Jim Root

Steve

While that particular file is locked away at the moment and I cannot place my hand on the document itself I can give you the backround of it, how I obtained it and how it relates.

The document itself is a phone registry for the American Advisory group in Greece while General Fredericks was the commanding officier. It gives the positon that Karamessines was assigned but without it in hand I cannot recall exactly what that position was. Walker at the time was running the Greek Desk at the Pentagon after a stint at the War College where the new Cold War policies were being discussed in general and the 'Greek Problem" (end of British aid to Greece in particular were discussed). These war college sessions were influenced by the teachings of George Kennan and the select group that participated became our Cold Wariors of the 1950's, 1960's. One of my many conclusions is that Walker was not the idiot that most people today believe that he was and his association with so many people who surround the assassination story is not a coincidence.

This end of British aid to Greece led to the Truman Doctrine and th early development of US Cold War Strategy.

If you are familiar with Fredericks he was the CO of the First Special Services Force during WWII (while Walker commanded the 3rd Regiment). When Fredericks was "moved up" (becomming at the time the youngest General in the US Army) Walker would take command of the FSSF. Both Fredericks and Walker were students at West Point during the time that Maxwell Taylor was an instructor, although Fredericks was two years Walker's senior.

Fredericks and Walker maintained a cordial relationship for the rest of Fredericks life and I obtained several pictures and documents, including the one mentioned above via the Frederics collection located at the Hoover Library at Stanford University.

Have you read NSC 68? As an attorney I would love to hear your take on it, especially the closing portion.

Jim Root

John

Just to clarify a couple of points about John J. McCloy (whom I believe may of had a great deal to do with the assassination of JFK).

You wrote:

As an assistant secretary in the War Department during the war:

*McCloy blocked the executions of nazi war criminals"

McCloy was the American High Commissioner of Germany at the time the sentences of many Germans were reduced. McCloy in fact had nine Germans executed while AHC. He did set up a panel that reviewed and reduced the sentences of 77 Germans most of which had not been sentenced to death. Put into prospective this was a period that war with the Soviet Union seemed not only possible but probable in the near future. The American Joint Chiefs were pushing for the rearmament of Germany to curtail this threat. In response to the American push for the rearmament of West Germany we find this quote from "America's Germany, John j. McCloy and the Federal Republic of Germany:

"Adenhauer asked for an end to war crimes trials, as well as the communtation of the remaining death sentences. He demanded the "complete restoration of German sovereignty in the administration of justice" as well as an end to the extradition of Germans to foreign countries. In conclusion he told the High Commissioners that the "state of public opinion is not healthy," and that they must act to reverse this situation. "Otherwise it will be very difficult, if not impossible , to win over the minds of the German people to voluntary cooperation in the defense of Europe." (Pg. 149)

Jim Root

For those of you that have been following this thread on Operation Stella Polaris, (Venona, Frank Rowlett, Meredith Gardner and John Hurt) I have some additional information.

I have just uncovered a box of information that was sealed from researchers for, I believe, twenty years (sealed around 1983 and left untouched since). This box contains several items written by Wilho Tikander and includes an unpublished document titled the "History of the O.S.S. Mission to Sweden" as well as another memoir.

Within this cache of material there are five additional names not previously mentioned in this thread:

Whitney Shepardson

Sherman Kent

Willard Matthias

Eric "Red" Erickson

and a "Mr. Seaton"

The first four names are interesting because they have CIA/OSS backrounds that run rather deeply. Of the four Whitney Shepardson peaks my interest because of his close relationship with John J. McCloy. I am at a loss to find any information about the fifth person, "Mr. Seaton."

The various dates on the materials seem to be clumped together in three periods. The first period deals with WWII OSS information that would and should encumpass Operation Stella Polaris. The second time period is the later half of 1959 (Shepardson and Erickson information). The final period starts, 04/28/1964.

Setting aside my excitement about gaining access to this material (should be in my possession shortly) has anyone seen or had reason to previously associate the above names in any way with the JFK assassination? If so in what context?

Jim Root

Charles Drago wrote:

"JFK WAS whacked by more than one guy, and there WAS a conspiracy, and there IS an ongoing coverup.

"I so state not out of hubris or arrogance.

"I so state out of knowledge. Period."

Since you "state out of knowledge. Period."

Exactly who were the shooters?

Exactly where did each shoot from?

Exactly who was involved in the conspiracy?

Exactly who is in charge of the ongoing coverup?

Thes questions should be simple for you to answer after all that I have read on this thread.

Can't wait for all these answers after all these years!

Jim Root

Greg:

REPORTER: "Did you shoot the President?"

OSWALD: "No, they've taken me in because of the fact that I lived in the Soviet Union. I'm just a patsy!"

(Two sentences or three?)

One of my favorite sayings is K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple Stupid)

So, in my own stupidity I will make these suggestions.

1. When asked the question, "Did you shoot the President?" Owasld wished to refocus the questions, to do that he said, "NO." End of sentence, not part of the next sentence. I suggest that this is in the same action that many of us might take, I know I have done it myself a million times, to refocus the question back to my/his issue. "No" as in I'm not answering that question, changeing the focus and allowing Oswald to make his most important statement, "they've taken me in because of the fact that I lived in the Soviet Union. I'm just a patsy!"

But what was his issue? I continue to suggest that it is "because of the fact that I (Oswald) lived in the Soviet Union." and that he was "just a patsy!"

I do believe that Oswald ment exactly what he said and that Oswald had a purpose in assassination the President of the United States. It is also my belief that if we understand his "motive" ("They've taken me in because of the FACT that I lived in the Soviet Union. I'm just a patsy"

The reason that I believe he was a "patsy" was because Oswald did have access to information on the U-2, Oswald was willing to provide that information to the Soviets, and that Oswald later realized that it was the U-2 incident that thwarted the Paris Summit making him the "patsy" that he believed himself to be (see Spring Hill College speech by Oswald, July 27, 1963). The sabotage of the Paris Summit, might I a suggest, could have been accomplished by US Intelligence under the direction of NSC-68. In addition it was John J. McCloy, who participated in formulation of NSC-68, who, in a Nov. 4, 1959 meeting, expressed the fear that the limited test ban treaty being forced upon the US via international pressure and proposed to be signed at the Paris Summit the following year (may 1960), would be detrimental to the security of the United States. Did/would this fear have prompted a NSC-68 response. In a recent email from an expert on NSC-68 dealing with the issues confornting US policy makers as they prepared for the Paris Summit of 1960, I received this response: "In the specific case you mention, I am certain that opposition to the treaty was based in part on the conclusions of NSC-68. But, as you know, President Kennedy did pursue the treaty in 1963 even though the strategic situation for him was even worse than for Eisenhower." Could the same person who had the ability to sabotage the Paris Summit via the creation of an international incident also have the ability to execute a plan to assassinate the President of the United Sates? If we can accept this possiblity then we can speculate that John J. McCloy is a pivitol character in this drama.

All the pieces fit without 100's if not thousands of conspirators manipulating every detail to frame Oswald.

2. How many people must be added to the number of conspiritors to accomplish the missrepresentation or the misquoting of Oswald's words while in custody as suggested in this thread? 3? 5? 10? 20? Why would the conspirators need to take the investigation of the assassination out of the hands of the Dallas authorities if they already had all these willing co-conspirators in place to skew the investigation exactly how they wanted it skewed anyway? Or did the conspirators want to "plan" for every contingency before hand and have every detail in place ready to unfold in exactly their prearranged manner no mater how many co-conspirators were needed?

3. The Smith Act or Alien Registration Act was designed to protect the United States from internal threats posed by those living within the United States. It is my belief that Oswald was not stupid and that he understood exactly what the Smith Act was and how it had been used in the past. It is also my belief that he knew that he needed an attorney that was a specialist in this field, a person that would understand what had happened to him and how he had been made a "patsy" by US Intelligence agencies to thwart the Paris Summit. It is also my belief that his plan was to attempt to convince the world of the evils of both the Soviet and US governments because he was the committed Socialist that he said that he was.

I do not believe in a "Lone NUT."

But then all this is to simple. One shooter who was not a nut but a patsy and the conspirators that knew that Oswald, who they were watching closely (FBI survalence), would take the shot because only they knew that why Oswald had already shot at Walker (CIA letter to David Belin). No extra conspirators to do the shootings, no conspirators at Parkland to plant a bullet, no conspirators on the plane to switch or alter the body, no conspirators in the autopsy room, no conspirators to get Oswald the job, no conspirators to build a "story" around Oswald. IMO it was not that difficult. Run the motorcade past where Oswald worked and not allow the evidence (Hosty's 3rd note) to be revealed which would have let the world know who had access to the information of where Oswald was working. The motorcade route was decided in Washington, not Dallas. The last building passed was where Oswald was working. There were plenty of other options for that route. Oswald place of employment was known.

IMO John J. McCloy is the key. One man, one purpose (control the spread of nuclear technology) and the means to accomplish his goal NSC-68. John J. McCloy was a man used to letting no man (even the President of the United States) stand in his way (McCloy as High Commissioner of Germany only took the job after Truman agreed his (McCloy's) demand to give him absolute power to build a post war Germany. Truman repeatedly, dispite political opposition gave McCloy absolute power and did not interfere with his negotiations while supporting him 100 %). I have no doubt that when McCloy accepted the postion as Kennedy's lead arms advisor/negotiator, McCloy insisted on the same level of committment from Kennedy that he had demanded of and received from Truman. When Kennedy sidesteped McCloy and "President Kennedy did pursue the treaty in 1963 even though the strategic situation for him was even worse than for Eisenhower." McCloy may well have felt that it was in the strategic interest of the United States to eliminate the president (see Taylor speech at West Point, June of 1963 and McCloy walker exchanges on the presidentcy as the temporary custodians of the Constitution.

Jim Root

Greg

Just some thoughts:

"That's one of the flaws, as I see it: Oswald did not let everyone know who he wanted. The only thing he said publicly was "I am waiting for someone to come forward to give me legal assistance."

Oswald was waiting for someone....Abt. This is consistant with what he said to the Dallas attorney that visited him.

"If he in fact did know, I would surmise it was through Ruth Paine, since Abt's wife was (or had been) on the AFSC board. Recall that Oswald allegedly rang Ruth for help in getting Abt - and that an internal Dallas ACLU investigation had concluded Oswald had attended that one meeting with Ruth - not Michael."

I believe that there is enough consistant evidence to show that Oswald repeatedly spoke of the Smith Act in conjunction with his desire to have Abt represent him. The ACLU was secondary to the Smith Act in Oswalds desire to have Abt. It is this apparent knowledge of the Smith Act by Oswald that I find so intriguing. If looked at together with the backyard photos (taken prior to the Walker assassination attempt) we find Oswald holding two different magazines from two organizations that did not agree with each other yet both had, at different times been targeted by the Smith Act.

In consideration of this particular information it is my belief that Oswald was building his defense and his desire to have Abt act as his attorney was based upon his knowledge of these two different organizations and how the government had played 1st one then the other against themselves (perhaps just as the government had played him).

""Yet that very night, Henry Wade, who presumably had been briefed for the interview, was asked by the press if Oswald had yet engaged a lawyer, to which Wade replied, "His people have been here, but we don't know of any particular individual."

This is consistant with the testimony. Oswald had not "engaged a lawyer." he was holding out for Abt, the Smith Act Attorney.

"Later that day, Curry faced the media. At one point, he was told by an unknown reporter from NBC that Oswald had been yelling and complaining about no attorney, before being asked if he had one yet. Curry's curt reply: "Not that I know of." Meanwhile Bob Clark of WFAA was claiming to Curry that Oswald had told him that he wanted Abt. Clark then asked Curry if he knew who Oswald had been referring to. Curry replied, "No, I don't" despite having been present during Oswald's appearance before David Johnson in which again, Oswald had allegedly asked for Abt."

It seems that by the time of the Clark question even the press was aware of who Oswald wanted as his attorney making Currys reply at that time rather unifomed if not moot.

"Does it really make any sense that Oswald would be keen as mustard to tell every official he could that he wanted Abt, whisper to a reporter that he wanted Abt… but specifically refrain from saying so with the worlds microphones pointed at him?"

There are many things about the assassination of JFK that do not make much sense, which if we could understand them all would make this case much simpler. I still believe that there is enough in the record to show that Oswald wanted Abt, that Oswald never got a hold of Abt, that Oswald was aware of Abt's involvment in the Smith Act cases and that Oswald had a knowledge of the Smith Act.

Have you ever read NSC-68?

Interesting document for my research.

Jim Root

Greg

I wrote this piece several years ago. Perhaps it will help in this thread. Needless to say I am intrigued by Oswald's isnsistance on having Abt act as his attorney.

ATTORNEY FOR THE DEFENSE, JONATHAN ABT

Can anything be logical about the actions of the man who was charged with shooting the President of the United States? The Warren Commission suggests that Lee Harvey Oswald was a “lone nut” assassin, not a rational person. If Oswald had a motive its content was lost to history at the exact moment that Jack Ruby recklessly ended Oswald’s life on the morning of November 25th 1963. But like so many anomalies in this case, Oswald, the irrational nut, knew whom he wanted as his attorney, Jonathan Abt. And, while Lee Harvey Oswald let everyone know why he wanted Jonathan Abt, the Warren Commission was hesitant to share that information in their conclusion!

The name John Abt was mentioned repeatedly by Oswald while he was in the custody of the Dallas Police. There exists about forty pages of written documentation, filed by the men who interrogated Oswald, that appear in Appendix XI of the Warren Report that attests to this interesting, yet under investigated, subplot within the assassination drama.

Each person present tells a similar story.

Captain Will Fritz:

“Oswald asked if he was allowed an attorney and I told him he could have any attorney he liked, and that the telephone would be available to him up in the jail and he could call anyone he wished. I believe it was during this interview that he first expressed a desire to talk to Mr. Abt, an attorney in New York.”

Lee Harvey Oswald turned 24 years old in October of 1963, just a month before the assassination of John F. Kennedy. For myself I found it surprising to see that Oswald knew the name of the attorney that he wanted to represent him in the earliest of interviews with detectives. He also knew where attorney Jonathan Abt lived. My mind began to contemplate, “How many 24 year olds, living in Texas, would know the name of an attorney in New York?” It is true that Oswald had lived in New York at one time but how did he know about this particular attorney, Jonathan Abt?

During a subsequent interrogation, Captain Will Fritz would reveal that Oswald knew even more about Jonathan Abt than just his name:

“He (Oswald) reminded me that he did not have to answer any questions at all until he talked to his attorney, and I told him again that he could have an attorney any time he wished. He said he didn’t have money to pay for a phone call to Mr. Abt. I told him to call ‘collect.’ If he liked, to use the jail phone or that he could have another attorney if he wished. He said he didn’t want another attorney; he wanted to talk to this attorney first. I believe he made this call later as he thanked me later during one of our interviews for allowing him the use of the telephone. I explained to him that all prisoners were allowed to use the telephone. I asked him why he wanted Mr. Abt, instead of some available attorney. He told me he didn’t know Mr. Abt personally but that he was familiar with a case where Mr. Abt defended some people for a violation of the Smith Act….”

The Smith Act, actually the Alien Registration Act, was adopted by congress at 54 Statutes at Large 670-671 (1940) on June 29, 1940. Authored by Representative Howard W. Smith of Virginia, it was signed into law by President Franklin Roosevelt. Smith, a fifth term congressman at the time, would continue to serve in congress untill1967.

The intent of the Alien Registration Act was to make it illegal for any person to advocate, abet, or teach the desirability of overthrowing the government of the United States. The law also required all foreign residents of the United States that were over the age of 14 to register as aliens.

Within five months of passage (November of 1940) over 4,741,971 persons had complied with the obligations of the Act. Each registered alien was required to make a statement that included their occupational status and information about their political beliefs. It was the first statute since the Alien and Sedition act of 1798 to make the mere advocacy of ideas a federal crime. (Michael Steven Smith, About the Smith Act Trials) The government’s ability to register and process so many individuals in such a short span of time was a reflection of the crisis that was, at that time, destroying the world order. John J. McCloy, the newly appointed Assistant Secretary of War at this time, advocated the collection of information on potential saboteurs within the United States. The Smith Act provided the vehicle to accomplish his goal.

John J. McCloy had made his reputation as the attorney that broke the Black Tom case (dealing with German sabotage during World War I at the Black Tom pier in New York). His decades spent unraveling the covert operations of German espionage during World War I made him an ideal candidate to help Secretary of War Stimson upgrade the military intelligence apparatus.

In 1941 the Smith Act was used to prosecute leaders of the Socialist Workers Party. At the time the United States was being driven toward an alliance with the Soviet Union against Germany which had invaded Russia. The Communist Party in America fully supported its use by the government of the United States against their “Trotskyist” political opponents. The later use of the Smith Act would involve Jonathan Abt.

Historians who disagree with the conclusions of the Warren Commission Report have criticized the officers that questioned Oswald. An argument is made that since the various Dallas Police detectives and the FBI and Secrete Service agents present did not tape record or keep their detailed notes of all the Oswald interrogations, the written reports must be incomplete. The truth is that at the time of Oswald’s arrest, the Dallas Police Department did not own a tape recorder. For better or worse the majority of information that survives, survives within the numerous volumes of the Warren Commission Report. It is these written reports, made by the people who witnessed the interrogations and heard the words of Lee Harvey Oswald while he was in custody, that I find so interesting. Rather than speculating on what might have been lost, I am intrigued by what is contained in the supporting records of the Warren Commission that were not included in the final summary report.

The accumulated reports were transcribed from notes kept by the interrogators as well as their own personal recollections, all within hours of the interviews with Oswald. I have chosen to look more closely at what is in the written reports and interviews but did not survive into the final draft of the Warren Commission Report than to speculate on what might or might not be missing. Their statements demonstrate that Lee Harvey Oswald repeatedly referred to Abt as a Smith Act Attorney and that his desire to have Abt for this reason was made abundantly clear to all present. What reasons can be ascribed to this coincidence?

The record shows that between 4:45 and 6:30 P.M. on the day of the assassination, Captain Will Fritz of the Dallas Police conducted his second interview with Lee Oswald. The interview took place in Captain Fritz’s office:

Oswald.

“…I want that attorney in New York, Mr. Abt. I don’t know him personally but I know about a case that he handled some years ago, where he represented the people who had violated the Smith Act…I don’t know him personally, but that is the attorney I want….If I can’t get him, then I may get the American Civil Liberties Union to send me an attorney.”

During the same interview Oswald repeated his request with these words:

“…I want to talk with Mr. Abt, a New York attorney…”

During the 1948 presidential election race, Harry Truman’s Republican rivals were accusing the Democrats of being “soft” on Communism. (Michael Steven Smith, About the Smith Act Trials) At the Republican National Convention in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania the delegates added a plank to their platform that stated;

“We pledge a vigorous enforcement of existing laws against Communists and enactment of such new legislation as may be necessary to expose the treasonable activities of Communists and defeat their objective of establishing here a godless dictatorship controlled from abroad.“

To counter this threat Truman turned to J. Edgar Hoover and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

J. Edgar Hoover had first developed his reputation as a tough investigator and prosecutor by deporting radicals and immigrants during the 1919 Palmer Raids. For Hoover the harassment of the radical fringe would become a professional trait. It was J. Edgar Hoover that suggested to Truman that the Smith Act could be used against members of the Communist Party. On July 20th, 1948 eleven members of the American Communist party were arrested and charged under the Alien Registration Act.

The Smith Act defendants were not charged with the actual commission of a crime. As strange as it may seem today the charges were designed to prove that “they conspired to organize as the Communist Party and willfully to advocate and teach principles of Marxism-Leninism.” It was then construed to show that by the mere fact that they had organized as a Communist Party that they therefore advocated, “overthrowing and destroying the government of the United States by force and violence” sometime in the future.

For Truman, behind in the polls, the Presidency itself was at stake. Truman needed these prosecutions to deflect the criticism of his Republican rivals. The federal government successfully prosecuted the defendants and Harry Truman defeated his challenger Thomas Dewey and his running mate, Vice Presidential candidate Earl Warren (later chairman of the Warren Commission) in one of the closest elections in United States History.

Chief Justice Earl Warren would later overturn these same Smith Act convictions.

Between 10:30 A.M. and 1:10 P.M. on November 23rd Oswald was again interrogated in Captain Fritz’s office when he stated:

“I said I wanted to contact Attorney Abt, New York. He defended the Smith Act cases in 1949, 1950, but I don’t know his address, except that it is in New York….”

On Saturday afternoon, November 23, 1963, around 3:30 PM Oswald made a telephone call to Ruth Paine

Ruth Paine:

I said, “Well, hi.” And he said he wanted to ask me to call Mr. John Abt in New York for him after 6:00 PM. He gave me a telephone number of an office in New York and a residence in New York…He said he was an (the) attorney he wanted to have…

Oswald’s mother confirmed Ruth Paine’s story when the Warren Commission questioned her. Marguerite Oswald recalled the call she received from Ruth Paine.

Marguerite Oswald:

…the telephone rang, and it was Mrs. Paine. She said, “Mrs Oswald, Lee called and he was very upset because Marina was not with me, and he asked me to get a lawyer for him, a Mr. Abt.”

At 6:30 P.M. on November 22nd Oswald was a part of a police lineup for three witnesses to the Jefferson Davis Tippit murder. The three witnesses were Cecil J. McWatters, Sam Guiyard, and Ted Callaway. Once again Oswald is quoted as saying:

“I want to get in touch with a lawyer, Mr. Abt, in New York City…”

Early the next morning, at 1:35 A.M., November 24, 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald was arraigned for the Murder with Malice of John F. Kennedy when he said:

“Well, sir, I guess this is the trial…I want to contact my lawyer, Mr. Abt, in New York City. I would like to have this gentleman. He is with the American Civil Liberties Union.”

Mr. Abt was never a member of the American Civil Liberties Union. He was general counsel for the Senate Sub-Committee on Civil Liberties from 1935-1937, and was later a legal advisor for the Progressive Party from 1948-1951. He worked with and knew Alger Hiss and has been, many times, labeled as a communist.

But Lee Harvey Oswald was absolutely correct on his other statement; a study of John Abt’s biography demonstrates that he had indeed represented people accused of violating the Smith Act. Oswald, it seems, was familiar enough with the Smith Act cases that had begun fifteen years earlier, when Oswald was eight years old. He had knowledge of Mr. Abt that he knew where Jonathon Abt could be located (New York). Oswald knew that these particular cases had actually occurred more than a decade earlier.

On November 23, 1963, H. Louis Nichols, President of the Dallas Bar Association, contacted Oswald for a brief discussion at 5:30 P.M.:

Oswald

“….Do you know a lawyer in New York named John Abt? I believe in New York City. I would like to have him represent me. That is the man I would like.”

Assistant counsel for the President’s Commission, Mr. Samuel A. Stern, interviewed James W. Bookhout on April 8, 1964. Bookhout was a Special Agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation stationed in Dallas at the time of the assassination. He was present at several of the interrogations of Oswald at the invitation of Captain Will Fritz. On the morning of November 24, 1963, James Bookhout participated in an interrogation of Lee Harvey Oswald conducted by Captain Fritz and was later questioned about his knowledge of this event. Also present at the Oswald interrogation were T.J Kelly and David B. Grant, of the U.S. Secret Service, Robert I. Nash, a U.S. Marshall and Detectives Billy L. Senkel and Fay M. Turner of the Homicide and Robbery Bureau of the Dallas Police Department.

Mr. Bookhout:

Yes. It was in this interview that he (Oswald) mentioned he wanted to contact Attorney Abt (spelling) A-b-t, New York City. I recall Captain Fritz asked him if he knew Abt personally and he said he did not, but he explained that he knew that Abt had defended the Smith Act cases in 1949, or 1950, and Captain Fritz asked him if he knew how to get ahold of Mr. Abt, and he stated that he did not know what his address was, but he was in New York.

On April 17, 1964, just nine days after James Bookhout was interviewed by Warren Commission attorneys, J. Lee Rankin, general counsel for the Warren Commission, and Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant counsel of the Presidents’ Commission interviewed John Abt. (Warren Commision Report) Wesley J. Liebeler was also the Warren Commission Attorney that interviewed General Walker.

Unfortunately for history, the interview was amazingly short. J. Lee Rankin neglected to probe into Abt’s involvement in the Smith Act cases, even when the opportunity afforded itself. The total transcript of Jonathan Abt’s interview contains less than two pages of questions and responses. The longest statement made by Abt dwelt with how, because he and his wife were at their mountain retreat, he had missed the calls that Lee Harvey Oswald had made to him from the Dallas Police Department jail. Were the Warren Commissioners and the American public denied an opportunity to understand that a possible Oswald defense was to center around Jonathan Abt’s knowledge of the Smith Act?

Reading the transcript of Abt’s testimony, I was surprised, not by what was there but once again, by what was missing. Lee Harvey Oswald repeatedly stated that he desired Jonathan Abt as his attorney because Abt had represented clients in Smith Act cases. But the questioning by the General Council for the Warren Commission went in a different direction:

Mr. Rankin.

“Mr. Abt, did you learn that Lee Harvey Oswald was interested in having you represent him apparently because of some prior connection of yours with the American Civil Liberties Union?”

Mr. Abt.

“No. My assumption was, and it is pure assumption, that he read about some of my representation in the press, and, therefore, it occurred to him that I might be a god man to represent him, but that is pure assumption on my part. I have no direct knowledge of the whole matter.”

(Warren Commission Hearings, Vol. X, p. 116)

Mr. Rankin then asked:

“You have told us all that you know about it?

Mr. Abt.

“Yes. I may say that I had no prior contact with Oswald, knew nothing about him, did not know the name, and this request came as something entirely new and surprising to me when it came.”

Mr. Rankin.

“None of your clients had ever communicated to you about him prior to that time you heard about it over the radio?”

Mr. Abt.

“No; I had no recollection of even having heard the name, his name, before that time.”

Mr. Rankin.

“Thank you.”

At this point the interview was ended. The Warren Commission gathered no further information about Johathan Abt nor was there any speculation about why Lee Harvey Oswald would be so insistent upon having an attorney that was familiar with the Smith Act. An act designed to prosecute for advocating the over-through of the Government of the United States.

What can we speculate about any possible Oswald defense?

The mother of Lee Harvey Oswald Marguerite Oswald, and his wife, Marina Oswald visited Lee at 1:10 P.M. November 24, 1963 for about 20 minutes. At this meeting Oswald again reiterated his desire to have Abt as his attorney.

“Everything is fine. I know my rights, and I will have an attorney. I already requested to get in touch with Attorney Abt,…”

In 1993 we learned more about the thoughts of Marina Oswald when her friend and biographer, Priscilla McMillan appeared on the television show Frontline.

Historian Priscilla Johnson McMillan was a reporter in Moscow in the 1950’s and interviewed Lee Harvey Oswald shortly after his defection to the Soviet Union. Later, after the Kennedy assassination, McMillan befriended Oswald’s widow, Marina, and the two spent considerable time together. In 1977, McMillan wrote “Marina and Lee,” an intimate portrait of the Oswalds’ life together. In an interview conducted in conjunction with the first broadcast of Frontline’s “Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?” in 1993, Priscilla Johnson McMillan made this statement:

“Lee, in jail, told Marina that she had friends, that they would help her. He told her that there was someone in New York who would help him. He was counting on John Abt, lawyer for the American Communist party, to be his lawyer. He telephoned Ruth Paine and asked her to call Abt. Marina thought, when she saw Lee in jail, she could see that he was frightened. But then she thought that he would use the trial to proclaim his ideas, and to say that what he had done was justified by History.”

Frontline also interviewed Robert Oswald, Lee’s older brother, about Abt:

“I asked him about this lawyer in New York…and I told him I would get him one down here, meaning in Texas. He said no, he wanted that one up there. I didn’t press it any further. He was seeming to be pretty adamant about it. …”

Was the assassination of John F. Kennedy an attempt to overthrow the government of the United States? If so, it failed. It did succeed in showing the world that our Constitutional government was not only resilient but that it could, again, survive another cataclysmic event just as it had done numerous times before.

I believe Lee Harvey Oswald knew his history well enough to know that a single event would not change our government. But we can question why Oswald would be so intent on having Abt act as his attorney. Since the record shows that he repeatedly stated the reason he wanted Abt was his connection to the Smith Act Trials, I began to wonder, was Oswald going to use his trial to accuse someone, or group, of violating the Smith Act? I remembered that Oswald had left information behind that would have been found if he had been apprehended for assassinating Edwin Walker. Did he have a motive? Did he believe he need a trial?

Did Oswald have a reason to believe that someone or some group was attempting to over-through the government?

Remember:

“She (Marina) testified that Oswald said that General Walker ‘was a very bad man, that he was a fascist, that he was the leader of a fascist organization, and when I said that even though all of that might be true, just the same he had no right to take his life, he said if someone had killed Hitler in time it would have saved many lives.”

If a trial had taken place would anybody believe that Kennedy had violated the Smith Act in some way that could justify taking the life of the President?

The strange thing is, Major General Edwin Anderson Walker would seem to be the more obvious choice if Oswald’s intent was going to be to accuse someone of attempting to overthrow the government. But it would also seem to be irrational to believe that Oswald would be siding with Walker and his “right wing” accusations that were being leveled against the Kennedy Administration. Is there any connection? The question began to haunt me.

In 1951 twenty-three Communists were indicted using the Smith Act. By 1957 the number had grown to over 140. It would take a number of Supreme Court decisions in 1957 to finally halt the parade of prosecutions. The two most important were Yates v. United States and Watkins v. United States. In Watkins the Court ruled that a defendant who had opted not to use the Fifth Amendment could still use the First Amendment against “abuses of the legislative process.” The vote was six to one, with Chief Justice Earl Warren writing the majority opinion.

Is it a coincidence that Earl Warren was associated with the use of the Smith Act to prosecute communists, first as a candidate for the vice-presidency in 1948 and then as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in 1957? In 1963 many conservatives in the United States considered Warren, the former Republican Governor of California for eight years, a left wing radical. Did Justice Earl Warren influence the commission to eliminate any mention of the Smith Act cases from the final report of his commission?

When Jack Ruby fired his fatal shots the American public lost the opportunity to witness the trial of Lee Harvey Oswald. The jury of public opinion lost our opportunity to hear more about the possible defense strategy that would be used to defend Lee Harvey Oswald when the telephone calls to Jonathan Abt went unanswered.

On Sunday morning November 25th 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald was himself assassinated while being transferred to a more permanent jail site to await prosecution. At the time of his death, Lee Harvey Oswald had very few items in his possession. One item of significance was a sheet of paper with two phone numbers written on it. Those phone numbers were the telephone numbers for Jonathan Abt.

Jim Root

Ron

Interesting where the newspaper clipping has Patterson saying, "no one knows where death and disease will strike" in a speech just a few days prior to his own death.

As you know, based upon my research, it is my belief that McCloy had written himself in as the head or coordinator of all intelligence organizations within the United States (similiar to the British system that he was sent by Stimson to investigate in 1940).

The history of the development of the CIA and NSA via the National Security Act of 1947 (July 26, 1947) is interesting to compare with this subject. Seven days before Patterson became Sec. of War, Executive Order 9621 dissolved the OSS effective four days after Patterson took office (Oct. 1, 1945). it would be McCloy, while working under Patterson, that would begin moving and salvaging the various components of the OSS that would be later consolidated into the CIA. Each step along the way McCloy had to receive the written approval of Patterson for what McCloy was doing.

If my belief is true (McCloy as the "czar" of US Intelligence is true, Patterson would be one of the few people in America that would have known this.

Is it possible that Patterson's death, after being in a disagreement with McCloy, may have been considered as an act of National Security....? If so, and the plane that Patterson was riding on was sabotaged would the government position itself to hide that fact?

Interesting questions.

By the way McCloy and Patterson's paths seem to have crossed at an earlier date, while McCloy was at Harvard Law School. This particular incident seems to have been one that McCloy never forgot and felt that it was a slight that he did not deserve.

Jim Root

Upon further research into the Jan. 22, 1952 American Airlines flight which killed the former Secretay of War Robert Patterson I have discovered this additional information of interest.

From Jan. 4, 1951 until Jan 22, 1953 (a period of one year before and one year after this Jan. 22, 1952 accident) there were 32 commercial airline accidents in the United States.

In 30 out of the 32 accidents the cause of the crash was identified and reported.

In only two cases was the casuse not identified, the Jan. 22, 1952 crash that killed Robert Patterson and a crash that occured on Dec. 21, 1952. Of note is the fact that the Dec. 21 crash occured over the Atlantic Ocean and the plane was not recovered making it impossible to determine the exact cause of that occurance (the reason given for no determination for the cause of the accident).

This leaves the Jan. 22, 1952 crash as the ONLY crash in at least a two year period where the crash scene could be investigated, that it was not reported or determined why the accident occurred. Either the government failed in its attempt to ascertain exactly what happened during its investigation of this crash or could it be that there were forces that were put into play to insure that a complete investigation was not done or the complete story not reported?

Some might suggest a similarity between the Warren Commission's investigation (or lack there of) of the death of John F. Kennedy, upon which John J. McCloy played a role, and the investigation of Flight 6780 which killed Former Sec. of War Patterson (a man whom, just as John F. Kennedy did) had had a major rift with John J. McCloy's policies in the months preceding his death.

Two events in some ways similiar in nature, two deaths, two incomplete investigations.

Coincidence?

Jim Root

Information taken from the book, America's Germany, John J. McCloy and the Federal Republic of Germany and additional articles about Robert Patterson.

In 1951 former Sec. of War Robert Patterson was employed by German Industrialist to sway High Commissioner John J. McCloy's position on German steel and coal production. McCloy's former boss would arrive in Frankfort armed with his legal brief, entitled "Restoration of the Rule of Law" which was a wide-ranging attack on the High Commission and John J. McCloys actions as High Commissioner.

Patterson would maintain that because there were no precedents for "Law 27" the High Commission had to administer the statute according to American procedures and that by American criteria "the provisions of Law 27 plainly transgress the requirements of due process of law" He (Patterson) compared it to a "bill of attainder," without safeguards against arbitraty action and with inadequate and overly narrow provisions for appeal.

The implications of Pattersons brief were clear: the United States would have to end its decartelization policy if it wished to meet its own legal standards and McCloy was out of line in forcing this Law on the Germans.

Needless to say, "McCloy was angry about Patterson's efforts and believed them highly improper..."

"McCloy convinced Patterson that with the Schuman Plan on the line, he should help prevent a serious crisis in US - European relations. Subsequently Patterson went back to his clients with the advice that "after review of the situation" they should "adopt (the ) American solution ...."

Paterson later wrote apologetically to McCloy, well aware, as he put it, of "the sense or irritation that men on distant outposts cannot help feeling when those back home who are not charged with particular responsibility bob up and offer their opinions."

On January 22, 1952 Patterson would die in a plane crash that was credited to "pilot error." Years later the daughter of the pilot (Captain Thomas Reid) would suggest that the plane had been sabotaged and that a severe mechanical malfunction had occured. Thomas Reid, it seems, had worked for ARAMCO and CIA agent Col. William Alfred Eddy in Saudi Arabia prior to becoming an American Airlines pilot.

Patterson's wife would invite nearly 40 people to be honorary pall bearers at the funeral that was attened by Harry Truman, Dean Acheson, George Marshall, Henry Morgenthau, Bernard Baruch, Omar Bradley, Dr. Ralph Bunche, Luciua Clay, J. Lawton Collins, Sam Rayborn, Jimmy Doolittle, Elihu Root, Jr. Ferdinand Eberstadt, Maxwell taylor, etc. etc.

Notably missing from the honorary pall bearer list is John J. MCloy, the only Asst. Sect. of War under Stimson not invited.

I have read that Patterson was slated to become the Chairman of the Counsel on Foreign Relations in 1952. Instead, that horor would go to John J. McCloy.

The coincidence. John J. McCloy would become angry with Robert Patterson for his "messing" with his administration of Germany after the WWII. A few months later Patterson would be dead and for some reason Patterson's wife would not invite McCloy to the funeral (suggesting bad blood).

On February 2, 1953 Mrs. Margaret Wl Patterson, widow of Robert P. Patterson, former Secretary of War who met his death in a plane crash in Elizabethm, N.J., filed a suit against American Airlines for $2,685,000 one of the largest individual damage claims ever fied against an airline.

Fast forward 11 years and it would be Kennedy that would be "messing" with McCloys positiiton on arms negotiations with the Soviets and Kennedy would end up dead.

It is interesting to see that in two cases, Patterson and Kennedy, when people mess with what McCloy wants they ended up dead and McCloy gets exactly what he wants!

Greg

Excellent post from my standpoint:

"1. You don't seem to have the exact date of Walker travel to Germany."

You are correct. I cannot pinpoint the exact dates of Walkers travel to Augsburg, his arrival in Augsburg or his assumption of command of the 24th Infanry Division. The command position is only listed as October although he did arrive before he took command and made a few tours of military instalations in both Augsburg and the surrounding areas with the possibility of a trip to Frankfurt being involved. The Frankfurt angle gives him a second possibility of meeting up with Oswald as Oswald moved toward Helsinki (but more on that at some future date). The lack of information about the exact time of his arrival in Europe and assumption of command in Augsburg is interesting and allows me to speculate on why this information seems to be so shrouded in mystery. I have good reason to believe that his travel to Europe was during the second week of October (he was still apparently in Little Rock during the first week) and indicators point toward him actually assuming command (ceremonys, etc,) in Augsburg during the third week of October. This leaves the second week of October (which coincides with Oswald's travel) as a distint possibility. I am currently working on some additional angles that may help me to pinpoint the exact dates of Walker's travel and have two leads which I am following up. Needless to say the ability to gather information of this sort is time consumming but has led me to the point where I currently stand.

"2. Would Walker be taking commercial flights to assume his command in Augsburg?"

I have had coorespondence with several men who served under Walker while in Augsburg. They indicate that it was not unusual (and it seems to be the norm) to fly commercially from New York to London, London to Hamburg while in route to Augsburg. From Hamburg the travel to Augsburg seems to take on a variety of methods and seems to be unique to each of the individuals that I have communicated with. Although I do not have a large sampling, there is enough evidence to suggest that it was not unusual to use commercial travel by the military to arrive in Augsburg. In addition I have had reason to research another General, associated with my Walker research, and was able to uncover several travel vouchers that reflected the use of commercial flights for this other generals movements. This seems to suggest that if Walkers associates were using commercial travel there is no reason to believe that he may have used commercial airlines as well.

I do not believe that I am going to far out on a limb to suggest that this was possible that Walker could have used commercial air transportaiton in this particular case.

"..I remain unconvinced by your Walker angles."

The story that I have pieced together is so complex that it takes me hours to attempt to explain them when I find people that have the patients to sit and listen to the puzzle. Luckily I have several people who have encouraged me along the way and have taken time to listen and critique the various components of my research. Each individual segment is dependent upon a great deal of background research that has taken years to compile. Little things such as Walker's connection to William Friedman's original team of cryptologists (that included John B. Hurt and Frank Rowlett) in the early 1930's. Walker's assignment to two particular missions during WWII that John J. McCloy took a personal interest in, Walker's repeated use by Maxwell Taylor for the most sensitive assignments of a National Security nature and Walker's successful completion of those assignments for his trusted commander leads me to believe that Walker would have done whatever was requested of him by Taylor and that his involvement in covert, counterintelligence opperations was not unique but rather the norm throughout his career. We find a man that was intrusted with moving the Nazi loot found at the Merker Mind near the end of WWII (billions by todays standards) was not a special person. If Walker was some sort of nut we must find that the man selected to lead the assult which was designed to recover the most sophisticated radar installation that the Japanese had installed was just there by coincidence? Are we to believe that a man that was involved with the War College research into how to deal with the new realities of the Cold War, research that was led by George Kennen and which established the policies that John J. McCloy would use to establish the National Security Act was a non player in the game of international intrique?

My files are full of Walker information that points to his being involved in the recruitment of intelligence assets, involvement in covert operations (such as the Greek Civil War), counterintelligence activities on a large scale, the recruitment and training of special forces to be inserted into foreign countries, the processing of large numbers of foreign nationals while sifting through their backgrounds for potential intelligence assets (repeatedly).

I have refered to Edwin Anderson Walker as the Forrest Gump of the 20th Century. He turns up everywhere in our history but has been relegated to the dust heap as political hack and nut associated with the most outragous right wing groups. If true, the man who was trusted with the "eggs" during the First Straits of Taiwan crisis was a nut! The man given some of the most sensitive assignments of the cold war, (Greece and the Chinese POW processing and exchange at the conclusion of the Korean War) was a man not to be trusted. The man who was whisked out of Hawaii within days of the bombing of Pearl Harbor, only hours after US Intelligence became aware that Japan was about to attack in the Pacific (information provided by John Hurt to John J. McCloy) was only an afterthought to the military high command.

The fact that Walker was traveling in Europe during the period that the CIA was unable to define how Oswald got to Helsinki gives me reason to suggest that the two events may coincide. The fact that Walker's fall from grace coincides with Oswald's first attempt to return to the US from the Soviet Union, gives me reason to believe that the two events may coincide. The fact that Walker would receive a letter from John J. McCloy in June of 1963, when McCloy was in a bitter dispute with Kennedy over disarmament strategy, gives me reason to believe that if Oswald was to be the assassin and if Walker had met him then these two events may coincide. Walkers actions while on an airplane traveling to Shreveport suggest that he worried that he could be accused of involvement in the assassination. The fact that Walker made contact with a German newspaper within hours of the assassination and that that newspaper would break the story of the association of Oswald with the attempt on the life of Walker before the FBI was onto this lead makes me believe that Walker knew more than he could tell and that Walker felt that he could be accused of orchestrating the assassination himself. Was this because of his association with Oswald as Oswald entered the Soviet Union? While not completely proveable it does tie together the known evidence nicely. It also allows for Oswald's suggestion that Walker was the leader of a facist organization and Oswald's statement that he was the 'patsy" because he had gone to the Soviet Union merit.

The facts suggest that the Walker "angle" is well worth continued pursuit, at least I believe so!

Jim Root

Duke

You stated, "Bonnie Ray Williams was very probably on the sixth floor to within three minutes of the shooting, most likely saw the shooter(s), was seen by the shooter(s), and knew full well that Lee Oswald wasn't on the sixth floor with them."

I don't believe the shooter/s stayed around on the 6th floor for "three minutes." The shooter/s would have been off that floor in very short order perhaps under a minute. Since the three men on the 5th floor did hear the shells hitting the floor from the rifle on the floor above they would have had to travel exactly the same distance as a person exiting the area to have seen the shooter/s. Would they have been in as much of a hurry to rush to find the assassin/s as the assassin/s would have been in to exit the area? Or would they have hesitated for a few moments to observe the drama that was unfolding before their very eyes as they peered out the 5th floor window at the scene below?

While you suggest that no one could have left the 6th floor without being seen you seem to suggest that assassins could have entered and exited the building without being seen.

I do not question your sincerity in what you believe but having been on the scene and walked the area I believe that the timming you suggest gives Oswald or anyone else the opportunity to exit the area.

If we suggest that Oswald was no where near the 6th floor we still have to have someone going to the 6th floor to leave the rifle and the shell cassing (which were heard hitting the floor while the shooting was going on), build the snipers nest and leave Oswald prints on the boxes and rifle without being seen going to the 6th floor and without being seen by anybody exiting the area after the shooting. The soud of the shell casings being ejected prove/suggest that someone was on the 6th floor at the time of the shooting. I find it easier to believe that it was Oswald on the 6th floor and exiting the 6th floor without being seen than to have strangers come into the building, plant the evidence that points to Oswald and then they themselves exit the scene without being seen.

For me it is more difficult to believe in evidence planters on the 6th floor that were not seen going or comming than it is to accept that Oswald may have been the shooter.

Jim Root

Greg

Thank you for revisiting this area in the strange life of LHO and for me, how that strange life may have crossed paths with General Edwin Walker at the moment and time that Oswald traveled from London to Helsinki. Since I was the author of the "Why Not Paris" I thought it might be appropriate to point out several facts that we do know for certain and where they have motivated me to speculate on why this area of travel was not investigated by the Warren Commission.

The "counterpart" that you refer to as the recipiant of information from Soviet Ambassador Golub was actually US Ambassador John Hickerson. There were actually two notes that he sent from Helsinki to the State Department with reference to access to the Soviet Union via Helsinki. The first, which you have refered to, was sent on the same day that Oswald applied for his passport in Santa Ana, California which was on the same day that he was informed of his early discharge from the Marines. The time difference between Helsinki and California makes it entirely possible that this information was available to anyone who would have wanted to start Oswald on his way toward the Soviet Union.

The second note sent by Hickerson is even more interesting because it states that if you want the Soviet Ambassador to issue a visa into Russia you need to purchase first class Intourist vouchers prior to your application. When Oswald would arrive at the Soviet Embassy he would have his first class Intouris vouchers in hand.

This second Hickerson note was sent the day before Oswald arrived in Helsinki, on the extra travel day that Oswald used to leave France and "backtrack" to London only to go directly to the London airport and begin his journey to Helsinki one day later than was necessary.

With the help of Antti Hynonen we have shown that if Oswald would have traveled to Paris on the day that he arrived in La Harve and booked a flight from Paris to Helsinki the flight would have routed him to Hamburg, a change of aircraft, then on to Stockholm (where the same plane would pick up passengers from London) then on to Helsinki.

This diversion by Oswald is the only known place where it can be proven that Oswald actually spent more money than he needed to spend to accomplish a goal that he set out to accomplish. The Warren Commission went to great lengths to show how "frugal" Oswald was but in this one instance we find that he was not in fact frugal at all. Ambassador Hickerson's second note (declassified during the HSCA hearings) was designed to prove that it was possible for a person to receive an entrance visa into the Soviet Union via Helsinki in the 24 hour period that it took Oswald. NO ONE at that time connected the extra travel day (and additional expendature) to that note but the notes did suffice to STOP the committee from looking deeper into Oswald's travel from London to Helsinki and accepting the truth that Oswald just happened to stumble upon the only Soviet Embassy in the World that would grant him immediate access to Russia.

I continue to believe that this is one of three specific places where the Warren Commission was willing to "cover up" information that would have allowed us to better understand who Lee Harvey Oswald really was and what his association to US Intelligence really was.

Ambassador Hickerson would leave Helsinki within days of Oswalds defection but a deeper look into the life of Hickerson is interesting from the standpoint of two players in the assassination story. During WWII Hickerson was the US laison to Canada for defense. In his role he would have been the person who would have negotiated the use of the First Special Services Force, a unit that Edwin Walker would be a part of and eventually command.

John Hickerson would, in the late 1940's be the State Departments lead player in the creation of NATO after the defense agreement was suggested by none other than John J. McCloy. It is interesting to note that Hickerson usually refers to John J. McCloy as "Jack" McCloy in his many references to the man. McCloy and Hickerson would work closely together on the creation of NATO and continue a personal relationship for years. Strange but true.

Last we find that Edwin Walker is assigned to take command of the 24th Infantry Division at this same point and time and leaves Little Rock, Arkansas to travel to Europe in early October of 1959. His travel would take him through London to Hamburg then to Augsburg. I find it interesting that there was a flight from London to Hamburg early enough for Oswald to make the Hamburg to Stockholm connection. This reality leaves open the possibility of Oswald and Walker being on the same flight (London to Hamburg). I cannot (yet) prove that they were on the same flight but I can prove that it is possible that they were. One thing is for certain, if Walker and Oswald were on the same flight there is no way the CIA/NSA or any other US Intelligence organization would want to produce the passenger lists for the flights that Oswald did use to arrive in Helsinki.

Hey wait a minute, the CIA and whoever didn't produce that information did they. I continue to ask why. But if my suggestion is correct then Oswald would have had a motive to attempt to murder Walker for helping him to get into the Soviet Union. Oswald would have believed that Walker was the head of an evil organization, as Oswald suggested that he was. And Walker, who during WWII, did at least two missions which McCloy, as Asst. Sec. Of War, took a personal interest in may have participated in another "mission" that McCloy was interested in, the failure of the Paris Summit that occured after the U-2 incident occured on May 1, 1960 (and after Oswald had threatened to provide the Soviets with information on the U-2).

Jim Root

Duke

The walk from the "snipers nest" to where the MC was located is very short and would not have taken much time. I made the walk myself in seconds through a crowed room with numerous assassination displays to obstruct my own recreation. The MC was located adjacent to where the stairwell was and would have been a natural place for an assassin to have stashed a weapon before moving downstairs toward the confusion which must have been created by the assassination.

I believe there is an accurate video recreation of how the assassins escape could have been accomplished in the time alloted without leaving the person who performed the recreation winded in any way. Gary Mack was involved in the recreation and I believe a copy is available at the 6th Floor museum.

Jim Root

Duke

Have you gone to the TSBD Building and examined the material that is available there on the subject matter you are researching?

Jim Root

Gerald

Nice to see you here. If you recall from our emails a year or so ago I to believe in the Nuclear angle playing into the assassination but for different reasons.

I personally believe that McCloy knew this card would be played to provide a legitimate reason for the coverup of the truth behind the assassination. In other words it was this "nuclear" ace in the hole that was the trump card which brought everyone into line within the intelligence communities.

I still believe that Oswald's trip to the Soviet Union was manipulated by intelligence organizations, perhaps on both sides of the Iron Curtain and that this was known by those in the highest echelons of government covert operations. In addition I will continue to suggest that it was McCloy who held the keys to the doors behind which this information still remains locked.

Jim Root

Greg/Ray,

I find this subject very interesing and somewhat supportive of my position when taken in total.

"the incident seems to have really occurred. Why would Finigan make it up? How did Oswald know about it to take credit in his letter of April 16?"[/b]

1st "Patrolman Finigan noticed a white male with a Viva Castro sign passing out literature on the corner of Main and Ervay. He was eventually chased by Finigan, but got away."

If Oswald "got away" he could not have been identified by Finigan, correct?

2nd In the testimony of James Patrick Hosty we find this information:

Mr. HOSTY. It says, "On April 21, 1963, Dallas confidential informant T-2 advised that Lee H. Oswald of Dallas, Tex, was in contact with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New York City at which time he advised that he passed out pamphlets for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. According to T-2, Oswald had a placard around his neck reading, 'Hands Off Cuba, Viva Fidel.'"

Mr. STERN. Did you attempt to verify that information?

Mr. HOSTY. When I got it, it was approximately 6 or 7 weeks old, past the date it allegedly took place, and we had received no information to the effect that anyone had been in the downtown streets of Dallas or anywhere in Dallas with a sign around their neck saying "Hands Off Cuba, Viva Fidel." It appeared highly unlikely to me that such an occurrence could have happened in Dallas without having been brought to our attention. So by the time I got it, it was, you might say, stale information and we did not attempt to verify it.

Mr. STERN. When you record this as something that an informant advised about on April 21, that doesn't mean he advised you or the Dallas office on April 21?

Mr. HOSTY. That is right.

Mr. STERN. Did this information come from another part of the FBI?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; it came from the New York office of the FBI. They were advised on the 21st of April.

Mr. STERN. But the information didn't get to you until some time after?

Mr. HOSTY. In June, I believe.

Mr. STERN. Did you have any information apart from this that there was an organization active in the Dallas area called, "The Fair Play for Cuba Committee"?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; we had no information of any organization by that name.

According to Finigan, Oswald was not identified because he "got away." How then did the FBI get the information to inform Agent Hosty that the event did occur and that Oswald was involved unless the Oswald letter was read in New York. If Oswald's mail was being read and he was writting to the FPCC on a regular basis, all of his movements (that we know that he was reporting to the FPCC) were being reporte by Oswald himself and if his name was on the mail opening watch list then all of his movements were being monitored by both the FBI agents and those doing the mail opening (see post above on mail opening program conducted by the CIA). Not only Oswald's movements but his thoughts were being monitored as well

Does this prove or just suggest that Oswald was on the CIA mail opening watch list? If so, when could we suppose that Oswald's name got added to this watch list. Since we know for a fact that the CIA was reading mail sent to organizations in New York and it appears that Oswald's mail was being read around April 21, 1963 would it be so far off the mark to suggest that Oswald's name may have made it to the watch list in 1957?

Jim Root

Mark

Thank you for the kind words, "I must say that Jim Root makes a VERY convincing case as to WHY Oswald might have done it." they are appreciated.

In regards to your statement, "The evidence that Oswald participated in the Walker shooting incident is tenuous at best. We have Marina's statement, we have Walker's statement, and we have Ruth Payne essentially corroborating Marina's statement."

We also have the lands and groves on the bullet, the letter and the pictures taken of Walker's home. I might suggest that we have more physical evidence than we have for a grassy knoll shooter! While the testimony of Marina may be considered tainted for whatever reason we may wish to create, in Marina's recent interview with Vincent Bugliosi she made it clear that she does not believe that Lee shot Kennedy but is still convinced that LHO shot at Walker because, "he (LHO) told me so."

I have been able to develop my story by fitting together a very complex maze of history and relationships that dates back to the 1920's. There is a motive that is consistant with National Security and consistant with the personalities of the people I believe were involved with arranging the assassination. It is very complicated in every aspect except one, the actual assassination. Where my ideas differ from most conspiracy theories is that the assassination itself is the easy part while the positioning of the responsible parties within the government, that occured over a 30 year period, is what gave the conspirators the opportunity to develop and execute their plan. While everyone seems to be willing to increase the complexity of what happened on Nov. 22, 1963 and after by having people everywhere to "fix" evidence in order to frame Oswald, I leave Oswald as the shooter and leave all the "evidence" in place.

The three things that point to the conspirators is their "coverup" of:

1) Missing flight records of Oswald's trip from London to Helsinki. (I am currently extending my research into the "Venona Secretes" and am amazed by how many coded identities were uncovered by following travel records for people whose travels occured, in some cases, 15 years earlier).

2). The Hosty note of Nov. 4, 1963 which provided the needed information of where Oswald was working but was not given a Commission Exhibit Number nor was it tracked to see who had access to that information, yet even Hosty knew that the State Department received a copy and Dulles (as well as McCloy I believe) was aware that that copy would have made its way to the CIA.

3). Oswald's attempt to contact John Hurt. Even if this John Hurt that Oswald attempted to contact is not the John B. Hurt that was a NSA employee for 30 years, the failure of the Warren Commission to include this vital piece of information within its report is a travesty.

It is the third point (John Hurt) that is the most revealing to me. If I am correct, Lee Harvey Oswald's attempt to contact a man who's work is still classified today would have sealed his own fate (leaving the hands of the conspirators clean in that respect). It is also that attempted contact, discovered by chance during the HSCA hearings, that points directly toward persons high within the intelligence structure of the United States. That two men, Frank Rowlett and Meridith Gardner, would be assigned by the NSA to investigate Oswald's intelligence connection (the documents by Rowlett and Gardner were themselves classified for 40 years), and that both were associated with John B. Hurt only adds to my presumption of complicity by members of the intelligence establishment.

If I am correct the biggest thing that those responsible for the assassination had to do was to convince the American public that Oswald was not the lone assassin of John F. Kennedy. While most people believe that our government is capable of many things, the one thing that most do not believe is that they themselves can be decieved by our government and that Oswald was not the lone assassin.

Everytime I read an explanation for some part of the assassination story the first question that goes through my mind is, "How many people did that take?" The numbers are to great. KISS

Jim Root

Tim

The Epstein article can be found at:

http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/diary/mccloy.htm

I personally believe that Oswald was exactly what he said he was, a socialist that got caught up in the Cold War and was made the "patsy" that he finally realized he had become.

From a post I wrote in April of 2005:

If you want to know what Allen Dulles, James Angelton, Thomas Karamessines and Richard Helms were up to during the period 1953 – 1965 you can find information in the following 122 page report.

But before reading the following information recall that on October 3, 1956, a few weeks before his 17th birthday, Lee Harvey Oswald wrote a letter to the Socialist Party of America based in New York City:

Dear Sirs:

I am sixteen years of age and would like more information about your youth League, I would like to know if there is a branch in my area, how to join, etc., I am a Marxist, and have been studying socialist principles for well over fifteen months I am very interested in your Y.P.S.L.

Sincerely

Lee Oswald

Three weeks later, Oswald enlisted in the Marines.

Final Report Of The Select Committee To Study Governmental Operations with respect to Intelligence Activities United States Senate: April 23, 1976.

The report begins with these words: “Between 1940 and 1973, two agencies of the federal government – the CIA and the FBI – covertly and illegally opened and photographed first class letter mail within the United States.” (pg 1)

“The CIA conducted four mail opening programs in four cities within the United States for varying lengths of time between 1953 and 1973. New York (1953-1973); San Francisco (four separate occasions, each of one to three weeks duration, between 1969 and 1971); New Orleans (three weeks in 1957) ; and Hawaii (late 1954 – late 1955).” (pg 5)

“Director Allen Dulles and Richard Helms, then Chief of Operations in the Plans Directorate, met with the Postmaster General and the Chief Postal Inspector, David Stephens, on May 17, 1954.” (pg 9)

“The CIA Staff Take-Over: "More" Mail Opening. -- In November 1955, James Angleton, the Chief of the Counterintelligence (CI) Staff, submitted a proposal to Richard Helms for the further expansion of the New York mail intercept project. Until then, the CIA was only receiving access to a portion of the United States-Soviet Union mail in its New York facility; Angleton recommended that "we gain access to all mail traffic to and from the U.S.S.R. which enters, departs, or transits the United States through the Port of New York." He also suggested that the "raw information acquired be recorded, indexed and analyzed and various components of the Agency furnished items of information which would appear to be helpful to their respective missions." Perhaps most significantly, he recommended a shift in the focus of the project from photographing the mail to opening it.” (pg 9)

“This proposal was approved by Helms on December 7, and funds were authorized by the Acting Deputy Director for Plans on March 3, 1956.” (pg 9)

“The only written approvals for the project as it subsequently developed during Dulles' tenure appear to be those of Richard Helms and the Acting Deputy Director for Plans. In December 1955, Helms approved the concept as outlined by James Angleton”

While it is unclear whether Dulles was ever informed about the laboratory, he was apparently at least made aware of the fact that mail was being opened. In May 1956, he received a memorandum from James Angleton in which Angleton noted that "for some time selected openings have been conducted and the contents examined." (pg 18)

“When the first request for formal approval had been submitted to Helms in November 1955, a branch chief of the CI staff suggested to, James Angleton that "in view of the sensitivity of this project, steps should be taken to have this proposed project approved by the Director without recourse to the normal channels for presentation of projects." (pg 19)

“Even James Angleton, the project's strongest supporter and, as Chief of the CI Staff, the official most directly responsible for its operation, testified that his understanding of its legality was simply: "That it was illegal." When asked how he could rationalize conducting a program he believed to be illegal, he answered that in his opinion, the project's benefit to the national security outweighed legal considerations.” (pg 38)

By 1965 Thomas Karamessines was Richard Helms point man in covering up this project

“In 1965, the Long Subcommittee hearings on the use of mail covers and other investigative techniques by federal agencies caused the Agency serious concern about possible Congressional discovery and revelation of the project. It is noted above that in September 1965, as a result of this concern, CIA officials briefly considered informing Postmaster General Gronouski of the project. When this proposal was rejected, presumably because Gronouski had cooperated extensively with the Subcommittee, Thomas Karamessines, then Acting Deputy Director for Plans, "suggested that, in his opinion, the President would be more inclined to go along with the idea of the operation." Karamessines "gave instructions that steps should be taken to arrange to pass through McGeorge Bundy to the President after the Subcommittee has completed its investigation." (pg 30)

“Three years later, the Long Subcommittee's investigation was believed to increase the risk of project exposure. An internal CIA memorandum dated April 23, 1965, states:

Mr. Karamessines [Assistant Deputy Director for Plans] felt that the dangers inherent in Long's subcommittee activities to the security of the Project's operations in New York should be thoroughly studied in order that a determination can be made as to whether these operations should be partially or fully suspended until the subcommittee's investigations are completed. (pgs 40 & 41)

In one document we bring together Allen Dulles, Richard Helms, James Jesus Angelton and Thomas Karamessines. We also show that Oswald’s letter to the Socialist Workers Party would have placed him, at minimum, on a “Watch List” of the CIA and perhaps was opened and read by some of the same people that would be monitoring his movements before the assassination of John F. Kennedy.

Was the CIA aware of Oswald as early as 1956? We can not discount the possibility! We have only recently learned that Oswald's movements were being monitored by Richard Helms and Thomas Karamessines in the months preceeding the assassination of JFK. No one has extablished the date when this attention began being directed toward Oswald. While it would seem obvious that a returned defector would be of interest to the CIA, the level to which the information on Oswald was directed suggests more than just a casual interest that began with his return to the US.

If Oswald was in fact on a “Watch List” in 1956 it would seem unlikely that he would be given the security clearances necessary to work on the U-2 while in the Marines, unless of course the “agency” had other plans for him.

The Watch List:

“Letters were selected for opening by two basic methods: (1) on the basis of a list of names known as the "Watch List," and (2) randomly. By one CIA estimate, the "Watch List" accounted for approximately 25% of the total volume of mail that was opened; random selection for 75%.” (pg 11)

“The Watch List. -- The Watch List originated in the mid-1950's, at which time it consisted of only ten to twenty names. With the SR Division, the CI Staff, the Office of Security, and the FBI all contributing names to the list it grew rapidly, however: by the end of the project the Watch List totaled about 600 names.” (pg 12)

Within a short time, the Watch List had expanded far beyond these relatively narrow and well-defined categories. The names of individuals who were in contact with Watch Listed persons and organizations were frequently added to the list themselves, and, as an August 1961 memorandum points out, a very large percentage of the names on the list were placed there because of "leads which came about through the random selection." (pgs 11 & 12)

We find the same names of the same people swirling around this mail opening program as we associated with the assassination of JFK.

Coincidence?

Jim Root

We find the same names were monitoring Oswald prior to the assassination of JFK. Had these same people used Oswald to abort the Paris Summit?

In reguards to "Nosenko." I believe that it was the same week that Oswald exited the Soviet Union that Nosenko first made contact with the CIA. From the begining Angleton believed him to be a false agent. What did Angleton know?

But did the US react in exactly the same way. Perhaps. Following shortly upon Oswald's first contact with the US Embassy wher he expressed a desire to return to the United States, the Pro Blue Program, and General Walker are beseiged by the Overseas Weekly expose. Soon Walker would be forced to resign from the military. If Walker could be identified by Oswald the US Government would have a major problem, unless of course Walker was portrayed as a Far Right Wing nut that did not represent US Policy.

Were the Nosenko defection and the Walker Pro Blue debacle moves by both governments to provide plausible denial for the activities that Oswald had engaged in while in Japan? Activites that may have led to the downing of the U-2 and the failure of the Paris Summit? Both governments acted in a similar fashion if in fact the Nosenko defection and the Overseas Weekly exposure of Walker were staged events to protect each government from being exposed as participating in the Oswald defection charade.

My story is consistant Tim and the circumstantial evidence, I believe mounts.

Jim root

The "patsy" statement made by Oswald was preceded by a statement about his going to Russia. Was Oswald the "patsy" when he went to Russia?

In his speech at Spring Hill College Oswald spoke about the failure of the Paris Summit and his discust with both nations for failing to take advanage of that opportunity to provide for a more peaceful international situation.

When returning to the United States Oswald wanted assurances that he would not be proscecuted for any wrong doing (perhaps he feared prosecution for sharing information about the U-2 that led to the failure of the Paris Summit).

In reference to Walker Oswald said that he was the leader of a facist organization. Did, as I have suggested, Walker help Oswald into the Soviet Union by providing him with the information needed about the Soviet Embassy in Helsinki, information that had just been collected by the American Ambasador in Helsinki one day prior to Oswalds arrival in Helsinki. Did Oswald realize that his entry into the Soviet Union had been facilitated by Walker and that it was therfore Walker's facist organization that had prevented the Paris Summit from going forward?

Was Walker the sensitive name that was on the passenger list that the CIA/NSA failed to provide to the Warren Commission for Oswald's London to Helsinki journey? Why did Walker take command of the 24th Infantry Div. in Augsburg, Germany out of the normal sequence of command changes?

Was it just a coincidence that Oswald and Walker were traveling in Euorpe at the same time or was the "guiding hand" of US Intelligence involved?

Walker, in his later life, seemed to feel that Oswald was working for both the Soviets and the US. Did he have first hand knowledge of this? If he had met Oswald in an airport in Europe in 1959 he would have first hand knowledge of this.

John J. McCloy himself would say during an interview with Edward Epstein "Yes. I was interested in the espionage angle. I spent 10 years investigating Black Tom explosions--that's how I got into Government. I thought Oswald was trained in Espionage. I saw a pattern--mail drops, micro dots, his code(?), his knowledge of sabotage, etc. I thought he might be a sleeper Soviet agent who went haywire. I think we put something of that in the Report, I did, but it was toned down. The others said my evidence was not "evidential." I still believe it is possible some document will turn up showing Oswald might have been an agent. Not necessarily a conspiracy but an agent gone haywire." Epstein, later in his interview would say this about McCloy's feelings about Oswald, b]"And, despite the report, he (McCloy)believed that there was a espionage conspiracy."[/b]

And who can argue with the integrity of John J. MCloy on such an issue as this.

If McCloys premis is true, Oswald could have had a motive to shoot at Walker. This would also explain why Walker was so quick to suggest that Oswald had shot at him within hours of the assassination of JFK.

But if we follow this particular logic then Oswald's motive for shooting at Kennedy would have been the same as his motive for shooting at Walker.

And: Only those who had used Oswald to sabatoge the Paris Summit would know that he had been used and that he would have had a motive to shoot at Walker. Those few "conspirators" would have wanted the FBI to keep an eye on Oswald after the assassination attempt on Walker. The FBI did start monitoring the movements of Oswald shortly after the Walker assassination attempt and those reports did make it to the highest eschelons of the CIA.

The conspirators would have needed access to the information about where Oswald was working. That information became available on November 4, 1963 when James P. Hosty wrote his report on where Oswald was working. The "conspirators" would then have needed to be able to direct the design of the parade route from Washington. It was done in exactly that manner.

The "conspirators" would have had to put Kennedy in Oswald's line of sight (fire). Someone did and the knowledge about where Oswald was working was available to so very few people. We must remember that the very last building to be passed before the President would get on the freeway in order to "backtrack" to the trademart luncheon was where Oswald, a man with a grudge, a man with a gun, a man who even the CIA said it could have been predicted that he would shoot the President if they had known that he shot at Walker, worked.

I do not believe these are coincidences.

And I agree that if Oswald did shoot at Walker not only does it shine a light on the potential quilt of Oswald it has led me to believe, after nearly 15 years of research that the Walker event leads us to the conspirators. The only people that would know that Oswald had a motive and a reason to shoot at Walker, the only people that had the ability to order the FBI to start monitoring the movements of Oswald after the Walker event. The only people who would be monitoring the FBI reports about Oswald and would know where Oswald was working. The only people that could then assure that the information about where Oswald was working would not be given an exhibit number so that we could today trace who exactly had that information.

These are the conspirators and they, I believe, continue to find shelter from exposusure because so many people are unwilling to believe that Oswald shot at Walker or that Oswald shot at Kennedy!

Jim Root

Tim

You stated: "Greg, not only were Oswald's prints not found on the note, neither were Marina's. The WC never bothered to mention that little fact."

Not only were latent prints not found on the note, the note was obviously never tested.

In 1954 the FBI began testing the use of Ninhydrin to lift latent prints on paper and it was in common use by 1957. The technique has proven successful for prints up to 30 years old. The process replaced the use of Silver nitrate which had replaced the use of Iodine Fuming (both of which were successful in lifting only recent prints from paper).

The problem with the use of Ninhydrin is that it will distroy or "run" any ink that is on the paper being tested. The evidence that the FBI did not test the note for fingerprints is that the note exists intact today without the ink being distroyed.

It seems that a conscious decission was made to keep the note intact (and note use Ninhydrin on it) since the FBI felt that the handwritting expert/s and Marina had both identified the note as having been written by Oswald.

But this creates an interesting problem for your logic:

If the FBI had "chosen" to destroy the note in order to lift prints I think we would be having a different discussion about the note and its authenticity today. It would seem that if consirators had a thought that the note could be proved not to be Oswald's (since in your theory they only needed it to prove Oswald's guilt) they would have had it destroyed using the ligitimate excuse of checking it for latent prints by a method that is/has been proven to be successful (but will distroy the document). Because the "conspirators" did not allow the use of the Ninhydrin method to examine the note (thus not distroying it) would seem to suggest that the "conspirators" believed that the note was in fact Oswald's and keeping it intact would continue to support the facts pointing to the quilt of Oswald.

Jim Root

William, I think you are probaby correct.

I was sure I read in "Breach of Trust" that Walker was running for Gov when the allegation first arose that LHO had shot at him nd he thought he might benefit politically. I will have to recheck the reference.

Thanks!

Tim

About a year ago I had the opportunity to correspond with Gerald McKnight about exactly the topic of the Walker incident. He himself said, "I don't believe that Oswald ever took a shot at Walker." although he has the accademic honesty to realize that the note written by Oswald, if written by Oswald, is damning!

McKnight was also clear that he is swayed by the Cuban angle in the assassination but was intrigued and helpful at directing me towards some additional researchers that would support my "nuclear" angle. "It certanly was true that the single most important geostrategic card in the government's hand in dealing with the international communist threat (USSR and China) was he overwhelming asymmetric advantage the US held in terms of its nuclear arsenal." Mcknight said. He then pointed me to some information that as he said, "You'll immediately see how it reinforce your Taylor/McCloy thesis."

His last quote continues to haunt me, "My deepest view of this whole thing is that if we ever get near the truth surrounding the assassination it will exceed any fictional rendering."

Overall I feel that Gerald McKnight was a wonderful and honest resource that took the time to read and critique some of my work. He is particularly interested in the Walker event and believe, as I do, that this event could be a major key in the whole assassination play.

By the way he was also intrigued with the Oswald - Walker travel times in Paris and felt that this was an interesting avenue of research that had been grossly overlooked, "I have gone over your piece on Oswald/Walker. You have some detail stuff here that is most intersting."

Jim Root

James

Sorry I do not have any info at hand. Somewhere in my files I have a War Department flow chart from the WWII era. McCloy employed many "investigators" when he began to form the Intelligence apparatus that would develop into the OSS. That sounds like a potential link.

I might suggest that you try to contact a Pentagon Historian to provide some help in this area. My contact has retired recently and my pipeline into that area of research has dried up for the moment.

Let me know what you find.

Jim Root

Tim

Let me start by saying that I appreciate your questions. They allow me to attempt to present the thousands of pages of research that I have gathered in a more detailed manner. As Gerald McKnight told me, when we uncover the truth of the assassination it will be stranger than any fiction novel that could ever be written.

What I have uncovered is very complex and has been pieced together by a careful examination of the lives of three men, Walker, McCloy and Maxwell Taylor. It does not begin on Nov.22, 1963 but rather goes back to 1927 and is woven together in a myriad of complex ways. My research is factual and takes into account all the information presented in the Warren Commission Report. Where I am stumpted is that I do get stuck on McCloy and his position on the Paris Summit. He did not want it to occur and it did not occur. Here is the if......If Oswald played a roll in the dowing of Francis Gary Powers and the U-2 then very few people would understand or have knowledge of how that transpired. McCloy benifited from that event and the proof is Kennedy's first press conference with McCloy by his side. I will suggest again, if the Paris Summit had transpired and Nixon would have stood next to Eisenhower and Khrushchev proclaiming peace and a thawing of the Cold War, Kennedy would not have won the 1960 election. At the time the Democratic primary was still in dispute. But the Paris Summit did not occur, Kennedy won the primary then the election and McCloy was named by Kennedy as his primary arms advisor in the very first words of his very first press conference as President. But by June of 1963 McCloy was in a dispute with Kennedy. Also in June of 1963 McCloy would pen his letter to Walker. Coincidence? Perhaps, but I feel that further investigation is both necessary and appropriate!

"To claim that McCloy was "linked" to the assassination because he participated in the Warren Commission is just absurd. So Earl Warren, Arlen Specter and others were also "linked" to the assassination?"

Do you claim that McCloy is not linked to the assassination story? If the Warren Commission failed in its mission then McCloy was part of that. If the Warren Commission covered up a conspiracy to assassinate the President, McCloy was part of that. Earl Warren, Arlen Specter and McCloy have been linked to the assassination by others long before I began researching the assassination. For myself I stumbled upon McCloy, so to speak, when I uncovered a letter he had written to Edwin Walker five months before the assassination. The letter itself may be a curiosity but it sparked further research into the Walker - McCloy association. I then identified two specific missions that were of importance to McCloy and the war effort as well as the post war efforts that McCloy was closely attuned to. Strange that one man, Walker, can be closely associated to McCloy yet McCloy did not participate in the questioning of Walker (nor did any other Warren Commissioner participate in the Walker testimony). Walker's involvement in the Greek Civil War, the First Straits of Taiwan Crisis and even Little Rock and the assassination of JFK makes Walker the Forrest Gump of histories mysteries.

Walker, would you not agree, is closely linked to the assassination. The fact that communication occured between McCloy and Walker five months before the assassination, while perhaps just a coincidence, sould be worth examining further or do you disagree?

"Re who made the decision not to bomb the death camps, I thought FDR himself was involved in that decision. I am not sufficiently well read on WWII to know why there was even any question about that but obviously there was. Certainly McCloy was no defender of the Holocaust and certainly his input into that decision has absolutely nothing to do with whether he conspired to kill JFK. So why even bring it up?"

I brought up the Holocaust because in a previous post you brought it up, "One only needs to consider the Holocaust to know that God himself would have approved the shooting, strangling or stabbing death of the evil madman and the people who assisted him in the deeds that a civilized person cannot even bear to contemplate." It is important to enlighten those that do understand the roll that McCloy played in WWII and the position of power that he held at that early time so that they might begin to appreciate how McCloy maintained his position of power in the world. Knowledge is power and McCloy, who had been the keeper of the most important secretes of WWII, had access to that knowledge and that knowledge gave him power. McCloy, as Asst. Sec. of War kept the essential elements of the OSS together after Truman dispanded that organization. McCloy then was involved in the National Security Act and the creation and organization of the CIA and the National Security Agency. I do not believe that he walked away from those organizations after their creation but rather that he remained very involved. When J. Edgar Hoover expressed his concern to Lyndon Johnson about McCloy's appointment to the Warren Commission it was not because McCloy sought publicity but because McCloy had out of necessity shunned publicity.

"What difference does it make that (if) McCloy had links to Gen. Walker unless you can prove Walker was a conspirator? Do you have any proof Walker was a conspirator?"

I do not have proof that Walker was a conspirator. To the contrary I believe that the phone call between Walker and a German newspaper (that publicized the Oswald - Walker assassination attempt the Thursday before the FBI began investigating that event is signifigant) was a reaction of fear on the part of General Walker. Fear that he would be associated with Oswald and become entangled or accused in the assassination of JFK. In Nov. of 1963 Walker was an outspoken critic of Kennedy's. Before 1961 Walker was a true American hero! When I first examined his military record I was surprized to uncover two interesting points. During WWII Walker commanded units that would provide over 100 future OSS and CIA operatives (including a future head of the CIA). Also, Waker was traveling in Europe at exactly the same time that Oswald's mysterious flight from London to Helsinki occured. With the help of Antti Hynonen we have proven that the two COULD have been a the same plane, but of course not passenger lists were presented from Oswald's travels. I have also proven that Oswald could have gone from LaHarve to Paris and arrived on a flight in Helsinki that would also be one of the two flights that he would have been on leaving London and flying to Helsinki on ly one day earlier. The extra extra travel and extra day that Oswald used is the only example of Oswald being less than frugal that anyone has ever presented. Yet that extra travel day allowed John Hickerson to provide information to the State Department that said if a person were to show up at the Russian Embassy in Helsinki with First Class Intourist vouchers in had they could receive a visa into the Soviet Union within 24 hours. Oswald followed those direction to the letter! Who gave him that information? I suggest that it could have been Walker who, as I have pointed out, was used by McCloy previously to conduct some very sensitive missions (as well as repeatedly by Maxwell Taylor).

Did Walker recognize Oswald after the assassination? The FBI did not begin survailing Oswald in ernest until after the Walker assassination attempt. The CIA admits that if it were known that Oswald had attempted to assassinate Walker then Oswald would be an odds on bet to assassinate Kennedy. Who would have access to that information?????? Perhaps only the man who was intent on the Paris Summit not happening and that would be John J. McCloy.

The motorcade would travel much further South than it had to in order to get to the Trade Mart luncheon. The final building it would pass would be where Oswald worked and the information that the FBI had gathered about where Oswald worked never even received a Commission Exhibit number! McCloy, the man who cracked the Black Tom case, did not find it important enough to follow up on who within the Government had access to this information. Yet both McCloy and Dulles would know that the normal procedure for a FBI report was that the State Department received a copy and they would both know that State Department copies and information made it to the CIA as did the FBI reports on Oswald. But McCloy neglected to investigate this important avenue further.

"And re the issue of John Hurt and McCloy's association with a man by that name, perhaps you need to explain your theory more. Was LHO a conspirator or not? Was Hurt himself involved in the conspiracy? If so, what evidence do you have to support THAT assertion? If Hurt was innocent, how does it implicate McCloy that McCloy may have worked with or been associated with him?"

Your best question and the one that I believe is the most important. Since Oswald attempted to contact John Hurt and there was a John Hurt that had been a NSA employee whose work is still so important that it remains classified to this day, did that fact (Oswald's attempted contact of John Hurt) bring into line all the intelligence organizations to coverup that single piece of information and therefore coverup any information about Oswald's involvement in the scuttling of the Paris Summit by US Intelligence? Without any words being said, without any orders being given, without taking any personal risk who could assure that a connection between Oswald and US Intelligence would never be revealed? Connect Oswald to an intelligence asset so important, to a person whose work is so deepley classified that it could never be revealed. That connection brought in two very important characters within the NSA to investigate Oswald's intelligence connections, Frank Rowlett and Meredith Gardner both associates and closely connect to John Hurt. I do not believe this is a coincidence.

Yet John J. McCloy is one of the few people who would have know the importance of John Hurt and the work that he would have done.

I connect dots and those dots have led me to McCloy!

Jim Root

Tim

"When all is said and done, you still have no evidence whatsoever linking JJM to the assassination. None whatsoever."

John J. McCloy was a Warren Commissioner. If the Warren Commission concealed or in anyway covered up the assassination of JFK then McCloy is, at a minimum, an accessory after the fact. Are you saying that the man who came up with the language for the "single bullet theory" is not linked to the assassiantion. You cannot have it both ways Tim, "you sully his (McCloy's) reputation based on rank speculation. Have you no shame, sir?" everytime you question the Warren Commission report that McCloy so whole heartedly defended until his death.

But my "rank speculation" is not just speculation. After 15 years of research I have accumulated a great deal of informtion about McCloy which began by researching the life of Major General Edwin A. Walker. It did not begin by attempting to link McCloy to the assassination in anyway but rather by finding several pre assassination links between McCloy and Edwin Walker. Links that included, but are not limited to an association with John B. Hurt, a NSA employee with links to three men, McCloy, Maxwell Taylor and Edwin Walker as well as to Meridite Gardner and Frank Rowlet who would investigate Oswald's intelligence connections for the Warren Commission.

A few years ago you challenged me to provide information on where McCloy would lie to the American public. I provided that information, the Korematsu case, where McCloy was willing to alter the truth to suit the needs of the US Govt. before the Supreme Court of the United States. This was in the 1940's is it "rank speculation" to suggest that this man, McCloy, would engage in a similar vain in the 1960's if he felt the need to protect the interests of the United States?

You stated, "One only needs to consider the Holocaust to know that God himself would have approved the shooting, strangling or stabbing death of the evil madman and the people who assisted him in the deeds that a civilized person cannot even bear to contemplate." Yet it was McCloy, when indisputable evidence was brought to him as the Asst. Sec. of War of the Holocaust and the death camps, that made decission not to order the destruction of those camps by allied bombing although the resources were available to the allies to do just that. McCloy, in essence, allowed the deaths to continue then after the war was the man who pardoned many German industrialist who had profited from the forced labor provided by the concentrated peoples of Europe.

I would not be the first to "sully his (McCloy's) reputation" in many areas. A man who attained his position in the world is not above reproach just because he obtained that respected position. Hitler himself was highly respected in Germany because he brought his nation out of depression and returned it to a position of strength within Europe. That did not make Hitler a good or decent man, it makes him a historical character that upon examination of his complete life we can identify the evil villian that he was.

It is when we lay open history to honestly examine the total life of a man that we can begin to see the core essence of who they were. A simple examination in McCloys roll in the life of the Shah of Iran might be an interesting area for you to research. The way in which the US Government used its might to manipulate the peoples of other countries to do what was deemed best for the United States can be condemed or praised depending upon which way one wishes to interpert the actions of those involved. My father did kill. Does that make him evil? One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. It is all preception.

"Have you no shame, sir?" Conspiracy theorist have named, just to name a few, these organizations or individuals as potential conspirators. In each case one could use your comment on anyone who would bring up these organizations or indidviduals, wouldn't you agree? The FBI, the CIA, Texas Oilmen, Anti-Castro Cubans, The Catholic Church, Joseph Alsop, Hale Boggs, McGeorge Bundy, George Bush (senior), John Connelly, Richard Helms, Nikita Khrushchev, Edward Lansdale, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Eugene Rostow, Arlen Specter, General Charles Willoughby, etc., etc.

If we are not allowed to present our research without "shame" then why bother with the research? If we must eliminate anyone who has attained any level of repect in this nation, warrented or unwarrented depending upon one individuals own values, then we could, I suppose, eliminate most everyone in government from being a suspect in the assassination of JFK. But then how would we explain the failure of the Warren Commission to truely investigate who Lee Harvey Oswald really was?

McCloy did play a very powerful roll in the failure of the Warren Commission to present all the evidence. The three points that I keep harping upon on not in dispute. The Warren Commission failed to provide the passenger list for Oswald's travel from London to Helsinki, lists that were available at the time. The Warren Commission failed to assign an exhibit number to the third Hosty note although it was McCloy who was questioning Hosty when the information was presented by Hosty about where Oswald was working. And the Warren Commission failed to let the American public know that Lee Harvey Oswald had attempted to contact someone by the name of John Hurt, a man that shared a name with an NSA employee that McCloy had worked closely with during WWII and whose work is still classified to this day.

Rank speculation or good research? One mans freedom fighter is another mans terrorist.

Jim Root