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
Harry J.Dean

Harry Dean: Memoirs

Recommended Posts

Despite my differences with Ernie Lazar, I appreciate the fact that he provided more FBI documents about Harry Dean to this thread than any other participant.

The data remain incomplete, so any conclusion is premature at this point, although it's all great food for thought.

IMHO, the Harry Dean story identifies a wider JFK conspiracy circle that involves General Edwin Walker -- the only US General to resign in the 20th century, who outspokenly regarded JFK and Adlai Stevenson as Communist traitors.

The story of General Walker also involves Southern California characters like Loran Hall, Larry Howard, Gabby Gabaldon, and through them, Silvia Odio and Gerry Patrick Hemming (and through him, Frank Sturgis, Eladio Del Valle and eventually the New Orleans team identified by Jim Garrison).

Harry Dean's story is an eye-witness account that connects General Edwin Walker (and JBS players in Southern California) with Lee Harvey Oswald. Because the FBI has hidden its files on Lee Harvey Oswald for 50 years, any evidence we can obtain about Lee Harvey Oswald's connections remains of great historical value.

How can the FBI justify keeping its files on Lee Harvey Oswald so secret for 50 years after the man was shot dead? How can the FBI justify preventing Senators and Congressmen from seeing those files?

I refer especially to Senator Richard Schweiker of the House Select Committee on Assassinations, and his request to see those files in 1977, and the FBI denial of his request. The FBI also denied other members of Congress access to its secret files on Lee Harvey Oswald, including Congressmen Henry Gonzalez, Thomas Downing, L.R. Preyer, Louis Stokes, Robert Edgar,Samuel Devine, Stewart McKinney, Charles Thone and Chris Dodd.

What part of the US Constitution gives the FBI Director such power over the US Senate and House of Representatives?

IMHO, this is a question involving the US Constitution. Jim Garrison might have lost the scent of the assassins, but his heart was in the right place -- he did not like the idea of the FBI telling the American People that they can't be trusted with records about their own history.

IMHO, Harry Dean is in the same camp as Jim Garrison -- a patriotic protester against such FBI arrogance.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul T. - can you tie your theory about Walker and the Minutemen being involved in the on the ground Dallas hit team with the idea that Angleton set up Oswald as the patsy? I have read Dean's book, done with help from you, and have also read most of your Walker did it posts, so no need to repeat information here. I find Newman and PD Scott convincing on the Mexico City story, and strongly suggest you read Scott's latest book Oswald, Mexico, and Deep Politics as well as Newman's Oswald and the CIA, which I think you said you had read. For your theories on Walker to make sense, I think you have to tie Walker and Oswald not just to the FBI but to the CIA. You rely on Banister's connections to the JBS and Minutemen, and have suggested to me that Banister was running Oswald in his FPCC smear campaign and sheep dipping him for use as the patsy. Do you think Banister was operating totally on his own, with no cooperation with ONI, FBI, or CIA in that effort?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite my differences with Ernie Lazar, I appreciate the fact that he provided more FBI documents about Harry Dean to this thread than any other participant.

The data remain incomplete, so any conclusion is premature at this point, although it's all great food for thought.

IMHO, the Harry Dean story identifies a wider JFK conspiracy circle that involves General Edwin Walker -- the only US General to resign in the 20th century, who outspokenly regarded JFK and Adlai Stevenson as Communist traitors.

The story of General Walker also involves Southern California characters like Loran Hall, Larry Howard, Gabby Gabaldon, and through them, Silvio Odio and Gerry Patrick Hemming (and through him, Frank Sturgis, Eladio Del Valle and eventually the New Orleans team identified by Jim Garrison).

Harry Dean's story is an eye-witness account that connects General Edwin Walker (and JBS players in Southern California) with Lee Harvey Oswald. Because the FBI has hidden its files on Lee Harvey Oswald for 50 years, any evidence we can obtain about Lee Harvey Oswald's connections remains of great historical value.

How can the FBI justify keeping its files on Lee Harvey Oswald so secret for 50 years after the man was shot dead? How can the FBI justify preventing Senators and Congressmen from seeing those files?

I refer especially to Senator Richard Schweiker of the House Select Committee on Assassinations, and his request to see those files in 1977, and the FBI denial of his request. The FBI also denied other members of Congress access to its secret files on Lee Harvey Oswald, including Congressmen Henry Gonzalez, Thomas Downing, L.R. Preyer, Louis Stokes, Robert Edgar,Samuel Devine, Stewart McKinney, Charles Thone and Chris Dodd.

What part of the US Constitution gives the FBI Director such power over the US Senate and House of Representatives?

IMHO, this is a question involving the US Constitution. Jim Garrison might have lost the scent of the assassins, but his heart was in the right place -- he did not like the idea of the FBI telling the American People that they can't be trusted with records about their own history.

IMHO, Harry Dean is in the same camp as Jim Garrison -- a patriotic protester against such FBI arrogance.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Paul: It is good to know that you now think there is something which qualifies as "food for thought" which makes any conclusion "premature" -- although you do not provide any specifics about what you mean.

You frequently make the observation that Walker was "the only US General to resign in the 20th century".

Up to now, I have let that comment pass because it did not seem to be particularly relevant. But, just for the record, you are (yet again) mistaken.

* Major General George W. Goethals resigned on July 24, 1917.

* Gen. Hugh S. Johnson resigned February 5, 1919.

* Maj. Gen. John B. Medaris resigned effective 01-31-60 but he submitted his resignation in August 1959 [same time as Walker!]

* Maj. General John K. Singlaub resigned in May 1978. As John Simkin correctly pointed out: "He was forced to resign in May, 1978 after criticizing President Jimmy Carter and his plans to reduce the number of troops in South Korea."

* If you check out the 9/8/72 issue of the New York Times, you will see an article entitled "25 U.S. Generals Told To Retire" -- which refers to the forced retirements of 25 older senior officers -- i.e. they resigned.

* MANY senior military officers have "retired" because they had profound policy differences or personality disputes with superior officers or with political leaders. For example, in 1958, Lt. Gen. James M. Gavin was approved for promotion to command the Seventh Army in Europe but, instead, he abruptly "retired" with this blast: "I won't compromise my principles, and I won't go along with the Pentagon system."

With respect to your comments about "FBI arrogance" concerning their "hidden files" -- I would point out that most JFK-related information has already been released. For example, see this article, originally published 10 years ago:
Instead of relying upon Paul Trejo's hyperbolic description, a more fact-based, accurate, and unbiased description regarding JFK Assassination Records is summarized here:
"All of the Warren Commission's records were submitted to the National Archives in 1964. The unpublished portion of those records was initially sealed for 75 years (to 2039) under a general National Archives policy that applied to all federal investigations by the executive branch of government, a period 'intended to serve as protection for innocent persons who could otherwise be damaged because of their relationship with participants in the case.' "
"The 75-year rule no longer exists, supplanted by the Freedom of Information Act of 1966 and the JFK Records Act of 1992. By 1992, 98% of the Warren Commission records had been released to the public."
"Six years later, at the conclusion of the Assassination Records Review Board's work, all Warren Commission records, except those records that contained tax return information, were available to the public with only minor redactions. The remaining Kennedy assassination related documents are scheduled to be released to the public by October 2017, twenty-five years after the passage of the JFK Records Act. Among the items most sought after by researchers are some 1,171 documents still closed by the CIA on national security grounds.
The Kennedy autopsy photographs and X-rays were never part of the Warren Commission records and were deeded separately to the National Archives by the Kennedy family in 1966 under restricted conditions. Several pieces of evidence and documentation are described to have been lost, cleaned, or missing from the original chain of evidence (e.g., limousine cleaned out on November 24, Connally's clothing cleaned and pressed,Oswald's military intelligence file destroyed in 1973, Connally's Stetson hat and shirt sleeve gold cufflink missing). Jackie Kennedy's blood-splattered pink and navy Chanel suit that she wore on the day of the assassination is in climate controlled storage in the National Archives. Jackie wore the suit for the remainder of the day, stating "I want them to see what they have done to Jack" when asked aboard Air Force One to change into another outfit. Not included in the National Archives are the white gloves and pink pillbox hat she was wearing."
Assassination Records Review Board:
The Assassination Records Review Board was not commissioned to make any findings or conclusions. Its purpose was to release documents to the public in order to allow the public to draw its own conclusions. From 1992 until 1998, the Assassination Records Review Board gathered and unsealed about 60,000 documents, consisting of over 4 million pages. All remaining documents are to be released by 2017.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul T. - can you tie your theory about Walker and the Minutemen being involved in the on the ground Dallas hit team with the idea that Angleton set up Oswald as the patsy? I have read Dean's book, done with help from you, and have also read most of your Walker did it posts, so no need to repeat information here. I find Newman and PD Scott convincing on the Mexico City story, and strongly suggest you read Scott's latest book Oswald, Mexico, and Deep Politics as well as Newman's Oswald and the CIA, which I think you said you had read. For your theories on Walker to make sense, I think you have to tie Walker and Oswald not just to the FBI but to the CIA. You rely on Banister's connections to the JBS and Minutemen, and have suggested to me that Banister was running Oswald in his FPCC smear campaign and sheep dipping him for use as the patsy. Do you think Banister was operating totally on his own, with no cooperation with ONI, FBI, or CIA in that effort?

Well, Paul B., your question is appropriate because I think there is credible evidence that James Jesus Angleton was in Dallas, at Dealey Plaza, incognito, on 22 November 1963.

As CIA counterintelligence chief, his presence there would signify a major issue in JFK research. Further, David Atlee Phillips, CIA Western Hemisphere chief, admitted to his brother that he was in Dealey Plaza on that day, too.

My personal take on it -- guessing through the secrecy -- is that these very high-level CIA men were acting on their own, internal conspiracy. They weren't acting on orders from the JFK appointed CIA chief, John McCone.

Their thinking was close to the thinking of the John Birch Society. Angleton was conditioned, IMHO, by his inferiority complex because his mother was a Mexican, and he wanted to prove his All-American pedigree by playing the rabid Anticommunist. (J. Edgar Hoover and General Walker shared a different inferiority complex -- they were homosexuals-in-the-closet, and they also wanted to prove their All-American pedigree by playing the rabid Anticommunist.)

Both James Jesus Angleton and David Atlee Phillips were up to their necks in the Bay of Pigs disaster. They were partly to blame for undermining JFK with bad information about the status of Cuba -- and their psychological response was to make JFK into their scape-goat for their own failings in the Bay of Pigs fiasco.

In their private conversations over whiskey and cognac they would have attracted CIA rogue fellow-travelers like William Harvey and David Morales, who also lusted for revenge. Harvey had been busted down in position for crossing RFK, and David Morales was just a hothead. (To these we might consider adding rogue CIA agents E. Howard Hunt, because of his deathbed confession, and Cord Meyer, who hated JFK for sleeping with his ex-wife.)

If anything, I would suspect these renegade CIA agents (and perhaps their quislings) of starting their own private war against JFK. HOWEVER, as effective as they could be, they would never have gone into Dallas without local allies. The key to Dallas would then be two-fold: (1) the leaders of the extremist right-wing in Dallas; (2) high-ranking government officials on their side.

Jim Garrison already suspected the Mayor of Dallas, Earle Cabell, brother of CIA Deputy Director Charles Cabell, whom JFK fired after the Bay of Pigs. If Cabell was a conspirator, then I would also suspect police chief Jesse Curry along with some of the most radical rightists in the Dallas Police Force, including and especially Roscoe White (a Minuteman whose son said he was a JFK shooter and also the killer of J.D. Tippit, and shared a THIRD fake photo of Lee Harvey Oswald in a new pose, owned by his father, Roscoe White).

Now, one might wonder if these rogue CIA hotheads sought out a person with vast experience in paramilitary operations who was local to Dallas to coordinate all these elements. But that does not go far enough.

Harry Dean has no eye-witness information for us about CIA agents in Dallas. Nor does Harry have eye-witness information about Guy Banister, David Ferrie or others that Jim Garrison exposed. But Harry Dean does offer eye-witness information that links General Edwin Walker with Lee Harvey Oswald as early as August, 1963. That is plenty.

In my theory, ex-General Edwin Walker did not need the CIA -- he was moving forward with his own plot involving Lee Harvey Oswald. It was only after Walker made substantial progress in the local planning and coordination of Southern elements that the rogue CIA agents named above heard about it, and then went South to lend their support and expertise.

At what time they entered the field, we can only guess. We have evidence from Antonia Veciana that David Atlee Phillips (alias Maurice Bishop) was seen in the company of Lee Harvey Oswald in the summer of 1963. This was when Lee Harvey Oswald was being sheep-dipped as a fake FPCC officer in a fake FPCC chapter in New Orleans with zero members aside from himself.

So, it appears to me that Walker, Banister, Ferrie, Angelton and Phillips (at the very least) were busy sheep-dipping Lee Harvey Oswald in New Orleans in the summer of 1963.

Jim Garrison failed to expose General Walker in his investigations -- but to be fair, Garrison couldn't expose anybody from Dallas in his investigations -- Garrison was effectively locked out of Dallas. (The time for Dallas to come clean would have been 1968, during the Garrison investigations -- but they kept their mouths locked shut, and so Dallas' reputation in the JFK murder and cover-up, now 50 years old, will probably last forever.)

So, Paul B., that's my scenario. I have read Newman's Oswald and the CIA, and I wasn't very impressed. Any theory that leaves out General Walker and the John Birch Society (who were directly identified by Jack Ruby to Earl Warren) is not digging deeply enough, IMHO. (Also, Newman didn't dig very deeply into FBI agent James Hosty, but hastily gave Hosty low marks.)

So, again, I don't think that the FBI, CIA, ONI or any official agencies as entities were involved in the JFK assassination, although I do believe that rogue elements from these agencies were almost certainly involved. But in my opinion they needed a leader, and the only leader who could have coordinated all the elements in Dallas -- especially the ground-crew and the patsy -- would have been the extremely capable, motivated and officially resigned Major General Edwin Anderson Walker.

Whether Oswald shot at Walker or not, we have documented evidence from Walker's own personal papers that Walker believed throughout most of 1963 that Lee Harvey Oswald was one of his April shooters. And of course, Harry Dean's memoirs confirm that Walker was aware of Oswald back in the summer of 1963.

That's my theory.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THEY

(Including Lazar)

They have made of Democracy a perennial fraud

They who first shunned our Constitutional mode,

They sieged faint hearts with brute economic rod

They have set our minds and feet on a global road,

They, the creators of chaos, and devious solutions

They the few, Masters of All world conditions!

Edited by Harry J.Dean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THEY

(Including Lazar)

They have made of Democracy a perennial fraud

They who first shunned our Constitutional mode,

They sieged faint hearts with brute economic rod

They have set our minds and feet on a global road,

They, the creators of chaos, and devious solutions

They the few, Masters of All world conditions!

Edited by Harry J.Dean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THEY

(Including Lazar)

They have made of Democracy a perennial fraud

They who first shunned our Constitutional mode,

They sieged faint hearts with brute economic rod

They have set our minds and feet on a global road,

They, the creators of chaos, and devious solutions

They the few, Masters of All world conditions!

Harry -- I don't have the remotest clue why you reference my name --- nor do I have remotest clue what your six "They" comments is supposed to be about -- although it does seem eerily familiar to standard John Birch Society dogma about "They" (elitists aka "Insiders" -- who are supposedly working toward merging us "into a one-world socialist dictatorship."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<snip>

"The 75-year rule no longer exists, supplanted by the Freedom of Information Act of 1966 and the JFK Records Act of 1992. By 1992, 98% of the Warren Commission records had been released to the public."

"Six years later, at the conclusion of the Assassination Records Review Board's work, all Warren Commission records, except those records that contained tax return information, were available to the public with only minor redactions. The remaining Kennedy assassination related documents are scheduled to be released to the public by October 2017, twenty-five years after the passage of the JFK Records Act. Among the items most sought after by researchers are some 1,171 documents still closed by the CIA on national security grounds.
<snip>

Ernie,

It is unacceptable that by 1992 the FBI had released only 98% of all its files. Just 2% of FBI secret files that were still locked up presumably amounted to many thousands of pages.

Besids that, by 1998, there were still vital Warren Commission records still withheld -- e.g. the all-important tax returns of Lee Harvey Oswald -- and redactions on vital documents that were curiously labeled, "minor redactions," as if such things exist.

We may presume that the FBI has good reasons for keeping secrets about living individuals and witnesses, however, I see no earthly reason for the FBI to continue to keep secret files on Lee Harvey Oswald who was shot dead 50 years ago.

This bizarre secrecy weakens the credibility of the FBI and weakens the moral stature of the USA. Insofar as US Senators and Congressmen have requested to see those files, and have been turned down by the FBI, I also consider this secrecy to be a violation of the US Constitution, because the Constitution of the USA gives the US Senate and Congress great powers, but does not give the FBI any powers at all.

Perhaps only the arrogance of J. Edgar Hoover, and the bureaucratic arrogance of the FBI can explain this shameful abuse of governmental power. (Those who defend the FBI from criticism are also infected, IMHO, with this bureaucratic arrogance.)

Patriotic Americans demand to know the reasons for FBI secrets about Lee Harvey Oswald -- secrets kept not only from private citizens, but also from US Senators and Congressmen. It's un-American.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<snip>

"The 75-year rule no longer exists, supplanted by the Freedom of Information Act of 1966 and the JFK Records Act of 1992. By 1992, 98% of the Warren Commission records had been released to the public."

"Six years later, at the conclusion of the Assassination Records Review Board's work, all Warren Commission records, except those records that contained tax return information, were available to the public with only minor redactions. The remaining Kennedy assassination related documents are scheduled to be released to the public by October 2017, twenty-five years after the passage of the JFK Records Act. Among the items most sought after by researchers are some 1,171 documents still closed by the CIA on national security grounds.
<snip>

Ernie,

It is unacceptable that by 1992 the FBI had released only 98% of all its files. Just 2% of FBI secret files that were still locked up presumably amounted to many thousands of pages.

Besids that, by 1998, there were still vital Warren Commission records still withheld -- e.g. the all-important tax returns of Lee Harvey Oswald -- and redactions on vital documents that were curiously labeled, "minor redactions," as if such things exist.

We may presume that the FBI has good reasons for keeping secrets about living individuals and witnesses, however, I see no earthly reason for the FBI to continue to keep secret files on Lee Harvey Oswald who was shot dead 50 years ago.

This bizarre secrecy weakens the credibility of the FBI and weakens the moral stature of the USA. Insofar as US Senators and Congressmen have requested to see those files, and have been turned down by the FBI, I also consider this secrecy to be a violation of the US Constitution, because the Constitution of the USA gives the US Senate and Congress great powers, but does not give the FBI any powers at all.

Perhaps only the arrogance of J. Edgar Hoover, and the bureaucratic arrogance of the FBI can explain this shameful abuse of governmental power. (Those who defend the FBI from criticism are also infected, IMHO, with this bureaucratic arrogance.)

Patriotic Americans demand to know the reasons for FBI secrets about Lee Harvey Oswald -- secrets kept not only from private citizens, but also from US Senators and Congressmen. It's un-American.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Paul -- Those of us who have spent decades making FOIA requests probably would agree with your "unacceptable" comment but there is nothing particularly "bizarre" about all this when you consider all of the allowable FOIA exemptions. Just today, I filed an appeal over the FBI redacting statistical information which appears in HQ Inspection Reports that are 51 years old.

While you are focusing exclusively upon whether or not someone is dead, the most compelling (and frequently cited) FOIA exemptions are related to entirely different matters such as revealing a law enforcement technique or revealing a source which provided information to the FBI with the expectation that their names would always be confidential -- including foreign government agencies, employers, landlords, other intelligence entities, etc.

The appeal I filed today concerns redacted text which the FBI used exemption "b7E" to withhold. That exemption is: "would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law"

So, YES, it is very frustrating to see 50 or 60 year old data redacted -- particularly when (as in my case) it is just numerical or statistical -- and has no relationship to revealing the identity of an actual person (living or dead). BUT Congress (not the FBI) created the law and the allowable exemptions. The FBI opposed the entire concept of FOIA statutes when they were first proposed and, in fact, initially the FBI was entirely exempt from all FOIA requests for several years.

With respect to your assertion re: U.S. Congressmen and Senators -- everything would depend upon how the request was posed. Was it an individual asking to see certain documents or files? Or did the oversight Committee make the request? Requests from individuals are treated differently from requests made by Congress as an institution.

This has nothing whatsoever to do with the "arrogance" of Hoover and/or the FBI (your whipping boy for everything you do not like).

The onus properly falls upon Congress because of the concerns which they had which they put into statutory legislation which passed both the originating Committees and subsequently passed after votes in both Houses of Congress.

One of the major original concerns (and we experienced this same issue here in California with respect to our State Un-American Activities Committee records which researchers wanted to become publicly available) -- is that FBI files contain so much RAW information -- and, often, that raw information is totally false or severely flawed or biased AND many times individuals are named or accused of something without there being any specific FBI investigation because the FBI had no jurisdiction over the particular matter mentioned OR the information was vague/ambiguous and the identity of the person(s) named could not be definitely established. Consequently, there was a legitimate concern over why such data should be revealed when it could harm the reputation of entirely innocent people. [Your villain, Gen. Edwin Walker, was accused of organizing an insurrection plot against the LBJ Administration circa 2/65. The "plot" information came from KKK sources whom the FBI declared had been totally "reliable" in the past. But it turned out that the "plot" information was false. The FBI files on this matter were captioned "Alleged Klan Participation in Insurrection Plot".

You may not think it is important to protect the innocent -- but I imagine that if we found derogatory information about YOU in FBI files which was NOT accurate -- you might understand why Congress was concerned over wholesale releases of entire FBI files -- regardless of whether or not all the information in those files was accurate and truthful and factual.

Lastly, I very much doubt that you are going to find any information in the LHO files which allows you to "connect the dots" more successfully than what you currently think you have "proven" or more successfully to conform to any of your current "theories".

Edited by Ernie Lazar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul T. - ...I...strongly suggest you read Scott's latest book Oswald, Mexico, and Deep Politics ...

Well, Paul B., I took your advice. The lucky thing about working on a college campus is that we have a great library, and this book by Peter Dale Scott, which was published only this year, was available to me. I enjoyed the book very much.

Basically, Scott is adding to his previous narrative on Deep Politics (1996) with new information from the recently declassified Edwin Lopez report about Oswald in Mexico City. It is excellent.

I won't go into all the glories of this new book, but I'll focus only on one aspect, the one relavent to this thread, namely, Harry Dean's memoirs about the alleged participation of General Edwin Walker in the assassination of JFK.

It is in chapter nine that Scott mentions this possibility with some insight, partly through the viewpoint of ATF Agent Frank Ellsworth who produced a report to Warren Commission Assistant Counsel Burt Griffin, naming the Minutemen and General Walker as 'the most likely groups in Dallas to plot to assassinate JFK.'

The report of Frank Ellsworth was dropped like a hot potato by the Warren Commission, when it should have been given lots of light. The name of Ellsworth is buried in the Exhibits portion of the volumes -- and actually some of the Exhibits he provided were deleted by the Commission (for example, a 'wanted' poster of Krushchev signed, "The Minutemen", and a DPD cable about rightist extremists in Dallas).

Ellsworth was important because he was present when Oswald's rifle was found at the TSBD. Ellsworth was also one of the first federal agents to interview Oswald on the day of the JFK murder.

Ellsworth's testimony was similar to that of Jack Ruby's, insofar as Jack Ruby also told Earl Warren that the JBS and General Walker were at the root of the JFK assassination -- and both of their assertions were basically ignored.

So, thanks for continuing the latest reading on this hot topic, Paul B. I appreciate the resource.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul T. - ...I...strongly suggest you read Scott's latest book Oswald, Mexico, and Deep Politics ...

Well, Paul B., I took your advice. The lucky thing about working on a college campus is that we have a great library, and this book by Peter Dale Scott, which was published only this year, was available to me. I enjoyed the book very much.

Basically, Scott is adding to his previous narrative on Deep Politics (1996) with new information from the recently declassified Edwin Lopez report about Oswald in Mexico City. It is excellent.

I won't go into all the glories of this new book, but I'll focus only on one aspect, the one relavent to this thread, namely, Harry Dean's memoirs about the alleged participation of General Edwin Walker in the assassination of JFK.

It is in chapter nine that Scott mentions this possibility with some insight, partly through the viewpoint of ATF Agent Frank Ellsworth who produced a report to Warren Commission Assistant Counsel Burt Griffin, naming the Minutemen and General Walker as 'the most likely groups in Dallas to plot to assassinate JFK.'

The report of Frank Ellsworth was dropped like a hot potato by the Warren Commission, when it should have been given lots of light. The name of Ellsworth is buried in the Exhibits portion of the volumes -- and actually some of the Exhibits he provided were deleted by the Commission (for example, a 'wanted' poster of Krushchev signed, "The Minutemen", and a DPD cable about rightist extremists in Dallas).

Ellsworth was important because he was present when Oswald's rifle was found at the TSBD. Ellsworth was also one of the first federal agents to interview Oswald on the day of the JFK murder.

Ellsworth's testimony was similar to that of Jack Ruby's, insofar as Jack Ruby also told Earl Warren that the JBS and General Walker were at the root of the JFK assassination -- and both of their assertions were basically ignored.

So, thanks for continuing the latest reading on this hot topic, Paul B. I appreciate the resource.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

The first time I saw Frank Ellsworth's name was in connection with the arrest, by the Dallas PD, of Ashland Burchwell. Somebody submitted an FOIA request which resulted in release of documents discussing Ellsworth back in 1983.

There are references to Ellsworth in FBI HQ file 62-109090 (JFK assassination), section 10 and again in section 12 --and-- in Lee Harvey Oswald's file HQ 105-82559, section 136 (you know---the files which Paul insists are "secret").

I attach one FBI memo which discusses Ellsworth.

FRANK ELLSWORTH.pdf

Edited by Ernie Lazar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul - glad you read Scott's excellent book. I am nearly through. I always have thought his research skills and insights were priceless. I actually took him to lunch one day over 20 years ago when I was working on my JFK assassination trading cards. We lived in the same town and I knew Paul Hoch, another well known researcher and friend of Scott's.

Ernie - thanks for the 11 page file - very interesting. I always thought Ellsworth's story was under investigated. I recall thinking that when some local Dallas cops got in the middle of his investigation of arms disappearing from a local military base, it was not an accident, but a way of protecting the source of those weapons from further scrutiny. A premature bust, so to speak, resulting in Masen and his Minutemen connections being protected. I will have to read up on Ellsworth more, but if you have anything else on him in your files I'd sure like to see it. The questions that arise when reading the 11 page FBI document you presented center on the definition of Minutemen, and the presence in the same file of Loran Hall and William Seymour, two individuals named by Dean and also suspected of being present at the Odio's apartment with some one named Oswald around the time of Oswald's Mexican trip. It feels like the tip of a very large iceberg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul T - glad you read Scott's excellent book. I am nearly through. I always have thought his research skills and insights were priceless. I actually took him to lunch one day over 20 years ago when I was working on my JFK assassination trading cards. We lived in the same town and I knew Paul Hoch, another well known researcher and friend of Scott's.

Paul B., another interesting chapter in Peter Dale Scott's new book is chapter 8, which speculates about the reasons why the US government printed so many falsehoods about Lee Harvey Oswald before the JFK assassination, and then it took those words back and denied them during the Warren Commission hearings.

For example, there were reports from Mexico City that said Lee Harvey Oswald was a "card-carrying member of the Communist Party." This turned out to be false, and the Dallas Police as well as the Warren Commission later rejected this. Also, there were reports that said when Oswald was in the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City in September, 1963, he threatened to kill JFK for causing Oswald's delay in getting to Cuba. Yet the Dallas Police and the Warren Commission would reject those reports, too.

Peter Dale Scott, with his usual brilliance, noted that the more falsehood in the story, the more it pointed to conspiracy. Simply brilliant. Let's see if I can render his argument here:

1. If those two reports were true, then the US government had foreknowledge of Oswald's intent to kill JFK, but simply failed to use those reports.

2. If those reports were somewhat true, that is, Oswald carried a fake CP card and said he would kill JFK just to provoke notoriety, then that suggests the possibility of a conspiracy involving Oswald with other people.

3. If those reports were mostly false, that is, a fake Oswald carried a CP card and threatened to kill JFK, then we have final proof of a conspiracy to kill JFK and frame Oswald (even if the conspirators were commoners).

4. If those reports were totally false, however -- simple lies made up by the Government agents involved -- this would be strong evidence of a high-level conspiracy to kill JFK and frame Oswald.

Peter Dale Scott is truly a high-powered logician. We need more like him.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two weeks ago I purchased a new computer and as I was loading all my saved Word documents and pdf files onto my new PC hard drive, I came across something which I totally forgot I had (common problem when you have over 6000 files saved---lol).

This pertains to the debate which Paul and I have had concerning FBI "secret files".

Back in 1948, senior FBI officials made a proposal to J. Edgar Hoover concerning highly sensitive files which they thought should NOT be listed in the Bureau's normal filing system, i.e. its Central Records System. What they proposed to Hoover is that such highly confidential and sensitive files should be placed into a "Special Files" room entirely outside the normal filing system and only certain designated individuals would be allowed to have access to those files. Hoover accepted this proposal.

This separate filing procedure enabled Hoover (and senior FBI officials) to technically provide correct answers to questions from superiors in the Justice Department and from Congressional oversight committees or from the White House when they asked if the FBI could find any references in their filing system to subject or person "x". Since the "Special Files" were NOT recorded in the normal Bureau Central Records filing system, FBI officials could "honestly" answer "no" to any question if they thought an entirely candid reply might cause problems.

Naturally, being a highly bureaucratic entity, there WAS nevertheless a file created to capture data about the files kept in Room #7231 (the confidential or "Special Files" room). Historians later discovered that these "Special Files" filled about 80 filing cabinets!

The type of files which were put into Room 7321 were mostly classified "secret" and "top secret". For example, here is a brief sample of files put into Room 7321:

* American War Plans

* FBI War Plans

* Department of State Codes

* Sex Perverts in Government

* National Intelligence Estimates

* Biological Warfare

* Double Agents Program (reports from Joint Chiefs of Staff)

* Soviet Diplomatic Couriers

* Files about key Mafia figures

I mention this because as I have attempted to make Paul understand, FBI files which are "classified" (even those with the highest level of classification because they include the most sensitive ultra-secret info maintained by our government) have often been identified through meticulous research by historians and political scientists -- such as that done by Dr. Athan Theoharis who is arguably our nation's most knowledgeable expert about FBI history and FBI filing practices.

In 2008, an FOIA request was processed on FBI HQ file 66-17404. This is the control file which pertains to "Confidential Files Maintained in Room 7321". I attach the 460 pages which were released. Obviously, there are numerous redactions because of the extreme sensitivity of the information -- but many of the subject matters and the FBI HQ file numbers are often revealed.

Yesterday, I received from the FBI the final portion of the HQ file which was used to archive the annual Inspection Reports on the FBI's Domestic Intelligence Division. One document was classified "secret". It was discussing the operations and accomplishments of the Nationalities Intelligence Section of the Division. The subject matter of the first item was redacted. But the HQ file number for that subject was not redacted. It is shown as 100-356015. I was curious whether or not I had ever previously seen any references to that file number during my FOIA research so I searched for that file number in my saved files/documents and, sure enough, I found it. So I now know what that file subject is, namely, "Communist Coverage Along Mexican Border".

I mention this merely to point out that even when the existence of a "secret" file is theorized or when the subject matters of files classified "secret" have been redacted it is still possible to discover what the file is about -- and, one can often determine if that file (or specific serial from it) have been released to anybody.

Obviously, the more interest there is in a particular subject -- the more likely it is that one or more researchers will have discovered something significant and previously unknown through their FOIA research. If nothing else, they might discover specific HQ and field office file numbers which pertain to the subject matters which interest them.

However, it is also true that many FBI files will never be identified (because of the enormous volume of files which were created by the FBI or because they have already been destroyed).

FBI Special File Room aka Confidential Files 1948-1973.pdf

Edited by Ernie Lazar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×