Sylvia Odio, Lee Harvey Oswald and Harry Dean

[Ernie Lazar]

On 12/28/2016 at 10:52 AM, Paul Trejo said:

Harry Dean told me that his personal experience harmonizes with Sylvia Dean's WC testimony.  I find him believable, and so does Jeff Caufield.

Harry Dean, formerly a member of Fidel Castro's 26th of July Movement, became a volunteer source of data for the FBI.  Castro had switched sides on him, according to Harry.   Another person in that milieu was Loran Hall, who had fought alongside Larry Howard, Gerry Patrick Hemming and Che Guevara, to bring down Batista.  But when Fidel Castro switched sides, Loran Hall ended up in a Cuban jail cell.

(Harry Dean provided me with a tape recording of Loran Hall's fund-raising speech, telling of his time in Cuba, and I posted it to YouTube, where it can be found today, courtesy of Harry Dean.)

Harry Dean met Loran and Larry Howard in Southern California, in the context of the John Birch Society and the Minutemen.  Their common friend was WW2 war hero Guy Gabaldon, also known as "Gabby," who had attempted to start his own Cuba Raid squad there in Southern California, but RFK shut him down, and he was bitter about it.

Harry Dean remembers that he and Gabby would collect paramilitary supplies from well-heeled members of the John Birch Society in Southern California, to supply secret Cuba Raid groups in New Orleans and Miami, including Gerry Patrick Hemming's INTERPEN, and Loran Hall's LA SAMBRA, among others.  Loran Hall used the war name, "Lorenzo," while Larry Howard used the war name, "Alonzo."

One day, says Harry Dean, after loading up his trailer with paramilitary supplies to drive from Southern California to New Orleans, Gabby gave Loran Hall an extra wad of cash.  This was to be used to drive Lee Harvey Oswald from New Orleans to Mexico City.

I believe Harry's account, and so does Jeff Caufield.

At this point in his life, LHO had accumulated an informal resumé of newspaper clippings which showed that he was known in New Orleans as an officer of the FPCC, a group beloved by Fidel Castro.  It included news events of a street fight with Carlos Bringuier, his arrest, a radio spot, and a TV program.  (The Lopez Report of 2003 reveals the full contents of this informal resumé.)   This resumé was a big fake, of course, because LHO was really working for Guy Banister and the Radical Right.

Now, it was not planned, but on the way to Mexico City, Loran Hall, Larry Howard and Lee Harvey Oswald stopped at the home of Sylvia Odio in Dallas.  Loran and Larry pretended to be with the Cuban resistance group, JURE, to which Sylvia's father and mother also belonged.  Sylvia suspected something fishy.  (Loran introduced Lee as "Leon" because in Spanish there is no such name as "Lee", but "Leon" is a common name.)

Loran tried hard to sell "Leon" to Sylvia Odio as a possible asset for JURE.  (Evidently they were seeking an alternative way to sneak LHO into Cuba, in case the Embassies in Mexico City did not fall for his resumé.)  Sylvia was just turned off by the hard sell.  She wrote to her father, who wrote back to her to stay away from these guys.  (This is part of US history now.)

In any case, Sylvia Odio remembers that the men used "war names" to introduce themselves to her.  This was common among the Cuban Expatriates in the USA.  One used a war name that started with "L" and the other started with "A".

Harry Dean remains convinced that this was Lorenzo and Alonzo along with "Leon" at Sylvia's doorstep on 9/25/1963.

All of this supports a Walker-did-it CT, as described in Jeff Caufield's superb book, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: the Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015).

CIA-did-it writers are irrationally jealous of this book, because it shatters their CT so thoroughly.

Fast forward to the end of Caufield's book.  To tie up loose ends, Caufield draws in the 1973 theory of LAPD officer, Gareth (Gary) Wean, who said that in a meeting with US Senator John Tower, Audey Murphy and Dallas Sheriff Bill Decker, Gary heard Senator Tower confess that the JFK assassination was started by General Walker, but only as a "false flag" conspiracy, that was, a "shoot to miss" conspiracy.  

Without going into further details, I would emphasize here that US Senator John Tower (according to Wean) named General Walker at the center of the JFK assassination.  I take this as one of the most important clues in US History.

I wish that Jeff Caufield had taken a more circumspect attitude toward Gary Wean's "false flag" report.  It is not needed to complete the case against the Radical Right in the JFK assassination.  Caufield offered plenty of new FOIA releases of FBI and CIA documents to make a solid case against Joseph Milteer, General Walker and the Radical Right.

So, despite minor errors here and there, the great achievement of Jeff Caufield -- which annihilates the CIA-did-it CT -- is that General Walker and the Radical Right must be our prime suspects for the JFK assassination.

By the way, for those who don't know much about Harry Dean (a simple sailor who was never in the FBI or the CIA, despite ridiculous rumors from CIA-did-it CT writers) here is the punchline: 

Harry Dean says that only days before he and Gabby sent forth Loran and Larry to New Orleans, they also had a meeting with select members of the Radical Right there in Southern California.  The leader of that meeting was General Walker, who at that meeting directly named Lee Harvey Oswald as his Patsy -- and Harry Dean has been telling this story publicly since January 1965, beginning with the Joe Pyne Show in Southern California.  

Harry Dean still offers his own self-published manuscript, "Crosstrails" to interested readers.  Harry Dean is still a member of this FORUM.

HAPPY NEW YEAR,
--Paul Trejo

In several instances you declare that Caufield believes Harry Dean's narrative.   If that is the case, why can't you QUOTE Caufield directly as saying he believes Harry's story?

[Paul Trejo]

On 1/28/2017 at 11:05 AM, Ernie Lazar said:

In several instances you declare that Caufield believes Harry Dean's narrative.   If that is the case, why can't you QUOTE Caufield directly as saying he believes Harry's story?

Ernie,

I certainly can quote Jeff Caufield in this context -- but for now I will rely on my personal correspondence with Jeff Caufield.  In fact, it was Harry Dean himself who introduced me to Jeff Caufield back in 2013.  

Jeff Caufield was the first to share with me the official FBI file number for Harry Dean -- just in case anybody doubted that the FBI never wrote about Harry Dean.   Jeff shared many other FBI files with me as well, over the years.   I shared with him my findings about General Walker over the years, too.

Jeff Caufield told me that he was convinced that Harry Dean was an honest person -- although what confused issues initially was all the lies printed about Harry Dean by W.R. Morris going back to 1965.   When Jeff finally contacted Harry, he was surprised to learn that Harry never claimed to be an FBI agent or a CIA agent, or even an official informant of the FBI.

Instead, Harry Dean affirmed that he was originally a supporter of Fidel Castro in 1959, a member of the 26th of July Movement, then a Secretary of the FPCC, and then he turned against Fidel Castro, and would tell the FBI everything he knew about the FPCC and its individual members and activities.

Now -- Harry Dean did initially believe that this informal sharing of information could be described as being an "Informant," and he was not aware that the FBI reserved that term for people with restricted contracts in the FBI.   So there was some initial confusion about terms.

Yet Harry Dean was very clear to Jeff Caufield -- he was a private citizen -- a patriot -- a whistle-blower -- and if the FBI didn't want his information, it was at least his duty to share it, for what it was worth.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited February 3, 2017 by Paul Trejo
1965

[Ernie Lazar]

4 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ernie,

I certainly can quote Jeff Caufield in this context -- but for now I will rely on my personal correspondence with Jeff Caufield.  In fact, it was Harry Dean himself who introduced me to Jeff Caufield back in 2013.  

Jeff Caufield was the first to share with me the official FBI file number for Harry Dean -- just in case anybody doubted that the FBI never wrote about Harry Dean.   Jeff shared many other FBI files with me as well, over the years.   I shared with him my findings about General Walker over the years, too.

Jeff Caufield told me that he was convinced that Harry Dean was an honest person -- although what confused issues initially was all the lies printed about Harry Dean by W.R. Morris going back to the early 1960's.   When Jeff finally contacted Harry, he was surprised to learn that Harry never claimed to be an FBI agent or a CIA agent, or even an official informant of the FBI.

Instead, Harry Dean affirmed that he was originally a supporter of Fidel Castro in 1959, a member of the 26th of July Movement, then a Secretary of the FPCC, and then he turned against Fidel Castro, and would tell the FBI everything he knew about the FPCC and its individual members and activities.

Now -- Harry Dean did initially believe that this informal sharing of information could be described as being an "Informant," and he was not aware that the FBI reserved that term for people with restricted contracts in the FBI.   So there was some initial confusion about terms.

Yet Harry Dean was very clear to Jeff Caufield -- he was a private citizen -- a patriot -- a whistle-blower -- and if the FBI didn't want his information, it was at least his duty to share it, for what it was worth.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul -- I will not dwell upon this but your assertion in paragraph #2 that Harry never claimed to be an FBI agent or even an official informant of the FBI is categorically false as I have proven, beyond dispute, by quoting NOT Morris but by quoting Harry's own words.  

Furthermore, as a consequence of how HARRY described himself repeatedly since the 1960's many people who came into contact with him described him as an agent or undercover operative because that was what HARRY wanted them to believe!

You always attempt to create a straw-man argument by appending the word "official" to the word "informant".   BUT NONE of our intelligence agencies uses the phrase "official informant".  

That description is entirely a DELIBERATE FABRICATION BY YOU to confuse the debate over what Harry has ALWAYS said about himself.  

A long time ago I pointed out that JBS founder, Robert Welch, attempted to create a similar bogus straw-man argument when he was interviewed on Meet The Press.  Welch declared (solemnly) that he never called President Eisenhower a "card-carrying Communist" -- as if THAT was the basis of the controversy over Welch's remarks.  Every serious person knew that the Communist Party stopped issuing cards to its members in the 1940's so Welch's transparent ploy was to deny something that was not even in dispute.

YOU are using the exact same type of bogus argument with respect to Harry.  

From the very first record we have regarding how Harry described himself, he ALWAYS used EVERY conceivable linguistic trick to convey the (false) impression that he had some kind of official connection to our intelligence agencies.  THAT is why he constantly sought publicity for his story -- because ONLY by claiming some official capacity would his story have ANY sort of credibility.

As I wrote to you in February 2016 -- when I summarized ALL the terms which HARRY used to describe himself:

1.  Harry was NOT an FBI "informant”

2.  Harry was NOT an FBI "political spy"

3.  Harry was NOT an FBI "street informant"

4.  Harry was NOT an FBI "undercover agent" (whether "official" or "unofficial")

5.  Harry was NOT an FBI "undercover operative" (whether "official" or "unofficial ")

6.  Harry was NOT an FBI "official paid informant" nor a "paid informant"

[BUT Harry did claim that he was "paid expenses" by at least one of our intelligence agencies—which....

 (a) would require authorization AND

(b)  that authorization would produce paperwork to document exactly what "expenses" Harry was being paid for AND

(c)  Harry would have been required to report that income on his state and federal income tax returns...AND,

(d)  Most importantly, if Harry WAS actually paid expenses THEN given FBI protocols, such a payment would mean that Harry was what Paul thinks is some sort of an indicator for being an "official informant"].  We can logically conclude that Harry lied about being "paid expenses" since there is NO record of any such payments or authorizations for payments or requests for such payments anywhere AND Harry has never produced copies of any of his income tax returns to document any such payments.

7.  Harry was NOT a "private investigator" (whether "official" or "unofficial")

8.  Harry did NOT "investigate" anything for the FBI (whether "officially" or "unofficially" )

9.  Harry was NOT an FBI "double agent" (YOUR FALSE description of him in November 2012)

10.  In 1962, Harry was NOT (as he falsely claimed in 2006) "involved with the Bureau in gathering political and subversive intelligence information."

11.  Harry was NOT "a former U.S. intelligence informant" (as HARRY described himself in November 2007)

12.  Harry was NOT a "U.S. intelligence...infiltration operative/informant" (as Harry described himself in September 2011)

13.  Harry was NOT "operating underground for the FBI, spying on the JBS in Southern California" (your FALSE description of him in March 2012)

Lastly, as I have pointed out REPEATEDLY, Harry has NEVER ONCE publicly stated what YOU now claim is his current position or description of himself.

THERE IS NOTHING ON THE PUBLIC RECORD TO SUPPORT PAUL's CONTENTIONS!

UNLESS AND UNTIL HARRY POSTS A CLEAR, DEFINITIVE, UNAMBIGUOUS MESSAGE CORRECTING ALL OF HIS FALSE STATEMENTS OVER THE DECADES (see partial list above), there is absolutely NO REASON to believe PAUL's attempt to whitewash Harry's deliberate deceptions.

Important Postscript re: "Paid Expenses"

For any reader who wants more information regarding this controversy over Harry's self-descriptions over the past 5 decades -- please consider this:

The FBI gave ALL of its 56 field offices extremely detailed instructions regarding IF, WHEN, and HOW any monetary payments could be made to individuals who provided information to the FBI.  The specific instructions were contained in both the Bureau's "Manual of Instructions" AND in various SAC Letters sent to the Special Agents in Charge of all field offices.

The process of making payments to somebody would always BEGIN as follows (and see Delmar Dennis memos link below):

1.  The SAC of a field office would prepare a summary memo to FBI HQ about their asset (i.e. the person to whom they wanted to pay money for expenses and/or for intelligence information).

2. "Expenses" could be for travel (personal vehicle mileage or rental car or train or bus ticket etc) OR for cost of staying at a hotel/motel, OR for copies of publications OR for membership fees OR for photocopying expenses or for a lot of other things.

3.  AFTER the SAC summarized the reasons for why the field office wanted to pay someone for "expenses" -- the SAC also had to explain why the proposed payment(s) were justified.  For example:  was there no other way to obtain that information without incurring so much expense?  AND was the person who was going to receive money considered to be stable, reliable, and likely to keep his/her mouth shut and not embarrass the Bureau?

4.  THEN--the field office had to await the decision of HQ Supervisors who reviewed the field office request.  HQ could agree to everything proposed OR it could reduce the amount requested OR it could just deny the field office request entirely.

5.  AFTER a field office got permission to pay "expenses" or pay for "services rendered", (usually a weekly stipend) THEN the field office SAC had to prepare another report to HQ to summarize what information was received AND then evaluate how reliable it was (such as by comparing anything recd to information received from other informants or compare it to other methods by which the FBI obtained information -- such as mail covers, trash covers, black bag jobs, military intelligence agencies, etc.

6.  IF ALL THIS was not enough -- the field office also had to prepare a quarterly summary of all information received from their assets (aka informants) AND provide HQ with an overall assessment of its importance/significance AND a summary of ALL payments made (dates and amounts).

7.  EVERYTHING summarized above produced REAMS of paperwork (from field to HQ and from HQ to field).

8.  Significantly, there is NOTHING WHATSOEVER in ANY file pertaining to Harry Dean OR pertaining to the JBS OR pertaining to John Rousselot OR pertaining to Guy Galbadon OR pertaining to Edwin Walker which confirms that Harry was (1) EVER paid anything OR (2) that ANY field office ever sought authorization from HQ to pay Harry for anything!

9.  Lastly, as I have pointed out before on several occasions, EVERY person who was an FBI asset (informant, double agent, mole, established source, panel source, etc) was given a temporary (and sometimes a permanent) symbol number to conceal their identity.  A description of that person (name, address, phone number, symbol number, code names, etc) was kept on an index card at both HQ and the appropriate field office.  NO SUCH CARD exists on Harry.

10.  I previously shared scanned pdf copies of a typical memo format used by field offices when they wanted to pay someone for expenses or for services rendered.  See:  pages 5 thru 8 of Delmar Dennis memos here:  https://sites.google.com/site/ernie124102/dennis

THERE IS NO COMPARABLE DOCUMENTATION ANYWHERE REGARDING HARRY DEAN.

So, AGAIN, we can logically conclude that Harry was NOT telling the truth when he claimed he was "paid expenses" -- but this is just another device by which Harry conveyed the idea that he had some sort of official connection to our "intelligence agencies" which Harry assumed would impress any gullible audience [i.e. ordinary individuals, newspaper reporters, Joe Pyne program Director, Tom Snyder, southern California Police Dept interviewers, or Education Forum readers, etc.]

Edited February 3, 2017 by Ernie Lazar

[Ernie Lazar]

5 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ernie,

I certainly can quote Jeff Caufield in this context -- but for now I will rely on my personal correspondence with Jeff Caufield.  In fact, it was Harry Dean himself who introduced me to Jeff Caufield back in 2013.  

Jeff Caufield was the first to share with me the official FBI file number for Harry Dean -- just in case anybody doubted that the FBI never wrote about Harry Dean.   Jeff shared many other FBI files with me as well, over the years.   I shared with him my findings about General Walker over the years, too.

Jeff Caufield told me that he was convinced that Harry Dean was an honest person -- although what confused issues initially was all the lies printed about Harry Dean by W.R. Morris going back to the early 1960's.   When Jeff finally contacted Harry, he was surprised to learn that Harry never claimed to be an FBI agent or a CIA agent, or even an official informant of the FBI.

Instead, Harry Dean affirmed that he was originally a supporter of Fidel Castro in 1959, a member of the 26th of July Movement, then a Secretary of the FPCC, and then he turned against Fidel Castro, and would tell the FBI everything he knew about the FPCC and its individual members and activities.

Now -- Harry Dean did initially believe that this informal sharing of information could be described as being an "Informant," and he was not aware that the FBI reserved that term for people with restricted contracts in the FBI.   So there was some initial confusion about terms.

Yet Harry Dean was very clear to Jeff Caufield -- he was a private citizen -- a patriot -- a whistle-blower -- and if the FBI didn't want his information, it was at least his duty to share it, for what it was worth.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

If you step back and try to be logical about this dispute AND if you want to be as fair as humanly possible to Harry -- then there is ONE question which Paul has never even attempted to answer.

WHY IS IT that after 5 decades of controversy regarding Harry and his narrative and his "eyewitness" testimony -- Harry has NEVER written one single statement like this?  

[Given the decades-long controversy and all the disputes and all the supposed "misunderstandings" -- (for example: see false statements made in EF by Bill Kelly and by Berneice at the beginning of this debate] wouldn't ANY honorable person have decided to issue a clear statement like the following one a VERY long time ago?]

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

"TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN":   "In (enter years here), I contacted the FBI field office in (enter city names here) and I also contacted FBI HQ in Washington DC in (enter dates here).

 ALL of my contacts with the FBI were always initiated by me.  I decided when to contact the FBI.  I decided what method to use for my contacts (phone, letter, in person).  I decided what information I thought the FBI might be interested in seeing.  

AT NO TIME was I ever asked by the FBI (or by any other government agency) to provide them with information nor was I ever asked to do anything for them.  

EVERYTHING I did was entirely voluntary and based upon my own motives.  I was NEVER an "informant" or an "undercover operative" or an "agent" or a "political spy".  I was NEVER assigned a case agent to report to nor was I given any sort of code name or symbol to conceal my identity.  I was never paid anything nor did I ask to be paid.

I also have no idea what the FBI did with any of the information I gave to them.  Like all other Americans, I contacted the FBI when I thought it would be a good idea to share something with them."

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

Edited February 3, 2017 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

Ernie,

You continue to make mountains out of molehills.  Why would you want to make a Federal case out of the fact that Harry Dean volunteered information to the FBI back in the early 1960's?

What's the big deal?

Sure, the FBI has actually publicized the fact that some FBI agents back then complained about Harry Dean, and said that it was "unwanted information," but so what?

The fact is that Harry Dean believed it was important information at the time, so he shared it with the FBI.  The FBI has officially acknowledged that they did receive that information -- whether they wanted it or not.

Why in the world  anybody would want to litigate this fact in the year 2017 is beyond me.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited February 3, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

Ernie,

I said I could quote Jeff Caufield on the topic of Harry Dean at any time -- and so I'll do that now.   On page 590 of his 900 page tome, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: the Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015), Dr. Jeffrey Caufield says the following:

"Records from the FBI show clearly that Dean contacted them regularly and furnished them with information about the Chicago Fair Play for Cuba Committee.  He did so strictly on a volunteer basis, and the FBI did not solicit his information. FBI documents make it abundantly clear that Dean was never an agent of the FBI, nor was he, formally, an FBI informant.  FBI documents trace Dean's career as a volunteer informant for the Chicago FBI to December 7, 1960, when he told them he had met a man named Ed Swabeck in Cuba the past summer....Dean also met Dr. Juan A. Orta, who was a Secretary to Prime Minister Castro, while in Cuba."  (Caufield, 2015, p. 590)

But wait, there's more:

"FBI documents show that FBI headquarters requested information from on Dean from the Chicago FBI on the day of the Kennedy assassination, but that no reason was given for the request.  This action partially corroborates Dean's claim that he notified them in September 1963 that there was talk of killing the President -- something that neither Dean nor the FBI actually felt was going to happen."  (Caufield, 2015, p. 591)

While I'm at it, I'll add this interesting opinion from Dr. Caufield: 

"The fact that he named [General] Walker as a conspirator, however, lends credibility to his claims against [Congressman] Rousselot."  (Caufield, 2015, p. 590)

There is, of course, more.   But this will do for now.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited February 3, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

13 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ernie,

You continue to make mountains out of molehills.  Why would you want to make a Federal case out of the fact that Harry Dean volunteered information to the FBI back in the early 1960's?

What's the big deal?

Sure, the FBI has actually publicized the fact that some FBI agents back then complained about Harry Dean, and said that it was "unwanted information," but so what?

The fact is that Harry Dean believed it was important information at the time, so he shared it with the FBI.  The FBI has officially acknowledged that they did receive that information -- whether they wanted it or not.

Why in the world  anybody would want to litigate this fact in the year 2017 is beyond me.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul -- you must have some kind of mental block if you do not understand the significance of Harry misrepresenting himself for 50 years.

As is your custom, you ALWAYS attempt to change the subject.  This dispute is NOT about (and has NEVER been about) whether Harry gave information to the FBI.  I have ALWAYS agreed that he did -- and I explicitly said so dozens of times.  In fact, the webpage I created about Harry lists that specific information.

This dispute is about what HARRY has told everyone for over 50 years.  

IF Harry had simply said that he provided information to the FBI -- nobody would even discuss this matter but he went much much further.  He claimed he was "asked by" our "intelligence agencies" to "investigate" and be a "political spy" and "undercover agent" for them AND Harry has NEVER ONCE corrected that self-description publicly.  Because of that -- MANY people (go back to the original Memoirs thread to see this) believed what Harry has said and written for 50 years and most of what Harry said or wrote is FALSE -- but is given a patina of authenticity because of his claims about "working for" our "intelligence agencies".

Edited February 3, 2017 by Ernie Lazar

[Ernie Lazar]

13 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ernie,

I said I could quote Jeff Caufield on the topic of Harry Dean at any time -- and so I'll do that now.   On page 590 of his 900 page tome, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: the Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015), Dr. Jeffrey Caufield says the following:

"Records from the FBI show clearly that Dean contacted them regularly and furnished them with information about the Chicago Fair Play for Cuba Committee.  He did so strictly on a volunteer basis, and the FBI did not solicit his information. FBI documents make it abundantly clear that Dean was never an agent of the FBI, nor was he, formally, an FBI informant.  FBI documents trace Dean's career as a volunteer informant for the Chicago FBI to December 7, 1960, when he told them he had met a man named Ed Swabeck in Cuba the past summer....Dean also met Dr. Juan A. Orta, who was a Secretary to Prime Minister Castro, while in Cuba."  (Caufield, 2015, p. 590)

But wait, there's more:

"FBI documents show that FBI headquarters requested information from on Dean from the Chicago FBI on the day of the Kennedy assassination, but that no reason was given for the request.  This action partially corroborates Dean's claim that he notified them in September 1963 that there was talk of killing the President -- something that neither Dean nor the FBI actually felt was going to happen."  (Caufield, 2015, p. 591)

While I'm at it, I'll add this interesting opinion from Dr. Caufield: 

"The fact that he named [General] Walker as a conspirator, however, lends credibility to his claims against [Congressman] Rousselot."  (Caufield, 2015, p. 590)

There is, of course, more.   But this will do for now.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

OK Paul -- at least you are now following correct protocol so that readers can understand what Caufield actually wrote -- and not YOUR interpretation or mangled paraphrase of what Caufield wrote BUT here are the problems with the two quotations you provided;

(1)  THE FIRST QUOTATION

You will notice that Caufield does NOT provide a footnote for his statement about what "FBI records show".  That is odd when you consider that Caufield's book has 3912 footnotes to document what he claims.  Consequently, nobody can go to the original source to discover for themselves what FBI records actually show because Caufield does not identify what documents he relied upon.

Caufield made a conclusion ABOUT Harry based upon whatever FBI documents he saw but HARRY has never publicly stated what Caufield has written ABOUT Harry (i.e. that he merely provided unsolicited information but had no official connection to any "intelligence agency" and no government agency "asked" Harry to do anything).

(2) THE SECOND QUOTATION

Caufield is totally mistaken when he claims that "no reason" is indicated in FBI records for why FBI HQ requested information from Chicago about Harry on 11/22/63.  [BTW--notice that, once again, Caufield does not provide a footnote to identify for readers the original source which is the basis for Caufield's statements.]

The "reason" why FBI HQ requested information from Chicago field office is so manifestly self-evident that one wonders if Caufield even saw the original FBI document (i.e. airtel from FBI HQ to Chicago dated 11/22/63 with caption "Harry Dean. La Puente, California - Research--Correspondence and Tours".  ??

HQ had just received a letter that Harry sent to J. Edgar Hoover in which Harry claimed to be an informant for the FBI in Chicago. 

Hoover then sent Chicago and Los Angeles a copy of Harry Dean’s 11/19/63 .letter to Hoover.  Hoover clearly stated the reason when he wrote:

“Bufiles contain no information indicating that this correspondent was considered an informant or a potential informant by your office.  Correspondent’s communication has not been acknowledged and you are instructed to furnish the Bureau and the Los Angeles Office with a summary of the contacts this correspondent had with Agents of the Chicago Office in order that his statements may be evaluated.  Your recommendations as to how this matter should be handled should also be furnished.  The LAX Office will hold in abeyance any contact with correspondent until instructions are received from the Bureau.”

So, obviously " the reason" was two-fold:

(1)  Hoover did not want to reply to Harry's letter until Chicago first explained what their relationship was to Harry since "Bufiles contain no information" to confirm what Harry wrote about himself

(2)  Hoover wanted recommendations from both the Chicago and Los Angeles field offices "as to how this matter should be handled" 

BUT Caufield's bigggest WHOPPER is the last sentence of your quotation.

There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in that HQ airtel to Chicago and Los Angeles (OR in Harry's 11/19/63 letter to Hoover) which "partially corroborates Dean's claim that he notified them in September 1963 that there was talk of killing the President..."

I am completely at a loss to explain why Caufield made such an irresponsible and stupid and unsupportable comment.  

As I previously have written -- what is astonishing about Harry's 11/19/63 letter is precisely that he never even mentions any assassination plot, he never mentions the Birch Society or John Rousselot or Guy Galbadon or Edwin Walker or Robert Welch or Wesley Grapp AND Harry never mentioned ANY of those subjects in his contacts with the Los Angeles field office -- even though Harry claims he had contemporaneous foreknowledge of the assassination plot!!!

Lastly, just for the record:

(1) you STILL have NOT provided any statement BY Caufield to corroborate your original statement that Caufield believed Harry's story.

(2)  Caufield LIED when he wrote on page 590 that:   "According to FBI documents, Harry Dean allegedly infiltrated the Covina, California branch of the John Birch Society..."

There is not one single FBI document which discusses Harry Dean in the context of the John Birch Society.  Not one!  THAT is why Caufield does NOT footnote his statement to provide readers with substantiation for "According to FBI documents..." ---  because there is no such FBI document!!  Furthermore, Harry has always maintained that he joined the JBS because he sincerely believed in their message and their objectives -- NOT because he wanted to (or was instructed to) "infiltrate" them.

BTW -- what I presented above regarding Caufield's "errors" -- is part of my larger critique of his book which I may still decide to post on EF at a later date.  Caufield's book is riddled with factual errors of all kinds.

ONE MORE THING:

This is especially interesting for those of us (unlike Paul Trejo) who actually look at primary source evidence:

In order to see this -- you must go to the Los Angeles field file on Harry which I have posted on Internet Archive website.  Also--keep in mind that NARA copied that file in reverse order (so serial #1 is at the end of the file just before the copies of documents which Harry gave to Los Angeles FBI Agents).

(1)  Pursuant to HQ instructions, two Los Angeles FBI Agents contacted Harry Dean at his home on December 10, 1963.  See serial #10 of the Los Angeles field file for the summary memo from Los Angeles to HQ regarding that contact.

(2)  During that meeting, Harry gave those two FBI Agents copies of 16 documents (56 pages) about Cuban nationals and about FPCC-Chicago  along with some correspondence and flyers which Harry thought the FBI might like to have.  See Los Angeles serial #11 for a list of the documents which Harry gave to Los Angeles agents.  

(3)  More importantly, see Los Angles sub-file serials 1A1 through 1A3 (at end of Los Angeles file) which are the actual photocopies of those 56 pages of documents.  Notice that Los Angeles field sent copies of those documents to the Chicago field office AND Chicago date-stamped them as being received by Chicago on January 30, 1964.   One wonders why Los Angeles bothered to send Chicago copies of those documents if Harry had supposedly already provided that information to Chicago field in 1960-1961???

Edited February 3, 2017 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

On 2/3/2017 at 9:04 AM, Ernie Lazar said:

Paul -- you must have some kind of mental block if you do not understand the significance of Harry misrepresenting himself for 50 years.

As is your custom, you ALWAYS attempt to change the subject.  This dispute is NOT about (and has NEVER been about) whether Harry gave information to the FBI.  I have ALWAYS agreed that he did -- and I explicitly said so dozens of times.  In fact, the webpage I created about Harry lists that specific information.

This dispute is about what HARRY has told everyone for over 50 years.  

IF Harry had simply said that he provided information to the FBI -- nobody would even discuss this matter but he went much much further.  He claimed he was "asked by" our "intelligence agencies" to "investigate" and be a "political spy" and "undercover agent" for them AND Harry has NEVER ONCE corrected that self-description publicly.  Because of that -- MANY people (go back to the original Memoirs thread to see this) believed what Harry has said and written for 50 years and most of what Harry said or wrote is FALSE -- but is given a patina of authenticity because of his claims about "working for" our "intelligence agencies".

Ernie,

Again, you accuse Harry Dean of "what HARRY has told everyone for over 50 years."

Then you put words into his mouth.

I have interviewed Harry Dean personally -- face-to-face -- and he NEVER told me those things you claim he said.  NEVER.

What Harry Dean told me personally was what I have printed here -- and what Dr. Jeff Caufield has printed in his recent book, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: the Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015).  Namely, that he voluntarily informed the FBI about what he thought was suspicious regarding the FPCC in Chicago -- and he was never paid for it.

Harry Dean was aware that for decades a fiction writer named W.R. Morris wrote tons of lies about Harry Dean, claiming that he was both a CIA agent and an FBI agent, in order to sell books.  Harry Dean received no money from W.R. Morris.  This was just a scam.

I absolutely refuse to blame Harry Dean for the sins of W.R. Morris.

If you have documented evidence for your accusations, Ernie, then post them here -- after you have authenticated them.

As for myself -- I know what I heard directly from Harry Dean himself, so I challenge all your accusations.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited February 17, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[James DiEugenio]

OMG, PT wants to go full circle on this.  What for another 14 pages?

To even put this in a thread with Odio is something of a non sequitur and a bit of a disgrace.

But, that is what you get when....

[Ernie Lazar]

32 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ernie,

Again, you accuse Harry Dean of "what HARRY has told everyone for over 50 years."

Then you put words into his mouth.

I have interviewed Harry Dean personally -- face-to-face -- and he NEVER told me those things you claim he said.  NEVER.

What Harry Dean told me personally was what I have printed here -- and what Dr. Jeff Caufield has printed in his recent book, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: the Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015).  Namely, that he voluntarily informed the FBI about what he thought was suspicious regarding the FPCC in Chicago -- and he was never paid for it.

Harry Dean was aware that for decades a fiction writer named H.R. Morris wrote tons of lies about Harry Dean, claiming that he was both a CIA agent and an FBI agent, in order to sell books.  Harry Dean received no money from H.R. Morris.  This was just a scam.

I absolutely refuse to blame Harry Dean for the sins of H.R. Morris.

If you have documented evidence for your accusations, Ernie, then post them here -- after you have authenticated them.

As for myself -- I know what I heard directly from Harry Dean himself, so I challenge all your accusations.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul -- if you would be kind enough to be specific about which of my quotations or statements that I attribute to Harry you are claiming Harry NEVER said (i.e. I allegedly put words in his mouth) --- then I will be happy to go back and give you the exact links to each webpage where Harry made the comment I attribute to him.  REPEAT:  Harry's own written words -- NOT ANYTHING BY MORRIS!

NOBODY can (or should) rely upon what you claim Harry has told you because we have no way to authenticate what you claim because you have never released any verbatim transcript of any alleged interview nor have you released copies of emails which you allegedly received from Harry.

THEREFORE:  That means ALL of us must rely EXCLUSIVELY upon what Harry has written or posted online for the past 50 years.

I still ask you to explain one thing:  

WHY has Harry never made an unambiguous, clear, definitive PUBLIC statement (here in EF or elsewhere) which conforms to what you now claim Harry has told you personally?

Lastly -- I implore you, STOP referring to W.R. Morris.  

STOP IT PAUL!  Focus exclusively upon what Harry has written himself (here in EF or elsewhere).  Why can't you stop trying to confuse the issue? Why must you ALWAYS bring up Morris when NOTHING I have written (again: ABSOLUTELY NOTHING) is based upon what Morris wrote.

IF you refer to Morris one more time -- THEN all of us will conclude that you are DELIBERATELY being dishonest.  Focus ONLY on what Harry has said about himself.  ONLY HARRY'S OWN WRITTEN WORDS--nothing else.

Edited February 16, 2017 by Ernie Lazar

[Ernie Lazar]

FOR THE BENEFIT OF PAUL TREJO WHO HAS FALSELY ACCUSED ME OF PUTTING WORDS INTO HARRY'S MOUTH

I copy below, a brief summary of 29 statements made BY HARRY (not by W.R. Morris) as well as a couple examples of how PAUL interpreted Harry’s previous statements about himself.

I won’t even get into all of the personal contacts which Harry has had over the past 50 years – often with professional journalists or prominent authors – who came away from their conversations with Harry believing that Harry was an FBI agent or undercover operative and NOT just an ordinary citizen providing unsolicited information -- because that is what HARRY wanted them to believe.

PAUL:  After reading the following summary -- If you do not retract your false accusation about what I have written and if you do NOT also acknowledge that the following list is a totally accurate, truthful, and factual summary of what Harry has written about himself over the years (as well as how YOU described him) ---- then everybody will know, with absolute indisputable certainty, that you are NOT intellectually honest.

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

As previously mentioned (and as revealed below) Harry used every conceivable linguistic device and public relations method to create a totally false perception about his alleged "connections" to "U.S. intelligence agencies".

1. In 1961, in his letter to JFK, Harry stated about the FBI-Chicago.. "...they ask me to stay in [the FPCC] and pass on all information. I did so gladly, recently they stated I have done a great one-man undercover job against the Fair Play Communists."  

2.  In his November 1963 letter to J. Edgar Hoover, Harry described himself as "an undercover agent" 

3.  In his December 1964 letter to the Director of the Joe Pyne Program, Harry described how the FBI "ask if I would pass info to them..." and "FBI said best one man undercover informante (sic) job seen…" 

4.  In his June 1975 interview by Tom Snyder for the Tomorrow Show program, the transcript of the interview of Harry (who was known then as "Mr. X") reflects that Snyder asked Harry this question:

SNYDER: "You were an agent of the FBI infiltrating into the John Birch Society, and there, you learned of the plans to assassinate John F. Kennedy?"

HARRY: "That's right"

In a subsequent question, Snyder asked Harry a question which began with this premise about Harry's relationship with the FBI: "...that you as an employee of the government of the United States of America..." and Harry accepted that premise without correcting Snyder's description.

5.  In Harry's 11/21/75 affidavit, he wrote about himself that:  

"I was recruited by U.S. National Security Intelligence by their uniquely convincing tactics that assure patriotic service from the right person, in the right place, at the right time." 

6.  During his May 1977 interview by Kenneth D. Klein of the House Select Committee on Assassinations, Harry described himself as follows:

“Dean stated he was an FBI informant when he was a member of the Chicago Fair Play For Cuba Committee.  His code names were Junior and Status Quo…”

and

“…upon moving to California, he continued to be an FBI informer.  He stated that in California he was an FBI informant and informed them of the activities of the Covina John Birch Society….Dean states that he never received regular payments from the FBI to act as an informant. All he received was expenses and he was always paid in cash.”

7. In his 1990 self-published memoir (Crosstrails) Harry wrote: 

"I was recruited by U.S. Intelligence by their uniquely convincing tactics.... {to avoid being indicted as an unregistered agent of a foriegn (sic) government}."

8.  In February 2005, Harry answered a question posed to him by using innuendo to suggest that he was routinely “meeting with Bureau agents” and he might even be required to travel to Washington DC to make a report at FBI HQ!!!!.  Harry also suggested he had made some independent decision to leave his onerous intelligence duties – again suggesting he had some official connection to U.S. intelligence agencies:

“By late in 1964 my decsion (sic) to get out 'from under' was made, the final meeting with Bureau agents ended in 1965. They considered me a traitor, they were angry and sort of nasty ever after. Yet by 1969 Bureau agents said that I may have to fly to Washington DC to identify the Cuban DGI agent Fransisco Vega who I had previously fed into their hands, and who had led my fearfilled interogation in Havana.”

9. In July 2005, in reply to a series of questions posed to Harry by John Simkin, Harry stated that he was "advising the Bureau as requested" regarding various individuals and groups (my emphasis on "as requested").  

Harry also commented that:  "In the time frame of being appointed acting secretary of FPCC {Chicago} I was given the task of entering Cuba to gather information for U.S. Intelligence." 

AND

“I entered Cuba in mid-1960 to gather information for U.S. Intelligence, resulting from my having apparently solid Cuban credentials as a member of Castro's 26th Of July Movement in the United States.”

AND

“Life after the five year involvement in political spying 1960/65 finally became, 'somewhat' normal."

 Also in July 2005 in answer to a question posed by Tony Basing, Harry declared that he was meeting with Bureau agents to provide them information at some risk to himself

“My concern after November 22 was that serious problems might arrive from my scheming associates. Also continued contacts and meetings with Bureau agents re; related subjects {eg} of political rightist and leftists groups and individuals as possible suspects. In general kept on with daily but fearful existance.”

10.  AND in August 2005, Harry made this even more explicit when he declared:

"Re: FBI they always denie [sic] associations with spys/informants for their protection and in my case because in 1965 I blabbed on TV, Radio and newspapers re; spying for the FBI in order to cut loose from that fearful existance of near five year involvement with them and the Cuba waste of life. My main task then was to openly expose the people that I knew, who hastened the death of President Kennedy."

In addition, Harry claimed that his “spy” position for the FBI was so important that the FBI “arranged that I not be called…” to testify at hearings about FPCC:

“I never was called to testify in any hearings, several of their investigators contacted me, and I was in contact with others and fed them info. In 1961 hearings were held re: FPCC while I was secretary of that Chicago group.  was not called because I was at that time informing FBI on FPCC and other pro-Castro activities the bureau arranged that I not be called even though my name appeared in hearings reports with other officers.”

11.  Other August 2005 messages by Harry in which he sought to convey his purported official connection to U.S. intelligence agencies by “reporting” to them and the dangers he allegedly faced from being  one of their undercover operatives:

“It was while yet remaining within the pro-Castro camp that I was betraying them to U.S. Intelligence, it was sad to turn from what I once considered a great humanitarian cause, but there are no regrets. what and how was I paid for reporting to U.S. Intelligence. Expenses. Wisely or not, I had joined this new patriotic cause.”

“While involved with Intelligence agencies, one must keep secret any/all information from anyone/everyone, and when nessasary mislead/lie and misinform. Even ones wife. Personal danger is always lurking.”

12. In January 2006, Harry replied to an inquiry by stating:  

"Later, when I joined more openly with anti-Castro, anti-Communist persons and groups did I become anti-Kennedy, even while doing assignments for the Feds..." [my underlining for emphasis]

13.  In August 2006, Harry posted numerous messages on the Mary Ferrell website in which he described his alleged relationship to the FBI.  He refers to alleged instructions and orders and requests and assignments supposedly given to Harry by the FBI

“The Chicago Office instructed me to choose a code name for use when either of us contacted the other. I came up with the initials "J.R." My wife and I knew who was calling when they ask for J.R. requesting information and\or to set up a meeting. Agents also advised me to work out a code for message writing, kindly offering to do it for me if I could not. H. Dean.”

“The FBI office in Los Angeles wanted information on the activities of SWP\FPCC member Ed Swabeck. The Bureau gave me his address in the Venice section of L.A. …The beauty of that assignment netted Cuban DGI Castro agent, Fransisco Vega, then illegally in the U.S.  Much other information also resulted. The Bureau was extremely pleased. So was I. Vega had arrested and interrogated me in Cuba, for several hours. H. Dean.”

With respect to FPCC:

“The Bureau convinced me to stay-in and pass it all information. I did. Later, in 1961 the Bureau fired me when I mentioned previous dealings with CIA agents re; Cuba…I had accepted cash expences at their insistence, but not this time. A few months later in Los Angeles, California I became involved in simular (sic) actions for that office. I sure welcome the opportunity to correct such semi-official twisted statements on the MaryFerrell.org site. Thanks. H. Dean.”

“Intelligence agencies naturally pour out unflatering (sic) information usually in somewhat 'twisted form' re; anyone who 'blabbs later' about having labored for them. Such information insures continued co-operation. It is their methodology. Re; FBI, they kicked me loose in Chicago because I mentioned talking with CIA agents there…”

“Re: the FBI interviewing me several times, in Los Angeles areas, the purpose of such, for example: to seek out information on L.A. area ALPHA 66 activities, and specifically it's leadership, after being shown an FBI photo of same. There are endless other examples "called interviews". H. Dean.”

“Hayward's warning to FBI brought Bureau agents out to forbid my going on this or any TV or Radio show re; my association with FBI in Los Angeles, Chicago or elsewhere. I did go on, as a way to end my informant status with them. The Bureau was furious. No more information, no more expense money! I was glad! H. Dean.”

14.  In December 2007, Harry complained about how he felt he was not getting the recognition which he believed he deserved from US intelligence agencies regarding his contributions to them as a “U.S. intelligence informant”:

“Exposing the 'alleged past of a former US. intelligence informant should not be done only in bits a pieces but with all possible details. What would be the reason for failing to inform the reader of other, more complete, even comdeming (sic) information? some of which includes so-called secret items/reports, no doubt of ongoing significance to them.  US. intelligence in their efforts to expose my 'alleged' past, after and because of my publically exposing some of our dealings re; Cuba Kennedy, Mexico City & et al. might well have mentioned,

{1} that FBI Chicago dumped me because I casually admitted to them that I told CIA agents I was also working with the FBI on Cuba, FPCC information.

{2} 1960 meeting, Chicago re; CIA plan for me to get money to sources inside Cuba.

{3} also withheld, reports of meetings with Los Angeles Bureau agents re; US, & Mexico City  connections. 1963

{4} others

15.  In February 2008, Harry was still circulating the same old b/s about himself “reporting” to and being officially connected to U.S. intelligence agencies:

“Many very important reports to the Feds. showing my connections are not displayed among the total 173 NARA one sided exposures. In brief, comparing any existing NARA and US. Intelligence records without viewing those still being withheld, create doubt and convince researchers to assume 'wrongly' my guilt, and involvement indicated by  incomplete reports presently existing re; my exacting past connections to Cuba, JFK, and US. Intelligence

16.  In his taped 2008 interview by author Dick Russell, Harry described himself as an “undercover operative, to inform the FBI as to certain activities.”

17.  In November 2008, Harry wrote again about the alleged “FBI request” for him to stay in FPCC:

“Re; FBI methods concerning me: After a fearfull year {at FBI request "to hang in there} and spy on "Castro's Network In The United States" from the inside, eg. The 26th Of July Movement, and The Fair Play For Cuba Committee 1960/1961.”

AND about what is "understood" within the intelligence community if he supposedly “exposed” his  “intelligence associations”:

 “It is understood, if one blabbs/exposes Intelligence associations, the dirt will hit the fan! As it did when in 1965 I blabbed/exposed information re; JFK details.”

18.  In May 2009, Harry answered a question by suggesting that he had access to classified intelligence information within FBI and CIA:

“Certainly whatever connections US. Communist Party had with Soviet KGB would be continued in their Fair Play for Cuba Committee activities. Most all US. Intel. and security agencies were urgently concerned with FPCC overall, and it is my knowledge FBI & CIA had infiltrated FPCC continent- wide.”

19.  In June 2009, Harry posted a message on the Deep Politics Forum website in which he again described himself as an “informant”: 

 “In the flow of events during my regular Intelligence/informant activities in 1962, I was made aware of the Conservarive (sic) Movement/John Birch Society and became a sincere member as did a great number of other Republicans.” 

20.  In March 2011, Harry again referred to intelligence agencies “requested” him to do something:  

“CIA as late as 1969, requested that I fly to Washington/New York to personally identify Cuba G2 agent Francisco 'Frank' Vega. FBI had me seeking out Alpha 66 leader's and other questionable Cuban groups & individuals in Los Angeles. I would no longer cooperate with either agency by mid 1965, nor they with me, except the 1969 CIA request, I had intentionly exposed some details via TV and radio to get out from that ever more dangerous existence. It worked. My thinking on the Vega Mexico Oswald, is that it should be researched.”

21. In September 2011, Harry referred to “orders” he received from “U.S. intelligence” because he was an “infiltration operative/informant”:

“U.S. Intelligence orders to me/we, who were infiltration operatives/informants were to never carry weapons even for personal survival, as in doing so, we could not/would not, be acknowledged by the federal agency with whom we were involved under such circumstance should we do so.”  

"Under certain such dangerous often deadly situation to be armed for defense naturally seemed urgent. I never disobeyed this warning. Though faced with death threats by the spied upon. Oswald did not! “  

22.  After Paul Trejo contacted Harry, Paul described Harry in August 2012 as follows.  I underline some key portions:

"Harry became a spy for the FBI at this point, and he used his undercover role to obtain the release of some US citizens from Cuban prisons (although Harry was unable to save them all). Harry Dean provided useful information to the FBI in those days.  In 1960, says Harry, the FBI gave him a further request -- to spy on the JBS (John Birch Society) in Southern California, and to send the FBI any seditionist information that he picked up. (By the way, we know the FBI had already spied on the JBS in 1959, because Hoover declared them Unamerican in 1959, and set a policy that no FBI agent could ever become a member of the JBS.)"

23.  Furthermore, PAUL TREJO wrote in April 2012 that:

"By 1962, Harry Dean had successfully completed a mission for the FBI as an undercover agent investigating and reporting on Fidel Castro in Cuba. Now, in 1963, Harry Dean was on a mission for the FBI as an undercover agent investigating and reporting on the John Birch Society in Southern California."  [my underlining for emphasis] 

24.  In February 2016, Harry inquired if I had found any records to support his contention that the FBI and/or CIA “arranged” a meeting with Harry after he returned from his Cuba trip:

“Lazar, Can you be kind enough to show either a FBI or CIA account of a meeting in Chicago as arranged by one of them in the 1960s requesting a meeting between them and Harry Dean upon his return from Cuba re; Cuba information just prior and including information on the US. invasion of Cuba and et al ? And or other such intelligence meetings by same?” 

When I replied by stating no such records exist, Harry again sought to convey the impression that he was routinely giving classified information to our intelligence agencies at their request:

“The meeting I mentioned above as requested by Intel contacts would, and I know you will agree, naturally have been recorded as would countless others we held in Chicago and Los Angeles. So it can be expected such reports will be released in 2017, or classified secret?”

25.  Also in February 2016, Harry again sought to convey the impression that he had some sort of “official” connection to our intelligence agencies – i.e. he was not merely occasionally providing unsolicited information but providing “official reports” – AND – Harry pretended that HE made a decision to “resign” from his official association with our intelligence agencies – because his “safety” was in jeopardy from the fact that he had exposed “many facts”.

“Paul T and Jon: It is not my aim to speak further on these subjects, just wanted to have Lazar's answer. It can be said that all official reports resulted 'after' I intentionally broke off all associations in 1965, both with FBI pro- and anti-Castro dealings. Several such FBI reports, as shown via Lazar are twisted, even untrue, which are expected and understood before my decision to resign and publicly expose many facts, done for personal and safety reasons.”

26.  In May 2016, Harry was still referring to his alleged “past relationship with U.S. intelligence 1960-1965…”

“At National Archives and Record Administration there are a total of 173 confusing, often erroneous references to me. They leave one wondering if most are ‘intentionally designed to sink me’ as to my past relationship with U.S. Intelligence 1960-1965, re; Cuba-JFK et al. Others of these documents are classified SECRET.”

27.  In September 2016, Harry was still  trying to get Education Forum readers to believe that he was a  “Chicago informant” who had a “connection” to the FBI when he wrote in reply to a message by Paul Trejo:  

“Paul, Lazar reported that my Chicago FBI informant records have been destroyed? Is it possible Los Angeles has done likewise? Bureau has exposed everything otherwise to deny and shoot down my connection with them only after I abruptly quit that fearful existence in 1965. What else can be expected, they still run the show.” 

28.  And when I replied to Harry’s message (above) by pointing out that he was NOT an FBI informant or undercover operative or political spy, Harry replied by asking everyone to STILL believe as unchanged “facts and truth” what he wrote in 1990 in his self-published memoir Crosstrails:

“Detailed facts and truth are found in the 1990 manuscript/Book titled CROSSTRAILS.”

29.  Harry has also REPEATEDLY written that he was a "political spy" for the FBI and in his 1966 flyer captioned "I Confess" Harry described himself as "an undercover informant to the FBI". 

ALL of these 29 examples reveal descriptive terms (such as: asked me, recruited by, requested, given the task of, spying for, undercover informant, political spy, doing assignments for, etc.) which have only one normal customary meaning in the context of contacts with the FBI or with intelligence agencies generally -- namely, that Harry was claiming he was an INFORMANT for U.S. intelligence agencies (FBI and CIA).

BY CONTRAST:  How many quotations can Paul Trejo cite where Harry has PUBLICLY acknowledged that everything summarized above was NOT a correct description because Harry was merely voluntarily providing UNSOLICITED information?   I have provided 29 (old and new).  Let's see how many Paul can provide us.

As I have previously pointed out numerous times, PAUL TREJO continually attempts to blame W.R. Morris for the fraudulent story which was created BY HARRY.  

As shown above, one can TOTALLY ignore EVERYTHING ever written by Morris and just QUOTE HARRY'S OWN COMMENTS to establish his dishonesty over the past 5 decades.

 

Edited February 17, 2017 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

Harry Dean's opinion about Sylvia Odio and her encounter with a Cuban, a Mexican and Lee Harvey Oswald on her front porch in Dallas during late September 1963, is the most rational explanation of all the options out there.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo 

[James DiEugenio]

In addition to ignoring all of Ernie's factual objections to Dean's story, your representation of the Odio incident--one of the most important episodes in the record--is inaccurate, based on naked assumption, and then used to bolster a view of Mexico City that is nothing but pure speculation.  How you can write that the Lopez Report was based upon FOIA is such a howler that no dog could duplicate it.

[Paul Trejo]

29 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

In addition to ignoring all of Ernie's factual objections to Dean's story, your representation of the Odio incident--one of the most important episodes in the record--is inaccurate, based on naked assumption, and then used to bolster a view of Mexico City that is nothing but pure speculation.  How you can write that the Lopez Report was based upon FOIA is such a howler that no dog could duplicate it.

James,

Ernie Lazar has presented rants against Harry Dean -- not factual objections.  Ernie has been doing this obsessively since 2010 -- for some bizarre reason.

As for your work, James, you have ignored the Lopez Report to your own peril.   It shows in your work. 

Regards,
--Paul Trejo