CE 573 "Walker Bullet" NOT the REAL Bullet ?

[Gil Jesus]

If Walker was involved in setting up Oswald for the assassination it would make absolutely no sense for him to kick up a fuss about the evidence allegedly tying Oswald to the attempt on his own life.

Agreed. That's why I don't believe that Walker set Oswald up for either the assassination or the shooting at his house. Carrying your reasoning one step further, if Walker set up Oswald for his own shooting and the shot was made from the Depository rifle using the copper jacketed bullets, why would Walker say that CE 573 was not the bullet ?

So I don't think that Walker was involved in setting Oswald up.

I believe the DALLAS COPS were involved in setting Oswald up and the framing of Oswald ( albeit post-mortem ) was continued by the FBI.

[Paul Trejo]

If Walker was involved in setting up Oswald for the assassination it would make absolutely no sense for him to kick up a fuss about the evidence allegedly tying Oswald to the attempt on his own life.

Agreed. That's why I don't believe that Walker set Oswald up for either the assassination or the shooting at his house. Carrying your reasoning one step further, if Walker set up Oswald for his own shooting and the shot was made from the Depository rifle using the copper jacketed bullets, why would Walker say that CE 573 was not the bullet ?

So I don't think that Walker was involved in setting Oswald up.

I believe the DALLAS COPS were involved in setting Oswald up and the framing of Oswald ( albeit post-mortem ) was continued by the FBI.

These are all very interesting objections to my theory, guys, so I appreciate it.

As for your theory, Gil, I see no contradiction between a Walker theory and a Dallas Police department theory. Walker was one of the most famous of the local residents in Texas; a true leader of men in Dallas. Remember William Turner's book, POWER ON THE RIGHT (1971), which claimed that it was impossible to get a job as a policeman in Dallas in the fifties and early sixties unless one was a member of the KKK, or the Minutemen or the John Birch Society - preferably all three.

He wasn't joking. The American rightists were self-righteous enough to insist on these tenets, and in Dallas they were such a majority that they had the power to enforce them. Now, General Edwin A. Walker was a leader of exactly this sort of person.

How many of these men were former military men? I would estimate a solid majority. How many had served under General Edwin Walker (who was 54 years old in 1963)? A fair number, I suspect. Edwin Walker was a well-known speaker across the USA. When he spoke in Dallas, he packed the venue. Who paid money to go listen to an ex-General spout right-wing vitriol?

I suspect the Dallas Police Force contributed more than the average number of adherents to Edwin Walker. Add to this the fact that Edwin Walker was an *official* in the Texas Minutemen organization. This group of rifle-carrying sharpshooters was more ideologically aligned than the National Rifle Association. Minutemen who reported directly to Edwin Walker - in the Dallas Police Department? YOU BET!

The attack on Adlai Stevenson in Dallas on 10/24/1963 was clearly inspired by General Walker's "revival" meeting on the evening of 10/23/1963 - where he spouted that the UN was Satan Incarnate! It is easy to imagine how the crowd could lose control if the Dallas Police were themselves part of the crowd.

Finally, consider the case of Roscoe White, former military and a fantastic sharpshooter. Was he also a Minuteman? Was he a member of the KKK? Well, he joined the Dallas Police Force in October, 1963, and he was a trainee on the force in November, wearing the uniform, the badge, and carrying the gun. Ron Lewis in his book, FLASHBACK, says that Guy Banister personally selected Roscoe White to be in Dallas on 11/22/1963.

So, Gil...the Dallas Police? I'm on board with that. But in my opinion, this places General Edwin Walker in the front row once again.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited January 18, 2012 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

The very fact the Gen. Edwin Walker contacted the HSCA over the matter of the bullet in evidence not being the one shot at him makes me think that Walker was NOT involved in the JFK assassination. Being very quiet is something a plotter would do, not stir up the water.

Having said that Gen. Edwin Walker was good friends with H.L. Hunt who I think was at the core of the JFK assassination along with Lyndon Johnson, the CIA, Ed Lansdale, etc.

Normally, I would be very suspicious of Gen. Walker - I think his friends killed JFK. But I do not put him in the plot.

Likewise, I think it is extremely unlikely, less than 1% that Oswald shot at Walker. If Oswald is so furious about JFK's handling of the Bay of Pigs, the LAST person he would shot would be an ultra-rightist like Walker.

I think the "Oswald shot Walker" theory is absurd and a fantasy of the Warren Commission as they tried to pin everything on Oswald (JFK, Tippitt, Walker shooting).

I can see your reasoning, Robert, so let me try to respond to your challenges one-at-a-time.

1.0. Although an ordinary person would not want to bring attention to themselves after an ordinary murder, a Presidential assassin is not an ordinary person.

1.1. All Presidential assassins in the USA always admitted to the shooting, always bragged about the shooting, and always used the spotlight to explain why they were *right*.

1.2. Look at Edwin Walker's personality. He was not invited to join the right-wing ICDCC because, said Larrie Schmidt, "he always wanted the limelight."

1.3. Edwin Walker loved giving speeches in front of the largest crowds possible. That is to say, his personality was exhibitionist.

1.4. So, although the average person would seek to hide in the shadows and keep quiet about any involvement in a Presidential slaying, this would not necessarily include General Edwin Walker.

1.5. In teasing the Government with his quizzical looks and questions, Walker was toying with the 'inferior' minds of the Establishment. He was enjoying it.

2.0. You are correct, Robert, to point out the important role played by HL Hunt as a friend of General Walker. When Walker resigned from the military (not retired, but resigned without a pension) he had to have a financial backer he could rely on to forego such a large amount of money as a General's Pension.

2.1. As soon as Walker quit the military in December, 1961, he went directly to his new office in the biggest Oil Company skyscraper in Dallas. There he began to write his first speeches.

2.2. It is almost certain that HL Hunt was the one who supported General Walker when he left his military pension behind. HL Hunt poured a lot of money into General Walker's first days as a rightist pundit.

2.3. Also, Walker kept many strong contacts in the military - men who thought little of JFK; Generals and other officers; the kind of career that tends toward rightist politics. People he could rely on.

2.4. Insofar as General Walker was good friends with people you would suspect, Robert, it seems odd that you exclude him. He was just as right-wing, and he was a man of action, not just a talker.

3.0 As for the idea that Oswald was innocent of the April shooting, I need only cite some authors that you respect, for example, David Lifton, who believe that Oswald did shoot at Walker.

3.1. It would have been extremely difficult to get three Warren Commission witnesses to keep their stories straight (as I'm including George and Jeanne DeMohrenschildt along with Marina).

4.0. As for Oswald complaining about JFK's handling of the Bay of Pigs, and then shooting at Walker, this is not hard to understand. For example:

4.1. Oswald wanted to be accepted by the big boys. Most Marines criticized JFK for the Bay of Pigs, so it is easy to imagine Oswald imitating them.

4.2. Then George DeMohrenschildt and Volkmar Schmidt tried to change Oswald for weeks. Again, since Oswald wanted to be accepted by the big boys, and DeMohrenschildt was a rich and successful guy, and Volkmar was this successful engineer, Oswald let himself be led along.

4.3. Also, Michael Paine's father was a leader in the American Trotsky movement, and he tried to influence Oswald; Michael Paine just hated General Edwin Walker. So it's possible that Oswald got confirmation for an anti-Walker attitude from Michael Paine.

4.4. Also, remember that George DeMohrenschildt had in his possessions a copy of that photograph of Oswald holding a rifle, a gun and two radical newspapers; and on the back was printed, 'to my friend George DM' and in the Russian language, "Hunter of Fascists, ha ha."

4.5. Only the kind of person who needs to please other people would send out a self-portrait signed like that. Oswald was trying to please George DM. Oswald thought the 'Hunter of Fascists' remark would please George DM. Why? Because these words came first from George DM.

5.0. The "Oswald shot Walker" theory still has plenty of energy.

5.1. Dick Russell, for example, proposes that Oswald acted in a group of three: Oswald, Larrie Schmidt and Bob Schmidt, two radical right-wingers, in shooting at Walker.

5.2. Now, we might not believe that a rightist would shoot a rightist, but Dick Russell believes it.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

[Thomas Graves]

The very fact the Gen. Edwin Walker contacted the HSCA over the matter of the bullet in evidence not being the one shot at him makes me think that Walker was NOT involved in the JFK assassination. Being very quiet is something a plotter would do, not stir up the water.

Having said that Gen. Edwin Walker was good friends with H.L. Hunt who I think was at the core of the JFK assassination along with Lyndon Johnson, the CIA, Ed Lansdale, etc.

Normally, I would be very suspicious of Gen. Walker - I think his friends killed JFK. But I do not put him in the plot.

Likewise, I think it is extremely unlikely, less than 1% that Oswald shot at Walker. If Oswald is so furious about JFK's handling of the Bay of Pigs, the LAST person he would shot would be an ultra-rightist like Walker.

I think the "Oswald shot Walker" theory is absurd and a fantasy of the Warren Commission as they tried to pin everything on Oswald (JFK, Tippitt, Walker shooting).

I can see your reasoning, Robert, so let me try to respond to your challenges one-at-a-time.

1.0. Although an ordinary person would not want to bring attention to themselves after an ordinary murder, a Presidential assassin is not an ordinary person.

1.1. All Presidential assassins in the USA always admitted to the shooting, always bragged about the shooting, and always used the spotlight to explain why they were *right*.

1.2. Look at Edwin Walker's personality. He was not invited to join the right-wing ICDCC because, said Larrie Schmidt, "he always wanted the limelight."

1.3. Edwin Walker loved giving speeches in front of the largest crowds possible. That is to say, his personality was exhibitionist.

1.4. So, although the average person would seek to hide in the shadows and keep quiet about any involvement in a Presidential slaying, this would not necessarily include General Edwin Walker.

1.5. In teasing the Government with his quizzical looks and questions, Walker was toying with the 'inferior' minds of the Establishment. He was enjoying it.

2.0. You are correct, Robert, to point out the important role played by HL Hunt as a friend of General Walker. When Walker resigned from the military (not retired, but resigned without a pension) he had to have a financial backer he could rely on to forego such a large amount of money as a General's Pension.

2.1. As soon as Walker quit the military in December, 1961, he went directly to his new office in the biggest Oil Company skyscraper in Dallas. There he began to write his first speeches.

2.2. It is almost certain that HL Hunt was the one who supported General Walker when he left his military pension behind. HL Hunt poured a lot of money into General Walker's first days as a rightist pundit.

2.3. Also, Walker kept many strong contacts in the military - men who thought little of JFK; Generals and other officers; the kind of career that tends toward rightist politics. People he could rely on.

2.4. Insofar as General Walker was good friends with people you would suspect, Robert, it seems odd that you exclude him. He was just as right-wing, and he was a man of action, not just a talker.

3.0 As for the idea that Oswald was innocent of the April shooting, I need only cite some authors that you respect, for example, David Lifton, who believe that Oswald did shoot at Walker.

3.1. It would have been extremely difficult to get three Warren Commission witnesses to keep their stories straight (as I'm including George and Jeanne DeMohrenschildt along with Marina).

4.0. As for Oswald complaining about JFK's handling of the Bay of Pigs, and then shooting at Walker, this is not hard to understand. For example:

4.1. Oswald wanted to be accepted by the big boys. Most Marines criticized JFK for the Bay of Pigs, so it is easy to imagine Oswald imitating them.

4.2. Then George DeMohrenschildt and Volkmar Schmidt tried to change Oswald for weeks. Again, since Oswald wanted to be accepted by the big boys, and DeMohrenschildt was a rich and successful guy, and Volkmar was this successful engineer, Oswald let himself be led along.

4.3. Also, Michael Paine's father was a leader in the American Trotsky movement, and he tried to influence Oswald; Michael Paine just hated General Edwin Walker. So it's possible that Oswald got confirmation for an anti-Walker attitude from Michael Paine.

4.4. Also, remember that George DeMohrenschildt had in his possessions a copy of that photograph of Oswald holding a rifle, a gun and two radical newspapers; and on the back was printed, 'to my friend George DM' and in the Russian language, "Hunter of Fascists, ha ha."

4.5. Only the kind of person who needs to please other people would send out a self-portrait signed like that. Oswald was trying to please George DM. Oswald thought the 'Hunter of Fascists' remark would please George DM. Why? Because these words came first from George DM.

5.0. The "Oswald shot Walker" theory still has plenty of energy.

5.1. Dick Russell, for example, proposes that Oswald acted in a group of three: Oswald, Larrie Schmidt and Bob Schmidt, two radical right-wingers, in shooting at Walker.

5.2. Now, we might not believe that a rightist would shoot a rightist, but Dick Russell believes it.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Paul,

Perhaps Oswald was trying to infiltrate (or had already infiltrated) Larrie and brother Bob's anti-Walker clique and, at their urging, shot "at" Walker but intentionally missed. The Coleman kid said he saw three guys leaving the scene. Maybe they were Larrie, Bob, and Oswald.

--Tommy

Edited February 16, 2012 by Thomas Graves

[Mark Knight]

Just a thought...Perhaps Oswald never told Marina that, after the Walker shooting, he buried the rifle in the ground. Perhaps what he actually said was that the rifle "went underground," or something of that nature. Maybe the phrase and concept of "going underground" doesn't translate well to Russian, if you're trying to translate it literally rather than idiomatically.

As I said...just a thought.

Now...back to Oswald and the Walker shooting, without the distraction I just brought up.

[Gil Jesus]

So, Gil...the Dallas Police? I'm on board with that. But in my opinion, this places General Edwin Walker in the front row once again.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

I just doesn't make sense to me that Walker would be involved in a conspiracy to kill JFK, a conspiracy that included the selection of a patsy, then claim that the only type of bullet that the patsy's rifle could fire was not the bullet recovered from his house.

I would agree that Walker may have had foreknowledge of a plot to kill JFK, but his objection to CE 573 being the bullet leaves a question in my mind of how much involvement he had in the details of the plot.

IMO, it just seems to me that we can't have it both ways...we can't have Walker setting up Oswald on the one hand, then arguing against the evidence "proving" Oswald's guilt on the other.

I have no doubt that this was a Dallas-based plot to kill the President that had logistical support from elements of the Federal Government.

Part of that logistical support included the FBI's foreknowledge of a plot and allowing the murder to happen and the SS removing the President's protection.

This is the secret IMO that Hoover was trying to hide......they let it happen.

Edited February 17, 2012 by Gil Jesus

[John Dolva]

I think if one manages to build a room of smoke and mirrors that is so effective that all the obvious focus on Walker is deflected so that serious researchers doubt his involvement, that's not bad ( if that's what's happened. ).

Could someone explain how someone could miss Walker in the conditions under which a bullet was fired in his direction and miss him but do some pretty amazing shooting when it came to Kennedy? (This is why I keep harping on Oswalds' writings on the minutemen. Within there, imo, is a piece that makes a lot make sense.)

edit typos

Edited February 17, 2012 by John Dolva

[Thomas Graves]

I think if one manages to build a room of smoke and mirrors that is so effective that all the obvious focus on Walker is deflected so that serious researchers doubt his involvement, that's not bad ( if that's what's happened. ).

Could someone explain how someone could miss Walker in the conditions under which a bullet was fired in his direction and miss him but do some pretty amazing shooting when it came to Kennedy? (This is why I keep harping on Oswalds' writings on the minutemen. Within there, imo, is a piece that makes a lot make sense.)

edit typos

I think Oswald missed Walker on purpose. See my post #26, above.

--Tommy

Edited February 17, 2012 by Thomas Graves

[John Dolva]

I think if one manages to build a room of smoke and mirrors that is so effective that all the obvious focus on Walker is deflected so that serious researchers doubt his involvement, that's not bad ( if that's what's happened. ).

Could someone explain how someone could miss Walker in the conditions under which a bullet was fired in his direction and miss him but do some pretty amazing shooting when it came to Kennedy? (This is why I keep harping on Oswalds' writings on the minutemen. Within there, imo, is a piece that makes a lot make sense.)

edit typos

I think Oswald missed Walker on purpose. See my post #26, above.

--Tommy

Ok, thanks Thomas.

It makes sense, imo, that it was indeed a deliberate miss. How Oswald was involved in any shootings, I don't know.

However the couple of sentences that Oswald wrote re the Minutemen concerned a direction Oswald (as admirer of them) thought the Minutemen should take. iow. to create a situation in the US so that a civil war would lead to the Minutemen taking control, or rather the aims of the Minutemen. In this context I can see a shot at Walker and a killing of Kennedy could polarise US militancy. However I think that this was a naive thought on Oswalds part but by approaching the Minutemen with this idea he became known to them and people far more astute took him in and he was led to believe he was participating in a plot that did not include him taking the fall, which made him perfect for the role. Hence ''I'm a Patsy'' really means ''I was cheated''. Quite a lot of stuff fall into place by taking his writngs on the Minutemen into account. The subsequent cover up was not only opportunistic by the ultra-reactionaries for forcing events while various persons sought to contain the civil war that ensued. IOW it was the importance of controlling forces that could tear the US apart combined with group interests including the conspirators all really had a common interest. just an idea...

[John Dolva]

I think if one manages to build a room of smoke and mirrors that is so effective that all the obvious focus on Walker is deflected so that serious researchers doubt his involvement, that's not bad ( if that's what's happened. ).

Could someone explain how someone could miss Walker in the conditions under which a bullet was fired in his direction and miss him but do some pretty amazing shooting when it came to Kennedy? (This is why I keep harping on Oswalds' writings on the minutemen. Within there, imo, is a piece that makes a lot make sense.)

edit typos

Perhaps, John, the shooter missed because he was meant to miss.

Didn't the Dallas police suspect that Walker engineered the incident for symapthy? If that was indeed the case the he probably wasn't even in the room when the shot was fired.

I think it's quite clear from the evidence that Oswald was neither the Walker sniper nor JFK's assassin.

Yes, Martin, that's along the line I'm thinking, (tho I'm less certain of what role Oswald did or did not have).

[Harry J.Dean]

So, Gil...the Dallas Police? I'm on board with that. But in my opinion, this places General Edwin Walker in the front row once again.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

I just doesn't make sense to me that Walker would be involved in a conspiracy to kill JFK, a conspiracy that included the selection of a patsy, then claim that the only type of bullet that the patsy's rifle could fire was not the bullet recovered from his house.

I would agree that Walker may have had foreknowledge of a plot to kill JFK, but his objection to CE 573 being the bullet leaves a question in my mind of how much involvement he had in the details of the plot.

IMO, it just seems to me that we can't have it both ways...we can't have Walker setting up Oswald on the one hand, then arguing against the evidence "proving" Oswald's guilt on the other.

I have no doubt that this was a Dallas-based plot to kill the President that had logistical support from elements of the Federal Government.

Part of that logistical support included the FBI's foreknowledge of a plot and allowing the murder to happen and the SS removing the President's protection.

This is the secret IMO that Hoover was trying to hide......they let it happen.

Gil

Does the so-called Walker bullet still exist? and where is it?

[Thomas Graves]

I think if one manages to build a room of smoke and mirrors that is so effective that all the obvious focus on Walker is deflected so that serious researchers doubt his involvement, that's not bad ( if that's what's happened. ).

Could someone explain how someone could miss Walker in the conditions under which a bullet was fired in his direction and miss him but do some pretty amazing shooting when it came to Kennedy? (This is why I keep harping on Oswalds' writings on the minutemen. Within there, imo, is a piece that makes a lot make sense.)

edit typos

I think Oswald missed Walker on purpose. See my post #26, above.

--Tommy

Ok, thanks Thomas.

It makes sense, imo, that it was indeed a deliberate miss. How Oswald was involved in any shootings, I don't know.

However the couple of sentences that Oswald wrote re the Minutemen concerned a direction Oswald (as admirer of them) thought the Minutemen should take. iow. to create a situation in the US so that a civil war would lead to the Minutemen taking control, or rather the aims of the Minutemen. In this context I can see a shot at Walker and a killing of Kennedy could polarise US militancy. However I think that this was a naive thought on Oswalds part but by approaching the Minutemen with this idea he became known to them and people far more astute took him in and he was led to believe he was participating in a plot that did not include him taking the fall, which made him perfect for the role. Hence ''I'm a Patsy'' really means ''I was cheated''. Quite a lot of stuff fall into place by taking his writngs on the Minutemen into account. The subsequent cover up was not only opportunistic by the ultra-reactionaries for forcing events while various persons sought to contain the civil war that ensued. IOW it was the importance of controlling forces that could tear the US apart combined with group interests including the conspirators all really had a common interest. just an idea...

John,

I might be wrong, but I think a reporter asked Oswald, "Did you shoot the President?", asd Oswald replied by saying, "No sir. I didn't shoot anybody." Now I'm thinking that maybe Oswald did fire a rifle in both the Walker incident and the assassination of JFK in Dealey Plaza, but intentionally missed in both cases. This scenario also reminds me of GPH's statement to the effect that he knew there wasn't going to be a serious investigation of The Assassination when he realized that neither he nor Mitch WerBell III were going to be arrested.

Mitch WerBell III. Hmmm.... Ah yes! SILENCERS.

Maybe LHO was told to fire a gun from the "sniper's lair" and to use "blanks" or to intentionally miss in order to draw attention away from the real shooters (who were in other locations and whose guns had been silenced by Mitch Werbell III). Or maybe LHO didn't even know about the other shooters and made his own decision to miss.

Hemming:

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKhemming.htm

WerBell:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitchell_WerBell_III#cite_note-13

--Tommy

Edited February 18, 2012 by Thomas Graves

[Paul Trejo]

It just doesn't make sense to me that Walker would be involved in a conspiracy to kill JFK, a conspiracy that included the selection of a patsy, then claim that the only type of bullet that the patsy's rifle could fire was not the bullet recovered from his house.

I would agree that Walker may have had foreknowledge of a plot to kill JFK, but his objection to CE 573 being the bullet leaves a question in my mind of how much involvement he had in the details of the plot.

IMO, it just seems to me that we can't have it both ways...we can't have Walker setting up Oswald on the one hand, then arguing against the evidence "proving" Oswald's guilt on the other.

I have no doubt that this was a Dallas-based plot to kill the President that had logistical support from elements of the Federal Government.

Part of that logistical support included the FBI's foreknowledge of a plot and allowing the murder to happen and the SS removing the President's protection.

This is the secret IMO that Hoover was trying to hide......they let it happen.

Gil, I think we need to sharply distinguish between Oswald as the confessed shooter at Walker on 4/10/1963 and Oswald as the accused shooter at JFK on 11/22/1963.

Walker knew that Oswald was his April shooter -- and he said so many times. He never divulged who told him that Oswald was the shooter -- but he hinted several times that it was somebody in a very high position. Sometimes he said it was the Dallas Police. Sometimes he said it was a Lieutenant. Sometimes he just said it was friends he had in Dallas.

But Walker had other information, as well. He believed strongly that there were two shooters on April 10, 1963, because he trusted his long-time neighbor who was an eye-witness. In his rage against the Kennedys and everything liberal in politics, he imagined that the Kennedys were trying to kill him, and that they were using Oswald for this, as well as others inside the CIA. This comes from his own pen over the course of many decades.

Now -- this is not the same story that the Warren Commission told. Walker is not agreeing with the Warren Commission when he says that Oswald killed Kennedy. Walker is promoting his own theory, and he is also accusing the Warren Commission of lying.

Walker hated the Warren Commission because he loathed and detested Earl Warren personally.

So, Walker is not trying to say that the Warren Commission is correct. But he did agree with part of their conclusion -- that Oswald the Communist killed JFK. Walker sharply disagreed with the idea that Oswald was a "Lonely Loner". Oswald was part of a plot; not only to kill JFK, but also to kill Walker in 4/10/1963.

Walker also believed that Oswald's handlers included the CIA and RFK himself. He believed it was ironic that the person RFK hired to kill Walker turned out to kill JFK.

Walker took things very personally. He was a military officer in WW2 and the Korean War, and he was in many, many very deadly battles where hundreds and thousands were killed. Walker was nobody to trifle with. When he found out (probably from the FBI, who learned it from Mr. and Mrs. Igor Voshinin on 4/14/1963, who learned it from George DeMohrenschildt the same day) Edwin Walker immediately contacted his military buddies and they planned a way to get even with this bothersome Lee Harvey Oswald.

These military buddies -- retired and non-retired -- had been looking for a patsy for their many, many plots. Harry Dean tells us explicitly that he was an eye-witness to meetings in Covina, California where some of these hot-headed rightists laughed when they selected Oswald as the patsy in mid-1963.

So -- the bullet didn't really matter. For what it's worth, the Dolph Briscoe Center has two photographs of Walker's bullet, so it does exist somewhere (probably Walker's nephew, George Walker still has it). But Walker was not trying (like the Warren Commission) to match the April 10th bullet with the November 22nd bullet.

Just the opposite. Walker was trying to prove to the American people that Oswald never acted ALONE. Instead, it was "leftists" in the CIA, and Communists generally, who worked with Oswald to damage the U.S.A. Walker and all his rightist pals wanted to prove this because they hoped that the U.S.A. would get angry enough to invade Cuba, at long last. That was Walker's entire plan -- and the same applies to all his co-conspirators; all these rabid, aging right-wingers (corrupt as they could be with alcohol, drugs and wild parties every weekend) wanted one thing only -- to mobilize America to invade Cuba. That was the main, number one reason that JFK was killed in the first place, IMHO.

But if the Warren Commission's fiction about a "Lonely Loner" was promoted, then the U.S.A. would have no motive to invade Cuba, only to feel sorry for the Oswalds.

So you see, Gil, that Walker's objection to CE 573 being the bullet actually plays a role in Walker's own personal involvement in the conspiracy.

Walker never believed that the JFK case relied on the April 10th shooting. Instead, Walker believed that Oswald's participation in the April 10th shooting (along with the other guys that RFK allegedly hired to kill Walker) was the very reason that taking the matter into his own hands was reasonable, justified and the patriotic thing to do.

I'm glad, Gil, that we can agree that the JFK conspiracy was first and foremost a Dallas-based conspiracy. Yes, it had a lot of support from inside the Federal Government, simply because there were many, many retired military men with contacts and influence throughout the Government who were solidly on General Walker's side.

I'm glad, also, that we can agree that the FBI was involved at a very early date. Even if it only meant that Hoover and his boys only looked the other way, that is, that they silently watched it all unfold before their very eyes, then they were accessories. We agree 100% that Hoover had to hide that the FBI let it happen.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

One of the things about the whole Walker episode that still confuses me is that the evidence indicates two men were involved and that the actual bullet found at the scene was a 30.06 silver jacket and, therefore, Oswald was not the shooter.

And yet, even though Marina says she now believes Oswald was set-up for the assassination, she sticks by her story that Oswald told her he took a shot at Walker.

What do we make of this? What would Marina gain by continuing to lie on this matter?

Martin, I'd like to re-address this interesting question that still comes up.

First, just because the rifle wasn't Oswald's rifle is no proof that Oswald was innocent of the shooting. Dick Russell's theory (TMWKTM, 1992) is that Oswald joined Larrie Schmidt and Bob Schmidt to shoot at General Walker on 10 April 1963 at 9pm.

If Dick Russell is right, then Oswald told Marina a half-truth -- he confessed what he did (actually he couldn't help boasting about it) -- but he didn't share the 'credit/blame' with Larrie and Bob, he claimed that he was the Lone shooter. Marina continually believed Oswald; she never met any of his extra-curricular pals, so she easily believed that Oswald did everything alone.

The eye-witnesses told the truth. The cars belonged to the Schmidt brothers. Dick Russell said the descriptions of the cars matched the cars that the young Schmidt brothers owned.

As for the question of whether they shot to miss or shot to kill -- I believe they shot to kill. My reasoning is that the only reason that the shot barely missed was because the bullet nicked the window sill on its way to Walker's head. It was far too close to be a deliberate miss, IMHO.

So, everybody was telling the truth except for Lee Harvey Oswald, and he still told half of the truth.

Finally, I found the photos of the so-called Walker bullet. There are two photographs – one taken from the ‘front’ and the other from the ‘back’. These photograph originals are stored in the Briscoe Center Archive Collection for General Edwin Walker:

http://www.pet880.co...er_bullet_1.gif

http://www.pet880.co...er_bullet_2.gif

Oswald could still be the shooter, even if he used a rifle that belonged to one of the Schmidt brothers.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited May 30, 2012 by Paul Trejo

[Malcolm Ward]

We know Walker hated the Kennedys.I mean a ex General like Walker would have a big Ego as people in high positions usually do.With RFK having him detained in a mental institution would be like waving a red flag at a bull to him.

What if Walker,even though he hated JFK,was reluctant to join in a conspiracy to kill the President.If someone then takes a shot at Walker,and Walker believes the Kennedy's are behind it.That might just be enough to give him a shove to agree to a assassination.If indeed he was reluctant to do so in the first place.