Harry Dean: Memoirs

[Ernie Lazar]

While going through my notes I found this comment by Keith Gilbert which might be of interest. It posits the Minutemen (not the JBS) as the primary actor in JFK's murder. I bold type some key points.

http://spirituality.feedfury.com/content/52796845-comment-on-a-league-of-their-own-by-keith-d-gilbert.html

Comment on A League of Their Own by Keith D Gilbert May 2nd, 2012

I was there in 1963…I know or knew quite a few of the people named herein. In June, 1963, Dennis Patrick Mower (MM-T1?), Ask me to contact Clinton Wheat for the purpose of selling him or a friend of his weapons and munitions. I went to his home in Hollywood (LA), CA, and we discussed his friend/s and what they wanted. I met with his ‘friends’ either that or the next day; one introduced himself to me a Pacillio, as I recall, the other man was Lee Harvey Oswald. Before the meeting Wheat had shown me a Japanese Type 99 machine gun which had been “customized” with a new barrel which fired the easy to get Italian Tierney round and a cheap telescopic sight about 4X or 6X, the stock was refinished and there was no tripod or bayonet lug. Clinton wanted a second magazine for the weapon which was totally functional.

After meeting with Pacillio (not likely his real name, known for failed invasions of Cuba) and Oswald and hearing their needs I agreed to meet with them at the same location the next evening and tell them what was available…for cash. I smelled a rat because they were too anxious and secretive about their intentions so when we met I declined to sell them any machine guns…though I had a number of fully automatic M-14 rifles, etc., and offered them some explosives instead which did not interest them. We parted with them literally begging for any available weapons

The following day I dropped by Wheat’s home (which I remember as being on Isabella St., but could be mistaken) and while we talked in his shop I noted that the Type 99 was missing and ask but he got all closed mouth about it and wouldn’t discuss it further. It was obvious to me that he had given it to his two visitors.

I suspect that this Japanese Type 99 ‘Bren gun’ was the weapon that actually killed JFK..it can be broken down to a very small package that would not be obvious. These weapons were very common in California and many were converted by rechambering to the Tierney cartridge because it was cheap ($17 for 2K rounds surplus ammo) to shoot misfires on no.

In early 1964 I was in possession of 1,400 lbs of stolen explosives and in contact with Dennis Patrick Mower but he and Richard Gent Butler wanted to use it to kill Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. To stop the plan I called the Los Angeles Times and told a reporter that we had the explosives and were going to use them to kill King…the media went wild and this effectively stopped the plot but had disasterous consequences for myself…I ended up in Canada as a fugative. After a few weeks in Vancouver, B.C., I again contacted Mower and while we talked I mentioned that if he were in contact with Joseph Rea Carey, a fugative from a machine gun charge, I’d be happy to have his company in Canada. Mower got all excited about this prospect and ask me to call him back in a couple of weeks, it appeared to be a solution to his housing Carey and unknown to me a girl named Lynn Luraya (15) whom I had seen in Mower’s garage shortly after Carey ‘dissapeared’ but hadn’t connected the two events until ‘much’ later.

The next time I called Mower and ask him about sending Carey up he got all ’serious’ and told me not to “ever” mention the man’s name again and to forget I had ever known him…and implied a threat to my family.

Because of police activity in Vancouver I fled across Canada ending up in Ottowa, Ontario, in a house on Resaka St. While there Mower came up for a visit and stayed about a week. During this visit he told me all about Lee Harvey Oswald, that he had joined the Minuteman organization right after coming back from Russia…that he had been very disappointed with his adventure in the old USSR and wanted to make up for it…and that the JFK murder was a Minuteman operation.

Mower used this latter information to try to get me to return to the U.S. and ‘finish’ the job on MLK, promising me a ‘deal’ that to this day sounds an awful lot like the one James Earl Ray said was offered to him…by two men whom I believe were Dennis Patrick Mower and Troy Houghton/Haughton (Houghton spoke good Spanish and sometimes impersonated Cuban or other Latin Americans). I was offered a passport, money, safe passage to South Africa and told that the action was sanctioned by FBI J. Edgar Hoover himself. I refused and a week later I was picked up by the RCMP and deported to the U.S.

While Mower was still with me in Ottowa I again ask him about Carey and he got very upset with me and ‘ordered’ me not to ever mention him again, he also told me that if I should get caught under no circumstances was I to talk to anyone lest something happen to my parents and family members…I believed him and did not speak to anyone for months until I spoke with my attorney in Los Angeles after I was extradited from Wattertown, N.Y. I literally sat in jail and refused to speak to prisoners or guards during that time…this led to me being put into ‘isolation’ which suited me just fine…I’d never ben in jail before this.

At my age I’m happy to share this information because it was left out…I wasn’t called before any hearings because of my absence in Canada…almost a year…and because so many people I knew about were either disappearing or dying mysteriously.

Yes, there is/was a vast right wing ‘christian’ conspiracy to sieze the country. I’m surprised that President Obama’s folks haven’t picked up on it.

Edited April 22, 2014 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

I have a new update for my theory -- I now believe that Interpen itself was the ground-crew for the murder of JFK.

Now -- one might think that I've changed my mind, and no longer support the Harry Dean Memoirs -- but that would be wrong.

What I've said from the beginning - is that despite some minor irregularities in the recollection of Harry Dean on this or that minor detail -- I believe Harry is telling the truth.

Yes -- but Harry never said anything about Interpen.

While that's true -- we must also remember that Interpen had direct dealings with Loran Hall, Larry Howard and Ex-General Edwin Walker.

So -- my new theory makes Harry Dean's Memoirs into a PART of the bigger picture.

The bigger picture will include MOST of the the research done by.Larry Hancock, Gaeton Fonzi, Dick Russell, Joan Mellen, Fletcher Prouty, Mark Lane, Jim Garrison, A.J. Weberman -- and even former FBI Agents Wesley Swearingen and Don Adams.

But don't most of those folks emphasize the CIA in their theories? Yes -- but they never get down to the ground crew -- and what the more recent studies have done is to show that there were real ties between Interpen and the CIA.

So -- this is exciting to me -- I'm putting together a synthesis of data to emcompass a Unified Field theory of the JFK murder.

I just thought I'd mention it first on the Harry Dean thread, since Harry and I are still together in this uphill battle for the TRUTH, JUSTICE and AMERICAN FREEDOM.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited April 24, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[John Dolva]

goodness me paul, you should be writing for monty python... jk, unified field theory indeed. good luck. all while true red white and blue too.

ernie, can you comment, please, on : "the minutemen were the armed wing of the jbs." ?

edit typo

Edited April 23, 2014 by John Dolva

[Ernie Lazar]

goodness me paul, you should be writing for monty python... jk, unified field theory indeed. good luck. all while true red white and blue too.

ernie, can you comment, please, on : "the minutemen were the armed wing of the jbs." ?

edit typo

My answer depends upon whether or not I understand your question correctly.

Was there any connection between the Birch Society and the Minutemen?

Yes--in the sense of the general ideological perspective of both organizations. Many Minutemen were also JBS members (or they had left the JBS because they did not think the JBS program would be successful and, consequently, they wanted to be prepared for the "inevitable" more "direct action". I'm sure that MM thought of the JBS as one of their best recruitment opportunities (as did many other right-wing groups).

HOWEVER:

MM founder, Robert DePugh, was kicked out of the Birch Society because Robert Welch made it very clear that he considered paramilitary right-wing organizations (like the MM) to be one of the "neutralizers" which seduced and then diverted well-intentioned anti-communists away from what they should be doing.

When a core ideological principle of an organization is that our country is 50-70% under "Communist influence and control" and that "traitors" were in charge of just about everything that mattered in our country --- then one can certainly understand why adherents of such ideology would chafe at JBS letter-writing and "educational" efforts.

It would be a mistake, however, to think that Birchers (as a whole) were receptive to the idea of joining (or defending) right-wing paramilitary groups. ALL genuine conservatives abhor what they consider to be mass movements which express a "mob mentality" (right or left). In fact, as a matter of principle, many Birchers (and other right-wingers) oppose all forms of direct democracy including, for example, direct election of U.S. Senators. recall elections, state referendums, etc. See, for example, Robert Welch's articles which quote writings by Chicago lawyer Harry F. Atwood and the Birch Society's fixation upon discrediting "democracy" while insisting that our founding fathers created "a Republic".

From the JBS perspective, paramilitary groups like MM undermined the rule of law because they promoted the idea of "direct action" (aka mob behavior) to address problems which (again from the JBS perspective) could only be resolved through massive re-education of our voters.

Edited April 23, 2014 by Ernie Lazar

[Ernie Lazar]

I have a new update for my theory -- I now believe that Interpen itself was the ground-crew for the murder of JFK.

Now -- one might think that I've changed my mind, and no longer support the Harry Dean Memoirs -- but that would be wrong.

What I've said from the beginning - is that despite some minor irregularities in the recollection of Harry Dean on this or that minor detail -- I believe Harry is telling the truth.

Yes -- but Harry never said anything about Interpen.

While that's true -- we must also remember that Interpen had direct dealings with Loran Hall, Larry Howard and Ex-General Edwin Walker.

So -- my new theory makes Harry Dean's Memoirs into a PART of the bigger picture.

The bigger picture will include MOST of the the research done by.Larry Hancock, Gaeton Fonzi, Dick Russell, Joan Mellen, Fletcher Prouty, Mark Lane, Jim Garrison, A.J. Weberman -- and even former FBI Agents Wesley Swearingen and Don Adams.

But don't most of those folks emphasize the CIA in their theories? Yes -- but they never get down to the ground crew -- and what the more recent studies have done is to show that there were real ties between Interpen and the CIA.

So -- this is exciting to me -- I'm putting together a synthesis of data to emcompass a Unified Field theory of the JFK murder.

I just thought I'd mention it first on the Harry Dean thread, since Harry and I are still together in this uphill battle for the TRUTH, JUSTICE and AMERICAN FREEDOM.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

"Minor irregularities"? "Minor details"?

One wonders what Paul considers MAJOR irregularities or MAJOR details?

[Paul Trejo]

"Minor irregularities"? "Minor details"?

One wonders what Paul considers MAJOR irregularities or MAJOR details?

Well, Ernie, if Harry Dean had said, for example, that he was never an officer of the FPCC (while we have FBI evidence that he was) then that would be a MAJOR detail flaw.

Or, if Harry Dean had said that he was a paid FBI agent; that would be a MAJOR detail flaw.

Or, if Harry Dean had said that he was a paid CIA agent; that would be a MAJOR detail flaw.

Or, if Harry Dean had said that he was in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/1963, so he knows from eye-witness evidence that Loran Hall and Larry Howard were the shooters at JFK that day, that would be a MAJOR detail flaw.

Or, if Harry Dean had said that he personally met Lee Harvey Oswald at any time, in any situation, that would be a MAJOR detail flaw.

Or, if Harry Dean had said that the FBI never kept any files on him, that would be a MAJOR detail flaw.

Or, if Harry Dean had said that he never had anything to do with Fidel Castro and the Cuban Revolution, that would be a MAJOR detail flaw.

Or, if Harry Dean had said that he never tried to report his experiences in the FPCC or JBS with the FBI, that would be a MAJOR detail flaw.

From these examples, Ernie, I suppose you get the general idea.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

P.S. By the way, Ernie, your analysis of the relationship between the Minutemen and the JBS that you offered in reply to John Dolva was very accurate -- well stated and historically factual. I look forward to more writing like that from you.

Edited April 23, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

"Minor irregularities"? "Minor details"?

One wonders what Paul considers MAJOR irregularities or MAJOR details?

Well, Ernie, if Harry Dean had said, for example, that he was never an officer of the FPCC (while we have FBI evidence that he was) then that would be a MAJOR detail flaw.

Or, if Harry Dean had said that he was a paid FBI agent; that would be a MAJOR detail flaw.

Or, if Harry Dean had said that he was a paid CIA agent; that would be a MAJOR detail flaw.

Or, if Harry Dean had said that he was in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/1963, so he knows from eye-witness evidence that Loran Hall and Larry Howard were the shooters at JFK that day, that would be a MAJOR detail flaw.

Or, if Harry Dean had said that he personally met Lee Harvey Oswald at any time, in any situation, that would be a MAJOR detail flaw.

Or, if Harry Dean had said that the FBI never kept any files on him, that would be a MAJOR detail flaw.

Or, if Harry Dean had said that he never had anything to do with Fidel Castro and the Cuban Revolution, that would be a MAJOR detail flaw.

Or, if Harry Dean had said that he never tried to report his experiences in the FPCC or JBS with the FBI, that would be a MAJOR detail flaw.

From these examples, Ernie, I suppose you get the general idea.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

P.S. By the way, Ernie, your analysis of the relationship between the Minutemen and the JBS that you offered in reply to John Dolva was very accurate -- well stated and historically factual. I look forward to more writing like that from you.

Many of the examples you cited as hypothetical "major flaws" are correct.

However:

1. Some of your examples do not materially affect the narrative which Harry presents so even if certain statements made by Harry were false or grossly exaggerated -- those defects would not rise to the level of "major" flaws. For example: your first two examples, i.e. "paid" FBI or CIA "agent". YES---if Harry made those declarations they would be falsehoods but neither of those statements (by themselves) would serve to falsify Harry's overall narrative.

2. "MAJOR FLAWS" are those which (when proven false) serve to undermine or falsify the basic predicates, assumptions, and conclusions being presented in any narrative -- particularly when made by "eyewitnesses".

3. For example: you may have seen the recent news coverage about the horrific accident in northern California which involved high school students traveling to check out a university which they were thinking about attending.

A Fed Ex truck smashed head-on into the bus carrying the high school students.

Two "eyewitnesses" declared emphatically that the Fed Ex truck was "on fire" just prior to smashing into the school bus. Those two eyewitnesses (a husband and wife) were about 50 yards away from the actual crash scene and they both claim that they saw the accident as it occurred.

HOWEVER, a student who was sitting directly behind the bus driver and who saw the Fed Ex truck smash into the school bus stated that the Fed Ex truck was NOT on fire before it hit the school bus --- and he was looking DIRECTLY AT the Fed Ex truck as it approached the bus.

4. In the context of Harry Dean --- there are many statements made by Harry in different forums, in different months or different years, which any rational person would recognize as highly suspect and, in some cases, contradictory of what he has said or written previously. And I am not referring to some relatively minor point which has no direct bearing upon his larger narrative. [Example: if the FBI or CIA actually did pay "expenses" to Harry at any point -- then a layman could excuse Harry for stating that he was a "paid FBI agent" or "paid CIA agent" -- even though those two descriptive comments are not valid --- PROVIDED that Harry was NOT claiming that those descriptive terms were central to his narrative. The same principle applies to your hypothetical example regarding Harry stating that the FBI kept no files on him. There is no way Harry could know (one way or the other) whether or not there were any "files" on him -- and, regardless of the answer, it does NOT change the essential components of Harry's larger narrative regarding a "JBS plot" to murder our President.

5. You conveniently chose to ignore (not list) major substantive flaws in Harry's story ---although, to be fair, Harry's story is not always presented in a coherent form and, consequently, it is subject to different interpretations of the words he chooses to use.

6. Lastly, one has to consider the larger context. It might help to think about this in terms of reverse engineering.

Suppose, for example, that you wanted to create a largely fictional narrative about your contacts with a government agency. Suppose you decided to embellish whatever contacts you actually had with one or more agencies to make them seem more important and more valuable and more productive to the agency (or even more frequent) than they actually were.

Put in metric terms, suppose your actual contacts with an agency were scored on a scale between ZERO (i.e. no importance or significance of any kind) and 100 (i.e. critically important and recognized by the agency as making a major contribution to their understanding and/or activities).

Suppose your actual score was 20-25 but you wanted to create the impression that your contacts were evaluated at 75-85.

HOW WOULD YOU GO ABOUT CREATING THAT FALSE IMPRESSION? What would you need to do to create a plausible deception?

Edited April 23, 2014 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

Many of the examples you cited as hypothetical "major flaws" are correct.

However:

1. Some of your examples do not materially affect the narrative which Harry presents so even if certain statements made by Harry were false or grossly exaggerated -- those defects would not rise to the level of "major" flaws. For example: your first two examples, i.e. "paid" FBI or CIA "agent". YES---if Harry made those declarations they would be falsehoods but neither of those statements (by themselves) would serve to falsify Harry's overall narrative.

2. "MAJOR FLAWS" are those which (when proven false) serve to undermine or falsify the basic predicates, assumptions, and conclusions being presented in any narrative -- particularly when made by "eyewitnesses".

3. For example: you may have seen the recent news coverage about the horrific accident in northern California which involved high school students traveling to check out a university which they were thinking about attending.

A Fed Ex truck smashed head-on into the bus carrying the high school students.

Two "eyewitnesses" declared emphatically that the Fed Ex truck was "on fire" just prior to smashing into the school bus. Those two eyewitnesses (a husband and wife) were about 50 yards away from the actual crash scene and they both claim that they saw the accident as it occurred.

HOWEVER, a student who was sitting directly behind the bus driver and who saw the Fed Ex truck smash into the school bus stated that the Fed Ex truck was NOT on fire before it hit the school bus --- and he was looking DIRECTLY AT the Fed Ex truck as it approached the bus.

4. In the context of Harry Dean --- there are many statements made by Harry in different forums, in different months or different years, which any rational person would recognize as highly suspect and, in some cases, contradictory of what he has said or written previously. And I am not referring to some relatively minor point which has no direct bearing upon his larger narrative. [Example: if the FBI or CIA actually did pay "expenses" to Harry at any point -- then a layman could excuse Harry for stating that he was a "paid FBI agent" or "paid CIA agent" -- even though those two descriptive comments are not valid --- PROVIDED that Harry was NOT claiming that those descriptive terms were central to his narrative. The same principle applies to your hypothetical example regarding Harry stating that the FBI kept no files on him. There is no way Harry could know (one way or the other) whether or not there were any "files" on him -- and, regardless of the answer, it does NOT change the essential components of Harry's larger narrative regarding a "JBS plot" to murder our President.

5. You conveniently chose to ignore (not list) major substantive flaws in Harry's story ---although, to be fair, Harry's story is not always presented in a coherent form and, consequently, it is subject to different interpretations of the words he chooses to use.

6. Lastly, one has to consider the larger context. It might help to think about this in terms of reverse engineering.

Suppose, for example, that you wanted to create a largely fictional narrative about your contacts with a government agency. Suppose you decided to embellish whatever contacts you actually had with one or more agencies to make them seem more important and more valuable and more productive to the agency (or even more frequent) than they actually were.

Put in metric terms, suppose your actual contacts with an agency were scored on a scale between ZERO (i.e. no importance or significance of any kind) and 100 (i.e. critically important and recognized by the agency as making a major contribution to their understanding and/or activities).

Suppose your actual score was 20-25 but you wanted to create the impression that your contacts were evaluated at 75-85.

HOW WOULD YOU GO ABOUT CREATING THAT FALSE IMPRESSION? What would you need to do to create a plausible deception?

See, Ernie, it's just that I don't believe (as you evidently do) that Harry Dean wanted to create an impression that he was different than he was.

You have shown a few FBI documents that clearly show that some FBI Agents held a very low opinion of Harry Dean. But that's not true of all the documents -- yet you seem to emphasize the negative ones.

Further, we haven't even seen all of the FBI documents on Harry Dean -- so the jury is out on this single point -- how many FBI Agents held a low opinion of Harry Dean?

I still expect to see some FBI documents relating a dialogue in 1964 between Harry Dean and Los Angeles FBI SAC Wesley Grapp. -- and I will give a lot of weight to that document when I finally see it.

Still, what we've seen so far -- aside from a few negative remarks by FBI Agents -- is that there were hundreds of pages that the FBI at one time maintained on Harry Dean (and they even destroyed many of them in their Chicago office).

You might presume that if the Chicago FBI destroyed those files, then they were probably meaningless -- but some on this thread would disagree with that presumption.

I don't find your question relevant -- I don't presume that Harry Dean went about to create a false impression about himself.

He really did serve Fidel Castro in 1959. He really was an FPCC officer in 1960. He really did try to tell the FBI about it -- to the best of his ability. This is all documented -- even by the FBI Agents themselves.

Harrry really did join the JBS in 1962, and he really did try to tell the FBI about it -- to the best of his ability. That's my position, and until I see documented proof otherwise, it makes perfect sense to me.

SIncerely,

--Paul Trejo

Edited April 24, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

Many of the examples you cited as hypothetical "major flaws" are correct.

However:

1. Some of your examples do not materially affect the narrative which Harry presents so even if certain statements made by Harry were false or grossly exaggerated -- those defects would not rise to the level of "major" flaws. For example: your first two examples, i.e. "paid" FBI or CIA "agent". YES---if Harry made those declarations they would be falsehoods but neither of those statements (by themselves) would serve to falsify Harry's overall narrative.

2. "MAJOR FLAWS" are those which (when proven false) serve to undermine or falsify the basic predicates, assumptions, and conclusions being presented in any narrative -- particularly when made by "eyewitnesses".

3. For example: you may have seen the recent news coverage about the horrific accident in northern California which involved high school students traveling to check out a university which they were thinking about attending.

A Fed Ex truck smashed head-on into the bus carrying the high school students.

Two "eyewitnesses" declared emphatically that the Fed Ex truck was "on fire" just prior to smashing into the school bus. Those two eyewitnesses (a husband and wife) were about 50 yards away from the actual crash scene and they both claim that they saw the accident as it occurred.

HOWEVER, a student who was sitting directly behind the bus driver and who saw the Fed Ex truck smash into the school bus stated that the Fed Ex truck was NOT on fire before it hit the school bus --- and he was looking DIRECTLY AT the Fed Ex truck as it approached the bus.

4. In the context of Harry Dean --- there are many statements made by Harry in different forums, in different months or different years, which any rational person would recognize as highly suspect and, in some cases, contradictory of what he has said or written previously. And I am not referring to some relatively minor point which has no direct bearing upon his larger narrative. [Example: if the FBI or CIA actually did pay "expenses" to Harry at any point -- then a layman could excuse Harry for stating that he was a "paid FBI agent" or "paid CIA agent" -- even though those two descriptive comments are not valid --- PROVIDED that Harry was NOT claiming that those descriptive terms were central to his narrative. The same principle applies to your hypothetical example regarding Harry stating that the FBI kept no files on him. There is no way Harry could know (one way or the other) whether or not there were any "files" on him -- and, regardless of the answer, it does NOT change the essential components of Harry's larger narrative regarding a "JBS plot" to murder our President.

5. You conveniently chose to ignore (not list) major substantive flaws in Harry's story ---although, to be fair, Harry's story is not always presented in a coherent form and, consequently, it is subject to different interpretations of the words he chooses to use.

6. Lastly, one has to consider the larger context. It might help to think about this in terms of reverse engineering.

Suppose, for example, that you wanted to create a largely fictional narrative about your contacts with a government agency. Suppose you decided to embellish whatever contacts you actually had with one or more agencies to make them seem more important and more valuable and more productive to the agency (or even more frequent) than they actually were.

Put in metric terms, suppose your actual contacts with an agency were scored on a scale between ZERO (i.e. no importance or significance of any kind) and 100 (i.e. critically important and recognized by the agency as making a major contribution to their understanding and/or activities).

Suppose your actual score was 20-25 but you wanted to create the impression that your contacts were evaluated at 75-85.

HOW WOULD YOU GO ABOUT CREATING THAT FALSE IMPRESSION? What would you need to do to create a plausible deception?

See, Ernie, it's just that I don't believe (as you evidently do) that Harry Dean wanted to create an impression that he was different than he was.

You have shown a few FBI documents that clearly show that some FBI Agents held a very low opinion of Harry Dean. But that's not true of all the documents -- yet you seem to emphasize the negative ones.

Further, we haven't even seen all of the FBI documents on Harry Dean -- so the jury is out on this single point -- how many FBI Agents held a low opinion of Harry Dean?

I still expect to see some FBI documents relating a dialogue in 1964 between Harry Dean and Los Angeles FBI SAC Wesley Grapp. -- and I will give a lot of weight to that document when I finally see it.

Still, what we've seen so far -- aside from a few negative remarks by FBI Agents -- is that there were hundreds of pages that the FBI at one time maintained on Harry Dean (and they even destroyed many of them in their Chicago office).

You might presume that if the Chicago FBI destroyed those files, then they were probably meaningless -- but some on this thread would disagree with that presumption.

I don't find your question relevant -- I don't presume that Harry Dean went about to create a false impression about himself.

He really did serve Fidel Castro in 1959. He really was an FPCC officer in 1960. He really did try to tell the FBI about it -- to the best of his ability. This is all documented -- even by the FBI Agents themselves.

Harrry really did join the JBS in 1962, and he really did try to tell the FBI about it -- to the best of his ability. That's my position, and until I see documented proof otherwise, it makes perfect sense to me.

SIncerely,

--Paul Trejo

Well, Paul, you are NOT in a position to make fair judgments because, as you have admitted in writing several times, you perceive yourself as Harry's "#1 defender", his "friend" and his "ally". Consequently, you perceive everything in terms of whether or not it might diminish Harry's story --- and if it does -- you reflexively dismiss or de-value it.

An impartial analyst who is NOT emotionally invested in, or trying to "defend" either Harry or the FBI -- would be more likely to perceive flaws and errors and inconsistencies and exaggerations which diminish Harry's story.

I am not even certain what your first sentence means. How does anyone know with certainty what "impression" somebody is consciously or unconsciously trying to create?

Normally, one does not have to consider a lot of personality factors because there is so much documentary evidence which enables an analyst to separate fact from fiction.

However, there are many peculiarities about Harry's story (some of which I have never previously mentioned -- such as Harry's familiarity with, and use of the term, "Trotskyite"). No casual member of a Communist front group would understand the meaning of that. By definition, front groups downplay ideology so that they can attract mainstream non-ideological types into their ranks.

I also do not understand your second paragraph. I have never "emphasized" anything. That is your pure INVENTION. I just accurately summarized the evaluations made by several FBI Agents.

You wanted to dismiss or de-value EVERYTHING they concluded about Harry -- because, again, your reflexive instinct is to "defend" Harry.

That is why you INVENTED an elaborate psychiatric HOAX about Harry's 11/63 Hoover letter -- and you then attributed all sorts of horrific motives to the FBI (lying, forgery, arrogance, etc.) -- all of which were inventions of YOUR mind because you wanted to totally discredit the FBI and elevate Harry to Super Hero status. That was YOUR attempt to "emphasize the negative" which pre-exists in your mind.

With respect to this comment by you:

Further, we haven't even seen all of the FBI documents on Harry Dean -- so the jury is out on this single point -- how many FBI Agents held a low opinion of Harry Dean?

Here again you expect us to believe that you have some type of secret knowledge about the total number of FBI documents which exist and the exact number we have NOT yet seen. My current best estimate is that we have seen about 90-95% of all FBI documents pertaining to Harry. The main point is that there is a consistent pattern starting in 1961 and continuing until the last document.

First of all, as I previously mentioned to you --- in every case where we now have a letter by Harry to compare to FBI memos or FD-71 forms prepared by FBI Agents, it is self-evident that the memos and FD-71 contact forms accurately and fairly summarized what Harry said or wrote. In other words, we do NOT have any factual evidence to support your paranoid theories about FBI dishonesty.

Secondly -- it is very clear from ALL available evidence (FBI and CIA) that the information which Harry provided was voluntary. Harry decided what HE thought might be of interest to those agencies. He was not "instructed" or "directed" to do anything. And a considerable amount of his information was speculative or anecdotal.

Lastly, it is also very clear that Harry was NOT told to report his information to any particular case agent. Instead, about a dozen different Agents recorded their contacts with Harry -- based upon his unsolicited phone calls or occasional correspondence. In addition, in almost every case, Harry's comments reveal that he felt it necessary to repeatedly EXPLAIN who he was -- i.e. he constantly repeated his story about being FPCC Secretary in Chicago and how he wanted FBI assistance with "clearing" his name as though NOBODY in Los Angeles had the remotest clue who he was.

THAT factual evidence is what makes Harry's larger story non-credible.

With respect to your comment:

I still expect to see some FBI documents relating a dialogue in 1964 between Harry Dean and Los Angeles FBI SAC Wesley Grapp. -- and I will give a lot of weight to that document when I finally see it.

There is no valid reason to believe that such evidence exists. As I pointed out in a previous message --- what is particularly striking about Harry's Los Angeles file serials (starting in March 1964 when Grapp became SAC) is that there is not EVEN ONE instance when Grapp hand-wrote any favorable comment about Harry on any memo or report pertaining to Harry. In addition, when Agents made what you describe as arrogant or insulting comments about Harry -- there is no evidence that Grapp ever censured them or attempted to prevent them from making such "unkind" comments.

With respect to this comment by you:

Still, what we've seen so far -- aside from a few negative remarks by FBI Agents -- is that there were hundreds of pages that the FBI at one time maintained on Harry Dean (and they even destroyed many of them in their Chicago office).

You still attach irrational significance to the number of pages in Harry's file. MANY of those pages are duplicative. For example, there are Los Angeles memos to HQ and then HQ memos or reports which summarize the same information provided by Los Angeles. And there are multiple serials which discuss a single subject (such as the back-and-forth regarding Bob Hayward and the Joe Pyne Show). There were not "hundreds of pages" in the sense of unique documents discussing separate subject matters.

With respect to this comment by you:

You might presume that if the Chicago FBI destroyed those files, then they were probably meaningless -- but some on this thread would disagree with that presumption.

It is not a "presumption" in the sense you mean. It is what EVERY field office routinely did when they had files of no particular significance -- especially when the substance of their field file had already been sent to HQ.

With respect to this comment by you:

I don't find your question relevant -- I don't presume that Harry Dean went about to create a false impression about himself.

Well, maybe, you should give some consideration to the idea. It is not as preposterous or as unkind as you seem to think. As previously noted, there are many examples of individuals who had brief encounters with government agencies like FBI, ATF, CIA, or police department intelligence squads --- who subsequently sought to capitalize upon their brief association and make it appear more significant than it really was. "Coincidentally" most of those examples involve Birch Society members! Keep in mind the extraordinary lengths to which Harry went during the 1960's to generate publicity for his story.

With respect to this comment by you:

He really did serve Fidel Castro in 1959. He really was an FPCC officer in 1960. He really did try to tell the FBI about it -- to the best of his ability. This is all documented -- even by the FBI Agents themselves.

So what? Actually, with respect to being "an FPCC officer in 1960" -- your description should be more precise. He was listed on paper as Secretary of FPCC. But Harry had no major decision-making or policy-making responsibilities. He notified FPCC members/supporters about forthcoming meetings. Big deal.

As previously noted, the real question is "What did the FBI do with Harry's information"?

The primary value of that information was clerical -- i.e. the FBI indexed the names/addresses of people connected to FPCC whom were mentioned in documents which Harry gave to the FBI. The major officers of FPCC were already known to the FBI because they were on the FBI Security Index.

HOWEVER -- at no point was Harry called upon to testify before ANY city, state, or national legislative investigating committee, nor did he testify at ANY public court proceeding or administrative hearing, nor did he testify at ANY "Executive Session" (i.e. off the record to protect his identity).

With respect to this comment by you:

Harrry really did join the JBS in 1962, and he really did try to tell the FBI about it -- to the best of his ability. That's my position, and until I see documented proof otherwise, it makes perfect sense to me.

So what? HUNDREDS of people contacted the FBI to report their concerns about, or their attendance at, JBS meetings and activities. in fact, one of the very first documents in the FBI HQ file on the JBS (January 20, 1959 -- three weeks after the JBS was founded) refers to somebody in Milwaukee Wisconsin who attended a local JBS recruitment meeting which he characterized as "secretive" and worrisome.

This summer, I will be posting online the first 35 sections of the FBI HQ main file on the JBS so you can see for yourself all the numerous examples of people who contacted the FBI to report information about the JBS. They were NOT "FBI informants". They simply volunteered information to their local FBI field office which THEY thought the Bureau might want to know.

You can currently see examples of these reports in the FBI files I have already arranged to be posted online. Check out the Boston and Los Angeles field files here: http://www.buildingdemocracy.us/archive/dox/jbs/

SIncerely,

--Paul Trejo

Edited April 24, 2014 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

Harry Dean, Wesley Swearingen and Don Adams have a lot in common.

Both Wesley Swearingen and Don Adams are former FBI Agents. Harry Dean isn't. What do they have in common?

All three men claim to have some personal experience that sheds light on the falsity of the Lone Gunman theory which blames Lee Harvey Oswald alone for the murder of JFK.

But wait, there's more.

It's just like the old HIndu tale of several blind men touching an elephant, and each one swearing that his understanding of the elephant was "tangibly correct," but each one had wildly different stories (e.g. one touched the tall, one touched a leg, one touched the trunk, one touched the ear, one touched a side).

Former FBI Agent Don Adams is adamant -- based on what he personally witnessed -- that Joseph Milteer was a prime JFK conspirator.

Former FBI Agent Wesley Swearingen swears -- based on what he personally witnessed -- that "Ramon" gave him the full list of names of the prime JFK conspirators.

Harry Dean declares -- based on what he personally witnessed -- that Ex-General Edwin Walker, Congressman John Rousselot, Gabby Gabaldon, Loran Hall and Larry Howard were prime JFK conspirators.

Now -- while some would only point out the differences between their accounts, and claim that they all disagree -- I take a novel approach and point out what they all have in common, and I claim that all three accounts can be unified.

Ex-General Edwin Walker is the link with Joseph Milteer, because both were active in Southern extreme right-wing politics in 1963.

Loran Hall is the link with "Ramon's" list of names, because they include CIA and Mafia types like E. Howard Hunt and Santos Traficante, and many Cuban Exile groups like Alpha 66 and so many others with whom Loran Hall was directly associated as a gun runner.

With some careful study -- and an open mind-- one can show that all three men can be quite correct. With this same methodology I can validate the writings of Larry Hancock, Joan Mellen, Gaeton Fonzi, Edwin Lopez, Dick Russell, Mark Lane and Jim Garrison -- they all had a piece of the Truth -- but none of them could solve the JFK murder mystery, because nobody stepped back far enough to see the elephant as a whole.

What's important is that the eye-witnesses -- and I openly name Harry Dean, Don Adams and Wes Swearingen along with Richard Case Nagell, John Martino, Silvia Odio, Robert D. Morrow, Fletcher Prouty and Edwin Lopez himself -- who directly witnessed one part of the "elephant" that is the JFK murder.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited April 25, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

FOR INTERESTED RESEARCHERS RE: HARRY DEAN

I am listing below the current status of all my FOIA requests pertaining to Harry or which pertain to related subject matters. An updated version of this list will be posted on my Harry Dean webpage in approximately 3-4 weeks as I receive additional information or actual releases.

This list includes specific files which I have requested along with individual serials that mention Harry in files about some other subject. The individual serials listed are shown on FBI Name Check Unit “search slips” in Harry’s HQ and Los Angeles files.

In some cases, I can identify the subject matter of a particular file. In other cases, there is no identifying data. In a few cases, the specific files containing serials may not actually be on our Harry Dean because the FBI Name Check Unit did not perform any research to confirm the identity of the “Harry Dean” mentioned in the serial.

1. THESE FILES/SERIALS HAVE BEEN TRANSFERRED TO NARA

· Chicago 100-18080 (Richard L. Criley / FPCC--Chicago)

· Chicago 100-37454 (Fair Play For Cuba Committee)

· HQ 2-1693 [Loran Eugene Hall]

· HQ 65-19763, serial #12X

· HQ 100-3-4, serial #1594 (HQ 100-3 is the FBI main file on the Communist Party USA. The -4 suffix refers to a specific field office location (perhaps Chicago).

· HQ 100-201103, serial #35

· HQ 100-284892 (Florence Criley, FPCC--Chicago)

· Los Angeles 100-60840 (Edgar Swabeck, FPCC--Chicago)

· HQ 105-4212, #1

· HQ 105-78016 [Loran Eugene Hall]

· HQ 105-114542 (J.U.R.E.)

· HQ 105-127490

· Los Angeles 100-15311, #782 (on “Harold Dean”)

· Los Angeles 105-13351 (Alpha 66/SNFE)

2. THESE FILES/SERIALS HAVE BEEN DESTROYED

If FBI provided date when destroyed, I have provided that info as “D=(date)”

· Chicago 105-6033 (Anti-Castro Activities) D=2013

· HQ 9-51846 (Loran Eugene Hall) D=8/22/07

· HQ 140-18902, serial #2 (Classification 140 pertains to “Security of Government Employees” matters, i.e. persons suspected of being risks to national security) D=2/5/09

· HQ 87-111598 [Loran Eugene Hall] D=2/16/91

· Los Angeles 25-8000, #4836 thru #4838 [Classification 25 pertains to “Selective Service Act” matters] = D-but no date specified

· Los Angeles 65-101, serial #1768 (Classification 65 pertains to “Espionage” matters. D-but no date specified

· Los Angeles 94-250, serial #904 [Classification 94 pertains to “Research Matters” which the Bureau used as a catch-all category for answering incoming correspondence from the public, from law enforcement agencies, from the media, and for all general public relations matters]. D-but no date specified

· Los Angeles 100-0-20989 [Classification 100 pertains to “Domestic Security” matters, including sabotage, treason, espionage, and general subversive activities]. D-but no date specified

· Los Angeles 100-1488 D=09/74

3. THESE FILES/SERIALS ARE STILL BEING PROCESSED – BUT STATUS MAY CHANGE TO “NARA” or “DESTROYED” AFTER FBI ANALYSTS COMPLETE THEIR RESEARCH

· Chicago 134-1540 [Classification 134 pertains to reports from FBI informants or confidential sources; this file number was listed as a cross-reference on one memo in Harry’s Los Angeles file and probably refers to some source who provided information about Harry]

· Dallas 105-1280 [This is Dallas main file on Minutemen – estimated at 4729pp]

· HQ personnel file (file number unknown) on Special Agent Ferd J. Rapp Jr. [Rapp had several contacts with Harry.]

· HQ personnel file (file number unknown) on Los Angeles SAC Wesley G. Grapp [estimated to be 2931pp].

· HQ main file on Richard L. Criley (FPCC)

· HQ 61-7559, serial #11881 [This is the Communist Party USA, General Activities main file)

· HQ 62-3907, serials #75, #85, #91, #100, #101 [Classification 62 pertains to “Administrative Inquiries – Miscellaneous Subversive and Non-Subversive”

· HQ 62-57092, serial #3

· HQ 62-104401 [This is HQ main file on John Birch Society – estimated at 10,050pp]

· HQ 62-107261 [This is HQ main file on Minutemen – estimated as 8500pp]

· HQ 97-3382 [Classification 97 pertains to “Foreign Agents Registration Act”]

· HQ 97-4196 [FBI HQ main file on FPCC; estimated to be 9500pp for entire file]

· HQ 97-4196-9 [FBI HQ main file on FPCC-Chicago chapter; estimated as 1750pp for years 1960-1961]

· HQ 97-4196-26 [FBI HQ main file on FPCC-Los Angeles chapter]

· HQ 97-4362 [Joaquin Freire, former Cuban Counsel in Chicago who defected]

· HQ 100-363991 [Edward Gourfain, FPCC--Chicago]

· HQ 105-94423 [Juan Del Rosario, FPCC-Chicago)

· HQ 105-112098 {Alpha 66/SNFE = estimated at 2681 pages for 7/61 thru 12/63]

· HQ 122-190, serial #17 [Classification 122 pertains to “Sensitive Positions in the United States Government” which includes FBI loyalty investigations of persons accepting employment or fellowships including State Department officials and some judicial appointments.]

· Los Angeles 9-2343, serial #2 [Classification 9 pertains to “Extortion” matters]

· Los Angeles 42-27545 [Classification 42 pertains to military “Deserters”]

· Los Angeles 62-2469, serial #92

· Los Angeles 62-5101 [This is Los Angeles main file on Minutemen]

· Los Angeles 67-30, serial #991 [Classification 67 refers to FBI "Personnel Matters"]

· Los Angeles 87-776, #257 [Classification 87 pertains to “Interstate Transportation of Stolen Property” matters.]

· Los Angeles 98-0-2219 {Classification 98 pertains to “Sabotage” matters.]

· Los Angeles 98-97

· Los Angeles 100-13364, serial #1632

· Los Angeles 105-0-820 [Classification 105 pertains to “Foreign Counterintelligence” matters.]

· Los Angeles 105-6561 [This file is on “Anti-Castro Activities”]

· Los Angeles 105-8734 [This file is on FPCC-Los Angeles chapter]

· Los Angeles 105-16378 [This file is on Frank Vega]

· Los Angeles 105-16406 [This file is on J.U.R.E.]

· New York City 97-1792 [This file is on FPCC-New York City chapter]

· Guy Louis Galbadon [HQ, Los Angeles, Mexico City, Miami, New Orleans, San Diego.]

· Gerald Patrick Hemming Jr. and Interpen [HQ, Dallas, Los Angeles, Miami]

4. MISCELLANEOUS OTHER

· HQ 134-9602, serial #6 [The FBI stated that this serial is exempt from release. I have appealed their denial. The denial reason is almost certainly because the 134-prefix refers to information which the FBI received about Harry from a security informant or confidential source.]

Edited May 3, 2014 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

While going through my notes I found this comment by Keith Gilbert which might be of interest. It posits the Minutemen (not the JBS) as the primary actor in JFK's murder. I bold type some key points.

http://spirituality.feedfury.com/content/52796845-comment-on-a-league-of-their-own-by-keith-d-gilbert.html

Comment on A League of Their Own by Keith D Gilbert May 2nd, 2012

I was there in 1963…I know or knew quite a few of the people named herein. In June, 1963, Dennis Patrick Mower (MM-T1?), Ask me to contact Clinton Wheat for the purpose of selling him or a friend of his weapons and munitions. I went to his home in Hollywood (LA), CA, and we discussed his friend/s and what they wanted. I met with his ‘friends’ either that or the next day; one introduced himself to me a Pacillio, as I recall, the other man was Lee Harvey Oswald. Before the meeting Wheat had shown me a Japanese Type 99 machine gun which had been “customized” with a new barrel which fired the easy to get Italian Tierney round and a cheap telescopic sight about 4X or 6X, the stock was refinished and there was no tripod or bayonet lug. Clinton wanted a second magazine for the weapon which was totally functional.

After meeting with Pacillio (not likely his real name, known for failed invasions of Cuba) and Oswald and hearing their needs I agreed to meet with them at the same location the next evening and tell them what was available…for cash. I smelled a rat because they were too anxious and secretive about their intentions so when we met I declined to sell them any machine guns…though I had a number of fully automatic M-14 rifles, etc., and offered them some explosives instead which did not interest them. We parted with them literally begging for any available weapons

The following day I dropped by Wheat’s home (which I remember as being on Isabella St., but could be mistaken) and while we talked in his shop I noted that the Type 99 was missing and ask but he got all closed mouth about it and wouldn’t discuss it further. It was obvious to me that he had given it to his two visitors.

I suspect that this Japanese Type 99 ‘Bren gun’ was the weapon that actually killed JFK..it can be broken down to a very small package that would not be obvious. These weapons were very common in California and many were converted by rechambering to the Tierney cartridge because it was cheap ($17 for 2K rounds surplus ammo) to shoot misfires on no.

In early 1964 I was in possession of 1,400 lbs of stolen explosives and in contact with Dennis Patrick Mower but he and Richard Gent Butler wanted to use it to kill Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. To stop the plan I called the Los Angeles Times and told a reporter that we had the explosives and were going to use them to kill King…the media went wild and this effectively stopped the plot but had disasterous consequences for myself…I ended up in Canada as a fugative. After a few weeks in Vancouver, B.C., I again contacted Mower and while we talked I mentioned that if he were in contact with Joseph Rea Carey, a fugative from a machine gun charge, I’d be happy to have his company in Canada. Mower got all excited about this prospect and ask me to call him back in a couple of weeks, it appeared to be a solution to his housing Carey and unknown to me a girl named Lynn Luraya (15) whom I had seen in Mower’s garage shortly after Carey ‘dissapeared’ but hadn’t connected the two events until ‘much’ later.

The next time I called Mower and ask him about sending Carey up he got all ’serious’ and told me not to “ever” mention the man’s name again and to forget I had ever known him…and implied a threat to my family.

Because of police activity in Vancouver I fled across Canada ending up in Ottowa, Ontario, in a house on Resaka St. While there Mower came up for a visit and stayed about a week. During this visit he told me all about Lee Harvey Oswald, that he had joined the Minuteman organization right after coming back from Russia…that he had been very disappointed with his adventure in the old USSR and wanted to make up for it…and that the JFK murder was a Minuteman operation.

Mower used this latter information to try to get me to return to the U.S. and ‘finish’ the job on MLK, promising me a ‘deal’ that to this day sounds an awful lot like the one James Earl Ray said was offered to him…by two men whom I believe were Dennis Patrick Mower and Troy Houghton/Haughton (Houghton spoke good Spanish and sometimes impersonated Cuban or other Latin Americans). I was offered a passport, money, safe passage to South Africa and told that the action was sanctioned by FBI J. Edgar Hoover himself. I refused and a week later I was picked up by the RCMP and deported to the U.S.

While Mower was still with me in Ottowa I again ask him about Carey and he got very upset with me and ‘ordered’ me not to ever mention him again, he also told me that if I should get caught under no circumstances was I to talk to anyone lest something happen to my parents and family members…I believed him and did not speak to anyone for months until I spoke with my attorney in Los Angeles after I was extradited from Wattertown, N.Y. I literally sat in jail and refused to speak to prisoners or guards during that time…this led to me being put into ‘isolation’ which suited me just fine…I’d never ben in jail before this.

At my age I’m happy to share this information because it was left out…I wasn’t called before any hearings because of my absence in Canada…almost a year…and because so many people I knew about were either disappearing or dying mysteriously.

Yes, there is/was a vast right wing ‘christian’ conspiracy to sieze the country. I’m surprised that President Obama’s folks haven’t picked up on it.

Yes, absolutely, Ernie, this post about the allegations of Keith Gilbert is indeed of great interest on the Harry Dean thread.

For one thing, Gilbert's claims confirm parts of Harry Dean's main story.

1. That Loran Hall (alias Lorenzo Pacillo) was seen in the company of Lee Harvey Oswald.

2. That Loran Hall and Lee Harvey Oswald were also connected with the Minutemen in Southern California.

That is a crucial observation -- it confirms the crux of Harry Dean's account of the JFK murder.

Now -- one can split hairs to argue that the Minutemen is completely separate from the JBS (John Birch Society), however, one can more easily make the case that the MInutemen and the JBS were very closely related, not only by ideology, but by personnel.

The key to their relationship was roughly as follows: the members of the JBS tended to be upper-middle class professional men and women, well-to-do, living in upscale neighborhoods like Pasadena, the Hollywood hills, Beverley Hills, and so on. Often they were doctors, dentists and lawyers. They had expendible money, and they would often make generous donations to political causes.

The members of the Minutemen, on the other hand, tended to be lower-middle class working men and women, often military veterans, comfortable, living in middle-class neighborhoods, and accustomed to hunting for food and sport. They were raised with firearms, and very comfortable with them. When it came to politics, they would more likely pick up their weapon than make a cash donation.

It was well known that members of the JBS would finance raids on Cuba. Doctors, lawyers and dentists from Southern California (and other places in the USA) would donate firearms and medicine (often amphetemines, which were helpful in combat situations).

Harry Dean and Guy Gabaldon, both active members of the JBS, had a circuit in Southern California in which they would collect firearms, cash and medicines to supply paramilitary adventures in Cuba. Minutemen supplied the manpower.

The politics of the teams were the same. It has always been the contention that the Minutemen and the JBS acted in concert -- not with separate causes, but with one unified cause -- to do anything and everything to oppose Communism in Cuba.

These claims by Keith Gilbert go a long way toward confirming the allegations of Harry Dean.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

While going through my notes I found this comment by Keith Gilbert which might be of interest. It posits the Minutemen (not the JBS) as the primary actor in JFK's murder. I bold type some key points.

http://spirituality.feedfury.com/content/52796845-comment-on-a-league-of-their-own-by-keith-d-gilbert.html

Comment on A League of Their Own by Keith D Gilbert May 2nd, 2012

I was there in 1963…I know or knew quite a few of the people named herein. In June, 1963, Dennis Patrick Mower (MM-T1?), Ask me to contact Clinton Wheat for the purpose of selling him or a friend of his weapons and munitions. I went to his home in Hollywood (LA), CA, and we discussed his friend/s and what they wanted. I met with his ‘friends’ either that or the next day; one introduced himself to me a Pacillio, as I recall, the other man was Lee Harvey Oswald. Before the meeting Wheat had shown me a Japanese Type 99 machine gun which had been “customized” with a new barrel which fired the easy to get Italian Tierney round and a cheap telescopic sight about 4X or 6X, the stock was refinished and there was no tripod or bayonet lug. Clinton wanted a second magazine for the weapon which was totally functional.

After meeting with Pacillio (not likely his real name, known for failed invasions of Cuba) and Oswald and hearing their needs I agreed to meet with them at the same location the next evening and tell them what was available…for cash. I smelled a rat because they were too anxious and secretive about their intentions so when we met I declined to sell them any machine guns…though I had a number of fully automatic M-14 rifles, etc., and offered them some explosives instead which did not interest them. We parted with them literally begging for any available weapons

The following day I dropped by Wheat’s home (which I remember as being on Isabella St., but could be mistaken) and while we talked in his shop I noted that the Type 99 was missing and ask but he got all closed mouth about it and wouldn’t discuss it further. It was obvious to me that he had given it to his two visitors.

I suspect that this Japanese Type 99 ‘Bren gun’ was the weapon that actually killed JFK..it can be broken down to a very small package that would not be obvious. These weapons were very common in California and many were converted by rechambering to the Tierney cartridge because it was cheap ($17 for 2K rounds surplus ammo) to shoot misfires on no.

In early 1964 I was in possession of 1,400 lbs of stolen explosives and in contact with Dennis Patrick Mower but he and Richard Gent Butler wanted to use it to kill Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. To stop the plan I called the Los Angeles Times and told a reporter that we had the explosives and were going to use them to kill King…the media went wild and this effectively stopped the plot but had disasterous consequences for myself…I ended up in Canada as a fugative. After a few weeks in Vancouver, B.C., I again contacted Mower and while we talked I mentioned that if he were in contact with Joseph Rea Carey, a fugative from a machine gun charge, I’d be happy to have his company in Canada. Mower got all excited about this prospect and ask me to call him back in a couple of weeks, it appeared to be a solution to his housing Carey and unknown to me a girl named Lynn Luraya (15) whom I had seen in Mower’s garage shortly after Carey ‘dissapeared’ but hadn’t connected the two events until ‘much’ later.

The next time I called Mower and ask him about sending Carey up he got all ’serious’ and told me not to “ever” mention the man’s name again and to forget I had ever known him…and implied a threat to my family.

Because of police activity in Vancouver I fled across Canada ending up in Ottowa, Ontario, in a house on Resaka St. While there Mower came up for a visit and stayed about a week. During this visit he told me all about Lee Harvey Oswald, that he had joined the Minuteman organization right after coming back from Russia…that he had been very disappointed with his adventure in the old USSR and wanted to make up for it…and that the JFK murder was a Minuteman operation.

Mower used this latter information to try to get me to return to the U.S. and ‘finish’ the job on MLK, promising me a ‘deal’ that to this day sounds an awful lot like the one James Earl Ray said was offered to him…by two men whom I believe were Dennis Patrick Mower and Troy Houghton/Haughton (Houghton spoke good Spanish and sometimes impersonated Cuban or other Latin Americans). I was offered a passport, money, safe passage to South Africa and told that the action was sanctioned by FBI J. Edgar Hoover himself. I refused and a week later I was picked up by the RCMP and deported to the U.S.

While Mower was still with me in Ottowa I again ask him about Carey and he got very upset with me and ‘ordered’ me not to ever mention him again, he also told me that if I should get caught under no circumstances was I to talk to anyone lest something happen to my parents and family members…I believed him and did not speak to anyone for months until I spoke with my attorney in Los Angeles after I was extradited from Wattertown, N.Y. I literally sat in jail and refused to speak to prisoners or guards during that time…this led to me being put into ‘isolation’ which suited me just fine…I’d never ben in jail before this.

At my age I’m happy to share this information because it was left out…I wasn’t called before any hearings because of my absence in Canada…almost a year…and because so many people I knew about were either disappearing or dying mysteriously.

Yes, there is/was a vast right wing ‘christian’ conspiracy to sieze the country. I’m surprised that President Obama’s folks haven’t picked up on it.

Yes, absolutely, Ernie, this post about the allegations of Keith Gilbert is indeed of great interest on the Harry Dean thread.

For one thing, Gilbert's claims confirm parts of Harry Dean's main story.

1. That Loran Hall (alias Lorenzo Pacillo) was seen in the company of Lee Harvey Oswald.

2. That Loran Hall and Lee Harvey Oswald were also connected with the Minutemen in Southern California.

That is a crucial observation -- it confirms the crux of Harry Dean's account of the JFK murder.

Now -- one can split hairs to argue that the Minutemen is completely separate from the JBS (John Birch Society), however, one can more easily make the case that the MInutemen and the JBS were very closely related, not only by ideology, but by personnel.

The key to their relationship was roughly as follows: the members of the JBS tended to be upper-middle class professional men and women, well-to-do, living in upscale neighborhoods like Pasadena, the Hollywood hills, Beverley Hills, and so on. Often they were doctors, dentists and lawyers. They had expendible money, and they would often make generous donations to political causes.

The members of the Minutemen, on the other hand, tended to be lower-middle class working men and women, often military veterans, comfortable, living in middle-class neighborhoods, and accustomed to hunting for food and sport. They were raised with firearms, and very comfortable with them. When it came to politics, they would more likely pick up their weapon than make a cash donation.

It was well known that members of the JBS would finance raids on Cuba. Doctors, lawyers and dentists from Southern California (and other places in the USA) would donate firearms and medicine (often amphetemines, which were helpful in combat situations).

Harry Dean and Guy Gabaldon, both active members of the JBS, had a circuit in Southern California in which they would collect firearms, cash and medicines to supply paramilitary adventures in Cuba. Minutemen supplied the manpower.

The politics of the teams were the same. It has always been the contention that the Minutemen and the JBS acted in concert -- not with separate causes, but with one unified cause -- to do anything and everything to oppose Communism in Cuba.

These claims by Keith Gilbert go a long way toward confirming the allegations of Harry Dean.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Well, we are back to your violations of Logic 101.

1. Just because two things are similar does not make them the same.

2. To my knowledge, there has never been any study made of actual Minutemen members in terms of demographic factors and there have been only two very small sample studies done on Birch Society membership (in the 1960's through anonymous questionnaires). There is no way to know how accurate those two JBS studies were because the sample used (i.e. the members who received and responded to the questionnaire) were not selected by the authors.

3. Consequently, your bold statements and conclusions in your "The key to their relationship..." paragraph are just your unsubstantiated suppositions. In 1962-1965, is it your contention that Harry was an "upper middle class professional"? How about Galbadon? How about Loran Hall? How about Edwin Walker? How about Lawrence Howard?

4. Yes, both JBS and MM members had a similar ideological perspective -- but their general ideological perspective was shared by many other conservatives who totally rejected both the JBS and the MM -- including the Bill Buckley/National Review crowd -- who really were "upper middle class professional" types!

5. The bottom-line is this: You tend to make sweeping generalizations from very minimal or weak or ambiguous factual evidence. The reason is because you force all evidence into the pre-existing story-line inside your head so EVERYTHING you like becomes "confirmation" of whatever point you want to make.

Edited May 3, 2014 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

Well, we are back to your violations of Logic 101.

1. Just because two things are similar does not make them the same.

2. To my knowledge, there has never been any study made of actual Minutemen members in terms of demographic factors and there have been only two very small sample studies done on Birch Society membership (in the 1960's through anonymous questionnaires). There is no way to know how accurate those two JBS studies were because the sample used (i.e. the members who received and responded to the questionnaire) were not selected by the authors.

3. Consequently, your bold statements and conclusions in your "The key to their relationship..." paragraph are just your unsubstantiated suppositions. In 1962-1965, is it your contention that Harry was an "upper middle class professional"? How about Galbadon? How about Loran Hall? How about Edwin Walker? How about Lawrence Howard?

4. Yes, both JBS and MM members had a similar ideological perspective -- but their general ideological perspective was shared by many other conservatives who totally rejected both the JBS and the MM -- including the Bill Buckley/National Review crowd -- who really were "upper middle class professional" types!

5. The bottom-line is this: You tend to make sweeping generalizations from very minimal or weak or ambiguous factual evidence. The reason is because you force all evidence into the pre-existing story-line inside your head so EVERYTHING you like becomes "confirmation" of whatever point you want to make.

No, Ernie, the error in Logic is yours, not mine.

1. I never said that "similarity is identity." That's your mistake.

2. As for the demographics of Minutemen versus John Birch Society members, I am clearly offering an opinion based on personal observation -- I've known many Southern California John Birch Society people -- many. They were all professional people; every single one. Doctors, dentists, lawyers, insurance and real estate agents. They were all home-owners; every one. They were all Anglo-European, with the exception of one Jewish person.

I myself was very interested in their literature for many years, and I read many of their books and magazines. I attended one showing of a JBS film in San Jose in 1975 in one member's home. It was out of curiosity, but I was allowed to attend. I felt very much out of place there -- but at least this proves that blue-collar workers (as I was at the time) could be allowed to become members. I just never saw any who were.

I myself never met a Minuteman -- except for Harry Dean. I asked Harry Dean many questions about them; and Harry told me that they were very comfortable with guns, rifles and paramilitary training. That does not match most ordinary middle-class people I know (although very likely there were a few doctors, dentists and lawyers in their ranks.)

So -- I never said that *all* JBS members were upper-middle class; or that *all* Minutemen were blue-collar types -- however, on the basis of my experience, reading people (JBS) tended to be upper-middle class, while the action people (Minutemen) were apparently lower-middle class.

3. Nor did I ever suggest that every single JBS member was "upper middle class professional." You are over-generalizing. My suggestion was merely that *most* JBS members were "upper middle class professionals."

As for Harry Dean, Guy Galbadon, Loran Hall, Edwin Walker and Lawrence Howard -- they were all Minutemen; so I will repeat -- the JBS were the ideological leaders, and the Minutemen were their foot-soldiers.

Yet there were blends. Edwin Walker, for example, was also an ideological leader -- that is, he gave speeches and he raised money for the cause.

Guy Gabaldon and Loran Hall also made speeches -- mainly in an effort to collect funds and supplies for Cuban Raids. So, their activities were blended -- a portion of JBS and a portion of Minutemen.

4. I am completely aware that many Conservatives rejected the JBS/Minuteman ideology -- and William F. Buckley is a perfect example. That proves nothing about social class. The JBS had many super-rich supporters like H.L. Hunt, Clint Murchison, and many others.

As for upper-middle-class JBS members, Guy Gabaldon and Harry Dean spent considerable time in Southern California collecting funds, supplies and medicines from dentists, doctors, lawyers and other upper-middle-class professionals with significant disposable incomes. One of these JBS supporters donated an *airplane* to Guy Gabaldon. These people had plenty of money -- that is extremely clear in the histories.

5. The real bottom line, Ernie, is this -- that you're missing my point. You are the one making generalizations. I merely pointed out some similarities. It's up to the reader to weigh these facts and draw possible conclusions. I pointed out that your subject, Keith Gilbert plainly confirmed key parts of Harry Dean's main story, namely:

.1. That Loran Hall (alias Lorenzo Pacillo) was seen in the company of Lee Harvey Oswald.

.2. That Loran Hall and Lee Harvey Oswald were also connected with the Minutemen in Southern California.

This isn't mere speculation on my part -- this is documented in your own post above. The similarities are striking.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited May 13, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

Well, we are back to your violations of Logic 101.

1. Just because two things are similar does not make them the same.

2. To my knowledge, there has never been any study made of actual Minutemen members in terms of demographic factors and there have been only two very small sample studies done on Birch Society membership (in the 1960's through anonymous questionnaires). There is no way to know how accurate those two JBS studies were because the sample used (i.e. the members who received and responded to the questionnaire) were not selected by the authors.

3. Consequently, your bold statements and conclusions in your "The key to their relationship..." paragraph are just your unsubstantiated suppositions. In 1962-1965, is it your contention that Harry was an "upper middle class professional"? How about Galbadon? How about Loran Hall? How about Edwin Walker? How about Lawrence Howard?

4. Yes, both JBS and MM members had a similar ideological perspective -- but their general ideological perspective was shared by many other conservatives who totally rejected both the JBS and the MM -- including the Bill Buckley/National Review crowd -- who really were "upper middle class professional" types!

5. The bottom-line is this: You tend to make sweeping generalizations from very minimal or weak or ambiguous factual evidence. The reason is because you force all evidence into the pre-existing story-line inside your head so EVERYTHING you like becomes "confirmation" of whatever point you want to make.

No, Ernie, the error in Logic is yours, not mine.

1. I never said that "similarity is identity." That's your mistake.

You keep pretending that you do not understand why your comments are perceived differently from what you may think you are conveying.

What you intend to "say" can only be judged by your use of the English language. When you make bold declarative statements and assertions without qualifiers, then you should not be surprised if your readers interpret your comments differently from what you may think you are saying.

I made no "mistake". I merely read your words where you attempted to assert that differences between the JBS and MM were only a matter of "splitting hairs" and that, in reality, the MM and JBS were "very closely related". You then pretended that you had specific factual knowledge about the demographic makeup of both the MM and the JBS to support your assumptions.

2. As for the demographics of Minutemen versus John Birch Society members, I am clearly offering an opinion based on personal observation -- I've known many Southern California John Birch Society people -- many. They were all professional people; every single one. Doctors, dentists, lawyers, insurance and real estate agents. They were all home-owners; every one. They were all Anglo-European, with the exception of one Jewish person.

The operative phrase in this paragraph is "I am clearly offering an opinion" -- which was totally absent from your original comment which was presented as factual (not an opinion). I have known many JBS people too. So what? Your (or my) anecdotal evidence is not the same as fact.

I myself was very interested in their literature for many years, and I read many of their books and magazines. I attended one showing of a JBS film in San Jose in 1975 in one member's home. It was out of curiosity, but I was allowed to attend. I felt very much out of place there -- but at least this proves that blue-collar workers (as I was at the time) could be allowed to become members. I just never saw any who were.

Well, I also attended several JBS events 30 and 40 years ago. So what? I specifically recall one meeting where John McManus spoke (he is currently President of the JBS but he was then National PR Director). The people in the audience around me were different from what you describe. The guy sitting next to me was a truck driver. There were several black people attending and our local JBS chapter subsequently sponsored a speech by Rev. E. Freeman Yearling (a black pastor from New York). I wrote an article about that meeting (entitled "TACT Comes To Fremont") for a southern California liberal newsletter. TACT was the JBS front-group, Truth About Civil Turmoil. Yearling also appeared on the Joe Pyne Program.

I myself never met a Minuteman -- except for Harry Dean. I asked Harry Dean many questions about them; and Harry told me that they were very comfortable with guns, rifles and paramilitary training. That does not match most ordinary middle-class people I know (although very likely there were a few doctors, dentists and lawyers in their ranks.)

Most NRA-members appear to be middle class or upper middle class so I don't know what you base your opinion upon.

So -- I never said that *all* JBS members were upper-middle class; or that *all* Minutemen were blue-collar types -- however, on the basis of my experience, reading people (JBS) tended to be upper-middle class, while the action people (Minutemen) were apparently lower-middle class.

Well, again, your current qualified statement is considerably different from your original statement. We are not discussing "All" of any category. That is another of your typical straw-man arguments. You originally presented a bold, definitive statement as a generalization -- proposing that your description was a factual summary of what is known about the background of the individuals who were members of two different organizations. My point continues to be that there have never been any sociological or demographic studies made to support your personal opinions---particularly with respect to Minutemen.

3. Nor did I ever suggest that every single JBS member was "upper middle class professional." You are over-generalizing. My suggestion was merely that *most* JBS members were "upper middle class professionals."

I did NOT write what you claim I wrote. You have this nasty habit of accusing your perceived opponents or critics of the very qualities which you reveal about YOURSELF! You "over-generalize" and then attempt to weasel-word your way out of your original statements.

As for Harry Dean, Guy Galbadon, Loran Hall, Edwin Walker and Lawrence Howard -- they were all Minutemen; so I will repeat -- the JBS were the ideological leaders, and the Minutemen were their foot-soldiers.

But I did not ask you if they were "ideological leaders". I asked you if they fit your sociological or demographic descriptions. Another typical straw-man argument by you.

Yet there were blends. Edwin Walker, for example, was also an ideological leader -- that is, he gave speeches and he raised money for the cause.

Guy Gabaldon and Larry Howard also made speeches -- mainly in an effort to collect funds and supplies for Cuban Raids. So, their activities were blended -- a portion of JBS and a portion of Minutemen.

4. I am completely aware that many Conservatives rejected the JBS/Minuteman ideology -- and William F. Buckley is a perfect example. That proves nothing about social class. The JBS had many super-rich supporters like H.L. Hunt, Clint Murchison, and many others.

You just made my point. Ideological perspective was not a class-based phenomenon as you originally suggested.

There were significant numbers of doctors and dentists who were JBS members but there were also many blue-collar types. If you were familiar with the literature about supporters of Sen. Joe McCarthy (and the JBS can be said to be his heirs) you would know that both McCarthy and Birchers appealed to a very wide range of people. For example, see sociologist Seymour M. Lipset's articles about McCarthy and JBS supporters. [incidentally, Lipset coined the term "radical right"]

As for upper-middle-class JBS members, Guy Gabaldon and Harry Dean spent considerable time in Southern California collecting funds, supplies and medicines from dentists, doctors, lawyers and other upper-middle-class professionals with significant disposable incomes. One of these JBS supporters donated an *airplane* to Guy Gabaldon. These people had plenty of money -- that is extremely clear in the histories.

But, again, my original question asked you to categorize Harry, Galbadon, Walker, Hall, Howard in terms of THEIR social class. Were they all "upper middle class professionals"?

5. The real bottom line, Ernie, is this -- that you're missing my point. You are the one making generalizations. I merely pointed out some similarities. It's up to the reader to weigh these facts and draw possible conclusions. I pointed out that your subject, Keith Gilbert plainly confirmed key parts of Harry Dean's main story, namely:

.1. That Loran Hall (alias Lorenzo Pacillo) was seen in the company of Lee Harvey Oswald.

.2. That Loran Hall and Lee Harvey Oswald were also connected with the Minutemen in Southern California.

No, Paul, I replied to YOUR original comments which you are now attempting (unsuccessfully) to change.

This isn't mere speculation on my part -- this is documented in your own post above. The similarities are striking.

You still do not understand. Apples and tomatoes are strikingly "similar" because they are both "fruits" which often are the same color (red, yellow, green) BUT they also have many different properties and they are used in very different ways. Frequently, apples are used to make pies. Tomatoes are not used for pies. Apples are consumed as a snack. Tomatoes are not. But they are "similar". Your problem continues to be your willingness to make broad generalizations from very weak or ambiguous or incomplete evidence.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

My replies appear underneath your comments

Edited May 5, 2014 by Ernie Lazar