Jump to content

The Baron and the Paines...


Steve Duffy
 Share

Recommended Posts

Is it possible that Walker was in on the shooting? That he stood still to be shot at, possibly to incriminate Oswald, whom he is posited to have picked as JFK patsy?

They did find criteria to put him in a mental hospital in the same period.

David, I've reconsidered this question many times, and I cannot say that I'm devoted to one conclusion or another today.

Even though the facts, as they seem strung together from 10 April 1963 all the way through his Warren Commission testimony on 23 July 1964, suggest that Walker was continually paranoid about the two shooters who tried to kill him on 10 April 1963, and about the Attorney General's alleged role in Oswald's escape for this crime, I cannot say that I am "all-in" with this theory.

The evidence remains that ex-General Edwin Walker was an accomplished xxxx as a homosexual in the US Army who rose to the rank of Major General while evading court marshal according to US military law from 1931-1961. Also, Gerry P. Hemming (on this Forum in 2005) once speculated that Walker was too calm after the shooting (when Hemming and Interpen visited the General at his home in Dallas). Hemming thought, as in your remark, that Walker participated in the shooting.

Now, Hemming is not the best witness, nor was he under oath when he said this; he often contradicted himself. But for what it's worth, Hemming thought Walker staged the whole shooting.

Now -- why would Walker then blame Lee Harvey Oswald? Actually, in this scenario, Walker had no reason to blame Oswald for anything -- and in fact he didn't blame Oswald for anything in April 1963. Oswald was an afterthought.

The question is -- how much of an afterthought?

Let's say, for example, that Walker staged this shooting. Actually, if this is the case, then I was wrong to challenge John Dolva by saying that Walker would have to sit still and let somebody shoot from 40 yards away and miss his head by inches. If it was all staged, then Walker didn't even need to be in the room. The scratches on his arm after the shooting could have been obtained from working outdoors that day -- or any number of sources.

If it was all staged -- what in heck would be the purpose? The only purpose I can imagine is that Walker had a sick obsession to be in the limelight. We must remember that exactly one-year prior, in April 1962, ex-General Edwin Walker was running for the office of Texas Governor. Walker had been in the news since he was fired by JFK as Commander of the 24th Infantry Division in Augsburg, Germany (April, 1961). April was a traumatic month for Walker in 1961, and a memorable year for Walker in 1962.

Half a year later in 1962, Walker led a failed race riot at Ole Miss University (in which hundreds were wounded and two were killed), and RFK tossed Walker into an insane asylum for a 90-day evaluation. Well, Walker walked out in only five days with a near-apology from the Attorney General's office, but the damage had been done.

Nevertheless, with the help of the brilliant attorney, Robert Morris (legal counsel for Senator Joseph McCarthy) and his long time friend, attorney Clyde Watts, ex-General Edwin Walker emerged from the Mississippi Grand Jury fully acquitted. Their courtroom strategy was brilliant -- probably the work of Morris. Instead of dwelling on the race riot itself, Morris directed the Grand Jury to focus entirely on the question about whether Walker was insane or not. Two hostile psychiatrists were called as witnesses, and both suggested that Walker was paranoid.

However, Morris handled them skillfully -- "Would you say that all right-wingers who seek racial segregation in Universities are paranoid?" he asked them. "Certainly not," they replied. Walker himself waffled back and forth about how much he enjoyed the riots and how sad he was to see the riots. His final words were that he was only there to calm the crowd down. No eye-witnesses to the riots themselves were called, to the best of my knowledge. The Mississippi jury quickly closed the case.

My point is that Walker was possibly somewhat paranoid -- but he got away with it. Then, from early February 1963 until early April 1963, Walker joined segregationist preacher Reverend Billy James Hargis on "The Midnight Ride" speaking tour from Florida to Southern California, preaching that the United Nations is Satanic and that all US Presidents since FDR have been Communists -- especially JFK.

The night after he returned to Dallas (9 April 1963) Walker called the police to report that somebody had tried to kill him in his home. His neighbors all came out because they heard the shot, and heard at least one car screech away, while a young neighbor boy saw two men jump in a car behind Walker's house toss something in the back seat and speed away.

Nobody saw Walker sitting at his desk, doing his taxes as he claimed. It is at least within the realm of possibility -- I must admit -- that Walker hired some sharpshooters to fire one bullet through his window, and then speed away, and then he called the police. That is, it is possible that Walker staged the whole thing. Why? To get attention. He lost his bid to be Governor of Texas, but at least he could stay in the news, in the limelight, and spread his propaganda that JFK was a Communist.

I mean, it's a least possible.

And we notice that in his testimony to the Warren Commission, Walker suggested that the "Baron and the Paines" were part of the plot to kill him on 10 April 1963.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 45
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Paul, it is possible that by accepting the Walker shooting as having a purpose other than what is generally accepted is significant.

It opens the way to reinterpreting known evidence in that light, rather than the one given by the Report or those speculated by various persons over time using the Reports findings on the matter as a basis. I think it begs a reevaluation of various connections across the board and in a world of rooms of smoke and mirrors the nodes of inconsistencies hold the various pointers that clear the air and smashes the mirrors..

I think with the Minutemen as the armed wing of the JBS one can use the known JBS MO (Reagan Ruckus (The local repository for the Berkley Barb articles on the matter wont be available to me for some weeks so I can't say whether there is more there, I read that article some years ago and cannot remember more (see Underground Collection : http://educationforu...&hl=underground ) ) and I think Oswalds own writings on the Minutemen together may provide a simple answer as well as Walkers peculiar state of mind.

I don't think an answer will finally be complex even though it may seem so at the moment..

edit typos

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it was all staged -- what in heck would be the purpose? The only purpose I can imagine is that Walker had a sick obsession to be in the limelight.

Paul - Well, that along with setting Oswald up as a lone nut who would take a shot at polar opposites to Kennedy - Nixon, even, according to Marina Oswald's Warren Commission testimony (not that that was foreseen by Walker).

Remember, Walker did finger Oswald as his shooter early after the JFK assassination, in hiis interview with that European newspaper.

Edited by David Andrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the previous posts take precedence, I'll just take this opportunity to delve a bit in to Oswalds personal opinions of the Minutemen. I read this (some time ago) off full res copies of the originals (I think it might have been the Librarys Original Presidential Commission volumes some years ago) and therefore cannot verify whether the rewrite is fully accurate as the copies I find now are not usable ( http://mcadams.posc..../jfk4/f490a.htm ) and have to for now rely on the 'transcript' : http://mcadams.posc....speechnotes.htm

"On Communism and Capitalism

Undelivered Speech?

Warren Commission Exhibit 25 Vol 16 pg. 106-122

Note: In the interest of clarity and legibility, spelling, punctuation, and capitalization have been corrected in certain cases.

"... There have already been a few organizations who have disclosed that they shall become effective only after conflict between the two world systems leaves the country without defense or foundation of government, organizations such as the minute men for instance, however they are preparing to simply defend the present system and reinstate its influence after the mutual defeat of both systems militarily, which is more or less taken for granted.

Their armed groups will represent the remaining hard core of fanatical American capitalist supporters.

There will undoubtedly be similar representation of this kind by communist groups in communist countries.

There will also be many decided religious segments putting forward their own alternatives and through larger memberships than the minute man, etc.

...

(other groups) unlike the minute men and communist partisan groups, will be unarmed.

...

I intend to put forward (just such) an alternative.

...

supporters must prepare now in the event the situation presents itself for the practical application of this alternative.

...

In this way the militarist minute men and their narrow support of capitalism have been most far-sighted, however, they present only a suicide force, whereas what is needed is a constructive and practical groups of persons...''

I suggest that these scribblings, apparently of an 'undelivered?' speech, formed the basis for Oswalds approach to the Minutemen and at that point Oswald was on the road to being a Patsy. The whole thing can be read as an 'I know better' and 'I have a message for those who have been most far-sighted'. This is naiive. I suggest that those he may have approached with this would, upon consideration, wish to make Oswald believe that they take him seriously and that that was the 'hook'. Lee didn't really get it until the end. He would have been recognised as intelligent enough to realise that at some point so his demise was always on the cards. The Walker event drew him tighter into the 'game'. A number of moments presented themselves when he could have been done away with but with the eyes of the world on events no credible moment could be found until the last desperate attempt, which still necessitated innapropriate heart massage, by a person so 'hooked' himself and rambly from his drug abuse ensured (the little brown bottle mystery :) ) that his attempts to tell the story went nowhere.

And there we are.

edit typos

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it was all staged -- what in heck would be the purpose? The only purpose I can imagine is that Walker had a sick obsession to be in the limelight.

Paul - Well, that along with setting Oswald up as a lone nut who would take a shot at polar opposites to Kennedy - Nixon, even, according to Marina Oswald's Warren Commission testimony (not that that was foreseen by Walker).

Remember, Walker did finger Oswald as his shooter early after the JFK assassination, in hiis interview with that European newspaper.

David, I had thought of that before, but it doesn't seem to fit the situation well. It seems to make sense after the JFK assassination, but way back in April, 1963, it doesn't seem to fit.

In other words, why would Walker select Oswald as the patsy of a shooting plot in April -- in private, without alerting the newspapers?

My theory has Walker boiing mad at the Kennedys after the Ole Miss fiasco of late 1962. Let's briefly review that history: Walker loved the limelight. When he quit the Army in late 1961, he immediately began writing and delivering speeches, starting in Dallas (to the NIC) and he would receive five or six standing ovations for every speech, and the final standing ovation might last for minutes at a time. (Some believe this popular fame convinced him to run for Governor of Texas.) He just loved the limelight.

After he lost his bid for governor, he gave more speeches, but he kept his eyes open for a Big Opportunity. It came with the Ole Miss protests in Mississippi. There we notice Walker's enormous ego -- he had to be at the head of this line -- he had to be in charge. Right before he traveled to Jackson, Mississippi, he wrote an open letter to JFK. The open letter protests the Ole Miss situation, but it gives top billing to the Cuban situation. Here's Walker's open letter to JFK from his personal letters: http://www.pet880.co...Open_Letter.JPG

When Walker was acquitted in late January, 1963 for his role in leading the racial riots at Ole Miss, he emerged like a raging lion. It was at this point that Walker seems to contemplate joining forces with the Cuban Exiles, so hot to take back Cuba from Castro.

However -- Walker doesn't immediately jump into the Cuban game -- from February through April, 1963, Walker goes on a coast-to-coast bus tour with segregationist preacher, Reverend Billy James Hargis.

We don't have copies of his speeches on this tour, but there were 27 stops from MIami to Los Angeles. We have some newspaper articles from reviewers, but the reviews were typically one-sided -- either praising Walker or condemning him broadly, with little substance. However, Walker's papers still include the outline he used to draft his speeches before he went out on the "Midnight Ride" speaking tour. This list of 23 questions reveals much about his thinking:

  1. What name has been devised for the world religion that will include the atheistic Communists and their clergymen?
  2. When will church property be taken over? What agency will control it?
  3. When will our armed forces and weapons go under the UN, and who will be their Commander in Chief?
  4. Who will draft and pay the American soldiers called to service in the World Peace Force? What oath will they take?
  5. What foreign troops will be stationed in the U.S.? What flag will they carry and what national anthem will they sing?
  6. When will the UN disappear and become the world government and under what name?
  7. Will UN currency replace U.S. currency?
  8. Will the World Government be located in Washington, Moscow or Havana, Cuba?
  9. When will the office and title of Commander in Chief cease to exist?
  10. When will the functions of the office of president of the U.S. cease to exist under the Constitution?
  11. Will the election in 1964 be for a president or for an agent of the UN who is fulfilling the policy of the UN?
  12. Will there be any elections held in the U.S. for UN officials?
  13. What government will the 50 states of the Union deal with? The UN government or with its agency in Washington D.C.?
  14. Will the states still have Governors?
  15. Does the Congress of the U.S. become a committee under the UN?
  16. How will the separate state National Guards, for which the Governors are responsible, be placed under the UN or what disposition will be made of these State Militia Forces?
  17. Will the Internal Police Forces take over all law enforcement at the community level?
  18. Will the Attorney General’s office still exist when the Connally Amendment is repealed?
  19. Will the Circuit and District courts deal directly with the UN government? Who will make the appointments? What prisons will be used for American political prisoners and others tried under international law?
  20. When will the inheritance tax be abolished and land reform commenced to destroy property rights and legal ownership?
  21. What will be the size of the migrants world labor force?
  22. Will a man be authorized one wife or five as the Moslems or will he be able to buy a mate as they can do in India?
  23. Based on Cuba, what will we do if the Soviets claim and take Alaska, considering that it would be 100% more difficult to defend?

This shows Walker's thinking after his narrow escape from a possible life-sentence (or even a death-sentence) for insurrection at Ole Miss. These there the issues that occupied Edwin Walker's mind in early 1963.

Reports say that thousands of people attended the "Midnight Ride" speeches, so that Walker and Hargis made a lot of money and had a solid following. Walker was a poor speaker when he was being cross-examined, or dealing with a hostile audience, but at his rallies he was preaching to the choir, so to speak, and in such situations he was a rousing speaker. He always got multiple standing ovations.

Walker liked being out in front. But everything seems to change after he returned from the "Midnight Ride". Two days later the police reported that somebody tried to kill Walker at his home.

After this point, Walker is not out in front nearly as much as in the previous two years. He seems to sulk and skulk around in the underground.

This is the period when -- as I believe -- Walker selected Oswald as the patsy. It is not merely because of Marina's testimony in early December, 1963 that I say this -- there was plenty of other evidence that Oswald was involved. George De Mohrenshildt believed that Oswald was involved. So did Volkmar Schmidt. Michael Paine refused to talk about it, although I believe he and Ruth know more about it than they ever admitted. If (and only if) Oswald shot at Walker, and if (and only if) Dick Russell is right that Mrs. Voshinin told the FBI about it on 14 April 1963, then we have a clear motive for Walker to make Oswald the patsy.

However, the theory that Walker staged his own shooting (simply because he was an egotist who wanted to be in the limelight) removes the motive that I perceive. Instead, Walker's motive for selecting Oswald as his patsy in April for a shooting that he himself staged remains vague. Why Oswald? How else did Oswald distinguish himself in Walker's world in April?

Yet it remains possible. Walker might have selected Oswald for no other reason than his Russian wife -- as shallow as that sounds; after all, Walker was a common man in many ways.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the previous posts take precedence, I'll just take this opportunity to delve a bit in to Oswalds personal opinions of the Minutemen. I read this (some time ago) off full res copies of the originals (I think it might have been the Librarys Original Presidential Commission volumes some years ago) and therefore cannot verify whether the rewrite is fully accurate as the copies I find now are not usable ( http://mcadams.posc..../jfk4/f490a.htm ) and have to for now rely on the 'transcript' : http://mcadams.posc....speechnotes.htm

"On Communism and Capitalism

Undelivered Speech?

Warren Commission Exhibit 25 Vol 16 pg. 106-122

Note: In the interest of clarity and legibility, spelling, punctuation, and capitalization have been corrected in certain cases.

"... There have already been a few organizations who have disclosed that they shall become effective only after conflict between the two world systems leaves the country without defense or foundation of government, organizations such as the minute men for instance, however they are preparing to simply defend the present system and reinstate its influence after the mutual defeat of both systems militarily, which is more or less taken for granted.

Their armed groups will represent the remaining hard core of fanatical American capitalist supporters.

There will undoubtedly be similar representation of this kind by communist groups in communist countries.

There will also be many decided religious segments putting forward their own alternatives and through larger memberships than the minute man, etc.

...

(other groups) unlike the minute men and communist partisan groups, will be unarmed.

...

I intend to put forward (just such) an alternative.

...

supporters must prepare now in the event the situation presents itself for the practical application of this alternative.

...

In this way the militarist minute men and their narrow support of capitalism have been most far-sighted, however, they present only a suicide force, whereas what is needed is a constructive and practical groups of persons...''

I suggest that these scribblings, apparently of an 'undelivered?' speech, formed the basis for Oswalds approach to the Minutemen and at that point Oswald was on the road to being a Patsy. The whole thing can be read as an 'I know better' and 'I have a message for those who have been most far-sighted'. This is naiive. I suggest that those he may have approached with this would, upon consideration, wish to make Oswald believe that they take him seriously and that that was the 'hook'. Lee didn't really get it until the end. He would have been recognised as intelligent enough to realise that at some point so his demise was always on the cards. The Walker event drew him tighter into the 'game'. A number of moments presented themselves when he could have been done away with but with the eyes of the world on events no credible moment could be found until the last desperate attempt, which still necessitated innapropriate heart massage, by a person so 'hooked' himself and rambly from his drug abuse ensured (the little brown bottle mystery :) ) that his attempts to tell the story went nowhere.

And there we are.

edit typos

John, thanks for posting these notes from Lee Harvey Oswald. They may well have been notes for a speech -- but certainly not a speech designed for Cuban Exiles!

At the very least, these notes prove that Lee Harvey Oswald was already aware of the Minutemen organization in 1962, which Robert DePugh had only recently founded.

How did Oswald become aware of the Minutemen? IMHO he wouldn't have learned about them from the "Baron and the Paines" who were openly moderate politically; rather, Oswald would have learned about the Minutemen from his fellow Marines, most likely.

Oswald is a puzzle of right-wing and left-wing attitudes. It's difficult to sort them out. His only consistent associates in New Orleans, for example, are Carlos Bringuier and Ed Butler, who were Cuban Exile radicals on the right-wing.

Also, Volkmar Schmidt admitted to Bill Kelly (and George De Mohrenschildt also admitted in his booklet, I'm a Patsy, I'm a Patsy!) that Lee Harvey Oswald expressed the strident Marine attitude that JFK betrayed the Cubans at the Bay of Pigs. This also matches what "Leopoldo" told Sylvia Odio in September of 1963. So, even though Oswald is somewhat familiar with Marxist-Leninist ideology, he continues to waver between leftist and rightist positions.

What was Oswald's opinion about the Minutemen? He shows some interest. He shows some intrigue -- as if he was tempted to join -- or perhaps he was invited to join -- and yet he also rejects them -- he will probably not join them because they are (1) suicidal; (2) capitalist extremists; (3) obsolete. Yet it is interesting that Oswald also calls them the "most far-sighted." So, Oswald remained ambivalent about the Minutemen.

We have evidence that both Edwin Walker and Guy Banister were leaders among the Minutemen. Insofar as Jim Garrison places Oswald close to Guy Banister in New Orleans from May through August 1963, I would like to place a date on these notes from Oswald that you posted, John. Any notion of month or year?

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul, Oswalds attitude is not difficult to sort out. He, as many, would have had no difficulty knowing about the Minutemen. His attitudes re left right is no puzzle. It is typical fascism. You're wrong to draw a conclusion that Oswald was ambivalent. The position that seeks to appeal to the left and right with an idea that a conflict between the two will enable a rise of a new order and he saw the Minutemen as 'the most farsighted' while acknowledging that the final conflict would be between an armed pro-capitalist grouping and an armed left. He clearly supports basic tenets of capitalism and rejects communism. It's in there that his ignorance re these concepts show themselves. He doesn't reject the Minutemen, he sees them as flawed and he is the one that has the 'alternative'. (that's his intro, his direction and ultimately his death sentence)

Sinilarly I see no need to separate the KKK, the FBI, the CIA, the Pentagon and Law Enforcement bodies from the Minutemen. Fundamentally they serve the same interests. aqfa as the KKK goes, it is important to define the KKK groups and Klaverns. Anyone close to the KKK in the south would have been aware of which operated in their locale. Tom Purvis has noted the White Camelias and has providsed a fair bit of informatioon on them on this forum. There are a number of archetypal events involving bodies like The Southern Intelligence Network, The K(lan).B.I., the Mississippi Hoghway Patrol, the various Citizens Councils that involves various official Agents in various capacities. Doctors, Dentists, Coroners, PI's, USPO personnel throughout the hierarchies, the Education System, Individuals high and low. Anyway I'm rambling now and probablyu just making things more confusing (while it's not confusing to me at all).

No I don't know the provenace of that set of writing nor if he mentions the Minuteman in anything else. His chained right fist clench is an old southern white supremacy symbol, often as a jail tattoo, useful for those so inclined that are entering the prison system to ensure protection, so I suppose in a sense, with symbols communicating concepts it's shorthand for everything.

edit typos

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it was all staged -- what in heck would be the purpose? The only purpose I can imagine is that Walker had a sick obsession to be in the limelight.

Paul - Well, that along with setting Oswald up as a lone nut who would take a shot at polar opposites to Kennedy - Nixon, even, according to Marina Oswald's Warren Commission testimony (not that that was foreseen by Walker).

Remember, Walker did finger Oswald as his shooter early after the JFK assassination, in hiis interview with that European newspaper.

David, I had thought of that before, but it doesn't seem to fit the situation well. It seems to make sense after the JFK assassination, but way back in April, 1963, it doesn't seem to fit.

In other words, why would Walker select Oswald as the patsy of a shooting plot in April -- in private, without alerting the newspapers?

My theory has Walker boiing mad at the Kennedys after the Ole Miss fiasco of late 1962. Let's briefly review that history: Walker loved the limelight. When he quit the Army in late 1961, he immediately began writing and delivering speeches, starting in Dallas (to the NIC) and he would receive five or six standing ovations for every speech, and the final standing ovation might last for minutes at a time. (Some believe this popular fame convinced him to run for Governor of Texas.) He just loved the limelight.

After he lost his bid for governor, he gave more speeches, but he kept his eyes open for a Big Opportunity. It came with the Ole Miss protests in Mississippi. There we notice Walker's enormous ego -- he had to be at the head of this line -- he had to be in charge. Right before he traveled to Jackson, Mississippi, he wrote an open letter to JFK. The open letter protests the Ole Miss situation, but it gives top billing to the Cuban situation. Here's Walker's open letter to JFK from his personal letters: http://www.pet880.co...Open_Letter.JPG

When Walker was acquitted in late January, 1963 for his role in leading the racial riots at Ole Miss, he emerged like a raging lion. It was at this point that Walker seems to contemplate joining forces with the Cuban Exiles, so hot to take back Cuba from Castro.

However -- Walker doesn't immediately jump into the Cuban game -- from February through April, 1963, Walker goes on a coast-to-coast bus tour with segregationist preacher, Reverend Billy James Hargis.

We don't have copies of his speeches on this tour, but there were 27 stops from MIami to Los Angeles. We have some newspaper articles from reviewers, but the reviews were typically one-sided -- either praising Walker or condemning him broadly, with little substance. However, Walker's papers still include the outline he used to draft his speeches before he went out on the "Midnight Ride" speaking tour. This list of 23 questions reveals much about his thinking:

  1. What name has been devised for the world religion that will include the atheistic Communists and their clergymen?
  2. When will church property be taken over? What agency will control it?
  3. When will our armed forces and weapons go under the UN, and who will be their Commander in Chief?
  4. Who will draft and pay the American soldiers called to service in the World Peace Force? What oath will they take?
  5. What foreign troops will be stationed in the U.S.? What flag will they carry and what national anthem will they sing?
  6. When will the UN disappear and become the world government and under what name?
  7. Will UN currency replace U.S. currency?
  8. Will the World Government be located in Washington, Moscow or Havana, Cuba?
  9. When will the office and title of Commander in Chief cease to exist?
  10. When will the functions of the office of president of the U.S. cease to exist under the Constitution?
  11. Will the election in 1964 be for a president or for an agent of the UN who is fulfilling the policy of the UN?
  12. Will there be any elections held in the U.S. for UN officials?
  13. What government will the 50 states of the Union deal with? The UN government or with its agency in Washington D.C.?
  14. Will the states still have Governors?
  15. Does the Congress of the U.S. become a committee under the UN?
  16. How will the separate state National Guards, for which the Governors are responsible, be placed under the UN or what disposition will be made of these State Militia Forces?
  17. Will the Internal Police Forces take over all law enforcement at the community level?
  18. Will the Attorney General’s office still exist when the Connally Amendment is repealed?
  19. Will the Circuit and District courts deal directly with the UN government? Who will make the appointments? What prisons will be used for American political prisoners and others tried under international law?
  20. When will the inheritance tax be abolished and land reform commenced to destroy property rights and legal ownership?
  21. What will be the size of the migrants world labor force?
  22. Will a man be authorized one wife or five as the Moslems or will he be able to buy a mate as they can do in India?
  23. Based on Cuba, what will we do if the Soviets claim and take Alaska, considering that it would be 100% more difficult to defend?

This shows Walker's thinking after his narrow escape from a possible life-sentence (or even a death-sentence) for insurrection at Ole Miss. These there the issues that occupied Edwin Walker's mind in early 1963.

Reports say that thousands of people attended the "Midnight Ride" speeches, so that Walker and Hargis made a lot of money and had a solid following. Walker was a poor speaker when he was being cross-examined, or dealing with a hostile audience, but at his rallies he was preaching to the choir, so to speak, and in such situations he was a rousing speaker. He always got multiple standing ovations.

Walker liked being out in front. But everything seems to change after he returned from the "Midnight Ride". Two days later the police reported that somebody tried to kill Walker at his home.

After this point, Walker is not out in front nearly as much as in the previous two years. He seems to sulk and skulk around in the underground.

This is the period when -- as I believe -- Walker selected Oswald as the patsy. It is not merely because of Marina's testimony in early December, 1963 that I say this -- there was plenty of other evidence that Oswald was involved. George De Mohrenshildt believed that Oswald was involved. So did Volkmar Schmidt. Michael Paine refused to talk about it, although I believe he and Ruth know more about it than they ever admitted. If (and only if) Oswald shot at Walker, and if (and only if) Dick Russell is right that Mrs. Voshinin told the FBI about it on 14 April 1963, then we have a clear motive for Walker to make Oswald the patsy.

However, the theory that Walker staged his own shooting (simply because he was an egotist who wanted to be in the limelight) removes the motive that I perceive. Instead, Walker's motive for selecting Oswald as his patsy in April for a shooting that he himself staged remains vague. Why Oswald? How else did Oswald distinguish himself in Walker's world in April?

Yet it remains possible. Walker might have selected Oswald for no other reason than his Russian wife -- as shallow as that sounds; after all, Walker was a common man in many ways.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Paul

Perhaps Walker was a bit too "out front" for what was planned and the attempted

Shooting was just the same as firing over the head of LBJ a warning from

Those higher up who could not handle Walkers ego.

Depending on who informed Walker of Oswalds alleged shooting was Walker spoofed this info

Would he have his own source for RFK's "release from custody?.

Also the " questions " used to build a speech appear similar to me

If you exchange UN for EU we have a right wing government that wishes to increase

The power of the European Union when all it seems to do is put our membership

Fee beyond our means .

Ian

Edited by Ian Kingsbury
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul, Oswalds attitude is not difficult to sort out. He, as many, would have had no difficulty knowing about the Minutemen. His attitudes re left right is no puzzle. It is typical fascism. You're wrong to draw a conclusion that Oswald was ambivalent. The position that seeks to appeal to the left and right with an idea that a conflict between the two will enable a rise of a new order and he saw the Minutemen as 'the most farsighted' while acknowledging that the final conflict would be between an armed pro-capitalist grouping and an armed left. He clearly supports basic tenets of capitalism and rejects communism. It's in there that his ignorance re these concepts show themselves. He doesn't reject the Minutemen, he sees them as flawed and he is the one that has the 'alternative'. (that's his intro, his direction and ultimately his death sentence)

Sinilarly I see no need to separate the KKK, the FBI, the CIA, the Pentagon and Law Enforcement bodies from the Minutemen. Fundamentally they serve the same interests. aqfa as the KKK goes, it is important to define the KKK groups and Klaverns. Anyone close to the KKK in the south would have been aware of which operated in their locale. Tom Purvis has noted the White Camelias and has providsed a fair bit of informatioon on them on this forum. There are a number of archetypal events involving bodies like The Southern Intelligence Network, The K(lan).B.I., the Mississippi Hoghway Patrol, the various Citizens Councils that involves various official Agents in various capacities. Doctors, Dentists, Coroners, PI's, USPO personnel throughout the hierarchies, the Education System, Individuals high and low. Anyway I'm rambling now and probablyu just making things more confusing (while it's not confusing to me at all).

No I don't know the provenace of that set of writing nor if he mentions the Minuteman in anything else. His chained right fist clench is an old southern white supremacy symbol, often as a jail tattoo, useful for those so inclined that are entering the prison system to ensure protection, so I suppose in a sense, with symbols communicating concepts it's shorthand for everything.

edit typos

John, you're certain that Oswald was a right-wing fanatic, but not all readers and researchers are convinced of this. I agree that it feeds the Warren Commission myth to insist that Oswald was a left-wing fanatic, and that myth has been sufficiently challenged. To make Oswald a right-wing fanatic, however, will take more proof than intuitive certainty.

For example, you say that Oswald's chained right-fist clench was an old southern white supremacy symbol. Edwin Walker, on the other hand, told his audiences that Oswald's right-fist clench was a symbol of Communist solidarity.

Now, I personally doubt that Oswald was a leftist -- yet this must be proved, and not merely asserted. Further, Oswald wasn't a "typical" fascist, because the typical fascist was not a double-agent.

It's painful to observe that Oswald's handing out FPCC leaflets on Canal Street in New Orleans is still regarded by the mainstream press as hard evidence that Oswald was an active member of the FPCC. The 100% phony nature of that New Orleans FPCC chapter must still be drilled into the public memory.

As for Oswald's support of capitalism -- that's not very clear to me. He himself had no capital or property, and he didn't try to befriend the rich, evidently. He seems to resent people with more money than himself, e.g. the Russian Exiles in Dallas. He tended to sympathize with the underdog (even when that was contradictory).

Now, John, in your opinion, the KKK, FBI, CIA, Pentagon, Police and the Minutemen can all be lumped together, without further distinctions. The fact that some are profoundly local while others are profoundly federal (and others in between) makes no difference in your view. Yet the FBI and CIA had rules that no member of their organization could also be a member of the KKK. (Probably that rule was broken quite a bit in secret, but the rule still remained in force.) Also, the KKK regularly clashed with the police in the latter part of the 20th century.

Without noticing the distinctions between the right and the center, everything except the extreme left will appear to be rightist -- so naturally Oswald will appear rightist.

At the same time, John, you make useful distinctions within the KKK itself; for example, you distinguish Klaverns, White Camelias, The Southern Intelligence Network, The K.B.I., the Mississippi Hoghway Patrol and White Citizens Councils (comprised of professional men).

But most interesting of all, you claim that Oswald "doesn't reject the Minutemen, he sees them as flawed and he is the one that has the 'alternative' (that's his intro, his direction and ultimately his death sentence)."

I find this interesting because Oswald was finally condemned by the Minutemen through ex-General Edwin Walker (if I can insert Harry Dean here). Yet the ploy that Walker used to get the JBS/Minutemen agreement to make Oswald into their patsy was the accusation -- and the widely held belief -- that Oswald was a Communist (a tyrant on the Left) instead of a Fascist (a tyrant on the Right).

If Oswald was clear in his own mind about his politics, it doesn't show. His public persona sometimes appears on the right, and sometimes appears on the left. But it never seems to appear in the middle.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul

Perhaps Walker was a bit too "out front" for what was planned and the attempted

shooting was just the same as firing over the head of LBJ a warning from

those higher up who could not handle Walkers ego.

Depending on who informed Walker of Oswalds alleged shooting, was Walker spoofed this info?

Would he have his own source for RFK's "release from custody?.

Also the " questions " used to build a speech appear [familar] to me.

If you exchange UN for EU we have a right-wing government that wishes to increase

the power of the European Union when all it seems to do is put our membership

Fee beyond our means .

Ian

Ian, your first comment appears to me to suggest: (1) that a high-level plot was already in the works before April, 1963, and Walker was a small player in that plot; (2) Walker got over-excited and so his superiors in the plot sent him a warning shot to let him know who was in charge; (3) and this was similar to the shooting of JFK over the head of LBJ, as Jim Garrison said, so that LBJ would also know who was boss.

No JFK researcher will deny the possibility of truth in your comment -- because it agrees in general with Jim Garrison's viewpoint. I myself reject much of Jim Garrison's theory, as follows:

(i) Although JFK had too few friends in the Pentagon, FBI and CIA, their motive to eliminate JFK could never find enough secrecy to act on it, and it is sheer speculation that there was a high-level plot. Suspicion alone is raised, and the hatred of JFK alone is raise, but the details of the plot are only guesswork and no evidence comes forth.

(ii) There are many theories about Walker's shooting -- that Oswald did it (Marina) -- that Walker staged it himself (Hemming) -- and now yours, that the military-industrial complex did it as a warning. To this we must add Walker's own published theory -- that RFK did it and was planning to do it again. They are all possible, but I believe they are all mistaken. The evidence we have evokes the names of George De Mohrenschildt, Volkmar Schmidt and Michael Paine (i.e. the Baron and the Paines), as well as the photographic equipment at Jagger/Chiles/Stovall.

Because the material evidence continues to point to Oswald, and because we know Oswald regularly lied to Marina, and because Oswald seems to me to be a young man who was fairly easily manipulated, I continue to maintain that the Walker shooters on 10 April 1963 involved a plot of at least two shooters and several Liberals, including the Baron and the Paines. Walker's alleged crime was his "Midnight Ride" speaking tour, after being improperly acquitted by a Mississippi Grand Jury for his role in the Ole Miss race riots. Liberals would have gone nuts over this -- so this is our best evidence, IMHO.

(iii) This was not a warning shot to Walker, nor was the JFK assassination a warning shot to LBJ, as I see it. Nor was the Pentagon, FBI or CIA in charge of the assassination of JFK. On the contrary, I believe they were all bemused observers, and accomplices after the fact. For me, the actual perpetrators were extreme rightists who believed that blaming a Communist patsy for the JFK killing would stir the American public to invade Cuba and kill Castro.

As for your question about Walker's sources and reaction to the shooting -- Walker continually said -- and I believe him -- that he heard from official Government sources that Oswald was a suspect. He did change this story a bit over the decades (e.g. who the source was) so I gather it was originally a voice over the telephone. I believe the shooting frightened Walker -- actually made him more paranoid than he already was.

For example, during the Warren Commission hearings in February 1964, Walker sent a man named "Moore" or "Morse" (or "Morris"?) to visit Marina's caretaker, James Herbert Martin, to ask for more information about the 10 April 1963 shooting. "Why?" asked Martin. "Because," said Morse, "Walker is frantic that the other shooter might still be at large."

Finally, Ian, you are intrigued by the 23 questions of ex-General Edwin Walker that formed the platform for his speeches for the "Midnight Ride" from February to April, 1963. That is, by replacing the "European Union" for the "United Nations" you find some sympathy with Walker's complaints. It seems clear to many that nationalism is a major problem in Europe today, in the face of the EU. Certainly nationalism was the main problem that Walker and his followers felt with the rise of the United Nations.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Whatever theories arise about George De Mohrenschildt, I maintain that the Warren Commission made a proper start by connecting George to Lee Harvey Oswald through the 10 April 1963 shooting at ex-General Edwin Walker at his home in Dallas.

George did not tell the Warren Commission about the Dallas party in February, 1963, in which Volkmar Schmidt put on an exhibition of converting Oswald from a Bay of Pigs fanatic into a hater of ex-General Edwin Walker. However, George did write of this incident in his 1977 booklet, I'm A Patsy! I'm A Patsy!, which he prepared for the House Select Committee on Assassinations before he committed suicide.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever theories arise about George De Mohrenschildt, I maintain that the Warren Commission made a proper start by connecting George to Lee Harvey Oswald through the 10 April 1963 shooting at ex-General Edwin Walker at his home in Dallas.

George did not tell the Warren Commission about the Dallas party in February, 1963, in which Volkmar Schmidt put on an exhibition of converting Oswald from a Bay of Pigs fanatic into a hater of ex-General Edwin Walker. However, George did write of this incident in his 1977 booklet, I'm A Patsy! I'm A Patsy!, which he prepared for the House Select Committee on Assassinations before he committed suicide.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Paul,

Thanks for calling attention to this important crossroads -

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul,

Thanks for calling attention to this important crossroads -

BK

Yes, Bill, and the proof that George was intentionally withholding vital information from the Warren Commission -- and also the HSCA -- is found in his booklet, I'm A Patsy! I'm A Patsy!, because in that booklet he lies again.

George De Mohrenschildt wrote that he could not remember exactly the name of the person who psychologically worked on Lee Harvery Oswald for so many hours -- but George was pretty sure he was Jewish. Jewish!

Volkmar Schmidt was a proud member of the German bourgeoisie and George De Mohrenschildt knew this very well. George and Lee Harvey Oswald used to call Volkmar, "Messer Schmidt!" and laugh.

Volkmar Schmidt himself declared that only weeks before George shot himself, George had begged Volkmar to allow him to move in with Volkmar and his family -- but Volkmar refused because George was clearly unstable after his own wife and children left him, and George was obviously suffering from depression. Volkmar opted to spare his family from that ordeal.

So, George obviously remembered Volkmar's name, and he knew very well that Volkmar was German and not Jewish. Why did he continue to lie to the HSCA? The truth was simply too much for George De Mohrenschildt to bear -- so rather than testify before the HSCA, he committed suicide.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like this YouTube video that links together George De Mohrenschildt, Volkmar Schmidt, ex-General Edwin Walker and Lee Harvey Oswald's Backyard Photographs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_n1eNcLWtk

Robert Blakey speaks out here, as does Priscilla Johnson McMillan -- both as biased as ever. But their negative spin cannot erase the clear connections between the major players. This is a great video, IMHO, and only 9 minutes long.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That clip is from PBS Frontline: Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald - which is definitely lone gunman-endorsing, the Oswald's Ghost of its decade. It has the virtues of having nice Dallas and NO footage, plus some historic footage.

Priscilla McMillan puts in her customary appearance as a lip-smacking old pornographer.

http://www.pbs.org/w...e/shows/oswald/

PS - How long has it been that Volkmar Schmidt has been telling his tale of how he "inadvertently" turned Oswald into a General Walker-hater? Did no investigating body or police department ever question him about conspiracy in the Walker shooting?

Edited by David Andrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...