1997-05-14, Cyberhabilis: Re WW-Hopsicker, Pt 2

From: cyberhabilis@mindspring.com
Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 05:05:33 -0400 (EDT)
To: ciadrugs@mars.galstar.com (The ciadrugs mailing list)
Subject: ciadrugs] Re: Fw: WW-Hopsicker, Pt 2

At 05:57 PM 5/12/97 -0700, Mike Rivero wrote:
>
>
>On Mon, 12 May 1997, Bear Bottoms wrote:
>>
>> The Mena story as told concerning Barry Seal is a myth. The
>> only thing Mena was to Seal's organization was a diversion, repair,
>> modification, hideout, and storage facility. None of the other
>> allegations are true.
>


> Look at it this way. If there really IS nothing at Mena, why would Bear
>Bottoms care what a bunch of internet folks thought? Were there nothing at
>Mena, there would be no reason for Bottoms to blow his cover as a former
>smuggler and present day D.E.A. informant,

Is this true, BB is a present-day DEA informant? I'm not aware of that. Please cite...


>risking not only his own life
>but those of every D.E.A. undercover agent he's ever been seen with. Quite
>a reckless thing to do is there truly is nothing going on at Mena.

Sorry, Mike, that isn't sound logic.

If 'truly .. nothing is going on' then there is no risk.

Therefore, BB's claim is consistent with the risk. ANd I doubt the Cartel holds a grudge *that* long.


> Bottoms is claiming to be able to prove a negative. He claims to speak
>for the activities of Barry Seal that occured at Mena when Bottoms wasn't
>even there. Given that Mr. Bottoms has the type of personality that led
>him to become an informant, Barry Seal would have been foolish indeed to
>confide in him.

Seal had the same personality, by your logic, so the Cartel killed him. Seal involved Bottoms because Seal needed help. They were already partners.


>Bottoms cannot in truth make any statement about what took
>place at Mena while he was not there. None at all. Bottoms cannot speak
>for what Barry Seal did when Barry Seal was not with Bear Bottoms.

Welch has answered this: Bottoms was very aware of Seal's operations.


> Contrast that to Police Officer L.D. Brown who, as an applicant to the
>C.I.A. accompanied Seal on some of the flights (originating at Mena) in
>October and December 1984 that dropped guns to the Contras and brought
>cocaine back to the United States. That's a first person account from a
>man with no known criminal past, versus the claim of a smuggler about
>events that didn't happen when he was not present to not witness them not
>happening.

LD Brown definitely is a strong counterclaim against Bottoms' version, but if BB's claims about the C123 dates are correct, LD Brown could actually just be another Terry Reed. Why do I say that?

Here's LD Brown's version of the story:
1. LD Brown claims to apply to CIA.
2. He gets involved in an operation before being fully employed by CIA (an inconsistency, as BB pointed out)
3. He gets disgusted and retracts application to CIA.

What's wrong with LD Brown's story?
1. He "quit" the CIA *before* they accepted him. (#2 above)
2. What if he never "quit" the CIA? Then LD Brown is a CIA asset/op. feeding us Mena stories. Do you want to believe LD Brown if this could be the case? (This is the same qualm I have about BB, BTW). Why should you believe LD Brown more than Billy Bottoms?

BB's track record on telling truth on the *basic facts* has been consistent. What's maddening is his insistence on blanket statements about post-Seal Mena. I sense someone still needs protecting: RICO statute of limitations goes back 10 years.

BB's history is problematic, but someone needs to show me where BB actually LIES (not oversteps his knowledge and states an opinion, but actually LIES). I've told BB I have *BIG* concerns re: his story, but it's mostly because he comes off so heavy-handed about post-Seal Mena.

I've stopped believing anything I read about Mena. It's too political, too much power on both sides of the game. I have as hard a time 100% trusting BB's version of the story as I do LD Brown's (CIA?), Terry Reed's (debunked) & Chip Tatum's (flaky as hell). As we note w/ Reed, he tells 'a lot of truth,' but it turns out that Reed is a liar.

And BB is, as even Welch concedes, telling a lot of truth.

What seems likely (indisputable?) is that Mena was an Iran-Contra backwater, where the support infrastructure hid out once the lid got blown off the Contra mess. On this count, I agree with Billy Bottoms.

Mark my words: Mena is smoke. Miami, Baton Rouge & Los Angeles: these are fire.

l8r,

+-------------| The perfect slave thinks he's free |---------------------+
|                                                                        |
| "Government creates an illusion    | "If you can appease a man's       |
|  of quenching people's thirst for  |  conscience, you can take away    |
|  justice.  In fact it lulls their  |  his freedom."                    |
|  conscience into thinking that the |                                   |
|  steam roller which is about to    |  "We give them happiness,         |
|  flatten them is salvation."       |   they give us authority."        |
|   -Alexander Solzhenitsyn	     |                                   |
|                                    |  - The Cancer Man, in the X-Files |
|                                                                        |
+----| They who laugh last have not been told the terrible truth! |------+


The CIA The "War on Drugs" Serendipity Home Page