"A Terrible Mistake" by H. P. Albarelli, Jr. - JFK Assassination

[Jack White]

Lee Harvey Oswald can ONLY be analyzed in terms investigated
for 12 years by John Armstrong and set forth with proofs in his
masterful 1000 page book plus CD...HARVEY & LEE.

Jack

Jack I could not agree more. One canot even begin to understand the entity that we know as LHO without reading Harvey and Lee. Yes it is long, but well worth the effort. I put it down for a bit to delve into Russ Bakers Family Of Secrets but getting back to it today. Your photo work btw way is wonderful. I had no clue the two faces were merged til I got John's wonderful book in Dallas this past Nov.
Speaking of COPA do you ever attend conferences anymore?

Dawn

I quit attending conferences several years ago because they
have become repetitions of the same stuff every year...seldom
anything new. They are great for new researchers, but offer
little to oldtimers.

Thanks for the nice words.

Jack

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

(I really appreciate the James Lee Burke quotes. He's one of America's finest novelists.)

Burke could not have described Lee Harvey Oswald with more precision and poetry if he had set out to do so.

As for Morales: His pathologies intrigue me. As do the rest of his psychic drive®s. The fictive construct that was, in the main, Gerald Patrick Hemming seems modeled on DSM. And I mean quite literally modeled.

I can think of no more novelistic or otherwise intriguing and potentially revelatory figure within our area of study -- with the possible exception of the aforementioned Mr. (Messrs.?) Oswald. In so many ways they are presented in profound counter-balance.

I agree -- completely. I spoke with and interviewed Jerry Hemming a number of times before his death. I even went up to North Carolina to see him once when he was pretty ill. Men like Hemming, and Morales, are cut from different cloth than most folks are. Oswald also, but perhaps in different sorts of ways. Hemming and Morales were grounded in their extreme form of belief and country and anti-Communism, but Oswald, to me, seemed ungrounded and a bit lost at times, or put another way, a patsy.

Hank,

On a soon-to-be-originated thread I'll go into some detail about my personal experiences with Hemming.

For now -- and with all deference to his certifiable history as a deep political player -- I submit that there is as much substantive difference between GPH and DSM as there is between either of them and LHO.

Hemming to me in the main was -- I'll use the term again -- a fictive construct. If you prefer, he was a character created to confuse and otherwise misdirect. The disconnect between, on one hand, his threatening physical presence and overt homicidal curriculum vitae, and on the other his erudition and refined storytelling skills leads me to conclude that his ultimate mission was to deflect our attention from the likes of Morales (and perhaps even "Buffalo").

Oswald was indeed a patsy -- and something less, and something more.

I'm prepared to argue that in the fullness of time we will appreciate the historic LHO as -- for lack of a better term -- a more highly evolved Frank Olson.

But a quick posting on an Internet site -- even one as sublimely advanced as the DPF (!) -- cannot do justice to the portrait I wish to paint.

So ... Hemming and Morales v. Oswald ...

Cut from different cloth?

I'd place Morales and Oswald at extreme ends of the same human fabric, and Hemming between them, if not precisely in the middle.

Put another way: In terms of the Morales/Oswald-symbolized conflict, Hemming is a bit player.

------

Hemming to me in the main was -- I'll use the term again -- a fictive construct. If you prefer, he was a character created to confuse and otherwise misdirect. The disconnect between, on one hand, his threatening physical presence and overt homicidal curriculum vitae, and on the other his erudition and refined storytelling skills leads me to conclude that his ultimate mission was to deflect our attention from the likes of Morales (and perhaps even "Buffalo").

-------
Charles good point. He sure had a way with words, but it was too romantic and in character all the time. Almost designed to appeal as the "Other" to people who spend a lot of time on the internet. Was he the first Renaissance Assassin or somebody paid by the word?

[Charles Drago]

Was [Hemming] the first Renaissance Assassin or somebody paid by the word?

Yes.

[H.P. Albarelli Jr.]

Well, I guess I responded and reacted to Hemming on a number of levels...
I spoke to him a bit as a former soldier [I had trained at Fort Bragg in the 1960s], and I spoke to him as a researcher and writer. At the time I was searching for a young American soldier of fortune who had been recruited by Frank 'Sturgis' to go to Cuba. This young man never returned to the U.S. after the Revolution, and later died (or was murdered) in Cuba. Hemming had met the young man but told me he could not recall anything about him after their meeting. After that we talked about Oswald and other matters. I found Hemming to be quite interesting and for the most part honest. But please keep in mind I was not there to evaluate him psychologically-- he had offered to help me and I had taken him up on his offer.

[Dawn Meredith]

(I really appreciate the James Lee Burke quotes. He's one of America's finest novelists.)

Burke could not have described Lee Harvey Oswald with more precision and poetry if he had set out to do so.

As for Morales: His pathologies intrigue me. As do the rest of his psychic drive®s. The fictive construct that was, in the main, Gerald Patrick Hemming seems modeled on DSM. And I mean quite literally modeled.

I can think of no more novelistic or otherwise intriguing and potentially revelatory figure within our area of study -- with the possible exception of the aforementioned Mr. (Messrs.?) Oswald. In so many ways they are presented in profound counter-balance.

I agree -- completely. I spoke with and interviewed Jerry Hemming a number of times before his death. I even went up to North Carolina to see him once when he was pretty ill. Men like Hemming, and Morales, are cut from different cloth than most folks are. Oswald also, but perhaps in different sorts of ways. Hemming and Morales were grounded in their extreme form of belief and country and anti-Communism, but Oswald, to me, seemed ungrounded and a bit lost at times, or put another way, a patsy.

Hank,

On a soon-to-be-originated thread I'll go into some detail about my personal experiences with Hemming.

For now -- and with all deference to his certifiable history as a deep political player -- I submit that there is as much substantive difference between GPH and DSM as there is between either of them and LHO.

Hemming to me in the main was -- I'll use the term again -- a fictive construct. If you prefer, he was a character created to confuse and otherwise misdirect. The disconnect between, on one hand, his threatening physical presence and overt homicidal curriculum vitae, and on the other his erudition and refined storytelling skills leads me to conclude that his ultimate mission was to deflect our attention from the likes of Morales (and perhaps even "Buffalo").

Oswald was indeed a patsy -- and something less, and something more.

I'm prepared to argue that in the fullness of time we will appreciate the historic LHO as -- for lack of a better term -- a more highly evolved Frank Olson.

But a quick posting on an Internet site -- even one as sublimely advanced as the DPF (!) -- cannot do justice to the portrait I wish to paint.

So ... Hemming and Morales v. Oswald ...

Cut from different cloth?

I'd place Morales and Oswald at extreme ends of the same human fabric, and Hemming between them, if not precisely in the middle.

Put another way: In terms of the Morales/Oswald-symbolized conflict, Hemming is a bit player.

Hemming was not only a bit player, he greatly exaggerated his importance and made things up out of whole cloth. I read younger researcher's posts now and many find him credible. I guess I need to refer them to some old posts at another forum where Hemming was confronted with his...ah... contradictions.
And look at the wild goose chase Joan Mellen was lead on by him, the Angelo Murgado fable. (imho)

"Chairs"

Dawn

[John Bevilaqua]

Gerry Hemming's career path and training were very much intertwined with the paths of both Lee Harvey Oswald, Robert Emmett Johnson and Roy Hargraves among others. James Richards has already confirmed that Robert Emmett Johnson was a shooter in Dealey Plaza, confirming what Hargraves told Mary Ferrell and Richards confirmed that Hargraves was also there playing various roles. Marita Lorenz said that Hemming was in Dallas that day along with Frank Strurgis and E. H. Hunt and her statements have recently been proven to be accurate given what E. H. Hunt said on his deathbed and given the fact that Sturgis tried to silence both her and myself regarding our knowledge of his role in the JFK Assassination. The South Florida "researchers" who tried unsuccessfully to debunk Lorenz's version and my version of South Florida and Dealey Plaza events did a great disservice and a gross injustice to the cause of seeking the truth in the JFK conundrum.

Hemming was a song and dance man, for sure, who had to walk the tightrope between fact and fiction to protect his own quite obvious roles in both the Miami and the Dallas plots against JFK. But to try to trivialize him and to call him a bit player is not accurate in my honest opinion. South Florida "researchers" tried to do the same thing to him because he could place several Miami based Cuban exiles in the thick of the Miami plot at the drop of a hat and perhaps even the Dallas plot as well.

Let history record that Gerry Hemming knew exactly who tried to kill JFK in Miami and that he was in Dallas on the day JFK died playing some unknown role or roles as described by Marita Lorenz who has always told the truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God. I am researching an AP photograph of Hemming which if still available will prove that he was in Dallas on D-Day.
Hemming was probably also trained just like Oswald, Johnson and others as a programmed assassin using MKULTRA techniques by Cline and Singlaub and Company.

I should also add the information that Noel Twyman gleaned from his incessant quizzing of Hemming at my suggestion on the subject of Robert J. Morris from the Dallas John Birch Society. I told Twyman to take the "pretense" or "supposition" approach with Hemming that you had some corroborated inside information about Robert Morris' role as one of the major plotters in the entire JFK conundrum. (Don't tell him that it was, in reality, from Richard Condon and myself.) And then, I continued, no matter how much he tries to deny it, no matter how much he tries to trivialize the Morris role, just keep pursuing that topic as if it was going to be a major cornerstone of your book until he finally cracks and leaks some insights or enhancements to your theory about Morris and The John Birch Society. And sure enough, Hemming broke ranks and told Twyman that he was ready to tell everything about Morris and The John Birch Society types like Willoughby, Walker and Hunt. Twyman then asked Morris to reconsider everything overnight and then if he still wanted to talk they would resume in the morning. Either Hemming was staying in California with Twyman or Twyman was staying near Hemming's house, I can not recall which was the case.
In any event, Hemming got cold feet as recounted in Twyman's book and decided against spilling the beans on Morris. But in fact, this exchange cemented in my mind the incontrovertible evidence against the JBS, Rober Morris, Willoughby and Walker as well as the Hunt family contributins to JFK's demise. And it further established the veracity of the work done by William Turner who investigated Patrick J. Frawley, OSJ, INCA and by inference Frawley's employee at Technicolor and Schick Safety Razor, Robert Morris of the JBS. You can also add Mae Brussell into that equation as well who spent decades on this case and wrote the Morris and Willoughby indictment in The Realist with Bill Turner who asked to have his name removed as a contributor at the last moment due to some minor issues he had with citations, sources and corroboration of some details. He told me that he wished he had not removed his name from the article as its importance loomed larger after Dick Russell revealed the info about his informant's details about Willoughby in the 1994 classic TMWKTM.

The other point to be made about these South Florida SOFs and their roles is that everyone just seems to assume that once you do a contract for the CIA or for Army Intel that every other clandestine or nefarious project you work on in the future can automatically be assumed to be sponsored by your original contractor for the sake of your pet theory or theories or whatever. In fact, people like Hemming, Hargraves, Sturgis and Sullivan and all the rest probably did projects for the CIA, Castro, Battista, Army Intel, the JBS, the Trujillos, the Mob, the Buckley clan, the Ryans, Ulius Amoss, the White Supremacists at The Citizens Councils, CREEP, John Dean, the Miss Sov Comm, HUAC, SISS and the anti-Castro exiles. They were guns for hire, they were mercenaries and they had no other way to put food on the table except through their highest paid specialty. So to assume that Hemming, Hargraves and Sturgis were ALWAYS working for just the CIA whenever they are involved in something covert or extralegal is either a case of convenient distortion and exaggeration to support some preconceived agenda or extreme naivete of the worst kind or even both. These SOFs changed sides as quickly as a chameleon changed colors. And they often worked both sides of the fence as well.

The group known as Nellie's Boys were the forerunners of outfits like Blackwater and Xe, except in much smaller numbers. The need for retired military operatives to rely on only their military specialties and their military training after severing ties with the military is a very dangerous proposition to say the least. It is quite comparable to the problem of releasing former violent felons after their jail time is done back into society with no visible means of support or hopes for re-entering the civilian mercantile work force. It is just asking for trouble. The same thing happened when The Shickshinny Knights of Malta was created to serve as an outlet for all the former Generals and Admirals who were still champing at the bit for another Great War. This type of organization should be on a prohibited list agreed to contractually by retired military and the same should hold true for Blackwater/Xe. Probably way too late now anyway.

[H.P. Albarelli Jr.]

Hemming was not only a bit player, he greatly exaggerated his importance and made things up out of whole cloth. I read younger researcher's posts now and many find him credible. I guess I need to refer them to some old posts at another forum where Hemming was confronted with his...ah... contradictions.
And look at the wild goose chase Joan Mellen was lead on by him, the Angelo Murgado fable. (imho)

"Chairs"

Dawn[/QUOTE]

I guess dubbing Hemming as a 'bit-player' is a matter of perspective. I don't see him as a bit player at all in certain regards.I don't consider myself a 'younger researcher'-- wish I was -- but again it's a matter of perspective. Hemming was there for much of the history. Of course he tossed out disinformation and misinformation. Could we expect anything less from him; but is it not our jobs as serious researchers to sort through the nonsense and drivel to find some truth? Isn't that the purpose of these forums? I can't speak for Joan Mellen's experience. A lot of folks have problems with her research. I don't: I take what I see to be true, interesting, worthwhile and leave the rest. I am new to these forums and find them quite fascinating. I'm still trying to ascertain their actual purpose. I find them quite helpful and loaded with good data and information (i.e. John Bevilaqua's wonderful info and research). I try to sort through the personal opinions, meaning those opinions that sway away from fact. In other words, I don't try to prejudge anyone or write anyone off as a bit-player, especially when they have shared the same space and air with the likes of Lee Harvey Oswald.

[Peter Lemkin]

The two prior [above] posts on this thread, have much merit and should not be taken likely, no matter what you think of the persons writing them....IMO. Another matter one should keep in mind, IMO, is the [on line] enmity between GPH and TP. In some ways I think they might have been/be creatures of the same entity.

[John Bevilaqua]

The two prior [above] posts on this thread, have much merit and should not be taken likely, no matter what you think of the persons writing them....IMO. Another matter one should keep in mind, IMO, is the [on line] enmity between GPH and TP. In some ways I think they might have been/be creatures of the same disinfo entity.

Who is TP exactly? I can not match up the initials with anyone in this community right now.

Hank, for me the purpose of these forums is to obtain feedback and additional leads into persons associated with my group of suspect Eugenicists and Richard Condon's gang of suspects. In the last month for instance an old John Dolva post put me onto the very live trail of Elmore Greaves from WACL, the Pioneer Fund and the Citizens Councils and a Steven Gaal post sent me to a Jerry Shinley posting about none other than Medford B. Evans and his roles with Edwin A. Walker and Guy Banister. Imagine my surprise when it turned out that they both knew each other and worked together on common segregationist and Eugenicist agendas including the assassination of JFK. Now the issue of George Soule from Soule Business College where Guy Banister once attended school rears its ugly head yet again. Soule College was twice the site of major private dog and pony shows done by Edwin A. Walker. Hopefully the net result will be input from others about Wickliffe Draper and his band of sinister and surreptitious cohorts.
Even Henry H. Goddard, Robert Yerkes and Robert Garrett came up on my radar once again as a result of some of your interesting postings and those of others. More and more it appears to me that these Mississippi segregationists and Eugenicists were the primary nexus of characters behind MOST if not ALL of these unsolved Civil Rights murder cases from the 1960's including JFK, RFK and MLK. To the extent that I can gain more info about them, we are all getting closer in our search for the Final Solution. I think others have also provided evidence that Guy Banister was not in either the CIA or ONI and that his boss during World War II in the FBI, William Harvey had no real CIA affiliations either according to Gerry Hemming. They were both disaffected, former FBI agents who were dumped by the FBI because they were basically total psychos and loose cannons. No one else but Wickliffe Draper and Medford B. Evans and Elmore Greaves would touch them with a 10-foot pole. E.H. Hunt may have used Banister in the Arbenz Guatamala coup and elsewhere, but to what extent can not be determined yet.

[John Bevilaqua]

Hank (or anyone else),

Geoffrey Sullivan's daughter is still trying to find definitive info about whether or not her Dad crash landed in Cuba with Alex Rorke and ended up in a Castro jail or not. Do you know anyone who could offer some insights into this question? It is also possible that their plane never reached Cuba and that it disappeared into the ocean as well.