Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team
Paul Trejo

Did the Dallas Radical Right kill JFK?

Recommended Posts

On 9/12/2017 at 5:18 PM, Paul Brancato said:

 

I'm struck by the visit in the spring of 1963 by Hunt and ? - to Madrid, Spain. If you recall who was with him please add that to your response.

 

Manuel Artime?

Cubela fits in there somewhat as well.

Edited by Michael Clark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, David Andrews said:

Jason - See Oswald and the CIA by John Newman for the false defector angle.

Ok, thanks David.   

My feeling is that Oswald in Russia is largely irrelevant, as is anything that happened after 63, such as the Garrison / Shaw case.   He could go to Russia for any number of reasons and it doesn't tell us about who arranged to kill JFK.   The CIA paid well and yet Oswald has to rely on charity at all times.  He is broke and homeless when they land in NY.  Finally, I don't believe Oswald is the first and last government agent for which no documentation exists.  ...but I will have a look at the book.

 

Jason 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jason Ward said:

Ok, thanks David.   

My feeling is that Oswald in Russia is largely irrelevant, as is anything that happened after 63, such as the Garrison / Shaw case.   He could go to Russia for any number of reasons and it doesn't tell us about who arranged to kill JFK.   The CIA paid well and yet Oswald has to rely on charity at all times.  He is broke and homeless when they land in NY.  Finally, I don't believe Oswald is the first and last government agent for which no documentation exists.  ...but I will have a look at the book.

 

Jason 

Yet some organization (formal, informal, hybrid) built his well-publicized and evidenced "Lefty Lee" legend domestically, in New Orleans and Dallas and Mexico City, and created a look-no-further patsy.  Plans for a political assassination may not have inspired the defection, but his return and subsequent activities are another development. 

Also, add up his unaccounted for expenses: an office on Camp Street in NOLA, helpers to hand out leaflets, a "trip to Mexico" (or hiatus somewhere in September 1963) while he was "drifting between jobs" - the latter is also part of his "disgruntled" legend.

Oswald is most probably ONI.  What CIA and FBI did with him is to be explored.

Edited by David Andrews

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, David Andrews said:

Yet some organization (formal, informal, hybrid) built his well-publicized and evidenced "Lefty Lee" legend domestically, in New Orleans and Dallas and Mexico City, and created a look-no-further patsy.  Plans for a political assassination may not have inspired the defection, but his return and subsequent activities are another development. 

Also, add up his unaccounted for expenses: an office on Camp Street in NOLA, helpers to hand out leaflets, a "trip to Mexico" (or hiatus somewhere in September 1963) while he was "drifting between jobs" - the latter is also part of his "disgruntled" legend.

Oswald is most probably ONI.  What CIA and FBI did with him is to be explored.

David,

John Newman's book (1995) is more or less superfluous after the final publication of the Lopez Report (2003).  Newman was only guessing about Mexico City, but Lopez and Hardway gave us solid data.

I agree with Jason that Oswald's Soviet adventure has nothing to do with the JFK assassination.  First and foremost, Oswald never defected.  Never.  He always had his US Passport -- he never gave it up.  He never applied for Soviet citizenship.  He never applied for Communist Party membership.  He was exploring and having a blast as a Free American.

It is possible -- says CIA agent Victor Marchetti -- that the ONI was using Oswald as part of a dragnet "dangle" operation.  In such an operation, IIRC, there are up to 12 members in which the members don't know each other, and they don't know the big picture.  All they know is their individual duty, which is to send a specific message whenever a specific person of interest enters a specific location.  They don't know any further details.  The "dangle" is supposed to do this for three years, IIRC.

Since there evidently was such a program that the ONI conducted inside the USSR during the period in which Oswald was there, it is certainly possible that this is correct.  Yet I personally believe that marrying a Russian girl was not part of the operation.  It seems to me that Oswald married Marina, and then quit the operation in mid-stream.

This would explain his later poverty -- that is: (1) the ONI disowned him; (2) the Marines downgraded his discharge papers; (3) he was unable to easily get work to support his growing family.

As for his Left-wing persona in New Orleans, I strongly believe that Jim Garrison explained that fully.  It was run by a wild-card named Guy Banister, who quit the FBI because it was too left-wing for him.  Guy Banister ran with the Radical Right in Louisiana, in White Citizens Councils, the Minutemen and the KKK.    He set up the Fake FPCC in New Orleans in which Oswald worked.

This charade caught the attention of CIA officer David Atlee Phillips, who lusted after the blood of Fidel Castro.  Phillips dearly hoped that Oswald could be used to join a hit squad in Havana, Cuba, and get rid of Fidel Castro once and for all (cf. The AMLASH Legacy, 1988).   So, he supported this charade invented by Guy Banister.

But when Oswald was hijacked for the JFK assassination, it took Phillips by surprise.  This is what David Atlee Phillips himself wrote in his AMLASH novel, and it is the closest we'll ever get to a confession out of him.

According to Ron Lewis (FLASHBACK, 1993) Guy Banister was directly blackmailing Lee Harvey Oswald over the General Walker shooting.  That makes perfect sense to me.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
1995

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Paul - regarding point 2.1, Walker's statement that Oswald shot at him was indeed the first public pronouncement of that supposition, but it doesn't follow that therefore he knew about it for months. Since you like to use sworn testimony by Marina to distinguish when she was being truthful and when not, why do you turn around and claim that Walker was not being truthful when he told Liebeler that he did not know until after that phone call early on Nov 23rd? You may be right, but there may be another explanation, and that is that he found out about Oswald on that phone call. He apparently interesected with Oswald previously, though we don't know how closely. But he may have known little. So we have to keep in mind the possibility that he was let in on the patsification of Oswald after the assassination, a part of which was the incriminating story that Oswald had been the Walker shooter. 

To me, the one fact that does indeed stand out in this phone call, which was initiated from Germany, is that Walker was close to Nazis across the pond in addition to those close to home, such as his American Nazi roommate. Were it to be discovered that the key link to the assassination team was a European Nazi fixer (QJWIN?) it would all make sense. If the plot was hatched in the US, as I'm sure most of us assume, the deed would have by necessity have been outsourced. Many in the US may have known it was coming, such as the various Cubans and anti-Castroites. I'm struck by the visit in the spring of 1963 by Hunt and ? - to Madrid, Spain. If you recall who was with him please add that to your response. Indeed, the presence of Lemnitzer as head of NATO forces in Europe brings him into Operation Gladio, which had become for all intents and purposes a fascist operation. Lemnitzer himself testified to Congress during the Walker pro-blue flap, so clearly they were well acquainted. 

I think we should weigh the beliefs and fears of two heads of state, one killed, the other nearly so, when looking for suspects at the top of the cabal. JFK feared his generals, DeGaulle barely escaped an attempt on his life by his own ultra right generals, and believed that these forces were successful with JFK. 

Paul B.,

You want to accept Walker's claim that this neo-Nazi German newspaper knew before Walker did that Oswald was his shooter on April 10, 1963.

Your guesswork requires a post-Nazi spy ring with tentacles everywhere.  This should remind all readers of Mae Brussell, who proposed this very theory in the 1970's.

Mae Brussell used vast detail to construct her theory of an Invisible Fourth Reich that is taking over the world.  As a Jewish girl who lost family in Auschwitz, her paranoia can be forgiven.

In fact, the fascists have had no such power after WW2.  It is strictly incorrect to call the USA a fascist regime. 

While it's true a neo-fascist subgroup in the form of a Confederate Flag waving Radical Right in Dallas did kill JFK, this was an underground movement, shame-faced, who were too cowardly to show their faces after the JFK murder, but slinked away into the shadows after J. Edgar Hoover demanded a Lone Nut theory of the JFK murder -- instead of their year-long plan of a Communist Plot.

By the way, there is no way that JFK feared his Generals.  JFK stood up to them like a lion during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

David,

John Newman's book is more or less superfluous after the final publication of the Lopez Report (2003).  Newman was only guessing about Mexico City, but Lopez and Hardway gave us solid data.

I agree with Jason that Oswald's Soviet adventure has nothing to do with the JFK assassination.  First and foremost, Oswald never defected.  Never.  He always had his US Passport -- he never gave it up.  He never applied for Soviet citizenship.  He never applied for Communist Party membership.  He was exploring and having a blast as a Free American.

It is possible -- says CIA agent Victor Marchetti -- that the ONI was using Oswald as part of a dragnet "dangle" operation.  In such an operation, IIRC, there are up to 12 members in which the members don't know each other, and they don't know the big picture.  All they know is their individual duty, which is to send a specific message whenever a specific person of interest enters a specific location.  They don't know any further details.  The "dangle" is supposed to do this for three years, IIRC.

Since there evidently was such a program that the ONI conducted inside the USSR during the period in which Oswald was there, it is certainly possible that this is correct.  Yet I personally believe that marrying a Russian girl was not part of the operation.  It seems to me that Oswald married Marina, and then quit the operation in mid-stream.

This would explain his later poverty -- that is: (1) the ONI disowned him; (2) the Marines downgraded his discharge papers; (3) he was unable to easily get even minimum wage jobs to support his growing family.

As for his Left-wing persona in New Orleans, I strongly believe that Jim Garrison explained that fully.  It was run by a wild-card named Guy Banister, who quit the FBI because it was too left-wing for him.  Guy Banister ran with the Radical Right in Louisiana, in White Citizens Councils, the Minutemen and the KKK.    He set up the Fake FPCC in New Orleans in which Oswald worked.

This charade caught the attention of CIA officer David Atlee Phillips, who lusted after the blood of Fidel Castro.  Phillips dearly hoped that Oswald could be used to join a hit squad in Havana, Cuba, and get rid of Fidel Castro once and for all (cf. The AMLASH Legacy, 1988).   So, he supported this charade invented by Guy Banister.

But when Oswald was hijacked for the JFK assassination, it took Phillips by surprise.  This is what David Atlee Phillips himself wrote in his AMLASH novel, and it is the closest we'll ever get to a confession out of him.

According to Ron Lewis (FLASHBACK, 1993) Guy Banister was directly blackmailing Lee Harvey Oswald over the General Walker shooting.  That makes perfect sense to me.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul - so many assumptions in your paragraphs. We know Banister left the FBI. What evidence can you show that he left because it was too left wing? What evidence can you offer that Phillips wanted to send Oswald to MC in order to go to Cuba and help kill Castro? Surely Phillips knew that were Oswald to go to MC and attempt to go to Cuba he would not succeed. What evidence can you show that Oswald set up the FPCC branch in NO at Banister's request? Why would you take Phillips word in a fictional novel as proof that he was surprised by Oswald being 'hijacked'? Phillips specialty was propaganda. What proof does Ron Lewis offer for Banister blackmailing Oswald? 

In my opinion the Walker shooting was laid on Oswald as part of his 'conviction' post assassination. There is no proof he did the deed, only post assassination stories, all of which you believe and have stated so on many posts in great detail. So we can agree to disagree on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Paul B.,

You want to accept Walker's claim that this neo-Nazi German newspaper knew before Walker did that Oswald was his shooter on April 10, 1963.

Your guesswork requires a post-Nazi spy ring with tentacles everywhere.  This should remind all readers of Mae Brussell, who proposed this very theory in the 1970's.

Mae Brussell used vast detail to construct her theory of an Invisible Fourth Reich that is taking over the world.  As a Jewish girl who lost family in Auschwitz, her paranoia can be forgiven.

In fact, the fascists have had no such power after WW2.  It is strictly incorrect to call the USA a fascist regime. 

While it's true a neo-fascist subgroup in the form of a Confederate Flag waving Radical Right in Dallas did kill JFK, this was an underground movement, shame-faced, who were too cowardly to show their faces after the JFK murder, but slinked away into the shadows after J. Edgar Hoover demanded a Lone Nut theory of the JFK murder -- instead of their year-long plan of a Communist Plot.

By the way, there is no way that JFK feared his Generals.  JFK stood up to them like a lion during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul, why so willing to mischaracterize my thoughts? Do you even know what Operation Gladio is? My questioning whether Walker told the truth doesn't imply a Fourth Reich. I didn't say the US is a fascist regime. Why do you always resort to red herring arguments?

I asked you simply to explain why you disbelieve Walker's statement to Liebeler when you are so adamant about believing sworn testimony from Marina? Seems to me you are willing to find reasons in the case of Walker why he would lie under oath, but unwilling to accept reasons why Marina would lie under oath. Cherry picking. I have no basic problem with not believing testimony is truthful when it is under oath. People lie under oath sometimes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Paul - so many assumptions in your paragraphs.

1. We know Banister left the FBI. What evidence can you show that he left because it was too left wing?

2. What evidence can you offer that Phillips wanted to send Oswald to MC in order to go to Cuba and help kill Castro? 

3. Surely Phillips knew that were Oswald to go to MC and attempt to go to Cuba he would not succeed.

4. What evidence can you show that Oswald set up the FPCC branch in NO at Banister's request?

5.  Why would you take Phillips word in a fictional novel as proof that he was surprised by Oswald being 'hijacked'? Phillips specialty was propaganda. 

6. What proof does Ron Lewis offer for Banister blackmailing Oswald? 

7.  In my opinion the Walker shooting was laid on Oswald as part of his 'conviction' post assassination. There is no proof he did the deed, only post assassination stories, all of which you believe and have stated so on many posts in great detail. So we can agree to disagree on this.

Paul B.,

By the numbers:

1. J. Edgar Hoover's WC testimony says that people with ties to the Radical Right, including the JBS, were not allowed in the FBI.  We have firm evidence from Jeff Caufield (2015) that Guy Banister was connected with the JBS, the Minutemen, the KKK as well as with the American Nazi Party through George Lincoln Rockwell.   There's my evidence. 

2. Phillips says openly that he wanted to send Oswald to MC to get to Cuba to help kill Castro in his novel, The AMLASH Legacy (1988). 

3. What did Phillips care if Oswald was shot dead in Cuba while trying to fulfill his mission?  It happened all the time in the covert operations.  It's the effort that counts.

4. My evidence that Guy Banister set up the Fake FPCC at 544 Camp Street in NOLA has been well stated by Jim Garrison in 1977.  Ron Lewis confirms it.

5.  Phillips had no outlet for his conscience by writing a non-fiction about the CIA in 1988.  His only option was to write a novel. I happen to believe he was reaching out.   

6.  Ron Lewis has only his eye-witness account of Banister blackmailing Oswald over the Walker shooting.  It's just his word for it.  I happen to believe him. 

7.  I find it ridiculous to claim that the Walker shooting was laid on Oswald as part of the Lone-Nut CT, simply because it involved too many witnesses.  It is ridiculous to imagine that so many people could be coordinated to hold to a fib -- not only Walker himself, but people who hated Walker, like George De Mohrenshildt.  The proof comes from sworn WC testimony, Paul B., and if you refuse to accept it, but instead prefer your own imagination, then that's your right. 

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paul Brancato said:

...I asked you simply to explain why you disbelieve Walker's statement to Liebeler when you are so adamant about believing sworn testimony from Marina?

Seems to me you are willing to find reasons in the case of Walker why he would lie under oath, but unwilling to accept reasons why Marina would lie under oath. Cherry picking.

I have no basic problem with not believing testimony is truthful when it is under oath. People lie under oath sometimes. 

Paul B.,

The basic difference between Marina Oswald's WC testimony and General Walker's WC testimony can be summed up as follows:

1.  Marina Oswald knew that if she was caught in just ONE SINGLE LIE in her WC testimony, she would be deported to the USSR.   She hated the USSR.

2.  General Walker resigned from the US Army because he was certain it was riddled with Communists.  So, General Walker did not respect the US Government.

3.  General Walker had -- for years -- promoted the JBS cause to "Impeach Earl Warren" -- so, General Walker did not respect Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren.

4.  General Walker had successfully killed JFK -- why in the world would he ever tell the truth to the Earl Warren Commission?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/13/2017 at 10:21 AM, Paul Trejo said:

 

On 9/13/2017 at 10:21 AM, Paul Trejo said:

4.  General Walker had successfully killed JFK -- why in the world would he ever tell the truth to the Earl Warren Commission?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul,

I'm about to finish the Caufield book and I question Walker's role as solo commander.

What evidence is there that Walker is running the assassination effort?   In the same way generals implement policy as instructed by the Pentagon or President, isn't it plausible that Walker is the public face of the reactionaries, but in fact takes direction or is part of a committee?   The Hunts, Perez, Welch, and even the likes of Hargis seem substantially more powerful in terms of finance and ability to infiltrate key nodes such as DPD.   I think they have the money and connections for talent (gunmen) recruitment.   Why so sure about Walker and Walker alone?

 

Jason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Jason Ward said:

Paul,

I'm about to finish the Caufield book and I question Walker's role as solo commander.

What evidence is there that Walker is running the assassination effort?   In the same way generals implement policy as instructed by the Pentagon or President, isn't it plausible that Walker is the public face of the reactionaries, but in fact takes direction or is part of a committee?   The Hunts, Perez, Welch, and even the likes of Hargis seem substantially more powerful in terms of finance and ability to infiltrate key nodes such as DPD.   I think they have the money and connections for talent (gunmen) recruitment.

Why so sure about Walker and Walker alone?

Jason

Jason,

I admit the possibility that General Walker was not the absolute leader of the Dallas plot to kill JFK.

But when look at the alternatives -- they are all self-canceling.

First and foremost, only somebody inside Dallas, living in Dallas, with a personal relationship with the shooters, could be the actual leader of the JFK plot.

That eliminates Perez and Welch.  Perez was a military man, but Welch was a candy maker -- a desk jockey.  He didn't do training in the hills with the Minutemen.

Secondly, the Hunts were billionaire oil men with nothing to offer except money -- or just the smell of money -- that is usually enough to motivate people.  But they had no Military Experience. 

In my CT, the shooters were absolutely NOT PAID for their role in the JFK assassination, but acted entirely out of PATRIOTIC FEVER.  They truly BELIEVED that they were doing the RIGHT THING.   They were fanatics.  And only a man with Military Experience can lead this sort of Violent Reactionary.  This was the act of the Dallas Minutemen.  James Hosty came very close to admitting it in his book, Assignment Oswald, when he said watching General Walker "and his Minutemen" was his main duty in Dallas.

The JFK assassins, in my CT, needed a strong, rightwing man who could use a rifle himself, and could lead Minutemen training exercises in the hills.  This was Walker.  He was regarded as a possible Presidential Candidate by many.  That's no joke.  

Here is a photo of Walker returning to Love Field, Dallas, on October 7, 1962, only one week after JFK and RFK had sent him to an insane asylum.  The ACLU and psychiatrist Thomas Szasz got Walker sprung.  His coat is still sooty from the racial riots at Ole Miss.  Notice the crowd welcoming him home is waving the Confederate flag -- and notice what the placard says!

www.pet880.com

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure that shooters were paid and that the plot goes far deeper than Walker and his cronies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said:

Jason,

I admit the possibility that General Walker was not the absolute leader of the Dallas plot to kill JFK.

But when look at the alternatives -- they are all self-canceling.

First and foremost, only somebody inside Dallas, living in Dallas, with a personal relationship with the shooters, could be the actual leader of the JFK plot.

...

Hi Paul,

I don't see why only somebody inside Dallas has to be the absolute leader of the plot.  I do agree that somebody inside Dallas is essential for the operational aspects of the plot.  The financial and other power necessary does not seem necessarily in Dallas, in my view.  Tactically, a strong Dallas operational role is obviously in place.  However, the strategic vision need not have any particular nexus to Dallas as far as I can see, but I'm happy to hear why you think otherwise.

As far as looking at the alternatives and seeing them as self-canceling; I understand your point but I suggest that's the same lazy logic of the CIA-did-it-crowd.  Where they can't pinpoint anything they invoke the CIA secrecy to explain everything.  I hope there is enough courage to say, "I don't know," and not simply default to Walker the way some default to a generic "the CIA" for every unknown link in the chain and for every place evidence is non-existent.

I don't see much from the CIA CTers nor the Right Wing CTers that crowns a strategic leader with anything like confidence; although granted your certainty is more convincing than arguing the intangible unidentifiable "CIA" has both the motive and operational ability for the assassination.  The great convincing evidence from your CT is that the Right stated they wanted Kennedy gone and expected to benefit from him being gone - I've never seen any evidence the CIA wanted Kennedy gone nor expected any benefit from his death.

Walker doesn't appear politically astute enough to be the prime mover here, I sense someone is backing him, even using him - but admittedly that is purely a subjective opinion at this point.

Jason

Edited by Jason Ward

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paul Brancato said:

I'm sure that shooters were paid and that the plot goes far deeper than Walker and his cronies. 

Paul B.,

Professor Walt Brown wrote a superb book on this topic, namely, Treachery in Dallas (1995).   in chapter one of this scholarly work Brown says that if money were involved in the JFK assassination, then blackmail would inevitably have followed in the following 30 years -- but it never did.

Furthermore, Brown writes, that the most reliable assassins have four key attributes: (1) they are native to their location; (2) they are highly skilled, usually with military training; (3) they easily blend in with their environment; and (4) they are immune from local authorities.

For Professor Walt Brown, the Dallas Police fit this profile to a "Tee".  

Furthermore, Brown writes, the Dallas police had full control of the following: (1) the motorcade route; (2) the crime scene; (3) the evidence; (4) the witnesses; (5) the suspects and their release; (6) the suspect's' family; (7) the investigation; and (8) what the media was allowed to see.

In the opinion of Professor Walt Brown, although we commonly regard the Dallas Police as great failures in the JFK assassination, he sees it the other way around -- he sees the Dallas Police as fabulously successful in their plot to kill JFK.  Their violation of the crime scene and the evidence was brilliant, and therefore was clearly coordinated by a single master-plan organized by somebody with intensive, perhaps lifelong Military Experience.    

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

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

×