Paul Trejo

Thanks for double-checking that, Ernie. It seems that I was mistaken in my reading of the NARA Indexes. Still -- you need to relax about these matters, Ernie. Just because I made a mistake doesn't mean I'm trying to deliberately lie about matters. When I'm mistaken, I admit it. I still need more time to gather all the documents about Wesley Grapp and Harry Dean from 1964 forward. I still maintain that Harry Dean and Wesley Grapp rode in a car together in Los Angeles in 1964, discussing Harry's beliefs about the John Birch Society and the murder of JFK. Harry's recollections of these events a half-century ago have been remarkably accurate. Nothing you've shown so far disproves Harry's claim -- and in fact, you've provided much information to substantiate Harry's claim that he had multiple interactions with the FBI during the years in question. Regards, --Paul Trejo

Tommy, It's an intriguing idea -- contacting 83-year-old Celio Sergio Castro Alba in prison. I'll actually look at some details to gauge the feasibility of it. (I've got an 8-5 regular job, so I can't just pick up and travel to interview people -- I conduct almost all my interviews over telephone and Email -- and that would have to be the case with Celio Castro as well. I'll ask around.) I doubt many aspects of Celio's story -- and I don't know his politics, so I wonder if he would be honest with me. For one thing, I believe his story when he says that Hall and Howard left Celio in Texas as they traveled to Mexico. However, I disbelieve when he says the cities were El Paso and Juarez respectively. (I wonder how he'd take my suggestion.) Also, it's virtually guaranteed that Hall and Howard left the trailer full of weapons with Celio in Texas (in whatever city) for many reasons: 1. Why take a full trailer on a long detour when you have a bodyguard sitting around doing nothing? 2. Celio was probably brought along for this trip specifically because he could stay in Texas and guard the trailer. 3. Silvia Odio saw no trailer attached to the car parked outside her window which she described to the FBI. As for the car itself, since Hall and Howard were always hard up for money (as I understand it) they would probably not have another car just sitting around for a long detour. They probably used the same car. (That's a separate issue that requires further research.) As for how long Celio waited for Hall and Howard to return from Mexico -- I think we have some firm guidelines: i. They were in Texas starting around 9/20/1963, according to Larry Howard ii. They checked into the Lawnview Model on 9/28/1963, according to the Lawnview management records. iii. Therefore, the outside limit for his wait would be eight days, approximately. Eight days is a reasonable amount of time to: (1) get Oswald in New Orleans; (2) meet Silvia Odio in Dallas; (3) deposit Oswald in Mexico City; and (4) return to Dallas to rejoin Celio. As for where Celio stayed in Texas (in whatever city) -- we know that Celio stayed in the home of Larry Howard when they were in Southern California -- this is probably because Celio only spoke Spanish, and Larry Howard's family was Mexican-American. There is a fair chance, therefore, that Celio stayed at the home of Larry Howard's other relatives or friends in Texas. That could be confirmed, possibly. We have decent information that Celio had few friends and family himself in California or Texas, since he had just escaped from Communist Cuba, knowing nobody inside the USA. Celio also had no money and no other job than a mercenary, paramilitary fighter. Celio would have probably been totally dependent on Hall and Howard. According to Harry Dean, Guy Gabaldon gave Loran Hall some money for their trip from New Orleans to Mexico City and back, so perhaps Hall gave Celio some money to survive in Texas while Hall and Howard drove to Mexico. (Or perhaps Hall and Howard gave their Texas connections some money to take care of Celio for a week -- that guess seems more likely to me.) You ask a good question, Tommy, about Masen's gun shop in Dallas as one possible stop for Celio and the trailer-load of weapons. After all, there was a YMCA in Dallas, which travelers often used as a hostel. (My question would be, how many rifles were in the lot? Also, how many rifles could Masen convert to fully automatic in one week?) Tommy, I don't know why you asked about bus travel for Loran, Larry and Celio from Dallas to Miami. They had a car and a trailer full of weapons to deliver to mercenary Freedom Fighters in Florida (including Interpen, La Sambra and others).. You ask whether Celio might know the name of the owner of the old, blue Oldsmobile driven by Hall and Howard in 1963. It's my guess that Celio would not know one Americano from another in those days. (Celio would probably remember if the car they drove on that trip was a blue Oldsmobile.) It would be interesting to ask about Celio Castro's leg -- if he had a limp (as Hemming claimed). However, Tommy, regarding Lee Harvey Oswald, we have no information (as far as I know) that Celio ever even met Oswald. Celio would not have seen Oswald during this trip, as it seems laid out today. Further, my guess is that Celio was selected for this trip (his very first trip with Hall and Howard) because he was a loyal and dependable mercenary soldier who needed a job and could keep his mouth shut Celio knew almost no Americans and he was flat broke. His country was occupied by the Communists, and he was ready to fight, but he needed support. Celio says he first believed that Hall and Howard were patriotic soldiers. That's why he accepted this gun-running job with them in the first place. This was not only Celio's frst trip -- it was also his last trip with Hall and Howard. After this trip Celio got the idea that Hall and Howard were goof-offs -- not very patriotic and not very good soldiers. Why would Celio think that? For one thing, because they interrupted the important work of gun-running to take a joy-ride to Mexico! I find it easiest to believe that the "Oswald detour" was entirely on a need-to-know basis only. Not one word about Oswald would have been spoken to Celio. (This gave everybody plausible deniability). Also, it is plausible that Loran Hall and Larry Howard told Celio Castro Alba that they really were going to Juarez, Mexico. So Celio really believed it then and probably still believes it today Why? Because Loran Hall wanted to party, just like he said. But what about this important shipment of guns to the Freedom Fighters? So, this would explain why Celio would have nothing to say about Lee Harvey Oswald. He probably never laid eyes on Lee Harvey Oswald in his life. In fact, it is likely that Hall and Howard told Celio nothing at all about anything at all. That would be true to form. That would also explain why Celio never wanted to travel with these two jokers again, anywhere. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

What utter nonsense! ...You are so prejudiced, Ernie Lazar, that anything you print or publish must be taken with a large grain of Epsom Salt. With utmost sincerity, --Paul Trejo ...I note for the record, that you deliberately truncated my point #5 to change its clear meaning. You edited it to present it as a declarative statement of my belief when, instead, I clearly prefaced the comment with this qualifier: "If I was conspiratorially-inclined, I could even build a case around the supposition..." Truncated or not, Ernie, those are YOUR WORDS. Now everybody can see how your mind works -- deviously. All your reseach is being funneled through your prejudices, and treated with your exaggerations as you jump to conclusions based on incomplete data. It's all very clear. With utmost sincerity, --Paul Trejo

I want to add, Tommy, that the problem of Leopoldo and Angelo may be the central key to unlocking the mystery of the murder of JFK. I say this with the backing of Sylvia Meagher and Gaeton Fonzi, who both recognized that Silvia Odio's testimony was concrete PROOF that Lee Harvey Oswald had accomplices, and that the FBI (and Warren Commission) deliberately acted to sweep all that evidence under the rug. (Gaeton Fonzi adds, that even if somebody else besides Lee Harvey Oswald was at Silvia Odio's doorstep that evening, the very fact that his person was called "Leon Oswald" (where Leon is the Spanish equivalent of "Lee") in the context of remarks about murdering JFK, this all by itself is proof of a conspiracy to make Lee Harvey Oswald into a patsy for a JFK murder.) What is more, the position of Leopoldo and Angelo evokes connections from within Cuban Exile paramilitary groups (e.g. Interpen, La Sambra, DACA, DRE, Alpha 66 and INCA) as well as the CIA (which was a sponsor for each of those groups), as well as fellow travelers Frank Sturgis, David Ferrie, Carlos Bringuier, Guy Bannister, Ed Butler, Clay Shaw and those who were cited by Jim Garrison's investigation. Besides the whole CIA-Cuban Exile connection, Leopoldo and Angelo are evidently connected in Dallas with Ex-General Edwin Walker, attorney Robert Morris and Lester Logue, all members of the John Birch Society in Dallas, which was also influential among the Dallas Police Department officials and sundry radicals within it. Leopoldo and Angelo also have a link with the John Birch Society in Southern California, including Harry Dean, Guy Gabaldon and Congressman John Rousselot. These guys got around. The common link that ties up all these connections (outside the CIA) is apparently the John Birch Society, which was a beacon for right-wing radicals, like Joseph Milteer. Naturally, also, when we speak of Cuban Exile paramilitary groups, we cannot ignore their financial backers in the Mafia, including Carlos Bringuier, Santos Traficante, Sam Giancana, Johnny Roselli and Charles Nicoletti (whose chauffer was James Files). It seems to me that the more work we do to dig out the facts behind Leopoldo and Angelo, the closer we'll get to a solution to the JFK murder mystery. I realize some people are waiting patiently for 2017 when the JFK Act promises to release all Lee Harvey Oswald files still held secret by the FBI and CIA -- but after 50 years of frustration, can we really afford to wait silently? Best regards, --Paul Trejo

What utter nonsense! You have some nerve, Ernie, criticizing JFK conspiracy theorists, when you come up with junk like this! Actually, Harry Dean could have no idea whatsoever that the FBI would ever destroy anything at all relating to his case or any other case. It was clearly Harry Dean's belief for his entire life until just weeks ago that the FBI would preserve all of its records pertaining to its very serious business. Furthermore, in 1990, when Harry Dean first published his manuscript, Crosstrails, the principals were still very much ALIVE, and Harry Dean made every effort he could to send them a copy. You are so prejudiced, Ernie Lazar, that anything you print or publish must be taken with a large grain of Epsom Salt. With utmost sincerity, --Paul Trejo

Yes, Tommy, I do believe you've identified CELIO CASTRO, who accompanied Loran Hall (perhaps Leopoldo) and Larry Howard (perhaps Angelo) on their trip from Los Angeles to Florida with a trailer full of military supplies (including drugs) derived from wealthy John Birch Society members, and collected by Guy Gabaldon and Harry Dean. Notice that the story of CELIO CASTRO within the FBI memo that you also cited, makes possible the dates and the personnel and the Mexico trip that JFK researchers have proposed for Leopoldo and Angelo. Although Larry Howard claimed that he was not at Silvia Odio's doorstep with Loran Hall and Lee Harvey Oswald, he LIED when he said he was in Texas from 9/20/63 to 10/3/63 with Loran Hall and CELIO CASTRO. We know Larry Howard LIED because CELIO CASTRO said that Loran and Larry left him, CELIO, in Texas on 9/20/63 while they went on a trip to Mexico! That is easily enough time for Loran and Larry to travel to New Orleans, pick up Lee Harvey Oswald, and then travel back to Dallas on 9/25/63 to visit Silvia Odio with Lee Harvey Oswald, and then escort Oswald to Mexico City (to meet Guy Gabaldon, who had a house in Mexico City as well as in Southern California -- and a private airplane to shuttle back and forth nearly every week). Loran Hall and Larry Howard also had enough time to return to Texas (probably Dallas) pick up CELIO CASTRO and their trailer of supplies, and check into the Lawnview Motel on 9/28/63, for which we have documented evidence. CELIO CASTRO proves that Larry Howard totally LIED. Loran Hall admitted he totally LIED when William Seymour refused to back his first story to the FBI. CELIO CASTRO, I believe, LIED about the names of the cities -- (Juarez and El Paso). The general locations remain plausible (Mexico and Texas). That Loran was Leopoldo and Larry was Angelo could not be determined by Silvia Odio, but for some reason the FBI picked up Loran Hall *almost immediately* and for some strange reason Loran Hall confessed to meeting Odio at her doorstep during the final week of September 1963. That is, he confessed AT FIRST. Then he took it back. IMHO, your work in digging out CELIO CASTRO has the historical effect of strongly confirming the testimony of Silvia Odio, as well as the memoirs of Harry Dean. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Ernie, things are much different in 2014 than they were in 2008. The Mary Ferrell site has revolutionized JFK research, for one thing. Your petty complaints about Harry Dean are beginning to disappoint me, Ernie. I used to think that you had something valuable to share, regarding FBI files and insight into them. Now it's becoming increasingly clear that you just want to carp and complain, and you have nothing positive to offer. We don't even know your motivation. It's kind of sad. Sincerely, --Paul Trejo

Well, Ernie, as I keep repeating -- but your mind seems as closed like a steel trap -- you're not giving me enough time. For example, on NARA today, under the FBI records under the Wesley Grapp heading, there is one file that is also cross-labeled "Harry Dean", and it is dated 6/28/1961. That's 1961, Ernie. Hmm. You haven't found anything like this, Ernie, but NARA is displaying this item for public viewing today. Why don't you have this FBI file, Ernie? Well, maybe you're just so prejudiced that you overlooked it! See, Ernie, your prejudice can jeopardize your entire project. I keep warning you of this, but you refuse to listen to reason. But soon -- given just a little more time -- I'll have a copy of that NARA archive of the FBI, with both Wesley Grapp and Harry Dean's name on it, and dated in 1961 -- something you have been calling INCONCEIVABLE for many months on this very Forum. Also, you keep callling me a xxxx in public, as above, even though the rules of civility and even the rules of this Forum forbid it. I haven't stooped down to your level, Ernie Lazar, but actually, the truth-challenged party on this thread is yourself. All I need to prove my case about Harry Dean is a little more time... With utmost sincerity, --Paul Trejo

Actually, Ernie, what's evident so far is that your records remain incomplete. Therefore, you revert to your modus operandi of exaggerating the value of the data you possess. Based on your exaggeration, you then jump to conclusions about Harry Dean; conclusions which are not fully warranted. The jury is still out -- only the prejudiced have already made up their minds. Sincerely, --Paul Trejo

Harry, once your request for your FBI records is fulfilled, you'll be able to demonstrate your claims in concrete terms -- with supporting documentation. Then you'll be able to put to rest the 48 years of disinformation continually spread about your Memoirs -- even in this very Forum; and even on the Spartacus web site, which is a sister-site of this Forum. The coming FBI torrent of records won't be easy -- and it's going to take a lot of time and effort -- but I'm on your side in this. Your Memoirs bring many aspects of the JFK murder into harmony and focus: Wesley Grapp; Ex-General Walker; Silvia Odio; Loran Hall; Larry Howard; Quarito; the John Birch Society; attorney Robert Morris; Lester Logue; Carlos Bringuier; Ed Butler; Interpen; La Sambra; DACA; Alpha 66; Lee Harvey Oswald -- all these accounts take on a sharper focus using your Memoirs. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

One of the most intriguing histories about Loran Hall (possibly Leopoldo) and Larry Howard (possibly Angelo) was about Hall's arrest in Dallas on 16 October 1963. During the Jim Garrison hearings, Loran Hall appeared before Jim Garrison, and later gave an interview to Harold Weisberg who formatted the story for the National Enquirer (September 1968). Here is how Jim Garrison's files reported the story: Loran Hall was stopped in his car in Dallas for having a concealed license plate and was then arrested along with William Seymour for possession of dangerous drugs (pep pills in their glove compartment). From the Dallas jailhouse, Loran Hall called General Walker, who then called attorney Robert Morris (both members of the Dallas John Birch Society) who promptly obtained $5,000 bond to release the two men. Hall and Seymour spent that night at a local YMCA. The charges were dropped on the condition that the two men exit Dallas within 24 hours. Loran Hall then said the following morning -- taking advantage of his 24 hour notice, he attended a Bircher meeing in Lester Logue's Dallas office. In that meeting, several right-wing activists gathered to talk about politics. Hall made his regular pitch for funds and support for Cuba Raid groups, La Sambra, Interpen and others. At this meeting, said Loran Hall, one of those present offered Loran Hall $50,000 to murder JFK. According to Loran Hall, he totally rejected the offer, and said the speaker was out of line. Lester Logue, also, chimed in to say the speaker was out of line. Loran Hall told those assembled that he would break the law only to the point of breaking the US Neutrality Act with regard to Cuba -- but beyond that line he would not cross. To Harold Weisberg, Loran Hall added, "anyway I say this: Lester Logue had nothing to do with it [JFK's death]." In other words, Loran Hall claimed to have special knowledge about who wasn't (and so perhaps who was) directly involved in the JFK murder. In the corresponding National Enquirer article, Loran Hall claimed that "radical right-wingers", including "Ex-military officers" made that offer of $50,000. Significantly, that statement directly contradicted Loran Halls' intereview in 29 December 1967 on Channel 7 TV News program in Los Angeles at 11pm, where he claimed that "liberals" had JFK murdered because JFK was moving towards "the center". Hall also complained in that article that he was arrested on 16 October 1963 only to put his name on record as having been in Dallas, so that when the JFK was murdered, he could be parlayed as a possible patsy. All this is interesting because one of the most prevalent ideological themes of the JFK assassination was the myth that the left-wing (liberals, Communists) murdered JFK using Lee Harvey Oswald. The notion that Oswald was a supporter of Communist Fidel Castro was accepted even by the Warren Commission, even though the evidence against it was significant (e.g. the FPCC organization in New Orleans headed by Oswald had only one member -- Oswald himself). The original intent of the JFK plotters, I suspect, was to inspire the USA to invade Cuba and kill Fidel Castro. That part of the JFK plot failed, according to me. In any case, the role played by Loran Hall in the JFK murder becomes increasingly suspicious the more we delve into it. You can read that entire National Enquirer article at this URL: [http://www.pet880.com/images/19680903_Natl_Enquirer_NB.pdf] Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Thank you, Robert, for sharing this viewpoint and these resources. The document that you cited from the HSCA era does seem to mention the same George Deen referred to by resigned General Edwin Walker during his Warren Commission testimony. Walker was even then, trying to propose that the Communists killed JFK (mainly for the purpose of blaming the right-wing for the murder, and further dividing the USA). In that document, which is an example of the FBI spying on the Communist Party in the USA (CP, USA), a memo was to be sent out to these three hundred CPUSA members. The memo was forwarded by a Spanish-speaking member, who advised the Dallas recipient of the memo (Dan Yarbrough) to ensure that George Deen of Dallas also received a copy. The FBI memo is dated November, 1960. You suggest, Robert, that the Cold War was alive and well in Dallas in the early 1960's, and the right-wing (with help from the FBI) was happy to spy on the CPUSA activities in Dallas. I would agree entirely. In the earliest days of the JFK murder, before the Warren Commission was established, the rumors that flew around in US newspapers would alternatively blame the extreme right-wing and the extreme left-wing. Even among the right-wing, it made very little sense that a Communist like Lee Harvey Oswald would kill a Communist like JFK. So, the right-wing was a frequent target in the US press. Ex-Generl Edwin Walker went on a TV news program to announce that Communists were trying to blame the Dallas right-wing. This announcement is available today on YouTube here: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mx_-K4jCpm8] Harry Dean once showed me a vinyl LP record he retained from the early 1960's, of Billy James Hargis, pretending to interview Lee Harvey Oswald. Hargis somehow obtained the New Orleans WDSU radio broadcast of Lee Harvey Oswald of 9/19/1963 debating with Carlos Bringuier and Ed Butler. Hargis edited the original tape by using his own voice to replace the voices of the interviewers (Bill Slatter and William Stuckey) -- so that the listener might believe that Billy James Hargis himself was interviewing Lee Harvey Oswald. Then Hargis added his commentary at the end, concluding that Lee Harvey Oswald was a Marxist-Leninist by his own admission, and therefore we have final proof that "the Communists murdered JFK." Hargis was clearly reaching. I tend to agree with your politics on this matter, Robert. I'd like to add, further, that the efforts of the right-wing in defense of Edwin Walker were uniquely remarkable. Although perhaps most Americans thought it fitting that JFK and RFK would remit Ex-General Edwin Walker to an insane asylum after he led the racial riot at Ole Miss in late 1962, we should recall that the John Birch Society wrote a book on the topic (The Invasion of Mississippi by Earl Lively, Jr., 1963) blaming JFK and the Federal troops for the violence at Ole Miss, and claiming that Edwin Walker was merely there trying to "calm things down." Anybody, however, who had heard General Walker on the radio and TV in the days before the riots, knew that Walker called for "ten thousand strong, from every state in the Union," to bring their flags, their skillets and their tents to Mississippi to confront JFK and the Federal Troops. The FBI traced dozens of calls and vehicles streaming into Mississippi from coast to coast -- many with trunks full of weapons -- manned by former US Army troops who had served under General Walker for many years until 1961. It is still amazing to me today that General Walker was completely acquitted of all charges in the Ole Miss riot. Either the right-wing or the left-wing was going to be blamed -- because this was perhaps the peak of the Cold War. In my opinion, the JFK plotters wanted first and foremost to spur the USA into invading Cuba and killing Fidel Castro. (This would have been the right-wing dream.) The fact that the Warren Commission did not move in their direction convinces me that those who plotted to murder JFK were not the same people who plotted to cover-up the truth about the JFK murder. They worked at odds. This is a minority opinon, granted, but I think the politics (and the evidence) will bear this out. Finally, regarding that second FBI memo from the Mary Ferrell site that you shared, Robert, I would add that Edwin Walker did have among his personal papers a booklet bearing the title, "What is Counterinsurgency?" which he himself wrote. It was, as I recall, made available to the members of his group, the Friends of Walker. It seems that W.T. Caley, who accidentally told FBI agent Louis Nicoletti about "Counter-Insurgency", was probably a member of the Friends of Walker group -- or knew a member. Best regards, --Paul Trejo <edit typos>

The John Birch Society was often scrutinized by the Warren Commission. The Warren Commission published not only 26 volumes of Hearings and Exhibits, but also a single summary volume, entitled "The President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy" (September, 1964). It is 888 pages long. The John Birch Society was scrutinized in that volume in multiple places. For one thing, Lee Harvey Oswald had the name and the telephone number of resigned General Edwin Walker in his personal telephone book. This required an answer; and Edwin Walker was a leader in the John Birch Society. For another thing, the famous 'black-bordered ad' entitled, "Welcome Mr. Kennedy to Dallas," which listed a dozen "WHY" items accusing JFK of Communism, was also traced to the John Birch Society on pages 294-299 of those volumes. The upshot of those pages is as follows: 1. The 'black bordered ad' was signed by Bernard W. Weissman, a member of CUSA (Conservatism USA), an ambitious right-wing action committee started by US Army servicemen in Germany in 1961. The leader of the CUSA group was Larrie Schmidt. 2. Bernard Weissman had been in Dallas only three weeks before publishing the 'black bordered ad.' Larrie Schmidt had been in Dallas about a year, maneuvering within Dallas right-wing circles for strategic advancement, and urging Weissman and other CUSA members to move to Dallas to help him. 3. Larrie Schmidt helped Ex-General Walker and other members of the John Birch Society booby-trap the Dallas Memorial Auditorium on 23 Oct 1963, in preparation for Adlai Stevenson's speech there on 24 Oct 1963. 4. National notoriety of Stevenson's humiliation greatly encouraged Bernard Weissman and another CUSA member to move to Dallas in early November 1963. 5. Once in Dallas, they promptly joined a local John Birch Society chapter, and were introduced to one of its active officers, Joseph P. Grinnan, 6. Grinnan managed and solicited money for the full-page ad, and also conferred with other, unnamed, John Birch Society leaders to provide and edit the wording of the ad. The role of Weissman was mainly to affix his signature to the bottom of the finished product, and to hand-deliver the ad to the Dallas Morning News. Weissman, the new kid in town, was basically used as a shill -- he did not know the names of the donors. 7. A fictitious sponsoring organization was invented to conceal the John Birch Society from publicity, namely, the "American Fact-Finding Committee." (Weissman admitted to the Warren Commission that the 'black bordered ad' was the creation of the John Birch Society.) 8. The Warren Commission then obtained the names of three men who donated money to Grinnan to support this ad -- all three were prominent members of the John Birch Society in Dallas, namely: Nelson B. Hunt, Edgar R. Crissey and H.R. Bright. These men had demanded authority over the wording of the ad (since they paid for it). 9. Grinnan, Hunt, Crissey and Bright were all questioned by the FBI, and all denied any knowledge of a plot to kill JFK. The month prior to this, Lee Harvey Oswald spoke publicly of attending the 23 Oct 1963 meeting of Ex-General Walker at the Dallas Memorial Auditorium. Oswald wrote in a letter (cited by the Warren Commission) telling how Walker's meeting resulted in the attacks on Adlai Stevenson at that same auditorium the very next evening. Larrie Schmidt told newspapers that he saw no spitting at Stevenson, and that Stevenson accidentally walked into a placard -- that the protests were peaceful. Schmidt later admitted, however, that the Auditorium was indeed booby-trapped with a giant, drop-down banner, hung from the ceiling the night before -- unfurled by a rope, which read, "US out of UN! and UN out of US!" Harry Dean's memoirs, which place the John Birch Society front and center in the suspect list of JFK murderers, are not alone in their suspicions, nor have they ever been. Best regards, --Paul Trejo <edit typos>

Well, you've basically lost your manners again, Ernie. Still, I'll respond one more time. A) You continue to claim that you know how many FBI serials, files, pages that exist on Harry Dean. But you haven't proved that. Still, you claim to be an expert on the topic. You know about the FBI forms, but you don't really know the FBI content. So, actually, you're not an expert on the topic. B] I'm not the one who pretends to know the extent of FBI data, Ernie; that's your claim. I say that we haven't seen all the data yet. Every few months we find a new cache of FBI data on Harry Dean. I expect that to be the case with Harry's personal request for his FBI files. I predict we'll find things you never dreamed of, Ernie. C) You seem to be ignorant, Ernie, about the JFK research on the FBI and J. Edgar Hoover. It's a paradox that you know more about FBI procedure and forms that most people, yet you seem to know very little about the status of J. Edgar Hoover and his multiple lies to the Warren Commission. That's really JFK Research 101 around here, Ernie. You're behind the times. D) You keep using the word, 'INCONCEIVABLE,' Ernie. I don't think it means what you think it means. E) As for the left-wing FPCC, it is a matter of historical fact that the JBS (e.g. Guy Bannister) and other right-wing radicals in New Orleans in 1963 had a fake FPCC. Lee Harvey Oswald was the one and only member of that fake FPCC. Every JFK researcher knows this fact, Ernie -- why don't you know it? F) Insofar as Harry Dean took all his knowledge about a JFK plot to the FBI, then he committed no felony. On the contrary, J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI may have committed a felony by failing to act on that information, and by covering it up for fifty years. That's not only my position, Ernie, but it's the position of perhaps a growing number of JFK researchers. Sincerely, --Paul Trejo

Ernie, you're slipping back into your insulting ways. But I'll keep the door open a while longer. Here are my careful replies to those remarks of yours that were at least partially respectful: 2. You say, Ernie, that "it is still necessary to apply that focus to what Harry contemporaneously told the FBI in 1964 when that 'main point' was even more relevant and current." I agree with this. Yet I want to see all the FBI files available, not just one or two. You're not providing the full picture for me to comment upon. Soon, however, Harry Dean will obtain FBI files from the US government about himself -- including many files about Wesley Grapp. Then we'll have something substantial to talk about. 3. You say, Ernie, "The type of information which Harry was providing to the FBI was NOT the type which would be withheld." This is your continuing error -- you believe you KNOW all the information that Harry was providing to the FBI. I say that you cannot draw that conclusion on the little bit of data that the FBI was willing to show to you. You say to me, Ernie, that "NOBODY (except you) believes that there are any 'secret' Harry files." But recent history has upheld my position. Last year you were announcing that the FBI had nothing about Harry Dean, not even a case number. Well, we found that case number, didn't we? And based on that you obtained hundreds of files on Harry Dean. No, they weren't secret - but they were unknown to you. I reserve the right to use the word, 'secret,' to refer to rare files that most people don't know about -- including Ernie Lazar. You wrote about the FBI, Ernie, saying, "in Los Angeles, they considered Harry a 'mental case.' You have never come to terms with that FACT." You're mistaken, because I remarked on that fact at length -- I said that the Los Angeles FBI was arrogant and insulting, and they weren't offering a medical opinion, because they aren't qualified for that. They were just being arrogant. Remember that the FBI Director decreed that Lee Harvey Oswald was the Lone Assassin of JFK. Harry Dean disagreed with that. No FBI agent would contradict J. Edgar Hoover -- so naturally, just as the FBI would consider Silvia Odio to be a 'mental case,' as they wrote, because she claimed that Oswald did not act alone, so also would the FBI in Los Angeles behave in exactly the same way towards Harry Dean. 4. You wrote, Ernie: "If the JBS was the entire focus of Harry's understanding regarding a 'plot' to murder somebody, it is inconceivable that NONE of Harry's letters to the FBI in Los Angeles mention the JBS or Walker or Rousselot!" But you're simply mistaken, and I already answered this well. Why did you shut your eyes to my replies? The individuals that Harry Dean focused upon in those letters you cite included Loran Hall, who was clearly linked with the JBS and Walker as FBI records themselves have shown. Also, you again seem to believe that you have *all* of the Harry Dean files and letters. But you don't. (In fact, you aren't sharing the few you have with this thread as you used to do -- so nobody here can really verify anything you say anymore.) For example, Harry Dean -- whose word has been 99% perfect so far -- insists that he had long conversations with Wesley Grapp. You have not been able to find those FBI records -- so you gave up looking, and presumed they don't exist. I maintain that they will turn up -- sooner or later. Also, Ernie, you wrote: "Harry told the police department interviewers that he gave the Justice Department information about 'the FPCC bunch that, as you know, finally killed Mr. Kennedy.' THAT WAS HARRY'S CONCLUSION IN MAY 1964!" Yes, and actually New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison proved that the JFK plotters really were operating a fake FPCC chapter in New Orleans. Lee Harvey Oswald was the one and only member of that fake FPCC. So, yes, it really was that "FPCC bunch" that finally killed JFK. So, Harry Dean was right again. 7. You wrote, Ernie: "WHEN did Harry 'encourage these guys to go forth and kill JFK?' BE SPECIFIC. You have previously written in this thread that Harry is NOT criminally liable because he was NOT an actual participant -- but merely a passive observer. If your NEW position is actually the case, i.e. he 'encouraged these guys to go forth and kill JFK,' then Harry just became an accessory to murder and should be prosecuted!" Actually, Ernie, Harry Dean has worried about this for half a century now. If you read our eBook you'd know that Harry Dean did play along with the plotters. He even put in his two cents during the main meeting with Walker and Rousselot at that JBS Headquarters, saying that 'the FPCC was a dangerous Communist organization that deserved to be shut down hard,' and so encouraged their plot. At the same time, Harry Dean also admitted that he thought (and hoped) that the plotters were just "letting off steam" and putting on airs for each other. It was in this spirit of showing off that Harry Dean played along with them, and "encouraged these guys to go forth and kill JFK." What exonerates Harry Dean is not, as you claimed, that he was "merely a passive observer." No, what we say in our eBook is that the innocence of Harry Dean is based on the fact that he took this information to the FBI as soon as he could -- and that the FBI still has these records! (Naturally, it will not be flattering for the FBI to expose these, so they are probably protected by "exceptions to the FOIA". That's my theory.) 8. As for Rapp's position on Silvia Odio and the JFK murder, his opinion is printed in black and white in the letter you copied in. I think you don't have enough background in the JFK murder yet, however, to understand Rapp's position. Sincerely, --Paul Trejo

All right, Ernie, your post was objective and respectful, so perhaps we can begin a new chapter of civility on this thread. I'll respond to your questions carefully. 1. I'm willing, for the sake of argument, to focus on the 11/19/64 interview with Harry and his 12/5/64 letter to FBI-Los Angeles. 2. I agree that the main point of our eBook is that Harry Dean warned the Los Angeles FBI about a Birch Society plot to murder JFK (months before the actual event occurred. 3. I still maintain that we have not seen all the US government records about Harry Dean, simply because some of them relate to the JFK assassination, and are still protected under exceptions to the FOIA. Even though the FBI released *some* of those files, they have not released them *all*. For example, the FBI released *some* documents about the murder of JFK and Harry's contacts with the FBI which discuss that matter, as long as Harry is made to look absurd in them -- very much like the FBI made Silvia Odio look absurd in 1964. Those records are already public. That will remain my opinion until the FBI verifiably releases all documents related to Harry Dean. What is my rationale for promoting the memoirs of Harry Dean? Actually, I'm working a process of elimination regarding the claims of Harry Dean; yet after more than three years of effort, all efforts so far have shown that Harry Dean is telling the TRUTH. (Your negative efforts, Ernie, are paradoxically helpful to my project.) Further, the FBI and NARA still adhere to FOIA exceptions on the topic of the JFK assassination. This worries me. Even though they promise to release everything by 2017, the mere fact that they have held back for a half-century remains suspicious. We know, also, that some FBI records have already been destroyed. So, just in case the US government in 2017 claims to release all its JFK documents and yet still insists that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone -- then I think JFK researchers must be ready to respond. We cannot just rest and trust our government to tell the truth after a half-century of secrets. We need to ask the hard questions. 4. You note, Ernie, that when Harry spoke with FBI agent Ferd J. Rapp on 19 Nov 1964, Harry did not mention Rousselot or the Birch Society, and you ask why. In my opinion, not every conversation from Harry had to involve the JBS. I have already said that it was specific individuals within and around the JBS in Southern California that Harry Dean identified in a JFK plot -- including Loran Hall. The conversation with Ferd Rapp that you cite was about Loran Hall. So, it was an indirect reference to the JBS. I would caution the reader, however, to avoid the conclusion that this letter by Ferd Rapp is the only such letter that the FBI has about Harry Dean's interaction with the Los Angeles FBIfrom 1963-1965 5. You also cite, Ernie, Harry's 12/5/64 letter to the Los Angeles office, recapping his Rapp interview. You would emphasize Harry's word, supposition. This is because of the context of Harry's interview -- which was about the behavior of Loran Hall and Larry Howard in Dallas during the final week of September 1963. Harry personally witnessed planning meetings in which Guy Gabaldon instructed Loran Hall and Larry Howard to pick up Lee Harvey Oswald from New Orleans and drive him to Mexico City during the final week of September 1963. However, Harry was not present on that drive. Silvia Odio claimed that two Latinos and Lee Harvey Oswald paid her a surprise visit during the final week of September 1963. They claimed they were only passing through, and that they had come from New Orleans. Now, as I say, Harry Dean was not present on that trip, so in all humility all he can do is "suppose," that Silvia Odio is telling the truth, and that she actually saw Loran Hall and Larry Howard with Lee Oswald at her doorstep. However, that stop was not part of the planning meetings in Southern California that Harry Dean witnessed. That is a sufficient explanation for the langauge that Harry used. 6. You ask, Ernie, why Harry's letter would be so tentative as to use the word, "supposition," and you copy Harry's own words from his 12/5/64 letter to FBI-LA: "I do not wish to interfere, or project any supposition into this case. It is hoped that none of these mentioned are in any way connected with the horrible death of Mr. Kennedy, as is my thinking by this time, I wish to clarify only my coincidental association with Hall and Howard, as I first reported to Agent Rapp near two weeks past." I think I answered your question fully -- Harry wasn't present on that trip. The stop at Silvia Odio's was not planned in Los Angeles. However, the pieces fit like a glove. 7. You ask, Ernie, why Harry Dean expresses his "hope" that he is wrong about his information. The answer is that there actually remains a chance -- even today -- that Harry Dean's conclusions were mistaken. That is, although he surely witnessed a plot within the JBS, involving Rousselot, Walker, Hall and Howard, to murder JFK using Lee Harvey Oswald as a patsy, that is not enough to prove that this plot was SUCCESSFUL. There were probably dozens of underground plots to murder JFK. Only one plot was SUCCESSFUL. Wes Swearingen believes the plot he heard about was the successful one. Larry Hancock believes the plot he heard about from John Martino was the successful one. Maybe they were. Maybe somebody ELSE entirely framed Lee Harvey Oswald. If so, that would be a RELIEF to Harry Dean, because he has been carrying around this guilt for a lifetime -- that he actually encouraged these guys to go forth and kill JFK. He thought they were just letting off steam, and he wanted to be a part of the intrigue -- but when it actually happened, Harry was stunned. Also, Harry Dean was not trying to pressure the FBi into accepting his story. He could see that, even at the end of 1964, the FBI was married to the idea of a Lone Assassin, because J. Edgar Hoover himself had been promoting it publicly for a solid year. So, Harry was being humble about it. What else could he do? This letter makes perfect sense to me. 8. You ask, Ernie, why Harry proposes (in November 1964) that Oswald was involved as a "conspirator" with Hall and Howard to commit the JFK assassination. As evidence you reproduce the entire memo by FBI agent Ferd Rapp as below: RAPP MEMO: “Harry Dean, 18109 Atina Drive, La Puente, California, phone 964-5111, was interviewed at his request and in response to his telephone call to the Los Angeles Office. He advised the following on 11/19/64: He read a copy of the Warren Report and was particularly interested in a section concerning Oswalds ‘alleged association with various Mexican or Cuban individuals’. Testimony was set forth concerning information furnished by a Mrs. Silvia Odio who related that two Cuban underground figures had contacted her, accompanied by an American whom she believed to be Oswald. It was determined that the two alleged Cubans were Lawrence Howard and Loran Eugene Hall. Subsequent investigation determined that it was not Oswald who had accompanied them. Dean stated that he had met Hall whom he knew as Lorenzo Hall who lived at one time at 877 West El Repetto, Monterey Park, California. He heard Hall make an anti-Castro speech in Covina, in September 1963. About this time he also met Lawrence Howard, Jr. who lived at 8325 Coral Lane, Pico Rivera California. He has had no contact with either of these persons since the time of the assassination. He did not hear either of them make any anti-Kennedy statements. Notwithstanding the evidence to the contrary, he stated that it was interesting to speculate that it might have been Oswald actually with these two men in Dallas. He speculated that both Hall and Howard who are anti-Castro leaders of the Cuban underground, actually wanted President Kennedy removed from the scene because of the failure of the 1960 Cuban invasion. He stated that in his opinion Hall and Howard would be capable of entering into conspiracy with Oswald to commit the assassination. Dean stated that the possibility of Oswald’s presence with these Cuban leaders appeared feasible to him and he wanted the FBI to be aware of this possibility in the event that it had not been previously checked out.” This memo makes perfect sense to me under the circumstances. First, it shows that FBI agent Ferd Rapp was a true believer in the J. Edgar Hoover story that he told the Warren Commission, namely, that the person Silvia Odio saw with the two Latinos (who were probably Loran Hall and Larry Howard) was really William Seymour. This is that the Warren Commission printed. However, even at the time that J. Edgar Hoover submitted that report to the Warren Commission, he knew that Larry Howard and William Seymour had both denied the story -- and that Loran Hall then changed his mind and denied ever seeing Silvia Odio in his life! That was part of the FBI record before Hoover took the previous, impeached testimony of Loran Hall to the Warren Commission! That is part of the historical record that almost every JFK researcher already knows. J. Edgar Hoover lied to the Warren Commission multiple times, but it is part of the official record today. No FBI SAC or agent would dare to contradict the FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, or he would be fired that day. It is fitting to claim that Hall and Howard were "conspirators" along with Lee Harvey Oswald in the murder of JFK because they accompanied Oswald to Mexico. Now, the complexity arises that Oswald was the "patsy." Yet for the FBI, and for the Warren Commission, Lee Harvey Oswald was the Lone Assassin, and not the patsy. So, the terminology becomes muddled for all involved. Lee Harvey Oswald had "associates" in his activities surrounding the JFK murder. They might also be called "accomplices", even if they ended up making Oswald their patsy. It was up to the FBI to sort out these associations -- but instead the FBI chose to blame Lee Harvey Oswald alone, and to lock up FBI files about Lee Harvey Oswald for a lifetime. That's why we're still sorting things out now. Regards, --Paul Trejo

Once again, Ernie Lazar claims too much for the tiny bit that he has shown so far. 1. Ernie claims that "we have already established that Harry could never have spoken to Wesley Grapp in the summer of 1963 because Grapp did not arrive in Los Angeles until March 1964." In actual fact, nothing of the kind has been "established". Ernie has claimed this, based on the fact that he has personally seen no FBI records to prove otherwise. There is nothing at all to prove that Ernie Lazar has all the FBI records in the case. So, Ernie again jumps to a conclusion, and he exaggerates the quality of the evidence he claims to hold. Notice, too, that Ernie has stopped posting FBI files to support his case -- we don't know what Ernie is looking at these days. Ernie apparently supposes that he can just conclude anything he wants and have it accepted. What a joke. 2. Ernie Lazar has finally found some FBI files that prove that Harry Dean and Los Angeles FBI agent Wesley Grapp had multiple conversations about the JFK assassination. Will Ernie Lazar now apologize to Harry for publicly doubting that these records even existed (e.g. post #889)? I doubt it. As for the sworn testimony of Silvia Odio that she saw Lee Harvey Oswald at her doorstep with two Latinos during the final week of September, 1963, she was deemed credible by multiple FBI agents, Gaeton Fonzi and members of House Select Committee on Investigations. The opinion of FBI agent Wesley Grapp merely agrees with the conclusion that J. Edgar Hoovers sent to the Warren Commission, based on testimony from Loran Hall, which Hoover knew to be impeached. FBI agents did not contradict FBI Director Hoover -- so Grapp's opinion is itself impeached. 3. Ernie Lazar wishes to jump to the conclusion that "Harry's contact with the FBI regarding the JFK assassination never occurred prior to November 1963," based only on the few FBI records that he has found so far (and is willing to talk about). A mediocre researcher, Ernie refuses to open his mind and wait until all the evidence has been made plain. He wants you, dear readers, to close your minds as well. 4. Ernie Lazar wishes to jump to the conclusion that :"the FBI did not request Harry to provide any information." But this is based only on the little bit of FBI data that Ernie has seen (and is willing to talk about). Ernie further wants to limit the data that Harry told the FBI to the little bit that he's seen so far. What a joke.. 5. Ernie Lazar wishes to make hay on the situation that Harry Dean didn't recall the organization JURE in May, 1964, but remembered it in December, 1964. Big deal. There were so many dozens or scores of Cuban Exile commando raid groups from coast to coast that it's a wonder Gaeton Fonzi himself could keep them straight. Sincerely, --Paul Trejo

Jim, you're right to note that Walker continued to boast about his opposition to Eisenhower even after his chances at a mainstream political career were gone. However -- he probably still kept the hope of a specialist political career -- as a spokesperson for the far right wing. Remember that during the early 1960's, some Democrats were planning to split off and form the Dixiecrats. The newspapers of Kent Courtney still called for a Third Party, and also called for General Walker to lead that Party -- even though most Americans thought Walker was a crackpot. I'm glad you're familiar with the "Muzzling the Military" hearings and the Senate Subcommittee on Military Preparedness -- because rumors of Walker's alleged "paranoia" began during that period. You're right to exclaim about Walker's far jump from a US General to an anti-Establishment right-winger. And yet, in those days of the Cold War, it might have seemed like a clever strategy to some folks in the South. It was in 1963, remember, that George Wallace came out with this famous slogan, "Segregation Today, Segregation Tomorrow, Segregation Forever!" Now, you note that Edwin Walker might have had intelligence duties in the US Army (e.g. the Greek Desk). I can accept that, because Walker was the leader of a Canadian/US special forces unit before World War Two. He was gung-ho. Walker was an expert in ballistics operations. He served brilliantly in WW2. Also, he took "Heartbreak Ridge" in Korea, specifically by bombing his target for two weeks straight, 24 hours a day. Eisenhower rewarded and challenged Walker with his role in Arkansas, racially integrating the Little Rock High School. Walker did not object to racial integration as such, he said, but he did object to using Federal Troops to push US citizens around. He asked to be excused, but Eisenhower insisted. Walker did his duty brilliantly again, and he stayed in Little Rock for parts of three years (1957-1959), but really about 24 months. During Walker's stay in Little Rock, he was the special target of right-wing Evangelists from B.J. Hargis to H.L. Hunt. It was Robert Welch with his John Birch Society who finally converted Walker. You question the timing of this radical change. I would like to quote from the Pecos Daily News of 14 Mar 1962. Walker kept this Editorial among his personal papers. The whole text is here: http://www.pet880.com/images/19620314_Fall_of_Walker.JPG Here is the excerpt: "The strange, poisonous bite of the John Birch Society infection forced him out of the Army for disloyalty to his Commander-in-Chief and inability to accept orders from his superior officers. The Birch infection dumped him into the Texas political scene, where he filed himself as an unwanted candidate for the Democratic nomination for governor...Now neither Party will accept him as a Presidential nominee -- quite obviously his overly ambitious ultimate goal." In my estimation, this Editorial is very close to the truth. The turning-point of this loyal US General was his "infection" by the John Birch Society, and its disloyal doctrine that US Presidents were Communist. Despite Walker's shrewd sense and street-smarts, he was not an intellectual. This was fairly common in the World War Two period -- intellectuals were rare in the USA. Walker was a West Point graduate -- but actually he graduated at the bottom 10% of his class -- that is, with a D- GPA. He was no valedictorian. Walker excelled as a man of action. He lagged in the realm of ideas. The John Birch Society became the highest intellectual achievement that Walker would ever attain. He practically worshipped Robert Welch, and followed the rules of the John Birch Society religiously. Was Walker involved in Intellience circles during World War Two and possibly Korea? I have no doubt that he was -- but at the level of Operations -- of taking orders and executing them quickly and accurately. He was excellent in that regard. He was fearless and a leader of men in that regard. However, Walker fell far short of the intellectual demands of the CIA or even the FBI. He was misled, IMHO, by the encouragement of H.L. Hunt, Billy James Hargis, Kent Courtney and Robert Welch. Walker copyrighted six speeches, basically all during his first three months after leaving the Army. He gave the same six speeches over a hundred times. His first several months of speaking, one should note, were roaring successes. Walker was a hero to many right-wingers from start to finish. Despite the fact that his speeches were fairly boring and his speaking skills were fairly slow -- we must remember that he preached to the Choir -- to true believers -- and they couldn't get enough. Here's a very brief example on YouTube: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYyONwsHqbw] Walker would receive thunderous applause every minute during his speeches, and a standing ovation every ten minutes (or more) without fail. His audiences loved him -- they really went wild for him. (In the movie, Seven Days in May, Burt Lancaster played a US General whipping up crowds to make himself President, and there was no doubt in those days that he was playing General Edwin Walker.) All this early adulation, from December 1961 through April 1962 expanded Edwin Walker's ego like a blimp. He began to believe Kent Courtney's propaganda, calling for Edwin Walker for US President! I have little doubt that Walker was very close to Gerry Patrick Hemming -- and I'm not surprised that Hemming warmed up to your questions when you mentioned his relationship with Walker. (We should recall that Hemming was a Neo-Nazi starting in high-school. The NAACP was virtually Communist to Hemming.) On the other hand, I think Oswald's relationship with Walker was far simpler -- what Oswald wrote about Walker should be taken at face value, IMHO. Most importantly, Lee Harvey Oswald looked up to George De Mohrenschildt, the elitist liberal, for his assessment of General Edwin Walker. This becomes clear in George's 1978 manuscript, I'm a Patsy!; they would both joke and call Walker, "General Fokker." Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Jim, (1) Clearly Edwin Walker made a "true copy" of his first resignation letter that he sent to the Defense Department -- and that is what made it official. I actually trust Walker's sense of official records. At the same time, Walker was making a flysheet for his political campaigns -- he was telling his fan base the truth about himself -- facts they could look up if they wanted. So, he combined his first resignation letter (which was rejected by Eisenhower's administration) with his second resignation letter (which was approved by JFK's administration). Both of the resignation letters were true and accurate, but they were reprinted in that format to fit both of them on a single page. Then Walker added his own contact information at the bottom. Why did he do it? He wanted to show his street credentials -- he wanted to show that he was a critic of the Communist Conspiracy in Washington DC going back to 1959. He wanted to accuse Eisenhower of being a Communist; part of the very "conspiracy" that moved Walker to quit the US Army. (2) I think that West Point, which is concerned with graduations and careers, was not so much interested in scandals such as quitting the US Army. Quitting is not the same as retirement. Walker had 30 years of highly decorated experience in the US Army as part of the greatest generation. He clearly deserved his US Army Pension. Didn't Walker know that even if he wanted to be the most radical, extreme rightist in the USA, that he still deserved to have his US Army Pension? He seems unclear about it. There is no logical reason for Walker's quitting -- it was a slap in the face of the Eisenhower administration in 1959, and it was a slap in the face of the JFK administration in 1961. That is the only explanation, I suspect -- it was a political move. (3) I believe that a resignation cannot be "dishonorable" in any military sense. It is not the same as treason, or of cowardice, or of defection, or being AWOL for six months, or even of "conduct unbecoming an officer." It is simply a personal and political choice. It's so rare and bizarre, in fact, that not one single US General except Edwin Walker had ever resigned from the US Army in the entire 20th century. In any case, although Walker gave up all rights to his Army Pension (which was substantial in those days) his termination was still "honorable" because his service record itself was unblemished. It was a political act. It was almost insane. Why did Walker do it? The only rational explanation is that he did it for political publicity -- feeling assured at the time that H.L. Hunt could help him become Governor of Texas and then eventually President of the USA. (The Pecos Daily News of 14 Mar 1962 suggested that this was Walker's original plan). Walker realized his mistake soon after he lost his bid for Texas Governor in May 1962. He made one last ditch attempt for political super-stardom with the Ole Miss race riot in September 1962. When he was acquitted by an all-white Grand Jury in Mississippi for his role in the Ole Miss race riot, he made a pact with two attorneys -- Clyde Watts and Robert Morris -- to sue every US newspaper that told the truth about Walker's instigation of that riot. If they had won every case they stood to win $30 million. (Which in the 1960's was worth ten times more than today, adjusted for inflation). They would be satisfied with ten percent of that. In fact, by the end of 1965 they had amassed $3 million in court winnings. So, Walker did not think to request his Army Pension to be restored at that time. Only after Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren heard the AP appeal and sent Walker away empty-handed in 1967 did Walker panic and begin to cry for his Army Pension. Best regards, --Paul Trejo <edit typos>

Tommy, we can deal with those details, IMHO, once we clarify: (1) the time factor; and (2) the variance in their stories. Loran Hall, Larry Howard and Quarito all tell different stories -- and this plays in our favor. In my opinion, because all three players tell three different stories, we are justified in picking and choosing the most rational details for a rational theory. There remain facts in their stories -- facts that we can verify -- so we can attempt (like paleontologists) to reassemble the reality. For example -- why El Paso? It might have been ANY Texas town. What is important in Quarito's story is not El Paso (unless he had documented proof it was El Paso), rather, what is important is this: that Loran Hall and Larry Howard went to Mexico without Quarito, who remained in Texas. That's critical. What actual part of Mexico is debatable. What city in Texas he was left in is debatable. But the absolutely critical fact for our purposes is that Quarito is admitting a vital fact -- that Loran and Larry went to Mexico without Quarito, who remained in Texas. Here is plausible Scenario "A" -- (i) Hall and Howard left Quarito and their trailer in Dallas on 9/20/63 as they went to New Orleans for Lee Harvey Oswald; (ii) Hall and Howard took Oswald to Mexico City; (iii) Hall and Howard returned to Dallas where they met Quarito with their trailer; (iv) all three checked into the Lawnview Motel by 9/28/63; and (v) Quarito invented a lie about El Paso and Juarez to cover up the actual facts. Here is plausible Scenario "B" -- (i) Hall and Howard left Quarito and the trailer in El Paso on 9/20/63 as they went to New Orleans for Lee Harvey Oswald; (ii) Quarito got other transportation to Dallas with the trailer; (iii) Hall and Howard took Oswald to Mexico City; (iv) Hall and Howard returned to Dallas where they met Quarito with their trailer; (v) all three checked into the Lawnview Motel by 9/28/63; and (vi) Quarito only had to lie about Juarez. What is key, IMHO, is that Quarito is offering details that Larry Howard did not volunteer -- and so suggests that one (or both) of them held back important data. The implication is that the trip to Mexico was a deep, dark secret for Larry Howard. Quarito knew it was a secret, but he was facing the FBI, so he said something about it while playing as dumb as possible. That was easy, because Quarito never actually saw the Mexican town that Hall and Howard visited -- he only heard about it -- and they could have lied to him (and probably did). It is plausible that Hall and Howard told Quarito they were going to Juarez, in order to keep him in the dark. Yet this cannot explain why Larry Howard would neglect to mention anything about a trip to Mexico to the FBI -- and instead told the FBI that the trio were in Dallas from 9/20/63 through 10/03/63. Best regards, --Paul Trejo <edited>

Wow, Tommy, did you see what I think I saw? "Quarito," who was Larry Howard's alibi against the sworn testimony of Silvia Odio (claiming that "Leopoldo" and "Angelo" were at her doorstep with Lee Harvey Oswald during the final week of September 1963) has given us a new twist on that alibi! Quarito said that while Loran, Larry and he were on the road from Los Angeles to Dallas (starting ~9/18/63) Loran and Larry decided to drop him off in El Paso! This, then, would free Loran and Larry to scurry to New Orleans to pick up Lee Harvey Oswald, and then meet SIlvia Odio at her doorstep on 9/25/63, and then deposit Oswald in Mexico City (perhaps to meet Gabaldon on the 26th or 27th) and then return to Texas in time to pick up Quarito and the trailer and then register with the Lawnview Motel in Dallas on 9/28/63 (as the register clearly shows). These new pieces make the story of Silvia Odio more plausible -- and they also make the story of Harry Dean more plausible. It's too early to draw conclusions, but I want to thank you again for your digging up these FBI artifacts about Quarito. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

OK, Jim, I think this may be what you're looking for. Here is a link to the personal papers of Edwin Walker, specifically his official 1959 resignation from the US Army -- denied. http://www.pet880.com/images/19611104_Walker_Resignations.JPG Also, here is (what I could salvage of) a multi-page, hand-written letter from Edwin (Ted) Walker to his brother Frank in January of 1960. I think this is the one you had in mind; please let me know. http://www.pet880.com/images/19600101_Ted_to_Frank_02.JPG http://www.pet880.com/images/19600101_Ted_to_Frank_03.JPG http://www.pet880.com/images/19600101_Ted_to_Frank_04.JPG http://www.pet880.com/images/19600101_Ted_to_Frank_05.JPG http://www.pet880.com/images/19600101_Ted_to_Frank_06.JPG http://www.pet880.com/images/19600101_Ted_to_Frank_07.JPG http://www.pet880.com/images/19600101_Ted_to_Frank_09.JPG http://www.pet880.com/images/19600101_Ted_to_Frank_10.JPG http://www.pet880.com/images/19600101_Ted_to_Frank_11.JPG Also, Jim, you were thinking of a letter from Edwin (Ted) Walker to his brother Frank in "October". I think you might mean October 1960. If so, then perhaps this is the multi-part letter you might be considering: http://www.pet880.com/images/19601005_Ted_to_Frank_1.JPG http://www.pet880.com/images/19601005_Ted_to_Frank_2.JPG http://www.pet880.com/images/19601005_Ted_to_Frank_3.JPG http://www.pet880.com/images/19601005_Ted_to_Frank_4.JPG Notice that Walker was in conflict with the Overseas Weekly newspaper of the US Army already in October, 1960, although they would not publish anything devastatingly negative about him until April 1961. Also, here is a letter from Ted to Frank in January, 1961 (sorry about the JPG label -- this is still a work in progress): http://www.pet880.com/images/19601005_Ted_to_Frank_5.JPG http://www.pet880.com/images/19601005_Ted_to_Frank_6.JPG Finally, I can only keep these links up for a limited time, so be apprised. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Thanks for the interest, Jim. Since the Briscoe shut down my web site, it'll take some time to recover the Walker papers you cite, but I'll try to respond to your requests by tonight. As for your notion that more than the right-wing was involved in the JFK murder, I'm inclined to agree -- with qualifications. I've been following Larry Hancock's work more closely, and it is clear that General Edward Lansdale and his contacts in the CIA had a hand in the planning -- outside of Dallas. The autopsy, the Secret Service, the limo, the press -- were all handled at a higher level than Dallas. However, when it comes to Dallas, it remains my opinion that the right-wing ran the show -- not the FBI, not the CIA, not some rogue Pentagon hawks. The right-wing characterizes Dallas, and the right-wing led the ideological attack on JFK in the public imagination. The right-wing was also a lightning rod for every wacko in America. One character who practically lived with Edwin Walker in Dallas was Robert Allen Surrey, his publisher, and also the publisher for the ANP (American Nazi Party) -- ultra-right-wing, and supremely motivated to stop JFK in his tracks. The rightist group, Friends of Walker, rallied true believers. I want to count how many DPD officers were also members of the Friends of Walker. As for shooters -- it's no accident that we find DPD officers on the grassy knoll in those same moments. William Turner wrote that the average DPD officer was a member of the John Birch Society, the White Citizens' Council or the KKK. That's tremendous motivation. What the DPD and right-wing leaders in Dallas offered any CIA plot was a "Dallas Intelligence Network" (to use Larry's wording). Knowing the terrain of Dallas was indispensible -- utterly indispensible. The DPD would be first in line with that knowledge. Anyway, Jim, I'll try my best to reply with those personal papers from Walker ASAP, Best regards, --Paul Trejo <edited>

Well, Larry, what's interesting to me is that General Edwin Walker was named in the Warren Commission volumes more than five hundred times. He was a person of interest to the FBI during the Warren hearings. He was not a person of interest for the HSCA, but I consider that an error by the HSCA. The connections between General Edwin Walker and Loran Hall (perhaps "Leopoldo") and Larry Howard (perhaps "Angelo") became known only after the Warren hearings, through the struggles of NOLA DA Jim Garrison. Oddly, Garrison's lead was abandoned by the HSCA. Gaeton Fonzi failed to pursue it. Today the connections between General Walker and Lee Harvey Oswald are best explored in the 90 boxes of personal papers belonging to Edwin Walker, now available at UT Austin. There is so much that the Warren Commission and the HSCA missed. Best regards, --Paul Trejo <bumped>

Tommy, again, nice work. I stand corrected. I suppose I had in mind the words of Gerry Patrick Hemming to this Forum back in 2007 when he expressed his outrage about Loran Hall keeping Hemming's rifle -- on the day of the JFK murder. So my error placed the events closer together. The report you provided from the FBI accidentally confirms the report of photographer Tom Dunkin who was documenting these Cuban Raid groups on his own. Very nice work. So - let's summarize the results for this morning: Loran Hall, Larry Howard and Celio Castro stayed at the Lawnview Motel in Dallas from 9/28/63 through 10/3/63 -- but where did they stay before that? Larry Howard claimed that they were together in Dallas since 9/20/63 for ten days -- so we have a time gap. The time gap lets us accept Silvia Odio's story that they were at her doorstep for 20 minutes with Lee Harvey Oswald. The time gap lets us accept Harry Dean's story that they delivered Oswald to Guy Gabaldon in Mexico City by the evening of 9/26/63. The time gap lets us accept a theory that they returned to Dallas by 9/27/63 to retrieve their trailer of supplies (supplied by Guy Gabaldon and Harry Dean) and a third companion (probably Celio Castro), to continue their gun-running activities, which had become Loran Hall's full time job. It had become at least a part-time job for Larry Howard and Celio Castro (and other Interpen members at other times, e.g. William Seymour). We must be wary of information about people associated with Interpen, No Name Keys and Gerry Patrick Hemming, because Hemming's policy was always to protect them under a cloud of disinformation. In any case -- the 10 days that Larry Howard claimed they were in Dallas DOES NOT WASH. The Motel records let us accept a theory that they met Silvia Odio for 20 minutes on 9/25/63 and then drove Lee Harvey Oswald to Mexico City on or about 9/26/63. Best regards, --Paul Trejo <edited>