Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

That I don't know Harry, but I would tend to doubt it. Didn't strike me as the horticultural type ;)

But hey, didn't Angleton have an orchid habit or something....Ha!

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is your evidence for those statements? Nobody knows and you won't provide it.

From Stubblefield's report:

"Mr Walker appears to be able to deal freely and accurately with his recollections of the incidents leading up to his arrest and present charges... it is our impression that the court in this case at this time is not concerned out Mr Walker's ability to understand fully the more complex and subtle aspects of his motivation in regard to the acts for which he is charged. If it were, and we were asked to evaluate those kinds of questions, it would be necessary to conduct a much more penetrating exploration of Mr. Walker's psychological operations."

In short, the examination was sufficient for stated purpose. As the the types of tests... courts routinely request psychiatric examinations to determine fitness to stand trial. When something is required often, it usually results in some type of standardization of processes and procedures. In this case, it would include a minimum set of particular tests. The courts for there part, being so used to reading such reports, would recognize one that has attempted to take short cuts, used non-standard tests, or indeed, has not given tests it usually sees in such cases. You seem to want to believe that Walker case somehow happened in a vacuum or in some alternate universe where standards don't have to apply.

More later. I have other fish frying.

No, I don't believe that the Walker case happened in a vacuum and I have already stipulated in message #108 that the examination had a limited purpose i.e. to determine if Walker was mentally competent to stand trial and your reply to me was your typical snottiness (message 112) when you stated:

"What was your purpose in adding this? It was not in contention. You're simply moving the goalposts."

My "purpose" was to explicitly recognize the limited nature of the "examination" so as not to draw unwarranted conclusions or make claims not supportable by available evidence. However, I still do not know what "tests" Walker was given or how Walker responded to whatever he was asked - nor does anybody else. That continues to be the relevant FACT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG!?

I could respond to some of this, blame me if you want, but I am presently busy with Biz and family stuff. Sorry.

Dr. Caufield never says or states that Walker was the mastermind behind the 11-22-63 hit , OK!?

It's more complex than that. If you read the original blurb I posted you will hopefully discern that.

There are reasons the Title is what it is. I cannot take days to explain that on a Forum!

Now; One thing I will address is Mr. Lazar's take on Paul Rothermel.

To dismiss Paul Rothermel as inconsequential in this case is a mistake at best.(That's my impression of Ernie's take)

Paul Rothermel was an insider to the world of H.L. Hunt, (The "Richest Man in the World”)

He was the ‘Chief of Security’ for H.L Hunt during this crucial period, and he had his finger on the pulse of Dallas and Texas State politics. It was his job to know the political landscape, and it often involved intelligence gathering as well. Rothermel had numerous connections inside and out of government. He also knew most of the key players in politics and industry in the region. As his own obit states;

"Rothermel was an active attorney in Texas for over 50 years. He was a former special agent of the FBI and of the Special Texas Rangers. He served as a Family Law Judge for Dallas County and as a Municipal Law Judge for the City of Richardson and was a former President of the Texas Academy of Family Law Specialists."

Funny how they omit his time with Hunt!

He was VERY conservative by his own admission.

He was a sitting judge at the time we interviewed him, at his Richardson Texas home in March of 2000.

(He died two years later)

What he was telling us regarding his talk / speech before the Dallas JBS at Austin’s BBQ, was that he was shocked at the increased level of radicalism within the JBS. (“I wasn’t right wing enough for them!”)

I recall he also said something to the effect that;

It seemed that the extremists were starting to take over….

I cannot quote this line verbatim since he would not allow me to take anymore notes at that point, but it was very close to my paraphrasing.

That interview was the most fascinating and yet disturbing interview I’ve ever been a part of. Very intense and nerve racking. The last entry in my notes are; “HE KNOWS, WE KNOW…that HE KNOWS!!

He also said some very cryptic things about the Z-film as well.

I would bet my life that he knew 'where the bodies were buried' so to speak, and reluctantly admitted as much to us.

It was an experience I won't forget!

Bill

Bill -- first of all please call me Ernie. I feel older than Moses when someone appends "Mr." to my last name.

Second, it is exceptionally interesting that the new book does not claim Walker was the "mastermind" of the assassination. [sorry Paul T.]

Lastly, I don't dismiss Rothermel as inconsequential but I am not currently aware of anything that makes him a central character.

However----do you know about this?

In 1979 Rothermel contacted the FBI to complain about information they had released as a result of an FOIA request concerning Rothermel providing documents in 11/63 to a Dallas Morning News reporter (Earl Golz) that pertained to JFK's assassination. In 11/63, Rothermel had sent H.L. Hunt a memo reporting that "a reliable source" of his had said there would be a violent incident in Dallas directed against JFK. Rothermel claims he gave this info to the Dallas Police and to the FBI.

Golz believed that H.L. Hunt gave money to JBS members in California who allegedly were training assassins --- one of whom visited Hunt just prior to the assassination.

In 1970, Rothermel's phone was tapped and he told the FBI that he believed two of H.L. Hunt's sons were behind it in order to secure information to discredit him and other former Hunt employees and to discover info which they could use to have H.L. Hunt declared incompetent.

Not sure if all this is known or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, we had the Mafia killed JFK: John Davis, Blakey and Ragano.

Then there was LBJ killed JFK with Nelson, McClellan and Stone.

Now there is Walker, Rothermel and the radical right killed JFK: Livingstone, Caufield,O'Neil and Trejo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Dr. Caufield never says or states that Walker was the mastermind behind the 11-22-63 hit , OK!?"

I"m glad to hear you say this. It has been nagging the back of my mind how "some" have made the assumption that this is the claim. I assumed "some" knew more than I did about Dr Caufield and the direction he was likely to take in this upcoming book. I should have known better.

I have no problem allowing room for Walker in this thing to some level or another, even "high up" - but when "some" (i won't say his name, but his initials are Paul Trejo) try to shove the mastermind idea down my throat, it surely destroys my willingness to listen to what would be otherwise good reasoning about the man.

Many in here have said really good things about Dr Caufield and his research and writing skills - and i respect their thoughts, mostly. But after listening to Trejo sell Walker Did It like it was Pomegranate Gold Water, i have no interest in reading much of anything about General Walker, whether he was smarter than General George Armstrong Custer or not (which to me has so very little relevance to whether he could organize this thing, in the grand scheme of things).

At least i know that this new book isn't as closed minded as Paul Trejo. Maybe i'll read it after I reread Montgomery a few more tiimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, we had the Mafia killed JFK: John Davis, Blakey and Ragano.

Then there was LBJ killed JFK with Nelson, McClellan and Stone.

Now there is Walker, Rothermel and the radical right killed JFK: Livingstone, Caufield,O'Neil and Trejo.

If I may, Jim -

we HAVE the Mafia killed JFK...

and there still IS LBJ killed...

and, again with respect, the author of this thread regained some credibility (with me at least), by clarifying that Walker Did It isn't the mainline.

I find that all too often CTers tend to word things so as to limit any theory to a singular causality, "the Mafia" did it, etc... I think we're going to find that there is a nice smorgasbord of strange bedfellows in this thing. I think it's important to remember that as we seek that evasive little tidbit (that DOES exist) that can unlock yet one more thread with which to unravel...

no offense, Jim. i know what you meant. just took the opportunity to expound a bit...

Edited by Glenn Nall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG!?

I could respond to some of this, blame me if you want, but I am presently busy with Biz and family stuff. Sorry.

Dr. Caufield never says or states that Walker was the mastermind behind the 11-22-63 hit , OK!?

It's more complex than that. If you read the original blurb I posted you will hopefully discern that.

There are reasons the Title is what it is. I cannot take days to explain that on a Forum!

Now; One thing I will address is Mr. Lazar's take on Paul Rothermel.

To dismiss Paul Rothermel as inconsequential in this case is a mistake at best.(That's my impression of Ernie's take)

Paul Rothermel was an insider to the world of H.L. Hunt, (The "Richest Man in the World”)

He was the ‘Chief of Security’ for H.L Hunt during this crucial period, and he had his finger on the pulse of Dallas and Texas State politics. It was his job to know the political landscape, and it often involved intelligence gathering as well. Rothermel had numerous connections inside and out of government. He also knew most of the key players in politics and industry in the region. As his own obit states;

"Rothermel was an active attorney in Texas for over 50 years. He was a former special agent of the FBI and of the Special Texas Rangers. He served as a Family Law Judge for Dallas County and as a Municipal Law Judge for the City of Richardson and was a former President of the Texas Academy of Family Law Specialists."

Funny how they omit his time with Hunt!

He was VERY conservative by his own admission.

He was a sitting judge at the time we interviewed him, at his Richardson Texas home in March of 2000.

(He died two years later)

What he was telling us regarding his talk / speech before the Dallas JBS at Austin’s BBQ, was that he was shocked at the increased level of radicalism within the JBS. (“I wasn’t right wing enough for them!”)

I recall he also said something to the effect that;

It seemed that the extremists were starting to take over….

I cannot quote this line verbatim since he would not allow me to take anymore notes at that point, but it was very close to my paraphrasing.

That interview was the most fascinating and yet disturbing interview I’ve ever been a part of. Very intense and nerve racking. The last entry in my notes are; “HE KNOWS, WE KNOW…that HE KNOWS!!

He also said some very cryptic things about the Z-film as well.

I would bet my life that he knew 'where the bodies were buried' so to speak, and reluctantly admitted as much to us.

It was an experience I won't forget!

Bill

Bill -- first of all please call me Ernie. I feel older than Moses when someone appends "Mr." to my last name.

Second, it is exceptionally interesting that the new book does not claim Walker was the "mastermind" of the assassination. [sorry Paul T.]

Lastly, I don't dismiss Rothermel as inconsequential but I am not currently aware of anything that makes him a central character.

However----do you know about this?

In 1979 Rothermel contacted the FBI to complain about information they had released as a result of an FOIA request concerning Rothermel providing documents in 11/63 to a Dallas Morning News reporter (Earl Golz) that pertained to JFK's assassination. In 11/63, Rothermel had sent H.L. Hunt a memo reporting that "a reliable source" of his had said there would be a violent incident in Dallas directed against JFK. Rothermel claims he gave this info to the Dallas Police and to the FBI.

Golz believed that H.L. Hunt gave money to JBS members in California who allegedly were training assassins --- one of whom visited Hunt just prior to the assassination.

In 1970, Rothermel's phone was tapped and he told the FBI that he believed two of H.L. Hunt's sons were behind it in order to secure information to discredit him and other former Hunt employees and to discover info which they could use to have H.L. Hunt declared incompetent.

Not sure if all this is known or not.

"...but I am not currently aware of anything that makes him a central character."

just a couple of points: A) this is of course how those with control ('they') would have it; to keep as many of the complicit as under the radar as possible. right? and B) this could have been said about a LOT of others at one point. until it couldn't be said anymore, once enough was uncovered...

just a point to remember.

right, nothing points to Rothermel. maybe never will. but i BET he's an interesting subject... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and speaking of Hunt and them, when i was watching Episode 9, i believe, of that History Channel series, (the Guilty Men or something...?), there was this other "Powerful" man around Dallas county that apparently had his hands on all the judges and police, etc. in that part of Texas at the time. what was his name? Even more powerful than HL Hunt, i got the impression.

with these names coming up here in this thread, Rothermel, etc. I'm wondering how this guy plays into it, wondering why i haven't seen his name more, really...

does anyone know who I'm talking about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea that Walker was the mastermind of the JFK murder -- that I have only seen in my own CT.

I haven't seen a preview of Dr. Caufield's forthcoming new book, however, I have conversed with Dr. Caufield on occasion, as he was impressed with the depth of my study into Walker's personal papers now stored at UT Austin's Briscoe Center. He graciously shared some of his valuable FBI file collection on Walker with me over the years.

Also, there are other caches of Walker's personal papers peppered throughout the USA, and Dr. Caufield has perused those as well.

I don't know what Dr. Caufield will propose in his new book -- I'm waiting with baited breath.

However, the most common objection to my own CT has been this: "Walker could never have controlled the Autopsy at Bethesda, the tampering with the Zapruder film, or the tampering with any evidence outside of Texas, or selecting the Warren Commission to cover it up."

Yes, I agree with all that -- therefore it makes most sense to me that one should first separate the JFK Kill-Team from the JFK Cover-up Team. Instead of trying to solve both the Murder and Cover-up together, one might regard them as separate, and solve them as separate and utterly unconnected.

Is that even plausible? Too many hastily say no. Yet it resolves many other problems instantly -- so it should be reconsidered.

In my CT, resigned General Edwin Walker planned the JFK murder in Dallas with one goal -- to blame a Communist FPCC Patsy, so that the USA would invade Cuba right away and topple Fidel Castro.

If (and only if) that is plausible, then we can see that Hoover's Lone Nut theory (which Professor David Wrone says Hoover invented around 3pm CST on 11/22/1963, ostensibly as a way to prevent riots in US streets during the Cold War) is the exact opposite of the Communist FPCC Patsy theory.

It therefore remains viable -- Walker masterminded the murder of JFK in Dallas -- and Hoover masterminded the Cover-up of the murder. Whether Hoover was working with Walker and pushing the Lone Nut theory to protect Walker, I will leave to others to quibble. In fact, Walker objected strongly to the Lone Nut theory, because it undercut all motive for invading Cuba.

It does not need to be one, monolithic Conspiracy -- Murder plus Cover-up -- as most CT theories have said in the past 50 years.

Instead, we should be satisfied with evidence that the JFK murder was planned and executed entirely in Dallas by Dallas residents, with outside help only from a few Rogues in the CIA, and a few clandestine Rightists in the South. (This leaves only the dangling episode of Jack Ruby's murder of Lee Harvey Oswald, yet Seth Kantor ties that up with a silver ribbon for us. Also remember what Jack Ruby told Earl Warren about the JFK murder, namely, 'there is a JBS in Dallas, led by Edwin Walker...')

By separating the two Conspiracies -- Murder versus Cover-up -- each is more easily solved and then more easily viewed together as two separate halves.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but Paul -

you cannot separate the two in order to solve other quandaries when you have no valid reason to believe the two acts are separate other than their convenience in doing so, just because these quandaries are hard to solve. you have to actually use reasonable and evidenced propositions to resolve them.

as i pointed out, to which you have given NO viable opposition, this, and any crime, is naturally a single entity UNTIL it is shown to have separate, unrelated parts - a crime is not a series of unrelated events UNTIL they are shown to be related.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GN: If I may, Jim -

we HAVE the Mafia killed JFK...

and there still IS LBJ killed...

and, again with respect, the author of this thread regained some credibility (with me at least), by clarifying that Walker Did It isn't the mainline.

I think you misunderstood what I said.

After the HSCA, there was a wave of Mob did it books: Blakey, Scheim, and then Davis.

Starting with Barr McClellan and his "I know Lyndon Johnson Killed John Kennedy" spiel on TV, there was a wave of LBJ did it books, including his own, Nelson's and Stone's.

Now, the title of this book is General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: The Extensive new evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy.

Which recalls the title of a book by Livingstone. Now, with that title I don't know how else you can classify this book except by saying that Walker and the rightwing nuts in Texas and their associated groups killed Kennedy. If that is not the case then the title is a misnomer.

It is always off-putting when it takes a Waldronesque 900 pages to describe a plot to kill Kennedy.

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no, i understood - i didn't even mean to correct you; i remember those waves - Mafia Kingfish, Davis, took my virginity...

i was just taking the opportunity to expound, i.e. these people probably STILL stick to their guns. the theories certainly still have life of their own.

you're right, the titles of some of these are unashamedly dramatic, i'm guessing for, lemme think, --- sales? which makes their content, and the author, suspect, In - to borrow Trejo's mantra - MHO (that's H for Humble, though, in this case).

seeing Barr speak on one of those films, i felt that he carries a good degree of plausibility and respectability.

but, no, i wasn't disagreeing at all. just grabbing yet another soapbox.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The notion that radical right-wing groups, anti-Castro Cubans, or "rogue" CIA elements were behind the JFK assassination is contradicted by everything that followed it.

We live in a politically correct society now; the msm and our pathetic politicians would love to be able to pin JFK's assassination on out of touch, racist elements. I don't think the ghost of Edwin Walker inspired Peter Jennings and ABC, for instance, to produce that monstrosity of disinformation 40 years after the event. I don't think the extreme right-wing is influencing typical liberal celebrities like Tom Hanks and James Franco to publicly proclaim their faith in the long discredited Warren Report.

We can't look at the JFK assassination in a vacuum. A crime of that magnitude required a slew of other crimes (MLK and RFK assassinations, deaths of witnesses, etc.) in order to perpetuate the cover up. If the far Right killed JFK, they didn't accomplish anything, as the Civil Rights Act and other liberal pieces of legislation were passed. If getting rid of Castro was the motive, that didn't work, either, as Cuba effectively disappeared as an American political issue after the death of JFK.

As I wrote in an article for Penn Jones' The Continuing Inquiry over thirty years ago, the John Birch Society and similar right- wing groups have long been marginalized in this country. They didn't have the power in 1963 to get virtually the entire liberal establishment behind the bogus official story, and they certainly don't have the power now to get every television network behind their impossible fairy tale.

Oddly enough, while "liberals" from Stephen King to George Clooney continue to perpetuate the ridiculous myth about what happened in Dallas, the John Birch Society and other far-right groups believed there was a conspiracy from the get-go. Of course, they thought the commies were behind it, but few of them bought the official narrative. Looking at the phony Left-Right paradigm, in my view, sends us scurrying down paths that lead nowhere.

At this point, it should be obvious that the forces who killed the Kennedys are still in power, even if the names are different. This is demonstrated by the manner in which the subject is presented by every organ of the mainstream media, approached by lauded historians, and how all politicians of both parties toe the official line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The notion that radical right-wing groups, anti-Castro Cubans, or "rogue" CIA elements were behind the JFK assassination is contradicted by everything that followed it.

We live in a politically correct society now; the msm and our pathetic politicians would love to be able to pin JFK's assassination on out of touch, racist elements. I don't think the ghost of Edwin Walker inspired Peter Jennings and ABC, for instance, to produce that monstrosity of disinformation 40 years after the event. I don't think the extreme right-wing is influencing typical liberal celebrities like Tom Hanks and James Franco to publicly proclaim their faith in the long discredited Warren Report.

We can't look at the JFK assassination in a vacuum. A crime of that magnitude required a slew of other crimes (MLK and RFK assassinations, deaths of witnesses, etc.) in order to perpetuate the cover up. If the far Right killed JFK, they didn't accomplish anything, as the Civil Rights Act and other liberal pieces of legislation were passed. If getting rid of Castro was the motive, that didn't work, either, as Cuba effectively disappeared as an American political issue after the death of JFK.

As I wrote in an article for Penn Jones' The Continuing Inquiry over thirty years ago, the John Birch Society and similar right- wing groups have long been marginalized in this country. They didn't have the power in 1963 to get virtually the entire liberal establishment behind the bogus official story, and they certainly don't have the power now to get every television network behind their impossible fairy tale.

Oddly enough, while "liberals" from Stephen King to George Clooney continue to perpetuate the ridiculous myth about what happened in Dallas, the John Birch Society and other far-right groups believed there was a conspiracy from the get-go. Of course, they thought the commies were behind it, but few of them bought the official narrative. Looking at the phony Left-Right paradigm, in my view, sends us scurrying down paths that lead nowhere.

At this point, it should be obvious that the forces who killed the Kennedys are still in power, even if the names are different. This is demonstrated by the manner in which the subject is presented by every organ of the mainstream media, approached by lauded historians, and how all politicians of both parties toe the official line.

It is interesting that you wrote that the JBS and similar right-wing groups "have long been marginalized in this country". Much of the commentary on liberal websites (such as Huffington Post) seems to think that the Tea Party Movement is merely a new incarnation of the Birch Society and the current complexion of our Congress is directly the result of efforts by (for example) the JBS and the Koch brothers. In this theory, the JBS is definitely not "marginalized" -- instead, it is preeminent in our national political life.

Edited by Ernie Lazar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GN: seeing Barr speak on one of those films, i felt that he carries a good degree of plausibility and respectability.

Until you read his book. I mean what a pile of trash.

​Ernie: the Tea Party is not just a reincarnation of the JBS. The Birch Society was really a small scale grass roots movement. I mean they actually had local bookstores to raise funds.

​The Tea Party was founded with big money from above. With allies in the media at Fox. The modern GOP knows how to create astroturf movements, that is fake grass roots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...