Jason Ward Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 (edited) 8 hours ago, Paul Trejo said: ... Harry had raised thousands of dollars back in 1960 for Fidel Castro, who then made Harry an honorary member of The 26th of July Movement, and then into the Chicago Secretary for the FPCC. Harry also organized donations collections from John Birch Society members ... Paul, So Harry Dean was friendly with both the revolutionary Left --- and the reactionaries? It takes a special personality to rail against the injustices of capitalism on Tuesday only to rail against the injustices of communism on Wednesday. Harry Dean has a striking dichotomy of friends. Someone else attached to this case has a similar blueprint of social connections; oh yeah, I remember now. Some guy named Lee Harvey Oswald is friends with both the ultra right wingers like Banister, but also friendly with the pro-Castro types. It's so strange that Oswald is connected to Birchers like Carlos Bringuier, but also maintains a friendly relationship with the CPUSA and the FPCC, is it not? Why do you think Oswald has General Walker's personal phone number in his address book? An eclectic group of friends.... ps - I got called in to work today and only just now got home. I'll do a little Gabaldon work tonight and post the best of what I find. Edited November 19, 2017 by Jason Ward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie Lazar Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 (edited) 48 minutes ago, Jason Ward said: Paul, So Harry Dean was friendly with both the revolutionary Left --- and the reactionaries? It takes a special personality to rail against the injustices of capitalism on Tuesday only to rail against the injustices of communism on Wednesday. Harry Dean has a striking dichotomy of friends. Someone else attached to this case has a similar blueprint of social connections; oh yeah, I remember now. Some guy named Lee Harvey Oswald is friends with both the ultra right wingers like Banister, but also friendly with the pro-Castro types. It's so strange that Oswald is connected to Birchers like Carlos Bringuier, but also maintains a friendly relationship it the CPUSA and the FPCC, is it not? Why do you think Oswald has General Walker's personal phone number in his address book? An eclectic group of friends.... ps - I got called in to work today and only just now got home. I'll do a little Gabaldon work tonight and post the best of what I find. One of the more fascinating questions to consider is this: Why is it not uncommon for a radical left individual to move across the ideological street and become attracted to (or endorse) extreme right individuals and organizations BUT the reverse (radical rightist becoming a radical leftist) is very rare? As I've mentioned previously, radicals of any persuasion seem to have an intellectual fever so it makes total sense to me why a extreme left adherent might later take a short walk across the ideological street to become an adherent of the extreme right -- because both perspectives appeal to the defective internal psychological and intellectual mechanisms which produce political extremists. In other words, the mental processes which originally produced an adherent of the CPUSA or the Socialist Workers Party or any similar radical-left organizations OR (as in Harry Dean's case), mental processes which resulted in him joining a pro-Castro group) don't just disappear AFTER they become disgruntled and then decide to leave those groups. Many scholars have commented upon the various reasons which cause social or political activism. Sometimes it is as simple as being bored---and wanting to do something and be involved with people who have clear goals and objectives. Sometimes it is just the excitement and the notion that your participation actually will help change conditions which you want to improve. Sometimes the idea is to restore and resurrect what a person considers a previous "golden age" -- when life was simpler or when people did not (supposedly) need to cope with onerous laws and regulations OR when caucasian Americans were in charge of everything that mattered in our country. I'm sure everyone here has read about former members of white supremacy groups (such as Aryan Nations or KKK) or neo-nazi groups who subsequently recant their bigotry. And there are members of ISIS and Al Qaeda who have defected and now attempt to encourage other radicals to leave those groups. But I can't think of many radical leftists who subsequently became a member or leader of the KKK or Aryan Nations or some neo-fascist Hitler-admiring group. By contrast, there are NUMEROUS examples of extreme rightists associated with, or members of, groups like the John Birch Society who subsequently associated themselves with Hitler-admirers. In fact, many neo-nazis in our country started out as JBS members -- but they regarded the JBS as only their "grade school" education so they then moved on to even more extreme viewpoints and activities. [Note: American Nazi Party founder George Lincoln Rockwell, worked for relatively mainstream right-wing groups after he left military service AND Rockwell wrote in his autobiography about his strong affection and admiration for people like Gen. Douglas MacArthur and Sen. Joseph McCarthy.] Edited November 19, 2017 by Ernie Lazar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 (edited) Castro, as the history now reads, went from right to left. It seems pretty clear to me that Castro, after taking down Batista, saw that he could not have a free and independent Cuba. Nixon, the mob and the Navy wanted their casinos, perks and Guantanamo, in perpetuity, and he did not accept that. His experience forced him away from imperial domination by the US and the criminal destruction of his independent country by the mafia. I get the feeling that Nixon made him nautious with his expectations. Was Castro truly a Communist? I don't think so. He found out that he and his country were going to be truly and wholly owned, and that was an unpalpable proposition. .... yes, I just made-up the word "unpalpable"; oriented to the word "palpable", and distinguished from the word "impalpable". I am an English major, I take such license on occasion. I hope you find it amusing, appropriate, interesting, acceptable; or the opposite of all of those. I just hope that you didn't miss it. Edited November 19, 2017 by Michael Clark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Ward Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 (edited) 20 hours ago, Paul Trejo said: Jason, I can't tell if this is an FBI document, a CIA document, or what SOURCE -- or what DATE. Please advise. I realize it is post-Assassination -- but the DATE is important. I assume it is CIA, but I could be mistaken. I regard it as BLOCKBUSTER, if it helps to connect Guy Gabaldon with the CIA in Mexico City Sep-Oct 1963, when Oswald was there. Please advise. Regards, --Paul Trejo Alright, Paul, you may have convinced me there is something possibly blockbuster in this. Because of their immense, repetitive and generally disorganized ways, two of our largest and least audited government agencies in1963 (the FBI and CIA) frequently toss around the same kernal of information repeatedly, repackaged a dozen or more times as staff send memos back and forth between themselves. The tidbit from the CIA cable I posted above about Gabaldon and an unnamed source "80%" certain the commies killed Kennedy acts as a marker I've been able to trace through 20+ documents spanning about two decades. I think I've located the original, unedited rough report from a local Mexico City CIA operative; probably that he turned into his boss, who in turn gave it to Winston Scott, who in turn edited it for transmission to Langley (which is the version I posted above). It's always essential to find the original raw intelligence report so that we can filter out the superfluous bureaucratic efforts of staffers, analysts, and paper pushers who like to mix and match intelligence reports into something they imagine is more comprehensive or useful. 20 hours ago, Paul Trejo said: I regard it as BLOCKBUSTER, if it helps to connect Guy Gabaldon with the CIA in Mexico City Sep-Oct 1963, when Oswald was there. Please advise. Here's the potentially explosive part: remember Gilberto Alvarado, the guy almost immediately discredited who initially comes forward to say he saw and heard Oswald taking big cash from some Cuban in Mexico City to kill Kennedy? Alvarado is either the source of the Gabaldon reference or is outright connected to Gabaldon according to documented evidence I've seen today. Likely both. Get it? Alvarado is a hired provocateur of Gabaldon. Chew on that for awhile! Jason {have to be with the family tonight - I may get some time later to post more. I like to verify this 2 or 3 different ways before we call this a secure find.) Edited November 19, 2017 by Jason Ward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie Lazar Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 8 minutes ago, Michael Clark said: Castro, as the history now reads, went from right to left. It seems pretty clear to me that Castro, after taking down Batista, saw that he could not have a free and independent Cuba. Nixon, the mob and the Navy wanted their casinos, perks and Guantanamo, in perpetuity. So he said "no way!". His experience forced him away from imperial domination by the US and the criminal destruction of his independent country by the mafia. I get the feeling that Nixon made him nautious with his expectations. Was Castro truly a Communist? I don't think so. He found out that he and his country were going to be truly and wholly owned, and that was an unpalpable proposition. .... yes, I just made-up the word "unpalpable"; oriented to the word "palpable", and distinguished from the word "impalpable". I am an English major, I take such license on occasion. I hope you find it amusing, appropriate, interesting, acceptable; or the opposite of all of those. I just hope that you didn't miss it. Never heard anything about Castro being right-wing. I think he was always a Communist! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 2 minutes ago, Jason Ward said: Alright, Paul, you may have convinced me there is something possibly blockbuster in this. Because of their immense, repetitive and generally disorganized ways, two of our largest and least audited government agencies in1963 (the FBI and CIA) frequently toss around the same kernal of information repeatedly, repackaged a dozen or more times as staff send memos back and forth between themselves. The tidbit from the CIA cable I posted above about Gabaldon and an unnamed source "80%" certain the commies killed Kennedy acts as a marker I've been able to trace through 20+ documents spanning about two decades. I think I've located the original, unedited rough report from a local Mexico City CIA operative; probably that he turned into his boss, who in turn gave it to Winston Scott, who in turn edited it for transmission to Langley (which is the version I posted above). It's always essential to find the original raw intelligence report so that we can filter out the superfluous bureaucratic efforts of staffers, analysts, and paper pushers who like to mix and match intelligence reports into something they imagine is more comprehensive or useful. Here's the potentially explosive part: remember Gilberto Alvarado, the guy almost immediately discredited who initially comes forward to say he saw and heard Oswald taking big cash from some Cuban in Mexico City to kill Kennedy? Alvarado is either the source of the Gabaldon reference or is outright connected to Gabaldon according to documented evidence I've seen today. Get it? Alvarado is a hired provocateur of Gabaldon. Chew on that for awhile! Jason {have to be with the family tonight - I may get some time later to post more. I like to verify this 2 or 3 different ways before we call this a secure find.) Waiting for the "blockbuster" from Trejo-and-Ward.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 1 minute ago, Ernie Lazar said: Never heard anything about Castro being right-wing. I think he was always a Communist! Ouch.... I'll have to read-up. I thought our side wanted Batista out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie Lazar Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 Just now, Michael Clark said: Ouch.... I'll have to read-up. I thought our side wanted Batista out. "Our side" may not have been all that thrilled with Batista but I am not aware that Castro ever supported Batista. [Interestingly one former State Dept official -- Ambassador Spruille Braden -- later became a John Birch Society member. During his State Dept service Braden wrote a scathing report about Batista -- but the JBS never bothered to point that out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Ernie Lazar said: "Our side" may not have been all that thrilled with Batista but I am not aware that Castro ever supported Batista. [Interestingly one former State Dept official -- Ambassador Spruille Braden -- later became a John Birch Society member. During his State Dept service Braden wrote a scathing report about Batista -- but the JBS never bothered to point that out. Ernie, I didn't mean to suggest that Castro supported Batista. I thought that Batista's corrupt, royalistic lifestyle and desire for his reliance upon his personal dignity and authority were what ran him afoul of interests in the US. I also thought that Castro was deemed to be a better option, but that he was not considered to be a candidate for becoming a Soviet-Block member. *** poorly worded, and I am poorly prepared for a debate with Ernie on this... Edited November 19, 2017 by Michael Clark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie Lazar Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Michael Clark said: Ernie, I didn't mean to suggest that Castro supported Batista. I thought that Batista's corrupt, royalistic lifestyle and desire for his personal dignity and authority were what ran him afoul of interests in the US. I also thought that Castro was deemed to be a better option, but that he was not considered to be a candidate for becoming a Soviet-Block member. Ya--if memory serves me correctly, there is an early article in the New York Times which described Castro as a democratic reformer and the "George Washington" of Cuba. Our corporate interests certainly supported Batista (along with other dictators in Central and South America). Oh--btw, the former head of the Cuban Air Force under Castro (Pedro Luiz Diaz Lanz) defected to the U.S. and he also became a JBS member and paid JBS speaker.] Edited November 19, 2017 by Ernie Lazar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Ward Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 20 hours ago, Paul Trejo said: Paul B., Jason has just posted a blockbuster -- as I read it -- a recent CIA memo from Mexico City with the "Gabaldon" name in it. I'm speechless again. It will take me some time to respond. Regards, --Paul Trejo 'another American' ... hmmm ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 8 minutes ago, Ernie Lazar said: Ya--if memory serves me correctly, there is an early article in the New York Times which described Castro as a democratic reformer and the "George Washington" of Cuba. Our corporate interests certainly supported Batista (along with other dictators in Central and South America). Oh--btw, the former head of the Cuban Air Force under Castro (Pedro Luiz Diaz Lanz) defected to the U.S. and he also became a JBS member and paid JBS speaker.] Ernie, as an aside, I don't recall you mentioning the Mafia, or Mob-interests all that much. Is that an accurate observation? If so, is there a reason for that? thanks, Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 10 minutes ago, Ernie Lazar said: Ya--if memory serves me correctly, there is an early article in the New York Times which described Castro as a democratic reformer and the "George Washington" of Cuba. Ernie, I think I get your point, tongue-in-cheek, as I perceive it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie Lazar Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 24 minutes ago, Michael Clark said: Ernie, as an aside, I don't recall you mentioning the Mafia, or Mob-interests all that much. Is that an accurate observation? If so, is there a reason for that? thanks, Michael If you mean Mafia interests in Cuba -- I know they were involved in the casinos but not sure how much they were involved with the corporate interests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Brancato Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 37 minutes ago, Jason Ward said: 'another American' ... hmmm ... Reading with interest. Let's not forget David Phillips - he promoted Alvarado's bogus stories. 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