Barry Seal's C-123 & the Hasenfus Shootdown
Larry-Jennie
The Miami Herald
October 9, 1986
DOWNED PLANE LINKED TO ROLE IN COCAINE STING
DOWNED CRAFT LINKED TO DRUGS
By JEFF LEEN And ALFONSO CHARDY
An anti-Sandinista cargo aircraft that was shot down by Nicaraguan troops
last weekend may have been the same one outfitted by the CIA for a 1984
drug sting that led to the indictment in Miami of a Sandinista official.
Federal Aviation Administration records show that the plane currently is
registered to a Daytona Beach company, Doan Helicopter Services. But it was
unclear Wednesday whether the company still controlled the plane, a
30-year-old Fairchild C- 123K, or what the plane's connection to the U.S.
government was.
The owner of the company, Harry Doan, was unavailable for comment.
But other aviation experts familiar with the plane said it had a long
history of quasi-governmental service.
In the summer of 1984, Doan swapped a C-123 to Adler "Barry" Seal, a Baton
Rouge pilot and drug smuggler who became an undercover informant for the
U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, according to Kent Sherman, a
consultant on the deal who is a partner in Sherman Aircraft of West Palm
Beach.
Seal flew the plane to Rickenbacker Air Force Base in Ohio, where it was
outfitted with hidden cameras by the CIA, according to a DEA agent who
testified in court in Fort Lauderdale.
Seal then piloted the aircraft to Nicaragua and returned with 1,472 pounds
of cocaine. The cameras filmed Federico Vaughan, who U.S. officials said
was an employee of the Nicaraguan Interior Ministry, helping load cocaine
into the plane.
Seal was murdered in Baton Rouge on Feb. 19. The IRS had seized Seal's
assets 16 days earlier, seeking to strip him of his drug revenues. The IRS
confiscated three of Seal's planes, but the C-123 wasn't among them.
Last year, Doan advertised a C-123 in Trade-a-Plane, a journal for the
buying and selling of aircraft.
"I talked to Barry and he left me the impression that it was the same
aircraft," said Ben Seal, Barry Seal's brother. "There wasn't but one or
two (C-123s) back in that time period that were certified to fly."
After Seal returned from Nicaragua, his C-123 was parked at a small airport
in Mena, Arkansas. The plane had no identification number painted on its
fuselage and "nobody ever forced the issue of it not having a number
because of the nature of work it was used in," said a knowledgeable
aviation source at the airport, who asked not to be quoted by name.
"Barry got it from Harry (Doan) and they worked up some kind of deal and
they sold it back to (Doan)," the source said. "It's had military use, it's
had sting operations and now it's been shot down running guns. It's had a
very colorful life."
Three other sources also told The Herald that Seal transferred the C-123
back to Doan.
In Washington, Reagan administration officials acknowledged that they had
known for some time that supply flights to the contras were leaving from a
military airfield in El Salvador. But they continued to deny any U.S.
government connection to the flight.
"Absolutely not," is how Reagan put it to reporters as he left the White
House for a campaign swing for Republican congressional candidates in North
Carolina and Georgia.
"We've been aware that there are private groups and private citizens that
have been trying to help the contras. . . . We do not know the particulars
of what they are doing," Reagan said.
Nicaraguan officials announced Monday that government troops had downed a
C-123 transport plane Sunday en route to drop supplies to anti-Sandinista
rebels in southern Nicaragua. Two Americans, Wallace Blaine Sawyer Jr. and
William J. Cooper, were killed in the crash, and a third, Eugene Hasenfus
of Marinette, Wis., was captured.
On Wednesday, the Sandinista newspaper Barricada reported in Managua that
the aircraft, which crashed in a remote area about 35 miles north of
Nicaragua's border with Costa Rica, bore the registration number N4410F.
FAA officials in Oklahoma City said that number had been assigned to a
C-123 owned by Doan's Helicopter Service in Daytona Beach.
An employee of the firm, who identified himself only as John, said Doan had
left town last Friday and would not be back for at least a week. A woman
who lives in a guest house on Doan's 10-acre residence said she had
expected Doan to return home last night, but that he had not yet returned.
The employee who called himself John acknowledged that Doan had owned a
C-123 aircraft, but said he had not seen it for "a couple of years" and
that Doan no longer owned it.
At the New Smyrna Beach airport, John Wilkinson, owner of Wilkinson
Aeromarina, an air service company where Doan's business is headquartered,
said he had serviced a camouflaged C- 123 for Doan. But he said he had not
seen the plane in about a year.
Meanwhile, a Reagan administration official familiar with contra activities
said it was likely that the crew of the doomed C-123 had also flown supply
missions for the State Department's Nicaraguan Humanitarian Assistance
Office, which was responsible for providing $27 million in nonlethal aid to
the contras earlier this year.
Sandinista officials said Tuesday night that they had found a business card
for P.J. Buecher, operations coordinator for the NHAO, in the wallet of
Cooper, one of the dead crewmen.
A U.S. official who worked with Buecher said he is not surprised Cooper had
Buecher's card because Buecher was in charge of arranging the shipment of
nonlethal supplies to the contras between 1985 and early 1986.
"It is logical to assume that Buecher gave out his card to the crews of the
planes we used to ship those supplies," the official said. "It is also
quite possible that Cooper was one of the pilots. But this does not mean
that the U.S. government is involved. It's just coincidence."
Herald correspondent Phil Long in Daytona Beach and Washington
correspondent Frank Greve contributed to this report.
****************
To subscribe for free to the CIA Drugs Discussion Group,
send a blank email to:
cia-dr...@mail-list.com
The email list examines evidence and testimony alleging CIA
complicity in global narcotics trafficking.
Here you will find:
* News of recent events and newly revealed information.
* Review of historical documents and testimony.
* Analysis of the record.
j...@globaldialog.com
Note that this was published eleven years ago. That's one year
before the Barry Seal smokescreen was concocted and disseminated
by Gene Wheaton as part of the "help" he gave the Christic Institute
in its suicidal lawsuit against the USG. What is conveyed in this
article about Seal and the C-123 is precisely what Bear Bottoms
has claimed.
<remainder snipped>
Larry-Jennie
So Seal bought, then sold back, the C-123 from a company connected with
US intelligence operations.
What is most intersting is the statement by Ben Seal, Barry Seal's brother, that
"There wasn't but one or two (C-123s) back in that time period that were certified
to fly."
"In that time period," there was a second C-123 identical to Seal's. While
Seal had a C-123 parked at Mena, there was an identical one just across the
Oklahoma border painted with the same camouflage. Funny how there were "but
one or two" C-123s, and both were so close to each and painted identically
Larry
j...@globaldialog.com
Larry-Jennie wrote:
>
>
> What is most intersting is the statement by Ben Seal, Barry Seal's brother, that
> "There wasn't but one or two (C-123s) back in that time period that were certified
> to fly."
>
> "In that time period," there was a second C-123 identical to Seal's. While
> Seal had a C-123 parked at Mena, there was an identical one just across the
> Oklahoma border painted with the same camouflage.
... which *never* landed at Mena, and which was the subject of
surveillance by law enforcement. Another disconnect for you.
And while we're at it, if Seal's C-123 was "identical" to
the Oklahoma C-123, and the Oklahoma C-123 was painted up
in camoflage, and there were "only one or two", then which
dark, almost black C-123 did L. D. Brown claim to see?
Go back to your toy soldiers, Larry.
pelmark
In article <3430FC...@interaccess.com>, Larry-Jennie
<lar...@interaccess.com> wrote:
<SNIP ARTICLE>
>So Seal bought, then sold back, the C-123 from a company connected with
>US intelligence operations.
Not arguing, but I assume you have proof that Harry Doan is connected to "US
intelligence operations".
To clarify: selling a plane to Barry Seal would not be "proof" to me. Nor
Doan selling a plane to another buyer who was a proven CIA
agent/representative. Doan buys and sells aircraft. I assume he is
interested in whether his customer can pay. Or is everyone who buys a plane
from Doan automatically a CIA asset?
But I don't know his history. Perhaps you could clarify, or point out a
source that would show me Doan's connections.
I apologize for not being up to speed; I am trying to learn. I "know" Harry
Doan's name; I have read it on various posts and articles; I just don't know
his history.
>What is most intersting is the statement by Ben Seal, Barry Seal's brother,
that
>"There wasn't but one or two (C-123s) back in that time period that were
certified
>to fly."
The whole Ben Seal quote from the article:
"I talked to Barry and he left me the impression that it was the same
aircraft," said Ben Seal, Barry Seal's brother. "There wasn't but one or
two (C-123s) back in that time period that were certified to fly."
Correct me if I am in error. The C-123 was originally purchased from Doan by
Seal, and then later sold back to Doan, for I *think*, $400,000. There
appears, as I recall, questions as to why Doan bought the plane back for
such a price; considerably(?) more than he originally sold it for, correct?
Was it refurbished, repaired, and put into better condition by Seal? Does
anyone know?
>"In that time period," there was a second C-123 identical to Seal's. While
>Seal had a C-123 parked at Mena, there was an identical one just across the
>Oklahoma border painted with the same camouflage. Funny how there were
"but
>one or two" C-123s, and both were so close to each and painted identically
For my own *curiousity*, and I am not trying to start anything, how and why
is Ben Seal an expert on how many Fairchild C-123 "Providers" are in active
service in the US and around the world?
This article was printed in 1986.
My closest reference to that date, _A Field Guide to Airplanes_ by M.R.
Montogomery and Gerald Foster, copyrighted in 1984, sold in 1985 (I ordered
it pre-press I was told, and received it in 1985), says this about the
C-123:
"Fairly rare. Upsweep of fuselage begins atop the wing; two radial engines;
convential tail plane.
The last active military C-123s are at Westover Air Force Base, near
Springfield, Massachusetts. The twin-engine C-123 bears only the slightest
resemblance to other upswept-fuselage aircraft--its sheer bulk and the
straight line of the upsweep into the convential tail seperate it
automatically from the de Havilland Caribou (midway tail plane) and Buffalo
(T-tail) (previous entries). Widely used in Vietnam, it was the principal
aircraft for defoliant spraying, and it can be seen occasionally in this
country performing insecticide spraying missions for the U.S. Forest Service
or the Bureau of Land Management. Overhead, it is fat and noisy."
p. 170
This is 1984, as compared to Seal being quoted in the article (when did he
*actually* say this, not the article date, though they may be the same; I
don't *know*) in 1986. Two years (or arguably less) before this article was
published, C-123s were still in active military service, in the US. Other
federal agencies used them, at least at that time.
[About this book: _A Field Guide to Airplanes_ is a book for airplane
enthusiasts, such as myself, who wander around airports, air shows, static
displays, and military bases pursuing our hobby of observing aircraft. Sorta
like bird-watching.
[The "Fairly rare" reference above means, from my own personal experience
using this book for years, that seeing a C-123 would be a fairly rare
occurence; there are not many times you would see such an aircraft. When the
book describes, for instance, a Call-Air A2 or variant A5, it is cited as
"extremely rare"; fewer than 50 were built, and a few more built as a crop
duster variant. An SR-71 Blackbird is described as "rare".
[It would be uncommon, and a sighting to note, to see a "fairly rare"
airplane such as the C-123, even for active observers; even more rare would
be a sighting of an SR-71, or Call-Air A2. Also, note that sighting an
SR-71, for example, would have to be done at pre-flight, static (rarely),
taxiing, takeoff, or landing; you are *not* going to see one at 70,000 feet
at 2300mph. The Douglas DC-3, or C47 Dakota, is listed as "not common, but
widely distributed". I never saw one when I lived in the north; I see them
every day where I live now. Flying, on the ground moving, and static.]
From _The International Directory of Military Aircraft 1996-1997_ by Gerard
Frawley and Jim Thorn, copyright 1996.
From the section on the use of the C-123:
"C-123Bs and C-123Ks served widely in the Vietnam War with US Forces
(including the AC-123 gunship variant, fitted with various sensors, cannon
and miniguns) and with the Republic of South Vietnam Air Force. Several
other Aisan nations have operated ex USAF and RSVAK C-123Bs and C-123Ks,
including Laos, the Phillipines, Thailand, Taiwan, and South Korea. Of those
nations, Thailand, Laos and South Korea operate small numbers of C-123s,
while two examples survive in El Salvador.
PHOTO: Thailand continues to fly C-123s alongside C-47s. (Glyn Jones)"
p. 74
(The photo shows a very nice C-123 of the Thailand Air Force.)
My point is simple: unless Ben Seal is an aircraft broker, or an active
aviation enthusiast, and I have no idea what he *is*, his statement appears
to be debatable. Therefore, to make conclusions off it, I believe is fraught
with the risk of making an error.
Now, if Ben Seal is an expert in the availability of C-123s in flying
condition, and his quote is from the same time period as the article, his
statement would certainly contain much more weight. If he was just a pilot,
with no particular expertise in how and what aircraft were flying in 1986,
his statement may be totally wrong. If he has no connection to aviation, and
is simply Barry Seal's brother, how could he possibly know the availability
of flying Providers (C-123s)?
[Every day during the rainy season, at about 2AM, three old Dakotas, still
equipped with *radial* engines, roar over my home, out spraying for
'skeeters. Granted, the Dakota (first flew in *1935*) was produced in huge
numbers, but old airplanes show up at many places, in the strangest of
circumstances.]
How did Ben Seal *know* only one or two C-123s were certified? And that
statement *certainly* can't apply for the world; they still fly *today*.
If *I* assume Ben Seal is indeed an expert, and I then assume his statement
is correct, I then have to assume a second C-123, painted similarly (perhaps
the same date of refurbishment by the same aircraft restorers?) is related
to the Barry Seal plane, and then this "proves" Seal is CIA, or whatever the
contention is.
If this is the standard of evidence and proof for Mena contentions, it is no
wonder there is so much confusion and conflict. And that is strictly my own
*opinion*.
It may lead observers to conclusions that are "true"; it may also very well
lead to unfounded conclusions.
Ben Seal's quote, to *me*, leads me to wonder how he knows what he states.
Because actual reference materials suggest otherwise. I *also* know I can be
in error with *my* conclusion.
Readers can draw their own conclusions about my post.
Billy Beck
Very interesting.
"pelmark" <skip...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
Excellent question.
It is not out of the realm of reality that such a thing might be
possible - that a person who operates a certain type of what is
essentially a vintage warbird might know of every other one operating
in the country. Such machines have unique maintenance requirements,
etc., which weld their owners into tight subcultures of the aviation
community, a fairly exclusive culture already. Dealers in such
aircraft come to know the market at least as well.
However, I would be interested in authoritative confirmation of
Ben Seal's contention of the number of C-123's active in those days.
The reason is that I really don't believe they were *that* ("one or
two") rare in the mid-80's.
>This article was printed in 1986.
>
>My closest reference to that date, _A Field Guide to Airplanes_ by M.R.
>Montogomery and Gerald Foster, copyrighted in 1984, sold in 1985 (I ordered
>it pre-press I was told, and received it in 1985), says this about the
>C-123:
>
>"Fairly rare. Upsweep of fuselage begins atop the wing; two radial engines;
>convential tail plane.
>
>The last active military C-123s are at Westover Air Force Base, near
>Springfield, Massachusetts. The twin-engine C-123 bears only the slightest
>resemblance to other upswept-fuselage aircraft--its sheer bulk and the
>straight line of the upsweep into the convential tail seperate it
>automatically from the de Havilland Caribou (midway tail plane) and Buffalo
>(T-tail) (previous entries). Widely used in Vietnam, it was the principal
>aircraft for defoliant spraying, and it can be seen occasionally in this
>country performing insecticide spraying missions for the U.S. Forest Service
>or the Bureau of Land Management. Overhead, it is fat and noisy."
>p. 170
>This is 1984, as compared to Seal being quoted in the article (when did he
>*actually* say this, not the article date, though they may be the same; I
>don't *know*) in 1986. Two years (or arguably less) before this article was
>published, C-123s were still in active military service, in the US. Other
>federal agencies used them, at least at that time.
Okay: a brief Web search didn't turn up too much, but I'm going
to poke around and see what I can dig up. The following URL turned up
some production history...
http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/annex/an40.htm (brief history & photo)
"The "Provider" is a short-range assault transport used to airlift
troops and cargo onto short runways and unprepared airstrips. Designed
by the Chase Aircraft Co., the C-123 evolved from earlier designs for
large assault gliders. The first prototype XC-123 made its initial
flight on October 14, 1949, powered by two piston engines. A second
prototype was built as the XG-20 glider. It was later test-flown,
powered by four jet engines. The production version, with two piston
engines, was designated the C-123B. Chase began manufacture in 1953,
but the production contract was transferred to Fairchild. The first of
more than 300 Fairchild-built C-123Bs entered service in July 1955.
Between 1966 and 1969, 184 C-123Bs were converted to C-123Ks by adding
two J85 jet engines for improved performance. "
...but nothing which reaches into the period we're talking about.
(Note the production run. We know that the '123 served in Vietnam in
both transport and gunship roles, the latter of which was a fairly
dangerous gig. I turned up some data on that role which described
interdiction missions on the Ho Chi Minh trail with fighter cover for
MIGCAP and AAA defense suppression. I was looking for numbers of
'123's destroyed, but didn't find that.)
With "more than 300" built, though, I would imagine the number of
survivors to be fairly high. I also turned up a list of Providers
*currently* extant in various states:
http://www.totavia.com/hawkeye/c123.html (photos & list of 123's
preserved, stored, & restored, mostly through the 90's)
Mark:
>[About this book: _A Field Guide to Airplanes_ is a book for airplane
>enthusiasts, such as myself, who wander around airports, air shows, static
>displays, and military bases pursuing our hobby of observing aircraft. Sorta
>like bird-watching.
>
>[The "Fairly rare" reference above means, from my own personal experience
>using this book for years, that seeing a C-123 would be a fairly rare
>occurence; there are not many times you would see such an aircraft. When the
>book describes, for instance, a Call-Air A2 or variant A5, it is cited as
>"extremely rare"; fewer than 50 were built, and a few more built as a crop
>duster variant. An SR-71 Blackbird is described as "rare".
>
>[It would be uncommon, and a sighting to note, to see a "fairly rare"
>airplane such as the C-123, even for active observers; even more rare would
>be a sighting of an SR-71, or Call-Air A2. Also, note that sighting an
>SR-71, for example, would have to be done at pre-flight, static (rarely),
>taxiing, takeoff, or landing; you are *not* going to see one at 70,000 feet
>at 2300mph.
(Anecdotal aside: I once watched an SR-71 take off from Barksdale
AFB, Shreveport, La., on a flight to Nellis AFB, Las Vegas, Nev. The
flight was well known in advance after a week-end air show. A bunch
of us stood in front of base ops watching him sitting at the end of
the runway for what seemed like an extraordinarily long time before
take off. Someone asked what the hell was taking so long. A grizzled
line chief present growled, "He's waiting for clearance into the
landing pattern at Nellis." That was a joke, which brought the house
down. This is flight of more than 1200 miles.)
>The Douglas DC-3, or C47 Dakota, is listed as "not common, but
>widely distributed". I never saw one when I lived in the north; I see them
>every day where I live now. Flying, on the ground moving, and static.]
>
>From _The International Directory of Military Aircraft 1996-1997_ by Gerard
>Frawley and Jim Thorn, copyright 1996.
>
>From the section on the use of the C-123:
>
>"C-123Bs and C-123Ks served widely in the Vietnam War with US Forces
>(including the AC-123 gunship variant, fitted with various sensors, cannon
>and miniguns) and with the Republic of South Vietnam Air Force. Several
>other Aisan nations have operated ex USAF and RSVAK C-123Bs and C-123Ks,
>including Laos, the Phillipines, Thailand, Taiwan, and South Korea. Of those
>nations, Thailand, Laos and South Korea operate small numbers of C-123s,
>while two examples survive in El Salvador.
>
>PHOTO: Thailand continues to fly C-123s alongside C-47s. (Glyn Jones)"
>p. 74
>
>(The photo shows a very nice C-123 of the Thailand Air Force.)
>My point is simple: unless Ben Seal is an aircraft broker, or an active
>aviation enthusiast, and I have no idea what he *is*, his statement appears
>to be debatable. Therefore, to make conclusions off it, I believe is fraught
>with the risk of making an error.
I absolutely agree. It is difficult for me to imagine that he
can be taken literally: that there were only "one or two" C-123's
certified to fly in the US in the mid-80's. If there were more than,
say, a *dozen* of them in one piece (and I think there were a lot more
than that), then that represents commercial potential which I simply
cannot imagine lying fallow.
Well...I don't want to cast undue aspersions of "lame innuendo"
or anything...
Billy
Bear Bottoms
Larry-Jennie <lar...@interaccess.com> wrote in article
<34306F...@interaccess.com>...
The plane was mechanically refurbished at RAFB. It was then flown
to Homestead AFB where the camera was installed.
> Seal then piloted the aircraft to Nicaragua and returned with 1,472
pounds
> of cocaine. The cameras filmed Federico Vaughan, who U.S. officials said
> was an employee of the Nicaraguan Interior Ministry, helping load cocaine
> into the plane.
>
> Seal was murdered in Baton Rouge on Feb. 19. The IRS had seized Seal's
> assets 16 days earlier, seeking to strip him of his drug revenues. The
IRS
> confiscated three of Seal's planes, but the C-123 wasn't among them.
>
Seal had sold the C-123 back to Doan for $250,000.
> Last year, Doan advertised a C-123 in Trade-a-Plane, a journal for the
> buying and selling of aircraft.
>
> "I talked to Barry and he left me the impression that it was the same
> aircraft," said Ben Seal, Barry Seal's brother. "There wasn't but one or
> two (C-123s) back in that time period that were certified to fly."
>
I was the same aircraft.
Southern Air Transport bought it via a Southern Air Transport check
for $450,000.
The attempted link to the CIA of Barry Seal through this airplane
is merely a huge jump without recognizing the details of this
article and the actual complete details of ownership and possession
of this aircraft. I thank Larry for helping to clear up the matter
that there is no link. Seal owned the aircraft for a short period of
time. It was flown twice to Nicaragua while he owned it. It was
then re-sold back to Harry Doan who later sold it to Southern
Air Transport. While SAT owned the aircraft, it was shot down
in Nicaragua with Hasunfus on board. The aircraft provides no
link to the CIA with Seal whatsoever, unless of course if you
want to count the CIA placing a camera in the plane when it
flew to Nicaragua during Seal's DEA Nicaraguan sting against
the Medellin Cartel. This would be a miniscule link as the CIA
only played a minor role directly with this DEA mission by placing
this camera in the airplane. It had nothing to do with the Contras
and the reason the camera was placed in the plane was to
collect intelligence of Sandinista drug smuggling.
pelmark
In article <343270...@interaccess.com>, Larry-Jennie
<lar...@interaccess.com> wrote:
>pelmark wrote:
>>
>> In article <3430FC...@interaccess.com>, Larry-Jennie
>> <lar...@interaccess.com> wrote:
>> >So Seal bought, then sold back, the C-123 from a company connected with
>> >US intelligence operations.
>>
>> Not arguing, but I assume you have proof that Harry Doan is connected to
"US
>> intelligence operations".
>
>
>I am mistaken. I cannot find a source to support my assertion that
>Harry Doan or Doan Helicopter was connected with US intelligence.
>
>Larry
Thank you for clarifying that, Larry. I appreciate it.
If *you* don't have one, I'm reasonably assured in the conclusion that a
source does not exist.
Mark
econtv
Larry-Jennie wrote:
>
> pelmark wrote:
> >
> > In article <3430FC...@interaccess.com>, Larry-Jennie
> > <lar...@interaccess.com> wrote:
> > >So Seal bought, then sold back, the C-123 from a company connected with
> > >US intelligence operations.
> >
> > Not arguing, but I assume you have proof that Harry Doan is connected to "US
> > intelligence operations".
>
> Harry Doan or Doan Helicopter was connected with US intelligence.
>
> Larry
-- au contraire. doan bought and sold for contra operativers 'at will.'
Daniel Hopsicker
Executive Producer
http://www.MadCowProd.com
"Barry Seal was to the CIA what 00 is to 7."
pelmark
In article <3432CC0E...@earthlink.net>, econtv <eco...@earthlink.net>
wrote:
>Larry-Jennie wrote:
>>
>> pelmark wrote:
>> >
>> > In article <3430FC...@interaccess.com>, Larry-Jennie
>> > <lar...@interaccess.com> wrote:
>> > >So Seal bought, then sold back, the C-123 from a company connected
with
>> > >US intelligence operations.
>> >
>> > Not arguing, but I assume you have proof that Harry Doan is connected
to "US
>> > intelligence operations".
>>
>> I am mistaken. I cannot find a source to support my assertion that
>> Harry Doan or Doan Helicopter was connected with US intelligence.
>>
>> Larry
>
>-- au contraire. doan bought and sold for contra operativers 'at will.'
And...so?
Chrysler sells the CIA 100 new cars. Chrysler now a CIA operative? Connected
to US intelligence?
[Hell, yes. They are "compromised".]
Look, if Doan buys and sells fifty old planes or helos to all sorts of
rogues, government agents, "contra operativers", or *all* to CIA agents, why
does that make him CIA?
It's not like Vero Beach Aviation, "Home of Piper Sales!", can come up with
a Provider, or a Caribou. Guys that buy and sell old military/government
airplanes are always going to be floating around with some interesting
"characters", some of them being spooks, mercenary spooks, and dopers.
Airplanes needed with large cargo requirements that can land in short, rough
airstrips is going to pretty much leave you with surplus military troop
transport/freighters. And the range requirements (or the price!) *may*
negate something like a Cessna Caravan. And this can range from an Alaskan
freight company to a doper bound for Bolivia.
IOW, what's the *market*?
j...@globaldialog.com
Larry-Jennie put on his ministerial robes, and beseeched:
> The following documentation and sworn testimony demonstrate that
> a drug smuggler performed modifications on Seal's C-123, which were
> supervised by the DEA and the CIA. An FBI memo ties Seal's cocaine
> pilot Red Hall with electronic modifications on the C-123. Why did
> the DEA and CIA turn to a drug smuggler to do electronics work?
Maybe because he worked for and was already familiar with the
equipment of that other drug smuggler they were working
with, Barry Seal, in preparation for the Nicaraguan sting?
Just a guess....
>
> Another FBI memo documents the FBI's investigation into Fred Hampton's
> smuggling activities and his bragging about his CIA connections.
How many *real* CIA operatives who "brag" about it keep their
jobs?
>
> BOY CLINTON
> by R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.
> Page 3
>
> In the autumn of 1984, Brown made his first flight with Seal. It
> was on October 23 or very close to that date, and Brown found
> himself seated on
Having been challenged, Brown now states that he doesn't recall
what the date was.
Bear Bottoms has stated that the C-123 didn't haul guns
to the Contras, and that Brown never flew on it with Seal.
Russell Welch has stated that if Barry Seal had transported
guns out of Mena in 1983, 1984, or 1985, Welch would have
caught him at it.
Al Hadaway had the C-123 under surveillance.
Larry-Jennie
The following documentation and sworn testimony demonstrate that
a drug smuggler performed modifications on Seal's C-123, which were
supervised by the DEA and the CIA. An FBI memo ties Seal's cocaine
pilot Red Hall with electronic modifications on the C-123. Why did
the DEA and CIA turn to a drug smuggler to do electronics work?
Another FBI memo documents the FBI's investigation into Fred Hampton's
smuggling activities and his bragging about his CIA connections.
BOY CLINTON
by R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.
Page 3
In the autumn of 1984, Brown made his first flight with Seal. It was on
October 23 or very close to that date, and Brown found himself seated on
a bench inside a cavernous C-123 K cargo plane roaring over a Central
American jungle. Seal, who piloted the plane, was one of the greatest
daredevil flyers of the day. His C-123 K also had a history [see
Appendix A, items H and I]. It was originally an Air Force transport
plane. Seal dubbed it "the Fat Lady." He had purchased it from Doan
Helicopter, Inc., of Daytona Beach, to which it would eventually be
returned; both transactions appear suspicious. The plane would later be
serviced and financed by Southern Air Transport, a CIA front company.
It is the same C-I23 K that was eventually shot down over Nicaragua in
a doomed supply effort to the Contras that left an American, Eugene
Hasenfus, a prisoner of the Sandinistas and revealed the CIA link to the
Contras. The plane's two pilots died.
***
BOY CLINTON
Appendix A, Item H
(FBI Teletype information on Barry Seal's C-123K)
3/9/84
FM LITTLE ROCK (12D-283) (245D-7)
TO DIRECTOR ROUTINE
NEW ORLEANS (245D-7) ROUTINE
MIAMI ROUTINE
ATTENTION SUPVR, JIM Mc NALLY
FRED L. HAMPTON, DBA RICH MOUNTAIN AVIATION; ET AL;
NARCOTICS; OO: LITTLE ROCK (LR 12D-283)
COINROLL; OO: NEW ORLEANS (NO 245D-7) (LR 245D-7)
FBIHQ AND MIAMI DIVISION HAVE ADVISED LITTLE ROCK THAT
DEA DOES, IN FACT, HAVE AN INTEREST IN THE C-123 AIRCRAFT
PRESENTLY AT THE MENA, ARKANSAS, HANGAR FACILITIES OF HAMPTON.
DEA HAS SEVERAL THOUSAND DOLLARS IN ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT ABOARD
THE C-123.
SUPVR. RON KELLY, LITTLE ROCK, HAS PERSONALLY ADVISED
SHERIFF A. L. HADAWAY OF THE DEA INTEREST IN THE AIRCRAFT,
AND HE HAS AGREED NOT TO SEIZE THE AIRCRAFT.
MIAMI SUPVR. TIM Mc NALLY IS REQUESTED TO ADVISE DEA,
MIAMI THAT RED HALL, A COLUMBUS, OHIO, DRUG SMUGGLER AND
ELECTRONICS EXPERT IS PRESENTLY PREFORMING SOME TYPE OF
ELECTRONICS WORK ON THE C-123, SUPRA.
(Two lines redacted.)
ALSO DETERMINE
FROM DEA, MIAMI: (1) WHY AIRCRAFT MOVED TO MENA, ARKANSAS,
FROM FLORIDA; AND (2) IS RED HALL DOING WORK FOR BARRY SEAL
OR DEA ON THE C-123.
LITTLE ROCK IS CONTINUING ITS INVESTIGATION IN CAPTIONED
MATTER TOWARD CONSPIRACY CASE AGAINST HAMPTON AND SEIZURE OF HAMPTON'S ASSETS IN MENA,
ARKANSAS.
MIAMI SUTEL RESULTS TO NEW ORLEANS, LITTLE ROCK AND
FBIHQ.
************
Why did a drug smuggler, Red Hall, do electronics work on Seal's plane for the
Nicaraguan sting operation?
Also note how the FBI was not sure whether Hall worked for the DEA or Seal.
Though Sheriff Hadaway, the FBI and Sgt. Richard Branch,of the Arkansas
State Police described Red Hall as a drug smuggler, Bear Bottoms disagrees:
Excerpt from:
From: true...@worldnet.att.net (Russell Welch)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater
Subject: Unravelled Response 2b
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 1997 11:20:28 GMT
Here are some selections from an interview
of Al Hadaway:
<snip>
QUESTION. Did you suspect that the Senecas
were involved in smuggling?
ANSWER. The informant indicated that the
Senecas were being used in the smuggling also, and
the Senecas were seeing more movement and were used,
came and went, a lot more often. There was a Red
Hall who was up here occasionally that was reported
to be one of the pilots of people who worked for Seal
that did some of his flying and did electronic
maintenance and installation for him. This was
alleged to me by other agencies and I met and know
Red Hall by sight. He was there and in and out of here
quite often and he flew the Senecas.
<snip>
QUESTION. Did you ever observe during the
period '82, '83, or '84, Barry Seal's Senecas and/or
Navajo Panthers departing and arriving at the Mena
Airport in a manner that was suspicious?
ANSWER. Well, on more that one occasion.
There was one particular occasion Red Hall started
one of the Senecas in the hangar and brought it out.
The Mena runway was closed at the time. It was just
a muddy wet field conditions and he taxied it out on an
access ramp and turned it parallel to a strip on the gas
and took off in the mud, just fire-walled it and did a
short field take-off in the mud. It was in a manner I
thought was unsafe and highly unusual. Firing it
up in the hangar. There were other aircraft in the
hangar. They rolled the doors open and he came
out of that hangar with RPM up on it, turned, set
the brakes, fire-walled it and did a short field take-off.
QUESTION. What year was that?
ANSWER. In '83, I think, over in the fall
of '83. I'm not real sure of the dates.
<snip>
Billy, here's another statement from Hadaway,
in reference to an incident that occurred on
May 18, 1983:
Sheriff Hadaway stated that he was personally
at the Mena Arkansas Airport at approximately
5:00 p.m. on May 18, 1983. Two airplanes landed.
He observed one of them to be a Piper Seneca
tail number 2931C. He stated that the other one
was not noted as far as the tail number.
Sheriff Hadaway stated that at the time of this
incident the runway of the Mena Airport
was torn up and under construction and it
was not possible to cross the runway in an
airplane taxiing. Sheriff Hadaway stated that shortly after
the Piper Seneca landed, he heard an airplane fire
up its engines. He observed that this aircraft was in front
of Freddie Hampton's Hangar. He observed that
it was a Piper Seneca. He believes it was blue and white
in color and the tail number was N8049Z. He observed
the aircraft to rev both engines up to full throttle
while the pilot stood on the brakes until maximum
revolutions were obtained at which time the
pilot released the brakes and the aircraft made a
short take off from the apron and not the runway.
He estimated that the aircraft took off in less
than 300 feet. Shortly after N8049Z took off,
he contacted his informant and was told
that the pilot of the aircraft was "Red" Hall
and the aircraft contained on duffel bag
of cocaine.
*************
Here is Bear Bottoms' response with Welch's consequent reply:
Subject: Re: 5/6 Mena Unraveled 2
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 97 08:51:47 +0000
From: truegrit <true...@worldnet.att.net> (Russell Welch)
> BB (Bear Bottoms) comment:
> How would the informant know what was
> in the duffel bag. Red Hall did not haul
> dope. We carried many different types
> of equipment and electronics in duffel
> bags. There was no dope at Mena besides
> the fact that the dope was owned by the
> Colombians and we delivered to them.
> Hall was not involved of this aspect of our
> operation.
RW (Russell Welch) comment:
Don't know, Billy. It wasn't my informant.
**********
And another report about Red Hall from Arkansas State Police:
Excerpt from:
From: true...@worldnet.att.net (Russell Welch)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater
Subject: Unravelled Response 2a
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 1997 11:17:08 GMT
(The following is from a report by Sgt. Richard Branch,
of the Arkansas State Police, dated April 20, 1983)
It's reported that Evans and Hampton became associated
with Seal in October or November 1982. Seal started
bringing aircraft into the Mena Airport sometime around
this time. It's reported that the planes are flown by Evans
and two other pilots. One is unknown and the other pilot
is a white male named Red Hall out of Columbus, Ohio.
The CI advises that when loads are expected, that they use
several different planes and flights to avoid the detection of
the true plane in flight.
The CI knows of two loads, one on March 24, 1983
and the other on April 15 & 16, 1983. The CI states
that the planes are usually gone for 12 to 14 hours
after leaving the Mena Airport.
The CI believes that they go into Colombia, South America,
and are returning with cocaine. One of the off loading vehicles
is reported to be a truck that is used to haul damaged
aircraft and has an Arkansas vehicle LPN B117579. Other
vehicle license at hanger in Mena are Oklahoma LPN
XE1535, Arkansas LPN JHY717, and Arkansas LPN
JPT128.
The suspected aircraft used in the operation are as follows:
Three Piper Navajos, bearing N numbers N7409L
which is issued to Charles Medina of Florida, suspected of
U.S. Customs service smuggling cocaine, N62856 which
is reported by Customs Service at one time as being owned
by Air America. It's further reported that Air America is
a front for the United States Central Intelligence Agency.
Agent Lacewell advises that he had made contact through
his supervisors concerning the aircraft and its use, and was
advised that the CIA no longer owned the aircraft, but they
were not able to furnish the name of the person or persons
whom the aircraft was sold to. N7100L, there was no
registration available. Also used, are two Piper Seneca's
bearing N80492 and N80482. These two planes are used for
decoys. The 9 in 80492 is made to look like an 8 when being
used as a decoy.
********
The following testimony from two DEA investigators are not consistent as
to what was done to Seal's C-123. Did the CIA install the cameras in
Columbus, according to Caffrey, or in Miami, according to Jacobsen. Was the
work at Columbus done by the CIA or the Pentagon? Where did Red Hall do the
electronics modifications referred to by the FBI?
BTW, DEA investigator Ernst Jacobsen was the handler for both Barry Seal
and Bear Bottoms.
Excerpt from:
INTERVIEW OF RONALD J. CAFFREY IN THE OVERSIGHT
INVESTIGATION OF THE ENFORCEMENT OF NARCOTICS,
MONEY LAUNDERING, AND FIREARMS LAWS
Tuesday, March 15, 1988
House of Representatives, Subcommittee on Crime, Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, D.C.
The person asking the questions is Hayden Gregory, Counsel for the
House Judiciary Committee.
Mr. Gregory: We are here today to interview Mr. Ron Caffrey of the
Drug Enforcement Administration.
[snip]
Mr. Hoffman: Let me just state for the record that Mr. Caffrey is
appearing here voluntarily. That he does not believe that he has any
need for counsel, any personal counsel. And that I am here by
agreement of Mr. Gregory and the subcommittee as agency counsel in the
event there are any sensitive matters such as informant privilege or
ongoing investigations that come up during the interview.
Mr. Gregory: Yes, and that is consistent with my understanding as
well.
Mr. Caffrey, the principal thing we would like to talk to you about
is the work of one Barry Seal, the late Barry Seal for the government
in law enforcement activities. In particular, some flights he made
to Central America in 1984 which I believe you had some
contemporaneous familiarity with.
<snip>
Mr. Gregory: When did you first learn of CIA interest in this
activity?
Mr. Caffrey: I do not know about CIA interest. I think that we asked
them for some cameras to go on this guy's plane, on this cargo plane
that he had. We did not have the type of tech equipment we thought we
needed, so I think it was our Miami division that requested the CIA to
put some photographic equipment on the plane. And they installed,
I think, a couple of 35mm. I am not sure what kind of cameras, but some
cameras anyway, on the plane prior to the trip when he went to pick up
the dope, those duffle bags. That was in June of 1984 sometime. I am
not sure of the exact date.
Mr. Gregory: This was arranged in Miami between DEA Miami and the CIA?
Mr. Caffrey: Yes, they were working the case. Now we...I see, we on
the desk may have made the liaison for them with the CIA, but I do not
even recall that. They may have done it themselves directly. Normally
that is the way, if we want to work with another agency...we do not
work with the CIA domestically. They cannot work domestically and we
do not do that. But this was going to be a foreign thing, you know. So
it was more a question of really lending us the equipment more than..I
mean, they were not involved in the operation operationally. This was
a DEA drug case.
Mr. Gregory: So it is your understanding that the DEA-CIA contact was
initiated by DEA and not by CIA?
Mr. Caffrey: I do not know. I cannot tell you. My recollection of the
relationship was simply we borrowed their camera for the plane. Now
whether they called us and offered it or whether we called them, I
could not tell you.
<snip>
Mr. Gregory: Do you recall anything about any retrofitting or repairs
being done on the plane beyond just the installation of cameras?
Mr. Caffrey: No. You mean like fuel tanks?
Mr. Gregory: I am talking about work done at an Air Force base in
Ohio.
Mr. Caffrey: Nor offhand.
Mr. Gregory: You were not involved, or at least you do not recall if
that were the case.
Mr. Caffrey: I do not remember. We may have, but I cannot remember.
Mr. Gregory: Do you recall any DEA expenses incurred in that regard?
Would that be something you would have to approve?
Mr. Caffrey: You know, you are refreshing my memory about fixing the
plane. I do not remember when it was, whether it was before of after.
I would be speculating if I were to tell you. We may have but I
just...it rings a bell, but I just cannot recall the details of it. We
may have helped get the plane fixed.[snip]
Mr. Gregory: What was the purpose of putting the cameras on the plane?
Mr. Caffrey: So we could see. We had the CI going. We were not going
down with an agent, so we did not have agent observations. We wanted
to make sure that when he came back and he told us, x, y and z
happened, that we could at least to some degree corroborate that
through physical evidence. This was an intelligence mission. This
was an evidence gathering mission. All right, we had the dope but...I
mean, unless we have an agent involved and an informant; informants
are informants. You know, we trust them but.....
Mr. Gregory: What sort of internal photo capability does DEA have, in
terms of equipment you have and technicians that are able to make a
similar kind of installation that was done here by the CIA?
Mr. Caffrey: Probably we had technicians that could have done what
they did. In fact, I thought we were going to get some exotic cameras
on this plane that we did not have. I think one of them did not even
work, one of the cameras. One worked, one did not. So that was a
little disappointing, to be honest with you.
Mr. Gregory: Do you know what kind of cameras were installed?
Mr. Caffrey: No, but very routine kind of cameras; 35mm, which was a
little surprising to because I thought we...
****************
Excerpts from Oversight Hearings before
the Subcommittee on Crime of the House Judiciary Committee
ENFORCEMENT OF NARCOTICS, FIREARMS,
AND MONEY LAUNDERING LAWS
Thursday, July 28, 1988
TESTIMONY OF ERNST JACOBSEN, DRUG ENFORCEMENT
ADMINISTRATION FIELD INVESTIGATOR FOR THE BARRY
SEAL CASE, ACCOMPANIED BY RICHARD FRIEDLAND, COUNSEL
The person asking the questions is Hayden Gregory, Counsel for the
House Judiciary Committee.
Mr. GREGORY. You were going to tell us about the acquisition of the
plane to make the flight.
Mr. JACOBSEN. Yes, sir. Mr. Seal had the Merlin 3B aircraft. He traded
that aircraft for a C-123K, which is a former military aircraft that you
can drive up into the back of. He traded that and we fixed the aircraft
and prepared it to go to Nicaragua.
Mr. GREGORY. Did DEA have any money or any financial interest in the
C-123?
Mr. JACOBSEN. Arrangements were made through the Pentagon to have the
aircraft flown to, I believe, Columbus, Ohio or an air force base in
Ohio, where it remained for about approximately seven to 10 days, where
it - some structural repairs and some engine repairs were done. I think
the final cost was approximately $40,000....
Mr. GREGORY. Okay. So now we have got the 123. We have got it
renovated, rebuilt, however you characterize it, in Ohio, what is next?
Mr. JACOBSEN. The aircraft was brought to Miami, Florida, where the
CIA met with us and took the aircraft and put two cameras in it. They put
one camera in the nose and they put one camera, yet to see this - you
have to see the aircraft. the back tail folds down. They put a camera in
a box inside, shooting down the ramp toward the back of the aircraft.
Mr. Seal was given a remote control button to put in his pocket, which
he could snap the photographs, remotely. That was done in Florida....
************
BOY CLINTON
Appendix A, Item I
(FBI internal memo with more information on Seal's plane.)
(Cover page)
U.S. Department of Justice
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
FOIPA DO NOT DESTROY
DO NOT DESTROY; HISTORICAL VALUE NATIONAL ARCHIVES
(signed off) ROSS 5/29/95
TRANSMIT VIA: TELETYPE
7/26/84
FM LITTLE ROCK (245D-7) (12D-283) (P)
TO DIRECTOR IMMEDIATE
ATTENTION ASSISTANT DIRECTOR REVELL
NEW ORLEANS (245D-7) IMMEDIATE
ATTENTION SAC PISTEY
BT
UNCLAS CONFIDENTIAL
FRED L. HAMPTON, DBA RICH MOUNTAIN AVIATION; ET AL; NARCOTICS;
OO: LITTLE ROCK (LR 12D-283)
COINROLL; OO: NEW ORLEANS (NO 245D-7) (LR 245D-7)
RE LITTLE ROCK TELETYPE TO FBIHQ, MARCH 6, 1984 AND
LITTLE ROCK TELCALLS TO FBIHQ AND NEW ORLEANS, JULY 25 AND
26, 1984.
FOR INFO OF FBIHQ, FRED L. HAMPTON IS SUBJECT IN CAPTIONED
MATTER WITHIN LITTLE ROCK AND NEW ORLEANS DIVISIONS. HAMPTON
HAS AMASSED 160-ACRE RESIDENCE, WITH LAKE, AND $400,000 AIRCRAFT
HANGAR FACILITIES AT MENA, ARKANSAS, AIRPORT ALLEGEDLY THROUGH
NARCOTICS SMUGGLING. IRS HAS EXTENSIVE FINANCIAL INVESTIGATE
DATA RE HAMPTON WHICH IS IN PROCESS OF BEING MADE AVAILABLE
TO FBI LITTLE ROCK THROUGH IRS INVESTIGATIVE DISCLOSURE
PROCESS.
ON JULY 24, 1984, HAMPTON INVITED POLK COUNTY SHERIFF
A. L. HADAWAY TO HAMPTON'S ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IN MENA AND
THEREAFTER RELATED THE FOLLOWING TO SHERIFF HADAWAY:
ALSO PRESENT DURING A PORTION OF THE CONVERSATION WAS
A LOCAL NEWSPAPER REPORTER. HAMPTON THEREAFTER PLAYED A
VIDEO RECORDING OF A CABLE NEWS NETWORK (CNN) REPORT OF AN
ALLEGED CIA OPERATION WHICH ALLEGEDLY SHOWED INVOLVEMENT OF
SANDINISTA REBELS IN INTERNATIONAL COCAINE SMUGGLING MARKET.
HAMPTON ALSO FURNISHED SHERIFF HADAWAY A COP OF A MIAMI
HERALD NEWSPAPER ARTICLE (UNDATED) CONCERNING THE SAME MATTER.
HAMPTON THEREAFTER ADVISED THE SHERIFF THAT THE THREE AIRCRAFT
PRESENTLY AT THE MENA AIRPORT AT HAMPTON'S HANGAR WERE, IN
FACT, CIA AIRCRAFT, AND THAT HE (HAMPTON) WAS MAINTAINING THE
AIRCRAFT FOR THE CIA. HAMPTON STATED THAT THE MILITARY TYPE
AIRCRAFT (CAMOUFLAGED PAINT WITH NO NUMBERS) WERE THE ACTUAL
CIA AIRCRAFT USED IN THE OPERATION SHOWN ON THE CNN VIDEO.
IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THIS AIRCRAFT WAS OBSERVED, IN CONNECTION
WITH LITTLE ROCK'S ONGOING INVESTIGATION, AT HAMPTON'S
HANGAR ON JULY 19, 1984, AND INDIVIDUAL EXITING THIS AIRCRAFT
WAS BELIEVED TO BE BARRY SEAL, SUBJECT OF NEW ORLEANS "COINROLL"
INVESTIGATION.
SHERIFF HADAWAY HAS ADVISED THAT HAMPTON HAS FURNISHED
HIM THIS INFORMATION SO THAT THE SHERIFF AND LAW ENFORCEMENT
OFFICIALS WILL BE AWARE OF HAMPTON'S ACTIVITIES WITH THE CIA
IN CONNECTION WITH NARCOTICS SMUGGLING.
FBIHQ SHOULD NOTE THAT SHERIFF HADAWAY HAS BEEN
EXTREMELY COOPERATIVE AND HAS WORKED CLOSELY WITH LITTLE
ROCK FBI AND DEA IN MANY SENSITIVE NARCOTICS CASES, SUCH AS
CAPTIONED MATTERS. SHERIFF HADAWAY HAS CONTACTED FBI LITTLE
ROCK WITH ABOVE INFO AND IS CONSIDERING SEIZURE OF
AFOREMENTIONED THREE AIRCRAFT AS HE DOES NOT BELIEVE THE CIA
WOULD OPERATE WITH A PERSON SUCH AS HAMPTON, AND FURTHER
THAT IF IT WAS SOME OPERATION WITH THE CIA, THAT HAMPTON
SHOULD NOT BE TELLING EVERYONE ABOUT IT. SHERIFF HADAWAY
OPINES THAT HAMPTON IS ATTEMPTING TO MASQUERADE HIS OWN DRUG
SMUGGLING ACTIVITIES WITH THIS ALLEGED CIA CONNECTION.
LITTLE ROCK DIVISION IN REFERENCED TELCALLS TO NEW
ORLEANS HAS DETERMINED THAT DEA MIAMI MAY BE INVOLVED IN AN
OPERATION WHICH INVOLVES HAMPTON OR INFORMATION PROVIDED BY
HAMPTON, AND THAT SAC, NEW ORLEANS, HAS BEEN CONTACTED BY
AD REVELL CONCERNING A DEA OPERATION THAT MIGHT INVOLVE
HAMPTON WHICH MIGHT LEND SOME CREDENCE TO SOME OF HAMPTON'S
STATEMENTS.
FBIHQ IS REQUESTED TO AFFORD THE AFOREMENTIONED THE
HIGHEST EQUITABLE REVIEW AND THEREAFTER EXPEDITIOUSLY CONTACT
THE FBI LITTLE ROCK IF ANY OF THE ABOVE INFORMATION FURNISHED
BY HAMPTON IS ACCURATE NOTING SHERIFF HADAWAY'S CONTEMPLATED
SEIZURE. LITTLE ROCK IS ALSO DESIROUS OF ANY INFORMATION,
THAT IN THE OPINION OF FBIHQ, WOULD SEVERELY IMPEDE LITTLE
ROCK'S ALREADY EXPENDED INVESTIGATIVE EFFORTS IN THIS MATTER.
LITTLE ROCK HOLDING IN ABEYANCE ALREADY PLANNED UC SA CONTACT
AT HAMPTON'S HANGAR IN CONNECTION WITH CAPTIONED LITTLE ROCK
INVESTIGATION. FBIHQ NOTE THAT REFERENCED LITTLE ROCK TELETYPE
TO FBIHQ, ON MARCH 6, 1984, INITIATED THE HAMPTON INVESTIGATION
WHICH HS BEEN COORDINATED WITH THE NEW ORLEANS
DIVISION WHERE APPROPRIATE.
**************
IMHO, Hadaway was naive when he concluded that "he does not believe the
CIA would operate with such a person as Hampton, and ... that Hampton
should not be telling everyone about it." The CIA employs some of the
nastiest people on the planet, Manuel Noriega and Craig Livingstone, for
examples.
Hadaway was blocked from seizing Seal's planes inside Rich Mountain's
hangar, though it was the DEA which claimed Seal's C-123. Hampton did not
have to worry about repercussions from bragging about his CIA connections.
He was shielded from prosecution, despite solid evidence against him for
laundering money and for assisting narcotics smuggling operations.
BTW, would anyone have any info on FBI Asst. Director Revell who received
this teletype?
Larry
******************
Bear Bottoms
econtv <eco...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<3432CC0E...@earthlink.net>...
> Larry-Jennie wrote:
> >
> > pelmark wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <3430FC...@interaccess.com>, Larry-Jennie
> > > <lar...@interaccess.com> wrote:
> > > >So Seal bought, then sold back, the C-123 from a company connected
with
> > > >US intelligence operations.
> > >
> > > Not arguing, but I assume you have proof that Harry Doan is connected
to "US
> > > intelligence operations".
> >
> > I am mistaken. I cannot find a source to support my assertion that
> > Harry Doan or Doan Helicopter was connected with US intelligence.
> >
> > Larry
>
> -- au contraire. doan bought and sold for contra operativers 'at will.'
> Daniel Hopsicker
> Executive Producer
> http://www.MadCowProd.com
>
> "Barry Seal was to the CIA what 00 is to 7."
>
Statements aren't good enough Mad Cow Hopsucker,
show proof. Irregardless, Seal bought the C-123 through
a "Trade A Plane" ad. He then resold the plane back to
Doan. This is documented and substantiated public record.
Doan resold the C-123 to Souther Air Transport who paid
for the plane via SAT company check. They owned the plane
when the flight in which Hasunfus was aboard was shot down.
Documented public record. Seal never had any link to
Southern Air Transport. The abuse of the huge jump which
attempts to link Seal to the Contras via this aircraft is
unsubstaintiated and verifiably wrong.
Bear Bottoms
Larry-Jennie <lar...@interaccess.com> wrote in article
<343306...@interaccess.com>...
Because Hall's role was periphery and his conspiracy knowledge
of our operations were unknown to them at the time. There was
never enough evidence to bring Mr. Hall to trial for his role as
electonics expert for our operation. He did lose his job with
Electrosonics.
> Also note how the FBI was not sure whether Hall worked for the DEA or
Seal.
>
Hall was brought into the game by Seal. He did not work for
the DEA. The sophisticated level of our operations left the
DEA behind and at our mercy for necessary equipment
installations.
> Though Sheriff Hadaway, the FBI and Sgt. Richard Branch,of the Arkansas
> State Police described Red Hall as a drug smuggler, Bear Bottoms
disagrees:
>
I have no knowledge if Hall ever smuggled drugs. He
did not within our operation. Knowing him very well,
I would be surprised to find out that he had any other
connections with drugs other than his role as our
electronics expert.
It takes at least 30 hours for one of our trips.
pelmark
In article <3435E3C3...@earthlink.net>, econtv <eco...@earthlink.net>
wrote:
>Bear Bottoms wrote:
>> econtv <eco...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
>> <3432CC0E...@earthlink.net>...
>> > Larry-Jennie wrote:
>> > > pelmark wrote:
>> > > > <lar...@interaccess.com> wrote:
>> > > > >So Seal bought, then sold back, the C-123 from a company connected
with
>> > > > >US intelligence operations.
>> > > > Not arguing, but I assume you have proof that Harry Doan is
connected
>> > > > to "US intelligence operations".
>> > > I am mistaken. I cannot find a source to support my assertion that
>> > > Harry Doan or Doan Helicopter was connected with US intelligence.
>> > > Larry
>> > -- au contraire. doan bought and sold for contra operativers 'at will.'
>> > Daniel Hopsicker
>> > Executive Producer
>> > http://www.MadCowProd.com
>> > "Barry Seal was to the CIA what 00 is to 7."
>> Statements aren't good enough Mad Cow Hopsucker,
>> show proof. Irregardless, Seal bought the C-123 through
>> a "Trade A Plane" ad. He then resold the plane back to
>> Doan. This is documented and substantiated public record.
>> Doan resold the C-123 to Souther Air Transport who paid
>> for the plane via SAT company check. They owned the plane
>> when the flight in which Hasunfus was aboard was shot down.
>> Documented public record. Seal never had any link to
>> Southern Air Transport. The abuse of the huge jump which
>> attempts to link Seal to the Contras via this aircraft is
>> unsubstaintiated and verifiably wrong.
>-- I've seen the 'bill of sale' between seal and doan.
>neither signed it, thus makingit binding in oh, say, 0 states.
>Daniel Hopsicker
>Executive Producer
>http://www.MadCowProd.com
>"Barry Seal was to the CIA what 00 is to 7."
How does this "prove" what I assume is your contention: that Harry Doan is
CIA, since you have posted on this twice in this thread. Therefore, since
Barry Seal purchased an airplane from Doan (on a document you contest),
this, in turn, proves Seal is CIA?
It appears to me, as if this is a "what came first; the chicken or the egg"
question; however it is based on the acceptance of an unproven
contention(s): that, one, Seal is Cia, or two, Doan is CIA, or three, both
are CIA.
Doan sells Seal an airplane; since Seal is CIA, Harry Doan is CIA;
OR
Seal buys a plane from Doan; since Doan is CIA, Barry Seal is CIA;
OR
Trust us, they are both CIA.
Neither Doan or Seal is proven as CIA; yet the "leap" taken, is that somehow
the interaction between the two *proves* both are.
In my original question, I specifically stated that neither Seal buying an
airplane from Doan, or Doan selling an airplane to Seal, does NOT constitute
"proof" to *me*, and it doesn't, since *no* one has yet to prove either Seal
or Doan is CIA. I was aware that that either of these exchanges would
possibly used as "proof", in an attempt to maneuver a reader of these posts
into some sort of complicit agreement that buying/selling airplanes proves a
CIA connection, outside of the fact that Doan sold an airplane to Southern
Air Transport, a CIA linked company.
It *doesn't* prove the contention, or the "connection".
This is absurd. A "bill of sale" is a formal instrument for the conveyance
or transfer of title to goods and chattels, and that definition dates to
1608. Not being an attorney specializing in contract law, I assume you can
then explain to me that a "bill of sale" must contain the signatures of the
parties involved before it is legal document? I, for one, would like to see
that explained, or point me to a reference which backs up your claim,
especially for the state this took place in. Is there a receipt for payment?
Since Doan was/is in Florida, I assume the aircraft was dealt with under
Florida state law. Is this correct? In Florida (or the state this
transaction this took place in) do you *know* if signatures are required to
produce a valid "bill of sale", or is this merely your personal contention?
In two posts, your "proof" of Doan being connected to US intelligence (the
original question) has been that Doan "...bought and sold for contra
operativers 'at will'", which proves nothing, even if you could show Doan
buying and selling to contra "operativers", and prove those you accuse are
actual contra "operativers".
Your second equally hazy claim is that your seeing an unsigned bill of sale
( a document I have no idea if it exists, and if it is legitimate) "proves",
what...exactly?
How does selling an airplane to Seal make Doan connected to US intelligence?
How does selling an airplane to Southern Air Transport make Doan connected
to US intelligence?
Outside of, obviously, the buyer/seller relationship?
If you can get past that:
How does buying an airplane from Doan make *anyone*, including Barry Seal,
connected to US intelligence, should you prove Doan is, indeed, a connected
to US intelligence?
I'll repeat what I had posted originally: if this is the standard of proof
over Mena contentions, it is no wonder there is so much controversy,
conflict, and confusion.
This isn't "proof"; it is, however, conclusions made on pure speculation,
and then presented as some sort of weird "eveidence" which then "proves" the
poster's contention. It's like eating cotton candy; it looks substantial,
but when you bite into it, there is *nothing* there.
People have been studying this for years, and they have yet to establish
such basics as to whether Doan was CIA? What is this whole woolly theory
based on? Personal and political views and opinions? Or just the unshakeable
*opinion* that it is "fact" that the CIA/government imports dope?
Bear Bottoms
econtv <eco...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<3435E3C3...@earthlink.net>...
> Bear Bottoms wrote:
> >
> > econtv <eco...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
> > <3432CC0E...@earthlink.net>...
> > > Larry-Jennie wrote:
> > > >
> > > > pelmark wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > In article <3430FC...@interaccess.com>, Larry-Jennie
> > > > > <lar...@interaccess.com> wrote:
> > > > > >So Seal bought, then sold back, the C-123 from a company
connected
> > with
> > > > > >US intelligence operations.
> > > > >
> > > > > Not arguing, but I assume you have proof that Harry Doan is
connected
> > to "US
> > > > > intelligence operations".
> > > >
Oh, so Seal can get it back? What kind of
reasoning is this Daniel? You once described
yourself as "small potatoes". Logic such as
this helps establish such. At least you admit
there was a bill of sale, thus substantiating the
fact evenmore. Aircraft do not carry 'titles'. The
sale of aircraft are handled via 'registration
certificates. No bills of sale are required. A
federal government aircraft registration form is
used to transfer ownership of aircraft. If you were
even half the investigator you think you are, you
would know this.
econtv
Bear Bottoms wrote:
>
> econtv <eco...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
> <3432CC0E...@earthlink.net>...
> > Larry-Jennie wrote:
> > >
> > > pelmark wrote:
> > > >
> > > > <lar...@interaccess.com> wrote:
> > > > >So Seal bought, then sold back, the C-123 from a company connected
> with
> > > > >US intelligence operations.
> > > >
> > > > Not arguing, but I assume you have proof that Harry Doan is connected
> to "US
> > > > intelligence operations".
> > >
pelmark
In article <01bcd0bf$03e065e0$3400...@bbottoms.hoss.rouge.net>, "Bear
Bottoms" <bbot...@eatel.net> wrote:
>
>
>econtv <eco...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
><3435E3C3...@earthlink.net>...
>> Bear Bottoms wrote:
>> >
>> > econtv <eco...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
>> > <3432CC0E...@earthlink.net>...
>> > > Larry-Jennie wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > pelmark wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > In article <3430FC...@interaccess.com>, Larry-Jennie
>> > > > > <lar...@interaccess.com> wrote:
>> > > > > >So Seal bought, then sold back, the C-123 from a company
>connected
>> > with
>> > > > > >US intelligence operations.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Not arguing, but I assume you have proof that Harry Doan is
>connected
>> > to "US
>> > > > > intelligence operations".
>> > > >
>Oh, so Seal can get it back? What kind of
>reasoning is this Daniel? You once described
>yourself as "small potatoes". Logic such as
>this helps establish such. At least you admit
>there was a bill of sale, thus substantiating the
>fact evenmore. Aircraft do not carry 'titles'. The
>sale of aircraft are handled via 'registration
>certificates. No bills of sale are required. A
>federal government aircraft registration form is
>used to transfer ownership of aircraft. If you were
>even half the investigator you think you are, you
>would know this.
Touche'.
Billy Beck
"Bear Bottoms" <bbot...@eatel.net> wrote:
>Larry-Jennie <lar...@interaccess.com> wrote in article
><343306...@interaccess.com>...
(...)
>> The CI knows of two loads, one on March 24, 1983
>> and the other on April 15 & 16, 1983. The CI states
>> that the planes are usually gone for 12 to 14 hours
>> after leaving the Mena Airport.
>>
>It takes at least 30 hours for one of our trips.
Wow. Did everybody get that?
Is anybody out there looking at *maps* of this stuff?
This aspect of this never occurred to me before. I *defy anyone*
to make the journies attributed to this operation, in the attributed
aircraft, in "12 to 14" hours. Go ahead. I dare ya.
Let us know how you did when you get back.
Billy
Larry-Jennie
Billy Beck wrote:
>
> "Bear Bottoms" <bbot...@eatel.net> wrote:
>
> >Larry-Jennie <lar...@interaccess.com> wrote in article
> ><343306...@interaccess.com>...
> >> and the other on April 15 & 16, 1983. The CI states
> >> that the planes are usually gone for 12 to 14 hours
> >> after leaving the Mena Airport.
Bear Bottoms wrote:
> >It takes at least 30 hours for one of our trips.
Billy Beck wrote:
> Wow. Did everybody get that?
>
> Is anybody out there looking at *maps* of this stuff?
>
> This aspect of this never occurred to me before. I *defy anyone*
> to make the journies attributed to this operation, in the attributed
> aircraft, in "12 to 14" hours. Go ahead. I dare ya.
12 to 14 hours would get aircraft to Central America and back, for example,
to John Hull's ranch in Costa Rica.
At least 30 hours are needed for Colombia.
Larry
Bear Bottoms
Larry-Jennie <lar...@interaccess.com> wrote in article
<3437AB...@interaccess.com>...
> Billy Beck wrote:
> >
> > "Bear Bottoms" <bbot...@eatel.net> wrote:
> >
> > >Larry-Jennie <lar...@interaccess.com> wrote in article
> > ><343306...@interaccess.com>...
> > >> The CI knows of two loads, one on March 24, 1983
> > >> and the other on April 15 & 16, 1983. The CI states
> > >> that the planes are usually gone for 12 to 14 hours
> > >> after leaving the Mena Airport.
>
> Bear Bottoms wrote:
> > >It takes at least 30 hours for one of our trips.
>
>
> Billy Beck wrote:
> > Wow. Did everybody get that?
> >
> > Is anybody out there looking at *maps* of this stuff?
> >
> > This aspect of this never occurred to me before. I *defy
anyone*
> > to make the journies attributed to this operation, in the attributed
> > aircraft, in "12 to 14" hours. Go ahead. I dare ya.
>
>
> 12 to 14 hours would get aircraft to Central America and back, for
example,
> to John Hull's ranch in Costa Rica.
>
> At least 30 hours are needed for Colombia.
>
> Larry
>
We didn't have the C-123 then Larry. The small aircraft
would have no reason to go to Central America because
you can't haul significant enough weight to support weapons.
Our connection was direct with the Medellin Cartel and
we flew from Colombia to US. Documented in every law
enforcement agency in this country.
Larry-Jennie
> > Billy Beck wrote:
> > >
> > > "Bear Bottoms" <bbot...@eatel.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > >> and the other on April 15 & 16, 1983. The CI states
> > > >> that the planes are usually gone for 12 to 14 hours
> > > >> after leaving the Mena Airport.
> >
> > > >It takes at least 30 hours for one of our trips.
> >
> >
> > > Wow. Did everybody get that?
> > >
> > > Is anybody out there looking at *maps* of this stuff?
> > >
> > > This aspect of this never occurred to me before. I *defy
> anyone*
> > > to make the journies attributed to this operation, in the attributed
> > > aircraft, in "12 to 14" hours. Go ahead. I dare ya.
Larry-Jennie wrote:
> > 12 to 14 hours would get aircraft to Central America and back, for
> example,
> > to John Hull's ranch in Costa Rica.
> >
> > At least 30 hours are needed for Colombia.
Bear Bottoms wrote:
> We didn't have the C-123 then Larry. The small aircraft
> would have no reason to go to Central America because
> you can't haul significant enough weight to support weapons.
> Our connection was direct with the Medellin Cartel and
> we flew from Colombia to US. Documented in every law
> enforcement agency in this country.
In other words, Seal's organization had regular business in Central
America which requires a continued cover up.
The drug flights in and out of CIA operative John Hull's Costa Rican
ranch is also well-documented.
Larry
Larry-Jennie
Bear Bottoms wrote:
> We didn't have the C-123 then Larry. The small aircraft
> would have no reason to go to Central America because
> you can't haul significant enough weight to support weapons.
> Our connection was direct with the Medellin Cartel and
> we flew from Colombia to US. Documented in every law
> enforcement agency in this country.
How could "every law enforcement agency in this country"
document the Seal's Mena-based cocaine smuggling operations
when Florida DEA exercised no controls over what Seal and
his conspirators did there?
Excerpt from:
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 10:18:49 -0500
From: truegrit <true...@worldnet.att.net> (Russell Welch)
To: Larry-Jennie <lar...@interaccess.com>
Subject: Re: Russell Welch on Barry Seal
There was plenty of reason to believe that Seal was making some of his
drops close to Mena, because the helicopters were here for several
months, and a fictitious business was developed around them, and the
smuggling planes were making regular trips. The helicopters are short
range. The fictitious business was taking a fuel truck to other
airports and buying aviation fuel, under false pretenses, to fuel Seal's
helicopters. Everything was done in secret. The day that Seal rolled
over and started snitching, his entire operation changed. On a chart, the
difference between March 23, 1984, and March 24, 1984, are like black and
white. Seal started using larger aircraft and did it in the open. No
more going to other airports and clandestinely purchasing aviation fuel.
Seal would pull his larger aircraft up to the FBO, fill up with 600+
gallons and go on his way. I got the before-and-after fuel tickets.
They would secretly tell friends and associates at the airport that they
were working on secret stuff for the government.
Barry Seal's "grace period," as we called it, started on March 24, 1984.
That was the date typed on his first "Plea Agreement," in Florida. That
was the day that he became a snitch for the DEA. It would have been
fruitless for me to try to make a case on anybody in his organization
after that date, because he was working on stings for the DEA.
Unfortunately, he was, also, being allowed to travel freely in Arkansas,
without any controls. The DEA, in Florida, later argued that they had
to do it that way to maintain the security of their investigation.
Maybe so, but at my level of investigating, if you had to let your
snitch run without controls and do what ever he wanted, without
accountability, then you didn't do it. If Barry wanted to run drugs or
anything else, after rolling over, he could have, and the controlling
agents in Florida, would not have known it. Anyway, anything after March
24 was pretty much out of the question. If I had caught him or his
people doing anything, he would have said, "Hey, this is a DEA
investigation and you just screwed it up." That happened to the
Louisiana State Police. The LSP believed that was what happened in
Barry's Nevada sting. And the DEA made a similar claim when Al
Hadaway started to seize the C-123.
************
Larry
j...@globaldialog.com
Larry-Jennie wrote:
>
> Bear Bottoms wrote:
> > We didn't have the C-123 then Larry. The small aircraft
> > would have no reason to go to Central America because
> > you can't haul significant enough weight to support weapons.
> > Our connection was direct with the Medellin Cartel and
> > we flew from Colombia to US. Documented in every law
> > enforcement agency in this country.
>
> In other words, Seal's organization had regular business in Central
> America which requires a continued cover up.
????
Were you drunk when you wrote this?
Billy Beck
j...@globaldialog.com wrote:
>Larry-Jennie wrote:
I wasn't gonna ask, JQ. Honest to god: I just stared at that for
several minutes, trying to get some kind of grip on it in order to
point out the crashing non sequitur. Then, I just got tired all over
and gave up on it.
I was astonished.
Billy
Bear Bottoms
Larry-Jennie wrote in message <3438F6...@interaccess.com>...
>Bear Bottoms wrote:
>> We didn't have the C-123 then Larry. The small aircraft
>> would have no reason to go to Central America because
>> you can't haul significant enough weight to support weapons.
>> Our connection was direct with the Medellin Cartel and
>> we flew from Colombia to US. Documented in every law
>> enforcement agency in this country.
>
>
>How could "every law enforcement agency in this country"
>document the Seal's Mena-based cocaine smuggling operations
>when Florida DEA exercised no controls over what Seal and
>his conspirators did there?
>
>
>Excerpt from:
>Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 10:18:49 -0500
>From: truegrit <true...@worldnet.att.net> (Russell Welch)
>To: Larry-Jennie <lar...@interaccess.com>
>Subject: Re: Russell Welch on Barry Seal
>
>There was plenty of reason to believe that Seal was making some of his
>drops close to Mena, because the helicopters were here for several
>months, and a fictitious business was developed around them, and the
>smuggling planes were making regular trips.
The answer to this is in the first paragraph. "There was
plenty of reason to believe..."
No one had any evidence that it happened. No one.
Speculation was conceived because of our diversionary
tactics. We could have done it had we wanted to,
but we had a much better place to do it. I was the
one who brought them in. I brought them to that
much better place. Larry knows this. Welch knows
this now. I told them. Had I brought drugs into some
other place, so what. I would say so. We did not.
I brought them all into Louisiana.