Edwin Walker

[Paul Trejo]

I thought Curtis LeMay was the model for Jack D. Ripper

Well, Paul B., I'm pretty sure that Edwin Walker was the model.

The give-away was the continuous reference to John Birch Society paranoia, for example, Ripper speaks of the Communist plot to pollute the Western water supply with a "foreign substance," namely, fluoride. Another hint of Walker is shown in a literary homosexual innuendo as Jack D. Ripper holds Mandrake (Peter Sellers) close with one arm and says:

"And as human beings, you and I need fresh, pure water to replenish our precious bodily fluids."

The rumors about Edwin Walker were known well enough among the American and British liberal literati in 1964 that this joke was caught by many viewers.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited December 1, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Steven Gaal]

Do you think your doing that will somehow advance JFK assassination research in the long run?

Your buddy,

--Tommy

++++++++++++++++++++++

Im countering the mastermind WALKER THEORY.

REASONS mastermind WALKER THEORY invalid

1. Ruth Paine has numerous files on pro-Castro peope in Garage. Ruths family members are intell connected. Ruth via husbands mother is connected to Dulles. Ruth is SPOOK.
2. Bannister's lawyer is connected to a CIA assassination plot that is close to Dulles heart. Bannister exists thus in an off the books,ultra secret CIA milieu.
3. JFK's CIA and Assistant Secretary of State and National Security advisor are ACTING againt JFK policies ,as if he is already dead.
4. Paranoid JJA would never break contact with LHO because of 'commie' spooky wife.
5. Positioning of LHO on route way beyond abilities a rouge CIA agent and Walker
6. SS stripping of security indicates a ultra high level plot.
7. Internal inconsistancies of theory : WALKER Mastermind but doesn know who/how many people shot at him.Futher theory pics and chooses parts of "confessions" (DEMOH letter to Bush// Hunt 'death confessuion') that seem to fit said theory and throws out simpler less convoluted interpretations.
8. Much of the theory hinges on a interpretation of the Germany call which has a much simpler realistic alternative explanation.

Edited December 2, 2014 by Steven Gaal

[Mark Knight]

From an earlier post by Paul Trejo: "Well, Mark, the EVIDENCE I'd cite would be the many people in Clinton, Louisiana who saw Lee Harvey Oswald in the presence of David Ferrie and Clay Shaw in a limousine there, with a license plate registered to the Trade Mart in New Orleans."

Paul, I would submit that you have introduced testimony that Shaw and another individual were in the Cadillac, and that Oswald was at the location.

You have not introduced testimony that Oswald came or left in the Cadillac, or that he was associated in any way with the others.

The "he must've" argument fails the fact test. Unless you can place them in the same car, at the same time, I believe you have....[dramatic pause]...nothing but speculation. And I believe that's exactly what the jury saw as well.

No, Mark, because Corrie Collins specifically said:

"I was outside the Registrar of Voter's office at about 9:30 or 10 AM...when a...black Cadillac drove up and parked. A white man...Lee Harvey Oswald...got out of the car and stood in line."

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

One person.

What happened to those "many people" you cited in the earlier post?

One person.

If only one person buys a ticket to a Broadway play, it's not a sold-out house.

One person.

One person is not "many people"; it's merely...

One person.

Where are the REST of "many people"???

[Paul Trejo]

From an earlier post by Paul Trejo: "Well, Mark, the EVIDENCE I'd cite would be the many people in Clinton, Louisiana who saw Lee Harvey Oswald in the presence of David Ferrie and Clay Shaw in a limousine there, with a license plate registered to the Trade Mart in New Orleans."

<snip>

One person.

What happened to those "many people" you cited in the earlier post?

One person.

If only one person buys a ticket to a Broadway play, it's not a sold-out house.

One person.

One person is not "many people"; it's merely...

One person.

Where are the REST of "many people"???

Well Mark, I cited the testimony of four people from Clinton. The combined weight of their testimony speaks for itself.

It convinced NOLA DA Jim Garrison. It convinced Judge Haggerty. It convinces me.

You asked for EVIDENCE. I showed you EVIDENCE from four witnesses. You're free to believe it or not.

Nevertheless, you then wrote: "You have not introduced testimony that Oswald came or left in the Cadillac, or that he was associated in any way with the others."

And that, Mark, was simply incorrect. I proved that conclusively.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Edited December 2, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Brancato]

Anyone else but you think that Walker was the model for Ripper?

[Paul Trejo]

Anyone else but you think that Walker was the model for Ripper?

Yes, Paul B., lots of people. It's not my original idea. It's in the Wikipedia entry on Edwin Walker, but it's also on movie reviews like this one:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Film/DrStrangelove

Regards,

-Paul Trejo

[Mark Knight]

Paul, you have ONE person who puts Oswald IN THE CAR with the others.

I have been seen in the vicinity of armored trucks, but no one has been able to place me in the company of them men in the armored trucks.

I have been seen in the same establishment with some entertainers, and have even spoken with some of them...but no one has claimed that as proof that I have ever been a co-conspirator with them.

You have given us the testimony of ONE person who claims Oswald was actually PHYSICALLY in the company of Shaw. When given one witness, we have three options regarding their testimony:

1) We can believe it is true;

2) We can believe it is false; or

3) We can believe that they may be mistaken.

Since Shaw was being tried by a jury, whether the prosecutor and the judge believed the witness doesn't matter. A jury did NOT believe. That's a ratio of 12-to 2, or a margin of 6-to-1, who chose NOT to believe.

That's a jury that decided that the burden of proof was not met.

That's a burden of proof that I believe you haven't met, either.

[Mark Knight]

Paul, the point you apparently don't get is that every time I question you, I also offer you a chance to PROVE your case. I'm not questioning that you believe your case; I'm just saying that simply because YOU believe something with all of your heart, doesn't necessarily make it fact for all.

[Paul Trejo]

I thought Curtis LeMay was the model for Jack D. Ripper

What complicates the issue is that resigned Major General Edwin Anderson Walker is portrayed in two opposite ways in mid-20th century movies, namely, Dr. Strangelove (1964) as well as Seven Days in May (1964).

It's odd because in Dr. Stranglove, Edwin Walker is portrayed as criminally insane, while in Seven Days in May, Edwin Walker is portrayed as a towering military General with wide popular support with a good chance of taking over the White House by a secret coup'd'etat.

That question about Curtis LeMay is often asked about the movie, Seven Days in May, because of the word, "May" in the title.

Notice the two opposite portraits of Walker -- one as a nutcase clown, and the other as a formidable enemy.

Notice, too, that both movies were released in 1964 -- which likely means they were in production throughout 1962-1963, when JFK was alive.

We know, for example, that JFK and RFK knew about the production of the movie, Seven Days in May, and they did whatever they could to support that production -- including clearing the White House sidewalk for the opening scene of the movie, and also allowing the film crew into various White House locations.

As for Dr. Strangelove, it was a British production -- it probably could not have been produced in the USA in 1964 -- we were too conservative even then.

It seems to me that JFK and RFK regarded Ex-General Edwin Walker as a thorn in their side from:

(1) the start of their term (e.g. Walker was released from his Augsburg command the same week as the Bay of Pigs fiasco),

(2) as their term progressed (e.g. Walker testified in the Senate Subcommittee on Military Preparedness, slamming the Kennedy Administration, and Walker also ran for the office of Texas Governor),

(3) into the middle of their term (e.g. the racial riots at Ole Miss University during the same week as the Cuban Missile Crisis), and

(4) in the last year of their term (e.g. Walker was acquitted from his deadly role at Ole Miss, and went about the USA like a roaring lion, during his famous Midnight Ride tour with Rev. Billy James Hargis, vowing vengeance on JFK and RFK for sending him to an insane asylum).

That is, I believe JFK and RFK were concerned that too many voters in the USA would regard Ex-General Edwin Walker to be too much like General James Mattoon Scott from Seven Days in May, and they promoted that movie to counter public perceptions in 1962-1963.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited December 2, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Brancato]

Wiki says conflicting things. In the Dr. Strangelove article it says Curtis LeMay was the model for Ripper. In the Walker article it says LeMay and Walker were both models for Seven Days in May, and Walker the model for Ripper.

[Paul Trejo]

Paul, the point you apparently don't get is that every time I question you, I also offer you a chance to PROVE your case. I'm not questioning that you believe your case; I'm just saying that simply because YOU believe something with all of your heart, doesn't necessarily make it fact for all.

Well, Mark, I get tired of saying, over and over, that I can be mistaken, and maybe the CIA and the FBI killed JFK. But the data doesn't add up. Just because OTHERS believe something with all THEIR heart, doesn't make it a fact for everybody, either.

I've been trying to raise consciousness about Edwin Walker ever since I joined this FORUM in 2011.

I keep finding data to confirm the leadership role of Edwin Walker in the murder of JFK; more data than Jim Garrison ever found to link Clay Shaw with the JFK murder.

I find Edwin Walker knee deep in politics with not only Guy Banister, but also with Gerry Patrick Hemming, Loran Hall, and that whole Richard Hathcock/Roy Payne scenario.

The Silvia Odio incident plays directly into the narrative of Edwin Walker as told by Harry Dean -- but JFK researchers keep harping on the weaker parts of the Dean story.

Edwin Walker is interesting to me. He's very likeable as the leader of the JFK plot in Dallas, and therefore of the Patsy Framing effort in New Orleans and Mexico City.

Edwin Walker has been underestimated for FIFTY YEARS. That's why there's so little data about him.

We can jump from the Warren Report in 1964 all the way to the release of Walker's personal papers in Texas in 2004, and the relative neglect of those papers ever since.

I realize I can't PROVE my case today, Mark. I don't need anybody to tell me that.

Yet I'm struggling for every inch of new data that I can get on Edwin Walker, and I get lots of skeptical catcalls for my efforts. It's not helpful.

The critical issue today, IMHO, is that only a few other persons alive besides Harry Dean know the central role that Edwin Walker played in Dallas in November 1963 -- and Michael Paine is probably the most knowledgeable of them all.

Next year Dr. Jeffrey Caufield will publish his book on Edwin Walker and his role in the JFK murder. That will push my research forward by leaps and bounds.

But if somebody would PLEASE ask Michael Paine about Edwin Walker, I believe that the avalanche of testimony would begin. Until those events, things are very slow going around here -- but I'm not quitting.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Edited December 3, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

ANOTHER STEP FORWARD:

Ernie Lazar just gave me permission to share this FBI file with you about Edwin Walker as reported by Dr. Stanley Drennan. In my opinion it's a major step forward.

Even though Ernie and I sharply (but mostly respectfully) disagree with each other about the Harry Dean account of Edwin Walker in the JFK murder, Ernie was kind enough to share the results of his longtime efforts in FBI FOIA data gathering on the John Birch Society (JBS).

What's interesting is that the account that Dr. Stanley Drennan told the FBI on 18 April 1963, is very similar to the story that Harry Dean (allegedly) told the FBI around 30 September 1963.

Here's a link to that FBI document:

http://www.pet880.com/images/Dr_Drennan_FBI_HQ1.pdf

Here's the summary: Dr. Stanley Drennan of Los Angeles, who moved around in JBS circles, told an Informant of the FBI on 18 April 1963 that he attended a private meeting of JBS members in Southern California, and also named Edwin Walker in the context of this meeting in which the assassination of JFK and RFK was discussed as a viable proposal.

The person obtained to commit the murder would be a non-JBS member, said Drennan, to prevent tracing back to the JBS.

[Now, this was a five full months before Harry Dean (allegedly) reported much the same thing. One may be tempted to ask, why would the FBI release a report like this from Dr. Drennan, but continue to withhold Harry Dean's report (as Paul Trejo proposes)? My response is this: there remains a key difference between the reports of Drennan and Dean, namely, the element of Lee Harvey Oswald. In the Harry Dean (alleged) report to the FBI, Harry also named Lee Harvey Oswald. The FBI (as the JFK research community has shown over the past half-century) has suppressed and tampered with much (or all) evidence linking Lee Harvey Oswald to the JFK murder which challenges J. Edgar Hoover's mandate that there could be only one "Lone Shooter" in the findings of the JFK murder case -- no matter the outcome. This was a matter of National Security in 1963 (probably because of the existing Cold War with the USSR which ended in 1990)].

But this FBI report regarding Dr. Stanley Drennan about Edwin Walker at a JBS meeting, speaking of assassinating JFK is relevant for further reasons -- not simply because of the Harry Dean comparison.

And not simply because Jack Ruby told Earl Warren on 7 June 1964 that Edwin Walker and the JBS were behind the JFK murder. There's even *more* that makes the Drennan angle a step forward for my theory.

Notice the date of the alleged meeting: 17 April 1963. This is only SEVEN days after the 10 April 1963 shooting at Edwin Walker at his Dallas home, allegedly by Lee Harvey Oswald.

According to Dick Russell (TMWKTM/1992) Mr. and Mrs. Voshinin told the FBI on Easter Sunday 14 April 1963 that they heard from George De Mohrenschildt, that Lee Harvey Oswald was Edwin Walker's shooter in Dallas.

In the personal papers of Edwin Walker, Easter Sunday is also the approximate time that Walker heard from unnamed "officials" that Lee Harvey Oswald had been arrested for the shooting, but released the same night as the shooting.

Edwin Walker's papers leave no doubt as to his opinion from that point forward -- he was convinced that JFK and RFK had hired Oswald to kill him. He had won freedom only seven months earlier from an insane asylum where JFK and RFK sent him. He had won a full acquittal of all charges for his deadly role in the Ole Miss riots of September 1963, only three months prior to the April shooting.

Walker was convinced that the Kennedys wanted him dead. He was convinced about this on or about Easter Sunday, 1963. His personal papers prove this.

Now look -- only THREE DAYS after Easter Sunday 14 April 1963, Edwin Walker was again named in the context of a secret meeting of JBS in Los Angeles area, in which plans of murdering JFK and RFK were discussed.

Many thanks to Ernie Lazar for sharing this additional link in the historical chain of events surrounding Edwin Walker in the history of the JFK murder.

This is a solid step forward for my theory.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited December 5, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Mark Knight]

FINALLY....Mr. Trejo has posted some actual EVIDENCE!

That's a step in the right direction...

UNFORTUNATELY, he has MISREPRESENTED the evidence. I just read through FIFTY PAGES, and the only mention of Edwin Walker is that this Dr. Drennan is a FOLLOWER of the ex-general.

NOWHERE do the documents state that Edwin walker ever ATTENDED such a meeting. There are a few redactions, but there is no reason to conclude that the redactions have anything to do with Walker's attendance at such a meeting.

All I got out of this is that Harry Dean's allegations of a JBS plot were also reported by at least one other informant...NOT that WALKER was actually involved in the plot.

So PLEASE, Mr. Trejo...show me EXACTLY where it says that Walker was a part of the plot. I went through FIFTY PAGES at the link, and found nothing to DIRECTLY link Walker to the JBS plot.

Give me the page number that implicates Walker in the plot. Just the page number.

Edited December 3, 2014 by Mark Knight

[Paul Brancato]

After reading through most of this interesting file, I have a few questions. Am I correct that the name of the person who supplied this info to the secret service or fbi is withheld, and that this person is claiming that Dr. Drennan told him that plans would be discussed? So the source was not at the meeting, and the meeting had not yet been held?

[Ernie Lazar]

ANOTHER STEP FORWARD:

Ernie Lazar just gave me permission to share this FBI file with you about Edwin Walker as reported by Dr. Stanley Drennan. In my opinion it's a major step forward.

Even though Ernie and I sharply (but mostly respectfully) disagree with each other about the Harry Dean account of Edwin Walker in the JFK murder, Ernie was kind enough to share the results of his longtime efforts in FBI FOIA data gathering on the John Birch Society (JBS).

What's interesting is that the account that Dr. Stanley Drennan told the FBI on 18 April 1963, is very similar to the story that Harry Dean (allegedly) told the FBI around 30 September 1963.

Here's a link to that FBI document:

http://www.pet880.com/images/Dr_Drennan_FBI_HQ1.pdf

Here's the summary: Dr. Stanley Drennan of Los Angeles, who moved around in JBS circles, told the FBI on 18 April 1963 that he attended a private meeting of JBS members in Southern California, and also named Edwin Walker in the context of this meeting in which the assassination of JFK and RFK was discussed as a viable proposal.

The person obtained to commit the murder would be a non-JBS member, said Drennan, to prevent tracing back to the JBS.

(Now, this was a five full months before Harry Dean (allegedly) reported much the same thing. One may be tempted to ask, why would the FBI release a report like this from Dr. Drennan, but continue to withhold Harry Dean's report (as Paul Trejo proposes)? My response is this: there remains a key difference between the reports of Drennan and Dean, namely, the element of Lee Harvey Oswald. In the Harry Dean (alleged) report to the FBI, Harry also named Lee Harvey Oswald. The FBI has been shown by the JFK research community over the past half-century to have suppressed and tampered with much (or all) evidence linking Lee Harvey Oswald to the JFK murder which challenges J. Edgar Hoover's mandate that there could be only one "Lone Shooter" in the findings of the JFK murder case -- no matter the outcome. This was a matter of National Security in 1963 (probably because of the existing Cold War with the USSR which ended in 1990)).

But this FBI report regarding Dr. Stanley Drennan about Edwin Walker at a JBS meeting, speaking of assassinating JFK is relevant for further reasons -- not simply the Harry Dean comparison.

And not simply because Jack Ruby told Earl Warren on 7 June 1964 that Edwin Walker and the JBS were behind the JFK murder. There's even *more* that makes the Drennan angle a step forward for my theory.

Notice the date of the alleged meeting: 17 April 1963. This is only SEVEN days after the 10 April 1963 shooting at Edwin Walker at his Dallas home, allegedly by Lee Harvey Oswald.

According to Dick Russell (TMWKTM/1992) Mr. and Mrs. Voshinin told the FBI on Easter Sunday 14 April 1963 that they heard from George De Mohrenschildt, that Lee Harvey Oswald was Edwin Walker's shooter in Dallas.

In the personal papers of Edwin Walker, Easter Sunday is also the approximate time that Walker heard from unnamed "officials" that Lee Harvey Oswald had been arrested for the shooting, but released the same night as the shooting.

Edwin Walker's papers leave no doubt as to his opinion from that point forward -- he was convinced that JFK and RFK had hired Oswald to kill him. He had won freedom only seven months earlier from an insane asylum where JFK and RFK sent him. He had won a full acquittal of all charges for his deadly role in the Ole Miss riots of September 1963, only three months prior to the April shooting.

Walker was convinced that the Kennedys wanted him dead. He was convinced about this on or about Easter Sunday, 1963. His personal papers prove this.

Now look -- only THREE DAYS after Easter Sunday 14 April 1963, Edwin Walker was again named in the context of a secret meeting of JBS in Los Angeles area, in which plans of murdering JFK and RFK were discussed.

Many thanks to Ernie Lazar for sharing this additional link in the historical chain of events surrounding Edwin Walker in the history of the JFK murder.

This is a solid step forward for my theory.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Paul -- You must have read a different Drennan file than I did

1. April 18, 1963

Contrary to what you wrote, Dr. Drennan did not tell the FBI on April 18th that he attended a private meeting of JBS members. Instead, on April 17th, Drennan told a "reliable" FBI informant (identified in the file as "Raheb" in one serial -- but his name is redacted in other serials) about a forthcoming meeting (date not specified) to be held at Poor Richard's Book Store in Hollywood (owned and operated by JBS member F.X. Ranuzzi.)

2. EDWIN WALKER

Contrary to what you wrote, Walker was NOT "named...in the context" of any "meeting in which the assassination of JFK and RFK was discussed as a viable proposal" which Drennan attended.

The only discussion of Walker in this file is in the context that Dr. Stanley Drennan was known to be a supporter of Walker. But there is no reference to Drennan discussing Walker at any meeting discussed in this file -- particularly the meeting at which the assassination of JFK, RFK, and members of Congress were discussed.

3. HARRY DEAN

This is where we get back to our continual problem regarding the differences between us regarding what you consider credible evidence.

3.1 = We DO have specific documentary evidence (in FBI and Secret Service files) regarding Dr. Drennan and his connections to the JBS as well as his connections to the National States Rights Party.

3.2 We DO have documents re: Drennan's spring of 1963 conversation with Lt. Col. Robert K. Brown (later known for his Soldiers of Fortune magazine fame) during which Drennan stated that NSRP members should arrange to murder JFK, his cabinet, and members of the Americans For Democratic Action. These documents can be found in various files -- including the FBI's JFK Assassination file (62-109060). [Note: Col. Brown thought Drennan was suggesting that Brown (not Edwin Walker) could be the military person who might be interested in organizing and carrying out this murder plot.]

3.3 = BY CONTRAST: We DO NOT have documentary evidence (in FBI or other files) to support Harry Dean's assertions about his relationship to our "intelligence agencies" -- in the context (for example) of his alleged reports to the FBI or to Wesley Grapp about the JBS, Minutemen, Rousselot, Galbadon, Walker or any "murder plot".

4. LEE HARVEY OSWALD

Your hypothesis is that the FBI withholds documents regarding the JFK assassination IF they contain references to LHO perhaps not being the lone assassin. But that simply is not the case. The FBI main file on the JFK assassination (62-109060) contains numerous serials which report interviews with all sorts of people who claimed to have knowledge about other people who were allegedly involved with planning, facilitating, or carrying out the murder of JFK. In fact, the Drennan file is one such file -- which is why several serials in his file originated in the FBI-HQ JFK assassination file. FBI files on NSRP, Constitution Party, Joseph Milteer, Willie Somersett, Eugene Bradley, Fernando Penabaz, Thomas Arthur Vallee, G. Clinton Wheat, William Potter Gale, John Martino, Kenneth A. Shand, and many others all contain documents which YOU think would be "withheld", "suppressed" or "tampered with".

Edited December 3, 2014 by Ernie Lazar