Edwin Walker

[Paul Brancato]

Ernie - Thank you for the scholarly historic material. It seems pretty clear that JBS put distance between themselves and the KKK. What evidence can you bring to show that they did likewise with the Minutemen in 1963?

[Ernie Lazar]

Ernie - Thank you for the scholarly historic material. It seems pretty clear that JBS put distance between themselves and the KKK. What evidence can you bring to show that they did likewise with the Minutemen in 1963?

If you review JBS Bulletins and publications by Welch such as "The Neutralizers" (1963), you will see a consistent message by Robert Welch which warned members against diverting their energies into pointless or even counterproductive activities such as associating themselves with paramilitary right-wing organizations like MM.

On one level, you could consider the MM and JBS as competitors. Welch wanted to build an "educational army" which ultimately would change the political behavior of our nation's electorate. He did NOT believe that groups like the Minutemen were helpful because they did not contribute anything to the "educational" purpose of the JBS. Instead, Welch knew (as a career sales executive) that any association with nutjobs and fanatics with guns would convince ordinary Americans that the JBS was exactly what its critics claimed -- i.e. an extremist organization that was a disaster waiting to happen.

That does NOT mean (however) that Minutemen were not JBS members or vice-versa. As long as they did not attempt to function as a boarding party and then divert JBS members from the agenda which Welch gave members every month in the JBS Bulletin -- they probably would be ok.

If YOU created your own organization -- you probably would accept anybody who followed your directions and who clearly wanted to achieve the same objectives as yourself. BUT if you discovered that there were people in your group whom had their own agenda and that they were trying to control or manipulate members of your organization into supporting activities or individuals whom you regarded as potentially causing embarrassment or controversy for you and your organization --- then, obviously, you would take steps to prevent that from happening -- right??

[Paul Trejo]

If you review JBS Bulletins and publications by Welch such as "The Neutralizers" (1963), you will see a consistent message by Robert Welch which warned members against diverting their energies into pointless or even counterproductive activities such as associating themselves with paramilitary right-wing organizations like MM.

On one level, you could consider the MM and JBS as competitors. Welch wanted to build an "educational army" which ultimately would change the political behavior of our nation's electorate. He did NOT believe that groups like the Minutemen were helpful because they did not contribute anything to the "educational" purpose of the JBS. Instead, Welch knew (as a career sales executive) that any association with nutjobs and fanatics with guns would convince ordinary Americans that the JBS was exactly what its critics claimed -- i.e. an extremist organization that was a disaster waiting to happen.

That does NOT mean (however) that Minutemen were not JBS members or vice-versa. As long as they did not attempt to function as a boarding party and then divert JBS members from the agenda which Welch gave members every month in the JBS Bulletin -- they probably would be ok.

If YOU created your own organization -- you probably would accept anybody who followed your directions and who clearly wanted to achieve the same objectives as yourself. BUT if you discovered that there were people in your group whom had their own agenda and that they were trying to control or manipulate members of your organization into supporting activities or individuals whom you regarded as potentially causing embarrassment or controversy for you and your organization --- then, obviously, you would take steps to prevent that from happening -- right??

Although there were some cynical moves made to distance the Minutemen from the JBS, this was low-key, obviously.

It was easy to belong to both groups simultaneously -- and Harry Dean is a perfect example. The reason that Guy Gabaldon befriended Harry Dean 1962-1963 was because Harry Dean was seen *both* at JBS meetings *and* at Minutemen rallies.

To the best of my knowledge, it was this specific combination -- JBS and Minuteman -- that spelled the criterion for the "Secret JBS Meeting" that Harry Dean speaks about in Southern California, September 1963, in which Lee Harvey Oswald was mentioned.

Not all JBS members, but surely those JBS members who were also members of the Minutemen, were involved in the JFK murder. This is what Harry Dean claims, and it is historically plausible.

It is true that the armchair JBS reader and the armed paramilitary Minuteman were two different political creatures -- one was bookish and the other liked firing weapons. Nevertheless, they BOTH believed that JFK was a "Communist" and therefore they both cooperated where they could -- preferably UNDERGROUND.

I feel confident that the FBI has data about the JBS and Minutemen related to the JFK murder that they aren't sharing with Ernie Lazar or the American Public just yet. But on 26 October 2017 we Americans are going to get an ear full.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited March 16, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Brancato]

Paul - why do you feel that the government has specific information on JBS and Minutemen that they are going to share in 2017? Are there leaks leading you to that conclusion? Was the last document dump leaning in that direction?

[Paul Trejo]

Paul - why do you feel that the government has specific information on JBS and Minutemen that they are going to share in 2017? Are there leaks leading you to that conclusion? Was the last document dump leaning in that direction?

Well, Paul B., when GWH Bush was President in 1990, the USSR collapsed and the Berlin Wall fell. It was the end of an era, and President Bush took great pride in that historical moment.

Partly as a result, President GHW Bush signed the JFK Records Act on 26 October 1992, stating that all top secret FBI, CIA and Federal records about the JFK murder would finally be released to the public in 25 years.

President GHW Bush knew that this date was 22 years EARLIER than the 2039 date set by Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren, as the date when the US Government would release all top-secret FBI, CIA and Federal records about the JFK murder.

(Earl Warren had enforced the JFK Cover-up for 75 years from the date of the WCR, on grounds of National Security, i.e. to be relaxed in 2039. What grounds specifically? That the Cold War with the USSR was raging hot in 1964, as well as in 1979 for the HSCA. When the Cold War was over, the National Security lock on the JFK murder suddenly fell to the ground.)

So, the new date, as signed into law by President Bush in 1992, mandates a release of all JFK murder materials still locked up tight -- on the date 26 October 2017. IMHO, this will reveal specific material on the JBS and Minutemen in Dallas (specifically) showing exactly how they planned, plotted and finally executed JFK.

There was no other way for JFK to die in Dallas, except at the hands of the radical right CITIZENS of Dallas, Texas. That is why the US Government will reveal this, as I predict.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited March 16, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

If you review JBS Bulletins and publications by Welch such as "The Neutralizers" (1963), you will see a consistent message by Robert Welch which warned members against diverting their energies into pointless or even counterproductive activities such as associating themselves with paramilitary right-wing organizations like MM.

On one level, you could consider the MM and JBS as competitors. Welch wanted to build an "educational army" which ultimately would change the political behavior of our nation's electorate. He did NOT believe that groups like the Minutemen were helpful because they did not contribute anything to the "educational" purpose of the JBS. Instead, Welch knew (as a career sales executive) that any association with nutjobs and fanatics with guns would convince ordinary Americans that the JBS was exactly what its critics claimed -- i.e. an extremist organization that was a disaster waiting to happen.

That does NOT mean (however) that Minutemen were not JBS members or vice-versa. As long as they did not attempt to function as a boarding party and then divert JBS members from the agenda which Welch gave members every month in the JBS Bulletin -- they probably would be ok.

If YOU created your own organization -- you probably would accept anybody who followed your directions and who clearly wanted to achieve the same objectives as yourself. BUT if you discovered that there were people in your group whom had their own agenda and that they were trying to control or manipulate members of your organization into supporting activities or individuals whom you regarded as potentially causing embarrassment or controversy for you and your organization --- then, obviously, you would take steps to prevent that from happening -- right??

Although there were some cynical moves made to distance the Minutemen from the JBS, this was low-key, obviously.

It was easy to belong to both groups simultaneously -- and Harry Dean is a perfect example. The reason that Guy Gabaldon befriended Harry Dean 1962-1963 was because Harry Dean was seen *both* at JBS meetings *and* at Minutemen rallies.

To the best of my knowledge, it was this specific combination -- JBS and Minuteman -- that spelled the criterion for the "Secret JBS Meeting" that Harry Dean speaks about in Southern California, September 1963, in which Lee Harvey Oswald was mentioned.

Not all JBS members, but surely those JBS members who were also members of the Minutemen, were involved in the JFK murder. This is what Harry Dean claims, and it is historically plausible.

It is true that the armchair JBS reader and the armed paramilitary Minuteman were two different political creatures -- one was bookish and the other liked firing weapons. Nevertheless, they BOTH believed that JFK was a "Communist" and therefore they both cooperated where they could -- preferably UNDERGROUND.

I feel confident that the FBI has data about the JBS and Minutemen related to the JFK murder that they aren't sharing with Ernie Lazar or the American Public just yet. But on 26 October 2017 we Americans are going to get an ear full.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

I don't agree with your "low key" comment.

With respect to Harry Dean -- I think we need to make a distinction between someone who actually is an "active member" of an organization versus someone who may have paid dues for some limited period of time and perhaps he/she even subscribed to publications of a group but he/she was never a truly active member. Inactive members includes people who do not attend member meetings regularly and/or who do not regularly participate in suggested activities.

Both the JBS and Minutemen made distinctions between active vs inactive "members". In 1997, for example, the JBS had 14,897 "active members" -- which (according to the JBS) was anybody whose membership dues were paid and that included Life Members (such as infants and small children whose membership was purchased by a relative). That number also included "Home Chapter" members (i.e. people who lived in locations which did not have a local JBS chapter but they received all JBS literature directly from HQ).

FBI DATA RE: JBS or MINUTEMEN:

No point in beating this to death but the type of information which Paul suggests exists in FBI files about the JBS and/or Minutemen (and JFK's murder) would NOT be the type of documents withheld until 2017 -- which is why such documents have already been released. Again, interested parties should read the ARRB Final Report to learn the type of documents being withheld, or better yet --- contact the former ARRB Chairman and ask him.

[Ernie Lazar]

Paul - why do you feel that the government has specific information on JBS and Minutemen that they are going to share in 2017? Are there leaks leading you to that conclusion? Was the last document dump leaning in that direction?

Paul B:

Your question is extremely pertinent.

Anybody can create a fictional characterization regarding the type of JFK-related documents being withheld until 2017. That relieves them of the necessity of presenting verifiable factual evidence to support their speculation. Consequently, the answer to every question becomes: "Wait until 2017".

But when 2017 comes -- and there is still no documentary evidence to support the original speculation --- then the obvious next fiction will be:

"Well, they are still hiding significant documents (or destroying them) because such material would reveal government corruption or government dishonesty or documents would besmirch the reputation of (and embarrass) prominent individuals"

OR there will be some other invented reason to "explain" the absence of the expected "proof" for their original speculation. In short, there is a bottomless pit of potential "explanations" -- all of which are based upon the original false predicate.

[Paul Trejo]

I don't agree with your "low key" comment.

With respect to Harry Dean -- I think we need to make a distinction between someone who actually is an "active member" of an organization versus someone who may have paid dues for some limited period of time and perhaps he/she even subscribed to publications of a group but he/she was never a truly active member. Inactive members includes people who do not attend member meetings regularly and/or who do not regularly participate in suggested activities.

Both the JBS and Minutemen made distinctions between active vs inactive "members". In 1997, for example, the JBS had 14,897 "active members" -- which (according to the JBS) was anybody whose membership dues were paid and that included Life Members (such as infants and small children whose membership was purchased by a relative). That number also included "Home Chapter" members (i.e. people who lived in locations which did not have a local JBS chapter but they received all JBS literature directly from HQ).

FBI DATA RE: JBS or MINUTEMEN:

No point in beating this to death but the type of information which Paul suggests exists in FBI files about the JBS and/or Minutemen (and JFK's murder) would NOT be the type of documents withheld until 2017 -- which is why such documents have already been released. Again, interested parties should read the ARRB Final Report to learn the type of documents being withheld, or better yet --- contact the former ARRB Chairman and ask him.

Well, Ernie, regarding membership in the JBS, it's a problem because it was ultimately a "Secret Society" that refused to publish their membership lists.

Furthermore, it was common practice amongst JBS members to deny being a JBS member. It's sort of ridiculous to try to distinguish who was a "real" JBS member and who wasn't, when the JBS members themselves denied their true status.

It adds little to simply give a "count" of members -- whether active or inactive. It's a distraction because it never gives particular or individual data.

Your continuing claim, Ernie, that the FBI has already released all of its top-secret files on the JFK murder remains as ingenuous today as it was the first time you said it.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

I don't agree with your "low key" comment.

With respect to Harry Dean -- I think we need to make a distinction between someone who actually is an "active member" of an organization versus someone who may have paid dues for some limited period of time and perhaps he/she even subscribed to publications of a group but he/she was never a truly active member. Inactive members includes people who do not attend member meetings regularly and/or who do not regularly participate in suggested activities.

Both the JBS and Minutemen made distinctions between active vs inactive "members". In 1997, for example, the JBS had 14,897 "active members" -- which (according to the JBS) was anybody whose membership dues were paid and that included Life Members (such as infants and small children whose membership was purchased by a relative). That number also included "Home Chapter" members (i.e. people who lived in locations which did not have a local JBS chapter but they received all JBS literature directly from HQ).

FBI DATA RE: JBS or MINUTEMEN:

No point in beating this to death but the type of information which Paul suggests exists in FBI files about the JBS and/or Minutemen (and JFK's murder) would NOT be the type of documents withheld until 2017 -- which is why such documents have already been released. Again, interested parties should read the ARRB Final Report to learn the type of documents being withheld, or better yet --- contact the former ARRB Chairman and ask him.

Well, Ernie, regarding membership in the JBS, it's a problem because it was ultimately a "Secret Society" that refused to publish their membership lists.

Furthermore, it was common practice amongst JBS members to deny being a JBS member. It's sort of ridiculous to try to distinguish who was a "real" JBS member and who wasn't, when the JBS members themselves denied their true status.

It adds little to simply give a "count" of members -- whether active or inactive. It's a distraction because it never gives particular or individual data.

Your continuing claim, Ernie, that the FBI has already released all of its top-secret files on the JFK murder remains as ingenuous today as it was the first time you said it.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Paul

1. Almost no organizations publish their membership lists so not sure why you think that is significant.

2. Many individual JBS members did acknowledge their membership -- particularly when newspapers around the country began publishing articles about their local chapters and, during that process, JBS chapter and section leaders were interviewed.

3. Like the Communist Party -- the JBS had at least 10 times as many sympathizers or "state of mind" members -- as actual dues-paying members.

4. A knowledgeable person can usually detect JBS members and sympathizers because of their unique and distinctive style of debate. For example: they always go for the jugular during debates. They do not recognize the existence of honorable, decent, principled and patriotic opponents. Instead they always use language calculated to evoke fear, contempt, and disgust toward perceived opponents. When they recommend authors or publications, they almost always are JBS-recommended (and JBS-friendly) sources.

5. Once again you deliberately misrepresent what I wrote. QUOTE something I wrote which stated that: "the FBI has already released all of its top-secret files on the JFK murder". If you refuse to QUOTE something I wrote which made that assertion, then we can all draw the appropriate conclusion regarding your intellectual honesty.

6. Lastly, knowing the actual number of JBS members (both active and inactive) is important because it gives a serious researcher an understanding of the degree to which there is any significant percentage of Americans who are receptive to the unique JBS interpretation of our history and it also gives analysts a factual understanding regarding how many Americans believe "treason" is the most appropriate understanding regarding the motives and objectives of our government officials during the past 100 years.

As an analogy: knowing that the American Nazi Party never attracted more than a handful of actual members and it was financially insolvent for most of its entire existence is an important bit of factual information which informs our judgment regarding the extent to which the ANP represented any sort of serious problem for our country. BY CONTRAST -- knowing that the JBS had TENS OF THOUSANDS of dues-paying members and TENS OF THOUSANDS more sympathizers and knowing that it had MILLIONS OF DOLLARS to finance its endeavors is something which any serious analyst would want to know.

YOU may consider that as a "distraction" -- but I can assure you serious analysts do not share your bizarre interpretation.

Edited March 16, 2015 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

5. Once again you deliberately misrepresent what I wrote. QUOTE something I wrote which stated that: "the FBI has already released all of its top-secret files on the JFK murder". If you refuse to QUOTE something I wrote which made that assertion, then we can all draw the appropriate conclusion regarding your intellectual honesty.

6. Lastly, knowing the actual number of JBS members (both active and inactive) is important because it gives a serious researcher an understanding of the degree to which there is any significant percentage of Americans who are receptive to the unique JBS interpretation of our history and it also gives analysts a factual understanding regarding how many Americans believe "treason" is the most appropriate understanding regarding the motives and objectives of our government officials during the past 100 years.

As an analogy: knowing that the American Nazi Party never attracted more than a handful of actual members and it was financially insolvent for most of its entire existence is an important bit of factual information which informs our judgment regarding the extent to which the ANP represented any sort of serious problem for our country. BY CONTRAST -- knowing that the JBS had TENS OF THOUSANDS of dues-paying members and TENS OF THOUSANDS more sympathizers and knowing that it had MILLIONS OF DOLLARS to finance its endeavors is something which any serious analyst would want to know.

YOU may consider that as a "distraction" -- but I can assure you serious analysts do not share your bizarre interpretation.

Regarding (5) Ernie, here is what you actually wrote (which was quoted above my text):

"...The type of information which Paul suggests exists in FBI files about the JBS and/or Minutemen (and JFK's murder) would NOT be the type of documents withheld until 2017 -- which is why such documents have already been released." (Ernie Lazar, 2015-03-16)

I didn't "misrepresent" what you wrote -- either deliberately or inadvertently. I interpreted your words to mean that the FBI has already released everything that it's going to release on the JFK murder. That would include top-secret files. That's a fair and honest interpretation of your words.

I simply disagree with your statement -- no matter how much you think you know about the FBI. You simply aren't privy to their top-secret information, Ernie. I think you need to get over that plain fact. Instead of dealing with that fact, however, you attack my intellectual honesty in public.

That's a mere distraction. Anybody can see through it.

As for number (6) above, although it's not useless to know the actual number of JBS members (active and inactive), still it's not really important in the context of this thread, i.e. the JFK murder.

I want to know a full list of all JBS members in Dallas in 1963. I want to know which ones were in powerful County and City positions in Dallas in 1963. I want to know which ones were members of the "Friends of Walker" group in Texas.

What I'm asking for is important -- and it is far beyond abstract sociological analyses.

Finally, my interpretation is far from "bizarre." My view is a minority interpretation today -- but all majority views once started out as minority views -- so I still have hope, though I have no outspoken followers on this FORUM, that's clear.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Edited March 16, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Steven Gaal]

I want to know a full list of all JBS members in Dallas in 1963. I want to know which ones were in powerful County and City positions in Dallas in 1963. I want to know which ones were members of the "Friends of Walker" group in Texas. // TREJO

}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
GOLLY YOU LIVE IN TEXAS. CANT YOU DO SOME RESEARCH ??? .....YOU SEEM TO HAVE A LOT OF TIME TO POST....

Edited March 16, 2015 by Steven Gaal

[Ernie Lazar]

5. Once again you deliberately misrepresent what I wrote. QUOTE something I wrote which stated that: "the FBI has already released all of its top-secret files on the JFK murder". If you refuse to QUOTE something I wrote which made that assertion, then we can all draw the appropriate conclusion regarding your intellectual honesty.

6. Lastly, knowing the actual number of JBS members (both active and inactive) is important because it gives a serious researcher an understanding of the degree to which there is any significant percentage of Americans who are receptive to the unique JBS interpretation of our history and it also gives analysts a factual understanding regarding how many Americans believe "treason" is the most appropriate understanding regarding the motives and objectives of our government officials during the past 100 years.

As an analogy: knowing that the American Nazi Party never attracted more than a handful of actual members and it was financially insolvent for most of its entire existence is an important bit of factual information which informs our judgment regarding the extent to which the ANP represented any sort of serious problem for our country. BY CONTRAST -- knowing that the JBS had TENS OF THOUSANDS of dues-paying members and TENS OF THOUSANDS more sympathizers and knowing that it had MILLIONS OF DOLLARS to finance its endeavors is something which any serious analyst would want to know.

YOU may consider that as a "distraction" -- but I can assure you serious analysts do not share your bizarre interpretation.

Regarding (5) Ernie, here is what you actually wrote (which was quoted above my text):

"...The type of information which Paul suggests exists in FBI files about the JBS and/or Minutemen (and JFK's murder) would NOT be the type of documents withheld until 2017 -- which is why such documents have already been released." (Ernie Lazar, 2015-03-16)

I didn't "misrepresent" what you wrote -- either deliberately or inadvertently. I interpreted your words to mean that the FBI has already released everything that it's going to release on the JFK murder. That would include top-secret files. That's a fair and honest interpretation of your words.

I simply disagree with your statement -- no matter how much you think you know about the FBI. You simply aren't privy to their top-secret information, Ernie. I think you need to get over that plain fact. Instead of dealing with that fact, however, you attack my intellectual honesty in public.

That's a mere distraction. Anybody can see through it.

As for number (6) above, although it's not useless to know the actual number of JBS members (active and inactive), still it's not really important in the context of this thread, i.e. the JFK murder.

I want to know a full list of all JBS members in Dallas in 1963. I want to know which ones were in powerful County and City positions in Dallas in 1963. I want to know which ones were members of the "Friends of Walker" group in Texas.

What I'm asking for is important -- and it is far beyond abstract sociological analyses.

Finally, my interpretation is far from "bizarre." My view is a minority interpretation today -- but all majority views once started out as minority views -- so I still have hope, though I have no outspoken followers on this FORUM, that's clear.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

The operative words in your lame excuse for deliberately MISREPRESENTING what I wrote is "I interpreted".

Direct quotation does not require "interpretation". Which is why people QUOTE (accurately and in context) whatever was originally written instead of merely attributing something to somebody. Obviously, I never wrote anything about how many "top secret files" the FBI has or has not released.

What I wrote was very clear:

I wrote that the type of documents which you always claim have been withheld (and will not become available until 2017) are NOT the type of documents which remain to be released. Again, review the ARRB Final Report to discover the methodology which was employed and what remains to be released. Nor did I write that the FBI has released everything it is going to release. That is another FABRICATION by you. I was the person who originally corrected YOU when you wrote something a long time ago which revealed that you were not even aware of the 2017 release date! Because you were citing the original "75 year" time-frame. What gall you have!

If your speculation was correct, there would be Minutemen and JBS-related files which the FBI would refuse to release BUT those file numbers would be listed in all sorts of files and the Bureau would cite the appropriate exemption code(s) which they would then claim preclude their release --as has always been the case in all sorts of matters.

For illustration purposes: as a consequence of a major lawsuit, the FBI files (i.e. every HQ and every field office file) which pertains to the National Lawyers Guild are totally exempt from disclosure but anybody can find all the NLG file numbers (HQ and field) listed in many different FBI files on other subject matters. if you then make a request for those file numbers, the FBI will send you a letter stating that they cannot be released and they cite the pertinent FOIA exemption code(s).

The same is true for JFK-related material.

There are hundreds (if not thousands) of references to Minutemen and JBS-related serials in the FBI HQ file on JFK's assassination (62-109060). Those subjects are also discussed in files such as "Threats Against Government Officials" OR "Assaulting a Federal Officer" (89-series file numbers). You can see numerous individual serials which discuss the Minutemen and JBS-related subjects (and JFK's murder) on Mary Ferrell's website.

I have numerous files about all sorts of matters which contain serials which either (1) originated in the FBI's HQ JFK Assassination File OR (2) they originated in other files but copies were channeled into the JFK Assassination File because those serials discussed JFK's murder.

Examples of files which contain JFK-murder serials include:

Mary Davison and Council For Statehood

Indignant White Citizens Council (Dallas)

Bob and William Joiner (Grand Prairie TX)

National States Rights Party (HQ and field offices)

Constitution Party (HQ and field offices)

Herbert Philbrick

Fernando Penabaz

Carl McIntire

Ashland Burchwell

Joseph A. Milteer

Willie Somersett

G. Clinton Wheat

Paul George Anderson

Francis X. Ranuzzi

John Howard Sucke

Thomas Arthur Vallee

Dr. Stanley L. Drennan

Revilo P. Oliver

Many of those serials discuss JBS and Minutemen and other extreme right groups who somebody thought had some sort of connection to the assassination. In fact, I shared one of those files with you (i.e. Stanley Drennan's file).

In addition, "search slips" and "correlation summaries" in all sorts of files reflect file and serial numbers that pertain to JFK's murder.

In addition, there would be cross-references in many files that reflect certain file or serial numbers which the FBI has not released (or specific documents within files that they refuse to release). But no researcher has found anything which establishes that some sort of JBS or Minutemen document has been withheld -- because your predicate is FALSE.

You are NOT privy to FBI files of any kind since you have never made any FOIA requests -- so stop pretending that you know what you are talking about.

[Paul Trejo]

...To your knowledge was there significant overlap in 1963 of JBS and the Minutemen, the American Nazis, or the KKK?

Well, John, it depends upon what one calls "significant". If you think that Edwin WALKER was knee-deep in the JFK murder, then you look at his immediate associates -- JBS members all over the South, also, Minutemen.

But wait, there's more. WALKER's constant companion since early 1962 was Robert Allen Surrey -- the unpaid President of WALKERs "American Eagle Publishing Company," as well as a printer for the American Nazi Party. Hmm.

We have at least one eye-witness that places Guy Banister in Mississippi seeking allies inside the KKK.

More to the point, we have WALKER being offered a KKK "Dragon" post (even though he turned it down).

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

[Mark Knight]

Remind me again, Mr. Trejo...where is the concrete link between Banister and Walker?

I don't want any guesses...please FIRMLY connect Banister with Walker.

[Ernie Lazar]

QUESTIONS FOR PAUL TREJO

1. Paul assures us that he has special knowledge regarding the existence of "top secret files" (heretofore never released or even identified) pertaining to JFK's murder.

2. Perhaps Paul could use his special knowledge to answer the following questions?

3. One of the most famous FOIA lawsuits is: United States Dep't of Justice v. Reporters Comm. for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749, 756 n.9 (1989) ---which is often known as the "Reporters Committee Decision". In that decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that FBI identification records (aka rap sheets) on living persons are exempt from disclosure (i.e. exemption b7c -- unwarranted invasion of personal privacy).

4. If you review Harry Dean's files (HQ, Los Angeles, and CIA file), they all contain copies of Harry's FBI identification record (aka rap sheet). Those rap sheets are classified "Confidential". Harry never authorized release of his FBI identification record. Nevertheless, his rap sheet was "declassified" on 1/5/94 and released. Please explain how this was possible -- given (1) the U.S. Supreme Court decision and (2) the document was classified

5. According to the U.S. Justice Department, a majority of courts have ruled in FOIA lawsuits that when a living individual writes to a government agency to express their personal opinions about any matter, they do so with the expectation of confidentiality, i.e. their identity should be withheld. Nevertheless, all of Harry's letters to FBI-Los Angeles have been released without redacting either his name or his address. Please explain how that is possible given the majority of U.S. court decisions which exempted release of the identity of such individuals.

6. Please review Harry's FBI HQ and Los Angeles and CIA files and then explain the following in the context of your previous comments:

* In April 1967, J. Edgar Hoover sent a memo to SAC Chicago which included information from the CIA which was classified "SECRET". That "secret" memo was originally filed in the JFK Assassination file (62-109060). Nevertheless, it was released in 1998.

* In March 1964, the FBI created a memo regarding information in its files about Frank Vega. That memo was classified "Confidential". Nevertheless it was released in 1998.

* In June 1976, the FBI created a memo regarding Lee Harvey Oswald which was classified "SECRET". That memo was originally filed in the FBI's LHO file and a copy was channeled into the FBI's JFK Murder file. Nevertheless, this "secret" memo was released in January 1997.

* In May 1967, FBI-Los Angeles created a classified memo which was filed into its "Assaulting or Killing A Federal Officer" file (89-75). This classified memo was originally filed in the JFK murder file. Nevertheless, it was released decades ago.

* In March 1964, the SAC in Los Angeles sent a classified memo to Director Hoover. The memo was classified in order to protect sources used for information obtained on FPCC and Edgar Swabeck. Such law enforcement records are automatically exempt from disclosure -- particularly when the person(s) discussed is (are) living. Nevertheless, the memo was declassified and released in January 1994. Swabeck was alive in 1994. He died in 2007. Please explain how it is possible that such a confidential memo could be released.

* Harry's CIA file contains documents classified "SECRET". Nevertheless, the documents were released in the 1990's or earlier.

7. In view of all of the above examples, why do you contend that "secret files" (actually this reflects your ignorance; files are not classified; individual serials in a file may be classified) are not released regarding JFK's murder? In other words, why is it that classified serials in all sorts of files (including JFK's Murder File, FBI HQ 62-109060 and similar files) have already been released?

8. Why do you think "classified" memos or reports about JBS or Minutemen would be exempt from disclosure when files on MM and JBS contain numerous classified serials which have already been released -- including memos and reports which specifically originated in the JFK Murder FIle??

9. Why do you think U.S. Supreme Court decisions and lower court decisions (on FOIA cases) are being routinely violated -- and records (on LIVING persons such as Harry Dean or Edgar Swabeck etc) which are explicitly exempt from disclosure were nevertheless being released?