Paul Trejo

Nathaniel, your point is valid -- the JBS was not isolationist, but interventionist on a Global scale. Still, their domestic followers - the popular power behind their millions - operated almost entirely on a WASP-centric worldview, which was always the capstone of USA Isolationism. That is, the JBS rank and file were echoes of old Isolationism; their hatred of the UN was an echo of old Isolationism; their fear of Global Capital was an echo of old Isolationism; their pursuit of provincial racism and patriarchy was an echo of old Isolationism. Although technically, and in the abstract, the John Birch Society was willing to intervene in global affairs in a hostile manner, the root of their hostility was their fear that their Home Values were threatened -- and this is the worldview of the Isolationist. So I conclude that at root, at heart, the Birchers were dreaming of Isolation *after* they conquered their allegedly intrusive enemies. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Paul, what is your source for Item number one? If Walker was on public record before the JFK assassination, of believing that the Kennedy brothers had taken out a contract on him, and attempted to shoot him, that should have made Walker the prime suspect in the eyes of law enforcement after JFK was assassinated. Good question, Richard. My source is the Briscoe Center for American History, Edwin Walker archives. (My PDF files from Briscoe are too big to upload to the Education Forum, but I'm working on a solution to that.) Allow me to share three of those documents, just to provide a sampling. I will start at the very end, with Walker's last known article on this topic, from November, 1991. ------------ BEGIN WALKER #1 --------------------- A common assassin with a dead President -- Commander in Chief is an ugly experience since 1963. The President went to Dallas knowing and protecting his November assassin Lee H. Hoswald from prosecution for his April Crime "Attempted Assassination of the former General working at his desk in his Dallas home, 9:00 p.m. April 10." The Kenney protection included an early-morning, secret release of the prime suspect Lee H. oswald, from Dallas Police Custody on Kenney orders, April 11. The President did not live to know that he knew his assassin but everyone else lived to know that he did and that his assassin could not be prosecuted for the November Crime because of his Kennedy protection for his April Crime. The law does not provide for protection and prosecution at the same time. Only by the election of a new government could the protection be eliminated. They common assassin was dead within forty-eight hours, Friday to Sunday. NOV. 1991 EDWIN A. WALKER ------------ END WALKER #1 --------------------- This short article was published verbatim in the Kerrville Daily Times Sunday, January 19, 1992, under the headline, JFK DIDN"T KNOW HE KNEW HIS ASSASSIN. This same theme is repeated in numerous other documents in Walker's Briscoe Center archives, too. Now here's an excerpt from a longer article from April, 1967. This article is also written by Walker, but as he so often does, he refers to himself in the third person. The reference to 4011 is to Walker's address (4011 Turtle Creek Road, Dallas, TX). For four pages Walker recollects his clash with the Kennedys from 1961 to 1963, including his 'imprisonment' in an insane asylum. This is the final paragraph: ------------ BEGIN WALKER #2 --------------------- In fact at 4011, Walker ways that witnesses in Dallas are ample and adequate to establish that Oswald was picked up by the law enforcement agency between 9pm and 12 midnight, April 10, 1963, after the incidence. He was released. Michael Paine testified that he brought the Oswalds to his house the night of April 10th for dinner. The pickup was withheld from the public, so Oswald's name was never heard of, except by his own associates and friends, of which there were many and some shockingly influential, until he was apprehended on Nov. 22, 1963. ------------ END WALKER #2 --------------------- But perhaps the most dramatic repetition of Walker's Forgotten Myth is found in the German newsapaper, Deutsche NationalZeitung, culled from a number of interviews that Walker gave the paper less than 24 hours after the JFK assassination. Helmut Muench was the editor who first received Walker's early A.M. call, after which he spoke with the Newspaper owner, Dr. Frey, and then set up two in-depth interviews to begin at 7am that same morning between General Walker and interviewer Haslo Thorsten. (In my opinion, those so-called interviews sound scripted, but that's another story.) To read the full trans-Atlantic phone call between Walker and the German newspaper on 11/23/1963 -- the actual transcript -- there is a clear online reproduction on the Mary Ferrell web site. Just logon to http://www.maryferrell.org/ and then use this search: ADMIN FOLDER-E11: HSCA ADMINISTRATIVE FOLDER, OUTGOING TO COMMISSION VOL IX. Then read pages 330-340. It's a short read, and most revealing. Please pay special attention to page 330, since it shows that Rankin had evidence that Walker spoke to Muench, and so Walker lied to the WC when he denied the fact. For just the blurb under the headline for that German article, I include an English translation of it here: ------------ BEGIN MUENCH 11/29/1963 --------------------- THE STRANGE CASE OF OSWALD. The murderer of Kennedy made an attempt on U.S. General Walker's life early in the summer when General Walker was sitting in his study. The bullet missed Walker's head only by inches. Oswald was seized, but the following investigation - as it was reported to us - was stopped by U.S. General Attorney Robert Kennedy. Otherwise, Oswald would have been imprisoned for many years and so he would not have been able to commit the murder of John F. Kennedy, the brother of Robert Kennedy. ------------ END MUENCH 11/29/1963 --------------------- I trust this addresses your question about my sources, Richard. As for your comment that Walker's vendetta against RFK for his trip to the insane asylum deserved special attention after the JFK assassination -- I absolutely agree. That is the heart of my own theory. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Bernice, a new member told me the date just yesterday: it was 11/23/1963, the morning after JFK was killed. I hope this new member, Gary Mack, joins this thread. His opinion is that the connection between Oswald and Walker was simply Reporting 101, and nothing else -- a connection anybody would make. That means it was a mere coincidence that Walker made this same connection in his 6am phone conversation with Helmut Muench in Germany that very same morning. Well, it's possible. Anyway, thanks again for your clippings and photos, Bernice. They help everybody go way back a half-century to recall events long forgotten. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Bernice, you have a superior collection. Many thanks for posting it. I have some immediate comments on your collection. First, the WANTED FOR TREASON poster was probably Walker's idea, as filtered through Larrie Schmidt. By posting it side-by-side with Walker's portrait you seem to be making the connection. Secondly, the most striking photograph you posted is the newspaper clipping entitled, "Sniper Shooting at Walker Home". It is critical for my theory to know the precise date of that newspaper clipping. I say this because we can contrast it with the other newspaper clipping you shared, namely, the one entitled, "Oswald Claimed Shot at Walker: Wife Tells FBI He Tried Killing Ex-General." The date for that article is clear: "Friday, December 6, 1963". Now, according to official FBI records, the FBI had no idea that Lee Harvey Oswald was the shooter at General Walker on 4/10/1963 until Marina told them on the evening of Thu05Dec63. General Walker's own writings tell several different stories: (1) Walker claimed that the Dallas Police suspected Oswald on 4/10/1963, brought Oswald into custody, yet had to release Oswald that same night because of a call from the State Department, from RFK, demanding his immediate release. This is Walker's most common story that he told the rest of his life. (2) Walker claimed that the FBI knew the Oswald was his shooter at that time. (3) Walker claimed that he had no idea that Oswald was his shooter back in April, 1963, but he only found out about it on December 6, like everybody else, and still had his doubts. This was what he told the Warren Commission in 1964. (4) Walker claimed that a German newspaper reporter, Helmut Muench, guessed that Oswald was his shooter on 11/23/1963, during an early morning interview with Walker less than 20 hours after the JFK assassination. (However, the FBI and WC attorney Liebeler claimed that Helmut Muench of the Deutsche NationalZeitung confessed that General Walker was the one who told him that Oswald was his April shooter.) (5) Walker claimed that the FBI and CIA strong-armed the Dallas Police to release Oswald on 4/10/1963, and that Jesse Curry knows it but refuses to confess it, and that there were two shooters that night, Oswald and probably a CIA contractor, both paid by RFK. My question is why General Walker would waver about his knowledge of this connection of Oswald with JFK and himself. Now you can see, Bernice, why the date of that first clipping is so important to my theory. It appears to come before Marina told the FBI that Oswald was Walker's shooter back in April, 1963, if I go only by the wording. If so, then I have little doubt that General Walker himself was the source of that story. He could not stop himself from spreading that rumor. He was basically boasting about it. He was connecting himself with the JFK assassination for the whole world to see. When asked point blank about this by the Warren Commission, General Walker lied and acted innocent; he only found out when everybody else found out. But the FBI testimony by Helmut Muench (available on the Mary Ferrell web site) told a different story. In any case, Bernice, I very much appreciate your sharing of your photo collection with this thread on General Walker. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

I have a correction to the story in the St. Joseph News-Press which claims that Walker flew his US Flag upside-down in apology to Adlai Stevenson. Actually, it was Mayor Earl Cabell who apologized to Adlai Stevenson. Walker never apologized. Walker -- coldly and factually -- disavowed any participation in the event itself. "I watched over TV," said Walker. "I didn't have to be there -- I'd done enough against him," he said in a boasting tone. Following that lead, Congressman Bruce Alger also refused to apologize to Stevenson. General Edwin Walker concluded: "Adlai got what was coming to him." We must remember that Edwin Walker and the JBS firmly believed that the United Nations was Communist plot #1. This was not a matter for debate with them. General Walker flew his US Flag upside down for two solid weeks. The Dallas Morning News said it was in protest of Mayor Earl Cabell's apology to Adlai Stevenson. But General Walker said it was to protest the assassination of South Vietnam President Diem. [source: Chris Cravens, 1993] Best regards, --Paul Trejo, MA

Excellent question, Richard. Your question implies a potentially explosive situation, doesn't it? --Paul

Bernice, it just now occurred to me that you might have more of these exciting thumbnails about General Edwin Walker. Now, where would you have obtained these? Have you been collecting them? Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Thank you, Bernice Moore, for these outstanding images from the historical period in question. I'm especially impressed by the newspaper clippings you found that identify General Walker and the JBS as key players in the attack on Adlai Stevenson on 10/24/1963. I would point out the American flag flying upside-down in front of Edwin Walker's home in Dallas. This was a deliberate act on the part of General Walker, who flew his American flag upside-down to protest the policies of the JFK Administration, as well as the general direction of USA politics, e.g. the existence of the United Nations on American soil, the Supreme Court ruling that segregated schools are Unconsititutional, the tolerance of Cuba as a Communist nation only a few miles from US borders, the partition of Germany, and Foreign Aid to nations inside the Soviet orbit. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

It's a good question, Richard. I personally believe the writer justified his presumption with this sentence: "Dallas is the home of Major General Edwin A. Walker, who is acknowledged here as the leader of the radical right wing in Texas, and one of the rightest leaders of the South." Since this was about 50 years ago, it is difficuilt for us today to recollect how popular General Walker was in the South, and especially in Texas. His face was on the cover of NEWSWEEK in December, 1961. He appeared on radio and television in the South. After he resigned from the Army, he recieved thousands of letters from admiring fans, sending him small amounts of cash. (Hundreds of these letters are on display in the Briscoe Center for American History, in the Edwin Walker archives.) One of the great right-wing radio hosts of 1962/1963 (segregationist preacher Reverend Billy James Hargis) would take General Walker with him on national speaking tours. I believe that the clearest view that we today might obtain of General Edwin Walker is found in the 1962 movie, SEVEN DAYS IN MAY, starring Burt Lancaster. It is the story of a General who disagrees so much with the White House that he goes on radio and tours making speeches and filling auditoriums with his extreme rightist audiences. He is supported directly by sycophants and not a few followers among the military Brass. Edwin Walker was so well-known in Texas, and had written so many critical articles about the JFK administration, that JFK's words would have been immediately understood by the majority of Texans to imply General Walker, just as the writer suggests. I don't believe J.F. Ter Horst was attemping to implant some foreign idea; I believe he spoke directly to the Zeitgeist of Texas in 1963.

Robert, it is somewhat arbitrary to place more blame on people who were present in Dallas on 11/22/1963, compared with those who were not in Dallas that day. While it is true that General Edwin Walker was not in Dallas on 11/22/1963 because he left town the night before to make a speech in Louisiana, we should consider his role in the attack on Adlai Stevenson on 10/24/1963. General Walker did not attend the "UN Day" rally led by Adlai Stevenson, but perhaps 100 of his followers did attend. In addition to little old ladies in tennis shoes, these followers of Edwin Walker were largely extremists from the Young Americans for Freedom, led by Larrie Schmidt. The night before, on 10/23/1963, Edwin Walker held his own "US Day" rally to whip up his followers to disrupt Adlai Stevenson's speech at all costs. The crowd (or mob) was given complete instructions by Walker -- to buy all the tickets they could afford, to take noisemaker toys, to bring megaphones, to make their own speeches, to hiss, boo and throw tomatoes...all of which were carried out with regimented precision. In other words, although General Walker was not at the Adlai Stevenson rally himself, his intructions were being carried out at that rally 100%. Furthermore, just because General Landsdale happened to be at the Texas School Book Depository with police following the shooting of JFK, this is in itself insufficient proof that he was personally involved in a conspiracy to kill JFK. I admit it looks suspicious, but final proof is lacking. In other words, based on previous behavior I find General Walker to be much more suspicious than General Landsdale. Hatred is simply not enough evidence of a conspiracy. Behavior is the only proper evidence in a case as serious as this. The fact that GHW Bush said that he can't remember where he was on 11/22/63 cannot be used to prove anything at all. The fact that J. Edgar Hoover started covering up the JFK assassination immediately is behavioral evidence that J. Edgar Hoover had foreknowledge of a plot to kill Kennedy. McKnight showed that Hoover had this knowledge as early as August, 1963, when he learned that Carlos Marcello put up a lot of money to kill JFK. McGeorge Bundy was following the lead of J. Edgar Hoover in promoting the Lone Nut theory. That is suspicious, but it is not proof he knew all the facts. Although CIA Agent David Atlee Phillips said before his death that US intelligence officers were likely involved in the JFK assassination, that is not enough evidence to name names. Were these rogue contractors like Frank Sturgis? Were these employees like Cord Meyer? Although E. Howard Hunt admitted to being a "backbencher" in the JFK assassination, this only means that he heard something from somebody, and this could have been mere rumor. The only names he offered were LBJ (who had no knowledge of details, according even to those who accuse him of 'masterminding' the full conspiracy), and Cord Meyer, whose wife had a love affair with JFK. Although CIA Agent David Morales said "we got that bastard" in Dallas, that is proof of nothing at all. Perhaps ten thousand right-wing fanatics said exactly the same thing! I agree that David Morales is suspicious, and truly hated JFK, but that in itself cannot be admitted as proof. Although LBJ told Madeleine Brown that Texas oil men and renegade intelligence bastards killed JFK, he was emotional and talking with his mistress. That cannot be used as hard evidence. Furthermore, it is unreasonable, because renegade CIA contractors have zero power to cover-up anything. Only a higher power could do that. (Nor does a Vice President have that kind of power. Nor even the richest oil men in America; the only people with the necessary power to mastermind a coverup of such gargantuan proportions, and maintain it for a half-century, are far more powerful.) I have no doubt that oil barons were involved, and that H.L. Hunt is most suspicious, but without full support from the FULL military-industrial complex, we cannot explain the enormity of the cover-up. Although Cord Meyer admitted there was a conspiracy to kill JFK, that proves very little. Actually, there were dozens of conspiracies to kill JFK, and we are aware of many of them -- from the Mafia, from Cuban Exiles, from Joseph Milteer. The question is, which one of the many conspiracies actually succeeded? Although James Jesus Angleton told Sy Hersh that a "mansion has many rooms" and to "blame someone else at Langley", this is very little to go on. Although Allen Dulles said "That little Kennedy...thought he was God," that is merely another of the countless expressions of hate we find for JFK, and that cannot be accepted as proof of anything else but that JFK was widely hated -- which we already knew. Although General Edwin Walker wrote a letter to the HSCA mocking them because the bullet fragment he retrieved from his living room wall did not match the bullet fragment they entered into HSCA evidence, this alone cannot absolve him. Walker was not afraid of anybody; not Hoover, not Dulles, not the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and certainly not Earl Warren. General Edwin Walker, from 11/23/1963 until 11/23/1991, told every outlet, newspaper and US Government official who would listen to him, that Oswald was only one of two shooters at his home on 4/10/1963, and that the other shooter, along with Oswald, was hired by Robert F. Kennedy. Walker believed, firmly, that RFK plotted to kill him. RFK had placed Walker in an insane asylum in early October, 1962, and Walker neither forgot nor forgave that insult. Walker's paranoia against RFK was sufficient to justify any risk. If Edwin Walker was the center-point of the Dallas conspiracy to assassinate JFK, I have little doubt that H.L. Hunt was his bankroller, because H.L. Hunt was Walker's bankroller when Walker resigned from the Army after 30 years of loyal service -- resigned without a pension. Hunt had high hopes for Walker from 1961-1962, but even H.L. Hunt could not support the man who was widely regarded as the instigator of the Ole Miss riots of 1962. Hunt stopped supporting Walker for public office about that time, but he continued his personal relationship with Walker, according to Hunt's own personal aide. My theory does not openly accuse Walker of the JFK conspiracy -- but rather attempts to disprove that Walker was involved at the center. I have not been able to disprove it, and the fact that Walker wrote a letter to the HCSA does not in the slightest prove that Walker is absolved. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Jim Garrison would have said anything to obtain more clues about the JFK assassination. In 1991 Craig Zirbel published his book, The Texas Connection about the JFK assassination, in which he simply and solidly claimed that LBJ was the mastermind. I believe Zirbel made a weak case, but he was very emotional and convincing to many. His theory appears to be the predominant theory circulating today inside the very latest books on the JFK assassination. As for Garrison's first remark that you cited above, Robert, it was arguably an exaggeration -- LBJ was clearly vital to the cover-up of the plot to kill JFK, but he was not alone in the cover-up, nor did he control the FBI or the CIA in this matter, because they were more active than LBJ was. Insofar as the US military-industrial complex was sitting at the center of this mess, with General Landon and General Walker so close to the scene of the crime, we must recognize that the FBI and CIA were themselves among the smaller players, and LBJ even smaller. It simply does not matter that LBJ would 'stand to benefit' the most from the JFK conspiracy -- that did not make him the mastermind. LBJ was an observer, no matter how much he benefitted. LBJ was the last to find out, according to Madeleine Brown. JFK had simply made too many enemies in his own Administration - and too few friends. JFK's practice of Free Love inside the White House was too big of a culture shock for the average 1961 WASP. And that was only the tip of the iceberg. Not enough friends. Our Military Generals were convinced that JFK was a weak leader, and that the USA was headed for more trouble with the Soviets than JFK could possibly foresee. Now, in that circumstance, if (and only if) our own Generals were at the center of the plot to assassinate JFK, what in the world could the Vice President, the FBI or even the CIA do to stop them? Nothing at all, frankly. They had to play along, for National Security reasons, at least to the point of a cover-up. J. Edgar Hoover and LBJ did not wish to pursue a nuclear war with the USSR. But the question had to be decided for the public -- was Oswald a tool of the right-wing or the left-wing? If Oswald was a tool of the right-wing, then a Civil War could have erupted. If Oswald was a tool of the left-wing, then a nuclear war could have erupted. The solution -- which appears to be the brainchild of J. Edgar Hoover -- was that Oswald was the tool of neither side, but was a Lone Nut, who would sometimes befriend the left-wing and sometimes befriend the right-wing. How convenient that he was a double-agent! It was almost serendipity. (If [and only if] this theory is correct, then Marguerite Oswald was correct when she said that Oswald's sacrifice was second to none. He played the patsy, the scape-goat, for the sins of a nation.) The conspirators were certainly known to the FBI and CIA, and actually it made no sense to portray Oswald as a Lone Nut while at the same time making his FBI and CIA records a matter of National Security. Oswald was now dead, so where was the threat to National Security? The best explanation is that the associates of Oswald were known and would never be given up. The FBI did not fear the conspirators, because the FBI knew very well that they were not Communists, nor any foreign body. They were protected precisely because the FBI knew exactly who they were. They were internal, and even essential to US existence. This explanation goes a long way towards identifying their contours. It has now been a half-century since this terrible act was committed in the face of our nation, and since its cover-up has divided our nation severely, eroding our confidence in the honesty of our leaders. Is it now time for a healing? Or is another quarter-century needed? Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Jim, your thread deserves to be revived. General Edwin Walker was involved in several of the key events of the Cold War in the domestic USA, including the Little Rock, Arkansas implementation of the Brown vs. Topeka Board of Education legislation to racially integrate all public schools in the USA, signed by Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren, which earned Warren the hatred of the extreme right wing, especially in the South. General Edwin Walker complied with Eisenhower's demand that he lead troops to force Arkansas to integrate their local high school -- and he delivered a fine speech for the occasion. But his heart was torn by this event, and it was this, perhaps more than anything, that led him to resent the Federal Government for the rest of his life. In 1961, with JFK as President, Walker implemented his compulsory right-wing reading program for the 24th Infantry Division in Augsburg, Germany, call the Pro-Blue (implying anti-Red) program. Some of this literature came from the Billy James Hargis segregationist Christian Crusade, and some came from the John Birch Society, both sources inspired by Joe McCarthy, and both insulted JFK, calling him a Communist. The John Birch Society was solidly aligned with the White Citizens' Councils of the South that condemned compulsory race integration for public schools -- showing that General Walker had a firm change of heart and would never again integrate a public school against their will. JFK mildly admonished Walker for this pecadillo, and offered him a promotion if he would move to Hawaii. Instead, General Walker resigned from the Army, being the only US General in the 20th century to resign, thus giving up his $12,000 a year pension (which is $120,000 in today's dollars). Clearly, Walker was hopping mad. But more to the point, Walker had dreams of entering politics and toppling JFK. With what money? Most likely, with the money of H.L. Hunt. When Walker quit the Army in late November, 1961, he made the December, 1961 cover of NEWSWEEK as the 'voice of the right-wing extremists.' To earn his money, he quickly began writing speeches. His new office was in a Dallas skyscraper belonging to one of Dallas' many oil companies. Would we be surprised to learn that H.L. Hunt was his sponsor? When General Walker came out of his office in early 1962 he delivered an hour-long speech in Dallas that Joe McCarthy might have been proud of, with all the JBS overtones of accusing the White House of a Communist Conspiracy. He earned ten standing ovations -- one every six minutes. At the end of his very first speech, the NIC (National Indignation Committee) gave Walker a big celebration, and he was awarded a Stetson hat by Dallas Mayor Earle Cabell. (I include that video below.) This was only the start of Walker's "coming out". Later in 1962 he tried to reverse his humiliating performance under Eisenhower. This time it was Oxford University in Mississippi that was ordered to accept a qualifying application by a Negro (James Meredith). JFK vowed to enforce the Supreme Court order to integrate Oxford (Ole Miss) and Mississippi Ross Barnett defied JFK head-on. So General Edwin Walker got on national radio in late September 1962, and called for thousands of protestors "from every State in the Union" to oppose JFK's use of Federal Troops in this alleged violation of State's Rights. Should they bring their guns? Walker replied, "That's up to them!" Walker knew he was addressing radical militia and the paramilitary Minutemen in many States, especially in the South. Actually, thousands did show up in Jackson, Mississippi for this mass protest. The short story is that the protests turned into riots, where two were killed and perhaps a hundred were wounded. It was no surprise when RFK ordered that Walker be arrested for insurrection and contempt of Court. However, in a horrible political blunder, RFK also ordered Walker to be detained for psychiatric examination. At this point, the eminent psychiatrist, Thomas Szasz (THE MYTH OF MENTAL ILLNESS, 1960) loudly protested this abuse of science in the service of political partisanship! Even the ACLU joined this protest by Szasz, what to speak of the extreme right-wing paranoia over RFK's blunder. The short story is that RFK had to release Walker immediately, and within a few weeks all charges against Walker were dropped! The JFK Administration all but apologized for their blunder. There is more -- much more -- about this colorful American General who is worthy of at least a monograph on his biography. But none exists, yet. On that score, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) possesses perhaps seven sound recordings of extended interviews of eye-witnesses to the Oxford riots -- yet they would not release copies to me when I requested them in the first few days of this month. Instead, they said, these sound recordings (which are now a half-century old) must endure another Security Screening before the American public can hear them again. So, I formally requested an official Security Screening, and am now currently awaiting the NARA response. Best regards, --Paul Trejo, MA <edit typos> P.S. Here is the video of Walker receiving an award after his very first McCarthyist speech:

Nathanial, here's what I infer from US Isolation and Global Empire. The right-wing in the US, resistant to change from any direction, continued to demand US Isolation. Keeping out of foreign wars is one of their ideals. This would clearly prevent losses to life and resources, but it would also prevent foreign entanglements, strange bedpartners, and the disappointment of endless broken treaties. Other ideals of the right-wing reflect a melancholy of what the USA could have been if we had respected their call to Isolation, i.e. a more Christian society, a less racially diverse society, a society with more consistent cultural values. Preventing change was high on the list of rightists in 1960. Even if this meant delaying Civil Rights as long as possible -- change was the enemy. Few leftist intellectuals were aligned with Isolationism. Progress involved foreign investments, foreign travel, foreign friendships, foreign adventures and the inevitable foreign conflicts. For most of US History, our model in the Global approach to politics was the United Kingdom of Great Britain. When the USA entered World War Two in December, 1941, we joined the Allied Powers already in progress in their modern warfare against the Axis Powers. Since Americans almost exclusively spoke English, we kept closer to the UK than to our other Allies. Again, the UK was our model in Global survival. The UK was a Global Empire, and the USA was largely a smaller economic force before WW2, content to follow the UK lead in most (but not all) foreign matters. To make a very long story very short, the Allied Powers won WW2, but at a terrible cost. London had been reduced to rubble. Much of Europe had been reduced to rubble. Some reports said the USSR lost 20% of its population to WW2. The USA did not expect it, and did not necessarily want it, but the fact remained -- the USA was the most powerful nation on the planet. At the end of WW2, like it or not, the USA was the heir of Great Britain as the Superpower of planet Earth. Some Americans loved the idea. Many Americans were most uncomfortable with the idea. For one thing, it was nearly impossible for US rightists maintain an attitude of Isolationism when the world looked to the USA as a Global Superpower. Did we rise to the occasion? In some cases yes, and in other cases, no. I believe that JFK rose to the occassion - for the most part. I believe that many among the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many retired Generals as well, did not rise properly to the occasion. General Edwin A. Walker, for example, continued to rail loudly in all news media possible, that the United Nations is Treason! Any political figures that did not embrace McCarthyism, or rightist Christian jingoism, or University race segregation, were for the extreme USA rightists, Communists pure and simple. And like all Communists, they must all be wiped out. Thus the extreme rightists in 1963 identified their main Communist enemy not in Moscow, but in Washington DC. This had a suppressive effect on US politics, as should be obvious. Many in the Soviet world enjoyed the buffoon side-show of rightist Americans attacking leftist and even moderate Americans, because they knew it weakened the unity of America. JFK took particular exception to these new Isolationists in the early 1960's. He made speeches against them. He encouraged movies to be made to criticize them (e.g. Seven Days in May (1962)). He had little or no patience at all with them. JFK was trying to adapt the Presidency and the USA to the demands of being the Global Superpower -- something new and unsteady for our people. So, Nathaniel, when I spoke of US Isolationsists, I referred to the US right-wing in 1963, including H.L. Hunt, Billy James Hargis, Dr. Fred C. Schwarz, Robert Welch, and General Edwin A. Walker. This is why I said that JFK was killed as a result of the clash of US Isolationists with Globalists -- I presumed it was self-evident that JFK was among the Globalists. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Paul, I'm not sure if you've been missing any of my past posts or you're just trying to give me a hard time, I really don't know what it is, and I thought perhaps you would have just let it go by now, but it seems you want to drag this on and for what reason? I really don't know, you're a reseacher why don't you find out yourself how tall Frank is. I really don't care to argue the fact of Frank hight. Is it not enough that you don't want to believe me? I guess it wouldn't help telling you that I knew Frank for nine years either would it? ... but I'm telling you he was taller then my dad, I do remember... Scott, I admit my comment was too sarcastic. I've read different reports about Sturgis' height, so it gets confusing. Yet you're an eye-witness, so that's a different matter. Also, your real point was about your dad, not about Frank Sturgis' height. So, my sarcasm was out of place, and I apologize. --Paul

Scott, if Frank Sturgis was 6'2" tall, then the man standing to his right in the videos you kindly shared in this thread must be 6'8" tall, since he's much taller than Frank. Is it possible Frank Sturgis wore high-heel boots in his later years? --Paul

Well, this came out in 1984, when LBJ (d. 1973), Mac Wallace (d. 1971) and Cliff Carter (d. 1971) were long dead. He was the only survivor of these alleged conspiracies -- so who could contradict his evidence? Also, he did not claim knowledge of the "precise details" of number 8, the JFK killing, which is our main concern here. Therefore, it is entirely possible that he was: (i) mistaken; (ii) exaggerating; (iii) trying to make a book deal real quick. Unless we can actually view the details of how the JFK assassination was allegedly "executed" by Mac Wallace, everything Mr. Estes claims is subject to skepticism, doubt and dismissal. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Scott, here are my replies to your question and your comment: (i) I've read rumors that he was medium height and rumors that he was shorter than average, but one way to know for certain is to obtain his Police mugshots and booking record from the Watergate break in. So, I've requested that; then I'll be able to tell you for sure how tall Frank (Fiorini) Sturgis really was. (ii) I believe that we had so many cooks in the kitchen (so many people contributing to any assassination plot against JFK that they heard about). But they weren't all contributing to the same ground-crew! Probably a lot of people believed that their hit squad killed JFK, and so their cash contribution was the deciding factor. But in reallity, it was only a fraction of that money that was successful, just as it was only a fraction of the hired 'mechanics' who actually killed JFK. Although the ground-crew that actually killed JFK was professional, and so they would not have talked, this would not prevent liars and boasters from claiming that they were the ones who killed JFK. It is almost a boast today - not really a confession - for somebody to say that his crew was the crew that killed JFK a half-century ago. Would somebody have talked? Actually, plenty of people talked -- but most of them are fake. For example, I don't believe the mob killed JFK, because, as Jim Garrison said, they did not have the means to cover it up, or the proper sniper's modus operandi. Yet Sam Giancana was going to testify, and Johnny Rosselli was going to testify, and others, also. Why? For prestige, probably. But the people who put up the cash for these hit-squads would never let them sing - so they were both murdered before they could testify to the HSCA. I think we agree, Scott -- the mob lacks the discipline of a long-term chain-of-command. That's why I believe the actual assassins were from a different school -- one with more discipline and more honor. The actual JFK assassins were probably trained marksmen with military discipline. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Scott, here are my replies to your questions and remarks: (1) My measurements were relative: (i) Howard Hunt was very tall compared to Sturgis; and (ii) the tramp who looked like Sturgis was very tall compared to the tramp who looked like Howard Hunt. Therefore there was no match. (2) I agree with you that either Marita Lorentz or Gerry Hemming was lying about who rode in that caravan. I don't know who was lying. When the late Gerry Hemming was on this Forum, he blatantly called Marita a xxxx. Yet in another context he softened his voice and admitted that he was invited to join the caravan. My point was that if (and only if) Marita was lying about Hemming, then she could have also been lying about Oswald. It is also possible that Marita was lying about Hemming and telling the truth about Oswald. (It is also possible that Marita was telling the truth about Hemming but lying about Oswald.) But if (and only if) Marita was telling the truth, then Hemming was lying. Yet please remember that Marita was not an eye-witness to the JFK assassination - she was only an eye-witness to an illegal weapons deal, which she claims was consummated by Howard Hunt (and Howard Hunt did not have a believable alibi for that day, according to a duly appointed jury). So, even if Marita was telling the truth, we are left to guess whether these weapons were the weapons used to assassinate JFK, and whether these sharpshooters were the sharpshooters that assassinated JFK. She had no eye-witness information about that. (3) While I'm no expert on the controversy over Oswald in Mexico, we have a Forum member (Harry Dean) who has also joined this thread, whose memoirs say that the famous war hero, Guy Gabaldon, was in Mexico at that time, working for the JBS, and that Gabaldon gave some money to Oswald in Mexico at that time. Oswald had no idea, according to Harry Dean, that the money came from the JBS, or that this money was buying Oswald's services as the patsy for a famous crime. (4) The money for the dozens of hit squads who promised to kill JFK for a price came from many different sources, according to my reading. Some money came from Carlos Marcello. Some came from Santos Trafficante. Some came from Sam Giancana. Some possibly came from Howard Hughes (since his accountant coordinated all the Mafia money). Some money came from Joseph Milteer, some money came from Jimmy Hoffa, some money came from H.L. Hunt, and some money came from the JBS, according to sources. There were probably hundreds of rich individuals and groups that contributed whatever they could, because they truly, sincerely believed that JFK was a communist traitor to the USA. H.L. Hunt was particularly generous, according to reports. Best regards, --Paul Trejo <edit typos>

That's another good question, Scott; how big a role did E. Howard Hunt play? On his deathbed he claimed to play a minor role, so that's fairly good evidence that he was at least involved. But how big was his role? A lot of our suspicions about E. Howard Hunt are centered in the landmark legal decision won by Mark Lane as described in his book, Plausible Denial (1992). Lane convinced a jury that E. Howard Hunt was involved in the JFK assassination to some degree, based mainly on the evidence of Marita Lorentz. Marita's story is to some degree documented in the videos you uploaded earlier today on this thread. She said that she joined Frank Sturgis and a number of rogue CIA operatives and stooges in a weapons smuggling operation in late November 1963, starting from Florida and ending in Dallas, Texas. Mark Lane made her sound believable. She further claimed that the purchaser of these weapons was none other than E. Howard Hunt, who went by the code-name, "Eduardo." Yet there are problems with her story. She also named Lee Harvey Oswald and Gerry Patrick Hemming as two of the men involved in that smuggling caravan. Yet Hemming (when he was a member of this Forum) denied that he was in that caravan! It is true that Hemming admitted that he was invited to join the caravan, and that he knew the caravan existed -- but he firmly denied riding in the car, as Marita claimed he did. So - if Marita lied about Hemming's participation, then she could have lied about Oswald's participation, too. (And for the record, that person standing behind Frank Sturgis in those videos you kindly shared -- that doesn't look like Oswald to me.) I'm not saying that Oswald wasn't in that caravan -- I have no proof for my theory yet -- but this is after all the week that Oswald should have been in Mexico with Nagell, trying to get into Cuba, wasn't it? Now, E. Howard Hunt claims to be a benchwarmer. I believe that is correct -- he was not one of the three tramps as some writers have claimed. (The two tramps that look a little like Howard Hunt and Frank Sturgis have a major difference -- the tramp who looked like Hunt was short, but Hunt was tall; and the tramp who looked like Sturgis was tall, but Sturgis was short. No match.) Because E. Howard Hunt knew so many of the conspirators, he was an accessory after the fact -- his main crime was his silence. (The same applies, also, to David Atlee Phillips, whose main role was to obtain lots of cash for Alpha 66 and similar counter-revolutionary groups. He knew what was going on, but he only offered minor help here and there, in response to rare requests from the major players, IMHO.) Yes - H.L. Hunt was far more involved. For one thing, when E.H. Hunt and D. Atlee Phillips wanted cash for their operations, they often got it from H.L. Hunt, anyway. Unlike the rogue CIA guys who were in the game for the money and the machismo, and who had no firm ideological beliefs of any kind, and whose loyalties could often go to the highest bidder, H.L. Hunt was totally committed to his ideology. For Hunt, and for all JBS extremists, JFK was a communist, a traitor, and worked for the aid and comfort of the USSR. The conspiracy was only the patriotic thing to do. What H.L. Hunt needed was somebody at the ground-level -- somebody with real military connections -- somebody with a real zeal to get the job done. Somebody who had nothing more to lose. (Remember, when Edwin Walker resigned from his post as Major General, he gave up his military pension! He was angry! He was penniless!) My current theory: It was General Edwin Walker -- financed by H.L. Hunt and supported by probably 100 field operatives, including violently anti-communist foreigners from Cuba, Germany and Russia, but mostly from the extreme right-wing in Dallas, USA. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Robert, we agree on many aspects of the Dallas connection. As for the resigned General Edwin Walker, however, you decline to believe that he was personally involved in the JFK assassination because in 1977 he wrote to the HSCA (House Select Committee on Assassinations) mocking them, saying that the bullet they filed in evidence of the Walker shooting on 4/10/1963 did not match the fragment that he found in his own living room wall and window sill. I don't find this to be inconsistent for somebody like Edwin Walker, but you believe that it draws too much attention, and that if Walker were really guilty, he would have simply remained quiet. After all - he was a known hater of the Kennedys, and he was called to testify for the Warren Commission mainly for that reason. Yet that presumes that if Walker did play a major role in the JFK assassination, that he would have preferred to hide in the shadows like a coward all his life. Based on his biography as a USA officer who saw many heated war compaigns, I find that difficult to accept. It makes more sense to me that Edwin Walker would have wanted to confront his opposition head-on, and explain the reasons why JFK had to be killed. Here's my reasoning on this: 1. Edwin Walker, as a member of the JBS, truly believed that JFK was a communist, and therefore a traitor. 2. Edwin Walker, as a victim of the Kennedy tyranny which committed Walker to an insane asylum in an unforgivable act of political imprisonment, was confirmed in the correctness of the JFK assassination. 3. Edwin Walker believed that Oswald tried to kill him on 4/10/1963, despite what he told the HSCA. 3.1. We know this because of the story that he spread all of his life; from 11/23/1963 all the way into the 1990's -- namely, that RFK was the one who tried to kill him on 4/10/1963, and that Oswald was only one of the shooters at 9pm that evening. 4. Edwin Walker was obsessed with finding out who the other shooter was. Even in the early 1990's, Edwin Walker wrote to Attorney General Janet Reno, demanding to obtain the CIA records on the shooting of 4/10/1963. He was convinced that he would have proof that RFK was behind it all. 5. In the early morning hours of 11/23/1963, less than 20 hours after JFK had been killed, Edwin Walker called a German newspaper (Deutsche NationalZeitung) and its news staff, Helmut Muench and Haslo Thorsten, in a jubilant mood, to exclaim how the shooter who failed to kill Walker on 4/10/1963 had just killed JFK on 11/22/1963. 6. In the interview that followed, Walker expressed the glee of irony that RFK failed to kill Walker, but instead his plan backfired and killed RFK's own brother. 7. This actually came out in the Warren Commission testimony, as Attorney Liebeler tried to pressure Walker into explaining how he knew on 11/23/1963 that Oswald was his 4/10/1963 shooter, when Marina had not told the FBI that fact until 12/02/1963. 8. Of course, Walker simply denied the whole thing, and there was nothing that Liebeler could do about it. What sort of proof could he provide other than the FBI statement from Helmut Muench himself? After all, Walker was not on trial. 9. Would the former General Walker lie to the Warren Commission? Remember that for the past five years Edwin Walker had been campaigning with newsletters, speeches, radio spots and bumper stickers: IMPEACH EARL WARREN! 10. Edwin Walker had no respect for Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren. None at all. For Edwin Walker, the honorable Earl Warren was a communist - a traitor - and one's patriotic duty is to lie to all traitors. 11. Edwin Walker did not fear the Warren Commission. Nor did he fear the FBI. For one thing, the FBI itself was lying when it said that they only learned about Oswald's April, 1963 pot-shot at Walker from Marina Oswald in December, 1963. Walker knew this was a lie because it was the FBI who told Walker of the fact back in April, 1963 (probably on Easter Sunday, 4/14/1963). 12. The FBI found out about it from Mrs. Igor Voshinin who had just heard it from George DeMohrenschildt! 13. So, the FBI had plenty to hide from the USA public, and General Walker knew all the facts. J. Edgar Hoover knew a lot more about what happened with Oswald than he ever could admit. 14. General Walker could blackmail the FBI itself if he'd wanted to. 15. But he didn't want to blackmail the FBI -- it was enough that he didn't fear them. Walker, the great warrior, was not afraid of Earl Warren and he wasn't afraid of J. Edgar Hoover. Or of LBJ, either, for that matter. 16. But like any "true believer" he would have been plagued by inner doubts. He had to continue to justify in his mind why the killing of JFK (and later RFK) was truly necessary. 17. The most material way to do that would be to demonstrate to the world (and to himself) that RFK was really and truly the person who was behind Oswald's pot-shot at Walker at 9pm on 4/10/1963. Walker was no ordinary conspirator. He was a unique personality -- a minor marvel of the Cold War. Does this influence your opinion about your position on Walker, Robert? Best regards, --Paul Trejo <edit typos>

Scott, thanks for bringing up the doubts by Mark Lane, one of the great writers on this topic since the days of the Warren Commission. I tend to think that letter was a forgery, too, since it is a little too blatant. Why would the KGB want to forge evidence linking Oswald to HL Hunt? For one thing, as LBJ himself said to Senator Russell when twisting his arm to join the Warren Commission, some people were claiming that the USSR killed JFK, and wanted to lead the USA into an immediate showdown with the USSR. But LBJ said, "we know that Khrushchev didn't have a damn thing to do with it." Well, the USSR were terrified that the extreme right-wing in the USA would use the assassination of JFK as an excuse to drop the bomb on the USSR (Dr. Strangelove style). Also, the Soviet press already announced their guess - that the extreme right-wing in Dallas, led by HL Hunt, was behind the JFK assassination. Therefore, the motive for the KGB to forge this letter by Oswald, asking "Mr. Hunt" for some money or for a meeting, is not difficult to put together. If Mark Lane thinks it was a forgery, and it sounds like a forgery (and it didn't show up until months later), then I tend to think it was a forgery. However, handwriting analysts say the handwriting is too close to be a forgery. So, it might be authentic. Oswald was a money-grabber, I believe. (This is why he liked hanging out with George DeMohrenschildt, and also with Clay Shaw. He was hoping that being a mercenary would one day pay off big time.) So, if (and only if) the letter is authentic, then I still believe Oswald would have addressed E.H. Hunt by his CIA alias instead. It's an intriguing question. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Mark, IMHO, if (and only if) that letter is authentic, then Oswald would have addressed E.H. Hunt by his CIA Alias, "Eduardo," and not by his last name. So, since the writer used the name, "Hunt," he was almost certainly writing to H.L. Hunt. --Paul Trejo ^^ Not necessarily true, E.H Hunt was "Eduardo" to the anti-Castro groups and during the Bay of Pigs, in fact many knew him by his real name, even during the Bay of Pigs. In fact Sturgis knew E.H. Hunt since 1954 during the Guatemalan coup. He only adopted that name "Eduardo" while he was involved with the Cubans in South Florida. Scott, I agree that Oswald might not have used the name "Eduardo" when addressing E.H. Hunt in writing -- but Hunt had other aliases, too. Insofar as Oswald was accepted in the fringes of the rogue CIA underground, he would have known the appropriate alias, and he would have used the proper alias when writing to E.H. Hunt. He wouldn't have used his real name, IMHO. That's why I say it's better than 50/50 that Oswald was writing to H.L. Hunt (if the letter is authentic). Think of Oswald's situation in life; he did not like holding down regular jobs. He changed menial jobs so often that one gets the idea he took those jobs only to provide a cover for his lifestyle. He obtained cash from his many post office boxes, and also from the local Western Union (according to a clerk in the Dallas Western Union). He owned a Minolta spy camera; he was always looking for money. Clay Shaw was mainly a money source for Oswald (and Banister and Ferrie). Oswald saw the older spies go to very rich people to ask for money for right-wing adventures -- and get it. He was practicing for the day when he would call the shots, IMHO. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

From 1990 manuscript/book CROSSTRAILS: All such information (re: President Kennedy) had no significance to those who desired to hasten his death. Kennedy's Dallas trip was a non-secret. It was known and leaked months earlier by...mole-agents-in-place that lurked for years in every agency, service and bureau of the U.S. government. The burrowing moles who's 'sacred duty' is always to serve only the 'ultimate goal' of the LDS-JBS conquest, informed RID (Research Intelligence Department) of the John Birch Society on a continuing basis concerning the 'movements' and even the 'personal' activities of the President. Harry, thanks for reminding us of the John Birch Society (and its LDS component) in connection with the participation of H.L. Hunt (and General Walker) in this drama. The John Birch Society is a major player in this drama because they were McCarthyists who believed that communists had taken over Washington DC, and that the only way to get them out is to "shoot them out" (according to Robert Welch). Harry Truman is quoted as saying that "the JBS is only the KKK without sheets." In any case, the JBS was known for its large membership of WASP professionals and small businessmen, who would send truckloads of money to Robert Welch. They were extremists, and they had scads of money. H.L. Hunt was one of their biggest contributors. Dan Smoot was an occasional writer to their monthly magazine. General Walker was one of its first members. They hated JFK openly, and JFK did not back off from them, but publicly insulted them, just as Harry Truman insulted them. Perhaps most literate adults in 1963 simply presumed that the JBS was behind the assassination of JFK. Frank Ellis (ATF) said so. Jack Ruby himself said so. The rhetoric of the JBS in 1963 would lead the average reader to believe so. They sincerely and honestly believed that JFK was a communist and a traitor to the USA. They believed that the assassination of JFK was the right thing, the patriotic thing, to do. In this regard, they had the full and complete support of H.L. Hunt and General Edwin A. Walker. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Mark, IMHO, if (and only if) that letter is authentic, then Oswald would have addressed E.H. Hunt by his CIA Alias, "Eduardo," and not by his last name. So, since the writer used the name, "Hunt," he was almost certainly writing to H.L. Hunt. --Paul Trejo

Robert, you and I agree on the central place that H.L. Hunt plays in the Dallas power structure, not only regarding wealth and power, but also regarding right-wing ideology. In my view, the assassination of JFK would not be possible without the extreme right-wing ideology that considered JFK to be a Communist-sympathizer or worse. To appreciate this theory to the fullest, we should become familiar with the right-wing hermenuetic of Dallas in 1963. We should be familiar with their literature, i.e. the "Life Line" radio show of H.L. Hunt, the Dan Smoot Report (which is plagiarized by the 21st century American left wing today), the rants of segregationist Evangelist Billy James Hargis, the John Birch Society teachings of Robert Welch, and the nationally broadcast speeches of General Edwin A. Walker. These people knew each other (Hunt, Smoot, Hargis, Welch, Walker) and they shared stories. I was at the Briscoe Center for American History for several hours today, looking through Edwin Walker's archives and trying to identify the tone of his speeches and writings. They sound so much like Robert Welch that it seems to me today that he borrowed much of his vocabulary and phrases from Welch. Now, Welch borrowed much of his vocabulary from Joseph McCarthy; and Joseph McCarthy got a lot of his ideas from General Charles Willoughby, the intelligence officer of General Douglas MacArthur. Willoughby was a right-wing fanatic (and like MacArthur he was an Army officer in World War One as well). It now seems that when Truman dismissed MacArthur, that's when the modern right-wing propaganda fired up in a major way. MacArthur and Willoughby began to entertain humor about Truman's treason. This was all Joe McCarthy needed to fire up his lackluster Senate career and become a superstar. Thus the right-wing was born, and even after Joe McCarthy was censured by the Senate, that didn't stop an American cottage industry in right-wing paranoia about Reds in Washington. Thus the John Birch Society was born. These people took themselves very seriously. H.L. Hunt was so impressed with this train of thought that he spent millions on a radio show to promote these ideas. He called it, "Life Line." Dan Smoot was one of his first announcers. H.L. Hunt was himself the main writer. Sometimes, however, he would hire Billy James Hargis to write some of his radio spots (because a young Billy James Hargis also wrote for Joe McCarthy). All of this was centered in Dallas, Texas, the national headquarters of the USA right-wing. JFK should have known that this was dangerous territory for a Liberal like himself. For the extreme right-wing, the very word 'Liberal' was equivalent to 'Communist.' The very notion of the United Nations would make some of them virtually foam at the mouth. They saw the United Nations as the USSR giving orders to the USA, and the USA paying for the entire show. The Dallas right-wing wanted the UN out of the US now. (This is still a major plank in the John Birch Society platform.) So, when Adlai Stevenson came to Dallas in October 24th, 1963 to advocate the UN, he should not have been surprised that the John Birch elements in Dallas would have had their own anti-UN rally the night before! That was set up by General Edwin A. Walker. He called it, "US Day". For the Dallas right-wing, the choice was always between the US and the UN, with no middle ground. So Edwin whipped up his crowd into a religious frenzy, cursing the godless and Satanic UN in favor of the Christian USA. He instructed them to interfere with Adlai's speech by all means possible. And they did just that. As part of this fiasco, in which Adlai Stevenson was struck on the head with a protest sign, a poster was circulated in downtown Dallas that day and evening. It read: WANTED FOR TREASON - JFK. Yes, Edwin Walker was behind that famous poster as well. One thing I found in the General Walker archives -- notes for a speech written in early October 1963, marking the anniversary of time RFK had him locked up in an insane asylum in Missouri. OK - that's the background, and now for my request. While at the Briscoe Center today, I asked to see all the transcripts they have for H.L. Hunt's radio show, "Life Line", for the year 1963. I wanted to read what H.L. Hunt had to say about the treatment of Adlai Stevenson in Dallas on 10/24/1963, and of course what Hunt had to say in the weeks leading up to the assassination of JFK on 11/22/1963. As it turns out, after a lengthy search, the Briscoe archives only have "Life Line" transcripts for December, 1963 and forward. Very frustrating. So - my question to you and to all who read this request -- do you have access to the written transcripts of H.L. Hunt's "Life Line" radio programs for the months of September through November of 1963? (I believe the transcriber will probably be Melvin Munn.) I would very much like to see these, and I suspect that the Forum might find them to be interesting as well. Best regards, --Paul Trejo