Why doesn't member Gary "Two Head Shots" Aguilar ever participate here?

[Lance Payette]

FWIW, Dr. Aguilar is 78 years old. He has a grand total of 28 posts at the Ed Forum, in two flurries 18 years apart (2007 and 2025). All of his posts are articulate, intelligent and respectful toward those he is addressing, with the possible exception of Fred Litwin (toward whom he is a bit snippy but scarcely rude). One assumes he doesn't participate here because he is elderly, has an actual life, and doesn't think KGB-obsessed crackpots on obscure internet forums are worth his time. This is what I meant by TG's first post answering the question posed by his thread: Does TG sound like someone you would waste your time with if you were a serious JFKA researcher?

In searching old posts here, I see that TG consistently refers to Dr. Aguilar as Gary "Rudeness" (or "Snideness") Aguilar; indeed, in one post he referred to me as exhibiting "Aguilar-like arrogance."  !!! It appears that TG, who seems to be in the grip of some truly weird case of OCD, has poor old Dr. Aguilar among his curious obsessions. In fact, TG started essentially an identical thread in 2025 and got no responses: https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4646.msg172179.html#msg172179. See also this: https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4930.0.html.

You couldn't make this stuff up; with folks like TG around you don't even have to try.

[Lance Payette]

Because I am (1) diligent and (2) exceedingly bored, I actually watched the 2004 C-SPAN presentation featuring Dr. Aguilar and Max Holland that TG keeps referencing in the context of Aguilar supposedly getting his butt kicked by Holland. It's definitely Inside Baseball sort of stuff, dealing with whether Garrison was a KGB dupe thanks to KGB-influenced articles about Shaw in the Italian Paese Sera magazine (as Holland asserted), but you may find it interesting: https://www.c-span.org/program/american-history-tv/warren-report-the-garrison-investigation/136882.

There was certainly no butt-kicking. The entire discussion was low-key and respectful, and Dr. Aguilar came off very well. The questioners, including Tink Thompson and other luminaries of the era, seemed uninformly skeptical of Holland. I can see why KGB-obsessed TG would like to think Aguilar got his butt kicked, but in fact the prevailing sentiment seems to be that Aguilar "dismantled" Holland's claims. I have no idea why this 22-year-old C-SPAN discussion looms so large in TG's thinking, or why he has such a hard on for Aguilar, but nothing here struck me as worthy of the attention TG has devoted to it on multiple threads here.

[Tom Graves]

Because I am (1) diligent and (2) exceedingly bored, I actually watched the 2004 C-SPAN presentation featuring Dr. Aguilar and Max Holland that TG keeps referencing in the context of Aguilar supposedly getting his butt kicked by Holland. It's definitely Inside Baseball sort of stuff, dealing with whether Garrison was a KGB dupe thanks to KGB-influenced articles about Shaw in the Italian Paese Sera magazine (as Holland asserted), but you may find it interesting: https://www.c-span.org/program/american-history-tv/warren-report-the-garrison-investigation/136882.

There was certainly no butt-kicking. The entire discussion was low-key and respectful, and Dr. Aguilar came off very well. The questioners, including Tink Thompson and other luminaries of the era, seemed uniformly skeptical of Holland. I can see why KGB-obsessed TG would like to think Aguilar got his butt kicked, but in fact the prevailing sentiment seems to be that Aguilar "dismantled" Holland's claims. I have no idea why this 22-year-old C-SPAN discussion looms so large in TG's thinking, or why he has such a hard on for Aguilar, but nothing here struck me as worthy of the attention TG has devoted to it on multiple threads here.

Dear FPR,

I didn't mean to imply that Gary Aguilar "got his butt kicked" by Max Holland in that C-Span debate.

https://www.c-span.org/program/american-history-tv/warren-report-the-garrison-investigation/136882

Why did you infer it?

I suggested that members watch it to get an idea of just how snide he is when he's trying to denigrate the CIA and/or Lone Gunman Advocates.

He did seem to gloat quite a bit over catching Richard Helms in a monster fib: Helms' testifying that in March 1967, "Paese Sera" already had a reputation of publishing KGB-written or KGB-approved articles, because in April 1961 it had published an anti-CIA article on the Algerian "General's Plot," when in fact a far-left French newspaper had beaten it to the punch by a day or two.

Wowie zowie.

It's interesting that Dr. Aguilar was dismissive of the fact that Garrison lied (he says he was "inaccurate") in his 1988 book On the Trail of the Assassins when he wrote that he didn't read the anti-CIA/anti-Clay Shaw "Paese Sera" article (or a French newspaper's knock-off version which had been translated into English and sent to him by Joan Mellen's ex-husband in London) until after the 1969 Shaw trial, even though we know from Richard Billings' diary that he read it shortly after he'd arrested Shaw in March of 1967.

Gasp . . . Tink Thompson and other anti-CIA JFKA luminaries of the era seemed to be skeptical of CIA-affiliated Max Holland?

Imagine that!

-- Tom

PS Regarding your beloved KGB (today's SVR and FSB), are you happy that the latter has invited Kash Patel to Moscow?

Are you hoping it will give him some Derkach-like "dirt" on Hunter Biden or [fill in the blank] so that MAGATS can win the midterm elections?