; which meant using Zang and/or Jefferson to Davis Street, then turning south the 3 blocks to the crime scene; [2] How could both the ticket taker and the manager of the Texas Theater done anything more than "wonder" as to the "DISTANT SOUNDS" of the old style "Q-Siren" [the electronic sirens weren't yet available]; [3] WC testimony, exhibits, etc., indicate that both the manager and the ticket [Wickett Cab] taker were completely ignorant of the Tippit shooting, that is: until Brewer followed them into the "LOBBY" and began ranting about: Both a cop shooting & a suspicious guy who had "sneeked?" into the theater w/o paying; [4] That the manager refused to call the police for quite a long time, and finally only gave in when Brewer became very loud and highy abusive; [5] While filming "JFK", we tested whether someone inside the shoe store could possibly hear the intermittent whining of the old model sirens, and we found it impossible -- save for the fact that if indeed one of the DPD vehicles had passed in front of the shoe store; [6] We could never get a time line [from the "Art Dept., Rusconi, et al.] as to when the Dallas radio stations first broadcast a "clear' report of the Tippit shooting, that is: with the location specifically described, and moreover, there were NO "police radio scanners" (that Brewer might have used) available to the public during 1963; and, [7] When Stone raised the issue as to how Brewer might keep a straight face and lie through his teeth, if in fact he was part of the conspiracy? -- I stated that if he was compartmented, and ONLY did his small task of reporting LHO, then he -- like the rest of us "usual suspects/subjects of interest", could even work on a JFK assassination movie !!; and, [stone didn't see the humor in that ?!] [8] Given a choice, and when setting up a patsy -- drastic measures would be required when the targeted patsy has eluded the non-existent "manhunt" !! I also had several discussions with OS as to the professional techniques used for VIP hits, and one included the circumstances where one of the shooter/support team "criticals" is detained/arrested by local police or others. I explained that, the "back-up/controller" would have just a few seconds to decide whether the cop(s) would be taken out; or "everybody goes !!" -- (and order by radio, or other devices) that both the "critical(s) and the cop(s) are forthwith taken out on the spot, or 'down-the-road-a-piece" !! Currently, the preferred method of removing cops from a target area is by the calling in of a house fire with shots fired (getting police radio frequency crystals is quite routine), or a couple of distant explosions. Hollywood has abused that scenario for years. Chairs GPH __________________

Let's do specifics, then: 1. You stated that "USSS relies heavily upon local LE for security," but you have downplayed "local LE's" responsibility for "security" as really being nothing more than crowd and traffic control. This is to explain why "local LE" presence was drastically reduced once the motorcade reached this "ideal kill zone" because crowd and traffic control - vice security - was no longer expected to be much of an issue. Which is it: "local LE" is "relie(d) upon heavily" for security, for mere traffic and crowd control (and not security), or really not much at all for anything except to keep USSS from playing traffic cop? <blockquote>(Note Mayor Earle Cabell's statement that "all possible security precautions were taken between the Dallas Police and the Secret Service." This statement was echoed exactly by newscaster Bill Lord prior to the "abortive transfer" with respect to that operation: "all possible security precautions have been taken ... Extreme precautions have been taken." DPD themselves said in a statement that Kennedy was afforded "the most stringent security precautions in the city's history." None of these comments reflect "traffic and crowd control only.") 2. You cite the logistical impossibility of USSS watching each and every window along a parade route, especially through a downtown area with lots of tall buildings. It is likewise true that DPD was not told by USSS to watch windows either. You also noted that USSS, in a moving motorcade, depends upon the ability to accelerate out of a situation for security. Since they don't keep people on the ground, and if they don't really "rel(y) heavily on local LE for security," are you suggesting that this is the only means of actual security afforded a dignitary-protectee in a motorcade? </blockquote>It seems to me that you first laid claim that local police acted as the "eyes and ears on the ground" (i.e., security), but when I pointed out that this "security" seems to have been lacking once Kennedy reached Dealey Plaza, you "defended" DPD by backpedaling and saying that really, they were only there for traffic and crowd control, not to provide any real security function, hence it's perfectly plausible why there were no longer any men on the ground (rather than atop bridges) or mounted officers capable of speeds greater than running (other than the motorcade escorts, who were told not to break formation "no matter what happens" ... meaning that they, too, were not intended to act as any kind of "security" either). (The actual quote is: "Why was there insufficient numbers of DPD throughout Dealey Plaza? Because once they made their turn onto Elm, the crowds were significantly minimal and closed off, so the need for ground security was minimal if not altogether not needed.") You stated that you "have been a grunt in motorcade route security, airport detail security, site arrival and site stating security, and motorcycle security where (you) have been a scout and lead car driver (and) been in charge of airport security and motorcade security," all of which belies your thesis that DPD was only to have provided crowd and traffic control ... or are you really saying that you've directed traffic and held back the crowd at all of these locations? Somehow I don't think so. Your further statement that "DP was an excellent killing zone not for the fact that it made the hit fairly easy, but it accomodated the plan of success and allowing all assassins to walk away" suggests that nobody recognized this about the place (well, apparently somebody did ... just not on the "security" side of the equation!). Does this equate with the idea that DPD was for crowd control only, and that nobody did or was supposed to evaluate the route from that perspective? You've also not explained your reference to "the history of incidents that plagued these type of visits" (in conjunction with the Adlai Stevenson problem). Can you expand on that? I appreciate that you have earned your "status through getting dirty and trying to educate and add to forum issues," but you seem to be requiring that people ask the right questions first (and in the proper manner) before you can respond, and so far what responses you've made seem to be contradictory to your original assertions. You seem to "defend" DPD by saying that they really weren't supposed to do all the things that they seemingly should have and even claim to have done! Can you please clear up the muddle so we can all understand what it is you're really trying to say? ------------------------------- Duke: Prior to the JFK assassination, the last serious "executive hit" had been: Tthat which was attempted against Harry S. Truman by "alleged" Latino radicals. While the assailants never even got inside the door of "Blair House" -- they did kill one of the "protective service" detailees, who was guarding the front door. A close examination of that attempt remains classified, but what little of what later did leak out included: [1] The deceased officer was armed with a "Navy/Commercial Model" Thompson Sub-Machine-Gun. However, his superiors forbade his having the weapon "cocked", albeit, with the safety engaged; [2] As is the case with all non "double-action" automatic pistols, if you don't have a round in the chamber, it matters NOT that you might be "the-fastest-draw-in-the-west". This is especially so, if you are forced to use both hands to "crank" the slide back to "chamber" a round. Because, by the time you "go-into-battery", the bad guy has already gotten off multiple shots; and, [3] Just before dying, the officer did fire his TSMG, but only hit the assailant once of about 16 rounds -- but, at least that was a fatal wound, and it dropped the bad guy to his knees. That the shooters attacked the front door -- seems to be so typical of latino incidents, but it caused the USSS to revise its manuals and training protocols. The USSS has very high standards, and requires extremes in training and drills. Other than S.W.A.T, S.P.U.. and some "special incident teams" -- the average street cop hasn't the first clue as to executive protection techniques. Why teach/learn something that will NEVER be used ??!! For instance, the average cop [and the average "Joe 6-Pack"] might question a security detail as to the "WHY" the teams are welding the manhole covers in the middle of the streets, but NOT the covers on the sidewalks ??!! It has absolutely nothing to do with preventing a shooter, knifer, or spitwad hurler from popping up amidst a motorcade. Nor is it to prevent assassins from placing explosive charges, per se !! [Even with a manhole with an "un-welded" iron cover, the explosive gases will take the path of least resistance, and end up blowing all of the drains clean of fecal matter and trash.] It instead, has to do with a very special type of "device' -- which only the most skilled of "powder-monkeys" might put together, and then, only with luck, correctly (and effectively) emplace said I.E.D. !! [This is why such curious inquiries are met with blank stares, as even the welding team has no clue as to the "why" -- but the supevisor knows.] What we are missing entirely here, is the following step-by-step protocols: [1] Long before any specific selection of "hit team" is made, a target study must be conducted, and this takes a considerable amount of time; [2] The sponsor(s) wishes have to be considered, i.e., is the "end result" of this operation against the targeted party (or parties) fulfilled by just a "scare", a "snatch" (kidnapping), less than fatal incapacitation, or deadly force ?; [3] How much "stalking" is required [and by which autonomous entities]; [4] What kind of, and how many, diversions are necessary to distract extant security forces, both close to, and on the periphery of the target(s) "personal space" ?; [5] If several different and distinct locales must be selected -- in order to fulfill "the contract", how many separate and autonomous ["compartmented"] teams are to be recruited and prepared. And how many "controllers" [compartmented & autonomous] are necessary for the proper exercise of the event ?; and, [6] How many "patsies" must be placed at each locale, and how much disruption of later forensic probes must be implemented ? Moreover, how many "phony patsies" [later found to have strong alibis] will be tossed into "the grab-bag" ?!! If the sponsor(s) have VIP influence/control -- how far in advance can the planning of the event be made ?! How much coercion, extortion, blackmailing, and use of "moles" -- is necessary to cause VIP elements to go along with the program. And this must be accomplished, even despite their complete ignorance of: Either the scheme or its outcome ?! ["moles"] are not necessarily persons who work for foreign entities, by might just be from political, religious, tribal, or revenge seeking insider "snitches/informants". Most often, they are themselves, simply amongst the cluster of "mushrooms" !! The very first questions asked in the aftermath of the RFK assassination were: [A] Did Sirhan Sirhan "always" carry a firearm to work at the Ambassador Hotel; and, How far in advance did the kitchen staff become aware of RFK's planned "exit routing", and who was it that so informed them ?! Having been much too close "in proximity" to the event, I have made it a point to avoid any in-depth study of than June 5th, 1968 tragedy. In answer to a member's inquiry, as to the "why" had me visiting the Sirhan family home the next morning ?! I was then a Special Agent with the "Special Problems Unit", City of Los Angeles. [sPU - an Intel operation which was controlled by then Mayor Sam Yorty -- directed by his office ONLY !!] At that time, I was an asset of JJA's MK/CHAOS projects, which had been organized to counter, and ultimately derail & destroy -- the MH/CHAOS projects. Said projects having "GONE ROGUE" during 1967. [The "rogueing" was just one of the inherent risks with all projects, in that they are oftentimes deviated by "zealots and/or moles"!!] No great skill was required, and no great excitement was to be had. The usual 99% extreme boredom, interspersed with moments of "stark terror". [And this was before the availability of "Depends" !!] Chairs, GPH ________________________

This is both the best of Gerry and the worst of Gerry within one post. He tells us something credible: that while he's aware of several Cubans who've claimed the CIA dood it, he isn't aware of one who's admitted his own involvement, even though there might be some money to be made. This is within the realm of Gerry's experience and is certainly believable. Unfortunately, before that, he told us that Gene Wheaton was paid off by Daniel Sheehan, and that Martha Honey and Tony Avirgan were on his payroll as well, and that all of this was somehow "Soviet-inspired". This info should set off everyone's BS detector. If we're to believe, as Tim, that it's ridiculous for Jenkins to admit his involvement to Wheaton, why should we believe that Sheehan or Wheaton would admit that Wheaton was paid for the story, or that the Avirgans--career journalists who come to PUBLICLY DISAVOW Sheehan and his secret team theory--would admit how much he paid them as well... Unless Gerry has something to back up how he came up with these numbers, I'll be forced to conclude he just made it up... His motivation to make things up is certainly clearer than Wheaton's. As stated previously, I spent a few hours with Martha Honey when she was trying to raise awareness of her case. Her main topic of discussion, as I remember it, was John Hull and his mysterious landing strip in Costa Rica. (Do you know anything about this, Gerry?) She told me something else which maybe someone can confirm (or maybe it's already been researched). She said that ABC News blamed the Sandinistas for the La Penca bombing within a few minutes after the attack, even though the assassin posing as a journalist (no, it wasn't Jack Ruby) was using a European passport, and appeared to be European. She told me that this is what made her suspicious there was something more to the bombing. She couldn't figure out how ABC would know who dood it, seeing as there was no one from ABC even at the press conference. She concluded that they were force-fed this info by the CIA (she may very well have been right). Of course, we're now supposed to believe that it was the Sandinistas after all. And this could very well be. be. But the point is that Martha Honey had legitimate reasons to doubt the official story, and legitimate reasons to get involved with a lawsuit against the government for almost killing her husband and then lying about it. I don't believe for a second she was interested in money or in providing disinformation about her native land. So where do you get this stuff, Gerry? She had only the nicest things to say about you... ------------------------------ Pat: There are many other "former" Christic associates who still have "nice" things to say about me, and this was because I made available to them -- the witness, whose photograph was used on the phony Danish passport allegedly belonging to, and used by, the "Amir Galil" dumbxxxx bomber. And I had made a specific trip up to D.C. to do this. [The "Galil" (AK-47 type) is the name of the Israeli assault rifle sold to Somoza, and most of the other Central American governments. They migh have come up with a more convincing surname for the "evil-doer" when they schemed to involve the Israeli Mossad in this matter !!] I later met with two of the Christic "investigators" in Bud Fensterwald's presence, and at his office. [1990] You might want to check the Christic "501(3)©" not-for-profit reports to the government. They slipped up in not disguising "expenses" to Martha, et al. as "legal & investigative" costs !! I am NOT saying that Martha "sold" her story, nor gave perjured statements in this matter. She was, as were others, led down the primrose path by professional "hostile" Intel officers -- who as a matter of course -- followed up the attempted assassination of Eden Pastora by their Sandinista cohorts, which is de rigeur !! [The 501(3)©" reports are a matter of public record !!] During February 1979, I was photographed by Somoza's spies while meeting with the leader of the Sandinistas -- whom I had trained in Cuba during 1960. I was later photgraphed standing in the jungle alongside Cmdte. "Zero", Eden Pastora a short while later. Somoza himself showed this photo to my former Parabellum Corp. business partner, "Anselmito" Alliegro, [inside his "Fuhrerbunker" at Monte Limar] -- and this scared the xxxx out of Alliegro. Somoza laughed and stated: "...You guys are really cool about having your people on both sides of a war...but that is no big deal...I can understand why these things are done this way...so don't you worry about it..!!" Anselmito's mother, Anita Duran, later found me at one of our Miami safehouses (via Freddy's inquiries to the CIA) -- and pleaded with me to not endanger her son's life by my continued support of the Sandinista insurgency against her son's employer !! I was the one who introduced the idea of smuggling Colombian marijuana to the Sandinistas, and John Hull was a part of that drug interdiction deal. Moreover, this was the only way we could get Torrijos, Noriega, et al. to go along with supporting the FSLN effort, other than outright cash payments. After the July 1979 FSLN victory, Ortega, Borges, et al. opted to keep Somoza's prime "Grass" smuggler onboard [General Genie] and left him ensconced at the Puerto Cabezas air base; where he continued to operate for years. [That is, until we brought in the competition from the Honduran Generals, and set up operations at our old (1974) operating base at La Ceiba, Honduras. I am not a bystander in these matters, and I don't get ALL of my data from "bookreading"!! Chairs, GPH __________________

-------------------------- Mark: You no doubt missed the Secret Service "Report" [uSSS/PR Post-Incident Analysis -1964] wherein the driving instructors ["Executive/Security/Protective-Research" Offensive/Defensive Course of Instruction] at MCB Quantico, VA (now at Glynco, GA) stated: ALL "Executive Protection" drivers were taught to drive with both hands in a specific position, and place their left foot "lightly" on the brake pedal; while simultaneously using their right foot to control the pressure on the accelerator pedal. During the subsequent series of intense testing, it was found that when a driver "turned" (or "shifted") his body [in order to observe something to the rear, and over his RIGHT shoulder]; this caused an automatic reflex straightening and stiffening of the LEFT leg; which immediately applied a positive pressure on the brake pedal. The more the "turning/shifting" of the upper torso by the driver, was the resultant and corrresponding increase in the brake pedal pressure. During every test, with ALL vehicles and drivers tested; it was observed that: This amount of brake pedal pressure either "Slowed" the vehicle dramatically and/or brought the vehicle to a sudden, and unanticipated "STOP" !! Fortunately, one of our UK researchers made a copy of said report before it was pulled from the N.A.R.A. box, and "re-classified" !! Chairs, GPH __________________________ Gerry, What does the manual say the driver should do when faced with a volley of shots from an unknown source? --------------------------------- The S.O.P. during "1963" (and thoroughly revised since) was that: [1] All vehicle-borne agents would insure that the "Executive(s)" would be immediately rushed out of the "Threat-Zone", and thereupon they would be tasked to run interference for the "Primary", guaranteeing his arrival at a pre-designated "Rally-Point". [said Rally-point would be a safe distance from the "event" or the "threat" -- and usually was a pre-secured series of buildings along the route of travel.]; [2] NO vehicle-borne agents were permitted to return fire, or engage in a fire-fight, nor dismount from the vehicles to apprehend suspects, or even "actual shooters"; [3] NO vehicle borne agents were permitted to fire upon an actual shooter, that is: until said shooter (after firing) had already gained close proximity to the "Executive(s)", and there existed no other recourse; [4] Since ALL crowd control police officers are instructed to always face away from a motorcade, the only time the order would be given to "take-out" a uniformed shooter (actual or police imposter), would again be: Only if the shooter gained close proximity to the "Executive(s)"; and, [5] Since 1963 (and the passage of the 25th Amendment) the Vice-President is taken to a separate and secure "Rally- Point" -- as are the President "Pro Tem" of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House; wherever they might be located at the time of the attack !! When we were involved in private agency "Executive Protection" (and the rare Diplomat protection) we were always armed with suppressed/silenced weapons. Moreover, when we trained foreign nation protective agents, we began our course of instruction thus: [A] If the "good guys" are making (unsilenced) loud noises by discharging their weapons in defense, then it is usually very difficult to target the "bad guy's" shooting positions; The "Customer(s)" (and their accompanying children and/or families) tend to get upset if the "good guys" are blasting off rounds right next to their ears -- and sometimes this causes folks to panic, and run away from the safety of either vehiles -- or pre-designated shelters; and, [C] Absent hostile bullets impacting near the "Customer(s), there have been instances where the "Executive(s)" remained ignorant of having been involved in a fire-fight -- and actually complained about their being pushed and shoved to those very points of safety or the vehicles !! Chairs, GPH ___________________________

And you ignored the rest of the information that went with the report. My dictionary defines constant as "invariable or unchanging... marked by steadfast resolution or faithfulness". I think that accurately explains your postings about the JFK assassination. ------------------------------ John: According to Mike Accoca, Wheaton approached him with the very first "homogenized" version of his Jenkins "Taurine Excrement !! Because Wheaton was spouting forth with an almost incoherent bag of non-sequiters, Mike asked him to "stand-by" for a couple of days, while he checked some things out. Mike then called upon Dick Billings, his old boss at the LIFE Miami Bureau. Billings expressed some doubts -- but encouraged Mike to continue with the interviews. By then, Wheaton had been "pandering" his theme around town -- and was frustrated because it was a very obvious attempt at "Gray-Mail" against the ex-CIA pogues who were running the "Humanitarian-Relief?" cargo flights; and his scheme was failing. He then contacted one of the very same political "panderers" that "Tooshie" had dealt with. [Check with the founder of "The National Security Archive", Scott Armstrong, he might want to fill you in on some of this crap. Check with Pete Kprnbluh at their Geo. Washington University Office (Gelman Bldg.) in Washington, DC] [see: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/] Wheaton was pissed-off because the "State Dept.?" contracts went to entities controlled by Mike Palmer of Vortex Aviation, my late client "Gus" Conner of Conner Airlines, et al. !! [Gus Conner, just before he reached 70 years of age, was beaten half to death by DEA agents while he sat in their unmarked parking lot, taking pictures of some of his ex-employees who were suspected of drug smuggling in collaboration with corurupt DEA and US Customs agents and snitches. Gus died two days later, at home, after checking himself out of the hospital against our advice. Howard K. Davis was appointed President of Conner Aviation by Gus' widow. See: "The Conner Airlines Conspiracy" - New Miami Times] During "November in Dallas - 1996", I turned over to Prof. John Newman -- all of the secret documents compiled by Gus Conner. These same documents had been denied to Senator kerry, after he stipulated with the DOJ that his questioning of Mike Palmer (Vortez) were be driven by an "agreed-upon" script !! Wheaton's first payment of $20,000 (in small bills) by "Shyster" Sheehan, came only after he agreed to continue committing perjury -- with his ongoing stream of ludicrous statements. All of this was in support of the fantasyland Andy & Leslie Cockburn script/book "Out of Control"; and numerous other wet-dream scribblings !! The Avirgan "couple" were paid an average of $50,000 per annum for their "cooperation" in this Soviet inspired "Disinformatziya" operation !! [They may now claim "False-Flag" recruitment, but they all were definitely "predisposed" to the commission of these treasonous acts. A de fact sate of belligerency existed between the U.S. and Nicaragua (affirmed by joint Congressional joint resolutions and appropriations. They gave more than just "Aid & Adherence" to our sworn enemies !!] [More than once i had to brief ex-POWS [Vietnam] or widows residing in Fort Whalton Beach, FL that: The reason that "Hanoi Jane" Fonda was never charged with Treason was that: Upon pre-trial 'Discovery" (under the "Brady Rule" & "The Jencks Act" she would have had a viable defense !! Her defense attorneys would have thereupon centered upon the fact that: She, Tom Hayden, et al., had been 'false-flag" recruited by Angleton's MK/CHAOS. JJA had created MK/CHAOS as a counter to the out-of- control MH/CHAOS projects -- and the rogues running rampant under its banners. I myself have been in and around a limited number of ex-CIA and Cuban pogues who: Oftentimes were heard to boast that -- the "Company" did indeed "Do Da Deed"!! However, they would NEVER foolishly involve themselves as direct, nor even indirect, participants. We have yet to find EVEN ONE Cuban who has ever duplicated the phony James Files, "Tooshee", et al. routine -- NOT even Orlando Bosch, Rolando Masferrer, Ventura, Posada, et al. !! AND, in the right circles, that meant serious money in your pockets real quick -- ask Wim about just how that game is played out ?! Chairs, GPH __________________________

-------------------------- Mark: You no doubt missed the Secret Service "Report" [uSSS/PR Post-Incident Analysis -1964] wherein the driving instructors ["Executive/Security/Protective-Research" Offensive/Defensive Course of Instruction] at MCB Quantico, VA (now at Glynco, GA) stated: ALL "Executive Protection" drivers were taught to drive with both hands in a specific position, and place their left foot "lightly" on the brake pedal; while simultaneously using their right foot to control the pressure on the accelerator pedal. During the subsequent series of intense testing, it was found that when a driver "turned" (or "shifted") his body [in order to observe something to the rear, and over his RIGHT shoulder]; this caused an automatic reflex straightening and stiffening of the LEFT leg; which immediately applied a positive pressure on the brake pedal. The more the "turning/shifting" of the upper torso by the driver, was the resultant and corrresponding increase in the brake pedal pressure. During every test, with ALL vehicles and drivers tested; it was observed that: This amount of brake pedal pressure either "Slowed" the vehicle dramatically and/or brought the vehicle to a sudden, and unanticipated "STOP" !! Fortunately, one of our UK researchers made a copy of said report before it was pulled from the N.A.R.A. box, and "re-classified" !! Chairs, GPH __________________________