Paul Trejo

David, in my humble opinion, the photo of the fingers in the right hand of CE-133A is probably Oswald's hand. I think we must take into consideration the fact that the camera used was a very cheap, Imperial Reflex camera, as well as the real possibility that the lighting and shadows of the turning of the fingers probably obscures the tips of the fingers so that they are not visible. I don't have a problem with the hands. My main problem is the one first articulated by Malcom Thompson and John Pickard and echoed by Jack White, namely, that the head on three photos is the same size, while the bodies of the three photos are not the same size. I'm still waiting for NARA to send me high-quality digital reproductions fo CE-133A, CE-133B and CE-133C, so that I can attempt to reproduce the Thompson-Pickard-White photographic experiments myself. Unless I see more evidence, the right-hand is a non-issue, IMHO. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Here's Part 2 of Edwin Walker giving a follow-up interview for the White Citizens' Council TV program in Mississippi on or about 7 March 1962. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9yUW019xoA Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Here's an example of Edwin Walker giving an interview for the White Citizens' Council TV program in Mississippi on or about 1 March 1962. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeQKuJTJi48 Best regards, --Paul Trejo

bump

By the way, if you still get those warnings from my web site, but you'd like to see those two movies of interviews of General Walker, you can go directly to YouTube at this address for Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9yUW019xoA This is the man that Oswald allegedly tried to shoot on 10 April 1963. This is the man that Oswald allegedly called a "fascist" to Marina, after which Marina added that note (Hunter of fascists, ha ha ha) to the back of the Backyard Photograph that Oswald signed and sent to George De Mohrenschildt! Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Thanks, Bernice, and for all who posted warnings about my web site after I uploaded two TV programs of Walker being interviewed by the White Citizens' Council. AT&T told me yesterday with certainty that one or more hackers has been attacking my site. So, I scanned all the contents of my site and removed some alien objects. Then I decided to upload my two movies to YouTube; so now when you visit my web site at www.pet880.com you can see two links at the top that point the user to my YouTube uploads. If you still see any warnings, feel free to let me know. AT&T has set a trap for the hackers now! Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Terri, as I understand this, you were not living in Terry, Mississippi at the time of the Ole Miss riots. If you had been living there, you would have seen things you could never forget, I'm convinced. But you were living in Syracuse, New York at that time. Next, you returned to Terry, Mississippi in July of 1963, and by that time the national uproar over the riots at Ole Miss in September, 1962, was completely overshadowed by the latest development in US/USSR relations as it related to Cuba, namely, that JFK wanted to show the world that the USA would keep its hands off of Cuba. To that end, JFK ordered that all Cuban Exile paramilitary training Camps (like the one led by Guy Banister at Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana) must be shut down. JFK ordered the FBI to confiscate all paramilitary weapons, which the Cuban Exiles and Minutemen -- and evidently the KKK -- had been planning to use for a new invasion of Cuba. I can easily see how this would trump the news of the Ole Miss riots. The Ole Miss riots were now nine months in the past, while the Cuban Crisis was still big news. At this time also -- according to ex-General Walker himself -- the US right-wing was officially joining hands with Cuban Exiles to invade Cuba, with or without White House approval. Therefore, when JFK ordered the shut down of all paramilitary training Camps, the radical right-wing (including the KKK) obviously thought that this was one more betrayal -- and one more proof that Washington DC was filled with Communists. Why else would a US President shut down Anticommunist paramilitary groups? The easiest answer was that JFK must be a Communist -- and so Joe McCarthy was right -- and the John Birch Society was right -- and ex-General Walker was right: JFK was a Communist; a traitor; and all traitors deserve the firing squad. So, Terri, the big news in July, 1963, when you returned to Terry, Mississippi, was no longer the Ole Miss riots of 1962, but now it was the fact that the Lake Pontchartrain paramilitary training camp (coordinated by Guy Banister) was being shut down, and their large cache of war weapons was confiscated by the FBI. The KKK would have framed this in terms of Constitutional rights -- JFK, they would have said, was breaking the Second Amendment to the Constitution -- proof of treason. That is now much clearer to me. Yet imagine, if you will, what Terry, Mississippi was like nine months before this time, when the big news of the day was that JFK was sending thousands of federal troops to Mississippi to force the State of Mississippi to change its way of life, using threat of bayonets. It seems to me that members of the KKK would never stay at home during the massive riots that occurred at Oxford, Mississippi in the autumn of 1962. I feel certain that your relatives in the KKK would have been there at Oxford. In any case -- you weren't there during that period, and that answers my initial question. My next question to you, though, is this: you say that you had seen Albert Lee Lewis shoot on occasion. Would you kindly relate to us the occasion or occasions in which you had the opportunity to see Albert Lee Lewis shoot a rifle? Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Michael, many thanks for this independent confirmation that Guy Banister personally knew ex-General Edwin Walker. Walker was a featured speaker at scores of extreme-right-wing rallies from 1961 to 1964, and Guy Banister was a member of almost every Anticommunist organization he could join -- no matter how extreme. So, Joan Mellen's account of their encounter makes sense -- Walker gave a speech and Banister listened to it. That is a material connection, and I appreciate the citation. There are also indirect connections -- both men were prominent members of the John Birch Society. Both were Minutemen in their respective cities. Both were closely linked to the White Citizens' Council groups that flourished in the South, and both associated with the State Sovereignty Commission in the South. In all those organizations, Walker was called upon to make speeches. There are conflicting reports about his speaking ability. Some say he could stir thousands to their feet in a roaring ovation. Others said he couldn't string a sentence together without help. The truth is somewhere in-between: when Walker was preaching to the choir, he spoke quite well. When Walker was being cross-examined, he spoke quite poorly. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

I'm increasingly impressed by Harry Dean's willingness to clarify his account in his manuscript/book, Crosstrails. Here's what Harry clarified for me yesterday: (1) Harry met with Walker, Rousselot, Gabaldon, Hall and Howard in Pasadena, California, where Walker identified their patsy, Lee Harvey Oswald, by name. Rousselot donated a huge amount of cash to the cause. (2) This same group met again at the San Marino, California offices of the John Birch Society. (Harry had known Hall and Howard since 1962 in the context of Cuban Exiles and the paramilitary Minutemen organization.) (3) Harry, Gabaldon, Hall, Howard and David Robbins later met at Guy Gabaldon's home in El Monte, California. The purposes of these meetings was to firm up details of the plan to transform Lee Harvey Oswald into a patsy. (4) The rationale they used was Oswald's self-avowed leadership role in the FPCC. Although Harry was himself a secret, former officer of the FPCC (and a personal acquaintance of Fidel Castro), and he could not reveal this, Harry knew from his own experience that the FPCC was indeed a Communist organization, and that it was exploited toward violent ends by Fidel Castro. (5) Now that Harry had converted to the other side -- that is, he was an informant for the FBI regarding all FPCC and Communist activities -- he would not defend the FPCC. (6) Harry was also informing to the FBI about the John BIrch Society and Minutemen in California. This fact was also kept secret, obviously, from the men at these meetings. (7) Knowing that the FPCC was indeed Communist, and believing that Lee Harvey Oswald was indeed an officer of the FPCC, Harry did not object to or obstruct this plan. He did, however, inform the Los Angeles FBI of the plan. (8) The FBI told Harry that they believed this account was merely "wishful thinking" on his part. (9) On 22 November 1963 Harry Dean was in Arcadia, California when he heard the news about the JFK assassination. When he learned that day that Lee Harvey Oswald was JFK's killer, Harry knew that this was the plot (among many others) that succeeded. (10) In early 1964 the Agent-in-Charge of the Los Angeles FBI office (Wesley G. Grapp) interviewed Harry for several hours about his earlier reports. (11) Harry neglected to mention the Minutemen in Crosstrails, because he feared for his and his family's safety. Best regards, --Paul Trejo <edit typos>

Thanks for your kind words, Paul B. As for the malware warnings that some people have seen on my web site, I have complained to my host, AT&T, about it. Some people have evidently been hacking my site, trying to bring it down. (Maybe i'm getting too warm?) AT&T still owes me a solid answer. As for LBJ, I have read the recent books that try to blame LBJ for the JFK assassination, and I find them to be vapid and unintelligent. Instead of hard evidence, they offer only innuendo, insult and circumstantial evidence -- the same kind of thinking that convicted Lee Harvey Oswald. Also, those books don't offer their opinions as theories (like I do) but as facts -- which is simply silly. Well -- they want the book sales. So, no, I'm not using a different measuring yardstick to gauge the degree of involvement in the Dealey Plaza plot. I want hard evidence from all sides, and I won't take weak evidence in any case. As for Philips and Hunt -- they were CIA agents, so they can be widely suspected and accused of anything at all. We can be certain with regard to David Atlee Philips that he withheld everything he could about Oswald's trip to Mexico -- every scrap of that data was known to Phillips and he refused to share that with the Warren Commission and with the HSCA. So, that is his known calumny. Everything outside of that is mere speculation. (Even Veciana could not swear that Maurice Bishop was David Atlee Philips, so that also remains speculative.) As for Hunt, until somebody shows me material evidence that he was actually at Dealey Plaza on 22 November 1963, then I will continue to be skeptical about his leadership role in any JFK plot. As far as we know with any certainty, we have witnesses that have him making one of hundreds of secret arms trafficking payoffs to Frank Sturgis and his gun-running pals. Suspicious? Yes. Proof? No. As for humility -- there is nothing more humble than the word, theory. My research on ex-General Edwin Walker's possible involvement in Dealey Plaza is a theory. Nothing more and nothing less. I operate strictly on a hard-evidence basis. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Does anybody know how I can get a message through to Michael Paine? With great respect and courtesy, I would like to ask him some questions -- not about himself so much, as about General Edwin Walker. My questions would go somewhat like this -- Michael Paine: (1) What were your thoughts about the events in the USA immediately preceding the Ole Miss riots of 30 September 1963? (2) What were your thoughts about the Ole Miss riots themselves? (3) Did you perceive at the time of the Ole Miss riots that ex-General Edwin Walker was one of the leaders of those riots? (4) Did you believe -- as many Americans did -- that Edwin Walker should have been punished for leading those riots? (5) What were your thoughts when Edwin Walker was arrested the next morning, and remanded to a psychiatric hospital? (6) What were your thoughts when the ACLU and psychiatrist Thomas Szasz demanded the immediate release of Edwin Walker from the psychiatric hospital, on the grounds that mixing politics and psychiatry is a bad business? (7) What were your thoughts when Edwin Walker returned to Dallas only seven days after the Old Miss riots? (8) What were your thoughts about the Mississippi Grand Jury hearing about Walker's alleged insurrection at Ole Miss in November and December 1962 and January 1963? (9) What were your thoughts when ex-General Edwin Walker was acquitted of all charges relating to the Ole Miss riots? Best regards, --Paul Trejo

I've updated my Walker web site at www.pet880.com to include two nearly-15 minute videos made for TV by the racist, White Citizens' Council of Mississippi in early 1962, featuring interviews of ex-General Edwin Walker. Some people thought Walker was a stirring speaker (just like Burt Lancaster in the 1964 movie, Seven Days in May, that Beatrice shared with this Forum). Well -- it may be more accurate to say that his message was passionately received -- he himself was a mediocre speaker. Anyway, now we can see and hear Walker speak for himself in these two interviews put on by the Citizens' Council Forum (CCF). The CCF tried to make a movie every two weeks, using State funding (from various State Sovereignty Commissions in the South). They even used at-cost TV studios in Washington DC, when they interviewed Congressmen and Governors for their films. The CCF distributed these films to TV stations nationwide -- at no cost. Their main goal was to reverse the Brown v. The Board of Education ruling which called for racial integration of US public schools. Their twin slogans were: "States Rights!" and "Racial Integrity!" Now, thanks to the Mississippi Department of History, the public can see and hear two of these programs as they relate directly to ex-General Edwin Walker. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

By the way, Terri, I have a theory that the Ole Miss riots of September 1962 were the preparation for the assassination of JFK in November 1963. Do you remember anybody in your family and neighborhood circles who talked about the details of KKK participation in the Ole Miss riots of 1962? Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Hi Paul I don't know if you are aware, but i received multiple number of "VIRUS ALERTS" from my AVG virus software, while trying to visit that website. the image below shows one of the alerts. Click on the image to see FULL SIZE Thanks for the heads-up, Robin. I contacted my web site host (AT&T) about this problem. Evidently somebody has been trying to hack into my web site to bring it down. (Maybe I'm getting warmer!) Anyway, AT&T is looking into solutions for me. Here's their chance to show whether they have the right stuff. In the meantime, I updated my web site at www.pet880.com to show two TV films from the Citizens' Council Forum, produced in March, 1962. The first film is 12 minutes long, and the second film is 14 minutes long. Now people can see and hear Walker in action. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

John, the 2008 book by Jefferson Morley, Our Man In Mexico, has a bit about Ann Goodpasture as it relates to the CIA career of Winston (Win) Scott, CIA chief in Mexico City. Anne served in the OSS during WW2 along with Julia McWilliams (who became known as TV cook, Julia Child). Anne went on to become the CIA secretary of James Jesus Angleton, and she was so efficient that when she traveled to Mexico in 1958 for a routine reporting task, Win Scott demanded that she stay and serve as his secretary. Angleton allowed this for several years. Anne's claim to fame is that she spotted Lee Harvey Oswald attempting to hurry his way into Cuba in the late summer of 1963. An American trying to get into Cuba always set off CIA bells. Although no photograph of Oswald at the Mexico City consulates has ever surfaced, there is eye-witness information that affirms these photographs do exist. Anne not only gathered the photographs of Oswald together, but she also transcribed the tape recordings of Oswald's conversations at the Cuba consulate, as well as telephone calls that he made in Mexico to the Soviet consulate. Some of these transcriptions were duplicated and filed away in the CIA's ponderous Oswald files. However -- due to exceptions in our Freedom Of Information Act, these files are not available to the American public. Even the Warren Commission and the HSCA were not allowed to see these. However, maybe now, after the USSR has fallen, the alleged threat to National Security imputed to the Oswald Files has now passed. Maybe now the American public can be allowed to peek at these historical documents. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Well, I agree, Randy. The involvement of CIA agent George Joannides with the files of Lee Harvey Oswald during his time in New Orleans, associating with Carlos Bringuier and the DRE (a right-wing Cuban Exile group committed to re-taking Cuba) is intensely interesting. The Warren Commission directly asked ex-General Edwin Walker if he ever attended a DRE meeting in Dallas, and Walker admitted that he did attend at least one meeting, and did contribute money to them. The DRE also had offices in New Orleans in association with Carlos Bringuier, the man who had a street fight with Lee Harvey Oswald on Canal street in August, 1963 -- who was named in the police report of the fight, and who was seen on TV with Oswald in a few more days. Here is one more link between ex-General Edwin Walker and Lee Harvey Oswald. CIA agent George Joannides knew a lot about it, because he was closely involved with the DRE and Carlos Bringuier. Yet Joannides delivered misinformation to both the Warren Commission and the HSCA. When a subordinate CIA agent, John M. Whitten was assigned to gather all data about Oswald after the JFK killing, Whitten realized that the FBI had withheld lots of data on Oswald, and so had his own bosses in the CIA. Whitten demanded to know about Oswald's political activities in New Orleans in the summer of 1963 -- and also asked about the DRE and about Joannides' relationship with the DRE. Whitten also asked about Oswald and General Walker and about Oswald's bogus FPCC chapter in New Orleans. Without this information, he said, all further analyses of the JFK case were "completely irrelevant." But when Whitten demanded to see the Mexico City photographs of Oswald taken outside the Cuban and Soviet Consulates, Richard Helms responded by immediately removing John Whitten from the case, and set James Jesus Angleton in his place. Later, when the HSCA re-opened the JFK assassination case, the CIA assigned George Joannides to work with the HSCA. Joannides (complained Robert Blakey later) successfully withheld all vital information about Oswald. Yet even Joannides could not withhold one salient fact -- that the telephone number of the DRE was recorded inside Lee Harvey Oswald's personal phone book. So, I agree with you that the files on Johannides would be critical to see -- and yet it may be another 25 years before exceptions to the FOIA regarding these files will expire. =*= All this reminds me about Allen Dulles and his clerk, Jacques Zwart. Zwart wrote a book, Invitation to Hairsplitting (1970) which begins with his memoir that Allen Dulles told him that the full answer to the JFK assassination is right there in the Warren Commission (WC) volumes -- but the reader must become an expert at "hairsplitting." Here are only a few examples of Zwart's experiment in "hairsplitting": (1) The WC was not instructed by Executive Order #11130 to report its findings and conclusions 'to the American people and to the world', but rather, to "the President alone." The 26 volumes of the WC, published on 28 September 1964, was intended for the public. The President, on the other hand, recieved a separate report, which was only one volume in length, and he received that four days before the public version was published. LBJ himself said that his version of the report was "four inches thick." A subset of that volume (only 2" thick) was published as a companion to the 26 WC volumes, entitled, the WC Summary. The Summary of the Official Warren Report (WR) is only 2" thick. That Summary never references EO #11130, and therefore it is not bound by that order. Zwart believes that LBJ's version of the Warren Report named names and told the full truth about the grassy knoll shooters, as well as the motives of the assassins. Zwart also believes that LBJ's version of the report fully disclosed that LHO had been a paid informant of the FBI and the CIA. For Zwart, the public version of the Warren Report was written to serve the interests of National Security -- not to tell the truth. Given this start -- Zwart believes that there was indeed a conspiracy to kill JFK, and that the conspirators were known (after the fact) by the US government. (2) The WC only says LHO was shot by Ruby, not killed by Ruby. So Zwart believes that Oswald was still alive when he was taken in the ambulance. (3) Another gaff was the non-believable testimony of Helen Markham who claimed to see Oswald kill Tippit, but could not keep her story straight. Add this to the FBI witness that they could not make a final, positive identification of the Tippit bullets with Oswald's pistol. This was an obvious confession on the part of the WC that Oswald really wasn't Tippit's killer. In 1970 Zwart openly asked the public to help him find more hairsplitting clues inside the WC that Allen Dulles claimed were all there. In later years, however, researchers began to place all their hopes in the HSCA. Blakey himself later expressed his disappointment in the HSCA results -- another obvious confession of truth withheld. Best regards, --Paul Trejo <edit typos>

Paul, All of your questions are excellent and we may never know the answers to them. I say the best answer we can acheive at this point in time is to study what stimulated and motivated Lee Harvey Oswald. For example, did you know his favorite TV show was "I Led Three Lives"? It was loosely based on the life of Herbert Philbrick, a Boston advertising executive who infiltrated the U.S. Communist Party on behalf of the FBI in the 1940s and wrote a bestselling book on the topic, I Led Three Lives: Citizen, 'Communist', Counterspy (1952). http://en.wikipedia....Led_Three_Lives Sounds very familiar, eh? Do you believe his trip to Russia was solely planned by himself? I don't. Hasn't it been proven that LHO had an CIA informant # 110669? "It appears at this point that CIA agent payroll number 110669 had been ordered by his superiors to furnish himself with a pro-Castro cover in order to enable him to enter Cuba by way of Mexico City possibly in order to infiltrate Cuban intelligence, or perhaps to try to assassinate Castro. Possibly, those members of the CIA involved in the Kennedy assassination plot were setting Oswald up as "the missing link," the connection between Fidel Castro and the assassination." http://www.spartacus...k/JFKoswald.htm He joined the Marines at very young age and while he was still captivated by "I Led Three Lives", his search was just beginning to become that "spy" on TV. I think he acheived his much desired "spy status" with limited success. He was trying to play both ends in the middle, good guys, bad guys, and got way over his head and ulitimately, crashed and burned. I believe he was the tip source for the "Chicago Assassination Plot", and thereby foiling JFK being shot in the Windy City, it was given by someone named "Lee" and I believe he was the source once again for the FBI teletype of November 17, 1963 warning of a "militant group that may attempt to assassinate the President" in Dallas. I believe he was trying to stop the plot in Dallas and got set-up as the "patsy" instead. Everytime I see the video of him saying "I'm just a Patsy", I think...Who uses the word "patsy" in 1963 with such ease? Maybe an agent provocateur, but not some regular Joe Blow. It wasn't a household word in 1963. Just my thoughts. I welcome the chance to hear yours. Best regards also, Randy Randy, (1) I knew about Oswald's favorite TV show, because Robert Oswald explained this in his book. (2) I also don't believe Oswald's trip to Russia was his own idea -- however, I caution against reading too much into this. I strongly doubt that this was a super-spy mission (except in Oswald's imagination). I believe it was a low-level OSI training mission. (3) I also believe that Oswald had CIA informant #110669, however, I also caution against reading too much into this. If Oswald was an informant for the CIA, we should never equate that with being an *employee* of the CIA. Oswald wasn't a salaried employee of the CIA. He was, at best, a part-time contractor. Again, this was all for training. He was being tested -- and it was harder than he thought it would be. (4) Therefore, I cannot link Oswald's CIA informant number to any plans to enter Cuba through Mexico City. Nobody goes to the Cuban Consulate in Mexico City and tells the clerk their CIA number and expects to get into Cuba. (5) I strongly believe that Oswald's superiors groomed him in New Orleans, however, using newspapers, radio and TV, to make Oswald appear to be an officer of the FPCC in New Orleans, so that Oswald could take *those* credentials to the Cuban Consulate in Mexico City and show the clerk *those* credentials and expect to get into Cuba. But that would not be the CIA who came up with that plan -- that would be a renegade right-wing individual named Guy Banister, aided by his associates David Ferrie, Jack Martin, Ed Butler and Carlos Bringuier. (6) I believe the CIA knew very well what Guy Banister was up to, and they hoped he would succeed. but they didn't run Banister's show. (7) But they did hope he would succeed. The CIA knew, IMHO, that Guy Banister was giving Lee Harvey Oswald a pro-Castro cover to enable him to enter Cuba and kill Castro. This was part of Operation Mongoose, IMHO. The CIA hoped this would succeed -- and so did RFK and JFK. This was their operation. RFK called Guy Banister's offices on a regular basis. (8) I believe that Oswald wanted to be a professional spy. I believe he was a candidate, and that he was being tested, but he was never hired full-time because he made too many mistakes. Well, he was still young. He still had a chance. And he might have believed he was more intelligent than he really was. (9) I mildly doubt that Oswald was the source for foiling the Chicago plot against JFK, or that he tried to foil the Dallas plot -- because Oswald had plenty of time to tell the Press during his two days in a Dallas jail. If Oswald was working for the 'good guys,' then the good guys would have saved him after he was arrested. But he was hung out to dry. (10) In my theory the key to Lee Harvey Oswald is his attempt to kill ex-General Walker on 10 April 1963. That is very controversial, still, and many JFK researchers deny that Oswald was involved, but the evidence seems to me to be overwhelming. (11) Evidence suggests that General Walker and Guy Banister knew each other through the White Citizens' Councils in the South, as well as through the John Birch Society and the Minutemen. Both men were leaders in all three organizations. Many suspects who knew Banister also knew Walker (e.g. Loran Hall, Lawrence Howard, Gerry Patrick Hemming, Lee Harvey Oswald and many more). (12) The Backyard Photographs were forged (all except one) but I believe that Oswald created the forgeries himself when he worked at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall. Oswald deliberately faked them for purposes of plausible denial. I'm currently taking steps to demonstrate this. Best regards, --Paul Trejo <edit typos>

That's right, Tommy, I did have in mind the 1975 book by A.J. Weberman entitled, Coup d'Etat in America. That early book -- going on 40 years old -- was a painstaking exploration of the Dealey Plaza boxcar tramps, and an attempt to find the Watergate burglars in their lineup. There is little worth repeating in that book -- although A.J. Weberman has since redeemed himself with some of the best interviews of Gerry Patrick Hemming that we possess today. There is also something valuable in the tramp photographs that Weberman pointed out -- the police seem to be posing in these photographs, and not really on duty. Additionally, the man in the suit with his back to the camera is very possibly US Army Major General Edward G. Lansdale, according to several who knew him well. His profile and his posture, along with his left-arm posture, was unique. What in the world was he doing there? The quest for the tramps is long discredited -- but those photographs may still yield valuable treasures. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Randy, I think most readers on this Forum would agree with you. Yet there are nuances. If Oswald was a "patsy" as he said, then who made him into a patsy? Who got close enough to him for that? How did they get that close? Did he know them? Did he hang out with them? Several times during his time at the Dallas jail house Oswald had a chance to tell the Press about the people who made him into a patsy -- but he didn't do it. Was he covering for them? Did he believe that a good lawyer would set him free if he only kept his mouth shut? Did Lee Harvey Oswald know who the real killers were? If not, why was he killed only two days after JFK? Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Terri, I'm very curious -- what is your uncle doing along side Fidel Castro? Can you digitize and upload that photograph? Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Only the photographically ignorant. He simply had no clue what he was doing or how to do it. There is a plethora of material on the web that shows just how and why he got it wrong. Craig, I admit I'm photographically ignorant, but I'm taking steps to correct that. NARA will soon deliver to me their best reproductions of the Backyard Photographs, and I have Photoshop ready-to-hand. As for Jack White, I was also impressed by the fact that he made the backgrounds of CE-133A and CE-133B match by an analysis of the horizon lines and the vanishing points. Using a photographic technique known as "keystoning", Jack White said that by tilting his easel he was able to make the backgrounds of these two photos match. That is truly a significant claim. White believed he had "reversed" the procedure which the forgers used to make the difference in background in the first place. If this is something I can do with Photoshop, you can be sure I'll spend time trying to do this. By the way -- the "evidence" that you cited to the effect that Thompson and Pickard reversed their opinions was weak, since that evidence was only a third person who made this claim on their behalf -- not the men themselves. Regards, --Paul Trejo

I'm inclined to agree with Jim here. The nonsense that the tramps were E. Howard Hunt and Frank Sturgis got a lot of press in past decades, but that false identification fizzled out. (For one thing, Hunt was clearly taller than Sturgis, but with the tramps, the alleged 'Hunt' tramp was clearly shorter than the alleged 'Sturgis' tramp). Also, referring to the main question of this thread, If Oswald Was an Intelligence Agent of Some Sort, How Was He Manipulated Into Being a Patsy? I would respond with two points: (1) Oswald was only pre-intelligence -- he was a wannabe who was working as a part-time contractor for the CIA, but he was never their salaried employee. This is why he hung out with Gerry Patrick Hemming, Loran Hall, Larry Howard, Ed Butler and Carlos Bringuier. Like them, he was a small-time contractor, hoping to be hired by the CIA or the FBI in some fantasy future. He might actually have gotten hired if he cleaned up his act -- long odds. (2) Oswald was easily manipulated into being a patsy on three counts: (i) as a part-time contractor, Oswald was a wannabe gopher; (ii) Oswald was a double-agent, which put him on the lowest rung of the ladder of spies, because they are so high-maintenance; and (iii) Oswald had boasted to the wrong person(s) that he was involved in the 10 April 1963 shooting at ex-General Edwin Walker. This put him on Guy Banister's xxxx-list. Best regards, --Paul Trejo <edit typos>

Larry Hancock's recent book, Someone Would Have Talked (2010), is excellent. In this book Larry reviews the little-known story of John Martino, who spoke out about the JFK assassination in 1975. Martino's memoirs substantiated much of Jim Garrison's 1968 investigation of Guy Banister and David Ferrie in New Orleans in the summer of 1963, especially in their dealings with radical Cuban Exiles and gun-running operations. This scenario is the environment in which Lee Harvey Oswald lived and moved when he was in New Orleans in the summer of 1963. Carlos Bringuier and Ed Butler were among the leaders of that movement, as was Antonio Veciana of Alpha 66, who operated inside the Lake Pontchartrain paramilitary training camp. With this scenario we have a full 50% of the JFK assassination plot, IMHO. The other 50% we can only find in Dallas. So we rightly seek any members of the New Orleans crew who also be found in Dallas. We find them with Gerry Patrick Hemming, Loran Hall, Lawrence Howard and Lee Harvey Oswald -- to name a few. They seem to report to Guy Banister in New Orleans, and then to ex-General Edwin Walker in Dallas. By the way, Harry Dean, who personally met with General Walker, Loran Hall and Lawrence Howard in Los Angeles in the early fall of 1963, and who heard these men name Lee Harvey Oswald as their pinko patsy, further remembers something about arms trafficking in that period. Harry Dean was associating with the JURE group of Cuban Exiles at that time, and reporting his findings to the FBI in Los Angeles. (The LA FBI was worried about JURE in those days, and was harassing them ) The leader of JURE in Los Angeles was named "Martinez," and one day Martinez pulled Harry Dean aside and said, "We need a white person to buy a large amount of weapons for us from a local manufacturer. We have cash." Harry conferred with the FBI about this, and the FBI encouraged Harry to play along and keep them apprised. Harry approached the arms manufacturer (the Golden State Arms Company) about the deal. Harry learned that -- white or not -- he would still have to file a report with the FBI for making such a large purchase of weapons. When Harry reported this fact back to Martinez, Martinez said, "Forget it, because my whole purpose was to stay below the radar of the FBI." This fact also corresponds to the many interviews that Loran Hall gave to the Tattler and the National Enquirer around the time of Jim Garrison's investigation -- namely -- that one of his main activities was collecting weapons, medicines and cash and shipping them to Florida for continuing raids on Cuba. For example: http://www.pet880.co...Enquirer_NB.pdf http://www.pet880.co...ren_Hall_02.JPG http://www.pet880.co...ren_Hall_03.JPG Best regards, --Paul Trejo <edit typos>

Yes, Jerry, very interesting. Although I'm not a photography expert, I'm impressed by Jack White's technical and objective approach. However, I flatly disagree with his conclusion. Let me quote his conclusion verbatim here: "If they are fakes, as I feel I have demonstrated, then who produced them? Why they were prodced is obvious enough -- to incriminate Oswald as the Presidential assassin. But who had the ability to produce such forgeries? It seems to me they must have been made prior to the assassination, and this means someone other than Oswald had prior knowledge of what was about to happen. It also seems reasonable to conclude that these fakes were produced in a sophisticated facility, with all of the equipment necessary for the techniques used." (Jack White) Here Jack White is repeating the same concerns as HSCA attorney Robert Blakey. If somebody else besides Oswald created the Backyard Photographs, then we have absolute proof of a JFK conspiracy, and we further have solid evidence that the conspirators were wealthy enough to afford highly sophisticated photographic equipment. (This would suggest to many people that a government agency, like the CIA, was involved.) Therefore, Robert Blakey and the HSCA, just like the Warren Commission, were very one-sided and firm about their denials that anybody else besides the Oswalds was involved in making these photographs with an amateur Imperial Reflex camera. Thus the HSCA and the WC came into contradiction with the material evidence (according to Major John Pickard, and Detective Malcom Thompson and of course Jack White). Thus the controversy would not go away. On his side, Blakey rightly argued that the copy owned by De Mohrenschildt had an expert-verified signature of Lee Harvey Oswald on its back. Further, DPD officer Roscoe White had his own version of the photograph -- in a third pose (other than the two poses in CE-133A and CE-133B found in Mrs. Paine's garage, along with one and only one negative). Also, The Militant newspaper eventually admitted that it had received a copy of CE-133B from Oswald himself. Finally, Michael Paine told Ray and Mary La Fontaine that Oswald showed him a Backyard Photograph back in March of 1963. So there is plenty of evidence to show that Oswald was possessive about this photograph back in March, 1963. That is precisely why I disagree so sharply with Jack White's final conclusion. White was right to ask the first question -- if they are fakes, then who produced them? Yet White fails to consider the possibility that Oswald himself made the fakes. White was too hasty when he concluded that the Backyard Photographs were made explicitly for the purpose of incriminating Oswald as the Presidential assassin. That is a leap of logic without much basis. White is merely admitting -- in his own mind -- that the very existence of the Backyard Photographs is enough evidence for him to conclude that Oswald was guilty of killing JFK. That is a serious miscalculation. The only thing the Backyard Photographs might plausibly demonstrate is that Oswald was planning to shoot at ex-General Edwin Walker. But so what? Even if Oswald was in the party that tried to kill Walker on 10 April 1963 -- that is no proof at all that Oswald was JFK's shooter. That is a leap of logic. So, White was wrong -- it is a leap of logic to presume that the Backyard Photographs were made explicitly to incriminate Oswald of the JFK assassination. It is quite possible and even probable that the Backyard Photographs were made by Oswald to boast to insiders about shooting ex-General Edwin Walker. And this is apparently what Oswald did. Next, White correctly asks, "who had the ability to produce such forgeries before the assassination?" Yet he fails to consider the obvious answer -- that Lee Harvey Oswald -- who was working at a sophisticated photography company (Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall) had such sophisticated equipment ready-to-hand. Thus White made his second error -- he mistakenly concluded that "someone other than Oswald" made those fakes. That is another leap of logic. White's technical work appears eminently reasonable and logical; while White's conclusions seem hasty and biased to me. Now -- somebody might well ask -- why would Oswald go to the trouble to make these fakes only to deny to Will Fritz that he made them? Yet I think that question answers itself. Oswald make the fakes precisely so that he could deny that they were real. It's called plausible deniability. Best regards, --Paul Trejo <edit typos>

Jerry, is it possible that you're referring to this Special Report video footage? Best regards, --Paul Trejo <edit typos>