Harry Dean: Memoirs

[Paul Trejo]

...It also speaks to the deposition of Keith Gilbert that Ernie Lazar shared above -- which also links Loran Hall (Lorenzo Pacillo) with Lee Harvey Oswald, and both of them to the Southern California Minutemen.

The words of Keith Gilbert accidentally supported the claims of Harry Dean -- but will the debaters here also AVOID THIS ISSUE?

With utmost sincerity,

--Paul Trejo

There is no "issue" other than your willingness to believe, or invent, anything which you think advances Harry's narrative.

Since you now want to use Keith Gilbert, please let us know what contacts you have had with Keith and what questions you asked him and what were his answers? In other words, how did you determine that Keith was presenting accurate, truthful, factual information?

There certainly is an issue, Ernie. The words that you recently posted from Keith Gilbert created an issue. Period.

You are clearly stunned by the surprise that your own posts have helped to confirm Harry Dean's position.

Now you want to back out of it? You want ME to do your leg-work for you? You want ME to disprove Keith Gilbert's own deposition?

LOL

You simply refuse to admit when you're mistaken, Ernie. Like Tommy, you'll go to any lengths of evasion and retain an offensive posture than admit the weakness of your argument.

YOU POSTED THE KEITH GILBERT INFORMATION, ERNIE. Now YOU explain why it just so happens to agree with Harry Dean -- the very person you've been attacking here since 2010. The whole world is watching.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Edited May 8, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

...It also speaks to the deposition of Keith Gilbert that Ernie Lazar shared above -- which also links Loran Hall (Lorenzo Pacillo) with Lee Harvey Oswald, and both of them to the Southern California Minutemen.

The words of Keith Gilbert accidentally supported the claims of Harry Dean -- but will the debaters here also AVOID THIS ISSUE?

With utmost sincerity,

--Paul Trejo

There is no "issue" other than your willingness to believe, or invent, anything which you think advances Harry's narrative.

Since you now want to use Keith Gilbert, please let us know what contacts you have had with Keith and what questions you asked him and what were his answers? In other words, how did you determine that Keith was presenting accurate, truthful, factual information?

There certainly is an issue, Ernie. The words that you recently posted from Keith Gilbert created an issue. Period.

You are clearly stunned by the surprise that your own posts have helped to confirm Harry Dean's position.

Now you want to back out of it? You want ME to do your leg-work for you? You want ME to disprove Keith Gilbert's own deposition?

LOL

You simply refuse to admit when you're mistaken, Ernie. Like Tommy, you'll go to any lengths of evasion and retain an offensive posture than admit the weakness of your argument.

YOU POSTED THE KEITH GILBERT INFORMATION, ERNIE. Now YOU explain why it just so happens to agree with Harry Dean -- the very person you've been attacking here since 2010. The whole world is watching.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Paul -- you are truly delusional.

1. I am not "stunned" by anything you fabricate. Only bemused.

2. Nothing presented by Keith Gilbert "helped to confirm" anything Harry has said or written. As already noted, factual truth requires verifiable PROOF -- not mere unsubstantiated assertions or speculations (which you prefer).

3. We have already established that you NEVER do any "leg work". You prefer to INVENT whatever you think moves Harry's story along -- just as you did with your elaborate psychiatric analysis hoax of the alleged "FBI forgery" of Harry's letter to Hoover.

4. Keith Gilbert did not provide a "deposition". A deposition is a sworn statement. Gilbert provided only an unsubstantiated anecdotal comment -- which only goes to prove (yet again) that you are a totally incompetent and intellectually dishonest person.

5. I am always happy to admit my errors but you have never proven anything I have written to be mistaken. And, for the record, I did not present any argument. I merely copied and pasted a comment made by Gilbert because, as I previously explained, I was attempting to illustrate that there are many different theories regarding who was responsible for the murder of JFK.

6. Your position has always been that ONLY the "JBS plot" theory promoted by Harry and yourself is the one which specifically identified Oswald. For example, in May 2008, you stated:

Loran Hall, John Rousselot, Harry Dean, General Walker and a few others would meet together at exclusive JBS meetings in 1963 where the assassination of Kennedy was discussed. That in itself is not very significant, because perhaps thousands of of such gripe sessions took place all over the U.S. in those months. What made these particular JBS meetings so interesting, however, is that they actively named Lee Harvey Oswald to be their patsy.

This is what makes the JBS-Walker-Hall-Rousselot meetings front and center in U.S. history. Of all the perhaps hundreds of JFK assassination plots in the country, including those by Cuban exiles, the Mafia, ex-CIA rogues, ex-FBI rogues, Russian exiles, German exiles, and so on, only one of them actually carried it off. The one that carried it off was the one that took extraordinary steps to make Lee Harvey Oswald into the patsy.

And you have repeated that assertion several times since 2008.

I provided Keith Gilbert's comment to illustrate that you are wrong (as usual). There are many examples of "plots" which mention Oswald but which did NOT mention one word about Walker, Rousselot, Welch, Galbadon, or the JBS.

7. I have never "evaded" anything you present. I have specifically and repeatedly addressed your incessant falsehoods and misrepresentations.

8. The only way for you to claim that Keith Gilbert "agrees" with Harry Dean's theory - is if you contact Keith Gilbert and ask him. At present, Gilbert has stated that the murder of JFK was a "Minuteman operation" -- not a JBS operation. Furthermore, the official JBS position regarding the Minutemen was HOSTILE. In fact, Robert DePugh was kicked out of the JBS -- as were other Minutemen members.

9. I note, for the record, that your recent attempt to claim that Wesley Swearingen had an "open mind" regarding Harry's narrative turned out to be another example of how you DELIBERATELY LIE whenever you want to claim that somebody supports your argument.

Edited May 8, 2014 by Ernie Lazar

[Larry Hancock]

The following would probably be useful in evaluating Keith Gilbert's associations...

http://greatwhitedesert.org/dir/index.php?title=Adolf_Hitler_Was_Elijah

[Ernie Lazar]

The following would probably be useful in evaluating Keith Gilbert's associations...

http://greatwhitedesert.org/dir/index.php?title=Adolf_Hitler_Was_Elijah

Keith Gilbert is a very unsavory character with a decades-long history of extreme bigotry. He joined or created several white supremacist and neo-nazi organizations - including the Socialist National Aryan People's Party of Post Falls, Idaho (a splinter group from Aryan Nations). He was a disciple of Rev. Wesley Swift (Christian Identity movement) and he is an ardent admirer of Adolf Hitler.

In February 1965, 1400 pounds of stolen dynamite were discovered in Gilbert's garage apartment in Glendale CA. He fled to Canada to avoid prosecution but was arrested and ultimately served time in San Quentin Prison for plotting to murder Martin Luther King Jr by bombing the Hollywood Palladium during a speech by King.

Gilbert again went to prison in 1985 on welfare fraud and income tax evasion charges. in 2006 he was convicted on illegal weapons charges.

For more details concerning Gilbert's disgusting background see the following court cases:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4126868664900537864&q=%22keith+d.+gilbert%22&hl=en&as_sdt=2006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13023594755729926795&q=keith+gilbert&hl=en&as_sdt=2006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12311013471995536991&q=%22keith+dwayne+gilbert%22&hl=en&as_sdt=2006

Also see: James Aho: The Politics of Righteousness: Idaho Christian Patriotism [university of Washington Press, 1990, pages 57, 60, 235]

http://books.google.com/books?id=4YNAYDaEAE4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=James+Aho&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ihVsU-q3NIW8oQTmtYHIBw&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=snippet&q=gilbert&f=false

It should come as absolutely no surprise that Paul Trejo latches onto something written by someone as despicable as Keith Gilbert and considers it as reliable factual data -- because Trejo believes anything which he thinks he can twist to conform to some statement made by Harry Dean.

Edited May 9, 2014 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

It should come as absolutely no surprise that Paul Trejo latches onto something written by someone as despicable as Keith Gilbert and considers it as reliable factual data -- because Trejo believes anything which he thinks he can twist to conform to some statement made by Harry Dean.

Ernie, your rhetoric is becoming transparent and sophomoric.

YOU are the one who posted the words of this Nazi, Keith Gilbert, onto this Harry Dean thread.

All I did was point out that Keith Gilbert's deposition suggested two facts:

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

2. Loran Hall and Lee Harvey Oswald associated with Minutemen from Southern California.

When I pointed this out to you, you froze -- stunned. You have been trying to backpedal ever since.

Now you're trying to blame me for bringing this Nazi onto this thread. But it was YOUR post, Ernie, as anyone can see.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Edited May 9, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

It should come as absolutely no surprise that Paul Trejo latches onto something written by someone as despicable as Keith Gilbert and considers it as reliable factual data -- because Trejo believes anything which he thinks he can twist to conform to some statement made by Harry Dean.

Ernie, your rhetoric is becoming transparent and sophomoric.

YOU are the one who posted the words of this Nazi, Keith Gilbert, onto this Harry Dean thread.

All I did was point out that Keith Gilbert's deposition suggested two facts:

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

2. Loran Hall and Lee Harvey Oswald associated with Minutemen from Southern California.

When I pointed this out to you, you froze -- stunned. You have been trying to backpedal ever since.

Now you're trying to blame me for bringing this Nazi onto this thread. But it was YOUR post, Ernie, as anyone can see.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Paul -- how did I "backpedal"?

I am not "blaming" you for "bringing" Gilbert's comment here. I am blaming you for BELIEVING and using his anecdotal comments without doing ANY research into them (which is your normal custom).

Also, FYI, in statements Gilbert made to law enforcement, Gilbert acknowledged that he had no personal knowledge regarding Oswald being a member of Minutemen. Instead, he was relying entirely upon a comment which he claimed was made by Dennis Mower. And, again, your use of the word "deposition" is a falsehood.

The key point (which understandably you choose to ignore and deliberately misrepresent) is your child-like gullibility and your credulous willingness to use ANY data -- no matter what source it comes from --- because you are INCAPABLE of performing rudimentary fact-checking --- which is why, (for example) your eBook contains so many total falsehoods about Harry's purported September 1963 "meetings" with Wesley Grapp whom you and Harry describe as "SAC Los Angeles" when, in reality, Grapp was not even in Los Angeles!

Lastly, STOP using the word "FACTS" -- when what you are actually referring to is speculation or hearsay or anecdotes.

[Paul Trejo]

Ernie,

Why did you post the words of Keith Gilbert on this thread? What was your purpose? What was your intention? What were you trying to communicate by sharing the words of that filthy, dirty Nazi on this thread?

Explain yourself!

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

[Thomas Graves]

Ernie,

Why did you post the words of Keith Gilbert on this thread? What was your purpose? What was your intention? What were you trying to communic

ate by sharing the words of that filthy, dirty Nazi on this thread?

Explain yourself!

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Word Twister Trejo,

Why do you insist on saying Gilbert gave a (legal, sworn) "deposition," when in fact all he did was make some hearsay-based statements to the police, as Ernie has already pointed out a couple of times?

All The Best Regards,

--Tommy

Edited May 10, 2014 by Thomas Graves

[Ernie Lazar]

Ernie,

Why did you post the words of Keith Gilbert on this thread? What was your purpose? What was your intention? What were you trying to communicate by sharing the words of that filthy, dirty Nazi on this thread?

Explain yourself!

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

I explained my reason in message #1082 above.

A key component of your argument is centered around the idea that senior leaders of the JBS (including Rousselot and Welch) and JBS members (such as Galbadon, Walker, Hall) organized, planned, financed, and executed a "JBS plot" to murder JFK.

You have written numerous times that the ONLY plot which made Oswald the patsy was the one which succeeded, i.e. the "JBS plot".

I copied/pasted the comment by Keith Gilbert (which is only his anecdotal reference to hearsay he allegedly got from Dennis Mower) to illustrate that there are alternative explanations floating around which also mention Oswald but which DO NOT mention the JBS. Instead, as Gilbert/Mower concluded, it was a "Minutemen operation".

You want us to believe that it is merely "splitting hairs" to attempt to make careful distinctions between the MM and the JBS.

Specifically, YOU wrote that:

"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."

But the reality is starkly different from your lowest-common-denominator reasoning.

As I previously wrote:

"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...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)...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."

One could reasonably conclude that ALL of the individuals and groups we have discussed (i.e. the "JBS plot" actors) probably were Goldwater supporters and voters during the 1960's.

However, one cannot use your lowest-common-denominator "logic" to also claim that all Goldwater supporters shared the same views OR that it is merely "splitting hairs" to make careful distinctions between pro-Goldwater political extremists like Welch, Walker, and DePugh (or about pro-Goldwater racists in southern states) versus vehemently anti-JBS and anti-MM but pro-Goldwater conservative intellectuals or political activists such as Gov. Ronald Reagan, Russell Kirk, Bill Buckley, James Burnham, Frank Meyer, Herbert Philbrick, and virtually the entire GOP political establishment (state GOP Chairmen and national GOP officials for example).

My larger point continues to be that YOU accept as credible ANYTHING (from ANY source) which you think conforms to something which you or Harry currently believe OR which you/Harry think can be used to advance your argument.

You never perform due diligence through careful fact-checking and research. Instead, you just immediately cite as authoritative and credible ANYBODY whom you think harmonizes with whatever point you want your readers to believe.

Edited May 10, 2014 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

Word Twister Trejo,

Why do you insist on saying Gilbert gave a (legal, sworn) "deposition," when in fact all he did was make some hearsay-based statements to the police, as Ernie has already pointed out a couple of times?

All The Best Regards,

--Tommy

OK, OK, Tommy. It wasn't a deposition, it was a series of official statements to the police. Satisfied?

Warmer regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited August 3, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

...

2. Nothing presented by Keith Gilbert "helped to confirm" anything Harry has said or written. As already noted, factual truth requires verifiable PROOF -- not mere unsubstantiated assertions or speculations (which you prefer).

3. We have already established that you NEVER do any "leg work". You prefer to INVENT whatever you think moves Harry's story along -- just as you did with your elaborate psychiatric analysis hoax of the alleged "FBI forgery" of Harry's letter to Hoover.

4. Keith Gilbert did not provide a "deposition". A deposition is a sworn statement. Gilbert provided only an unsubstantiated anecdotal comment -- which only goes to prove (yet again) that you are a totally incompetent and intellectually dishonest person.

5. I am always happy to admit my errors but you have never proven anything I have written to be mistaken. And, for the record, I did not present any argument. I merely copied and pasted a comment made by Gilbert because, as I previously explained, I was attempting to illustrate that there are many different theories regarding who was responsible for the murder of JFK.

6. Your position has always been that ONLY the "JBS plot" theory promoted by Harry and yourself is the one which specifically identified Oswald. For example, in May 2008, you stated:

Loran Hall, John Rousselot, Harry Dean, General Walker and a few others would meet together at exclusive JBS meetings in 1963 where the assassination of Kennedy was discussed. That in itself is not very significant, because perhaps thousands of of such gripe sessions took place all over the U.S. in those months. What made these particular JBS meetings so interesting, however, is that they actively named Lee Harvey Oswald to be their patsy.

This is what makes the JBS-Walker-Hall-Rousselot meetings front and center in U.S. history. Of all the perhaps hundreds of JFK assassination plots in the country, including those by Cuban exiles, the Mafia, ex-CIA rogues, ex-FBI rogues, Russian exiles, German exiles, and so on, only one of them actually carried it off. The one that carried it off was the one that took extraordinary steps to make Lee Harvey Oswald into the patsy.

And you have repeated that assertion several times since 2008.

I provided Keith Gilbert's comment to illustrate that you are wrong (as usual). There are many examples of "plots" which mention Oswald but which did NOT mention one word about Walker, Rousselot, Welch, Galbadon, or the JBS.

7. I have never "evaded" anything you present. I have specifically and repeatedly addressed your incessant falsehoods and misrepresentations.

8. The only way for you to claim that Keith Gilbert "agrees" with Harry Dean's theory - is if you contact Keith Gilbert and ask him. At present, Gilbert has stated that the murder of JFK was a "Minuteman operation" -- not a JBS operation. Furthermore, the official JBS position regarding the Minutemen was HOSTILE. In fact, Robert DePugh was kicked out of the JBS -- as were other Minutemen members.

9. I note, for the record, that your recent attempt to claim that Wesley Swearingen had an "open mind" regarding Harry's narrative turned out to be another example of how you DELIBERATELY LIE whenever you want to claim that somebody supports your argument.

OK, Ernie, you hope to justify your posting of this Nazi psychopath's statements on this thread by using your post #1082. So I'll hold my nose as I review post #1082.

(2) You continue to deny that anything presented by Keith Gilbert "helped to confirm" two claims by Harry Dean -- which everybody here can plainly see -- namely, that (i) Loran Hall knew Lee Harvey Oswald; and (ii) they were both connected with the Southern California Minutemen.

Your denial of these obvious facts shows your disconnect from reason and reality. You'll say anything, Ernie, to avoid admitting that you're mistaken -- which you clearly, obviously are.

(4) As for "deposition" argument, it's a pittance, and you know it. Gilbert offered his eye-witness remarks in an official statement to the Police. It was not under oath -- so it's not technically a "deposition."

However -- it remains a fact that it was presented in an official manner to authorities -- and it was presented as EYE-WITNESS information.

(5) You don't admit your mistakes, Ernie. You'll say anything at all to wiggle out. YOU posted this Nazi's words on this list. The very obvious fact is that Keith Gilbert's official statement to the Police agrees with Harry Dean's two claims that: (i) Loran Hall knew Lee Harvey Oswald; and (ii) they were both connected with the Southern California Minutemen.

Then you continue to deny any such connection. You've got some nerve to call anybody 'dishonest' here, Ernie. You're completely lacking in intellectual integrity. It's obvious to every impartial reader.

(6) Again, you're mistaken when you try to reduce my position to the "JBS plot" theory promoted by Harry. My research has always been independent of Harry Dean -- and I only met Harry Dean on this Forum in 2011. My research has always been a focus on Ex-General EdwinWalker -- the only US General to resign in the 20th century. His connections with Gerry Patrick Hemming, Loran Hall and Larry Howard are now matters of US history, thanks to the opening of his personal papers at the University of Texas at Austin.

(6.1) You now claim that you posted this dirty Nazi's words on this thread to show that "there are many examples of 'plots' which mention Oswald but which did NOT mention one word about Walker, Rousselot, Welch, Galbadon, or the JBS."

The problem with your wiggling there, Ernie, is that actually Loran Hall was a speaker for the Southern California JBS. Loran Hall is mentioned in FBI records as associated with the JBS in Texas. Loran Hall is the material connection between Lee Harvey Oswald and the JBS.

So, once again, Ernie, you are entirely mistaken. But of course, we don't expect you to admit it.

(7) You continually evade the truths before you, including the facts that you yourself post here without thinking them through (e.g. the Keith Gilbert statement). I have continually pointed out your steady stream of falsehoods -- and you never admit them.

(8) There is no way I'm going to call a dirty, filthy Nazi, Ernie. You're the one who posted his words here, so YOU are the one who should contact him, if you honestly believe he should be contacted.

In any case, there is nothing further needed from Keith Gilbert than this official statement that he gave to the Police. Either he was lying or he was telling the truth.

You presented his words, Ernie, as if he was telling the truth. I pointed out the contradiction in your logic (again) by showing that if Keith Gilbert is telling the truth, then he is also SUPPORTING the claims of Harry Dean.

You've been caught in a major blunder, Ernie. But again, we don't expect you to admit it -- although everybody here can see it clearly (even you).

(8.1) Your own post to John Dolva above admitted many points of agreement and cooperation between the JBS and the Minutemen, Ernie -- and now you try to backpedal like crazy, and deny the connection? Your logic is failing you.

Certainly the JBS and the Minutemen relationship did not last beyond the JFK murder -- they went in separate directions after that point. But until December 1963, the points in common between the JBS and the Minutemen are well documented -- even by you.

(9) The truth is that Wesley Swearingen personally wrote to me to tell me that he could not entirely eliminate the claims of Harry Dean -- all he could do was to promote his own observations. You, Ernie, are the incorrigible twister of words.

When you're caught in a self-contradiction, you turn to crass insults. Well, that's your personality.

With utmost sincerity,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

P.S. You've been getting away with calling me a xxxx for six months, Ernie, so I suppose that John Simkin's rule isn't being enforced anymore -- maybe that word is now acceptable culture here. I'll ask a Moderator again.

Edited August 3, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

Word Twister Trejo,

Why do you insist on saying Gilbert gave a (legal, sworn) "deposition," when in fact all he did was make some hearsay-based statements to the police, as Ernie has already pointed out a couple of times?

All The Best Regards,

--Tommy

OK, OK, Tommy. It wasn't a deposition, it was a serious of official statements to the police. Satisfied?

Warmer regards,

--Paul Trejo

For clarity, the original comment we were discussing (which Paul was using to support Harry's argument) was not even "an official statement to the police". It was an anecdotal comment which Gilbert posted on a webpage.

[Ernie Lazar]

...

2. Nothing presented by Keith Gilbert "helped to confirm" anything Harry has said or written. As already noted, factual truth requires verifiable PROOF -- not mere unsubstantiated assertions or speculations (which you prefer).

3. We have already established that you NEVER do any "leg work". You prefer to INVENT whatever you think moves Harry's story along -- just as you did with your elaborate psychiatric analysis hoax of the alleged "FBI forgery" of Harry's letter to Hoover.

4. Keith Gilbert did not provide a "deposition". A deposition is a sworn statement. Gilbert provided only an unsubstantiated anecdotal comment -- which only goes to prove (yet again) that you are a totally incompetent and intellectually dishonest person.

5. I am always happy to admit my errors but you have never proven anything I have written to be mistaken. And, for the record, I did not present any argument. I merely copied and pasted a comment made by Gilbert because, as I previously explained, I was attempting to illustrate that there are many different theories regarding who was responsible for the murder of JFK.

6. Your position has always been that ONLY the "JBS plot" theory promoted by Harry and yourself is the one which specifically identified Oswald. For example, in May 2008, you stated:

Loran Hall, John Rousselot, Harry Dean, General Walker and a few others would meet together at exclusive JBS meetings in 1963 where the assassination of Kennedy was discussed. That in itself is not very significant, because perhaps thousands of of such gripe sessions took place all over the U.S. in those months. What made these particular JBS meetings so interesting, however, is that they actively named Lee Harvey Oswald to be their patsy.

This is what makes the JBS-Walker-Hall-Rousselot meetings front and center in U.S. history. Of all the perhaps hundreds of JFK assassination plots in the country, including those by Cuban exiles, the Mafia, ex-CIA rogues, ex-FBI rogues, Russian exiles, German exiles, and so on, only one of them actually carried it off. The one that carried it off was the one that took extraordinary steps to make Lee Harvey Oswald into the patsy.

And you have repeated that assertion several times since 2008.

I provided Keith Gilbert's comment to illustrate that you are wrong (as usual). There are many examples of "plots" which mention Oswald but which did NOT mention one word about Walker, Rousselot, Welch, Galbadon, or the JBS.

7. I have never "evaded" anything you present. I have specifically and repeatedly addressed your incessant falsehoods and misrepresentations.

8. The only way for you to claim that Keith Gilbert "agrees" with Harry Dean's theory - is if you contact Keith Gilbert and ask him. At present, Gilbert has stated that the murder of JFK was a "Minuteman operation" -- not a JBS operation. Furthermore, the official JBS position regarding the Minutemen was HOSTILE. In fact, Robert DePugh was kicked out of the JBS -- as were other Minutemen members.

9. I note, for the record, that your recent attempt to claim that Wesley Swearingen had an "open mind" regarding Harry's narrative turned out to be another example of how you DELIBERATELY LIE whenever you want to claim that somebody supports your argument.

OK, Ernie, you hope to justify your posting of this Nazi psychopath's statements on this thread by using your post #1082. So I'll hold my nose as I review post #1082.

Why "hold your nose" to review or analyze anything presented here? Harry's entire argument depends upon his alleged recollections of his close personal friendships and associations with individuals and organizations which you have described as traitors and murderers. You seem to have a very selective nose.

(2) You continue to deny that anything presented by Keith Gilbert "helped to confirm" two claims by Harry Dean -- which everybody here can plainly see -- namely, that (i) Loran Hall knew Lee Harvey Oswald; and (ii) they were both connected with the Southern California Minutemen.

Your denial of these obvious facts shows your disconnect from reason and reality. You'll say anything, Ernie, to avoid admitting that you're mistaken -- which you clearly, obviously are.

You keep using the word "facts".

It is now time that you define what you mean by "fact". What is the difference (in your mind) between an assertion versus a fact?

Keith Gilbert presented an anecdotal reference which has never been vetted to determine whether or not it is accurate and truthful. You just ASSUME he is presenting "fact". DID YOU CONTACT GILBERT TO ASK HIM QUESTIONS? DID YOU EXAMINE ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN HIS POSSESSION?

(4) As for "deposition" argument, it's a pittance, and you know it. Gilbert offered his eye-witness remarks in an official statement to the Police. It was not under oath -- so it's not technically a "deposition."

I don't understand your comment. The May 2012 posting by Gilbert we are discussing was not any "official statement to the police". It was anecdotal. Do you know what anecdotal means? The definition is: "not necessarily true or reliable, because based on personal accounts rather than facts or research"

We have no verifiable proof of anything which Gilbert said. Gilbert was not an "eyewitness" in the way YOU want to use that term.

However -- it remains a fact that it was presented in an official manner to authorities -- and it was presented as EYE-WITNESS information.

Well, you seem to place a lot of credence upon what YOU describe as "eyewitness" testimony.

In 2013, a DVD was released entitled "I Shot JFK: The Shocking Truth--The Real Murderer Reveals His Secret" -- by James E. Files (actor) and Robert Kiviat (Director)

Keith Gilbert (your "eyewitness", who boasts, "I Was There!") wrote a review about that DVD on Amazon.com. Keith (your "eyewitness") identified the "actual shooter" who murdered JFK as "Gary Hemming".

(5) You don't admit your mistakes, Ernie. You'll say anything at all to wiggle out. YOU posted this Nazi's words on this list. The very obvious fact is that Keith Gilbert's official statement to the Police agrees with Harry Dean's two claims that: (i) Loran Hall knew Lee Harvey Oswald; and (ii) they were both connected with the Southern California Minutemen.

Which "official statement to the police" are you referring to? Please be specific. What date and which Police Department? Do you have a copy of it you can share with us? We are back to your use of lowest-common-denominator reasoning as "proof" for whatever you want to propose we accept.

Then you continue to deny any such connection. You've got some nerve to call anybody 'dishonest' here, Ernie. You're completely lacking in intellectual integrity. It's obvious to every impartial reader.

I have not "denied" any connection. I simply pointed out that we have no verifiable proof for any of Gilbert's assertions which are hearsay and anecdotal. By contrast, you accept ANYTHING -- regardless of source -- and you never bother to perform ANY research to separate fact from fiction.

(6) Again, you're mistaken when you try to reduce my position to the "JBS plot" theory promoted by Harry. My research has always been independent of Harry Dean -- and I only met Harry Dean on this Forum in 2011. My research has always been a focus on Ex-General EdwinWalker -- the only US General to resign in the 20th century. His connections with Gerry Patrick Hemming, Loran Hall and Larry Howard are now matters of US history, thanks to the opening of his personal papers at the University of Texas at Austin.

There are always "connections" between and among people. But you make definitive assertions and conclusions based upon very flimsy or ambiguous evidence. All of the alternative "theories" about who murdered JFK present voluminous evidence of "connections".

(6.1) You now claim that you posted this dirty Nazi's words on this thread to show that "there are many examples of

'plots' which mention Oswald but which did NOT mention one word about Walker, Rousselot, Welch, Galbadon, or the JBS."

The problem with your wiggling there, Ernie, is that actually Loran Hall was a speaker for the Southern California JBS. Loran Hall is mentioned in FBI records as associated with the JBS in Texas. Loran Hall is the material connection between Lee Harvey Oswald and the JBS.

I am not "wiggling". I provided very specific answers to your questions. You think Loran Hall's connection to LHO is significant. Other analysts arrive at different conclusions. So what?

So, once again, Ernie, you are entirely mistaken. But of course, we don't expect you to admit it.

Mistaken about what? Be specific.

What have I written about Loran Hall that you object to? QUOTE IT! I honestly have no idea what you are referring to!

(7) You continually evade the truths before you, including the facts that you yourself post here without thinking them through (e.g. the Keith Gilbert statement). I have continually pointed out your steady stream of falsehoods -- and you never admit them.

Keith Gilbert did not present "facts". He presented anecdotal comments. THAT is what you do not understand. You have never identified even one "falsehood" of mine. You project onto me your own worst qualities.

(8) There is no way I'm going to call a dirty, filthy Nazi, Ernie. You're the one who posted his words here, so YOU are the one who should contact him, if you honestly believe he should be contacted. In any case, there is nothing further needed from Keith Gilbert than this official statement that he gave to the Police. Either he was lying or he was telling the truth.

What "official statement" are you referring to? BE SPECIFIC. What is the date of his statement? And do you have a copy you can share with us so we understand what you are describing as "fact"? Is it your contention that every statement made to a police department is "fact"?

You presented his words, Ernie, as if he was telling the truth. I pointed out the contradiction in your logic (again) by showing that if Keith Gilbert is telling the truth, then he is also SUPPORTING the claims of Harry Dean.

No, Paul, YOU immediately interpreted Gilbert's comments as "truth". I made no evaluation of any kind whatsoever of his comments. I shared his comments only because (as I previously wrote), he identified the murder of JFK as a "Minuteman operation".

You've been caught in a major blunder, Ernie. But again, we don't expect you to admit it -- although everybody here can see it clearly (even you).

What "blunder"? You want to use Gilbert's comments to prove something. I don't believe Gilbert anymore than I believe Harry. YOU are the person who immediately and excitedly seized upon Gilbert's comments as "proof" for some part of Harry's narrative. Don't blame me for YOUR sentiments!

(8.1) Your own post to John Dolva above admitted many points of agreement and cooperation between the JBS and the Minutemen, Ernie -- and now you try to backpedal like crazy, and deny the connection? Your logic is failing you.

I noted that there was a general ideological connection between MM and JBS -- because they both believed that our nation was under substantial "Communist influence and control".

However, I also clearly stated that it would be a major mistake to assume that the JBS welcomed the MM as allies or partners. Instead, Welch (and the JBS) rejected and were hostile toward the MM (and comparable right-wing paramilitary groups). That is also why Welch distanced himself and the JBS from Edwin Walker -- particularly after the Oxford MS incident.

There is no backpedaling Paul except in your fevered imagination because you are incapable of making rational distinctions. For more specific details regarding the official hostility of the JBS toward MM (and DePugh), see Samuel Brenner's doctoral dissertation -- link here:

http://samuelbrenner.com/index.php/dissertation

Certainly the JBS and the Minutemen relationship did not last beyond the JFK murder -- they went in separate directions after that point. But until December 1963, the points in common between the JBS and the Minutemen are well documented -- even by you.

They went in separate directions long before that Paul. It is only your profound ignorance that prevents you from recognizing that. You obviously have no understanding about conservative political philosophy -- i.e. why conservatives instinctively recoil against vigilante or paramilitary type groups. Why do you think a core ideological principle of the Birch Society (from its inception) has been to bad-mouth "democracy" and to insist that we instead describe ourselves as a "Republic"? Why do you think Robert Welch described democracy as "the worst of all forms of government"?

(9) The truth is that Wesley Swearingen personally wrote to me to tell me that he could not entirely eliminate the claims of Harry Dean -- all he could do was to promote his own observations. You, Ernie, are the incorribable twister of words. When you're caught in a self-contradiction, you turn to crass insults. Well, that's your personality.

We have Wesley Swearingen's own words in writing. We do not need your self-serving and dishonest interpretations. He clearly and emphatically stated that Harry's narrative is fictional and Harry is in need of professional help. No amount of spin by you can change what Swearingen wrote in several messages to discredit both you and Harry.

With utmost sincerity,

--Paul Trejo

P.S. You've been getting away with calling me a xxxx for six months, Ernie, so I suppose that John Simkin's rule isn't being enforced anymore -- maybe that word is now acceptable culture here. I'll ask a Moderator again.

You use the word xxxx whenever you think it is appropriate. Other individuals in this thread have also described you as fact-challenged.

If you want me to stop describing you in pejorative terms, then limit yourself exclusively to presenting verifiable factual evidence and QUOTE or paraphrase what I write accurately. DO NOT invent statements or positions and attribute them to me (or anybody else for that matter). Change your behavior and you will not be subject to pejorative/derogatory descriptions.

Paul -- My replies appear underneath your comments. As usual, our fundamental dispute continues to be epistemological i.e. rules of evidence and logic which you use for ascertaining or confirming factual truth.

[Ernie Lazar]

In further reply to Paul's ignorance about JBS hostility toward MM and DePugh:

1. The John Hay Library at Brown University has hundreds of copies of JBS "Member Monthly Messages" (MMM) which members sent to JBS HQ in Belmont MA. A review of those MMM's (and the replies by JBS HQ) will reveal that JBS members frequently contacted JBS HQ from 1961-1963 to ask for instructions about how to purge MM from the JBS. For example, Hugh Cahill, chapter leader of JBS Chapter QIEJ in Torrance CA wrote to HQ "I think I have a Minute Man as a member in my chapter" and he then asked JBS HQ how he should go about getting rid of him.

2. By November 1961, Welch decided to address the MM issue in the JBS Bulletin---when he wrote:

"And we are much concerned about those equally good patriots who believe it is time to 'hole up' in the hills with groceries and rifles...All patriotic effort and resources should be put into the real fight, and not shunted off into hopeless or innocuous tangents."

3. By September 1963, Welch was making speeches about "Neutralizers" who adversely impacted effective anti-Communism in general and the JBS in particular.

Welch published a 55-page pamphlet entitled "The Neutralizers" whose purpose was to identify the persons and organizations and themes which prevented the Birch Society from being successful by diverting the energies of its members into irrelevant, harmful, or counterproductive activities or by producing defeatist attitudes.

Among the "neutralizers", according to Welch, were those people and groups who believed that it was already too late to accomplish anything through the JBS "educational" program because the enemy (i.e. the Communist conspiracy and its enablers) was already too powerful and too pervasive for successful resistance to be possible, and, consequently, it was time to "Grab your rifles and take to the hills."

4. In April 1964, the JBS revoked the membership of Robert DePugh. A St. Louis newspaper reported that the reason why the JBS revoked DePugh's membership was because JBS officials were concerned about DePugh encouraging Minutemen to carry arms.

5. So, contrary to Paul Trejo's comment, the anti-Minutemen attitude of the JBS was evident much earlier than "after" the murder of JFK.

[Ernie Lazar]

Does everyone recall the lengthy dispute between Paul Trejo and myself regarding what constitutes credible evidence?

1. It was Paul's position that no summary appearing in an FBI report concerning statements made by Harry Dean whether made to FBI Agents or made to other parties could be accepted UNLESS (1) we had a verbatim transcript of questions which Harry was asked along with the answers given by Harry OR (2) if we had a statement by Harry acknowledging the accuracy of whatever the FBI document or other sources revealed.

2. In general, this is what Paul has described as his requirement for "independent confirmation" -- even in situations where no such evidence could possibly exist (which is why, of course, Paul declared that only that type of evidence was acceptable)

3. Now----fast forward to Keith Gilbert's anecdotal comments which were originally posted on a website entitled "The White Report".

[incidentally, I also posted several comments on that website about several different matters pertaining to right-wing extremists and their falsehoods.]

4. Keith Gilbert's comments on White Report were in relation to David Boylan's article, "A League of Their Own" which covers a lot of topics including the origins of the Christian Defense League and various anti-JFK personalities -- such as William Potter Gale, Wesley Swift, Clinton Wheat, Loran Hall, Lawrence Howard, etc.

5. Let's itemize each major assertion made by Keith Gilbert in his May 2012 comment -- and then ask Paul Trejo to tell us what "independent confirmation" he has discovered for everything which Gilbert claimed.

* Gilbert states that Dennis P. Mower asked Gilbert to contact Clinton Wheat in June 1963 for the purpose of selling him "or a friend of his weapons and munitions".

---------Does Paul have any "independent confirmation" for that assertion? Did Paul ever contact Mower? Did Paul ever contact Clinton Wheat?

* Gilbert states that he met some of Clinton Wheat's friends at Clinton's home in Hollywood CA. Gilbert says he met with two of those friends ("that or the next day"). One "friend" was "Pacillio" and the other friend was Lee Harvey Oswald.

---------Did Paul discover any "independent confirmation" for that assertion, i.e. that Gilbert ever met with "Pacillio" and LHO?

* Gilbert states that after listening to Pacillio and Oswald explain their weapons needs, he agreed to meet with them at the same location the next evening to tell them what was available weapons-wise and the cost but when they met, Gilbert "smelled a rat" so he "declined to sell them any machine guns".

---------Does Paul have any "independent confirmation" that any such meeting with Pacillio and Oswald actually took place?

* Gilbert states that the next day he again went to Clinton Wheat's home -- which he thinks was on Isabella St (but he says he could be mistaken) and Gilbert says that he thinks Clinton Wheat gave Pacillio and Oswald a modified Type 99 machine gun which they subsequently used to kill JFK.

--------Does Paul have any "independent confirmation" for that claim?

* Gilbert states that he telephoned the Los Angeles Times in early 1964 and told a reporter that he was in possession of 1400 pounds of stolen explosives which Richard Girnt Butler (who years later became the leader of Aryan Nations) and Dennis P. Mower wanted to use to kill MLK Jr. -- and this action by Gilbert "stopped the plot".

--------Does Paul have any "independent confirmation" for these assertions, i.e. that Gilbert called the LA Times OR that Butler and Mower planned to use explosives to murder MLK Jr.?

* Gilbert states that he went to Canada as a fugitive and he contacted Dennis Mower from there. According to Gilbert, Mower visited Gilbert in Canada and stayed for about a week and during that visit Mower told Gilbert about LHO joining the Minutemen after he returned from the USSR. Also, Mower told Gilbert that "the JFK murder was a Minuteman operation".

--------Does Paul have any "independent confirmation" for any of these assertions, i.e. that (1) Mower visited Gilbert in Canada, (2) that Mower told Gilbert that LHO joined the MM, and (3) that Mower told Gilbert that JFK's murder was a Minuteman operation? [Does Paul have any documentary evidence to substantiate any of these assertions?]

* Gilbert states that Mower used this information to get Gilbert to return to the U.S. and finish the job on MLK Jr. [Gilbert does not explain precisely what he meant by this comment so you can interpret it anyway you want.]

-------Does Paul have any "independent confirmation" for this assertion?

* Gilbert states that he thinks Mower and Troy Houghton had offered James Earl Ray some sort of deal to murder MLK Jr. Gilbert says that he was offered a passport, money, safe passage to South Africa and he was told that J. Edgar Hoover "sanctioned" the action (i.e. the murder of MLK Jr.)

------Does Paul have any "independent confirmation" for any of these assertions? Has Paul discovered any corroborative evidence to establish that J. Edgar Hoover knew about and "sanctioned" any plot to murder MLK Jr.?

If Paul cannot provide "yes" answers to most of these "independent confirmation" questions -- then upon what basis does Paul believe Gilbert is presenting accurate, truthful, or "factual" information?

Incidentally, Gilbert also posts messages online using the screen name "Diesel 88888888". Copied below is another gem from him posted March 31, 2014. http://dirtydozensbunker.com/showthread.php?t=126383

While it's true that LBJ was a real piece of work…however, he did not kill JFK.

When Lee Harvey Oswald returned from the USSR he joined the first patriotic action organization he could find and it was "The Minutemen" based in Norborne, MO, and when he attacked JFK in Dallas, TX, he was not alone. A man named Gary Henning/Hemming was with him and is the shooter using a Type 99 Japanese machine gun reactivated from dewar status….given to them by Clinton Wheat (an old JBS member and radical that lived on Lafayette St. in LA,CA…Hollywood) when I refused to sell them M-14 rifles or other weapons after meeting them…twice! There are three people still alive today that know the details, myself, Dennis Patrick Mower (who has personally been responsible for a number of murders and may be the Zodiac killer in spite of the efforts of some to blame it on his close friend Troy Houghton/Haughton, and one other. Dennis Patrick Mower is also the real shooter in the MLK execution in Memphis…poor old James Earl Ray was telling the truth about being a patsy.

Try to get this straight…a commie did not kill Kennedy…a Minuteman did…and through ingenious black propaganda blamed it on the communist and got away with it. I know all this because I was there and not only remember the execution of a POTUS that was believed to be a traitor by his killers but know the details leading up to it.

Diesel 88888888

Gilbert also commented that:

There was a lot of momentum behind the Dallas event from Cubans, JBS 'conservatives' and the Minutemen…to say noting of the various KKK groups and National States Rights Party.