Ernie Lazar

Ya--if memory serves me correctly, there is an early article in the New York Times which described Castro as a democratic reformer and the "George Washington" of Cuba. Our corporate interests certainly supported Batista (along with other dictators in Central and South America). Oh--btw, the former head of the Cuban Air Force under Castro (Pedro Luiz Diaz Lanz) defected to the U.S. and he also became a JBS member and paid JBS speaker.]

"Our side" may not have been all that thrilled with Batista but I am not aware that Castro ever supported Batista. [Interestingly one former State Dept official -- Ambassador Spruille Braden -- later became a John Birch Society member. During his State Dept service Braden wrote a scathing report about Batista -- but the JBS never bothered to point that out.

Never heard anything about Castro being right-wing. I think he was always a Communist!

One of the more fascinating questions to consider is this: Why is it not uncommon for a radical left individual to move across the ideological street and become attracted to (or endorse) extreme right individuals and organizations BUT the reverse (radical rightist becoming a radical leftist) is very rare? As I've mentioned previously, radicals of any persuasion seem to have an intellectual fever so it makes total sense to me why a extreme left adherent might later take a short walk across the ideological street to become an adherent of the extreme right -- because both perspectives appeal to the defective internal psychological and intellectual mechanisms which produce political extremists. In other words, the mental processes which originally produced an adherent of the CPUSA or the Socialist Workers Party or any similar radical-left organizations OR (as in Harry Dean's case), mental processes which resulted in him joining a pro-Castro group) don't just disappear AFTER they become disgruntled and then decide to leave those groups. Many scholars have commented upon the various reasons which cause social or political activism. Sometimes it is as simple as being bored---and wanting to do something and be involved with people who have clear goals and objectives. Sometimes it is just the excitement and the notion that your participation actually will help change conditions which you want to improve. Sometimes the idea is to restore and resurrect what a person considers a previous "golden age" -- when life was simpler or when people did not (supposedly) need to cope with onerous laws and regulations OR when caucasian Americans were in charge of everything that mattered in our country. I'm sure everyone here has read about former members of white supremacy groups (such as Aryan Nations or KKK) or neo-nazi groups who subsequently recant their bigotry. And there are members of ISIS and Al Qaeda who have defected and now attempt to encourage other radicals to leave those groups. But I can't think of many radical leftists who subsequently became a member or leader of the KKK or Aryan Nations or some neo-fascist Hitler-admiring group. By contrast, there are NUMEROUS examples of extreme rightists associated with, or members of, groups like the John Birch Society who subsequently associated themselves with Hitler-admirers. In fact, many neo-nazis in our country started out as JBS members -- but they regarded the JBS as only their "grade school" education so they then moved on to even more extreme viewpoints and activities. [Note: American Nazi Party founder George Lincoln Rockwell, worked for relatively mainstream right-wing groups after he left military service AND Rockwell wrote in his autobiography about his strong affection and admiration for people like Gen. Douglas MacArthur and Sen. Joseph McCarthy.]

After Menjou joined the JBS and became a National Council member, Buckley asked Menjou to accept a dinner invitation which Menjou did. During their dinner conversation, Buckley brought up some of the ideas which Robert Welch believed and Buckley pointed out how such ideas would serve to discredit the entire conservative movement. Subsequently, Menjou resigned from the Society and left their National Council.

One of the FBI files on Galbadon: https://archive.org/stream/foia_Galbadon_Guy_L.-HQ-1/Galbadon_Guy_L.-HQ-1#page/n0/mode/2up

I have a lot of FBI files which discuss John Lechner, Steve Foote, Americans For Cuban Freedom and other people connected to those organizations and to related organizations such as the American Committee To Free Cuba and the Americanism Educational League. Many of those files are among the ones currently being digitized at UC-Berkeley and I will be adding them to my Internet Archive webpage in the not-too-distant future

Yes he is and David's article re: Christian Defense League and all the folks associated with it http://cuban-exile.com/doc_026-050/doc0046.html still stands as the most definitive history of all the people connected to CDL -- including Caufield's main cast of characters.

Insofar as Paul's recollections are correct -- it serves to support what I wrote in a previous message about how people that might initially share political beliefs often have a falling out with each other OR they have personal qualities which render them incompatible with each other. Nevertheless, if you create a chart connecting people because of EVERY association they ever had with one another you can pretend that they were (or are) always allies and friends - even if that is NOT true! That is inherently part of conspiracy arguments (left or right). On the right, I constantly see pejorative references to George Soros and on the left there are constant derogatory references to the Koch family and how they supposedly corrupt our political life and "control" or "finance" everything which their opponents don't like. But it is never just that simple -- but the very nature of conspiracy arguments requires dumbing-down our perceptions of how complex relationships operate so that lowest-common-denominator "reasoning" can be used. Yesterday, I spent hours on the Free Republic website debating some very hostile critics -- one of whom asked me the question: "Why are Jews leftists?" -- so I asked him why, in the entire universe of categories of human beings, he chose to focus exclusively upon the allegedly noxious nature of "Jews"? That enraged him -- and of course he won't answer the question honestly because he does not want to reveal his bigotry.

Just FYI -- Skousen's son (Paul) told me that his father had a falling out with Robert Welch and the JBS. Skousen never joined the JBS and his speaking engagements under the sponsorship of the JBS abruptly ended. Although it is true that he did write several articles for the JBS magazine at that time (American Opinion) -- he was never as prolific as people like Gary Allen and Alan Stang and others. As I have said many times -- IF you are active in the political life of our country (and I don't mean just running for office or working on campaigns) -- but you frequently participate in national discussions, attend events of like-minded individuals, and give speeches around the country, then it is INEVITABLE to create "dots" which connect you to dozens upon dozens of other similar personalities BUT that often does NOT reflect personal disputes, angry disagreements, and irreconcilable differences which ultimate cause a breach. Other people (for example) who started out as JBS contributors or speakers or endorsers or even members later resigned from the JBS -- sometimes with very bitter and caustic attacks. For example -- both Fred Koch and his son Charles resigned -- as did Robert Love (a JBS National Council member also from Wichita KS). Phyllis Schlafly withdrew her support but LIED for decades (even to her two biographers) and she claimed she and her husband never joined the JBS which is a falsehood. The actor Adolph Menjou resigned after he had a dinner conversation with William Buckley Jr. Denison Kitchel (Goldwater's campaign manager) resigned his JBS membership 2-3 weeks after he joined -- because he became aware of what Welch really believed. And look at what Harry Dean claims about how he allegedly became disenchanted with the JBS and NOW Harry thinks the Mormon Church controls the JBS (which is predominantly made up of Catholic members and officials!) So, anybody can "connect dots" that really are not relevant or which don't really reveal much of anything but conspiracy adherents ALWAYS assume the worst about their perceived political opponents so there is a pre-disposition to connect those dots anyway!

Perhaps the most direct method of illustrating the errors made by Jason would be to review the FBI files on Eustace Mullins especially HQ file sections 2 thru 4 https://archive.org/search.php?query=FOIA%3A+Mullins&sort=titleSorter In section 2, start at pages 48-49 where you will see the following T-numbers identified: T-1 = Anti Defamation League employee in Chicago T-2 = Chicago Police Dept employee T-3 = Cook County Superior Court records reviewed by FBI Special Agent T-4 = Cook County IL Assumed Names Section file reviewed by FBI Special Agent T-8 = ADL employee in Washington DC T-9 = ADL employee in Richmond VA T-10 = U.S. Postal Service, Postal Inspection unit employee T-11 = ADL employee in Washington DC In many FBI memos (circulated within the FBI) the names of persons providing information are NOT redacted. However, when the information is sent outside the FBI, the sources are then identified with T-numbers. In numerous memos regarding Mullins, the names of people interviewed are shown. For example, here are just some of the types of people interviewed: * local grocery store employees * drug store owners and druggists * garage mechanic * service station operator If these persons were mentioned in any report going outside the FBI - it is entirely likely that they would be identified by a T-number How do I know that? Because in section 4 of the HQ file (pages 82-104) there is a correlation summary re: Mullins. That document summarizes information pertaining to Mullins and identifies the file number and serial number where the info is located. In many instances, you will see "protect identity" input after the name of the person who provided info. In these cases, T-numbers would be used. Here are a few examples: * a report from G-2 (Army Intelligence) * an employee at American National Life Insurance Company * ADL employees in Maryland, New York City, Chicago and Washington DC * a Bolling Air Force Base employee * a Maryville Detective Agency employee * a person described as "a potential panel source - PCI (Racial)". A panel source is defined by the FBI as follows: "Panel sources are defined as individuals who are not involved in an investigated group but who 'will attend its public gatherings on behalf of FBI for intelligence purposes or as potential witnesses.' Panel sources were first developed to meet the need for witnesses in the course of Smith Act trials of Communist Party members in the 1950s. In those trials, it was necessary to prove simple facts as to the existence of the Communist Party, the dates and places of public meetings held by the Party, and similar matters. To avoid surfacing and exposing regular FBI informants within the Party to establish such facts, panel sources were developed." Other examples of T-numbers are given to: * ONI (Office of Naval Intelligence) information * a clerk at the St. Louis National Personnel Records Center (where military service records are kept) * an apartment custodian re: rental and lease information * a person who provided a physical description of Mullins * a person who provided the FBI with photostats of correspondence between Mullins and Matt Koehl (American Nazi Party) * an employee at Talbot Real Estate Company * the Chief of Police in Louisville KY * an employee at the Illinois State Unemployment Office * an employee in the Registrar's Office of a university * a neighbor of Mullins * personnel file at Library of Congress Section 3 of the Mullins file contains reports about Mullins obtained from local Credit Bureaus As you consider the significance of all this information -- think of what Jason declared, i.e. "T numbers have NOTHING to do with "developing background" of an investigative target."

CNDI refers to Confidential National Defense Informant which in subsequent years (circa the 1950's) were known as security informants. Often, CNDI's were people employed by defense or military-related industries --- such as Boeing or Northrup or Lockheed. In other cases, they were informants inside the CPUSA. For example: the early files concerning FBI informant Matt Cvetic refer to him as a CNDI.

I am in the process of installing my new computer so I don't have a lot of time to address your claims. Briefly, however, the T-number was used by the FBI to conceal the identity of the person OR the method by which the FBI obtained information. So when a letterhead memorandum was sent outside the Bureau, the recipient could only know that the FBI obtained info from a source which was identified by that T-number and, as I mentioned previously, the T-number could even refer to NON-HUMANS -- as discussed by Director Hoover in his memo to the Attorney General. You could not be more mistaken when you claim that credit reporting agencies were never referenced by a T-number. You also could not be more mistaken when you claim that information primarily obtained illegally was assigned a T-number. After I finish installing all my new software and I have moved all my saved files over to my documents section -- I will be happy to give you some specific examples from my FBI files collection online.

Sorry -- I do not totally understand your point. We agree that routine background checks (from persons who have direct knowledge about something) would not qualify someone as "an FBI informant" -- although they might be assigned a T-number. The purpose of the T-number was simply to NOT reveal anything regarding how the FBI got its information. Actually, T-numbers were also assigned to NON-HUMAN sources -- such as wire taps or mail covers or surreptitious entries (aka black bag jobs). For example: In March 1955, FBI Director Hoover sent a memo to the Attorney General which made the following observations: "In many instances, a source concealed by a temporary informant symbol is not a live informant, but, instead, is a technical surveillance, a microphone surveillance, a trash cover, mail cover, or other investigative technique...In an estimated 55% of the Security of Government Employee cases, the reports contain inanimate sources of this type whose identities are concealed by temporary informant symbols. Other temporary informant symbols would pertain to such sources as live informants and neighbors or professional men who specifically requested their identities not be disclosed." [HQ 66-2542-3, serial #928, page 2; 3/1/55 Hoover memo to AG] Rothermel was NOT an FBI informant. If you are interested, I have posted his FBI personnel file online here: https://archive.org/details/RothermelJr.PaulM.HQ1 One of the methods that can be used to determine who actually was an FBI informant requires a review of their FBI file(s). Actual FBI informants had files created on them with either a 134- or a 137-prefix. In addition, very often, FBI files contain "search slips" which identify all references to that person contained in FBI files. Those search slips list all the file numbers (and often the specific serial numbers) which contain references to that person. So--it becomes easy to determine if any informant file was ever created. Lastly, all FBI informants submitted information to the FBI on a regular basis and their information was recorded on a specific form such as FD-209 or FD-306. If the informant provided a verbal report that was typed, he often was required to initial or sign that report to signify it was accurately reflecting his report. Significantly, there are no such documents in Rothermel's file. HOWEVER: he did contact the FBI-Dallas field office and FBI-HQ upon several occasions to provide unsolicited information which he thought the Bureau would want to know.

That is a silly reply. If the FBI contacts a Police Chief or Deputy Sheriff to ask them if they have information about Bart Kamp -- i.e. was he ever arrested or convicted of some crime in his city --- how does it become "snitching"? I did point out that a T-number was a temporary number designed to conceal the identity of someone who provided information. T-numbers were assigned to bank officials, credit reporting agencies, landlords, employers, law enforcement officials, newspaper reporters, contacts at veterans organizations, and a host of other information sources used by the FBI in order to develop background info about whatever subject was of interest.

Nothing particularly unusual about that. The FBI routinely contacted local and state law enforcement officials to inquire about whatever matters were of interest. Often, these folks were considered "established sources" -- because the FBI could ask them for information about any matter with the understanding that they would keep such contacts confidential. In the most generic sense, an "FBI informant" could be ANYBODY in an official or in an unofficial capacity who provided information. If YOU contacted the FBI or if you were contacted BY the FBI because they wanted to know something which you may have knowledge about -- then YOU might be listed on an FBI document as an "FBI informant". BUT it is entirely possible that you might be contacted only once or twice for some specific purpose. In order to determine if Sheriff Decker was genuinely an FBI informant would require obtaining his FBI file (if one even exists). If he regularly supplied the FBI with information, he would not be given just a T-number (a temporary code to conceal the identity of the person who provided information to the FBI). Instead, a genuine FBI informant would be assigned a permanent symbol number. If that person was an informant for the Dallas FBI field office, then his permanent symbol number would start with "DL" (for Dallas) and there would be a suffix added to his symbol number -- such as: DL-1234 (Rac) or (S) or (PSI) or (CI). Here is what such suffixes would mean: DL-1234-S = (a security informant for the Dallas field office) DL-1234-S* = (a security informant whose identity would never be revealed AND who was NOT available for court testimony; the asterisk (*) designated non-available informants) DL-1234 (Rac) = (a racial matters informant for the Dallas field office) DL-1234 (PSI) = a potential OR probationary security informant for the Dallas field office [Potential Security Informant refers to a person who was not yet established as a reliable information source. That process might take a year for the FBI to make a conclusion with respect to their reliability.) DL-1234 (CI) = (a criminal informant for the Dallas field office) -- OR "PCI" One of the JFK-related FBI documents released during 2017 contains a list of literally DOZENS of Chiefs of Police and County Sheriffs in Texas who were contacted about some matter (I forget what the subject was right now). All may have been given a T-number but few actually were genuine FBI informants.

Yes, Claire's book gives a very good idea of what it is like to live in a very dark ideological environment. She mentions me in her book because I sent her some information which she wanted.

Yes-- it was discussed in Harry's FBI-Los Angeles file.

The Edwin Walker Collection -- i.e. 1208 photos of individual pages of documents at the Briscoe Center -- has been online on Internet Archive website for over 2 years" https://archive.org/details/edwinwalkercollection&tab=collection Their webpage appears to have been created by "Emma Best" who is associated with Muckrock.com. I suspect she is related to Michael Best-- a prolific FOIA requester. Just FYI: Muckrock and Michael Best often copy documents obtained by other people and then post them online -- often without asking permission of the original requester.

Paul: The actual publication (not the photograph) which is a transcript of Walker's testimony is available for sale from Sacred Truth Publishing -- which sells a lot of bigoted literature -- including compilations of pamphlets and booklets originally published by Gerald L.K Smith -- decades ago. Some Collected Shorter Works of Gerald L. K. Smith, Volume One - http://sacredtruthministries.com/books/philosophy-political-science-law-economics-exposing-conspiracies

There are links which contain references to his Congressional testimony but I don't think there is any complete copy online. The following 17-page document is available for sale as part of a collection of Gerald LK Smith documents. https://archive.org/details/edwinwalkercollection?&sort=-downloads&page=5

The problems with Jason's message are as follows: 1. There are numerous methods which serious researchers can use to discover all the documents created by (or in the possession of and/or under the control of) government agencies. Nobody has ever found some previously unknown or secret indexing system which might produce a listing of records which have never been seen before. 2. IF the proposed new "FOIA request" about Walker refers to a plan to submit some new request for FBI documents, then there are some fundamental facts which must be addressed as follows: (2a) the FBI (like every large bureaucracy) created a very extensive cross-referenced indexing system to capture information about any and all subjects discussed in FBI documents. In a previous message I listed the DOZENS of different indexes used by the FBI to capture information about every conceivable subject. See: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22106-new-book/?page=104&tab=comments#comment-356905 This was particularly necessary because (unlike many other agencies).... (2b) the FBI had an intelligence function which required them to have rapid, thorough, and readily accessible access to pertinent data contained in FBI files and (2c) the FBI was required to compile and organize factual data and compelling evidence about matters which might have to withstand scrutiny within an adversarial courtroom environment 3. Because of (2b), the FBI developed systems to facilitate quick retrieval of data by their employees. (3a) Keep in mind that during the time period we are discussing (the 1960's), information was compiled and indexed BEFORE the advent of sophisticated computer systems. In other words, the 6000+ FBI Special Agents as well as all FBI HQ personnel did NOT have their own personal desktop computer so that they could perform their own search of FBI records. (3b) INSTEAD: The standard method used to retrieve information from FBI files was the same for all FBI employees regardless of each employee's status within the organization. In other words, both senior management officials (such as Assistant Directors, HQ Section Chiefs, HQ Supervisors, or Special Agents in Charge of a field office OR just a newly hired Special Agent) used the same method to request a search of FBI files to discover data on persons, organizations, publications, events, controversies, etc. That method was to fill out a search request form (form 4-22) and give it to the unit within either their field office location or at FBI HQ which performed records searches. [NOTE: However, there were some records or files where access was limited to just certain specific people.] 4. FBI records pertaining to Edwin Walker have been identifiable for many decades especially because FBI HQ compiled a "Correlation Summary" on two occasions regarding Walker (January 1964 and again in July 1966). A Correlation Summary lists all the file numbers and serial numbers containing information about a person or subject AND that summary also provides a synopsis of the information contained in those serials AND if the same information is contained in some other file -- that additional file and serial number is identified. 5. Another method which is particularly useful for researchers is when a field office is asked to identify all references in its indexing system to a specific person's name (or about an organization, publication, event, or other subject). The results of those requests are listed on a "Search Slip". FBI employees who perform searches are trained to find and list ANYTHING which corresponds to the search terms----including name variations. For example: a person named William Randolph Smith could be searched under "Bill", "Billy", "Willie" or W.R. Smith and other permutations. BOTTOM-LINE Researchers already know all the file numbers which contain some sort of reference to Edwin Walker. In my case, I requested and received all the main files created on Walker AND I also requested and received many (perhaps most) of the secondary files which contain references to Walker (but which are not exclusively about him). NOTE: Many of those secondary files will be added to my Internet Archive webpage once the Univ of California finishes their scanning project of my paper FBI files.] Nobody has ever discovered ANY references to Walker being involved in a murder plot against JFK -- and certainly not in conjunction with the people whom are the main protagonists in the preferred conspiracy theories on Education Forum. Consequently, one has to ask the obvious question: WHAT would any new FOIA request accomplish? YES--there are some files which have been destroyed (such as a New York City file on Walker) but many field offices opened files for some specific purpose (such as covering a speech) and then closed their file -- or subsequently destroyed it because it contained no useful information which was not already in HQ files.

Latest Group of JFK Assassination Records Available to the Public Press Release ·Thursday, November 9, 2017 Washington, DC In the fourth public release this year, the National Archives today posted 13,213 records subject to the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992 (JFK Act). The majority of the documents released today were released previously in redacted form. The versions released today were prepared by agencies prior to October 26, 2017, and were posted to make the latest versions of the documents available as expeditiously as possible. Released records are available for download. On October 26, 2017, President Donald J. Trump directed agencies to re-review each and every one of their redactions over the next 180 days. As part of that review process, agency heads were directed to be extremely circumspect in recommending any further postponement of information in the records. Agency heads must report to the Archivist of the United States by March 12, 2018, any specific information within particular records that meets the standard for continued postponement under section 5(g)(2)(D) of the JFK Act. The Archivist must then recommend to the President by March 26, 2018, whether this information warrants continued withholding after April 26, 2018. The records included in this public release have not yet been re-reviewed by the agencies as part of that process and have not been reviewed by the National Archives. The National Archives released 676 documents on Nov. 3, 2,891 documents on Oct. 26, and 3,810 records on July 24. The National Archives established the John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection in November 1992, and it consists of approximately five million pages of records. The vast majority of the collection has been publicly available without any restrictions since the late 1990s. Online Resources: The President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Documenting the Death of a President JFK Assassination Records Review Board The work of the Kennedy Assassination Records Collection JFK Assassination Records FAQs Warren Commission Report

Latest Group of JFK Assassination Records Available to the Public Press Release ·Thursday, November 9, 2017 Washington, DC In the fourth public release this year, the National Archives today posted 13,213 records subject to the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992 (JFK Act). The majority of the documents released today were released previously in redacted form. The versions released today were prepared by agencies prior to October 26, 2017, and were posted to make the latest versions of the documents available as expeditiously as possible. Released records are available for download. On October 26, 2017, President Donald J. Trump directed agencies to re-review each and every one of their redactions over the next 180 days. As part of that review process, agency heads were directed to be extremely circumspect in recommending any further postponement of information in the records. Agency heads must report to the Archivist of the United States by March 12, 2018, any specific information within particular records that meets the standard for continued postponement under section 5(g)(2)(D) of the JFK Act. The Archivist must then recommend to the President by March 26, 2018, whether this information warrants continued withholding after April 26, 2018. The records included in this public release have not yet been re-reviewed by the agencies as part of that process and have not been reviewed by the National Archives. The National Archives released 676 documents on Nov. 3, 2,891 documents on Oct. 26, and 3,810 records on July 24. The National Archives established the John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection in November 1992, and it consists of approximately five million pages of records. The vast majority of the collection has been publicly available without any restrictions since the late 1990s. Online Resources: The President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Documenting the Death of a President JFK Assassination Records Review Board The work of the Kennedy Assassination Records Collection JFK Assassination Records FAQs Warren Commission Report