Howard Hughes' flying boat is, of course, on display in the excellent Evergreen Aviation Museum in Oregon. But there is another museum in Southern California that features a key piece of the flying boat's story.
The Western Museum of Flight, near the Torrance airport, has the original hand-drawn sketches of the so-called Spruce Goose, lovingly rendered in pencil by engineers under Hughes' watchful eye. John Bogert, a columnist for the Daily Breeze newspaper in Torrance, describes the museum and the drawings here.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
23 comments:
Interesting that the so called "Mormon will" gave the "Spruce Goose" to the city of Santa Clara, a gift they did not want and a name for the Hercules that Hughes would have died rather than use! I plan to go see the Hercules soon in it's new home. Didn't get to see it in 77 when I visited out here.
The "Mormon Will" gave the Flying Boat to the CITY OF LONG BEACH.
The checks to the heirs were not sent from Las Vegas, but from Houston where the entire Estate was administered; the Nevada administration was merely ancillary to the administration in Texas.
Thanks, I'll check my photo static copy, for who the SPruce Goose went to, Of course I wouldn't feign to argue with a man who was as closely associated with it's writing as you! lol
Are you nuts? I worked very hard to prove that fake will to be invalid! What are you driving at?
What year was this purported son of Jean and Howard born?
I found a copy and kudo's you are right on Long Beach. Thanks (even though I'm red in the face)lol.
Check the Seattle McDonald impostor put up by our FOX friends. They obviously know most of the specifics about the real heir because they are using Fox (IMHO) to post his stats as close to the real thing as possible). Kindda doubt Howard made two women pregnant at the same time, but maybe!!.. (Customer private info is no longer private when you buy the company the customer is using).
Strangely, Howard may have several offspring floating around, "I wonder how many little bastards I have running around. ...to have a SOB like me for a father..." One by Jean and Howard would be considered legitimate.
You don't want me to discuss the rest of that on a public forum, now do you?? I will say, that you seem smart enough to not "accidentally" compose such an obviously third grade effort as the "Mormon will".
I do think you probably have proof that will take me a couple years to dig out. Why not just ante up now and save us all a lot of trouble??? You might be surprised how little your clients have to fear! Besides, the more this costs us, the more people we have to bring in for support.
Purported? No? Suspected? Yes! Counselor, please quit trying to put trap words into our mouths, OK??. I know you lawyers are trained to try to trap people, but no dice here! It's not in your best interests!
Ask Will Lummis if he'll agree to be tested and we'll settle this once and full all if he, and you have the gonads to take the chance??? From your viewpoint: (You could lose, but without an amicable test, a positive would make ogres of all of you. We'd make sure of that)If the test is negative: We all shake hands and I buy you lunch!
From our viewpoint: (Pos or neg: we still get the info we need to pursue the outcome that is much larger than Howard or even LV to us.) In spite of popular opinion, there is a much better life out there than LV, Houston or LA! lol
Why GOP, Neo con, Republican and Mormon is likely interchangeable.
http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/07/mormons_the_most_conservative_religious_group_in_america.php
With every post you show that you just don't know what you are talking about. First of all, I do not have any clients, so your basic premise is way off the mark.
Secondly,my previous decision not to respond to a fool was absolutely the right one!
Easy Paul!
Righteous indignation looks a lot better on Geoff than on you! lol
We ALL have clients Paul, declared or not, official or not, retained or not! If no one else, we all represent ourselves before the judge of the universe (and often we have a fool for a client).
Jesus said, "We're all fools for Christ." So I'm not insulted. The person who hasn't made a fool of himself is afraid to live.
Bottom line: I will pursue the Hughes heirs until I have a valid DNA sample (everybody leaves DNA on smoke butts, drink container, bathroom stalls, etc, and yes I will go to those means if necessary), the same for the Peters, a valid answer is much more important than the results of that answer. I know you don't understand that, but that's best for our safety and well being.
I bear you no ill will, but unlike the young lady from Niger, I bear no illusions about the real intentions of you and others. Thus I cover my identity as well as I can. I do however understand that virtually nothing is private on the internet and always hold aces in the hole. (now you can understand that, considering where you live, can't you??)
Geoff:
I think you should edit out the news article of the book by Darwin Porter. It's just an obvious porno book written to titillate the masses and the Hughes family should sue the be Jesus out of him for it!
I agree the Porter book is lame, but I don't see any articles about it. Must have fallen off the list.
Sorry, I figured out what you were referring to. But alas, I have no way to delete it.
Thanks for the effort anyway Geoff. I guess the privilege of free speech means we have to put up with some idiots, my self included sometimes. BTW just wait till the Milwaukee "Hughes son" finds your site. You'll be looking for ways to delete like you never imagined! The CIA used to hide drops in the Soviet Union in dead cats, bird, etc. On the supposition that no one would look in something so disgusting for a valuable object. Likewise the "Hughes freaked son" try's to cover Hughes postings with such disgusting garbage, that people close the sites down or quit reading just out of revulsion.
Now WHEREEEEEEE??? would he have picked up those tactics?????? lol
May be coming to work on research for 6 months or so in LV or LA, now won't that be cozy??? Geoff, Paul and I could have our own coffee clotch, uhhh forgot, I kicked the caffeine addiction, would have to be beer or tea for me! I'd like to invite some people in who worked for Hughes in LA and LV, should be quite a gathering! lol
Nice HRH blog. I thought you might like this flickr! set.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/31383210@N00/sets/72157603590381367/
Be careful what links you click on and also, make sure your computer is fire walled. (better yet if it belongs to a library or some other gov entity, gets the hackers prosecuted). There have been a bunch of key loggers and worms planted to get info of user computers when they google or comment on these Hughes subjects. (It's pretty sophisticated so there is some big money involved).
Eureka!!!!
Your August 28, column, brought to mind the three trips I made to California in the last year. Of particular interest was the one to San Diego. I was in awe of the miles and miles of beautiful and luxurious homes all around the area. I went to a national chain steak restaurant alone. It was around 7pm. A family of three left as I entered and that was the last customers I saw for the 50 minutes there.
I had 4 waiters hovering over me, because they didn't have anything else to do!!!
The manager came over and we started talking. She sat down and after a few minutes I asked here where was everyone???? She said and quote:
"I think they are all home, eating beans, trying to figure out how in the world they are going to make another mortgage payment.
On checking the records at the court house I found Jean Peter's properties were heavily mortgaged (in my opinion, far beyond their worth). I won't get into numbers here to save embarrassment of the family, but suffice to say, the depression has hammered Jean's heirs as bad as it has hammered the banks.
A moral surfaces here, and that is, no one is immortal, and no place safe from the ravages of time and the unforeseen circumstance. I wish I had more resources as it would be nice to relieve them of the burden for Jean's sake. I wonder just how much of her property was mortgaged to pay off the cancer treatments.
The moral??? Health care has provided me with some nice money but I would be glad to survive on half income if we could have a good comprehensive national health insurance.(and I don't care which political party claims credit for it).
I never knew who examined the "Mormon Will" till now, seems Bob Bennet is claiming credit: He obviously is a mental midget! Lord, with this fellow doing the public relations, no wonder Howard had so many PR problems. Jesh! This guy don't seem too bright!
An example: I quote from the article! "He explores who a forger could have been, if one existed, such as perhaps a college professor with access to a library." I have worked with many college professors and some where real idiots but none would have made the spelling, grammar and context errors in the "Mormon Will". Whoever wrote it only graduated from primary school because the seats got to big for a 20 year old. It is such an obvious 3rd or 4th grade effort that the person almost surely never went to high school. Bennet only illustrates his own limitations with such statements and why is he trying to impress the state Republicans anyway! Hasn't he heard that anyone with sense is jumping ship??? I think John McCain will in the next six months.
Also, the post about the equation involving Mormons, KKK and Neo Cons is really reinforced by the Bennett article.
Been reading the FBI files (don't skip point number 7 below)on Howard Hughes and most is extremely boring. Did however run into an item from early June, 9, 1954 about an apparent religious fanatic, who was sending Hughes masses of religious papers etc about the Catholic patron saint of the Americas (Lady of Guadalupe). The woman evidently attended the Old Plaza Church and used that for her address, rather than her home. She wanted Hughes to give 10 million dollars to the building of a new Catholic Church or making a movie about the Catholic saints.
Interesting items and questions:
1. The woman was "a considerable annoyance to Hughes..sent large amounts of literature to Hughes.. Hughes in turn delivers to ____and most of it is subsequently burned."
2. Getting the papers to Hughes is the first mystery, as all kinds of junk mail were routinely deleted by aides. How?? And the fact that it had happened a number of times indicates someone with an inside access.
3. Sister of the woman states, "her sister has become a religious fanatic....has done everything possible to try to get ____ to be more moderate in her religious activities without success...".
4. WHY????? is this item in the FBI file on Hughes unless the person in question had a close link to Hugher.
5. Is the fanatic referenced here, Jean Peter's sister, Shirley Cook??? And is the sister trying to explain the event to FBI investigators really Jean Peters??? Is Shiley Cook, still a religious fanatic???
6.This religious fanatic was also referenced in an investigation by the LA Bureau of the FBI as having been a subject "in which ____was office of origin and investigation was conducted in 1937, 1938, and 1939.????????? Does she have a record??? Did Shirley Cook ever work for Elizabeth Arden in New York?
7. Now for the real killer question: Was this so called fanatic really a blackmailer in disguise, using the Catholic church in much the same way a later "will" used the Mormon church for cover??? Why did they EXPECT Hughes to give up the ten million unless they knew something? Was that something that Jean Peters was due to deliver Hughes' child within a month or so?? Just piecing together these facts, and getting some interesting questions!! Interestingly Walter Winchell and the Hollywood gossips later hinted at a son born around this time.
The pieces Anonymous is trying to put together will not fit. Jean married Stuart Cramer III in May of 1954 and divorced him in December 1956, the very period during which he wants to invent the birth of a son. She and Hughes were married in January 1957.
Jean's sister, Shirley was married to Judd Brandreth. I am unaware of her ever being Shirley Cook.
As far as the annoying person who was trying to get $10 million - there were lots of those. Although I wasn't there in 1954, I was from 1957 on, and from my experience I can tell you that Hughes was never aware of the requests. We got such requests by the hundreds. If someone became particularly persistent, or annoying, the requests would be turned over to the Byoir organization, and they then perhaps turned this over to the FBI if there appeared to be a problem or possible threat of some kind. Hughes would NEVER tolerate having someting like this referred to him. He had others who were supposed to deal with this kind of stuff. It was difficult enough to get him to take things that were of importance to his business. We had a group of several secretaries who answered all this kind of mail. It became a torrent when he moved to Las Vegas, but all the letters were answered. There were form letters sent out - someone would read the incoming mail and mark each one #2, #7, #12 depending upon which form letter applied.
As far as your fear of the Mormon Church is concerned, you can go to sleep knowing that you are safe. I can assure you that the Mormon Church has absolutely no interest in the Hughes DNA or anything of that nature and especilly in you and whatever it is you are trying to prove or disprove. They were, of course interested in the Dummar will because it contained a bequest to the Mormon Church. However, when the will was determined to be a fake, whatever interest there was disappeared. I can't imagine why you would think the Mormon Church had any interest beyond that. Remember, not all the aides were Mormon, and, even if they were, what business would that be to the Mormon Church? I think you are not only paranoid about this but so far off the mark that it makes one question your sanity.
You mentioned very early on that the aides should be prosecuted. Are you aware that most of them are deceased? Are you not aware that John Holmes WAS prosecuted and plead guilty to drug charges in Las Vegas, along with Dr. Crane? Are you not aware that Dr. Thain went to trial on drug charges in Utah? Are you not aware that there are statutes of limitations?
I haven't looked at the FBI files for a long time, so I don't recall the monetary requests you are referring to.
I knew Shirley and Judd Brandreth fairly well, and they were not fanatics of any kind. I also knew Jean's mother, Mrs. Best, and she was a very nice lady. Shirley and Judd and their two kids used to visit Ranch Santa Fe on the weekends.
As for not discussing this in a public forum, it is you who desires the public forum by remaining "anonymous". You know who I am, where I am, and how to reach me, so if you want to take this out of the public forum, it is your choice. As for accusing me of having some kind of sinister agenda or protecting anyone, my only interest in this whole thing is that the REAL truth come out, not a lot of bizarre speculative B.S. God knows that the life of Howard Hughes was bizarre enough without embellishing it with a lot of speculative nonsense for the purpose of making it even more sensational. It appears to me that is your goal. If your goal is to uncover facts, let's talk. If it's merely for sensationalism, count me out.
Paul B. Winn
You admit you weren't' there, so you don't know!
The FBI files detail this. I quoted those files because I knew you would plead omnipresent knowledge. You need to rethink your assertions on things you don't know and that J. Edger evidently did. It's in the last file.
I can give you the address of Shirley if you want it, and her name now is Cook!
Despite you trying to assume that Jean stayed with Cramer until she married Howard, it simply DIDN'T happen that way. The fact that Hughes' PI was following Jean daily while she was with Cramer, is well documented and the fact that she returned to Hughes and Hollywood very quickly is also well documented.
Shortly after Apache (Jan-March 1954) (when Jean would have been 7 -9 months in my "theoretical" time line: lol) they fled the Vegas channel 8 house for parts unknown, and didn't reappear in the public eye till some time later at the spot you came in. Kind of fits with getting her somewhere where she could have the baby quietly doesn't it??. Now I'm guessing that that spot was also on the coast, on a cliff, with windows opening on the ocean, with a very old doc, with a special crib and a special first toy that the baby was very scared of, and pressure put on Jean to give up the Baby, and with a very high ranking official of the justice department in on the deliberations. Of course we all know that's just a wild guess, now don't we???? Now chew on that! lol
It is well documented by Geoo that Howard ordered the house sealed and it wasn't opened until I assume you and your buddies burned all the evidence that the house contained in 1976 and retrieved Jean's appointment book (kind of blows your "Jean was with Cramer till 1957 theory" up don't it???)
Not making fun of you, but you were in on enough of this to know better. You should have (and I'm guessing you may well have) saved some of that evidence from that Channel 8 house. Wouldn't that settle this issue immediately????
The time line also fits the facts VERY WELL, Jean finished filming the film APACHE around March (5 months pregnant in the proposed time line). During the early portions of the film, she conveniently managed to avoid camera angles that show her belly. When shown close up and full body she seems to always have a blocking item (the water bucket in the prison line is a prime example). I am also trying to prove that Hollywood intentionally wrote in the pregnancy of the Indian girl to cover Jean's belly in the later parts of the movie. I also observed that you I couldn't ever see Jean's face when any rough stuff was going on (the director would have better sense than chance harming an unborn baby). And having some experience with pregnant women myself, her pregnant waddle is almost TOO perfect to be fake. In my opinion.
Paul:
Of course this is all speculation isn't it, but let's dream?? Hey!!
Didn't the SUDDEN marriage to Cramer ,whom she barely knew, even bother you???? Doesn't that sound like a girl who was pregnant in those days and times. Scandal and all was in the wind!
Once she married Cramer she could "dissappear" on a lovers holiday.
A well known report,however, states that the Howard's detective observed the newlyweds having sex. If this is true, the detective's next report to Howard would have been a blockbuster, as the belly would have been hard to miss in that state of undress and in 6-7 month state. No longer able to be disguised! Now the sudden compulsion of Howard to get her back at makes sense doesn't it???
His investigation of Cramer also makes a lot more sense now doesn't it??
Hughes and Cramer had an intense negotiation session in LA (which is also documented). Hughes needed to know what assurances he had that Cramer could keep his mouth shut. And Cramer letting her go, now also makes a lot of sense. In fact Cramer comes off as a sort of white knight here, as he was willing to either marry her or give her up so she could be happy. I like the man more than anyone else in this whole ugly mess! He at least had honor!
Howard wouldn't marry her before but since he knew EXACTLY where she was the previous OCTOBER, he was in a pickle now!
Now, in CA and TX, if the father of an illegitimate child later marries the mother (even for a short time), the child is legitimate and has full heir ship rights.
Of course I'm only theorizing, aren't I??????
Post a Comment