Harry Dean: Memoirs

[John Dolva]

How can I Ernie, I'm australian.

Thta aside. So, the docs exist because they have been previously released in a FOI thing to someone. Maybe the collector/fan or that person found them somewhere else. I can't find them. Of course I've tried the ref #'s but again only get two hits; being that site. There is another that talks of the matter and mentions a general, but that's it. Anyway. re this matter it's my word on it.. Besides it was interesting to read the doc's and the story. The topic was a bit fun too.

I certainly agre with Ernie re Walker being honest. His whole life was a sham. One could argue conditions made it so but that doesn't change the fact it was. In fact considering the FBI's (and others) evaluation; it made no impact on his career. Why is that? Considering that the FBI are so ready and keen to mess with peoples lives.

[Ernie Lazar]

How can I Ernie, I'm australian.

Thta aside. So, the docs exist because they have been previously released in a FOI thing to someone. Maybe the collector/fan or that person found them somewhere else. I can't find them. Of course I've tried the ref #'s but again only get two hits; being that site. There is another that talks of the matter and mentions a general, but that's it. Anyway. re this matter it's my word on it.. Besides it was interesting to read the doc's and the story. The topic was a bit fun too.

I certainly agre with Ernie re Walker being honest. His whole life was a sham. One could argue conditions made it so but that doesn't change the fact it was. In fact considering the FBI's (and others) evaluation; it made no impact on his career. Why is that? Considering that the FBI are so ready and keen to mess with peoples lives.

Well, perhaps you could get a friend in the U.S. to request it and then send it to you. I noticed that somebody by the name of Darryl Blankenship is shown on the FBI's 2002 FOIA log as having requested the file and he was sent pre-processed material -- meaning that somebody before him also received it. The FOIA # assigned to Darryl's request was #968498.

Also noticed a posting by someone who made this comment:

The FBI has at least 5 files that contain information about MAD magazine. File 43-13592 is information concerning unauthorized use of the Bureau's name, file 62-55169 contains letters from citizens enclosing copies of comic strips with sensitive, derogatory or not appropriate for reading by children, etc., and file 62-106572 contains letters from citizens about MAD. The other two are 62-0-58624 and 62-0-59876. The FBI refers to their files as "bufiles" which is short for Bureau Files. Some point after January 1961 the FBI reclassified their other files with MAD information to bufile 62-106572. If the FBI sent a letter back to the individual it was referred to as a "bulet" which is a Bureau Letter.

[Paul Trejo]

...I certainly agre with Ernie re Walker being honest. His whole life was a sham. One could argue conditions made it so but that doesn't change the fact it was. In fact considering the FBI's (and others) evaluation; it made no impact on his career. Why is that? Considering that the FBI are so ready and keen to mess with peoples lives.

Well, John, the complexity of Ex-General Edwin Walker is somewhat amazing. Yes, he was a homosexual in the closet even as he rose to the rank of Major General in the US Army (1931-1961) at a time when it was an instant court-martial offense to be homosexual in the US Army.

Yes, he lied to the Mississippi Grand Jury, and claimed that he was at Ole Miss on the night of the race riots there in order to "keep the peace,"

Yes, he lied to the Warren Comission when he claimed that he never heard of Lee Harvey Oswald until the JFK assassination. Even H.L. Hunt's butler told Dick Russell (TMWKTM) that he overheard Hunt and Walker talking about Lee Harvey Oswald in the weeks before the JFK assassination.

We must remember, however, that there are extenuating circumstances.

First, we must remember the Clyde Watts was at Walker's side before the Mississippi Grand Jury and before the Warren Commission. Watts had to fight Walker continually to keep Walker from being candid. This is very clear in the Grand Jury transcripts, when Walker obviously gets excited and joyful when describing the race riot and all the wonderful things that the kids did to the US marshals. Watts interrupts Walker often -- that's my reading of it.

The same was true, by the way, during the early 1962 Hearings of the Senate Subcommittee on Military Preparedness by Senators John Stennis and Strom Thurmond, who set this up to defend Ex-General Walker from the stigma of being dismissed from his Augsburg post in 1961. Walker showed then and there that he was a loose cannon and would say the wackiest things -- unless Clyde Watts stopped him and advised him continually.

Walker was being groomed by H.L. Hunt, Dixiecrat Senators, the White Citizens' Councils, NIC, Kent Courtney, Phoebe Courtney, Robert A. Surrey, Robert DePugh and the John Birch Society. Even if Walker didn't have much of a chance in politics (which was unclear from late 1961 through early 1962 when Walker was getting headlines) Walker was still useful as a tool to manipulate public opinion on a nationwide scale (especially in the South) in those years.

Yet again -- Walker was a loose cannon when he wasn't being tightly controlled by his lawyers. Walker was not very well educated -- but he was as shrewd as a jungle tiger. He had powerful instincts and when he moved into action, even his handlers could not stop him.

The story that Kelly Brown tells about Edwin Walker -- that Walker expected a nationwide race riot to tear the USA apart and give the US Military total dictatorial powers forever -- this is plausible in my opinion, given the fact that in just a few more months Walker would buy radio and TV time to call for "ten thousand strong from every state in the Union" to join him in a massive racial showdown at Ole Miss in Oxford, Mississippi in late September 1962.

It seems to me that Walker bet the farm that the national race riot that he predicted would begin at Ole Miss and carry him to power as a newly restored General of the US Military Dictatorship controlled from the Deep South.

Some might call Walker a looney toon and ridicule him for his nerve in suing MAD Magazine. But if he had been correct about a race war -- or if JFK and RFK had backed down -- we might actually be living in a very different America today.

IMHO, the race riot at Ole Miss in 1962 is one of the key moments of US history in the 20th century. There is film about the riots existing at NARA -- but sealed under FOIA "exceptions" I'm told by them. It's still too sensitive to talk about today.

And there is no movie about the Ole Miss riot. Nor is there any full-length book about it (except by the John Birch Society, which portrays it as the aggression of a Communist JFK, and the heroism of General Edwin Walker).

The Ole Miss riot might be mentioned as a single chapter in a few obscure books here and there -- but there really should be a movie about it. IMHO, the seeds of the JFK assassination are there.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 5, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[John Dolva]

How can I Ernie, I'm australian.

Thta aside. So, the docs exist because they have been previously released in a FOI thing to someone. Maybe the collector/fan or that person found them somewhere else. I can't find them. Of course I've tried the ref #'s but again only get two hits; being that site. There is another that talks of the matter and mentions a general, but that's it. Anyway. re this matter it's my word on it.. Besides it was interesting to read the doc's and the story. The topic was a bit fun too.

I certainly agre with Ernie re Walker being honest. His whole life was a sham. One could argue conditions made it so but that doesn't change the fact it was. In fact considering the FBI's (and others) evaluation; it made no impact on his career. Why is that? Considering that the FBI are so ready and keen to mess with peoples lives.

Well, perhaps you could get a friend in the U.S. to request it and then send it to you. I noticed that somebody by the name of Darryl Blankenship is shown on the FBI's 2002 FOIA log as having requested the file and he was sent pre-processed material -- meaning that somebody before him also received it. The FOIA # assigned to Darryl's request was #968498.

Also noticed a posting by someone who made this comment:

The FBI has at least 5 files that contain information about MAD magazine. File 43-13592 is information concerning unauthorized use of the Bureau's name, file 62-55169 contains letters from citizens enclosing copies of comic strips with sensitive, derogatory or not appropriate for reading by children, etc., and file 62-106572 contains letters from citizens about MAD. The other two are 62-0-58624 and 62-0-59876. The FBI refers to their files as "bufiles" which is short for Bureau Files. Some point after January 1961 the FBI reclassified their other files with MAD information to bufile 62-106572. If the FBI sent a letter back to the individual it was referred to as a "bulet" which is a Bureau Letter.

I wonder what the timestamp of the Walker notes in the mad bufiles were. If my memory is right it was late fifties early sixties. I also get the impression that these files were previously unknown to you and Paul. If so the question is how can one ensure that one gets all Walker files which I suppose is a question Paul has asked re Harry and I suppose on anyone really. Anyway, JFK went to nut-country and got shot. Which nut did it? Why?

[Harry J.Dean]

Check out HERMAN MARKS, Castro's executioner a sadist dirty American swine, his is Ernie Lazar's present day counterpart. These swine are also

are found on here on computer

They are destroyers of normal humanity by different mentally methods!

[Ernie Lazar]

How can I Ernie, I'm australian.

Thta aside. So, the docs exist because they have been previously released in a FOI thing to someone. Maybe the collector/fan or that person found them somewhere else. I can't find them. Of course I've tried the ref #'s but again only get two hits; being that site. There is another that talks of the matter and mentions a general, but that's it. Anyway. re this matter it's my word on it.. Besides it was interesting to read the doc's and the story. The topic was a bit fun too.

I certainly agre with Ernie re Walker being honest. His whole life was a sham. One could argue conditions made it so but that doesn't change the fact it was. In fact considering the FBI's (and others) evaluation; it made no impact on his career. Why is that? Considering that the FBI are so ready and keen to mess with peoples lives.

Well, perhaps you could get a friend in the U.S. to request it and then send it to you. I noticed that somebody by the name of Darryl Blankenship is shown on the FBI's 2002 FOIA log as having requested the file and he was sent pre-processed material -- meaning that somebody before him also received it. The FOIA # assigned to Darryl's request was #968498.

Also noticed a posting by someone who made this comment:

The FBI has at least 5 files that contain information about MAD magazine. File 43-13592 is information concerning unauthorized use of the Bureau's name, file 62-55169 contains letters from citizens enclosing copies of comic strips with sensitive, derogatory or not appropriate for reading by children, etc., and file 62-106572 contains letters from citizens about MAD. The other two are 62-0-58624 and 62-0-59876. The FBI refers to their files as "bufiles" which is short for Bureau Files. Some point after January 1961 the FBI reclassified their other files with MAD information to bufile 62-106572. If the FBI sent a letter back to the individual it was referred to as a "bulet" which is a Bureau Letter.

I wonder what the timestamp of the Walker notes in the mad bufiles were. If my memory is right it was late fifties early sixties. I also get the impression that these files were previously unknown to you and Paul. If so the question is how can one ensure that one gets all Walker files which I suppose is a question Paul has asked re Harry and I suppose on anyone really. Anyway, JFK went to nut-country and got shot. Which nut did it? Why?

In answer to your question, there are many different methods which can be employed to determine "all" of the FBI (or any other agency) files which pertain to a specific subject -- including those files which have been destroyed or have been transferred to NARA.

Keep in mind, however, that when we refer to "files", we have to make an important distinction between what an agency categorizes as a "main file" versus a file containing "cross references".

A "main file" is a file opened on a specific subject (person, organization, publication, public event, criminal act, etc.). For example, FBI HQ or field offices might decide to open one or more "main files" about Edwin Walker.

The reason why more than one main file would be opened normally is because there was a perceived need to capture data about distinct categories of information.

For example, one main file might be opened to capture data about a person's or organization's connection to some sort of internal security matter or racial matter whereas a separate main file might have been opened because a person applied for some sort of government position which required a background investigation by the FBI. A third main file on that same person might have been opened because of some federal crime which the person was connected to as a victim or as a witness or because he was involved in committing or financing that crime. And a fourth main file could have been opened simply to archive incoming public inquiries and Bureau replies about a particular person or subject.

Lastly, many "main files" also had separate "sub-files" created for various reasons. One of the most common reasons being to archive large amounts of public source material (newspaper/magazine articles, pamphlets, booklets, Congressional hearings and reports, etc.) pertaining to the main file subject.

A "cross reference" is one or more serials (and sometimes there can be dozens of serials which total hundreds of pages) which mention a person or subject or publication or public event or federal crime etc.

In the past, when the FBI conducted a search for documents in response to FOIA requests, they searched for both main files and cross-references. But they changed their policy years ago to exclude automatic searches for cross-references in order to reduce their administrative burden--especially as FOIA requests to the FBI increased dramatically.

It is extremely time-consuming (from their perspective) to manually pull every main file about some other subject and then search them to see if a specific serial referenced on their index cards contained a releasable cross-reference---especially when that cross-reference might be a single sentence or a phrase in a document about some other matter where the context cannot be released. This is something which agencies describe as "no segregable material" or "outside scope of request".

Having said all this --- one of the best methods to determine whether or not you are getting everything available (or at least you can be fairly certain that you know about all files which contain relevant documents) is to request copies of all "search slips" used by the FBI to perform its search on a subject. And, where applicable, you should request any "Correlation Summary" if the FBI created one.

I attach one FBI search slip for your reference.

This particular search slip was used for Major General Ralph H. Van Deman -- who is often described as the father of our military intelligence since he lobbied (prior to World War I) for the creation of a US Army Military Intelligence Division -- and he subsequently became its first leader. After he retired from the US Army, he continued to collect information on "subversive" individuals and organizations and his personal files were frequently reviewed by the FBI. When he died in 1952, his files were donated to several sources including the US Senate Internal Security Subcommittee.

Notice that the FBI search slip on Van Deman allowed someone to request a check of several different categories of references. In Van Deman's case, the requester asked for "all references" in FBI files -- and that resulted in 18 pages of search slips listing every FBI file/serial containing his name.

Search Slip Example.PDF

[Ernie Lazar]

Check out HERMAN MARKS, Castro's executioner a sadist dirty American swine, his is Ernie Lazar's present day counterpart. These swine are also

are found on here on computer

They are destroyers of normal humanity by different mentally methods!

Harry's rhetoric is very revealing of his temperament. All this hostility and venom is caused by what? Because I ask him questions? Because I do not believe all the details of his narrative? And he equates that skepticism or disbelief with destroying normal humanity and sadism?

This comment by Harry is a very important window into Harry. ALL political extremists (left and right) suffer from what might be described as an intellectual fever. They are totally convinced that their way of thinking (and ONLY theirs) is decent, moral, honorable, principled. All critics or opponents are described with language calculated to evoke fear, disgust, contempt, and revulsion. Critics/skeptics are portrayed as having utterly no redeeming human qualities. Why? Because political extremists do not recognize the existence of legitimate, alternative, competing points of view.

Authoritarian and totalitarian mentalities (whether extreme right or extreme left) perceive the outside world almost identically. They always attempt to de-humanize their critics and opponents. Such people are not misguided or mistaken. They are "enemies" who must be destroyed, punished, rendered totally impotent - and thus become incapable of challenging the views or positions dictated by the extremists.

Let us all remember that Harry's political journey includes his association with a brutal Marxist dictator on the left (Castro) and then Harry consciously decided to associate himself with the brutal and poisonous extremist ideas on the other side of the political spectrum (the Birch Society/Minutemen). EVEN WORSE, Harry claims that he counted among his personal friends and acquaintances people who planned to commit political murder (seditious conspiracy or treason - depending how you want to analyze it) and Harry bought into THEIR ideology.

SO...when Harry uses phrases such as "sadist dirty American swine" --- we can safely assume that his Marxist beginnings are still present in his contemporary warped political thinking -- which does not permit anybody to challenge what he asserts or believes.

Edited February 7, 2014 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

...Let us all remember that Harry's political journey includes his association with a brutal Marxist dictator on the left (Castro) and then Harry consciously decided to associate himself with the brutal and poisonous extremist ideas on the other side of the political spectrum (the Birch Society/Minutemen). EVEN WORSE, Harry claims that he counted among his personal friends and acquaintances people who planned to commit political murder (seditious conspiracy or treason - depending how you want to analyze it) and Harry bought into THEIR ideology.

SO...when Harry uses phrases such as "sadist dirty American swine" --- we can safely assume that his Marxist beginnings are still present in his contemporary warped political thinking -- which does not permit anybody to challenge what he asserts or believes.

Well, Ernie, I think Harry objects to your one-sided and relentless attacks on him. It isn't just disagreement -- you attack him, and then you claim that you're not attacking him. It's insidious.

As for Harry's confessed support of Castro in 1959-1960, it is a matter of record, not only in Harry Dean's Memoirs, but also in FBI records, and even in Senate hearings. But it's also a matter of record that Harry sent messages to the FBI about Castro's regime.

You, Ernie, neglect that Harry made an underground resistance against Castro. That's the part you wish to downplay, so that you can continue to accuse Harry Dean of Communism. But Harry Dean was and remains far, far from a Communist.

Harry Dean, like many Americans in 1959-1960 -- including TV show host Ed Sullivan -- was taken in by Fidel Castro in 1959-1960, when it was still unclear that Castro was going to side with the Communists. After it became glaringly clear to Harry Dean that Fidel Castro had taken the Communist side, Harry ran to the Chicago FBI to give them information.

You don't have enough records about this event, Ernie, so perhaps you're justified in your, "prove it" attitude. That's because you still haven't seen all of the FBI records that are now available under FOIA requests. But those will all come in due time.

Let's all remember, instead, that Harry's political journey includes a red-blooded American service in the US Navy during World War 2, and a daring underground series of reports to the FBI about the Communist regime of Fidel Castro.

That is the TRUTH about Harry, no matter what you're incessant attacks say, Ernie. I suppose we'll simply have to hold our noses and wait until the FBI finally releases to you all of their records about Harry Dean, so that we can all see them and realize the TRUTH of the matter.

I agree that Harry is sometimes overbearing in his patriotism -- that was the fault of Ex-General Walker as well. Harry sometimes jumps to conclusions. I've cautioned him about that, and he does calm down.

Yet Harry is 87 years old this year, and he has been sharing his views about the JFK assassination for nearly 50 of those years, and has been slammed and slammed by the public media and the FBI during that entire time.

Harry doesn't want his TRUTH about the JFK assassination to be scattered away by the FBI. This is how Harry probably perceives you, Ernie. As an objective observer, I can see his point.

Yet I don't see you as a "sadistic swine" Ernie. I do think you're one-sided, relentless and even callous to personal feelings -- but I also draw the line with public insults.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 7, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

...Let us all remember that Harry's political journey includes his association with a brutal Marxist dictator on the left (Castro) and then Harry consciously decided to associate himself with the brutal and poisonous extremist ideas on the other side of the political spectrum (the Birch Society/Minutemen). EVEN WORSE, Harry claims that he counted among his personal friends and acquaintances people who planned to commit political murder (seditious conspiracy or treason - depending how you want to analyze it) and Harry bought into THEIR ideology.

SO...when Harry uses phrases such as "sadist dirty American swine" --- we can safely assume that his Marxist beginnings are still present in his contemporary warped political thinking -- which does not permit anybody to challenge what he asserts or believes.

Well, Ernie, I think Harry objects to your one-sided and relentless attacks on him. It isn't just disagreement -- you attack him, and then you claim that you're not attacking him. It's insidious.

As for Harry's confessed support of Castro in 1959-1960, it is a matter of record, not only in Harry Dean's Memoirs, but also in FBI records, and even in Senate hearings. But it's also a matter of record that Harry sent messages to the FBI about Castro's regime.

You, Ernie, neglect that Harry made an underground resistance against Castro. That's the part you wish to downplay, so that you can continue to accuse Harry Dean of Communism. But Harry Dean was and remains far, far from a Communist.

Harry Dean, like many Americans in 1959-1960 -- including TV show host Ed Sullivan -- was taken in by Fidel Castro in 1959-1960, when it was still unclear that Castro was going to side with the Communists. After it became glaringly clear to Harry Dean that Fidel Castro had taken the Communist side, Harry ran to the Chicago FBI to give them information.

You don't have enough records about this event, Ernie, so perhaps you're justified in your, "prove it" attitude. That's because you still haven't seen all of the FBI records that are now available under FOIA requests. But those will all come in due time.

Let's all remember, instead, that Harry's political journey includes a red-blooded American service in the US Navy during World War 2, and a daring underground series of reports to the FBI about the Communist regime of Fidel Castro.

That is the TRUTH about Harry, no matter what you're incessant attacks say, Ernie. I suppose we'll simply have to hold our noses and wait until the FBI finally releases to you all of their records about Harry Dean, so that we can all see them and realize the TRUTH of the matter.

I agree that Harry is sometimes overbearing in his patriotism -- that was the fault of Ex-General Walker as well. Harry sometimes jumps to conclusions. I've cautioned him about that, and he does calm down.

Yet Harry is 87 years old this year, and he has been sharing his views about the JFK assassination for nearly 50 of those years, and has been slammed and slammed by the public media and the FBI during that entire time.

Harry doesn't want his TRUTH about the JFK assassination to be scattered away by the FBI. This is how Harry probably perceives you, Ernie. As an objective observer, I can see his point.

Yet I don't see you as a "sadistic swine" Ernie. I do think you're one-sided, relentless and even callous to personal feelings -- but I also draw the line with public insults.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Well, Paul, one wonders what questions you or Harry would permit to be asked without characterizing them as "relentless" or "attacks" or "one-sided" or "insults"? From everything you and Harry have written thus far, a strong case can be made that you and Harry both resent and are hostile toward ANY questions which express skepticism or doubt about Harry's story. That is not the attitude of somebody who genuinely is interested in discovering truth or verifiable facts.

One problem here is that neither you or Harry seem to have any experience with examination of evidence -- particularly when something is disputed or open to multiple interpretations or when there is little or no documentary evidence or verifiable corroborating witness testimony. As I have previously suggested to you, if any knowledgeable academic ever decides to review your eBook or any of Harry's interviews or writings, they will tear them apart in a way which will, by contrast, make my questions or comments seem to be pleasant.

Why don't you give us all an example of something you consider a "disagreement" but which you do NOT consider an "attack"? It appears that you define "disagreement" as being when someone accepts your basic predicates but then offers a slightly different interpretation of something you both agree upon. Example: if someone challenges your assessment of Edwin Walker, that is merely a "disagreement" as long as they do not dispute your basic predicate that Walker and the JBS were involved in a murder plot against JFK. Another example would be if someone declares that your assumptions about some matter contradict all available evidence regarding routine FBI procedures or policies -- then that becomes an "attack" because someone challenges your basic knowledge in such a way that you interpret it as discrediting or falsifying your predicate.

If neither Harry or yourself want to be subjected to careful examination of what you say or write -- then stop attempting to influence public perceptions and debate by claiming that you have unique insights or critical "eyewitness" evidence to present.

With respect to Harry and Castro: you missed my point (probably deliberately). My comment was intended to address something which you seem incapable of understanding, i.e. the underlying factors which made Harry RECEPTIVE to believing in Castro and FPCC and the J26M and then (a short time later) RECEPTIVE to believing and associating himself with right-wing extremist groups (JBS/Minutemen etc). In other words, why was Harry so consistently attracted to associating himself with extremist ideologies?

This is particularly significant when you consider that Harry claims he was buddies with Wesley Grapp and Harry claims he had a positive relationship with the FBI in both Chicago and Los Angeles. Surely, you are not going to tell us (and expect us to believe) that Harry was not familiar with the FBI's pejorative comments about extreme right groups like the JBS? OR that Harry was not familiar with the fact that virtually the entire conservative movement in the United States rejected Robert Welch and the JBS as "irrational" and "irresponsible" starting in 1962 (the very year Harry joined the JBS?) -- such as the National Review articles endorsed by giants within the conservative movement including Sen. Barry Goldwater, Cong. Walter Judd, Russell Kirk (arguably the most influential conservative intellectual of the 20th century), James Burnham, Eugene Lyons, William Buckley Jr. etc.

Nevertheless, Harry decided to totally ignore all of the warnings by Hoover, warnings by senior FBI employees who gave literally hundreds of speeches around the country about the dangers of believing political extremists like the JBS, warnings by the leaders of the conservative movement (politicians, intellectuals, activists, authors, columnists, newspaper editorials etc.) -- so he joined the JBS anyway! AND the Minutemen!

Harry was living in the Los Angeles area in 1962, right? Did he EVER read a Los Angeles-area newspaper? Surely he must have been aware of the huge controversy within GOP circles in California during that time about Robert Welch and the JBS and how virtually every elected GOP official in our state denounced the JBS and the Minutemen -- including our leading Republican Senator--Sen. Thomas Kuchel, the minority whip of the GOP -- who previously served in the California Assembly and Senate and was our State Controller??

At no time have I done what YOU falsely claim, i.e. that I attempted to "downplay" anything regarding Harry's subsequent anti-Castro activities. In fact, just a few messages back I went to great lengths to itemize exactly what we know about Harry's contacts with the FBI. In fact, I have presented more specific details about this than you have! So, this reveals once again how YOU deliberately LIE because you PREFER to present your lies instead of engaging in principled debate or discussion. If you were intellectually honest (which you are not), you could have written something like this:

"Ernie, I recognize that you have presented considerable details here in EF about Harry's contacts with the FBI, when he presented them with information about FPCC or about pro-Castro individuals and organizations, but I think you may be missing the significance of..." (enter your argument here).

But you NEVER do that. Instead, you DELIBERATELY LIE -- such as me supposedly accusing "Harry Dean of Communism". What unadulterated bullxxxx. I simply said that Harry has been receptive to extremist political groups and ideologies for much of his adult life. (See comments above again).

Yes, Harry went to the FBI. But what did he take away from being burned by his pro-Castro experience?

Did Harry say to himself:

"Gee, I need to be more careful about joining or supporting groups that I have not carefully researched OR which the leaders of my political party or political leaders of my state have warned against and condemned" ??

Did Harry say to himself:

"Maybe I should take a look at state legislative hearings which have been conducted on these groups that seem to be patriotic and well-meaning to make sure I don't repeat my earlier mistakes when I became pro-Castro ??

NOPE! He just JUMPED immediately into YET ANOTHER extremist group -- one that arguably was exponentially worse than FPCC since FPCC leaders never considered murdering anybody and they never published books, pamphlets or sponsored speakers who slimed our entire state and national leadership over the past 50 or so years!

With respect to your comment about FBI RECORDS:

What an incredible statement by you!. You have a lot of nerve chastising me for not having "enough records". YOU DO NOT HAVE ANY RECORDS! And you have never even had the intellectual curiosity to request them!

Give us all a major break. What a xxxxing hypocrite! AFTER you receive 600,000+ pages of FBI (and other government agency) files, I will be happy to talk to you about what constitutes "enough" records.

Also, I had to chuckle when I read this comment by you:

"I suppose we'll simply have to hold our noses and wait until the FBI finally releases to you all of their records about Harry Dean, so that we can all see them and realize the TRUTH of the matter."

This comes from the guy who has declared that the FBI has both FORGED and PURGED documents which appear in Harry's FBI files!!!

With respect to this comment by you:

"Yet Harry is 87 years old this year, and he has been sharing his views about the JFK assassination for nearly 50 of those years, and has been slammed and slammed by the public media and the FBI during that entire time."

Once again, you are asserting something not in evidence. Give us EXAMPLES of when Harry has been "slammed by the public media" and by the FBI.

The public media is the primary medium by which everyone knows Harry's story! He has been repeatedly interviewed (on radio, on TV, in newspapers) and he has told his story without any sort of criticism by the media. Instead, they have allowed Harry to present his story EVEN WHEN the FBI advised some of them that Harry was NOT (as he claimed) an undercover operative for the FBI.

I have no clue what this statement by you means:

"Harry doesn't want his TRUTH about the JFK assassination to be scattered away by the FBI. This is how Harry probably perceives you, Ernie. As an objective observer, I can see his point."

At one point (circa 2005), the FBI informed me that I was their largest single FOIA requester (approximately 5% of all pending FOIA requests at the Bureau were from me).

There is probably NOBODY on Planet Earth who has devoted more time, energy and personal financial resources to obtaining and sharing FBI files (and other agency files) than me. So, how does that translate in your (or Harry's warped scheme of things) to me being potentially interested in "scatter(ing) away" anything??

Aside from the 1200 FBI files which I arranged to have posted online last June, there is another batch of hundreds of files which will be posted online sometime this summer. And aside from all that, I have donated (entirely at my own expense) sets of dual-layer DVD's containing all these FBI files (along with considerable other material not available in ANY library) to various colleges, universities, and private organizations. So does that sound like the behavior of somebody interested in suppressing anything or interested in impeding the discovery of "TRUTH"?

This is why I do not respect you Paul. Because you feel compelled to deliberately LIE about my motives and activities -- just because you disagree with my conclusions.

With respect to this comment by you:

"Yet I don't see you as a "sadistic swine" Ernie. I do think you're one-sided, relentless and even callous to personal feelings -- but I also draw the line with public insults."

I don't believe you. Your relentless attacks upon my character and integrity and motives and your TOTAL inability to recognize or employ standard principles of logic and evidence does not present me with any possibility of believing you.

Edited February 7, 2014 by Ernie Lazar

[Ernie Lazar]

NARA REPLY RE: HARRY'S FBI FILES

Just got an email from NARA and here is their summary regarding Harry's FBI files. "LA" refers to Harry's Los Angeles file. The HQ 62-109068 file incorporates documents which originally were put into HQ file 62-109217.

105-LA-12933 Subject: Harry Dean, totaling approximately 250 pages

94-HQ-54427 Subject: Harry Dean, totaling approximately 8 pages

62-HQ-109068 Subject: Harry Dean, totaling approximately 200 pages

Unfortunately, unlike most government agencies, NARA does not provide the first 100 pages free. But it has changed its policy and now copies files onto CD or DVD -- but it does not reduce the cost for choosing that option as other agencies do. NARA charges 80 cents per page (paper or CD or DVD) so the total cost for everything listed above is $366.40.

There is one additional matter which I have to clarify and that concerns HQ 94-54427, the file whose serial #30 is the FBI Legal Counsel memo regarding Cong. John Rousselot's 1977 inquiry about Harry. NARA estimates the total pages at 8. However, since serial #30 alone is 4 pages, I need to find out where the other portion of that file is.

Edited February 8, 2014 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

Bump

Edited February 8, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

...Harry was living in the Los Angeles area in 1962, right? Did he EVER read a Los Angeles-area newspaper? Surely he must have been aware of the huge controversy within GOP circles in California during that time about Robert Welch and the JBS and how virtually every elected GOP official in our state denounced the JBS and the Minutemen -- including our leading Republican Senator--Sen. Thomas Kuchel, the minority whip of the GOP -- who previously served in the California Assembly and Senate and was our State Controller??

...Yes, Harry went to the FBI. But what did he take away from being burned by his pro-Castro experience?

...NOPE! He just JUMPED immediately into YET ANOTHER extremist group -- one that arguably was exponentially worse than FPCC since FPCC leaders never considered murdering anybody and they never published books, pamphlets or sponsored speakers who slimed our entire state and national leadership over the past 50 or so years!

...Give us all a major break. What a xxxxing hypocrite! AFTER you receive 600,000+ pages of FBI (and other government agency) files, I will be happy to talk to you about what constitutes "enough" records.

...There is probably NOBODY on Planet Earth who has devoted more time, energy and personal financial resources to obtaining and sharing FBI files (and other agency files) than me...

Well, Ernie, you keep asking for examples of how you insult Harry Dean, and this post is a perfect example. Your hostility reaches new heights here.

Everybody can see this, Ernie -- but evidently you are incapable of self-criicism.

As for your presumption that Harry had access to all the writings by Hoover and so on -- you jump to conclusions. Not everybody 50 years ago was as well read as people today. Particularly people who stopped school at 8th grade, as did Harry Dean and millions of others in the pre-War period. Harry Dean did the best he could with the hand that he was dealt. I'm proud of this fine American named Harry J. Dean.

So, your statements there are merely unkind and boasting. Harry was taken in by Castro's people when he was in Chicago, and Harry was taken in by the John Birch Society when he was in Los Angeles. There's nothing unusual about that -- tens of thousands of Americans were also taken in -- and yet you spill hostility upon hostility on top of Harry Dean for these rather common characteristics. It only shows your arrogance, Ernie.

Furthermore, not every GOP official in California denounced the JBS, Ernie, you're simply mistaken about that (as you're mistaken about most of what you conclude). In fact, Congressman John Rousselot of California was not only a defender of the John Birch Society, but he was also a member of the JBS, and more than that, he was a sponsor and donated his own real estate to the JBS cause. Nor was he alone. So, either you're ignorant about the facts of California politics, Ernie, or you're deliberately spreading disinformation.

In other words, we must doubt your intellectual honesty.

As for your accusing Harry Dean of Communism -- I'm not the only reader who took your baited barbs that way, and they appear deliberately constructed to make the innuendo. So, I think perhaps you're deliberately spreading disinformation -- and now we need to explore exactly why.

Also, with regard to the FPCC, since Harry Dean was intimately close to their leadership, anything Harry says about them is ten times more valid than anything you say about them fifty years later -- you are simply ignorant of their Communist danger and their use of weapons to further their cause, as Harry Dean explains. But you don't admit your ignorance -- instead, you insist that you're the key authority here. What nonsense.

Also, when you use filthy language in a Forum like this, you are showing your extreme arrogance.

If it is indeed true that "NOBODY on Planet Earth" has "devoted more time, energy and personal financial resources to obtaining and sharing FBI files (and other agency files) than" Ernie Lazar, one must wonder what your motives are. One must also realize that this puts you in a perfect position to spread disinformation, and to twist the facts for underhanded purposes. Your extreme arrogance makes many readers wonder about you.

I will admit this -- you are sharing FBI files with the Education Forum, and that is indeed useful to everybody. That's why I can't understand your continual barrage of attacks against Harry Dean, and your continual insisting that you're not attacking him!

As for your "conclusions," Ernie, you have no right to make any at all until you've seen all the empirical evidence. So, you should really be more humble.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 9, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

...Harry was living in the Los Angeles area in 1962, right? Did he EVER read a Los Angeles-area newspaper? Surely he must have been aware of the huge controversy within GOP circles in California during that time about Robert Welch and the JBS and how virtually every elected GOP official in our state denounced the JBS and the Minutemen -- including our leading Republican Senator--Sen. Thomas Kuchel, the minority whip of the GOP -- who previously served in the California Assembly and Senate and was our State Controller??

...Yes, Harry went to the FBI. But what did he take away from being burned by his pro-Castro experience?

...NOPE! He just JUMPED immediately into YET ANOTHER extremist group -- one that arguably was exponentially worse than FPCC since FPCC leaders never considered murdering anybody and they never published books, pamphlets or sponsored speakers who slimed our entire state and national leadership over the past 50 or so years!

...Give us all a major break. What a xxxxing hypocrite! AFTER you receive 600,000+ pages of FBI (and other government agency) files, I will be happy to talk to you about what constitutes "enough" records.

...There is probably NOBODY on Planet Earth who has devoted more time, energy and personal financial resources to obtaining and sharing FBI files (and other agency files) than me...

Well, Ernie, you keep asking for examples of how you insult Harry Dean, and this post is a perfect example. Your hostility reaches new heights here.

Everybody can see this, Ernie -- but evidently you are incapable of self-criicism.

You are projecting your own personality deficiencies upon me. I have no problem whatsoever with criticism. What I object to are your deliberate LIES.

As for your presumption that Harry had access to all the writings by Hoover and so on -- you jump to conclusions. Not everybody 50 years ago was as well read as people today. Particularly people who stopped school at 8th grade, as did Harry Dean and millions of others in the pre-War period. Harry Dean did the best he could with the hand that he was dealt. I'm proud of this fine American named Harry J. Dean.

Once again, you misrepresent what I clearly stated.

I did not say or hint that Harry "had access to all the writings by Hoover and so on". What I presented was a range of possibilities via which Harry should have been familiar with the FBI's attitude toward Welch and the JBS and Minutemen.

More importantly, unlike 99.9% of the rest of humanity, Harry claims that he had an ongoing PERSONAL relationship with a senior employee of the FBI in Los Angeles. Are you telling us (and you expect us to believe?) that Harry NEVER ONCE asked Grapp or any other Los Angeles FBI Special Agent about the JBS or Minutemen -- i.e. whether or not they were responsible anti-communist organizations?

Paul, you are an expert at creating STRAW-MAN arguments. You always raise totally irrelevant points (such as how well-read somebody was in the 1960's).

I did a quick search of the Los Angeles Times archives just for the period from January 1, 1962 through December 31, 1963. Would you care to guess how many articles were published during that period that mentioned the Birch Society? 693!!! Do you really expect anybody to believe that Harry was totally unaware of the fierce debate going on about Welch and the JBS within conservative anti-communist circles during that time?

We won't even get into the question of whether or not Harry listened to radio or TV reports or perhaps picked up copies of the Santa Ana Register (the JBS-friendly newspaper published in Orange County) which reported exhaustively upon the aforementioned debate within GOP circles.

Nor will we get into the question of whether or not Harry ever saw news coverage of statements made by the California State Senate Factfinding Subcommittee on Un-American Activities, or whether or not Harry ever saw statements made by his local American Legion post or statements made by the California Attorney General or statements made by the Governor of California during that period.

Keep in mind, Paul, that you and Harry want us all to believe that Harry was providing information to FBI-Los Angeles about JBS and Minutemen -- but, simultaneously, you expect us to believe that the FBI never said ONE WORD to Harry about why they were interested in Harry's "information"??

So, your statements there are merely unkind and boasting. Harry was taken in by Castro's people when he was in Chicago, and Harry was taken in by the John Birch Society when he was in Los Angeles. There's nothing unusual about that -- and yet you spill hostility upon hostility on top of Harry Dean for these rather common characteristics. It only shows your arrogance, Ernie.

You are an excellent example of what Lenin meant by his phrase "useful idiots". You are historically a blank slate which believes any falsehood presented. It was not a "common characteristic" for someone within a period of 2 years to join pro-Castro groups and then join the JBS and Minutemen. Plus, as previously noted, we do not know anything about Harry's current political beliefs.

You still confuse asking probing questions with "hostility". Because of your gullibility, you are prepared to believe anything Harry tells you OR you are prepared to INVENT whatever you think advances his story.

Furthermore, not every GOP official in California denounced the JBS, Ernie, you're simply mistaken about that (as you're mistaken about most of what you conclude).

And I did not previously write that "every GOP official in California denounced the JBS". Again, it is significant that you NEVER QUOTE what I write -- so you are free to DELIBERATELY LIE. Here is what I actually wrote:

Surely he must have been aware of the huge controversy within GOP circles in California during that time about Robert Welch and the JBS and how virtually every elected GOP official in our state denounced the JBS and the Minutemen

Rousselot was a JBS member who LOST his election in 1962 mostly because of all the adverse publicity about his connection to the JBS! And you expect us to believe that Harry was unaware of that?

Other California JBS members/endorsers included Cong. Edgar Hiestand (who also LOST his election in 1962 mostly because of all the adverse publicity about his connection to the JBS!) and Cong. James B. Utt (the only pro-JBS Congressman to survive the 1962 election).

But the entire Republican political establishment (starting at the top with state-wide office holders (such as Sen. Kuchel) plus the GOP candidate for Governor in 1962 (Richard Nixon and, btw, Nixon defeated his primary opponent who was non-committal about the JBS by a 2-1 margin!) and the State GOP Chairman (Casper Weinberger---who was Reagan's Secretary of Defense) all denounced Welch and the JBS. Many of the County GOP Chairmen did likewise. In addition, the State GOP Convention passed a resolution condemning the JBS. And you want us to believe that Harry was totally clueless about all this?

In fact, Congressman John Rousselot of California was not only a defender of the John Birch Society, but he was also a member of the JBS, and more than that, he was a sponsor and donated his own real estate to the JBS cause. Nor was he alone. So, either you're ignorant about the facts of California politics, Ernie, or you're deliberately spreading disinformation.

See my previous comments above which reveals how abysmally ignorant YOU are about what happened in California during the time Harry decided to join the JBS!

In other words, we must doubt your intellectual honesty.

No--we must doubt yours

As for your accusing Harry Dean of Communism -- I'm not the only reader who took your baited barbs that way, and they appear deliberately constructed to make the innuendo. So, I think perhaps you're deliberately spreading disinformation -- and now we need to explore exactly why.

Very silly comment Paul. But, again, I note for the record that you never QUOTE what I write. Not once. Not ever. You merely ATTRIBUTE something to me which almost always is totally false. Again, for the record, my previous comments were focused upon the larger issue of why Harry was RECEPTIVE to radical organizations (left or right). There was no sinister "innuendo". It is a natural question which anybody (except you) would ask before believing Harry's narrative.

Also, with regard to the FPCC, since Harry Dean was intimately close to their leadership, anything Harry says about them is ten times more valid than anything you say about them fifty years later -- you are simply ignorant of their Communist danger and their use of weapons to further their cause, as Harry Dean explains. But you don't admit your ignorance -- instead, you insist that you're the key authority here. What nonsense.

You continue to miss the salient point. J. Edgar Hoover addressed this in his Warren Commission testimony when he observed that:

"Now, there again, merely because a man belongs to a subversive front organization, in my estimation doesn't mean that he is blacklisted and is a menace to the country for life. If he belongs to 20 of them, it certainly shows either one of two things, he is either very gullible and dumb or he is a menace. That has been my attitude in regard to Government service where you find a Government employee who belonged to one or two, maybe in his early days. I don't believe this necessarily makes him a security risk. Rather, this would be dependent on the degree of his activity in the front group and his purpose and intent in associating himself with it. But where he has belonged to 15, 18, 20 of them, I don't think he has enough good judgment to be in the Government."

So the real point is this:

What was Harry's "purpose and intent" in associating himself with both radical left and radical right groups -- especially one right after the other? How could he be totally unaware of the prevailing sentiments of virtually the entire anti-communist and conservative movements with respect to organizations like the JBS and Minutemen ?

Why was Harry attracted to such extreme groups? YOU describe FPCC as representing a "Communist danger" and J. Edgar Hoover described both the extreme left and the extreme right (such as JBS) as representing the exact same type of danger. As Hoover stated during his Warren Commission testimony:

"I think the extreme right is just as much a danger to the freedom of this country as the extreme left. There are groups, organizations, and individuals on the extreme right who make these very violent statements, allegations that General Eisenhower was a Communist, disparaging references to the Chief Justice and at the other end of the spectrum you have these leftists who make wild statements charging almost anybody with being a Fascist or belonging to some of these so-called extreme right societies. Now, I have felt, and I have said publicly in speeches, that they are just as much a danger, at either end of the spectrum. They don't deal with facts. Anybody who will allege that General Eisenhower was a Communist agent, has something wrong with him. A lot of people read such allegations because I get some of the weirdest letters wanting to know whether we have inquired to find out whether that is true. I have known General Eisenhower quite well myself and I have found him to be a sound, level-headed man."

With respect to FPCC:

I have never even mentioned FPCC except to acknowledge that Harry joined the organization along with other radical left groups. So why are you attempting to make something out of that?

Also, when you use filthy language in a Forum like this, you are showing your extreme arrogance.

Well, I am sorry I offended your delicate sensibilities. . If you stop lying about me, I will stop telling the truth about you.

If it is indeed true that "NOBODY on Planet Earth" has "devoted more time, energy and personal financial resources to obtaining and sharing FBI files (and other agency files) than" Ernie Lazar, one must wonder what your motives are. One must also realize that this puts you in a perfect position to spread disinformation, and to twist the facts for underhanded purposes. Your *extreme* arrogance makes many readers wonder about you.

So, in other words, let me translate your comment:

You do not respect nor even want to learn about any data from anyone who has more knowledge than you about any specific subject because you always interpret their comments as arrogance and disinformation and indicative of suspect motivations.

This is yet another example of how you filter out anything which contradicts what you prefer to believe and then create self-sealing circular arguments!

I think you should write a letter to the Pulitzer Prize Board at Columbia University to insist that they withdraw all awards they have made over the decades for outstanding contributions to journalism or literature because, obviously, in your scheme of things, nobody who invests time and resources and specializes in any subject deserves to be acknowledged for their work and they certainly should never be rewarded for their research or writing -- because, most likely, they are spreading disinformation and they are arrogant fools.

I will admit this -- you are sharing FBI files with the Education Forum, and that is indeed useful to everybody. That is why I can't understand your continual barrage of attacks against Harry Dean -- somebody who never did you any harm (until perhaps, you insulted him publicly for the umpteenth time).

This is NOT personal. You simply do not like to have anything you write (or that Harry says) questioned.

What is being done here does NOT constitute "attacks". Instead, it is the process known as "witness impeachment" which is a standard procedure which is used as a tool for discovery of truth. It comes as no surprise that you have no familiarity with this standard procedure because you previously have acknowledged that you prefer a different method which you describe as giving all testimony "the benefit of the doubt". Actually, you go beyond that, You don't even acknowledge that there is ANY "doubt".

Witness impeachment requires careful examination of all available evidence to discover contradictions, bias, inconsistent statements and to determine whether or not a witness has deficiencies in memory or competence or character which affect their testimony.

I regret that you are ignorant of these standard procedures and you think that they amount to "attacks". But your comment reveals that you have NO ABILITY to evaluate evidence and, in fact, you are HOSTILE toward the very process of discovering truth. I suggest you review the following "Rules of Evidence" prepared by Cornell University because maybe (just maybe) you might learn something important about how to evaluate evidence.

http://www/law.cornell.edu/rules/fre

As for your "conclusions," Ernie, you have no right to make any until you've seen all the empirical evidence. So, you should really be more humble.

There is no such thing as seeing "all the empirical evidence" -- because, among other reasons, often one confronts the situation which Harry has described, i.e. lost or stolen personal records OR key witnesses who will not respond to questions or who have died or cannot be contacted OR documentary evidence or personal testimony which cannot be verified.

So, instead, one has to review and evaluate and assign weight and significance to what evidence is available.

Often, available evidence makes it possible to form reasonable preliminary conclusions which are not likely to be contradicted by anything which remains to be discovered -- because the accumulation and importance or significance of available data points to a general conclusion which is not really disputable. This might also be described as preponderance of evidence. A preponderance of evidence has been described as just enough evidence to make it more likely than not that whatever is claimed is actually true.

Lastly, one also has to agree upon what constitutes "empirical evidence". For example: you have NEVER identified ANYTHING which supports Harry's recollections. Your eBook is nothing more than a personal memoir which has no footnotes or evidence trail one can prove to be accurate, truthful, and factual.

You have not found or identified one single person or one single document which provides us with any basis for believing Harry.

Instead, you constantly whine about and propose that "secret files" exist -- although, by definition, something which is "secret" obviously is unknown so you could not possibly know if anything exists in such "secret" files which would corroborate Harry's story. It is more of a wish on your part than any realistic expectation. In addition, we already have mountains of "empirical evidence" which contradicts major components of Harry's story. Your only reply to that evidence is to allege that "forgery" has taken place or files have been purged of relevant documents.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

MY COMMENTS APPEAR UNDERNEATH YOURS

Edited February 8, 2014 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

Ernie, the simple fact is that I don't lie. You keep calling me a xxxx on the EF, and working yourself into an emotional tizzy -- but it doesn't change the fact. I tell the truth. Everyody can see it except yourself, evidently. You are clearly incapable of self-criticism, just as you appear to be incapable of self-control. Have you considered asking your doctor about Valium?

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 8, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Harry J.Dean]

Answers

Harry J. Dean...My choice to assist Cuban Revolutionary movement began in late 1957 as an humanitarian gesture. By 1960 it all had turned

into political ashes. My choice was to then enlist with individuals and organisations actively opposed to the great and cruel deception that had

betrayed the True Revolution in Cuba.

My thinking is, don't get involved in such activities that assist or oppose, if you choose adventure, don't write a book on the subject. For example,

in Cuba I was threatened with death, in the ebook 'Confessions', destruction!

Have been a life-long moderate, Real Republican.