An attempt to bring an end to the JFK Forum

[James Richards]

Font got between our fistfight, and that is how Andy St. George & our Tom Dunkin made the trip [with a little cash from Billings at LIFE naturally]. (Gerry Hemming)

Gerry,

I did not know that Tom Dunkin was present for the Baku thing. Do you know if his photos are archived anywhere?

I have seen most of the shots taken by Andrew St. George but the Dunkin coverage would be very interesting.

Cheers,

James

[Gerry Hemming]

Font got between our fistfight, and that is how Andy St. George & our Tom Dunkin made the trip [with a little cash from Billings at LIFE naturally]. (Gerry Hemming)

Gerry,

I did not know that Tom Dunkin was present for the Baku thing. Do you know if his photos are archived anywhere?

I have seen most of the shots taken by Andrew St. George but the Dunkin coverage would be very interesting.

Cheers,

James

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

-----------------------

James:

Tom took ALL of the LIFE pix on the "Baku Op", and Andy focused on the narrative. I speak with Andy's widow all of the time, and she is in the process of getting the masses of files and pix organized.

I will check with Gordon Winslow on whether the large amount of negatives & pix he recovered at Tom's shack [upon his death] included any of the Comandos "L" Ops -- though I really doubt it, as Andy was very scrupulous in maintaining personal custody of all Ops pix.

Tom was found dead in the front yard of the shack that former Chief Justice Alto Adams [Florida Supreme Court] had provided for him whilst he did the judge's memoirs -- and it turned out to be a thick volume, though tedious to read. I had set Tom up with the Adams contact after the good Justice became a person of interest in the JFK matter [early 1970s.] I had done construction work for his Son-in-law [Nat Harrison, Jr.] who was a major contractor in south Florida.

After Winslow arrived [ a couple days after the death was reported] at the shack, he was told that the Coroner suspected Tom was a victim of a "lightening strike ??!!

Winslow found the inside of the shack totally trashed, with pix & negatives strewn all over the place. Initially, I reminded Gordon that Dunkin was a bit of a slob, and I doubted that it had been a shakedown search -- but, later I wasn't so sure. After leaving us at No Name, Tom went on to work with Paul Poppenhager [our jumpmaster/pilot] at the Circle-T ranch east of Indiantown.

He logged almost a thousand jumps, and by the 1980s was a volunteer curator at the UDT/SEAL Museum, Ft. Pierce -- where he was well liked by all, and especially by Dick Marcinko's buddy, "Pointman/Patches" BMC Watson. [bosun's Mate Chief, USN - Ret.]

A couple of times I landed Cartel planes [empty of course] on that 33,000 acre cattle ranch just southwest of Vero Beach. Man, did Tom get pissed at that, with us carrying weapons, etc. -- but the judge thought it was a spook Op and enjoyed the hell out of our infrequent visits. The best part of the ranch was the very large-high ceilinged law library behind the ranch-house, alongside a bubbling brook.

WARNING: Heed "Ms. Congenialty's" recent pubic..er..public remonstrations !!

DO NOT believe any of the foregoing, above-mentioned "wannabe SOF/non-mercenary, etc., etc." spurious appearing text -- failure to heed this may result in a severe "hissy-fit rant!!"

Cheers mate,

GPH

PS: Soon I will respond in kind -- and clue John, et al. in on the great success of the "Gerry Springer, Geraldo Rivera, Christina" wailing & gnashing of teeth, hair pulling, clothes shredding spectacles which seem to get tremendous television ["Telly"] ratings. Hell, we might just double the membership of this Forum if we keep up the pissing contests !!

___________________________________

[James Richards]

Thanks, Gerry.

I have several images taken on the Baku Op. There were some terrific blow-ups on display at this anti-Castro rally in the early 1960's. Howard Davis and Ron Von Klaussen were photographed there.

I tried to track these images down but drew a blank.

Not that I would really know, but the Dunkin thing seemed a bit strange. I did manage however to track down several hundred of his photographs.

FWIW.

James

[Chris Cox]

Gerry, really glad to hear about the archiving of Andy's photos. He was all over the place and Dunkin deserves a story for the record, as well.

Hey, the Happy Meal thing is touching. I remember a Wendy's way back when. Andy and Starbucks. Just the way it is sometimes.

Could you explain your statement: "The only info that JM/WAVE got on me [NOT from me], was via the Castro DGI agents they employed as spotters and snitches against ALL of the exile raider groups."

So they doubled Castro agents? When did this begin? As early as Morgan, for instance? Is it possible it was this kind of thing going on in some of the pilot incidents such as Matt Duke (ambushed 1960 picking up people on Central Hwy) or Navas Bay bust--Cuba tipped off in this manner? Intriguing and troubling.

[Al Carrier]

One last comment here and I will put it as simple as I can so Hemming can reply with a straight answer (holding my breath, NOT).

What exactly did the all knowing, all important GPH accomplish with his soooo important associates and contacts???

Most believe this gentleman has inside information on the Kennedy Assassination through his work, contacts and associates. But from what we see in history, these individuals did nothing but chase their tails and make fools of themselves with their so-called covert operations. So we are to believe that they were somehow connected or in the know of what went down in Dallas on November 22, 1963? And the truth has been hidden for 42 years since? Oh, I forgot, Hemming knows but is keeping quiet because the death squads are watching him. AS THE STOMACH TURNS....

Hemming can keep going off on me and then rambling his anti-sematic crap to show what a little mind he possesses, I am simply asking a simple question and waiting for a simple answer.

Al

[John Simkin]

Tom took ALL of the LIFE pix on the "Baku Op", and Andy focused on the narrative.  I speak with Andy's widow all of the time, and she is in the process of getting the masses of files and pix organized.

I will check with Gordon Winslow on whether the large amount of negatives & pix he recovered at Tom's shack [upon his death] included any of the Comandos "L" Ops -- though I really doubt it, as Andy was very scrupulous in maintaining personal custody of all Ops pix.

Tom was found dead in the front yard of the shack that former Chief Justice Alto Adams [Florida Supreme Court] had provided for him whilst he did the judge's memoirs -- and it turned out to be a thick volume, though tedious to read.  I had set Tom up with the Adams contact after the good Justice became a person of interest in the JFK matter [early 1970s.]  I had done construction work for his Son-in-law [Nat Harrison, Jr.] who was a major contractor in south Florida.

After Winslow arrived [ a couple days after the death was reported] at the shack, he was told that the Coroner suspected Tom was a victim of a "lightening strike ??!!

Winslow found the inside of the shack totally trashed, with pix & negatives strewn all over the place.  Initially, I reminded Gordon that Dunkin was a bit of a slob, and I doubted that it had been a shakedown search -- but, later I wasn't so sure.  After leaving us at No Name, Tom went on to work with Paul Poppenhager [our jumpmaster/pilot] at the Circle-T ranch east of Indiantown.

He logged almost a thousand jumps, and by the 1980s was a volunteer curator at the UDT/SEAL Museum, Ft. Pierce -- where he was well liked by all, and especially by Dick Marcinko's buddy, "Pointman/Patches" BMC Watson. [bosun's Mate Chief, USN - Ret.]

A couple of times I landed Cartel planes [empty of course] on that 33,000 acre cattle ranch just southwest of Vero Beach.  Man, did Tom get pissed at that, with us carrying weapons, etc. -- but the judge thought it was a spook Op and enjoyed the hell out of our infrequent visits.  The best part of the ranch was the very large-high ceilinged law library behind the ranch-house, alongside a bubbling brook.

WARNING:  Heed "Ms. Congenialty's" recent pubic..er..public remonstrations !!

DO NOT believe any of the foregoing, above-mentioned "wannabe SOF/non-mercenary, etc., etc." spurious appearing text -- failure to heed this may result in a severe "hissy-fit rant!!"

This information on Tom Dunkin is very interesting. In an attempt to keep this information organized, I have reposted it on the original thread on Dunkin:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2518

Gerry, is it true that Tom Dunkin was also helping Tony Cuesta with his autobiography. They both died in the same year (1994). Do you think there is any connection. Is it possible that some people did not want Cuesta to tell his full story?

Please answer this question in the Tom Dunkin thread:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2518

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

There was no "Cause of Action/Case or Controversy" [Tort?] in the Christic matter, that is why they lost and paid a heavy fine !!

Yes, Gerry, that was precisely my point.  Christic bore the consequences of making allegations without sufficient proof.  That was the "wrong" to which I referred.  I still fail to see how this bears the slightest relevance to Tim Gratz's legalistic belly-aching here.

You nag repeatedly as to "...read the posts !!" -- I have diligently read the posts, and I have yet to find Gratz "threatening" the forum.  However, after noting your's [and others unmamed] proclivity for assuming the worst and taking statements out of context, I have repeatedly advised Gratz to refrain from even using any legalisms in his missives, as it seems to upset you girls no end !!

Never-the-less, I found his "treatise??" on Blakey & R.I.C.O. quite instructive,

not threatening.  Grow up and get back to your usual well researched offerings on this forum.

You don't like Gratz -- well tough titty !!  Get a life.  You don't like him because he is a bible-thumper??  I am a diehard atheist, and served in several revolutionary activities, but I have opted to not adopt either right-wing nor left-wing "theologies".  After laughing our asses off in Havana, with reference to self styled "left-wing/socialist/marxist" tourists who arrived in floods during early 1959, we chose to avoid these puffed-up fools -- and get on with our business [removing Somoza, Trujillo, Duvalier, et al.].

Again, I'm at a loss to understand what Tim's "bible-thumping" has to do with anything.  To insist that our pique with him is due to his Christianity is well wide of the mark, amigo.  It's the nonsense posts, full of vapor and steam but no substance, that most of us have found tedious.  But when Tim decides to go postal and predict his cakewalk to a "simple" legal victory, he not only displays an astonishing lack of legal knowledge for someone who once practised, but pisses on the shoes of all here who value the Forum.  What, pray tell, does "bible-thumping" have to do with it?

I have a tremendous dislike for dogmatic "evangelicals" of both the left and the right -- none have ever provided genuine support when it really mattered.  "Che" found that out the hard way !!

As to K.G.B./G.R.U. -- go tho their extant websites, you might discover that quited a bit is overtly commented upon these days.  Remember also, that I had access to more than just a few "Intel Insiders" over the years, and even 40 years ago they were quited casual in making these very same references at that time --  as they considered that to be quite routine, of no great consequence; and just the way that this business was done. [Mitrohkin does contain some tidbits of accuracy]

We gave Keating minor tidbits, because our sources demanded that nothing be exposed to the moles infesting "Camelot" at that time.  Our RFK liaison did quietly make mention of "tidbits", but was rebuffed while staying at "Hickory Hill".  Senator Smathers [Democrat] tried also, and witnessed a dinner plate being smashed at the Palm Beach Compound.  We were left with DEMOCRATIC Governor Ferris Bryant, because we discovered that most of our Republican contacts were scared xxxxless assholes, and were of the same stripe as Generals Lemay & Powers, who wanted to start World War III or IV !! [Gov. Bryant's Air Nat'l Guard Adjutant General (2 Star General) came back to the Mansion in Tallahassee from DC, practically in tears, while briefing Gov. Bryant that the Pentagon & SAC were planning to "wait-it-out" !!

Ron Lippert got busted at Jose Marti Int'l, never uncovered one clue, and I would like to see any cites to authority on any of his "Intel" submissions.

And you can make this definitive declaration on what basis, exactly, Gerry?  Were you DCI at the time?  Did you run WAVE? 

CIA later attempted to claim our David Cabezas and Rumbaugh as their own, but were laughed out of town.  Lippert "heard" some comments as to the S.A.M. AAA site equipment rumored to have arrived at Casilda [near Trinidad], but he even missed out on the broad daylight reports of SAM missiles banging against houses as they turned the corners of the extremely narrow streets of Trinidad enroute to Cienfuegos.  So how the hell does he predate our firm June & July '62 confirmations??  [bTW, the warheads came in first !!]

You are too quick to dismiss Lippert, Gerry.  You may not be aware of his background, but I've spent much time trying to confirm aspects of his story and what can be verified, has been.  I should also like to ask you:

* why he was given a death sentence by Cuba if he was so insignificant;

* if you know why that death sentence was commuted;

* if you know who finally got him sprung;

* if you know why he was "sacrificed" and by whom.

I should also like to point out that while US pilots were making occasional forays into Cuban airspace, Lippert was in and out of Cuba with great regularity, because he was a Canadian, and because he was flying in supplies made more scarce by the US trade embargo.  Consequently, I can guartanee you that he was in a position to know far more about developments in Cuba than those who sat Stateside, no matter how great their braggadocio after the fact.  Lippert served his cause heroically, kept his mouth shut then, and refrains from boasting now. 

There were rumors running wild inside Cuba as I left during October 1960, and not just about "cohetes" [missiles] -- to the point that when I stopped for coffee at a bodega in Pinar del Rio, I was accused  by a crowd of being a Russian.  I quickly confessed to them that they were "correcto" ["Cierto"]; and that I had parked my submarine just down the highway.

Why did I wait 40 years ??!!  Are you just stupid, or a wise-ass -- or BOTH??!!

Presumably, time will tell.  But why only two options, Gerry?

DGI's death squads have murdered scores of exiles since 1963, and their squads remain active to this day inside the U.S. !!  Why do you think that the hammer fell so heavy on the "Miami-5"??; because the court received Intel as to their nexus with real bad guys, not just a snitch who might have?? assisted in Basulto's "Brothers" aircraft shootdown.

Then it's a miracle you've survived this long, innit?  Given your proclivity for alluding to much without actually disclosing anything substantive, it seems as though you're willing to put yourself in the cross-hairs with your self-sought high profile, but for no discernible purpose or gain.  

More importantly, those with insider knowledge of events opted to remain alive and well with their families [both inside Cuba, and in exile locales] -- which I consider to be a very smart series of decisions.  Have you ever been in harm's way, or am I dealing with yet another mouthy wannabe ??

Gee, Gerry, I was just about to ask you the same thing.  While there is no doubt that you were part of the milieu back in the day, it's also clear that not everyone who ate flapjacks at Nellies necessarily found themselves in the xxxx.  It's also clear that those who did find themselves in the xxxx invariably ended up with battle scars and shallow graves, and hence are unavailable for comment on your own prowess.  To draw upon the old fishing analogy, I have no doubt that you went fishing, and you likely did catch something, but was it really as big a fish as you'd have us believe? 

I expect that you will continue to provide us with somewhat more intelligent data in the near term, and avoid these amatuerish polemics.

And from you I will expect much more in the way of vaguely relevant personal anecdotes that don't actually resolve much.  The stories always seem to promise a payoff when they begin, but.....  You're a lot like Grampa Simpson, Gerry, only funnier and with more stamina.

And, needless to say, when Tim Gratz's profile here slumps toward the muck, we'll count upon you to repeatedly intercede on his behalf in a vain attempt to give him the gravitas and respectability you think will help him sell the fantasy bill of goods that you two purvey.  Maybe it's time to call up Winslow as a reliever, just for good measure.

Semper Fi, Ger.

_________________________

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Pat Speer]

Al, while I have no idea where the truth ends and Gerry's stories begin, enough records and information have been derived from the government files to indicate Gerry was indisputably a SOF who had contact with Castro, Sturgis, Hall, etc.  I believe there's also evidence he was an FBI informant somewhere along the line.  So the man is no "wanna-be." He could very well be prone to exaggeration and story-telling, but to compare him to Files is unfair.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

--------------------------

And here I was, partially convinced that "Miss Congeniality" had given up self-abuse in the shower ??!! -- It just leaves me emotionally drained. A "Rasslin'"

fan ??!! Do those big bruisers in their oily muscled bodies turn you on ??

After the Bay of Pigs, it was not a healthy move to claim ANY affiliation with the hated CIA, especially amongst the Miami Cubans. After 1967 [Garrison follies, Ramparts Nat'l Student Assoc., etc.], it wasn't wise to even mention knowledge of "The Company" anywhere in the USA. Dick Russell's use of the term "Agent" in the Argosy article was NOT well received by me, despite the fact that an "agent" is an informant reporting to a CIA Case "Officer".

"Informant" for the FBI ??!! The only time that S/As Bob Dwyer and Jim O'Conner could get a decent meal was to set up a phony "meet" with me, because,as they reported back repeatedly to the MIA/FO S.A.C. "...Hemming won't speak with us unless it is at Toby's restaurant [sW 12th Ave. & 1st St.]

and it MUST be a steak dinner (for all).."

The only info that JM/WAVE got on me [NOT from me], was via the Castro DGI agents they employed as spotters and snitches against ALL of the exile raider groups.

After Howard Davis had arranged for cash and thousands of dollars worth of maritime equipment, arms & munitions, radios, etc. from Texas & Maryland

financiers, Tony Cuesta veto'd Ramon Fonts OK for both of our persons on the "Baku" sinking operation !! Why? Because Tony swore that a "CIA buddy" had tipped him that "Davy" was a "Company Man", and that only I could go.

Font got between our fistfight, and that is how Andy St. George & our Tom Dunkin made the trip [with a little cash from Billings at LIFE naturally].

The same occurred with "Bayo" [who had broken with Tony after the "Baku Op"],

when -- after we had gotten heavy financing for a Haitian Op, Martino, Sturgis, et al. coopted our funding from Baltimore, and ultimately brought in Pawley on the deal, which was switched to a phony Sov/extraction Op. More wasted money,

and more interference from the "Company Pogues" !!

"Bayo's" coxwain [Cantin] left a large family behind, and they came to me in July '63 wanting to know why I was alive and their father/husband/uncle/cousin was MIA ??!! I took them straight to Bill Pawley's office in the Ingraham Bldg. and explained that one of our lawyers would soon be in touch. Against my verbal protestations, he handed the boys a wad of $100 bills. I remained behind after they left, and told Bill that it was a big mistake to give out the cash, as they were going to sue LIFE, Billings, and him for a bundle.

All parties later settled out of court and the family was awarded a large sum.

My extended family joins with "Miss Congeniality" in the infliction of abuse upon moi -- as they are furious with me for even uttering a word on these matters, despite that many years have passed in the aftermath of Kazak Jew Weberman's spurious foibles. When they learned of my giving an interview to a Canadian writer [Cigar Afficianado & Oliver Stone confidant] at a Ft. Lauderdale MacDonald's !! [vice the near Out-Back Steakhouse]; they have since defamed me as the "Kiddy-Meal Commando". "....What did he pay you Dad?...a Kiddy-Meal with extra fries !!

Can't win for losing. If anybody has a serious query, let me know down the road sometime.

GPH

_______________________________

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Gerry, here's a serious query. You clearly have led an interesting life. You clearly are a talented and colorful writer. Why haven't you written a book? I wasn't kidding when I said I'd buy it. I'm sure many others would as well.

FWIW, my comment about story-telling was not meant to imply you were a xxxx. It was an acknowledgement that many of the events you write about happened 40 years ago. Human memories blur together. As a result, people are prone to expand upon true-life stories, and fill-in the blanks where the details have been lost. This is a fact of life. I make stories out of events that happened yesterday; I can only assume others do the same. After 40 years, God knows what I'll be saying about this internet exchange. Maybe by then I'll be telling people you and I had a wrestling match and you beat me with a chair.

No harm intended. I was trying to defend your position as someone who had insight into the case. Sorry if you took offense.

[John Simkin]

John I don't think you understand the laws.

Did not Roman Polanski just successfully sue "Vanity Fair", an American publication, in England?

I can assure you if an English citizen violates the laws of the United States within this country he is subject to the laws of America.  Thus, for example, the Guardian, which is distributed in the US, would be subject to libel laws in the US.  The fact that many of your members are American demonstrates that the Forum reaches into the United States.

I was not disputing the fact that someone in America can sue someone in another country for libel. Roman Polanski was indeed libelled by Vanity Fair and deserved to win his case. After all, the woman who Polanski had apparently tried to seduce, admitted this had not happened (it was based on the claim of the boyfriend).

My point was that you could not use American laws to freeze my financial assets. As far as I am aware, this can only be done if I have committed some important international crime (I don’t think my comments about you on this Forum fits into this category).

Even so, have so many people have pointed out over and over again, according to US and UK law, you would be completely unsuccessful in suing Shanet and myself for libel. Your comments were just an attempt to bully me into condemning Shanet. This I refused to do.

However, you did manage to bully Shanet into leaving this forum. For that, you deserve to be condemned by all members. I hope that in the future Shanet will recognize that you are full of hot air and will return to the Forum.

It should be clear to all, that despite your legal training, you do not seem to have developed a logical mind. I suspect you spent too much time as a member of the Young Americans for Freedom. Being a devout supporter of George Bush has not helped either.

[Tim Gratz]

Perhaps you ought to explain why you would NOT condemn or at least chastise Shanet for making a post clearly implying he had friends in Wisconsin who had information I was involved with Arthur Bremer when he knew that was false and he later so admitted. In his retraction he admitted all he had was the statement in Sprague's book attributing something to William Turner.

Shanet's complete "make-up" of a factual assertion certainly seems a rather serious infraction of the rules to me. It would appear, John, that you do not apply the rules when the violations are directed against people with whose opinion you disagree.

What would people think if I write that a private source had told me a fact tending to inculpate Castro (eg if I posted I had visited Miami and talked to a Brigade member who had recognized the DCM as a member of DGI) and it turned out I had never even talked to anyone--I had just made it all up? That is quite a serious thing, one would think. That by definition is being a "disinformation agent".

So you had someone admitting to posting disinformation on your Forum and chose to ignore it. Notice that disinformation as I use it is totally different from a difference of opinion or interpretation. Disinformation means, by my definition anyway, that you are claiming personal knowledge of a fact that you know to be false.

At least Shanet had the graciousness to apologize and I accepted his apology and let it drop at that.

After that, of course, we discovered from Mr. Turner that Sprague had no basis for making the statement he made about me in his book.

And for the umpteenth plus time every single time I posted about the RICO law I made it clear I was using it as an example and was not threatening to even attempt to use it against you or the Forum. How hard is it to understand that?

[Tim Gratz]

John, in your post above, you wrote:

I was not disputing the fact that someone in America can sue someone in another country for libel.

But, John, let me remind you exactly what you wrote earlier:

I can assure you that a RICO suit has no legal power in the UK. You might be able to send troops into other countries, but US laws do not apply to countries in Europe. [Emphasis supplied.] By which you must have meant that US laws do not apply to citizens of foreign countries.

That is a much broader statement than the one you now claim you made, that US courts do not have the right to seize assets that are subject to the jurisdiction of a different country. That issue is probably too complicated to dissect here.

Do you admit that I had before this controversy arose I tried to (by private e-mail) caution you so that you did not inadvertently let the Form run afoul of libel laws--can't even remember the statement that prompted my concern and warning to you but as you know it was prompted as a sincere warning and out of my concern for you. Do you admit that?

And regarding your personal insult to me, I can assure you that to the extent I am not a logical thinker it cannot be due to my years in YAF since my grades were quite good in law school and I was selected for two years in a row to teach legal writing to freshmen law students. Perhaps I have gone downhill from there! But then again perhaps you question my logic because my opinions differ from yours. The readers can make that assessment.

Edited August 22, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

Perhaps you ought to explain why you would NOT condemn or at least chastise Shanet for making a post clearly implying he had friends in Wisconsin who had information I was involved with Arthur Bremer when he knew that was false and he later so admitted.  In his retraction he admitted all he had was the statement in Sprague's book attributing something to William Turner.

Shanet's complete "make-up" of a factual assertion certainly seems a rather serious infraction of the rules to me.  It would appear, John, that you do not apply the rules when the violations are directed against people with whose opinion you disagree.

In order to reach this conclusion, you must misconstrue what Shanet posted - as you've repeatedly done - and attribute to him something he did not say [to wit, "he had friends in Wisconsin who had information I was involved with Arthur Bremer."  Only these linguistic contortions allow you to claim "Shanet's complete "make-up" of a factual assertion." 

What would people think if I write that a private source had told me a fact tending to inculpate Castro (eg if I posted I had visited Miami and talked to a Brigade member who had recognized the DCM as a member of DGI) and it turned out I had never even talked to anyone--I had just made it all up?  That is quite a serious thing, one would think.  That by definition is being a "disinformation agent".

Instead, you cite for us here the stories of others - US government personnel working for CIA, and exiles subsidized by the Agency - who "made it all up."  Not much difference in the final analysis.  You are not the xxxx, merely the means by which the lie is repeated and spread.  By that standard, your conclusion is worth noting: That by definition is being a "disinformation agent".    

So you had someone admitting to posting disinformation on your Forum and chose to ignore it.  Notice that disinformation as I use it is totally different from a difference of opinion or interpretation.  Disinformation means, by my definition anyway, that you are claiming personal knowledge of a fact that you know to be false.

Your definition might be broadened a tad to include those who are intelligent enough to see through sham evidence, but nevertheless present as it genuine.  When dealing with such a person, one notes they are highly reluctant to seek out and analyze the source data upon which their regurgitated lie is based, for doing so will only demonstrate the shallowness of their purported evidence.  Instead, they will take as an article of faith that their reguritated lie is true, without confirmation, and insist that others do so as well.  Again, by that standard, your conclusion is worth noting: That by definition is being a "disinformation agent".    

At least Shanet had the graciousness to apologize and I accepted his apology and let it drop at that.

After that, of course, we discovered from Mr. Turner that Sprague had no basis for making the statement he made about me in his book.

And for the umpteenth plus time every single time I posted about the RICO law I made it clear I was using it as an example and was not threatening to even attempt to use it against you or the Forum.  How hard is it to understand that?

An example of what?  It is plain that you were referring to what legal recourse you think is available to you, and crowing about how "simple" it would be to seize the assets of your Forum host and shut down the very venue that allows you to post your content-free blather.  When confronted with hostility from others for making this empty gesture, you back-pedalled with assurances that you didn't actually intend to go through with it; you were merely asserting how "simple" it would be to do.  So, what is the point of this whole exercise, if not to put a chill in the heart of your host?  There's nothing "hard" about understanding that, either.    

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Edited August 22, 2005 by Robert Charles-Dunne

[Tim Gratz]

Robert:

Shanet admitted that he meant to say he had sources in Wisconsin to connect me to Bremer. And that he made that up. And that is the clear reading of his post.

In order for me to be a disinformation agent, you would have to prove that I do not believe the factual assertions made by others that I report. The problem is that, unlike you, I do not disbelieve everything that is in a CIA report. Then again, neither do you. There are obviously things in CIA reports with which you would agree. Your methodology is simply to attack any report of a Castro agent in Dallas because it was reported to the CIA.

There were a number of apparently independent reports of DGI agents in Dallas. Is it possible they were all made up, or reported by people who were mistaken? Well, anything is possible. But the only fair way to summarize the evidence, I believe, is that IF those reports were true, there is a very high probability of Cuban involvement in the assassination. I would even go further and state the burden ought to be on the person attempting to attack those reports to demonstrate that the person making the report was unreliable. As we have discussed, one report came from Miguelito's aunt. As I recall our discussion, you somehow thought that she was unreliable for some reason BECAUSE she was his aunt.

Tell you what, Robert, I know how we can easily solve this. I once wrote that many people whose political persuasions are left-of-center seem to have a hard time accepting any theory that there was involvement in the assassination by Communists. You replied that there was no way I could determine the political allegiances of the members posting here. I think that reply is absurd. Let's do a poll of the members (it can even be anonymous). If the poll shows the membership is overwhelmingly leftist oriented, I want you to join the "Fidel Did It" Club. If, however, the poll shows that the political division here is close to equal, then I will agree never to make another post pointing toward Fidel.

I don't think you will accept my challenge because you know as well as I do the leftist orientation of this Forum (and I will limit it to active participants in the Kennedy assassination debate). Frankly, it would surprise me if more than two other posters voted for George Bush in the last election.

[Mark Knight]

Tim, you're turning this thread into another Castro thread...but then you already knew that.

As far as your "poll" results determining what someone believes...

If the poll shows the membership is overwhelmingly leftist oriented, I want you to join the "Fidel Did It" Club.

...I don't believe it's that easy for a person of integrity to change his beliefs, based upon something so trivial as a poll.

And what of me? I voted for Bush in 2000, and I voted against him [NOT for Kerry, by the way] in 2004. So does that make me a leftist? Or am I a disaffected conservative? Or am I a moderate? Or can you even tell? I believe Nixon was a crook, but I believe the same of Bill Clinton, whom many on the left revere. So where does that place me? As a pragmatist, rather than as a shill for either American political party? I've been a card-carrying member of the UAW, but I voted against Clinton [bOTH times], Gore, and Bush. Does the term "INDEPENDENT" cross your mind? Probably not, if you're still seeing things as red and blue states, and leftists and rightists.

And what of forum members from England, Australia, France, Sweeden...none of whom had a choice whether to vote for Bush or not? Because they couldn't vote FOR Bush, does that make them ANTI-Bush, and therefore leftists? You know better, Tim, and yet that's what you imply:

Frankly, it would surprise me if more than two other posters voted for George Bush in the last election.

I don't have a hard time believing that Communists may have been behind the JFK assassination. I believe that the left can be equally evil as the right...as evil knows no party.

It's not all about red and blue states, or left and right. As far as I can see, it seems that if someone doesn't believe what you do--or stand even further to the right--they're automatically a "leftist," or "on the left." I believe you're overlooking a lot of moderates, people who are standing somewhere in the middle looking for the facts. This isn't a matter of "divide and conquer"; it's a matter of presenting facts, and letting the readers decide...just as you would have had to do with a jury.

So...about those facts...can I presume the NYC bombing info will be forthcoming soon?

[Tim Gratz]

No, Mark, from what you tell me I would certainly call you an independent thinker.

Of course I would not apply the "Did you vote for Bush" test to non U.S. members of the Forum. But perhaps you would admit that there is quite a bit of "Bush-bashing" by Forum members (and by calling it that it is not necessary here to evaluate the accuracy of the statements, I simply note that the many of the assassination researchers have made their opinions clear through other posts).