Michael Clark

22 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Harry - did you talk with forum member Michael Clark?

I brought off-forum talk to the forum.

I should not have done that.

My direct question to Harry, was on a forum post.

The fact that we will not name names, here, is a testament of the fear that endures.

I have been scolded appropriately.

Paul Trejo's use of the death notice, the RIP thread, of a highly-regarded forum member (BM) to further his Walker bunkumemt, will continue to drive me to a contempt for him. 

Sorry, I Can't let that go. Paul never apologized. He is a Bot.

Paul Trejo is a loud incessant, prevaricating bot.

17 minutes ago, Jason Ward said:

An interesting proponent of releasing the assassination files early:

 

Where did you get that?

On 7/9/2017 at 1:21 AM, Robin Finn said:

former CIA officer Glenn Carle:

"During the 1960s, Maurice Bishop was the alias used by an infamous CIA officer in Mexico City, whom conspiracy theorists believe met Lee Harvey Oswald shortly before President John F. Kennedy was murdered in 1963. The alleged meeting is cited as clear evidence that CIA officers were somehow involved in Kennedy’s assassination.

I knew Maurice Bishop, whose real name was David Atlee Phillips. A long time ago, he got me into the agency."

http://glenncarle.com/tag/central-intelligence-agency/

As part of my working pet-Ct, I have William Buckley Jr. working in the same ring as DAP in 1963. If Glenn Lincoln Carlisle (not to be confused with (as per Glenn Lincoln Carle) Roger Craig interviewer, Lincoln Carle) is offering a hangout, in the form of DAP, it may actually be William F. Buckley; is Buckley the Queen?

40 minutes ago, Jason Ward said:

  18 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

 

I accept this statement as historical.

 

40 minutes ago, Jason Ward said:

It's eyewitness testimony.   Compared to those who rely on conspiracy books it is as fact is to speculation.

 

Jason

Like James Files? Or dozens of other confessors?

Paul Trejo is selective in the tidbits of bunk that he drops around the forum. He clearly does not expand beyond his selected bunk-pile. He never comes across anything interesting that does not sequuze through his die in the way that he prefers.

3 hours ago, Jason Ward said:

Threats or imagined threats we've added later?   

 

Jason

It is Walker who is becoming the later-day imagined threat. His support of a few score men to an army of perhaps a million men is being imagined right here on the Education Forum, by two people.

Walker is typical fall-guy material. He is a disgraced, homosexual malcontent with no family and unknown encestry. Like the fall-guy for the USS Iowa incident, blame a gay guy, or make him gay and blame him.

40 minutes ago, Jason Ward said:

Sandy, 

I think you're failing to recognize that at 12:29 in Dallas before any shots are fired the presumption is that any assassination attempt on Kennedy would come from the Right.  

Jason

Jason, There are other threats at that time, including the Mafia, corrupt and threatened Democrats, Castro, Industrialists and even ant-Catholic elements.

Mike

8 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

Most certainly not the one James Files claimed to use.   Not that either one Was used in the assassination.  Though WerBell could well have been represented in some capacity.

Hi Ron, Chris was referring to forum member James Richards, and a missing/broken link of his.

13 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Sandy,

I had presumed that you subscribe to the CIA-did-it CT.  

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

And who is NOT getting tired of that?

Paul Trejo wrote: "During my more than five years on this Forum I have always admitted that I don't have final proof of my Walker-did-it CT -- but that in itself is no proof that it is WRONG -- it is simply awaiting the final proof."

And who is NOT getting tired of your Nostradamus-like predictions, ten times daily.

Bump. I am shocked that there are not more documents that are of-interest.

I figured that I would open a thread in which replies to other threads, that repeatedly get driven off-topic and into a pet theory, can be replied-to without diverting the subject thread.General Walker and Saint Ruthie are the most common diversions, thus the title.

4 minutes ago, Jason Ward said:

According to the opening post in this thread, Harold Weisberg acquired it from John/Jack Martin in 1968.  I gather it was available to purchase for a long period of time after that, although it's unclear to me how public this was.   I'm considering your earlier post re: double cross etc.

regards

Jason

For reference on my working,  pet, "double-cross" CT...

13 minutes ago, Chris Newton said:

btw, I recommend reading The Devil's Brigade by Robert Adelman for a fair assessment of Gen. Walker's record & character in WW2.

let's re-wind to Ruth, any objections?

 

Not at all. Thanks for the offering. And again, my apologies.

When did this film become public?

What are the first mentions in the record of this film?

17 minutes ago, Jason Ward said:

Hi Michael,

Can you elaborate on this?   IMO the film crucifies Walker without needing any more bits released, so if blackmail is the motive who is the blackmailed target?  What line is meant to be towed exactly?

thanks

Jason

Jason, The film seems to be far too short to be complete. If someone was on vacation, would this be all that they took home with them? It has enough in it, and is short enough, to assume that there is more.The chances of a simple vacationer taking a few short sections of film that show Walkers house after the fake-hit on him, and Oswald leafleting in NOLA are as infinitesimal as it gets. 

Specifically, and presumptively, and only as an example, the LHO-leafleting clip would have a larger perspective of who was involved in the JFKA (Morales? Other perps that would show up at Watergate?). Does the full length film show other "passengers" on the plane. Who else was in the film of Walkers house? This could be enough to shut Perps up.

I'll place this in the perspective of my double-cross CT. This film, in it's entirety, might have been used, by Dallas money, industrialists and cops, to keep CIA element-perp-rogues and Anti-Castro Cubans from expecting follow-through on the Cuban invasion.

In short, this film is not complete and it suggests much more. What are we not seeing?

To be sure, Chris, I apologies for following the Walker-Worshppier off topic.I do try to stay on topic.

48 minutes ago, Chris Newton said:

Michael let's be fair.

If you had a virtual warehouse full of Walker-did-it ebooks you would be doing the same thing. (like any good capitalist).

For the record, as much as we disagree, I don't think Walker is Mr. Trejo's hero.

Chris, 

Paul's analysis is evolving into, or being revealed-as, an admiration for a person that he considers to be a perpetrator the JFK assassination.

1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said:

Mark,

I have been saying for five years on this Forum that Ex-General Edwin Walker was a great man when he served in uniform...

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

General Walker was derided by his colleagues. His military brass peers held him as suspect. He did not have the respect of his peers or subordinates. He was kept around as a useful idiot, and later used as a tool in the Kennedy plot. He twice quit the service of his country.

He was repeatedly arrested for sexual crimes, in public and with children.

General Walker is Paul Trejo's hero.

20 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

Paul Trejo expresses:  ".Why blame Ruth Paine?  In my reading, it’s mainly because she’s an educated woman, and CIA-did-it CTers tend to be old-fashioned MCP’s.  Also, she’s from the wealthy class, and class envy is a part of that."

I am guessing that Paul means Middle Class People with the MCP anacronym..

Paul would, I believe, opine that "all researchers that blame the MICC and Corrupt officials and industrialists are just doing so because they are jealous that they don't share the wealth."

Paul, where were you when guys were being drafted for Vietnam?

3 minutes ago, Tom Hume said:

Hi Jason and Paul,

Sure, trying to locate the real John T, or Jack T, Martin might be fruitful, but since the film appears to be so blatantly coincidental, it looks to me like a possible trap somebody set for Walker. The real meaning of the film might be in the film itself, and here’s a suggestion I made in November of last year on this thread:  

“A shot in the dark: It’s my suspicion that John T Martin is a fictional character, and that the real filmmakers filmed a cameo of themselves at a building in downtown Dallas. The footage is between 1:14 and 1:27 and while it’s very dark, someone on the forum with the proper skills and software might be able to give us a good look at these fellows - it might turn out to be important.”

I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that we all know the two guys in that cameo footage, but somebody on the forum with Photoshop skills would have to shed some light on the subjects, and identifying them looks a whole lot easier than identifying Prayer Man.

Tom

 

Tom, I agree with part of what you are saying. It seems likely that there is no Jack T. Martin, at least as far as this story goes. This film is portions of a longer film, or parts of multiple films. The bits that we see are a message to other people that there is more film that could and would be exposed if people don't tow the line. It's blackmail.

2 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Jason,

By the numbers: 

1.  Yes, the CIA-did-it CTers have long claimed that the “Walker Letter” was forged by Ruth Paine.

2.  Yes, Jason, you’re right “Walker Letter” is not the first evidence that Oswald shot at Ex-General Walker – rather, the German newspaper, the Deutsche Nationalzeitung is the first evidence, because that story was obtained less than 24 hours after the JFK assassination.

2.1.  In my reading, the person who told the DMN on 11/22/1963 that Oswald was the likely shooter of Ex-General Walker was closely linked with Walker – if not Walker himself.

2.2.  WHY is Ex-General Walker spreading this story?  Because he was proud of his role in the JFK assassination, that’s why.  He truly in his heart believed he was doing the right thing for America – because he was a Radical Right wing in politics.

2.3.  There is no way that Ex-General Walker could know that Lee Harvey Oswald had written the “Walker Letter” in Russian for Marina Oswald on April 10, 1963.  That was mere happenstance for Walker.

2a.  Why the Deutsche Nationalzeitung?   Mae Brussell’s take on this is the best I’ve heard so far.  Back in 1960-1961, in Augsburg, Germany, when General Walker was in command of troops defending the Berlin Wall, he had become good friends with the Neo-Nazi editor of this newspaper, namely, Gerhard Frey.  Walker wanted to be the first to break the news – he was proud of his “achievement.”  But he had deals going with his Radical Right collaborators, and could not tell the US Press.  This was his “leak.”

3.  Marina found Lee Harvey Oswald’s “Walker Letter,” written in Russian and made out to her, on April 10, 1963.  It doesn’t mention General Walker at all.  

3.1.  Ruth Paine never saw that letter until a few days after the JFK assassination, when the Secret Service came pounding on her door, and screaming at her, accusing her of having forged this letter.  That was the first she ever saw the letter.  This is what she testified for the WC, and also what she told me personally.

4.  The CIA-did-it CTers argue that since LHO never shot at JFK, then he never shot at General Walker, either, and so it must be a CIA plot to frame LHO.  Since Ruth Paine had sent a package of personal property to Marina Oswald through the Irving Police, and since the “Walker Letter” was found inside one of the books of that personal property package, the Secret Service accused Ruth Paine of forging it.  So, that gives the CIA-did-it CTers all they need to blame Ruth Paine of conspiring to kill JFK.

4.1.  The reason that CIA-did-it CTers focus on the “Walker Letter” instead of the earlier mentions that link LHO with the Walker shooting, is that the “Walker Letter” brings Ruth Paine into the scene, and so gives them a local punching bag.  The other two mentions fail to provide the desired punching bag.  (Mae Brussell did not promote a CIA-did-it CT, but an “Invisible Fourth Reich” CT.)

5.  Why blame Ruth Paine?  In my reading, it’s mainly because she’s an educated woman, and CIA-did-it CTers tend to be old-fashioned MCP’s.  Also, she’s from the wealthy class, and class envy is a part of that.

5.1.  Jason, I have been saying for years on this Forum that the real smoking gun is that Ex-General Walker was advertising himself as Oswald’s first target before the FBI ever heard any such thing.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul Trejo expresses:  ".Why blame Ruth Paine?  In my reading, it’s mainly because she’s an educated woman, and CIA-did-it CTers tend to be old-fashioned MCP’s.  Also, she’s from the wealthy class, and class envy is a part of that."

I am guessing that Paul means Middle Class People with the MCP anacronym..

29 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

The point is that Jim Hargrove tries to sneak these "facts" into the discussion that are not facts at all. Jim and others here praise Armstrong's research. But they fail to inform readers that many of the discoveries made by Armstrong and archived at Baylor do not support his theory but rather contradict it. The Argentinian article I mentioned is but one example. LHO didn't "need" a translator, it was a matter of convenience as I explained. BTW, I don't intend to spend too much time in the future on Armstrong's theory. I have a good sized archive of articles and that, along with the work of Greg Parker and Jeremy B. and others is enough to persuade those who are willing to be persuaded. But I may pop in from time to time when Jim tries to slip one of his "facts" into the discussion.

Tracy, I more or less don't involve myself with the subject. I am convinced that there was an operation of some kind to place an imposter here and there to confuse things but I don't have the available RAM in my noggin to seriously study Armstrong.

Yet, Jim Hargrove's mastery of the subject matter is beyond impressive. I think that you agree, no?

...

6 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Sandy,

By the numbers:

1.  It's the other meaning of "understanding."   The fact that a decorated US General was involved in the JFK assassination would appear like a coup d'etat to many people.   It wasn't a coup d'etat.

1.1.  The JFK assassination was merely a Fake-out, to try to blame the Communists for the JFK assassination, so that the USA would invade Cuba.  The US Government was supposed to remain intact, but invade Cuba.  So, it wasn't a coup d'etat.

1.2.  But it would be confusing to millions.

2.  The truth is that the FBI in 1963 did not know how many Minutemen existed coast to coast in the USA.  They only knew that the Minutemen were heavily armed.

2.1.  There were not enough FBI men to go after the heavily armed and dedicated Minutemen -- even if only several hundred.

2.2.  To go after the Minutemen -- if there were several thousand -- would have required the US Military.

2.3.  Sending the US Military against US citizens during the Cold War was very, very bad politics.

2.4.  In Dallas, FBI agent James Hosty called the Minutemen, "General Walker's Minutemen"  (Assignment Oswald, 1996, Ch. 1)

3.  In my reading, Sandy, the US Government after 1963 knew with a certainty that General Walker's Minutemen and sundry Radical Right forces in Dallas were responsible for the JFK assassination, and trying to blame the Communists like mad.

3.1.  FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover found this out by 3pm EST on 11/22/1963 (cf. Prof. David Wrone, 2001)

3.1.  The initial questions of that afternoon were how to explain to the American People that their own US General had led this assassination.  The decision was clear -- blame Lee Harvey Oswald and him alone -- and let the chips fall where they may.   That's my interpretation of the history.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

A pile of Paul Trejo's Hegelian-dialectic nonsense.

4 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

(BTW, I'm already convinced that Ruth was being controlled by the CIA.)

 

I am thinking she was being used to establish the culpability of Dulles, and force him into the cover-up.

...