Gene Kelly

I think that Evan is close to the truth...

Hello Stephen: I've recently taken an interest in the case, based on reading Patricia Cornwell's book. I realize that she's not generally regarded credible by Ripperologists, but she does in my opinion make a strong circumstantial case for Walter Sickert. I know you didn't like her persona and presentation, but - author aside - the details do point to him as a person of interest. His art in particular evokes controversy, and some of his traits (multiple Whitechapel studios or "rat-holes", wanderings, music hall fantasies, master of disguise, penchant to wear soldier uniforms, prolific letter writing, treatment of women) collectively bring him "into the frame". Ironically, while trying to link modern forensics to the scant/distant evidence (a notable effort in my view), she found compelling links between his stationary (i.e. watermarks) and artistic methods, and many of the Ripper letters. Not necessarily proof of murder, but hard to ignore once you appreciate the scope of her 'investigation'. Also, my instincts tell me that this murderer did not stop after 1888 - although I'm no criminal profiler - and kept killing perhaps in a different MO. I'm interested in your views of Sickert as suspect. Best, Gene Kelly

Jim: Can you please tell me what (in your opinion) would be the best works or books to read regarding this controversial subject? I know its a long list of theories, failed investigations, possible suspects and motives... numerous side-plots and many "rabbit holes", almost mind-boggling in its breadth and depth. While an admitted amateur but nonetheless earnest student of the assassination, I realize that there are many agendas, personalities and dis-information. I've read several books and many articles (including your fine work in CTKA and Probe), monitored the threads in this (and other) Forum, and seen many of the televised specials. I am fond of Dick Russell's work and that of Larry Hancock, both of whose books I've read. What is the best source and read on this subject? Best, Gene Kelly This is my current Top Ten list http://www.ctka.net/reviews/top_ten.html If you want to skip all the stuff that rips apart and wrecks the Warren Commission, on the grounds that today it is overkill, then that leaves the following: Anthony Summers Conspiracy Phil Melanson Spy Saga Gaeton Fonzi The Last Investigation Jim DiEugenio and Lisa Pease The Assassinations Bill Davy Let Justice be Done Jim Douglass JFK and the Unspeakable In several ways, the Melanson book has been superceded by Newman's Oswald and the CIA and Armstrong's Harvey and Lee. But the former is not an easy read, Melanson's book is. And Armstrong's book--though chockful of information--is 900 pages long. (After Bugliosi, Horne, and Waldron, I am anti most books that long.) Summers' book is rather old, but in my view, I still think he has the best handle on how the conspiracy actually worked on the ground level: with the CIA and Cuban exiles setting up Oswald, and then the Mafia used to call in Ruby to kill the scapegoat. The other books, like Davy, Fonzi, and Lisa's and myself, amplify this skeleton and update it significantly with the ARRB and HSCA stuff. The Douglass book is very good at the big picture. I have always said, and will always say this: although there are over 900 books published on this subject, the vast majority of them are flotsam or worse. In my personal library I have about 45 books on the JFK case. THat is more than adequate to write all the reviews I do. (Supplemented with on line sources of course.) In addition, one should have the following: GIbson's Battling Wall Street, Newman's JFK and Vietnam, Kornbluh's Bay of Pigs Declassfied, James Blight's VIrtual JFK, the May/Zelikow The Kennedy Tapes, and Mahoney's JFK:Ordeal in Africa. These give you an idea of who Kennedy really was and why the Establishment had to have him killed. Thank you.

Jim: Can you please tell me what (in your opinion) would be the best works or books to read regarding this controversial subject? I know its a long list of theories, failed investigations, possible suspects and motives... numerous side-plots and many "rabbit holes", almost mind-boggling in its breadth and depth. While an admitted amateur but nonetheless earnest student of the assassination, I realize that there are many agendas, personalities and dis-information. I've read several books and many articles (including your fine work in CTKA and Probe), monitored the threads in this (and other) Forum, and seen many of the televised specials. I am fond of Dick Russell's work and that of Larry Hancock, both of whose books I've read. What is the best source and read on this subject? Best, Gene Kelly

One reference used Heming... another used Hemming. One used Jerry... another used Gerry. I only found the Lemar (middle name) after digging more, and your challenge. I thought there was something to this, something odd... and I still do. Was hoping some other researcher (more familiar with GPH) might shed some light, such as nicknames ("hotrod") or participation in My Lai. For the record, I have no proof that its GPH, just a suspicion.

Len: I don't know too much about GPH, other than what I've seen in his posts on this website, plus earlier descriptions by A. J. Webberman in his research. It painted a picture of a very colorful guy, one who knew how to spin a tale and one who liked the soldier of fortune moniker. Truthfully, I don't know if he drank a lot or ever used LSD. When you read the trial summaries and F. Lee Bailey's defense of Capt. Medina - specifically how he discredited certain witnesses for the prosecution (like this Heming fellow) - one is left with the impression that the soldier who admitted to drinking excess wine and wistfully wanting LSD was either was either naive or intentionally forthcoming (so as to help Medina). So, what i'm saying is, the admission in trail by Heming of his drinking and drug habits appeared not credible and devious. However, none of that proves this was GPH. This simply seemed like an interesting coincidence to me... the name popped off the screen when I read it. Gene

Len: One reference (for a BBC documentary) lists witnesses called during the trial, including a “Jerry LeMar Heming”, and Calvin Louis Hawkins C Company, 26th Engineer Bn, both demolition experts. This is obviously not Gerry P. Hemming, but my conspiratorial imagination tells me it could’ve been an alias for the ex-marine mercenary. The action and Phoenix implications sure fit the bill for his kind of work. There’s also another book (“Light at the End of the Tunnel” by Bilton and Sim; Chapter 24) which indicated that Jerry “Hotrod’ Heming’ joined the Charley Company mission as a ‘volunteer’ just the day before the massacre, as part of a contingent (including military intelligence officers, interpreters, and photographers) temporarily assigned for the ‘Pinkville’ attack. While the spelling is different, and I can’t tell if ‘Heming’ was Army or Marines, the name jumped out at me. It seems a strange ‘coincidence’ that demolition soldiers would ‘volunteer’ for a search/destroy mission, especially in a “hot” VC zone such as My Lai where CIA Phoenix operations were being conducted. In fact, my study of the My Lai facts strongly suggests that it was precisely that... a Phoenix terror operation. So I’m naturally suspect of ‘volunteers’ for such atrocities. The trial excerpts are found on a website for the law office of Gary Myers & Associates. He is a former JAG Officer, and experienced civilian military defense attorney, involved in My Lai, Abu Ghraib, and Haditha affairs. Here’s the excerpt from ‘Heming’s’ testimony, where he managed to have himself removed as a witness and discredit the prosecution's case (perhaps a plant, or intentional) during Captain Medina’s 1971 court martial trial: “Colonel Howard, in his instructions to the jury, cast doubts on the testimony of some of the prosecution witnesses. He referred to Gerald Heming as a "frequent user of wine, drinking as much as four quarts a day and (who) had experimented with LSD." (Ref: Army Withdraws Witness At Medina’s Court-Martial, By Homer Bigart, New York Times, 26 August 1971) Coincidence... or just a different guy? Gene

There were two trial references that mentioned his name, plus a book, although the spelling was off a bit. It sounds so much like him... irreverent, swashbuckling, cocky and colorful. Comes through the page as enjoying the controversy, putting himself in the limelight. The nickname they used for him was "Hotrod", if that's any clue. Claimed to be a 'demolition' man. He was blowing smoke up the prosecutor's butt during the cross-examination. What I found intriguing (and a bit sinister) is that - according to the book - he 'volunteered' for the My Lai mission (a search and destroy task) only the day before. It sure paints a picture that fits his soldier of fortune profile. There were infamous CIA "tiger teams" rumored to be carrying out Project Phoenix executions and grab/snatch operations... maybe he was a participant.

Here's an excerpt from the September 1971 trial of Captain Ernest Medina... one of the witnesses for the prosecution was Gerry Hemming (spelled wrong here) who was a "demolition man" who had apparently 'volunteered' for the My Lai mission one day before the attack, and was a participant in the massacre. It appears that he discredited himself (perhaps intentionally) by admitting to excessive wine use and alluding to drugs, when challenged by defense attorney F. Lee Bailey. There are other witnesses (for the prosecution) that either perjured themselves, took the "fifth", or otherwise were afraid to testify. It seems to me that Hemming was a 'plant' to discredit the prosecution, pretending to be an eyewitness who would testify against capt. Medina, when in fact he was weakening their case by coming across as unreliable and of questionable stability. His involvement in this infamous war crime is very telling... "Judge Howard said that he would decide tomorrow whether Mr. Widmer should be ordered to testify. Gerald Heming, a former demolition man and Captain Medina’s command group, said that he saw an officer step from a helicopter at Mylai and warned Captain Medina, “These shootings got to stop.” He said that he thought the officer who dismounted from the helicopter was Col. Oran K. Henderson, then commander of the 11th Brigade, American Division, and now on trial at Fort Meads, Md., for covering up the Mylai slayings. When the witness insisted that the officer had been wearing a major’s insigne, a gold leaf, Mr. Bailey pointed out that Colonel Henderson was already a colonel at the time of the incident. Mr. Bailey also brought out that Mr. Heming had told an Army investigator that because of the helicopter noise he wasn’t sure that he had heard the conversation between Captain Medina and Colonel “Henderson.” “Does it mean anything to you when you make a sworn statement?” Mr. Bailey asked. “No,” the witness replied. Mr. Heming admitted to a taste for wine and said that he had consumed four quarts on the eve of his appearance. “I do that every day,” he said. “You been blowing a little LSD?” Mr. Bailey asked? “I wish I could,” Mr. Heming said. “Then maybe I could forget the whole thing.”

John: Many Americans (at that time) thought that LT Calley was a ‘scapegoat’, and the majority disagreed with his indictment and conviction. In the end, a few officers got demotions, no one did any jail time, and the country quickly forgot about the massacre… to quote one of the reporters/analysts, it was “just another day in the War”. The incident further polarized the nation – mostly against the unpopular war – and led to severe mistreatment of returning soldiers (e.g. anti-war and young people started calling the Vietnam veterans “baby killers” and spitting on them in public). Post-traumatic syndrome became a household term for veterans, and veterans suffered mental and guilt anxiety. Much of this was a direct result of My Lai. On a more philosophical (and conspiratorial) point, I think the real causes for My Lai were never publicly aired or published. I also think its much more complicated than some of the advertised reasons retrospectively offered such as: (1) Calley’s incompetence/inexperience; (2) confusion about ‘Fire-free Zones’ and rules of engagement; (3) a part-time/shift work platoon of “Charley Company” high school dropouts; (4) revenge for recent losses (snipers, booby traps etc) and the Tet offensive; (5) ‘de-humanizing’ the VC and regarding the enemy as less than human (i.e. gooks); (6) the ‘collective psychological breakdown of Charley Company’; (7) lack of training regarding Geneva Convention and battlefield ethics (i.e. what does a soldier do when he’s give an unlawful order?); (8) over-emphasis on body counts and how the war was strategically conducted (e.g. excessive shelling, bombs, napalm, destruction of villages, etc); and (9) finally (most important, in my mind) the idea that we were in a different kind of war – one that the enemy was fighting “below the belt” in a unique and unfair way – with enemy tactics that “clutched the people close to their vest. That last point is most telling. The VC ‘hid’ amongst the villages and common folk. Our soldiers had to fight an enemy that was ‘disguised’ among the civilians. The VC also used children and women to ‘fool’ the Americans into booby traps, as snipers, and to throw grenades. Its no wonder they mistrusted ‘civilians’ and at times attacked them as the enemy. This was unconventional, and yet part of the VC tactics... so, CIA/Phoenix was intended to "fight fire with fire"... bring death/destruction (via search/destroy) to the enemy. Notwithstanding all of the above reasons for the behavior of C company that day, I think the real driving force behind this atrocity was CIA and their ‘Phoenix’ program. That’s why we never heard what really happened for years, and that’s why they didn’t prosecute any officers or top brass. So, in that respect, LT Calley can be viewed as an immoral scapegoat, along with all of those young GI’s in C company... they were used by the CIA and politicians. Gene

John: Its just an informal paper that I cobbled together, from Internet articles and pictures. Its a word document that - if you're interested - I can forward separately to your email. It consists of some trial records, and some witness accounts.... its not an original writing, but rather bits and pieces lifted from existing articles, a compilation if you will. Things that I found interesting reading. In one of the accounts of Captain Ernest Medina's trial, I came across commentary from a witness who turned out to be Gerry Hemming... sounds like he was blowing smoke up the prosecutors butt, and if I were of a conspiratorial bent, i'd think he was a deliberate plant to make Captain Medina sound innocent (which he appears most certainly not). Gene

John/Peter: My study of My Lai tells me that it was part of CIA's "Phoenix" program, and these young, inexperienced and undisciplined soldiers of C company were used by their intelligence handlers to terrorize (and massacre) a village of women, children and old men. I believe there were many other such atrocities, perhaps not as large or infamous. Only for an ethical helicopter pilot, an allegation sent in form of a letter a year later, and the publishing of Ron Haberle's private photographs... this war crime would never have seen the light of day. None of the officers above Calley were punished (although a few received some minor discipline/demotions) nor were any of them held accountable. There were many plausible excuses (revenge, inexperience, confusion about free-fire zones, over-emphasis on body counts, dehumanizing the enemy, etc.) and the official Army investigation by General William Peers (ex-OSS, CIA) sounded hard-hitting but never once mentioned the Project Phoenix angle and carefully avoiding implication of CIA. Col Frank Barker, who headed the special task Force that C company was part of, is never mentioned in any of the indictments or criminal charges... yet he was fully aware of the bogus intelligence that sent Charley Company into My Lai "loaded for bear" (i.e. villagers would be gone, only VC remaining, 48th Battalion stronghold, etc.). Calley's sentence was reduced and commuted- none of the soldiers would testify against him (or the officers) - and he simply served a few years of house arrest, becoming a darling of the pro-war hawkish right. Even today, we know little of the full story or real driving forces. Ironically, two months ago, William Calley made a rare public appearance and offered an apology (similar to Ted Kennedy's remorse ( "...not a day goes by that I don't regret..."). Interestingly, one of the My Lai soldiers who testified on Calley's boss's behalf (Capt Medina) was none other than our own Gerald Hemming. My Lai was a Phoenix operation... I wonder if Morales and friends - true forces of evil - had a hand in the war crime? Gene

Several facts about Chappaquiddick have caught my interest: 1. At the time of the incident, Mary Jo Kopechne had been unofficially engaged to be married to a career foreign service officer (his name is never mentioned in any of the accounts...is this evidence of a CIA 'guardian') 2. A rope was found attached to a stick which held the Oldsmobile throttle wide open also caught the driver’s rear view mirror and tore it loose so that it was hanging by the rear bolt. 3. Frank Sturgis and E. Howard Hunt were allegedly on Martha’s Vineyard at the time for a Regatta (no source). 4. The contents of Howard Hunt's White House safe, and John Dean's remark, “These should never see the light of day.” They are of a very, very, very secretive nature.” L. Pat Gray subsequently burned the Hunt files, was betrayed by Nixon, and resigned as FBI Director for that act. Is that what Watergate is really about? 5. Anthony Ulasewicz said he was ordered by the Plumbers to fly immediately to Chappaquiddick and dig up dirt on Ted. A sinister implication is that, according to his testimony, he arrived early on the morning of the "accident", before the whole incident had been made public... unusually quick timing. 6. In March 1973, John Dean said to Nixon, “If Kennedy knew the bear trap he was walking into…” It would seem that John Dean was aware of the trap set for Ted Kennedy after the fact. 7. Charles Colson (on later released tapes) informs the President that anti-Kennedy efforts did indeed extend beyond surveillance: “I did things out of Boston. We did some blackmail and … my God, uh, uh, uh; I’ll go to my grave before I ever disclose it". 8. Mary Jo lived for 1-2 hours in the submerged car on a pocket of air trapped above. The diver who recovered her body, John Farrar, described proof not only that Mary Jo was alive and breathing, but also that she was trying desperately but unsuccessfully to get out. The doctor claimed she had died of suffocation rather than from drowning. But there was no autopsy. 9. The coincidental (and suggestive0 connection of Mary Jo to George Smathers, Bobby Baker, LBJ et al 10. The subsequent "silence" of his friends - Paul Markham and Joe Gargan, and his driver John Crimmins. Also, the 5 other young women present at the barbecue - for 40 years

Bill: I second jack's comments. interesting and well written. This addresses the 'process' and strategy... as opposed to facts, how many shooters, who did it, and speculation of motive. It resonates with the work Tom Scully has done on the magicians, and gets to the heart of the intelligence operatives pulling the strings in Dealey Plaza. I've always thought that it's the pattern of facts (i.e. rabbit trails, disinformation, false flags, deception) that points to the culprits. Your work is thoughtful and thought-provoking. Gene

Jim: McCloy and his collaborators were not clearly affiliated with the Cubans, so they seem to be a parallel path to all of the other prominent suspects. The men from intelligence who orchestrated Guatemala and BOP (Barnes, Hunt, Morales, Phillips) seem to appear again in Dealey Plaza intrigues. The Cubans and CIA types would have had serious emotional energy towards JFK and his administration. As I got deeper in the BOP plotting, I was struck by the similarity of names and strong negative feelings in the aftermath. Add to that mix the so-called "provisional government" that consisted of several high-strung exile factions (some of whom were thugs and goons)... some of these groups didn't get their way, were never 'favored' by the Kennedy's, and had some serious motive and means to participate in the murder plot. The AMHINT operatives were somehow used...perhaps indirectly by McCloy's crowd. I still have the same impression many of the readers express... Maxwell Taylor was awfully close to the Kennedy's. hard to seee him as a bad guy... unless you take the adage of "keep your enemies closer". The military aspects of BOP are equally intriguing. There's some things that seem to have been overtly sabotaged - intentionally allowed to fail - and some aspects that were "off the books" and withheld from even JFK. I believe these were Northwoods type deceptions, intended to induce a military response (even as JFK insisted we would not actively involve US military). I believe that Kennedy recognized he was being 'played', and subsequently went to 'war' with the DOD and CIA aggressors. I can't fully put my finger on it, but Nixon is somehow involved (covertly) although he didn't get his Cubans into power. William Pawley (who committed suicide) also figures prominently, for the same reasons. I am left with a strong feel that Dealey Plaza was "blowback" from the Bay of Pigs. Gene

Jim: I've been deep into reading everything I can on Bay of Pigs. Am now convinced that it was a Northwoods type setup, but JFK didn't 'bite'. Lots of very angry black Ops and Cuban extremists... didn't just get mad, but got even with Kennedy. Plenty of motive, obvious means and perfect opportunity in Dealey Plaza. Military and Intelligence paybacks, by a select few specialists. Explains the umbrella man and certain 'signs' and signals. Interested in your view, as well as James Richards. Regards, Gene

Jim: I've been deep into reading everything I can on Bay of Pigs. Am now convinced that it was a Northwoods type setup, but JFK didn't 'bite'. Lots of very angry black Ops and Cuban extremists... didn't just get mad, but got even with Kennedy. Plenty of motive, obvious means and perfect opportunity in Dealey Plaza. Military and Intelligence paybacks, by a select few specialists. Explains the umbrella man and certain 'signs' and signals. Interested in your view, as well as James Richards. Regards, Gene

McCloy and Taylor?

And I second that notion... thanks Jim for your excellent investigation into key individuals and a very thoughtful analysis. Your work ties together some larger 'strings' and - for me - makes sense of the important historical events (i.e. Cuba, Cold War, BOP, the missile crisis, McCloy and the Warren Commission, Vietnam, oil interests, JCS generals) on the periphery of the assassination. It has always been my 'thesis' that an understanding of the major political events surrounding 1963 (the 'bookends' so to speak) would provide insight as to not only who killed the president but more important, why he was murdered. Call me superstitious, but the significance of November 22nd for military professionals is quite a tempting coincidence... and Ian Fleming had some interesting words for those who believe in coincidence. Gene Kelly

Another dumb instinctive point... I know no one named Boris. Never met a soul with that name. Last time it came into my life, it was the cartoon Rocky & Bullwinkle... the Russian spy's, Boris and Natasha. Boris 'bad-enough" for goodness sakes. Just this guys name gives me the creeps.

Jim: I also re-read the old threads about Taylor and the bay of pigs. Amazing retrospect... a scheme essentially to draw Kennedy (USA) into conflict with Cuba... my best basketball analogy is the player who sets himself up to draw an offensive foul. Allow the invasion to stall - blood on the beach-head - and then bring on the full scale attack. But JFK didn't take the bait... and he also didn't succumb to similar tactics during the Cuban missile crisis. Fast-forward to bizarre Northwoods schemes, escalation in Vietnam, Central American intrigues. His administration was literally at war with the generals...at war with the national security establishment. Who was the 'Michael Jordan' of that crowd, at the time? Answer: John J. McCloy. I'm convinced. I'm still struggling mightily with Taylor... friend of the Kennedy's, pallbearer for RFK, war hero/JCS Chair.. American hero, right? No disparaging words.. no black marks, no black marbles rolled into his personnel file. Almost too clean... and he quietly morphs into the sunset of the 70's as Nixon and the war die a slow death in our national consciousness. What do they say... old soldiers don't die, they just quietly fade away? But I am seriously biased by the quote of his distant relative who described him as a well trained sophisticated spy. And J.J. Angleton was apparently running poor Oswald (Lee, Harvey, both...) A lone nut indeed... a tragic American 'legend' (in all intelligence aspects of the word). Perhaps he is at the unwitting center of everything important that happened during the 2nd half of the 20th century! I'm starting to believe he was a tragic hero... a guy who tried to stop some really perverted bad men, but ended up a dead patsy. What in God's name does Marina Porter really know?? Tell me more about the April 1963 Walker shooting... explain the McCloy letters again, in depth, including the astral significance of 11/22 and Thayer. Convince me that General Taylor wasn't the ultimate high-level traitor. How do McCloy, Taylor and Walker survive the next 20 years until their deaths? Why was a iconoclast like Walker abandoned for the remaining 25 years, undiscovered and undistinguished for the rest of his life? Now my brain starts to really hurt... Gene

Jim: I've taken some time to go back to your threads several years ago, especially the back-and-forth with Shannet and Tim C. It was insightful to read the totality of Walker/Taylor information. I am not yet well prepared to come back at these three points. I beieve that the U2 and Summit are somehow linked to what transpired. I am also convinced McCloy is a powerful (behind the scenes) bad-guy... way too many 'coincidental' affiliations with the JFK case and all the pertinent players... a ponter towards the 'big fish'. 1. I am inclined to see the Walker shooting as some kind of scripted event... LHO is involved, but why I'm not fully sure... perhaps, as Judith baker has alleged, he was actually trying to stop the assassination. Did he shoot at him on his own accord...or was he following 'orders' (and for whom?). Eitehr way you cut it, it's a precursor to later events in November, so really understanding it is a key piece of the puzzle you describe. 2. I read the McCloy letter to Walker... he was defensive, and admonished Walker for resigning from the graduate organization. He wanted to distance himself from New Frontiermanship, Cuba and the Kennedy administration. He attached his acceptance speech. But, how did this in essence 'burn' Walker with repsect to the alleged counterintelligence intrigues with LHO and U2/Summit? Did McCloy somehow send Walker a hidden message, or some go-ahead instructions for November? Nonetheless, you are right in that McCloy is a skillful lawyer, practiced at the highest levels and in international waters. Powerfully connected, financially and Pentagon wise ("McCloy's Folly"... he built the buliding!). Not a guy you'd want to go head to head with. 3. Taylor just blows my mind... his nephew described him as a sophisticated experienced spy. He and Walker (along with McCloy) had 30-40 years of battle-tested common causes; way more allegiance and loyalty than what young JFK could've established in a short time. Those guys were thicker than blood. But he has remained 'clean' on everyone's agenda, no black marks, no suspicious anechdotes, a solid upstanding reputation. he seemes to have always risen above the crowd, away from the fray. He was one of RFK's pallbearers! A so-called close 'friend' of the Kennedy familty. Its really hard for me to see him orchestrating the murder, or sanctioning the hit. I'd like to discuss more as I collect additional thoughts. Gene

I've always thought this guy looked creepy... if he's anything like what his reputation and legend suggests, he's (according to EH Hunt) a CIA 'sweeper'. If that's really him at Parkland Hospital, things do get very interesting.

Jim: You are welcome... and I believe you are onto a very important thread indeed. I am still puzzled by several assertions: (1) why did Oswald shoot at Walker and what was the meaning of that episode; (2) why did John McCloy send that letter to Walker, and in essence 'burn' him; and (3) why would a purported 'friend' of the Kennedy family like Max Taylor allow these machinations/intrigues to persist, or be even remotely invloved in them? I realize these are somewhat 'big' questions, but that's where this thread is leading me and I need to put all of this in some context. Thanks, Gene

So who indeed is this self-published author? From Virginia (Langley)...? Interesting enough to get some attention, with a semi-plausible story-line that has aspects of truth... like a limited-hangout. Disinformation or tease?