William O'Neil

Hi Ali, Please contact me at my email. WE have much to discuss👍

wco7171@msn.com

Steve, "Birds of a feather....."

Evidently Draskovitch had extensive connections, which guys like De Pugh (Minutemen) could use. Guys like Oliver and Draskovitch were seeking compatriots further to the Right at that time, who were more action oriented than Welch.

Bill

Dr.Slobodan M. Draskovitch; Native of Serbia who fled his country (Communism) and became a citizen of U.S. in 1956. He was a writer for and member of the National Council of the JBS, He "resigned" from it along with Revilo Oliver, after some "acrimonious disputes" with Robert Welch, in I believe  August of 1966.

 Author of ,"Tito, Moscow's Trojan Horse" and Editor of "Srpska Borba" (Serbian Struggle), a weekly newspaper in Chicago.

Was considered "one of the worlds best informed men in all aspects of the Communist Conspiracy"

Sources are my personal files and Weisberg files on Draskovitch.

Bill

I have corrected my post typo in which I wrote Oswald had Walkers address in his notebook, it should have been name and phone #.

Bill

I think things are getting a little twisted around. Caulfield’s theory is not that Walker knew Oswald personally or had a direct relationship with him. Rather, that Oswald’s involvement in the shooting attempt may have been the result, of his getting involved with others who did have relationship with “Ted”

The reference by Caufield to Oswald and Walker “possibly working together”, was in regards to the Police ignoring the odd fact that Oswald had Walkers name and phone number in his address (note)book (p392).

Not only did the DPD,FBI and the WC fail to consider that possibility, every subsequent investigation did as well, as far as I know....

Caufield is not saying they did know each other, but why was this possible clue ignored ?

Bill

I'm not sure multiple choice polls are a good source of data for conclusions, since there might be many variables within a vote. It is also dependent on an individuals knowledge or understanding of the evidence at hand.

Yes, it's interesting on a surface level but after that... can we really draw real conclusions?

Just asking.

Bill

That's a lot of homework done there Jim. I quickly spotted where you quote Talbot saying "James McCord, [part] of the CIA’s Office of Security, called the case a suicide. (p. 296)". I may be mistaken, but my understanding is McCord wasn't just [part] of Office of Security, but he was Director of Security. McCord was in charge of Security operations at Langley and JMWAVE.

​McCord was also responsible for heading up counterintelligence against FPCC and Lee H. Oswald. I have found a document which outlines Banister FBI reporting to McCord, McCord was also FBI at one time, this information is apart of my updated book.

Scott Kaiser

Scott, Not quite sure what you mean by "Banister FBI reporting to McCord" ??

Could you clarify that a bit?

Thanks

Bill

Ernie,

What I am asserting is that the Kennedy administration saw Walker as a serious threat to national security. The CIA was merely the tool chosen to eliminate that threat.

Regards,

Craig C.

P.S. John McCone had not only been appointed Allen Dulles' replacement as director of the CIA by JFK, but was also a friend and ally of the Kennedy family.

Craig, The CIA had as much love for JFK as Walker did.There would have been little motivation to collaborate in this regard and if it had happened, that secret would have been played to the hilt (Blackmail) by CIA. JFK would have been fully aware of that potential gambit, and not risked it.

Bill

The government and the media did such a propaganda mind trip on the American people which continues to this day, that most young folks will never know (confused), or even want to know the truth (weary and non- relevant),about what was taken away from them. “Sheeple” forever is the goal, and it works well enough that it is repeated every year at this time Re- -propped…like clockwork!

Just my opinion.........

Bill

It's your theory I am resisting Paul. I didn't overstate my case, I stated your case that LHO led a secret life. Your response about Robert Oswald was strange. Like you I question his honesty and motives. But stand by your statement that LHO was a secret right wing fanatic, and that this was kept secret from everyone close to him.

I would also like you and maybe others to address a previous question I put to you which no one took up - the fact that there is no proof in writing from the various racists and anti-communist radicals that LHO either mentions in his address book or intersects with in NO that they knew him, or if they did know him, that they considered him one of their own. If LHO kept his true alliances secret from his family and known friends, her certainly would have had little reason to do likewise with his secret compatriots.

This all goes to your theory that LHO is guilty in part for the murder of JFK, that he was part of a right wing plot. Well, I have no doubts now, and never have had any doubts, that the assassination was carried out by a committed cabal of right wingers. But there is little reason to think Oswald was one of them. He was their Patsy, not their co-conspirator.

Paul B.

When you’re running a covert operation do you reveal your relationships in writing and risk blowing the Op? Banister, Walker and Co. weren’t foolish enough to do that, and if there were breaches that they knew about they would have tried to resolve them before it did any damage. It would have been very poor tradecraft to leave evidence like you suggest around, especially when your plotting to kill the President! You don’t commit those things to paper, especially anything linking yourself to the fall guy.

If at one point there were some written evidence linking individuals with Oswald, then surely after 11-22, all who had any sense of self-preservation would make sure it was destroyed. That’s not to mention what the interested parties in Government (pushing the agenda of the ‘Lone Assassin theory’) were concealing.

This is what we were looking for when searching these individuals’ papers etc. What we found time and again was correspondence files in pertinent times and years were missing or purged, especially of any discussion of the assassination. So much so, that it became a suspicious pattern. So, if there ever was any written correspondence or discussion with, or regarding Oswald and the assassination, it would have been removed. We were told by several archivists that collections had been edited, and or parts withheld by the families requests. Material was also confiscated by the FBI and other agencies of Gov. This happened to us with the Hale Boggs collection at Tulane, and the archivist finally acknowledged it, due to his disgust that it had even happened.

Many of these collections came with caveats regarding use, especially their ‘correspondence’ files. We found for example at University Of Miss. that there were entire boxes of correspondence withheld indefinitely in the James O. Eastland Papers. “Why?” we asked, “They just are” was the response.

If Edwin Walker had an address book with Oswald’s address or contact info, would it be left in the papers for public viewing? I’m sure Walker and /or his relatives including his nephew who donated them, would have sanitized the record before release, which by the way was “restricted” (read banned) for many years to “researchers” Wonder why?... I don’t.

Bill

---------------------

Actually Ernie, Jeff and I agree totally on this. If the book included all of our sources and citations, the book would have been back to 1,200+ pages again.I mentioned this example, as a means to show there was not a monolithic viewpoint among all Right Wingers. I don't believe Caufield states that at all.

Write a book, and deal with editors who insist on compromise and brevity.

Bill

There were radical anti- communists and there were radical anti- communists racists. They often co-mingled and sat at the same tables. However, that doesn’t mean they all shared the same particular philosophies across the board. Walker complained / explained to J. Evetts Haley, that Robert Morris was not quite like us on the segregation front. He also had to be convinced of the threat in their view, of the United Nations threat to world order. This is documented in a letter from Walker to Haley. These folks are not always monolithic, or in lock step with each other. Like any movement there are ego’s and differing opinions on some issues.

Yet, in the end they had an overriding mutual commitment to the anti- communist agenda! This is what brought them together in the first place. Compromises were made along the way, to facilitate those objectives. Even Hitler had his problems with contrary viewpoint’s among his loyalists.

Bill

It is my understanding that the FBI is not a prosecutorial body. That would have to come from the Justice Dept. and the AG. The FBI’s job was to investigate and gather information.

Bill

We don't know that it was LHO that Hubie was referring to in this instance. However, it shows a definite proclivity and MO as to what these folks were up to at the time! The activities that LHO subsequently engaged in, fit the designed program to a tee. If it wasn't directed by Banister it definitely helped his cause, coincidence?

Bill

Jim, I believe this "T-2" source referred to information taken from FBI informant Victor Thomas Vicente, who was was opening/ intercepting mail and allowing FBI access to FPCC material in New York office. He found Oswald's letter photographed it, and On April 21, 1963, Vicente -" advised that Lee H. Oswald of Dallas, Texas, was in contact with FPCC of New York City at which time he advised that he passed out pamphlets for the FPCC.....” ( Bill Simpich in "FPCC and the Cuban Revolution" article).

The" Dallas T-2" designation was puzzling for years until this revelation, since it seemed to indicate that the info was from a local source, when it was actually from an illegal mail intercept program in NY which they were trying to disguise.

Bill

Look, towards the last few years of GPH's (Hemming) interaction with researchers, he was just F'N with researchers.What he had to say was suspect, as to it's validity and or purpose. Having interviewed him on two occasions, I realized this when he kept dodging my questions the second time, most of those had never been previously broached by anyone to my knowledge.

Once he realized I was on to something REAL, Oh boy, his respect level changed and his attitude got more serious. He wasn't shinning me on anymore (I guess)... cause he caught himself in mid sentence several times, realizing he was saying too much, after I got him a little worked up.He swore at me several times, realizing I was knowledgeable and touching on things that were sensitive.

One sore subject was Robert Morris!...no BS!

No Brag folks, just the way it went down.

Bill

Paul B , Caufiled and I are in agreement on Garrison. I was just elaborating on the other factors which( IMO) also played into his actions.

Bill

Paul . Yes, essentially Garrison was trying to make them synonymous which is absurd. The Radical Right hated the CIA and that's reflected in their literature and correspondence. That's what caught my eyes and ears when he tried to make that metaphorical shift, like a slight of hand diversion to shift focus onto another object. Yet, there was a reason for this, and he felt the need to verbalize it.

Bill

Paul, Actually it's a general observation that has to do with the nature of the Garrison "probe". It's sudden turn away from the 'Racist Right' (or "Nazi's" as Garrison once described them)

to the "intelligence agencies" was noticeably acute. It's a theory, but I believe from our research that it's an accurate take.

I saw a video once where Garrison says (and I'm paraphrasing here) 'When you talk about the NSRP and the Citizens Councils... what you're really talking about is the CIA!... that's whats behind them.

Somewhere I have this video, but I cannot locate it. My point is that it displays his shift away from the radical segregationists, to the intelligence agencies such as CIA. You may say that Garrison merely came up empty handed in that regard, and moved onto another theory, but his own documents show he had good enough leads not to suddenly abandon it. (IMO)

Bill

Due to others of record who were on the scene, we suspect Garrison was also influenced by certain “researchers” who gained favor with the DA.

They managed to sway ( distract) Garrison towards their own theories that mostly revolved around Government involvement, chiefly, the CIA. I won’t get into individual names but they are known to most.

In our opinion, the main factor for Garrison’s abrupt shift was fear and intimidation by the Right Wing extremists in Garrisons midst. I suspect he was strongly urged, if not threatened by some influential segregationists to cease pursuing that trail.

Keep in mind who became his $ponsors …!

Bill

Seems he meant that JFK,also had the same disdainful feeling towards Lemay

"Bombs away Curtis Lemay"

Bill

One of the perks of writing a book, about a controversial or ‘unsolved’ case, is that previously unknown witnesses or relatives are sometimes inspired to come forward, to reveal things they never felt motivated or comfortable to disclose.

Yes, one has to be very careful of phonies making up stories, so due diligence is required. This is why one can’t take someone’s word for a claim, without some confirmation. This is starting to happen now, and the people that are contacting Dr. Caufield seem genuine and sincere. Their credentials are also checking out via their own disclosures and verification, which appear to check out!

This also happened during the long field trips to interview lesser known witnesses over the years.

These folks didn’t want to ‘rock the boat’, as they figured the Government had their man in LHO.

Or, that their knowledge had little or no significant importance, due to the authorities stated conviction they they had found the lone perpetrator in Lee Oswald.

Most of them repeated the phrase; “you are the first people to contact us about this subject, no one has ever asked us about any of this; not the police, the FBI, the Warren Commission, HSCA…nobody!”

We cannot reveal who these people are at present, as we offer to uphold their trust or confidentiality as requested. They will decide as to what level they choose to become public.

The only reason I put this out is to demonstrate that even at this late date, that perhaps there are still unknown witnesses to history.

Bill

More slight of hand and mud on the wall...BS. They (media and their enabler authors) trot this stuff out every anniversary...Hmm, little early folks, isn't it??

Can't wait till Halloween at least?

Bill

Paul T; This was part of a larger effort called “Operation Tip Top” secretively code named “Operation 50”

This was designed and motivated by the state of Louisiana’s effort (LUAC), to link so called ‘communist’ orgs with the civil rights movement, principally targeting SCEF, but incuding several others including CORE and the FPCC as well.

All part of a larger project by the SISC (Senate Internal Sub -Committee) and Senator Eastland and others, to create examples of their theory of “interlocking subversion”

Don’t know what LUAC or SCEF is? Do the research and reading on it. Or, consult the book (Chapter 23), it’s all there!

Chris, yes Huff was close friends with Delphine and Guy Banister. Actually, Garrison produced some doc's on him and his association with Banister. Not too much else is known about him, tho' I do have a file on him. Have to dig that one out sometime.Where did you get that great pic?

Bill

No problema Paul.

Bill