William O'Neil

He does not commit, except to say it was a publicity stunt. There is adequate evidence to show this, as you know.... which is presented in the book. . One should look at this as a propaganda move at a crucial timing point. Walkers own words, point to it as being the impetus for "Operation Alert". That in itself is grounds for looking at this scenario in a different light than the WC. Considering the timeline and context, it really looks like it had nothing to do with 11-22! Separate act, conveniently used later, as further frame against Os. Depugh had very interesting things to say about Ted and his proclivities for publicity etc Complicated issue on several levels ....right? Bill

Meanwhile,' back at the Ranch.'The cattle are wandering loose. Uh, can we get back home on this thread , or start another PLEASE! Bill

That I don't know Harry, but I would tend to doubt it. Didn't strike me as the horticultural type But hey, didn't Angleton have an orchid habit or something....Ha! Bill

OMG!? I could respond to some of this, blame me if you want, but I am presently busy with Biz and family stuff. Sorry. Dr. Caufield never says or states that Walker was the sole mastermind behind the 11-22-63 hit , OK!? It's more complex than that. If you read the original blurb I posted you will hopefully discern that. There are reasons the Title is what it is. I cannot take days to explain that on a Forum! Now; One thing I will address is Mr. Lazar's take on Paul Rothermel. To dismiss Paul Rothermel as inconsequential in this case is a mistake at best.(That's my impression of Ernie's take) Paul Rothermel was an insider to the world of H.L. Hunt, (The "Richest Man in the World”) He was the ‘Chief of Security’ for H.L Hunt during this crucial period, and he had his finger on the pulse of Dallas and Texas State politics. It was his job to know the political landscape, and it often involved intelligence gathering as well. Rothermel had numerous connections inside and out of government. He also knew most of the key players in politics and industry in the region. As his own obit states; "Rothermel was an active attorney in Texas for over 50 years. He was a former special agent of the FBI and of the Special Texas Rangers. He served as a Family Law Judge for Dallas County and as a Municipal Law Judge for the City of Richardson and was a former President of the Texas Academy of Family Law Specialists." Funny how they omit his time with Hunt! He was VERY conservative by his own admission. He was a sitting judge at the time we interviewed him, at his Richardson Texas home in March of 2000. (He died two years later) What he was telling us regarding his talk / speech before the Dallas JBS at Austin’s BBQ, was that he was shocked at the increased level of radicalism within the JBS. (“I wasn’t right wing enough for them!”) I recall he also said something to the effect that; It seemed that the extremists were starting to take over…. I cannot quote this line verbatim since he would not allow me to take anymore notes at that point, but it was very close to my paraphrasing. That interview was the most fascinating and yet disturbing interview I’ve ever been a part of. Very intense and nerve racking. The last entry in my notes are; “HE KNOWS, WE KNOW…that HE KNOWS!! He also said some very cryptic things about the Z-film as well. I would bet my life that he knew 'where the bodies were buried' so to speak, and reluctantly admitted as much to us. It was an experience I won't forget! Bill

Ernie, Your last paragraph is closest to my point; "The essential point you seem to be making (and please correct me if I am wrong) is that there was some group of "radical" JBS members inside the Society who were rapidly becoming alienated against Welch's leadership and what they regarded as ineffective JBS activities (mostly letter-writing?) and because of their zeal or their desire for more "direct action" they decided to network with each other (quietly) and that resulted (ultimately) in a plot to murder JFK?? Is that what you were attempting to say?". There is ample evidence that is out there which confirms that many were indeed alienated. For example; Welch himself was becoming alarmed at Edwin Walkers association with Radicals. Mary Surrey was the founder and president of the Dallas JBS: Husband Robert Surrey (and Walker’s top aide) was the Secretary Treasurer (he was also head of the Dallas American Nazi Party.) In that regard; Welch expressed his concern about whom Walker was getting advice from. HL Hunt security chief Paul Rothermel told Caufield that he spoke at a meeting of the Dallas JBS that was held at Austin’s Barbecue. Rothermel felt he did not please the crowd because he was “not right wing enough.” Like with the "Minutemen", there were members who split off to either form their own groups or join existing ones more suitable to their agenda. De Pugh talked about this with William Turner I believe, about some of his former members going rogue. Caufield talked with him also. There was a great deal more activity involved with the JBS than mere "letter writing" I can assure you. We traveled all over the country for the last 12-13 yrs. searching out University Historical collections, documents, witnesses and political ephemera, from Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, Alabama, California, Oregon, Wisconsin and Washington DC, and God I can’t even remember now. It doesn’t make us right. But we definitely did our due diligence to get at the truth. I don't have the time right now to elaborate on all of your questions, sorry. I can't reproduce the book's citations here on the Forum either. If you wish to reject this viewpoint, that's OK too. Bill

Well shoot Greg, I don't have all the Bloody news. Bill

Dr. Caulfield’s theory is not based on any monolithic JBS conspiracy. It is more detailed and delineated than that. It doesn’t take 900+ pages to spell that simple concept out. By the time of 11-22-63 the JBS was barely a background influence. The goal posts had been pushed way back. Bill

Robert Welch, by this time frame (late 62’ and early 63’), had managed to alienate all but his closest allies, by making extreme claims about government officials including former and current Presidents. His rank and file JBS membership were dividing into factions or deserting him for several reasons. His viewpoints differed on many key points with that of his radical members, which had given him a broad based coalition in the past. He had failed the controversial racial issues including the ‘Jewish question’, which had become a key tenant of radical belief, which held that the “Jews” were the founders and propagators of communism. Many former adherent’s to the JBS, no longer considered Welch relevant to the then current and evolving mind set, of politics on the “Right” They left to join other more hard core orgs, which embraced their agenda. Yet they were nonetheless, spawned by some of the original precepts of Welch’s dogma. In essence, Welch had neutered his own political potency. In fact he was no longer considered a “good reference” or endorsement among many of his former followers…..especially the radical ones we are considering. The JBS as an organization did not officially condone violence or criminal activity in the name of its goals, but there were those in its membership rolls that did. Some were purged, while others were smart enough not to openly state their true beliefs, while others simply left the fold. The radical right didn’t need or want Welch; they were headed off to their own horizon.

The books printing had a setback- delay by the publisher.... (typical). The last news I got, was that printing will hopefully be done in 3 weeks. It will be available via a website and eventually Amazon. When I know more I will report. Bill

Oh my, so much to say...however, I will leave you with this nugget for now; “If I had the Kennedys here I would line them up and shoot them.” -General Walker Yes, it is sourced. Bill

David,the entire (Ruby threat) letter will be contained in the Appendix. It appears that the Walker "tale" started via Walker in the Nat'l Enquirer around May 17th 1964. It is almost the exact tale Walker told soon after, but without his name being used as a source by the Inquirer. The paper threw in the CIA's involvement as well, (which Walker left out) perhaps to make it more intriguing for readers, as they usually do. Bill

The subject matter before and after are non- contextual. This is what Walker would do when he was being cryptic, he had a habit of dropping it in the middle of an unrelated discussion. I suspect it was by design. I do not have a copy right now, it is with the Author. I have seen the letter and as the the Author says above; "The information was buried in the third paragraph of a letter following a trivial discourse about a briefcase Hargis had given him, his regrets that he could not attend a function with Hargis and his family, and his libel lawsuit. " Bill

Dave, I think within the context of what is presented about Walker in the rest of the book, these "issues" will become clearer.I can assure you the "provenance and veracity" are accurate, unless somebody is tainting the the Collection, it is also in his distinct handwriting. Walker's obsession with RFK, stems from his incarceration in Springfield Missouri at the hands of the Kennedy's, after the "Ole Miss riots". Walker blamed Bobby for his persecution and humiliation, and he never forgot it!The Walker tale regarding Oswald being released via the demands of the offices of the AG, has no factual basis in reality (IMO) and is most likely an effort to embarrass and humiliate RFK. It didn't start right away because Walker was wary about talking about any personal knowledge about Oswald. The tale regarding RFK started sometime in early 64' I believe. Edwin Walker was a man scorned and never let that vendetta go, and it lasted till his dying days as did his tale, btw it later morphed into including Ruby as well...oh and the FBI was now in on it too, in later versions. I can look up the earliest reference in my records, when I get a chance. Bill

Jon, if your referring to Walker's quotation text, that's the way it appears in the letter. Not my error... or the author's..OK? Bill

Uh, OK Jon. Who's your likely candidate with the impetus to do so? WHY? If you say George D. I may not disagree...either way, I believe it was nonetheless an inside joke. Bill

Mr. Ruby. There is an organization here, Chief Justice Warren, if it takes my life at this moment to say it, and Bill Decker said be a man and say it, there is a John Birch Society right now in activity, and Edwin Walker is one of the top men of this organization--take it for what it is worth, Chief Justice Warren. Unfortunately for me, for me giving the people the opportunity to get in power, because of the act I committed, has put a lot of people in jeopardy with their lives. Don't register with you, does it? Chief Justice WARREN. No; I don't understand that. Mr. Ruby. Would you rather I just delete what I said and just pretend that nothing is going on? Chief Justice WARREN. I would not indeed. I am only interested in what you want to tell this Commission. That is all I am interested in. Mr. Ruby. Well, I said my life, I won't be living long now. I know that. My family's lives will be gone. When I left my apartment that morning---- Chief Justice WARREN. What morning? WC Vol. V pg203

Yep, Plug that in with Ruby's testimony and it starts to have new meaning. This is what Walker and others would do to disguise the nature of a communication. This is also why it is important to read EVERYTHING in an archive or collection. Tedious yes, but there are nuggets to be found. Funny how Walker IS skeptical about the nature of Ruby's illness... but NOT the fact that he will leave the hospital in a box! Bill

General Walker’s Warning: Ruby Might Talk On October 5, 1966, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted Jack Ruby a new trial, citing the fact that Ruby’s statements to the police shortly after the shooting should not have been admissible. The death sentence was reversed, and the venue was changed to Wichita Falls, Texas. When the sheriff of Wichita Falls arrived to transfer Ruby, he noticed that Ruby was ill and refused to move him. Ruby was taken to Parkland Hospital on December 19, 1966, and was diagnosed with pneumonia. Shortly after that, it was determined that Ruby had cancer in both lungs. On December 28, 1966, nine days after Jack Ruby entered the hospital, General Walker wrote to Billy James Hargis and expressed his fear that Ruby might talk, and then Walker issued a warning. The information was buried in the third paragraph of a letter following a trivial discourse about a briefcase Hargis had given him, his regrets that he could not attend a function with Hargis and his family, and his libel lawsuit. The letter was discovered by the author and revealed here for the first time. Walker wrote: “Another peculiarity—with de Mohrenschildt returning to Dallas from Haiti as Rubenstein is allegedly dying with cancer (and might talk)—de M. made a front-page spread; and our informant produced his address and whom he is staying with—not good. A warning. When Rubenstein leaves the hospital in a box (the only way he will come out), there is no further “block” to returning the blame on the right wing. The books and press will gradually pick it up again. RFK must have it—it must be done, as insurance and assurance—an RFK political necessity.” The letter concluded with seven unrelated paragraphs about the business matters of the Christian Crusade.2675 The letter and comments are extraordinary. Walker is not completely sure Ruby is dying of cancer, deeming it only an allegation. History regards Walker as a near victim of the president’s assassin, not a confederate. As such, Walker has no need to be concerned about George de Mohrenschildt, the Russian who had an early relationship with Oswald—and may have known that he was not the true Communist the Warren Commission concluded he was. De Mohrenschildt suspected Oswald was involved in the Walker shooting incident from the beginning and asked him how it was that Oswald had missed him. In turn, Oswald gave de Mohrenschildt the photo, taken before the shooting, of him standing in the backyard holding his pistol and rifle, and the Communist newspapers, which was inscribed with the words, “The Hunter of Fascism. Ha, Ha, Ha.” The inscribed comments suggest that Oswald was letting his friend know that the shooting was a hoax. If so, Walker had plenty to worry about regarding de Mohrenschildt and what he might say on his recent return to Dallas. Otherwise, as Oswald’s near victim, Walker would have had no need to take the extraordinary step of using an informer to determine where De Mohrenschildt resided and with whom. De Mohrenschildt’s return and interview in the newspaper was, as he put it in his letter to Hargis, “not good” for Walker. Walker’s worry and warning that Ruby might talk is astonishing. It is inconceivable that Walker meant anything else in the message to Hargis other than that he would murder Ruby (or have him killed) before he allowed him to leave the hospital (and presumably leave Dallas for Wichita Falls for his re-trial, where Walker had no power). As long as Ruby was in Dallas, the comment suggests, Walker could block him from talking. (*This may have been behind Ruby’s frantic pleas to Earl Warren to take him back to Washington, and his expressed fear of Walker and the John Birch Society) With Ruby out of the Dallas County Jail, and on his way to the change of venue for re-trial in Wichita Falls (which was scheduled for February 1967), then the block on his talking was off. Only a guilty man makes the type of remark Walker made to Hargis. (As we shall see in the next chapter, during the Clay Shaw trial, Walker relayed his concerns about Marguerite Oswald in another letter, and had informers watching her very closely. He embedded the remarks, similarly, in an otherwise ordinary letter to another close associate.) *My additional comment-WCO These summaries are just of few of those presented in the extracts I have read from the soon-to-be released book, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: The Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy, by Dr. Jeffrey H. Caufield. I am just reporting or summarizing on what is in the book. It is meticulously sourced with over 4,000 end notes and citations" Bill

I guess it all depends on how much you trust the record. I'm sure most of the factors you site regarding agents knowledge and competency are factors. I doubt they explain it all.I think you should be equally as skeptical regarding the motivations of senior personnel involved in "decision making" who were answerable to SOG (Hoover) Wasn't one of their motivational priorities, 'protect the Agency at all costs?' Is the FBI's extant record,always the real record? What IS your interest in the Field Office files? Just curious.Would love to see some of those. Bill

Mr. Lazar, I know where you're coming from, we were there many times. Let me just make a super long story shorter. -Walker was nuts, they all were! We are not dealing with the Boy Scouts of America. I've read most of their political ephemera and it's all pretty GD crazy! -When Hoover issued instructions and or responses, were these really truisms or statements for the record? Several FBI agents have told us this was routine MO in threatening situations. The record is cloudy because of his obfuscations, demonstrated through subsequent claims and provable falsehoods about who knew what and when. That is covered in the book. Even non - conspiratorial authors acknowledge this practice. -Wiesberg and Paul Hoch demonstrates in the archives, numerous incidents of Hoover's Field Office personnel not transmitting important information to HQ. This is not typical protocol for field agents unless it is understood to be permissible. There were agent scapegoats in the aftermath of 11-22. Most of them did not deserve that treatment and were sacrificial lambs for Hoover. This is why the Field Office records are important , IMO. Bill

I suggest that one look at the evolution of this plot as acts in a Play, taking place on several different stages,which were eventually brought together or exploited, by a common interest and need by "interested parties" Yes I'm being vague, but it is spelled out in the chapters. One has to understand the historical and political context of the time, especially in the various locations that Oswald occupied along the way to Dallas. This is where the evolutionary roots of the plot began. IN MY OPINION This is where the research started and was followed. Hoover was compromised early on by KNOWLEDGE. Given how sensitive he was about the legacy of the FBI, he had little choice but to cooperate in a CYA cover-up. This is documented in the book. I give you credit Mr. Lazar for going after the Field office records, this is where Hoover often stashed his skeletons. Weisberg learned that early on. We FOIPA'd the whole file on Walker and Banister years ago. I'm sure they are not complete. Bill

Thanks Dave (Boylan). Jeff says he cited your work and gave you due acknowledgement. Good stuff! Bill

Sorry about the spelling, I'm tired as hell. Books are a bigger hassle than I ever imagined. My respect for authors has gone up greatly. Bill

Thanks, I can assure people that their are startling revelations in this book. It's not just about Walker, it's over 900 pages and covers a large area of Right Wing activity from 1956 through 1968. From the likes of Guy Bainister to James O. Eastland to Joesph Milteer to HL Hunt, Robert Morris,Walker, Hoover etc etc........it covers the gamut. The book was originally over 1,200 pages, but the publisher though it best to keep under that figure. So,some things had to be left out or condensed. Hopefully a website in the future can be a repository for these eliminated items and more. This work will be self published and all costs are paid out of pocket. We don't expect to make much at all, it was a labor of love and a search for truth. Bill

Speculation and conjecture Mr.Lazar?... hmm, sounds very much like what your doing, without having read much of anything contained in the book.Yes, there is a good deal of info that has never been brought forth until now. I'm not here to debate the issues, just to inform people about a work that I deem very valuable and informative. Bill