New Book!

[William O'Neil]

Speculation and conjecture Mr.Lazar?... hmm, sounds very much like what your doing, without having read much of anything contained in the book.Yes, there is a good deal of info that has never been brought forth until now.

I'm not here to debate the issues, just to inform people about a work that I deem very valuable and informative.

Bill

[Greg Parker]

Speculation and conjecture Mr.Lazar?... hmm, sounds very much like what your doing, without having read much of anything contained in the book.Yes, there is a good deal of info that has never been brought forth until now.

I'm not here to debate the issues, just to inform people about a work that I deem very valuable and informative.

Bill

Bill, I am positive this book will add to our knowledge of this case.

[David Boylan]

_{Congrats to Jeff on finishing his book.}

Edited July 22, 2015 by David Boylan

[Ernie Lazar]

Speculation and conjecture Mr.Lazar?... hmm, sounds very much like what your doing, without having read much of anything contained in the book.Yes, there is a good deal of info that has never been brought forth until now.

I'm not here to debate the issues, just to inform people about a work that I deem very valuable and informative.

Bill

Bill: I very much look forward to and I intend to purchase his book. My comments were merely intended to make it clear that the value of any new book regarding a historical matter ultimately depends upon significant new evidence discovered. Otherwise, the result is just speculation and conjecture or a re-hash of what is already known. Sometimes, a re-telling can be useful but when it comes to the murder of JFK I think everyone already is familiar with the 13 or so major theories.

[William O'Neil]

Thanks, I can assure people that their are startling revelations in this book. It's not just about Walker, it's over 900 pages and covers a large area of Right Wing activity from 1956 through 1968.

From the likes of Guy Bainister to James O. Eastland to Joesph Milteer to HL Hunt, Robert Morris,Walker, Hoover etc etc........it covers the gamut. The book was originally over 1,200 pages, but the publisher though it best to keep under that figure. So,some things had to be left out or condensed. Hopefully a website in the future can be a repository for these eliminated items and more. This work will be self published and all costs are paid out of pocket. We don't expect to make much at all, it was a labor of love and a search for truth.

Bill

Edited July 22, 2015 by William O'Neil

[William O'Neil]

Sorry about the spelling, I'm tired as hell. Books are a bigger hassle than I ever imagined. My respect for authors has gone up greatly.

Bill

[William O'Neil]

Thanks Dave (Boylan). Jeff says he cited your work and gave you due acknowledgement. Good stuff!

Bill

[Paul Brancato]

I look forward to reading this, and have no doubt about the underlying hatred of the old south towards JFK. But I am with Jon Tidd on this one, and would go one step further. If, as O'Neil says, the coverup was aided by some who had foreknowledge, then they are equally guilty of the crime. If Angleton and Hoover and Dulles et al let Walker and his minions escape from punishment, then perhaps the perpetrators knew this was the plan and carried out the assassination knowing they had a green light.

I find it interesting that the authors did not, apparently see the FBI files which Lazar has requested. Mr. O'Neil - what do you think of this?

[Jon G. Tidd]

I imagine, I could be wrong, that Senator Richard B. Russell was fairly attuned to right-wing activities in the South in the 1950s and 1960s. As most certainly was J. Edgar Hoover. Perhaps Hale Boggs as well -- I don't know about him.

Russell never suggested, to my knowledge, that JFK was killed by a U.S. right-wing conspiracy.

Hoover seems to have been confused about the details of the assassination at first. The FBI Report on the assassination fairly means there was a conspiracy, but it doesn't point to a U.S. RW conspiracy in any way.

Given the enthusiasm expressed here for the forthcoming book, I wonder if JFK scholars and students grasp what a distraction it may be to blame a bunch of early 1960s right-wing nuts for JFK's murder. I don't dispute there were a whole bunch of nuts, ranging from low-life KKK-ers and Nazis to wealthy and powerful individuals. I don't dispute these individuals hated JFK and wished him dead. None of this, however, explains the behavior of James Humes, for example, or the behavior of many other key post-assassination players -- all of whom wanted the truth hidden for reasons that prevail today.

Yeah, I'm a broken record. But when I see a crowd or consensus forming, I know from experience to head the other way.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Jon G. Tidd

[Ernie Lazar]

Thanks, I can assure people that their are startling revelations in this book. It's not just about Walker, it's over 900 pages and covers a large area of Right Wing activity from 1956 through 1968.

From the likes of Guy Bainister to James O. Eastland to Joesph Milteer to HL Hunt, Robert Morris,Walker, Hoover etc etc........it covers the gamut. The book was originally over 1,200 pages, but the publisher though it best to keep under that figure. So,some things had to be left out or condensed. Hopefully a website in the future can be a repository for these eliminated items and more. This work will be self published and all costs are paid out of pocket. We don't expect to make much at all, it was a labor of love and a search for truth.

Bill

Those of us who are old enough to remember those dark and incomprehensible days of November 1963 have never thought of this subject as merely a crime. Something profound changed in our country as a consequence of JFK's murder---and that something has never been made right.

Subsequent developments including the murders of RFK and MLK only deepened our depression and the sense that we had lost our way as a nation. Then the Vietnam War, the racial riots, Watergate, and the resignation of Nixon made it impossible to believe that we could ever believe in ourselves and our future potential again.

Given this background, it comes as no surprise that 52 years later we still want to find some indisputable answer and some unmistakable villain(s) who were clearly responsible for taking our innocence from us. And I am absolutely certain that on the 100-year anniversary of JFK's murder, a new generation will still be arguing about whom was responsible.

[Steven Gaal]

Thanks, I can assure people that their are startling revelations in this book. It's not just about Walker, it's over 900 pages and covers a large area of Right Wing activity from 1956 through 1968.

From the likes of Guy Bainister to James O. Eastland to Joesph Milteer to HL Hunt, Robert Morris,Walker, Hoover etc etc........it covers the gamut. The book was originally over 1,200 pages, but the publisher though it best to keep under that figure. So,some things had to be left out or condensed. Hopefully a website in the future can be a repository for these eliminated items and more. This work will be self published and all costs are paid out of pocket. We don't expect to make much at all, it was a labor of love and a search for truth.

Bill

Those of us who are old enough to remember those dark and incomprehensible days of November 1963 have never thought of this subject as merely a crime. Something profound changed in our country as a consequence of JFK's murder---and that something has never been made right.

Subsequent developments including the murders of RFK and MLK only deepened our depression and the sense that we had lost our way as a nation. Then the Vietnam War, the racial riots, Watergate, and the resignation of Nixon made it impossible to believe that we could ever believe in ourselves and our future potential again.

Given this background, it comes as no surprise that 52 years later we still want to find some indisputable answer and some unmistakable villain(s) who were clearly responsible for taking our innocence from us. And I am absolutely certain that on the 100-year anniversary of JFK's murder, a new generation will still be arguing about whom was responsible.

David Talbot's new book The Devil's Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America's Secret Government" is available on preorder from Amazon with a release date in mid October 2015. I suspect this book will be very revealing.

Thanks for the heads up about the book, Paul, and for the kind words in your previous post.

I just read the description of the book on Amazon and can't wait to read it.

BRIAN me too !!

Prescott Bush and Allen Dulles were very close friends since the early 1930s , GAAL

see http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21367&p=289607

the Dulles did it thread by gaal

--------------------------------------------------------

This Talbot book should be the new book that will help with the answer, gaal

[John Dolva]

I see the hourglass as a shape to explain the assassination hierarchy.

Those at the base carried out the assassination. They had no knowledge of those at the top and did not do it for the same reason.

Those at the top were pure pragmatists. They knew and manipulated those below them.

The intermediary followed and gave orders.

For example :

Financiers, MIC, Int
........Walker
..Segregationists

I suggest that this book may cover the base and in combination with other work ends up covering the lot.

edit typo

Edited July 23, 2015 by John Dolva

[Glenn Nall]

"The people skills ... required to ... facilitate ... the assassination of the President of the United States."

while i agree with you that Walker "didn't do it," I have to admit I haven't thought of it in those terms before...

i do, however, think that it's very likely that LBJ was one of "them," and i surely don't see his people skills helping him much, either.

i realize my editing the sentence blows the context - i was just really enjoying that phrase...

I'm not sure I understand your comment. LBJ was famous for his people skills -- which involved cajoling, reasoning, pressuring, and threatening in various measures to accomplish his purposes.

However, let me be clear about what I meant:

1. For his entire adult life, Walker functioned in a top-down authoritarian environment. In other words, his people skills were limited to giving orders to subordinates whom operated in a clear hierarchical system with explicit (and often severe) penalties for disobedience.

2. When somebody contemplates planning, organizing, and facilitating a complex crime (particularly one that requires the acquiescence and support and participation of numerous individuals in a non-hierarchical system --- i.e. where everyone has their own opinions and judgments about what should be done and on what schedule and whom should be given specific responsibilities) --- that requires an entirely different set of people skills. The temperament required to assure the success of the proposed objective is much different because so many different stakeholders are involved and they all have egos which must be taken into account.

3. My point about Walker is that he was not accustomed to using normal people skills - i.e. instead he was used to merely giving orders and having them obeyed. That is probably why (in 1959) he was attracted to, and joined, the John Birch Society because Robert Welch explicitly created it as "a monolithic body" to eliminate what he contemptuously described as follows:

"A republican form of government or of organization has many attractions and advantages under certain favorable conditions. But under less happy circumstances it lends itself too readily to infiltration, distortion, and disruption."

Because, (according to Welch), the "certain favorable conditions" were NOT in existence in December 1958 when the JBS came into existence, he proposed to create the JBS as a "monolithic" organization which "will operate under completely authoritative control at all levels" -- because, again quoting Welch, "democracy, of course, in government or organization, as the Greeks and Romans both found out, as I believe every man in this room clearly recognizes -- democracy is merely a deceptive phrase, a weapon of demagoguery and a perennial fraud."

Welch also explained how he would eliminate "parliamentary procedures" and what he described as the "two-sides-to-every question" problem.

It is this contempt for democratic processes which also explains why, in 1965, Walker assisted in the formation of the American Royal Rangers (Bossier City LA). The Rangers group was designed to take the place of the Klan and it was to be organized along military lines. Members were going to wear uniforms and be assigned ranks. Walker was to become a "five star general having jurisdiction over the entire organization" but he wanted to "remain in the background". So, again, you see Walker's pre-disposition for authoritarian top-down decision making where HE gave orders and subordinates obeyed them.

"LBJ was famous for his people skills -- which involved cajoling, reasoning, pressuring, and threatening in various measures to accomplish his purposes."

that's all I meant. I meant to be more clear at the end when i said that i was really just enjoying the phrase. the phrase "people skills" to me implies more of a Dale Carnegie talent - which is why i made fun of the fact that LBJ's were more of an aggressive, threatening or purchasing assortment.

i didn't mean to disagree at all. i agreed with what you said. just liked the refreshing way you said it. sorry. not necessary to explain...

[Glenn Nall]

I see the hourglass as a shape to explain the assassination hierarchy.

Those at the base carried out the assassination. They had no knowledge of those at the top and did not do it for the same reason.

Those at the top were pure pragmatists. They knew and manipulated those below them.

The intermediary followed and gave orders.

For example :

Financiers, MIC, Int

........Walker

..Segregationists

I suggest that this book may cover the base and in combination with other work ends up covering the lot.

edit typo

many times when i'm contemplating the thought of just exactly who is "in on it" i get stuck thinking that "there's just no way" that number of people could all be in collusion, yet realizing that it sure seems that way.

this model of yours really does make some sense in that respect. it might be an effective way of filling in some gaps and remaining realistic. i can see how it coould make the placement of certain people less tedious.

i like this idea, as a new approach, at least, for now.

[Glenn Nall]

Thanks, I can assure people that their are startling revelations in this book. It's not just about Walker, it's over 900 pages and covers a large area of Right Wing activity from 1956 through 1968.

From the likes of Guy Bainister to James O. Eastland to Joesph Milteer to HL Hunt, Robert Morris,Walker, Hoover etc etc........it covers the gamut. The book was originally over 1,200 pages, but the publisher though it best to keep under that figure. So,some things had to be left out or condensed. Hopefully a website in the future can be a repository for these eliminated items and more. This work will be self published and all costs are paid out of pocket. We don't expect to make much at all, it was a labor of love and a search for truth.

Bill

Those of us who are old enough to remember those dark and incomprehensible days of November 1963 have never thought of this subject as merely a crime. Something profound changed in our country as a consequence of JFK's murder---and that something has never been made right.

Subsequent developments including the murders of RFK and MLK only deepened our depression and the sense that we had lost our way as a nation. Then the Vietnam War, the racial riots, Watergate, and the resignation of Nixon made it impossible to believe that we could ever believe in ourselves and our future potential again.

Given this background, it comes as no surprise that 52 years later we still want to find some indisputable answer and some unmistakable villain(s) who were clearly responsible for taking our innocence from us. And I am absolutely certain that on the 100-year anniversary of JFK's murder, a new generation will still be arguing about whom was responsible.

Mr Lazar, i like the first two paragraphs so much that i would ask your permission to quote them, for the most part, on another website i'm beginning. with proper credit, of course.

well said. well focused.