Ernie Lazar Posted February 17, 2017 Share Posted February 17, 2017 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said: 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 How can a list of quotations BY HARRY be characterized as "a rant"? Why don't you describe your own enabling and defense of Harry since 2010 as an "obsession"? Incidentally, JBS members/sympathizers also refer to my critiques of their false arguments as my "obsession" with the JBS. This is standard operating procedure by intellectual cowards. Edited February 17, 2017 by Ernie Lazar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Knight Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 Actually, had you taken the time to READ Mr. Lazar's post, you will find QUOTES FROM HARRY DEAN, as well as the source for each quote. If that constitutes "rants," then your definition is quite different from Webster's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 PT is resorting to his usual diversions In my book Reclaiming Parkland, in my chapter on Mexico City, there are 47 footnotes to the Lopez Report. I know the report very well as I have read it more than once. And I should alert the readers, Len Osanic now has the audio version of it for sale at BOR. IF you are taking a long trip, what better way to idle the time than listening to this report. As for Ernie's rants and raves, IMO, Ernie instead uses much factual information in his posts. And he is one of the most prolific FOIA clients there is. I mean anyone who can ignore that fact, and then say the Lopez Report was based upon FOIA--as Paul T did--does not know very much about FOIA or about the Lopez Report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Mileto Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 Here's that full audio book of the Lopez report, for free: https://www.dropbox.com/s/oqu24yfyb6humx8/HSCA_Oswald-the-CIA-and-Mexico-City_Our-Hidden-History.zip?dl=0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted February 21, 2017 Author Share Posted February 21, 2017 (edited) On 2/18/2017 at 11:12 PM, James DiEugenio said: PT is resorting to his usual diversions In my book Reclaiming Parkland, in my chapter on Mexico City, there are 47 footnotes to the Lopez Report. I know the report very well as I have read it more than once. And I should alert the readers, Len Osanic now has the audio version of it for sale at BOR. IF you are taking a long trip, what better way to idle the time than listening to this report. As for Ernie's rants and raves, IMO, Ernie instead uses much factual information in his posts. And he is one of the most prolific FOIA clients there is. I mean anyone who can ignore that fact, and then say the Lopez Report was based upon FOIA--as Paul T did--does not know very much about FOIA or about the Lopez Report. James, The important point is that the Lopez Report makes it crystal clear that Lee Harvey Oswald was undoubtedly in Mexico City's Cuban Consulate and USSR Embassy, attempting to get instant passage to Cuba in late September, 1963. Further, the Lopez Report makes it crystal clear that Lee Harvey Oswald undoubtedly presented as "credentials" his Fake Resumé attempting to "prove" that he was an officer of the FPCC (because FPCC officers got instant passage into Cuba). Further, the Lopez Report makes it crystal clear that the staff at the Cuban Consulate and the USSR Embassy unanimously rejected Oswald's pitiful "credentials" and thought, quite correctly, that Oswald was a provocateur attempting to infiltrate the Communist Party in Cuba. They denied him any passage to Cuba. They denied him any support from the USSR. Oswald was pitied as a pathetic figure. Oswald even took a loaded pistol to the USSR Embassy, and in further melodramatics, even cried real tears for them. They politely escorted him out of the building, recognizing his foolish behavior. Further, the Lopez Report correctly recognized that after all these melodramatic failures, on October 1, 1963, somebody who was not Lee Harvey Oswald chose to impersonate Oswald by using the heavily wire-tapped telephone between the Cuban Consulate and the USSR Embassy, asking for KGB agent, Valeriy Kostikov. The CIA knew within 15 minutes that this was an impersonation. As Bill Simpich (2014) showed, the CIA started a Mole Hunt at this point, to find the Impersonator. Except for the Simpich Mole Hunt, all of this important data is in the Lopez Report, James, and I find it to be conspicuously absent from your works. Regards, --Paul Trejo Edited February 21, 2017 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted February 21, 2017 Share Posted February 21, 2017 (edited) OMG, this is what you think is important about the Lopez Report? I wonder if you have read it. Because to this day, neither Danny nor Eddie will say for certain if Oswald was at either place. In fact, if you press Eddie for what he really thinks, he will tell you that no, he does not think it was Oswald. As per the stuff about his being in the Cuban consulate, the vast majority of witnesses say it was not him. And when Duran turned him away to get a photo, the FBI searched every passport photo shop within a five mile radius, no one recalled him coming in to get a picture. Not one photo taken of Oswald with at least ten entrances and exits. Think about that for a minute. At the beginning of the Lopez Report--if you read it, which I don't think you have--Eddie and Dan take a lot of time to show just how sensitive the cameras were at the Cuban consulate. They snapped photos when the air pressure changed at the front door!! So the idea they would miss anyone is simply off the wall. So what did Phillips do? He lied and said that the camera was out that day. Except Danny and Eddie found out this was not the case. So the question becomes: Why would Phillips lie about this? And several other matters, like the notice getting to Langley seven days after Oswald's alleged meeting with Kostikov. When in fact it should have been there within 48 hours. If you can show me where Danny and Eddie said that Oswald loaded up a pistol and took it to the Russian Embassy, I would like to see the page number on that. Because from my memory that is in Passport to Assassination, which I do not consider a very credible source, especially since I have learned some stuff about the guy behind the book. And BTW, when you say that one communication from Oswald to the Russian Embassy is phony, not true. There is a chart in the Lopez Report which shows that every communication by Oswald is false. Why did they fake these? The key point of the Lopez Report is simply this: Why, if Oswald did the things the CIA says he did, can they produce not one photo, not one tape of him doing it? The triumph of the Lopez Report is that they got so inside the CIA operations down there and showed that, by their own routines on data collection, the CIA should have had both. What were they hiding? And the bigger question is, why were they hiding it? And an even bigger point: How could the Warren Commission have fallen for such a pile of crap? Edited February 21, 2017 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Thomas Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 I'm just asking because I don't know. Harry Dean says that he knew Loran Hall and Larry Howard. Do they say that they knew him? Steve Thomas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted February 23, 2017 Author Share Posted February 23, 2017 (edited) On 2/21/2017 at 2:12 PM, James DiEugenio said: ...Not one photo taken of Oswald with at least ten entrances and exits. Think about that for a minute. At the beginning of the Lopez Report--if you read it, which I don't think you have--Eddie and Dan take a lot of time to show just how sensitive the cameras were at the Cuban consulate. They snapped photos when the air pressure changed at the front door!! So the idea they would miss anyone is simply off the wall. So what did Phillips do? He lied and said that the camera was out that day. Except Danny and Eddie found out this was not the case. So the question becomes: Why would Phillips lie about this? And several other matters, like the notice getting to Langley seven days after Oswald's alleged meeting with Kostikov. When in fact it should have been there within 48 hours. If you can show me where Danny and Eddie said that Oswald loaded up a pistol and took it to the Russian Embassy, I would like to see the page number on that. Because from my memory that is in Passport to Assassination, which I do not consider a very credible source, especially since I have learned some stuff about the guy behind the book. And BTW, when you say that one communication from Oswald to the Russian Embassy is phony, not true. There is a chart in the Lopez Report which shows that every communication by Oswald is false. Why did they fake these? The key point of the Lopez Report is simply this: Why, if Oswald did the things the CIA says he did, can they produce not one photo, not one tape of him doing it? The triumph of the Lopez Report is that they got so inside the CIA operations down there and showed that, by their own routines on data collection, the CIA should have had both. What were they hiding? And the bigger question is, why were they hiding it? And an even bigger point: How could the Warren Commission have fallen for such a pile of crap? James, You are entirely mistaken in your claim that, at the Mexico City consulates, "not one photo taken of Oswald with at least ten entrances and exits" Bill Simpich's superb eBook, State Secret: Wiretapping in Mexico City (2014) supplies the full explanation. Within 15 minutes of the Impersonation of Oswald at the telephone at the Cuban Consulate, calling the USSR Embassy and asking about KGB agent Valeriy Kostikov, the CIA chiefs knew that it was an Impersonation. There was a Mole! Therefore, they changed Oswald's 201 File, removing all the photographs, and placing a Fake photo in there of some large Russian dude. Also, they changed the middle name of Oswald to HENRY, and other secret changes. This was intended to catch the Mole. It was great that the Lopez Report came out in 2003 -- but of equal importance to history was when Bill Simpich published his eBook in 2014, with all those FOIA releases of CIA documents. Brilliant work. Why did the CIA lie? Because there was a MOLE in the CIA, that's why! Lee Harvey Oswald was in Mexico City, trying hard to get an instant visa into Cuba, based on his FPCC "credentials" that he brought from New Orleans, at 544 Camp Street, sent by Guy Banister. The consuls in Mexico City felt disgust and pity for the pathetic Lee Harvey Oswald -- a sad sack if they ever saw one. Regards, --Paul Trejo Edited February 23, 2017 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted February 24, 2017 Author Share Posted February 24, 2017 (edited) On 2/21/2017 at 2:12 PM, James DiEugenio said: OMG, this is what you think is important about the Lopez Report? I wonder if you have read it. Because to this day, neither Danny nor Eddie will say for certain if Oswald was at either place. In fact, if you press Eddie for what he really thinks, he will tell you that no, he does not think it was Oswald. As per the stuff about his being in the Cuban consulate, the vast majority of witnesses say it was not him. And when Duran turned him away to get a photo, the FBI searched every passport photo shop within a five mile radius, no one recalled him coming in to get a picture... James, Yes, this is what I think is important in the Lopez Report -- that Lee Harvey Oswald was undoubtedly in Mexico City's Cuban Consulate and USSR Embassy, attempting to get instant passage to Cuba in late September, 1963. The Lopez Report actually reproduces the Fake "credentials" that Oswald brought from Guy Banister in New Orleans, attempting to "prove" that he was an officer of the FPCC (because FPCC officers got instant passage into Cuba). But don't take my word for it. Let's read it from HSCA attaché Edwin Lopez himself: Lee Harvey Oswald himself probably visited the Cuban Consulate at least once since his application for a Cuban in-transit visa bears his signature. (Lopez Report, p. 242) So -- we have your word, James, that Edwin Lopez will tell us , "no, he does not think it was Oswald," or we can take the word of Edwin Lopez himself, in his written text. Lopez further remarks that Sylvia Duran herself testified that she saw Oswald write that signature in her presence. The Lopez Report further describes the arguments that Oswald had, bickering with the Cuban consuls who refused to accept these stupid "credentials." At the USSR Embassy, Oswald took a loaded pistol -- then, when they took it from him, removed the bullets and gave it back to him, Oswald cried crocodile tears. Very likely Oswald was banking on the fact that he was able to enter the USSR in 1959 with similar melodrama -- except in 1959 he actually cut his wrist. The key is that the CIA knew on October 1, 1963, that the caller from the Cuban Consulate telephone to the USSR Embassy claiming to be Oswald and asking for KGB agent Valeriy Kostikov, was not Oswald. They knew this within 15 minutes of that phone call. The complicated fact is that Oswald really did visit Mexico City in late September 1963, and also Oswald really was impersonated (over telephone) in Mexico City in early October 1963. CTers who use Either/Or logic argue -- Either Oswald was in Mexico City or Oswald was Impersonated -- you can't have both! Actually, we do have both. Regards, --Paul Trejo Edited February 24, 2017 by Paul Trejo typos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted March 10, 2017 Author Share Posted March 10, 2017 On 11/30/2016 at 10:50 AM, Mark Knight said: I still don't see it. IF the folks of JURE managed to get Oswald into Cuba, how is this yanqui' who speaks English and Russian, but LITTLE TO NO SPANISH, going to keep from drawing attention to himself in Cuba? I'm trying to connect the dots, and they just aren't there. Mark, Well, Harry Dean got himself into Cuba -- specifically as an officer of the FPCC. He even met Fidel Castro for a few moments. And Harry Dean speaks almost no Spanish. The truth is that Fidel Castro spoke some English, and many of his officers spoke some English, too. If a person was valuable to the FPCC, they could get into Cuba. It was not only possible, but very likely. But they had to KNOW SOMEBODY. This is what Lee Oswald lacked in his resume of fake news claiming he was an FPCC officer. Regards, --Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted March 10, 2017 Author Share Posted March 10, 2017 On 2/22/2017 at 8:35 AM, Steve Thomas said: I'm just asking because I don't know. Harry Dean says that he knew Loran Hall and Larry Howard. Do they say that they knew him? Steve Thomas Steve, To the best of my knowledge, Loran Hall never mentioned Harry Dean. Neither did Larry Howard. Of course, Larry Howard refused to speak with almost everybody. He was not a talker. Loran Hall, when he was younger, was a big-mouth, and spoke to everybody. He didn't mention Harry Dean, however, almost certainly because in the mind of Loran Hall, the fund-raiser Harry Dean was nobody special. Loran Hall was interested in fighters -- people who would take rifles into combat against forces in Cuba. Loran Hall ran side-by-side with Gerry Patrick Hemming in Cuba on the side of Fidel Castro and Che Guevara in the early days in 1959. (At this time, Harry Dean was raising funds for the 26th of July Movement in Chicago. He raised a lot of money, and Fidel appreciated that, but it was not the same as fighting in the trenches with a rifle.) Later, when Fidel showed his Communist colors by 1961, Loran Hall, Gerry Patrick Hemming, Frank Sturgis, Larry Howard and Harry Dean -- and hundreds of others -- all switched sides. Now they were against Fidel Castro. Again, however, Loran Hall was interested in fighters. Loran Hall himself was reduced to gun running, and making political speeches to raise money for Interpen, La Sambra and other Cuban Raid groups in 1962. This is when he met Harry Dean. They had a mutual friend -- famed WW2 war hero Gabby Gabaldon. Loran Hall looked up to Gabby as a hero. Harry Dean was good buddies with Gabby as a peer. Gabby once ran for California Congressman, and he asked Harry Dean to run his campaign. Harry could have done a good job at it -- he was once Secretary for the FPCC, but Harry didn't want to do that anymore, so Harry advised Gabby to select Loran Hall to run the campaign. Gabby selected Loran Hall, and Loran Hall ran the campaign into the ground. Gabby lost badly. Loran Hall didn't think of Harry Dean as a fighter -- and probably thought of him as a gopher -- that is, Harry Dean would go out into the streets of Los Angeles and speak to members of the John Birch Society and collect donations -- weapons, bullets, medicines, cash, anything -- for the Cuba Raid fighters in Miami and New Orleans. Then, Harry Dean would store it in his garage, and when Loran Hall and Larry Howard came by, Harry would help them load up their trailer with it. So -- it seems to me that Loran Hall would not have remembered Harry Dean as a "comrade in arms". Larry Howard was a simpler person. Larry Howard was closer to Harry Dean, actually -- they would spend time together. However, Larry Howard was not the most talkative person in the world. I can't find any comments by Harry Dean or Larry Howard about Harry Dean. Yet I can't find any about Gabby Gabaldon, either. And when Gabby Gabaldon speaks about his own Cuba Raid group, he never mentions any of the members by name. It was against the law, at one point. Regards, --Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie Lazar Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, Paul Trejo said: Steve, To the best of my knowledge, Loran Hall never mentioned Harry Dean. Neither did Larry Howard. Of course, Larry Howard refused to speak with almost everybody. He was not a talker. Loran Hall, when he was younger, was a big-mouth, and spoke to everybody. He didn't mention Harry Dean, however, almost certainly because in the mind of Loran Hall, the fund-raiser Harry Dean was nobody special. Loran Hall was interested in fighters -- people who would take rifles into combat against forces in Cuba. Loran Hall ran side-by-side with Gerry Patrick Hemming in Cuba on the side of Fidel Castro and Che Guevara in the early days in 1959. (At this time, Harry Dean was raising funds for the 26th of July Movement in Chicago. He raised a lot of money, and Fidel appreciated that, but it was not the same as fighting in the trenches with a rifle.) Later, when Fidel showed his Communist colors by 1961, Loran Hall, Gerry Patrick Hemming, Frank Sturgis, Larry Howard and Harry Dean -- and hundreds of others -- all switched sides. Now they were against Fidel Castro. Again, however, Loran Hall was interested in fighters. Loran Hall himself was reduced to gun running, and making political speeches to raise money for Interpen, La Sambra and other Cuban Raid groups in 1962. This is when he met Harry Dean. They had a mutual friend -- famed WW2 war hero Gabby Gabaldon. Loran Hall looked up to Gabby as a hero. Harry Dean was good buddies with Gabby as a peer. Gabby once ran for California Congressman, and he asked Harry Dean to run his campaign. Harry could have done a good job at it -- he was once Secretary for the FPCC, but Harry didn't want to do that anymore, so Harry advised Gabby to select Loran Hall to run the campaign. Gabby selected Loran Hall, and Loran Hall ran the campaign into the ground. Gabby lost badly. Loran Hall didn't think of Harry Dean as a fighter -- and probably thought of him as a gopher -- that is, Harry Dean would go out into the streets of Los Angeles and speak to members of the John Birch Society and collect donations -- weapons, bullets, medicines, cash, anything -- for the Cuba Raid fighters in Miami and New Orleans. Then, Harry Dean would store it in his garage, and when Loran Hall and Larry Howard came by, Harry would help them load up their trailer with it. So -- it seems to me that Loran Hall would not have remembered Harry Dean as a "comrade in arms". Larry Howard was a simpler person. Larry Howard was closer to Harry Dean, actually -- they would spend time together. However, Larry Howard was not the most talkative person in the world. I can't find any comments by Harry Dean or Larry Howard about Harry Dean. Yet I can't find any about Gabby Gabaldon, either. And when Gabby Gabaldon speaks about his own Cuba Raid group, he never mentions any of the members by name. It was against the law, at one point. Regards, --Paul Trejo Very strange comment by Paul re: whether or not Loran Hall and Larry Howard ever "mentioned Harry Dean" considering that as far back as September 2012, Paul wrote: "According to Harry Dean's manuscript, Crosstrails (2001), in September 1963 he attended a John Birch Society meeting in Southern California along with ex-General Edwin Walker, Congressman John Rousselot, war-hero Guy Gabaldon, Loran Hall, Lawrence Howard and others, to discuss how to make Lee Harvey Oswald their patsy in a plot to assassinate JFK." and then in November 2012, Paul wrote: "Harry claims that he met Loran Hall and Larry Howard in late 1962 in connection with anti-Castro propaganda, and that after meeting them Harry was invited to become a member of the Southern California Minutemen. He joined, and this increased his value in the eyes of the most radical members of the JBS. This plausibly explains why he was invited to this top-secret meeting led by Congressman John Rousselot and ex-General Edwin Walker." and in June 2013, Paul wrote: "I can vouch for the fact that Harry Dean is an articulate and friendly fellow, and he also loved Southern California, his new home in 1960. As a member of the John Birch Society (and the Minutemen) Harry Dean was delighted to make friends with Guy Gabaldon, Loran (Lorenzo) Hall and Larry (Alonzo) Howard. It is based on Harry's friendship with these men that Harry was allowed into the inner circle, the exclusive and secret "RID" organization of the John Birch Society, and told about the plot to kill JFK and make Lee Harvey Oswald into the scapegoat for the crime." AND HARRY DEAN WROTE A LETTER TO FBI-Los Angeles in December 1964 wherein Dean reported a phone conversation he had with Larry Howard about Loran Hall: "In the phone conversation Howard stated to me that Hall was always a chronic l-i-a-r, in every case, a person who talked to (sic) much, ‘a big mouth’, and that Hall had harmed the operations of several anti-Castro groups and Howard as well, that Hall since leaving the Castro forces in Cuba in 1959 had returned to the U.S. and became an opportunist, who wished to cash in on his past adventure, to become a ledgend (sic), at the expence (sic) of anyone and everyone. Howard seemed to want me to see Hall in a bad light as Howard stated that Hall had said something unfavorable about me and had had me investigated by anti-Communist members." So--contrary to what Paul Trejo wrote, (i.e. "To the best of my knowledge, Loran Hall never mentioned Harry Dean. Neither did Larry Howard") we know (1) that Loran Hall made "unfavorable" comments about Harry Dean and (2) Harry was recommended for membership in the "inner circle" of the JBS by Howard and Hall (and Galbadon) and (3) Harry attended meetings with Loran Hall and Larry Howard -- so one might think they had something to say about someone in their "inner circle" who was familiar with the alleged JFK murder plot. Edited March 10, 2017 by Ernie Lazar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted March 31, 2017 Author Share Posted March 31, 2017 (edited) Steve, Ernie's argument that Loran Hall said that he knew Harry Dean only comes from Harry Dean himself, in Harry's memo to the FBI. Not a strong position -- since Ernie also tends to dismiss Harry's FBI reports anyway. Nevertheless -- if we do accept that much, that only shows that Harry Dean did know Loran Hall and Larry Howard -- well enough to complain about them. Loran Hall would move military supplies -- including medicine -- to Cuba Raiders in Miami and New Orleans -- and he would use the medicine on the side to make extra money -- and even got hooked himself. He was scary. But did Loran Hall say anything PUBLIC about Harry Dean? I have no evidence that he did. Ernie's example only suggests that Loran Hall said something unfavorable about Harry to their mutual acquaintance, Larry Howard. There is another route for verification, however, namely, Guy (Gabby) Gabaldon -- a famous WW2 hero, of whom a movie was made (Hell to Eternity, 1960) and who wrote a book: Saipain: Suicide Island (1965). He died in 2006, but his children live on. Harry Dean says that he met Loran Hall and Larry Howard through Guy Gabaldon, and that Loran and Larry worshipped the ground that Gabby walked on. I've tried to talk to his children, but they didn't respond to my efforts. Maybe somebody else would have better luck. Regards, --Paul Trejo Edited March 31, 2017 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie Lazar Posted March 31, 2017 Share Posted March 31, 2017 53 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said: Steve, Ernie's argument that Loran Hall said that he knew Harry Dean only comes from Harry Dean himself, in Harry's memo to the FBI. Not a strong position -- since Ernie also tends to dismiss Harry's FBI reports anyway. Nevertheless -- if we do accept that much, that only shows that Harry Dean did know Loran Hall and Larry Howard -- well enough to complain about them. Loran Hall would move military supplies -- including medicine -- to Cuba Raiders in Miami and New Orleans -- and he would use the medicine on the side to make extra money -- and even got hooked himself. He was scary. But did Loran Hall say anything PUBLIC about Harry Dean? I have no evidence that he did. Ernie's example only suggests that Loran Hall said something unfavorable about Harry to their mutual acquaintance, Larry Howard. There is another route for verification, however, namely, Guy (Gabby) Gabaldon -- a famous WW2 hero, of whom a movie was made (Hell to Eternity, 1960) and who wrote a book: Saipain: Suicide Island (1965). He died in 2006, but his children live on. Harry Dean says that he met Loran Hall and Larry Howard through Guy Gabaldon, and that Loran and Larry worshipped the ground that Gabby walked on. I've tried to talk to his children, but they didn't respond to my efforts. Maybe somebody else would have better luck. Regards, --Paul Trejo 1. It is not "Ernie's argument". It is what Harry Dean has said/written for many years and which YOU repeated in messages on EF and in your Ebook as accurate and truthful. Since when do you EVER dispute or express skepticism about what Harry has told you? 2. However -- in this case (as in virtually everything Harry says or writes) there is no independent confirmation available. 3. Given that you recently posted a message in the "New Book" thread here on EF stating that you were planning to apply for a grant in order to pursue "Harry Dean Research" -- this is a good example of how totally pointless it would be to give you any "research" money to pursue Harry's story, because there is nobody alive left to "research" and there is no paper trail which can be pursued either. Every possible avenue which a normal competent researcher might think about pursuing is a dead-end when you confront Harry's story. For example: (a) Walker, Rousselot, Welch, Galbadon, Howard, Hall -- are all dead. (b) The FBI files on all those guys have already been requested and released decades ago. (c) There are no personal papers archived at some institution donated by Rousselot, Galbadon, Howard, or Hall. You claim that you have already reviewed Walker's papers at University of Texas---but there is nothing in those papers about Harry Dean. (d) Welch's papers are controlled by the JBS but the JBS does not allow outside independent researchers to have access to them. There are personal papers of major JBS figures (such as National Council members) at various colleges, universities and at other places -- but none of their finding aids include anything pertaining to Harry Dean or Galbadon or any "JBS plot" and there is not even much material pertaining to Walker in those papers. So---unless you come up with something totally new that nobody else has ever even thought about -- there is no avenue left for "research" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted March 31, 2017 Author Share Posted March 31, 2017 Ernie, The children of Loran Hall, Larry Howard and Guy Gabaldon are still alive. Just in case they know anything from their parents, they would be interesting witnesses to US History. Regards, --Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now