1997-05-29, Bear Bottoms: Re Seal & the CIA

From: "Bear Bottoms" <bbottoms@eatel.net>
To: "The ciadrugs mailing list" <ciadrugs@mars.galstar.com>
Subject: ciadrugs] Re: Jean Duffey on Seal & the CIA
Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 20:06:25 -0500

A lurker responds:

----------

> From: Larry-Jennie <lar-jen@interaccess.com>
> To: ciadrugs@mars.galstar.com
> Subject: ciadrugs] Jean Duffey on Seal & the CIA
> Date: Thursday, May 29, 1997 6:29 AM
>
> After I left Arkansas in 1991, I was in hiding for
> nine months and didn't have the opportunity to take
> the required legal education hours to maintain my
> law license. I had no desire to become recertified
> until it became a reality that Linda Ives was going
> to be able to build a civil case against the killers
> of her son. Recently I have focused on getting my
> license back (which should be mid-June), so that I
> can be an attorney of record in Linda's civil case
> (to be filed this fall if all goes well).

So that is the only case relevant in maintaining your law license? I find that rather bizarre. Maybe it is just because I have accumulated a dislike for her because of her misuse of her position and tactics which reek of evil and untruth.
>
> Because of the time I spend on those two goals, I
> don't spend much time concerning myself with Billy
> Bottoms. What he thinks, writes, claims, or argues
> is of little or no consequence to Linda's civil case,

Well, that is literally correct since I nor Seal have anything to do with it. Her agendizing on the subject is relevant however.


> and besides, Larry and company have been keeping the
> arguments well stacked against him. I do, however,
> have a tid-bit of information to add to Larry's deck
> regarding Seal and the CIA.

Larry and company have only made bigger fools of themselves. A team or club can rally around each other, sure, but the factuallity of their religion is lacking by mega proportions. The Seal myth has been well debunked.
>
> The following is an article excerpt on the subject:

Oh no, not another article.
>
> >> "Clinton trapped in an American ritual"
> >> by Martin Walker
> >> GUARDIAN WEEKLY
> >> April 3, 1994
> >>
> >> In his memoirs, Oliver North paid tribute to the
> >> help of Barry Seal, the former owner of that plane.
> >> Barry Seal was a CIA and Drug Enforcement Agency
> >> informant.

This is obfuscation at its maximum. The Seal North relationship has been well described. The only interest North had in Seal was what he could glean from Seal's Nicaraguan sting in order to gain support for his Contras. Even at the expense of blowing the most significant case the government had against the Medellin Cartel. BTW, North was NSC and not CIA. Big difference. Apparently this reporter doesn't know this.
>
> On May 21, John Q. wrote in response to that article:
>
> > Seal was not a CIA informant, except to the extent
> > that he and the DEA allowed CIA cameras to be placed
> > on the C123 for surveillance purposes.
>
> Of course, J.Q. is regurgitating what Bottoms says:
>
> Then, on May 24, in a post to The CIA Drugs Mailing
> List, Bottoms wrote:
>
> > Seal did not work for North. There is no evidence
> > except allegations by Reed, Brown, and Tatum and
> > pure speculation. All of the above is filled with
> > speculation. The truth of the matter is how I have
> > related it.
>
> The truth of the matter is, Bottoms left out several
> other individuals who have independently corroborated
> Seal's involvement with the CIA. One is Fred Hampton
> who has been referenced by others as saying Seal had
> CIA connections. Additionally, Linda Ives and I spent
> five hours this past March talking with Hampton in
> Mena, when he repeatedly insisted and reiterated that
> as far as he was aware, every drug-related trip Seal
> made was as an informant for DEA, with the exception
> of the "Fat Lady" sting operation.
>

This is absolutely untrue and the attempt to use it as a truth shows you how far Duffey will go beyond truth for her own purposes. The woman is evil. This is the funniest and poorest attempt to hypnotize readers with untruth. I can guarantee you that if Hampton said this he was only trying to protect his own ass. Hampton has good reason to try and make his role appear as innocent as possible. Seal was most definately a smuggler and once caught snitched on the people he worked for to attempt to get out of going to jail. His "government" service only envolved the DEA directly for him. North interjected himself for his own reasons.


> Hampton told us that Seal was approached by the CIA
> for his help with that operation. That was after
> sounding like a broken record for hours about Seal
> being a DEA informant and the DEA paying Hampton to
> modify the planes Seal flew. So, when Hampton blurted
> out that the CIA approached Seal, I was somewhat
> surprised. I promptly told Hampton that Bottoms
> insisted the only part the CIA played in that operation
> was to loan camera equipment to the DEA. Hampton did
> not change his assertion.

This is the most absurd investigative prowess I have ever witnessed. Duffey can not really believe this as it is well documented as to Seal's government activity. She will get eaten alive in any courtroom with this tack. I am sure she will not attempt it. Her only purpose is to hypnotize you readers into believing that she has not made a huge mistake concerning me. She cannot admit this, especially since she has gone so far overboard with it.


> He was emphatic about that
> sting operation being planned and executed by the CIA,
> not the DEA. I asked Hampton about Oliver North, and
> although Hampton verified North's involvement, he
> either didn't know or was not willing to tell us the
> extent of it. However, Hampton had no reservations
> about revealing that the operation was CIA. Hampton
> did say he knew North wanted to verify Russian
> involvement with the Sandanistas so Congress would
> be more sympathetic about supporting the Contras.
> Hampton said the color of the fuel that was in the
> "Fat Lady" when it returned to Mena was evidence that
> it was Russian fuel.
>

For the record, Hampton was not involved in the DEA Nicaraguan sting and had no direct or indirect envolvement or knowledge of it. It wasn't even a Mena case. The only involvement Mena had was a Lockheed Lodestar was parked there when it was shown to Cartel members. The use of this plane for Seal's first DEA sting resulted in the Nicaraguan case. This is well iterated in my Ollie North and the C123 story. The only other use of Mena was after the sting when the C123 was stored at Mena after the sting until it was sold.


> If one applies logic to the conflicting claims made
> by Hampton and Bottoms, about Seal's CIA connections,
> Hampton is more believable. Hampton, who denies he
> knew Seal ever made an illegal run for profit, claims
> all of Seal's trips were under the auspices of the DEA-
> except the one.

This is even more ridiculous than any of the above. Seal only put two events together for the government. The resulting Nicaraguan Sting and the Norman Saunders case, both for the DEA. Prior to these events, all of Seal's activity from 1974 through 1983 was drug smuggling. Russell Welch is correct that Hampton was complicit in the Seal smuggling operation, though he played a very minor role considering. BTW, Larry claims Hampton was a partner of Seal's. He was not. He was used by him, though paid well for that use. In the beginning of that use, Hampton did not know we were smuggling. Somewhere along the way, he became well aware of what we were doing.


> Hampton has no agenda other than to
> blanket Seal (and himself in the process) with government
> authority. It doesn't matter to Hampton which agency the
> authority came from. He just wants to make certain he
> can claim the devil - I mean the government (same thing)-
> made him do it. There is absolutely no logical reason
> for Hampton to suggest CIA involvement if there was none,
> and in fact, it would discredit his claim of government
> authority if he lied about the CIA being involved. If
> the operation was not CIA, Hampton would do better to
> stick with the less disputed claim that Seal was DEA.
>

What crap this is. It is the same logic Seal used as well as Reed, Tatum, Brown, Brenneke, Tolliver, et al. That logic is to hide criminal behavior or jump on a bandwagon. Duffey is a bandwagon jumper. No logical reason to say "I wasn't a criminal, I wuz working for the government?" Are you actually going to swallow this because Duffey is agendizing and trying to cover her ass as well as simply discredit me and hide the truth for her agendizing? Go for it.


> Bottoms, on the other hand, has an agenda to disaffirm
> any CIA involvement with Seal in spite of the evidence
> to the contrary that is beginning to make Bottoms look
> foolish.

What is that agenda? I was CIA? I wish I were. I wish I could hide my crimes behind that screen. I am not going to try and make what I did appear anything other than what it was. I was CIA, sounds a lot better than I was a drug smuggler. If I went that route, I could make millions as the biggest liar or them all. Unfortunately, it is not true. I have risked my life to make retribution for it. I have done this moreso than anyone alive on earth. I did this without being made to do it. I was not arrested, investigated, charged, or convicted when I did so. I went forward voluntarily. Full disclosure is the last part of this. I am doing this voluntarily.
>
> Another individual who has alleged Seal was CIA, is the
> pilot Bottoms refers to as "Duffey's pilot" who goes by
> the code name, Joe. Joe has not revealed his real name
> publicly, and I wish to make it clear that I do not vouch
> for Joe's total veracity. He is a confessed drug-running
> pilot who, like Bottoms, has never been held accountable
> for his crimes. But, unlike Bottoms, Joe has given me
> valuable information about the Saline County drop-site
> where Kevin and Don were murdered, and much of the
> important parts of that information has been verified
> to me by the FBI. Additionally, I have never found an
> inconsistency in Joe's information and have not discovered
> anything he has said as not true, and one of the assertions
> Joe makes is that Seal's Mena operation was primarily CIA
> just prior to his death.

Well so much for Joe's veracity. Seal was never CIA. Joe didn't even know Seal. He never met him. How would he know? He never worked for Seal. He never had anything to do with Seal. He is a bandwagon jumper. He is possibly trying to say his smuggling was sanctioned by the government to make himself look better. I know nothing about this person. Nor does anyone else who was in Seal's organization.
>
> I have documented what Fred Hampton said to Linda Ives
> and me about Seal and the CIA as well as what "Duffey's
> pilot" alleges. I refuse to argue with Bottoms.

Duffey, that is what you are doing. You are full of it.


> He has
> made unsuccessful efforts to counter the preponderance
> of evidence that connects Seal to the CIA, including
> Seal's own sworn statements, and has exposed himself as
> a disinformant. (By the way Billy, you told me several
> months ago you had talked to an attorney and you were
> going to sue me if we didn't take down our webpage that
> posts your claims under "Disinformation" located at
> http://www.idmedia.com/menapage2.htm. It's still up,
> and we haven't changed a word. Where's the suit? Please
> respond via this listing. By the way, stop sending me
> e-mail. I don't read it.

I have spoken to an attorney concerning this. He is willing to file a lawsuit on my behalf. I haven't made the decision whether or not it is really worth the effort. Do you want me to file it? I have made the statement to Larry and Hopsicker that I do not want to sue anyone over this crap with the possible exception of you and idmedia.com for your slander. I can still do this. Is this what you want. I can accommodate you. You should know that I can file a lawsuit against you for this.
>
> One more thought: I find it interesting, that Bottoms,
> or anybody else, has offered a reasonable explanation as
> to why three Republican U.S. Attorneys thwarted two
> federal grand juries that were investigating the crimes
> of Mena.

Very confusing sentence. What you mean, I believe, is no one has offered a reasonable explanation as to why. This is not correct. I have and the record shows it to be true. Seal had a deal with the Feds which prevented such. This was admitted in the interview which was conducted and attended by Welch and Duncan of Seal just months before his death.


> If Mena was a "hoax," a "smoke screen," a
> "myth," why not allow the jurors to see the evidence
> and hear the witnesses they asked for. Why were Russell
> Welch and Bill Duncan prevented from testifying to the
> Western District Grand Jury? Why were my task force
> officers and I prevented from testifying to the Eastern
> District Grand Jury? Both grand juries requested our
> evidence, but were not allowed to have it. Who was being
> protected? Seal was not that important. If legitimate
> DEA sting operations were being protected, why not just
> say so? They did in Louisiana. The logical explanation
> for why neither grand jury was allowed to probe the
> crimes of Mena, including the murders of Kevin Ives and
> Don Henry, was to prevent the exposure of the CIA's
> involvement in drug-and-gun running.

There are many logical explanations. Why not seek the truth? One thing is obvious. You are not seeking the truth and are obfuscating for you own agenda. BTW, I have a surprise coming soon regarding some of this.
>
> Jean Duffey
> jean@idmedia.com
>


CIADRUGS list The CIA
The "War on Drugs" Serendipity Home Page