New Book!

[Paul Trejo]

This new book by Dr. Jeffrey Caufield, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: The Extensive New Evidence of a Radical-Right Conspiracy, will revive a very old theme of a role by the resigned General Walker in the JFK murder.

While the theme is rare, it is certainly not new. I can cite six sources immediately:

(1) In 1964, Jack Ruby himself told Earl Warren that "General Edwin Walker and the John Birch Society in Dallas" were behind the JFK assassination;

(2) In 1964, ATF Agent Frank Ellsworth, who reported to the WC, said that "Edwin Walker and the Minutemen" were the most likely to murder JFK in Dallas;

(3) In 1965, Harry Dean appeared on the Joe Pyne radio show in Los Angeles and told the public that the resigned General Walker addressed a secret meeting of select JBS members, and announced a JFK murder plot with a Patsy named Lee Harvey Oswald.

(4) In 1975, the Tattler reported that the JFK plot involved Loran Hall, Harry Dean, Gerry Patrick Hemming, John Thomas Masen and General Edwin Walker;

(5) In 1990, Harry Dean's manuscript, Crosstrails, repeated his account of the resigned General Walker as central to the JFK murder plot;

(6) In 1992, Ron Lewis alleged that his pal Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) in NOLA during the summer of 1963 told him that Guy Banister found out about his shooting at Walker, and was blackmailing him.

Another theory that will be explored by Dr. Caufield in his new book, according to Bill O'Neil, is that the 10 April 1963 shooting at General Walker by Lee Harvey Oswald was a Fake Assassination. This theory also has a long history. For example, in his 1987 book, There's a Fish in the Courthouse, Gary Wean tells of a December 1963 meeting he attended on the topic of the JFK assassination. Let's take a closer look at Gary Wean's story:

Gary Wean was a Ventura County cop and a friend of war-hero movie-star, Audie Murphy, and also a friend of Dallas Sheriff Bill Decker. The three men would lunch at the Los Angeles Police Academy whenever Bill Decker came to LA, as he did in early December 1963. Of course, everybody in those days talked about the JFK assassination.

Decker dominated that conversation when he announced that he knew, without a doubt, that LHO never fired the shots that killed JFK. Further, Decker knew somebody in Dallas who wanted to tell the truth to people unconnected to Dallas or Washington DC, and he invited them to a meeting in Ruidoso New Mexico the following week.

The man was Senator John Tower (though Gary withheld his last name until after Tower died). Tower told the group in New Mexico that LHO was a CIA asset reporting to Howard Hunt, and that LHO deliberately developed Communist credentials in order to infiltrate Red organizations.

Howard Hunt burned with rage against JFK for his role in the failed Bay of Pigs invasion, and had tried for years to manage the assassination of Fidel Castro, but kept missing. Hunt held LHO as an asset for this purpose. According to Tower, the Walker shooting was really a Fake Assassination plot, staged to give LHO additional Communist credentials.

Further, said Tower, Howard Hunt invented a Fake Assassination plot against JFK, and hired LHO for the job. The plan was to miss JFK, and then blame Fidel Castro for it, so that the USA would rise up and finally invade Cuba.

JFK was unaware of the plot, but some US Officials in MI, FBI, CIA and the Senate knew about it. Evidence would be pre-planned to point to Cuba, and LHO was only supposed to fire into the air to get the ball rolling (and was promised rich rewards by the CIA for his role). But the plan went awry, so LHO was left to take the full blame. Tower said that he knew that LHO would never be allowed to leave the DPD alive.

According to Gary Wean's fans, this 1987 book was based on a first-draft that appeared in 1974. That could explain why the idea of a Fake Assassination gone awry was first publicized in the September 1975 special issue of The Tattler. Later, the idea of a Fake Assassination gone awry was found in the JFK CT novel, Libra (1988) by Don DeLillo. Fourteen years later, a physicist named William J. Fritz, Jr. published his book, The Kennedy Mutiny (2002), and added his own twist.

In the CT of William J. Fritz, Jr., the Fake Assassination of JFK was really the invention of the resigned General Walker. LHO (along with Volkmar Schmidt and Everett Glover) was really one of the Friends of Walker, claims Fritz. The Fake Assassination of Walker himself was only a rehearsal of the ultimate plot. However, opines Fritz, CIA Officer James Jesus Angleton later "hijacked" that plot, stepping in quickly to actually kill JFK, and then stepping out immediately to allow Walker and LHO to take the blame.

IMHO, despite some weaknesses, this 2002 book by Fritz gets five key points right, namely:

1. General Edwin Walker was the mastermind of the JFK assassination.
2. General Edwin Walker manipulated Lee Harvey Oswald for most of 1963.
3. General Edwin Walker worked closely with the NOLA Team that Jim Garrison exposed in 1968.
4. General Edwin Walker hoped that the drama upon JFK would spur the USA to invade Cuba and topple Fidel Castro.
5. General Edwin Walker had confederates inside Dallas City Hall, including FBI Agent James Hosty and SS Agent Forrest Sorrels.

We don't know yet how Dr. Jeffrey Caufield will finally stand on these key issues -- for example, his assertion that the Walker shooting was a Fake Assassination will be interesting to read.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

<edited>

Edited August 30, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[William O'Neil]

Steve Benson's reply:

"That is a ridiculous, unfounded, spurious and outlandish claim."

What the H_ll else would he say!?

Bill

[Kenneth Drew]

Right, I gather that reporter for OW was Siegfried Naujocks, who Walker had banned from access to the base, after he was caught snooping around command HQ's, looking for dirt on Ted.

Bill

Yes, that's right, Bill. In fact, the Senate Subcommittee Hearings on Military Preparedness held in April 1962, were sponsored by Senators John Stennis and Strom Thurmond, planned months in advance specifically for the purpose of letting General Edwin Walker explain how the Communists in Washington DC had "fired" another great General (just like the "definitely pink" President Harry Truman had "fired" General Douglas MacArthur in 1951).

In those hearings, the Senate had to endure long tirades about this Overseas Weekly reporter, Seigfried Naujocks, and just how much he had annoyed General Walker throughout 1960. It's now a matter of US History -- anybody can look up these public hearings and read all they desire to know about Seigfried Naujocks. It would be funny if it wasn't so pitiful.

What is equally amusing is that JFK and RFK actually feared General Walker's fame. Between the months of November 1961 (when Walker resigned from the US Army) and April 1962 (when the Subcommittee was called to order) the resigned General Edwin Walker gave many speeches in Dallas and throughout the South -- and he attracted very large crowds.

Reports of those speeches say that Walker would get a standing ovation every 60 seconds on average -- and would enjoy a thunderous five-minute standing ovation at the end of his speeches. The press had portrayed Walker as a Media Wizard. Newsweek magazine put Walker on their front cover in December 1961, with the caption, "Thunder on the Right!" Walker was compared with MacArthur by some, and with McCarthy by others. No wonder that JFK and RFK were concerned.

So great was the concern on the part of JFK and RFK that they insisted that the Senate Subcommittee hearings be held behind closed doors -- with no TV or Radio allowed. After the end of the Hearings, however, they deeply regretted their decision, because the resigned General Walker gave such a pitiful performance that JFK and RFK then wished that the American People had been permitted to witness the fiasco live and uncut.

The resigned General Walker could perform very well in front of crowds of True Believers. (This was portrayed in the 1964 movie, Seven Days in May, by Burt Lancaster). But when Walker faced cross-examining Senators, he would lose his temper, bluster, stutter, ask his lawyers for help, and generally put his foot in his mouth. One of the saddest episodes of those Hearings was having to endure Walker complain on and on about that OW reporter, Siegfried Naujocks.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Reports of those speeches say that Walker would get a standing ovation every 60 seconds on average -- and would enjoy a thunderous five-minute standing ovation at the end of his speeches. The press had portrayed Walker as a Media Wizard.

Isn't that contrary to the impression we are given earlier about Walker being a terrible public speaker, nervous twitches, not being able to put two coherent sentences together?

Everything depends upon what you research.

Going back as far as Walker's time as commanding officer of the so-called Devil's Brigade (First Special Services Force), soldiers under his command commented upon Walker's poor speaking voice and his excitability or other unattractive traits.

Walker replaced Brig. Gen. Robert T. Frederick as C.O. of the Devil's Brigade. Frederick described Walker as "an outstanding soldier" when Walker served under him.

However, during the 1960's, when Frederick was a private citizen, he attended several of Walker's speeches -- including a 1962 Walker speech at Stanford University. When interviewed by John Nadler (for his book, A Perfect Hell: The Forgotten Story of the Canadian Commandos of the Second World War) -- Frederick described the Walker speech "rambling on and on and on" and Frederick characterized Walker as "irrational".

Sgt. Bill Story who served under Walker in Germany, remembered Walker as someone “who under strain, spoke in the same high-pitched and garbled manner that years later he used before a Senate Investigative Committee”. Story also said Walker was “a dirty unshaven man in a G.I. raincoat and a pulled down knit cap who looked like a tramp and was an altogether miserable character.”

Another soldier (Gus Heilman) who served under Walker recounted an incident which should be considered because Paul Trejo is on record claiming (absurdly) that Walker was NOT a racist.

Heilman reported that when an African American Red Cross official was visiting and he entered the Officer’s Mess, “Walker sent over an orderly to tell him that he would not be allowed to eat there…that he must eat in the public rooms.”

I guess it does depend upon what you research and the opinion the researcher wanted to prove. Based on the statement (in blue below) which is within the same time frame apparently he was giving a 'brilliant' speech. So it seems as if "the opinion is within the eye of the beholder"

Between the months of November 1961 (when Walker resigned from the US Army) and April 1962 (when the Subcommittee was called to order) the resigned General Edwin Walker gave many speeches in Dallas and throughout the South -- and he attracted very large crowds.

Reports of those speeches say that Walker would get a standing ovation every 60 seconds on average -- and would enjoy a thunderous five-minute standing ovation at the end of his speeches.

[Brian Schmidt]

Another theory that will be explored by Dr. Caufield in his new book, according to Bill O'Neil, is that the 10 April 1963 shooting at General Walker by Lee Harvey Oswald was a Fake Assassination. This theory also has a long history. For example, in his 1987 book, There's a Fish in the Courthouse, Gary Wean tells of a December 1963 meeting he attended on the topic of the JFK assassination. Let's take a closer look at Gary Wean's story:

Gary Wean was a Ventura County cop and a friend of war-hero movie-star, Audie Murphy, and also a friend of Dallas Sheriff Bill Decker. The three men would lunch at the Los Angeles Police Academy whenever Bill Decker came to LA, as he did in early December 1963. Of course, everybody in those days talked about the JFK assassination.

Decker dominated that conversation when he announced that he knew, without a doubt, that LHO never fired the shots that killed JFK. Further, Decker knew somebody in Dallas who wanted to tell the truth to people unconnected to Dallas or Washington DC, and he invited them to a meeting in Ruidoso New Mexico the following week.

The man was Senator John Tower (though Gary withheld his last name until after Tower died). Tower told the group in New Mexico that LHO was a CIA asset reporting to Howard Hunt, and that LHO deliberately developed Communist credentials in order to infiltrate Red organizations.

Howard Hunt burned with rage against JFK for his role in the failed Bay of Pigs invasion, and had tried for years to manage the assassination of Fidel Castro, but kept missing. Hunt held LHO as an asset for this purpose. According to Tower, the Walker shooting was really a Fake Assassination plot, staged to give LHO additional Communist credentials.

Further, said Tower, Howard Hunt invented a Fake Assassination plot against JFK, and hired LHO for the job. The plan was to miss JFK, and then blame Fidel Castro for it, so that the USA would rise up and finally invade Cuba.

JFK was unaware of the plot, but some US Officials in MI, FBI, CIA and the Senate knew about it. Evidence would be pre-planned to point to Cuba, and LHO was only supposed to fire into the air to get the ball rolling (and was promised rich rewards by the CIA for his role). But the plan went awry, so LHO was left to take the full blame. Tower said that he knew that LHO would never be allowed to leave the DPD alive.

According to Gary Wean's fans, this 1987 book was based on a first-draft that appeared in 1974. That could explain why the idea of a Fake Assassination gone awry was first publicized in the September 1975 special issue of The Tattler. Later, the idea of a Fake Assassination gone awry was found in the JFK CT novel, Libra (1988) by Don DeLillo. Fourteen years later, a physicist named William J. Fritz, Jr. published his book, The Kennedy Mutiny (2002), and added his own twist.

Some problems I have with this:

Howard Hunt wasn't a household name in 1963. Did he specifically call out Hunt and was Hunt's identity known to those present at the meeting? Kind of coincidental that the story materialized in 1974. Also, if this were really how it happened, why wasn't it Hunt's "deathbed confession?"

[Kenneth Drew]

Another soldier (Gus Heilman) who served under Walker recounted an incident which should be considered because Paul Trejo is on record claiming (absurdly) that Walker was NOT a racist...

Once again you overreact and over-state your case, Ernie. What I said was that I scoured the speeches of Edwin Walker to find a clear instance of overt racial comment -- the sort which we found in the speeches of Governor George Wallace in the same period -- and I found none.

George Wallace even felt free to use the "N" word in public in 1960-1963 -- but not Edwin Walker.

There was one reporter who claimed he heard Walker say it once in Oklahoma -- but that is hearsay. It never appears in his official speeches -- even though Walker spoke mainly in the Southern States.

That's significant. Also, Walker refused to join the ANP and the KKK. That's also significant.

IMHO, the resigned General Walker wanted to be US President, and his model was the Democratic President Woodrow Wilson, who was President when Walker was a boy. Woodrow Wilson was famous in the South for keeping Princeton University an all-white campus.

This is one reason Walker chose to run as a Democrat --even though his main supporters in the Senate were Republicans. The Dixie Democrat was Walker's ideal.

I note also that Walker had plenty of opportunity to complain about Black Americans in the Korean War -- but he didn't.

Nevertheless, I always emphasized that Walker supported the Confederate Flag, and Dixie ideals, and that the Brown Decision was anathema to him. Yet Walker always framed that argument under the rubric of State's Rights. States should have the absolute Right whether to obey the Brown Decision to integrate public schools, according to Walker.

The Southern States didn't want to integrate -- and the Governors resisted it fiercely -- and only Federal Troops could force them to accept it. General Walker himself led Federal Troops to racially integrate Little Rock High School.

So -- no -- we're not looking at a career racist here -- we're looking at a political opportunist.

Edwin Walker used the race card to advance his political career -- and one is hard pressed to find overt racist slurs in his speeches. I never found one, though I searched high and low.

That said, one young politician (an elderly friend of FORUM member Robert Morrow) once said he met Edwin Walker after a speech in Mississippi (as I recall) and Walker warned him of a coming race riot in the USA that would overwhelm America until the American people begged the US Army to restore order. Then, said Walker, the US Army would initiate Martial Law and never again allow civilians to control the USA.

So, racial politics were a means to an end for Edwin Walker -- and not an end in themselves as they were for many of his followers and supporters. If you think I'm wrong, then kindly quote any public speech of Walker that sounds like George Wallace.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

"George Wallace even felt free to use the "N" word in public in 1960-1963 -- but not Edwin Walker." Just a comment. In that time frame, the word Negro was used to describe a race of people. It was in common use. it became bastardized to the "N" word at some point, after that time. Once it did, the only people that claim it as proper usage are Black people. I still think the "N" word shouldn't be used. George Wallace was not out of place at that time.

"The Dixie Democrats" were Republicans.

"Edwin Walker used the race card to advance his political career -- and one is hard pressed to find overt racist slurs in his speeches." much unlike current racists, especially such as Obama.

[Kenneth Drew]

Another soldier (Gus Heilman) who served under Walker recounted an incident which should be considered because Paul Trejo is on record claiming (absurdly) that Walker was NOT a racist...

Once again you overreact and over-state your case, Ernie. What I said was that I scoured the speeches of Edwin Walker to find a clear instance of overt racial comment -- the sort which we found in the speeches of Governor George Wallace in the same period -- and I found none.

George Wallace even felt free to use the "N" word in public in 1960-1963 -- but not Edwin Walker.

There was one reporter who claimed he heard Walker say it once in Oklahoma -- but that is hearsay. It never appears in his official speeches -- even though Walker spoke mainly in the Southern States.

That's significant. Also, Walker refused to join the ANP and the KKK. That's also significant.

IMHO, the resigned General Walker wanted to be US President, and his model was the Democratic President Woodrow Wilson, who was President when Walker was a boy. Woodrow Wilson was famous in the South for keeping Princeton University an all-white campus.

This is one reason Walker chose to run as a Democrat --even though his main supporters in the Senate were Republicans. The Dixie Democrat was Walker's ideal.

I note also that Walker had plenty of opportunity to complain about Black Americans in the Korean War -- but he didn't.

Nevertheless, I always emphasized that Walker supported the Confederate Flag, and Dixie ideals, and that the Brown Decision was anathema to him. Yet Walker always framed that argument through the rubric of State's Rights. States should have the absolute Right whether to obey the Brown Decision to integrate public schools, according to Walker.

The Southern States didn't want to integrate -- and the Governors resisted it fiercely -- and only Federal Troops could force them to accept it. General Walker himself led Federal Troops to racially integrate Little Rock High School.

So -- no -- we're not looking at a career racist here -- we're looking at a political opportunist.

Edwin Walker used the race card to advance his political career -- and one is hard pressed to find overt racist slurs in his speeches. I never found one, though I searched high and low.

That said, one young politician (an elderly friend of FORUM member Robert Morrow) once said he met Edwin Walker after a speech in Mississippi (as I recall) and Walker warned him of a coming race riot in the USA that would overwhelm America until the American people begged the US Army to restore order. Then, said Walker, the US Army would initiate Martial Law and never again allow civilians to control the USA.

So, racial politics were a means to an end for Edwin Walker -- and not an end in themselves as they were for many of his followers and supporters. If you think I'm wrong, then kindly quote any public speech of Walker that sounds like George Wallace.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

No Paul, you previously definitively stated your judgment that Walker was not a racist. Your original judgment was not based upon his speeches but, rather, because you told us that he never joined the KKK or similar groups.

You also wrote: "Walker naively thought that colored people should all know their place in White Society, and keep that place."

I have no clue what you meant by "naively". He was a racist for his entire life! And he believed "integration is illegal".

Maybe there are two different Paul Trejo's who contribute messages in EF?

I also asked you for AFFIRMATIVE evidence to demonstrate Walker's NON-racist character, but you produced NONE.

I repeat my previous challenge:

• Does ANYBODY know of ANY local, state, or national civil rights organization or civil rights leader which Walker endorsed or praised?
• Did ANY civil rights organization EVER invite Walker to speak before their conventions?
• Did ANY civil rights organization or publication endorse Walker in Texas when he ran for Governor?
• Did Walker EVER state (in his entire lifetime) anything POSITIVE about civil rights groups OR
• Did Walker EVER make ANY financial contribution to a civil rights organization in Dallas, in Texas, or nationally?
• Did Walker EVER affirm or defend statements made by J. Edgar Hoover or by the FBI regarding our civil rights movement?
• Did Walker EVER refute or challenge racist comments made by his associates and friends or any of their defense-of-white-privilege arguments?

"And he believed "integration is illegal"." just for the record Ernie, up until about 64, integration was illegal in many states. There was nothing wrong with persons that had lived that way all their lives believing that it would be better for themselves if it remained that way.

[David Andrews]

If a large conspiracy and larger cover-up were perpetrated against Kennedy with Walker at its head, one wants to know what political allies Walker retained in US military leadership after his resignation and throughout his post-military political activities.

This is something that is somewhat missing in the Caufield book, other than the Charles Willoughby association. Did Walker have political support in the military after his resignation?

[Kenneth Drew]

Another soldier (Gus Heilman) who served under Walker recounted an incident which should be considered because Paul Trejo is on record claiming (absurdly) that Walker was NOT a racist...

Once again you overreact and over-state your case, Ernie. What I said was that I scoured the speeches of Edwin Walker to find a clear instance of overt racial comment -- the sort which we found in the speeches of Governor George Wallace in the same period -- and I found none.

George Wallace even felt free to use the "N" word in public in 1960-1963 -- but not Edwin Walker.

There was one reporter who claimed he heard Walker say it once in Oklahoma -- but that is hearsay. It never appears in his official speeches -- even though Walker spoke mainly in the Southern States.

That's significant. Also, Walker refused to join the ANP and the KKK. That's also significant.

IMHO, the resigned General Walker wanted to be US President, and his model was the Democratic President Woodrow Wilson, who was President when Walker was a boy. Woodrow Wilson was famous in the South for keeping Princeton University an all-white campus.

This is one reason Walker chose to run as a Democrat --even though his main supporters in the Senate were Republicans. The Dixie Democrat was Walker's ideal.

I note also that Walker had plenty of opportunity to complain about Black Americans in the Korean War -- but he didn't.

Nevertheless, I always emphasized that Walker supported the Confederate Flag, and Dixie ideals, and that the Brown Decision was anathema to him. Yet Walker always framed that argument through the rubric of State's Rights. States should have the absolute Right whether to obey the Brown Decision to integrate public schools, according to Walker.

The Southern States didn't want to integrate -- and the Governors resisted it fiercely -- and only Federal Troops could force them to accept it. General Walker himself led Federal Troops to racially integrate Little Rock High School.

So -- no -- we're not looking at a career racist here -- we're looking at a political opportunist.

Edwin Walker used the race card to advance his political career -- and one is hard pressed to find overt racist slurs in his speeches. I never found one, though I searched high and low.

That said, one young politician (an elderly friend of FORUM member Robert Morrow) once said he met Edwin Walker after a speech in Mississippi (as I recall) and Walker warned him of a coming race riot in the USA that would overwhelm America until the American people begged the US Army to restore order. Then, said Walker, the US Army would initiate Martial Law and never again allow civilians to control the USA.

So, racial politics were a means to an end for Edwin Walker -- and not an end in themselves as they were for many of his followers and supporters. If you think I'm wrong, then kindly quote any public speech of Walker that sounds like George Wallace.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

No Paul, you previously definitively stated your judgment that Walker was not a racist. Your original judgment was not based upon his speeches but, rather, because you told us that he never joined the KKK or similar groups.

You also wrote: "Walker naively thought that colored people should all know their place in White Society, and keep that place."

I have no clue what you meant by "naively". He was a racist for his entire life! And he believed "integration is illegal".

Maybe there are two different Paul Trejo's who contribute messages in EF?

I also asked you for AFFIRMATIVE evidence to demonstrate Walker's NON-racist character, but you produced NONE.

I repeat my previous challenge:

• Does ANYBODY know of ANY local, state, or national civil rights organization or civil rights leader which Walker endorsed or praised?
• Did ANY civil rights organization EVER invite Walker to speak before their conventions?
• Did ANY civil rights organization or publication endorse Walker in Texas when he ran for Governor?
• Did Walker EVER state (in his entire lifetime) anything POSITIVE about civil rights groups OR
• Did Walker EVER make ANY financial contribution to a civil rights organization in Dallas, in Texas, or nationally?
• Did Walker EVER affirm or defend statements made by J. Edgar Hoover or by the FBI regarding our civil rights movement?
• Did Walker EVER refute or challenge racist comments made by his associates and friends or any of their defense-of-white-privilege arguments?

• "Did Walker EVER state (in his entire lifetime) anything POSITIVE about civil rights groups OR"

Strange how certain statements strike you at times. for example: I don't think there is anything POSITIVE that I have ever said or could ever say about a civil rights group.

[Kenneth Drew]

No Paul, you previously definitively stated your judgment that Walker was not a racist. Your original judgment was not based upon his speeches but, rather, because you told us that he never joined the KKK or similar groups.

You also wrote: "Walker naively thought that colored people should all know their place in White Society, and keep that place."

I have no clue what you meant by "naively". He was a racist for his entire life! And he believed "integration is illegal".

Maybe there are two different Paul Trejo's who contribute messages in EF?

I also asked you for AFFIRMATIVE evidence to demonstrate Walker's NON-racist character, but you produced NONE.

I repeat my previous challenge:

• Does ANYBODY know of ANY local, state, or national civil rights organization or civil rights leader which Walker endorsed or praised?
• Did ANY civil rights organization EVER invite Walker to speak before their conventions?
• Did ANY civil rights organization or publication endorse Walker in Texas when he ran for Governor?
• Did Walker EVER state (in his entire lifetime) anything POSITIVE about civil rights groups OR
• Did Walker EVER make ANY financial contribution to a civil rights organization in Dallas, in Texas, or nationally?
• Did Walker EVER affirm or defend statements made by J. Edgar Hoover or by the FBI regarding our civil rights movement?
• Did Walker EVER refute or challenge racist comments made by his associates and friends or any of their defense-of-white-privilege arguments?

Your grandstanding is becoming silly, Ernie. Nobody doubts that the resigned General Walker, the man who led the Ole Miss riots of 30 September 1962 would ever, ever, ever be a friend of the Civil Rights movement, or vice verse.

My point was simple -- Edwin Walker never used the "N" word. Edwin Walker wanted to be US President. Edwin Walker avoided intimate contact with the KKK and ANP -- precisely for that reason.

Edwin Walker deliberately preached to the White Citizens Councils all over the South -- yet never used the "N" word there.

Walker was "working his base" as they say in politics today. He did believe that colored people should stay in their place -- without power. That's racist in 2015, yet the truly outspoken racists in 1963 would use the "N" word in public speeches -- and would openly propose that all Black Americans should be shipped back to Africa. That's not a joke -- that's reality.

So -- one must know where to draw the line. Surely the NAACP always held Edwin Walker to be a nuisance. Yet George Wallace and the KKK were far more fearsome to them.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

If I understand your position regarding how to determine racist sentiments, it continues to be the following:

The most important criteria for making fair determinations are:

(1) does someone use the n-word in their writing or speeches? AND

(2) does someone belong to the KKK or ANP or similar explicitly racist organizations?

According to the Trejo Theory of Racism -- if the answer to questions 1 and 2 is "NO" -- then the subject under scrutiny CANNOT fairly be described as racist.

So I repeat my previous challenge to Paul:

I suggest giving a random scientific sample of black Americans copies of articles and speeches authored/published by Walker AND then also give them a list of the organizations which Walker helped to create or which he endorsed AND a list of organizations and publications which Walker associated himself with (as a speaker or contributor of articles in their publications).

THEN, let's ask 1000 black Americans what THEY think about Walker, i.e. ask THEM, "Was Edwin Walker a racist?" And let's see the result and compare that result to Paul's assurances.

"I suggest giving a random scientific sample of black Americans copies of articles and speeches authored/published by Walker" sounds fair. Now there are a couple of stipulations: First they all have to be from 1963 and have no knowledge of any event that has occurred since that time.

The problem with your thinking is that you are thinking in today's terms, while Paul is talking about what was happening in the early 60's and he's talking in terms of the realities in that time frame.

Under those conditions, I think most blacks would say he was an average American. I have seen nothing of Walker's activities that make me inclined to think he was any different than the average white American living in the southern US in the 50's and 60's. One thing you're missing Ernie, is that blacks didn't have a 'race card' to play back then. Most of the racism that exists today is only as a result of someone playing a race card. The 'race card' being a Democrat invention. The average white citizen in the US today is no more or no less racist than the average black citizen of the US today.

[Kenneth Drew]

Does anyone besides me think there is something particularly sleazy and offensive about Trejo's constant defense of Walker's character -- i.e. always trying to minimize the evidence of Walker's bigotry and characterizing Walker's behavior as nothing more than "working his base" as if there was nothing morally objectionable about what Walker said and believed during his entire lifetime?

As I wrote to Paul once before: racist sentiments can be expressed in many different virulent forms -- some of which can be "subtle" and some might use code words which targeted audiences certainly understand.

One of the things which most Citizens Councils attempted to do was dissociate themselves from the most extreme elements within anti-black and pro-segregation circles. This was supposed to represent the "kinder gentler" face of the "states rights movement" -- which was predicated upon a philosophical argument about the proper role of the federal government vs. state governments.

Significantly, this "kinder gentler" subterfuge did not impress or fool genuine conservatives like Sen. Barry Goldwater.

UNLIKE Walker:

Goldwater NEVER accepted a speaking invitation from ANY white supremacist organization

Goldwater NEVER endorsed a white supremacist organization or political leader

Goldwater NEVER accepted a request from an explicitly racist publication (such as Ned Touchstone's, The Councilor or Conde McGinley's Common Sense or Harry W. Pyle's Political Reporter) to write articles for their publications.

Goldwater NEVER sought or wanted the endorsement of groups like KKK or Americans For The Preservation of the White Race

INSTEAD -- Goldwater was a charter member of (and a financial contributor to) NAACP in Phoenix! [That is the type of AFFIRMATIVE evidence that is TOTALLY absent from Walker's record!]

Now, Paul,-- COMPARE THAT RECORD to Edwin Walker's and THEN tell us again (with a straight face) that Edwin Walker was NOT a racist or that he NEVER accepted arguments made by white supremacists, and he NEVER contributed articles to and letters-to-the-editor to racist newspapers, and he NEVER endorsed racist politicians or organizations.

MUCH MORE IMPORTANTLY:

WHERE IS THE AFFIRMATIVE EVIDENCE RE: WALKER WHICH WOULD JUSTIFY PAUL'S EVALUATION?

Contrary to what Paul wrote, there is nothing remarkable about Walker never using the n-word in public. As previously noted, he had political ambitions. He knew that any explicit endorsement of or expression of bigotry would DOOM his chances and such expressions would be constantly used against him by his critics -- including moderate conservatives like Sen. Goldwater or Sen. John Tower (Texas).

Nor does Walker not "joining" the KKK have much significance because as he certainly knew from his Army days forward -- the KKK was on the Attorney General's List of Subversive Organizations and had he become a KKK member, he would have been summarily kicked out of the Army and his political ambitions would be totally dead. In any event, Walker was a "state-of-mind" member of the KKK - which is just as valuable as an actual dues paying member.

Significantly, Walker endorsed and campaigned for Gov. Wallace in 1968. See: http://search.lib.vi...uva-lib:2220845

Significantly, Walker spoke at events which were sponsored by white supremacist organizations -- and many of them had KKK members or were endorsed by the KKK

From Paul's website: http://www.pet880.com/images/19650305_Walker_and_White_People.JPG

Significantly, Walker was friendly toward and often praised politicians who were endorsed by the KKK

PAUL: If you endorse and campaign for a bigot who DOES routinely use the n-word --- then what does that tell you about the values of the endorser?

"Technically speaking" and by every known metric for indisputable racist sentiments and values -- Edwin Walker WAS a racist.

Which is why he was so actively sought as a featured speaker by (and he accepted invitations from) explicitly racist organizations and that is also why the Imperial Wizard of the United Klans of America did not hesitate to offer Walker the job of Grand Dragon for the UKA in Texas---which Walker seriously considered accepting!

"Does anyone besides me think there is something particularly sleazy and offensive about Trejo's constant defense of Walker's character" Don't understand your point. I've not seen where Paul seems to be dealing with anything other than reality. As I said earlier, you seem to be concentrating in today's terms and not the reality that existed in the 60's. But, just for your 'argument', what difference does it make if Edwin Walker was a racist? There is/was likely thousands of those around or many different colors, so why single Walker out as somehow especially different? To my knowledge Walker is credited with absolutely nothing that was responsible for significant change to the world.

I find it offensive that you are trying to attach sleaze to Walker's activities when nothing proves that in reality.

[Ernie Lazar]

Steve Benson's reply:

"That is a ridiculous, unfounded, spurious and outlandish claim."

What the H_ll else would he say!?

Bill

Bill -- You obviously have no clue about Steve Benson's history. He has never spared his grandfather from any legitimate criticism. You can still find dozens of his articles online and his postings on Mormon history message boards in which he severely criticizes ETB. If Steve thought there was any possibility that ETB was involved, directly or indirectly, in any "plot" to murder anybody or even if he thought it was possible that ETB condoned something as serious as murder of a national politician -- he would have no problem whatsoever acknowledging the possibility. Furthermore, there is a greater issue involved with Steve because he has renounced his entire upbringing within (along with the values of) the LDS Church. If he thought the LDS Church or any of its senior officials were involved in or facilitated or approved any sort of murder plot, Steve would be the first and most vociferous voice to make the case!

In fact, often the children and grandchildren or other relatives of prominent individuals go to great lengths to dissociate themselves from their relatives because In many cases they are profoundly embarrassed by their own family history.

I have received numerous emails from such people. For example: Kenneth Goff's son contacted me about his father. A grand-nephew of Edgar Bundy did so. So did the daughter of JBS National Council member Stillwell J. Conner (who wrote a very critical book about her parents) and I have been contacted by other relatives of other JBS members who cannot understand why their relatives succumbed to JBS ideology.

This phenomenon (if that is the right word) is very common. Ronald Reagan's son (Ron) is an atheist and well-known liberal Obama supporter. Warren Buffet also supports Obama but his dad was a JBS member. And many children of Communist Party and Socialist Worker Party members later became hard-line anticommunist conservatives.

I respectfully suggest that if you want to be considered a fair-minded and thoughtful researcher that you should not automatically dismiss data which does not conform to your preferred theory.

[Ernie Lazar]

Right, I gather that reporter for OW was Siegfried Naujocks, who Walker had banned from access to the base, after he was caught snooping around command HQ's, looking for dirt on Ted.

Bill

Yes, that's right, Bill. In fact, the Senate Subcommittee Hearings on Military Preparedness held in April 1962, were sponsored by Senators John Stennis and Strom Thurmond, planned months in advance specifically for the purpose of letting General Edwin Walker explain how the Communists in Washington DC had "fired" another great General (just like the "definitely pink" President Harry Truman had "fired" General Douglas MacArthur in 1951).

In those hearings, the Senate had to endure long tirades about this Overseas Weekly reporter, Seigfried Naujocks, and just how much he had annoyed General Walker throughout 1960. It's now a matter of US History -- anybody can look up these public hearings and read all they desire to know about Seigfried Naujocks. It would be funny if it wasn't so pitiful.

What is equally amusing is that JFK and RFK actually feared General Walker's fame. Between the months of November 1961 (when Walker resigned from the US Army) and April 1962 (when the Subcommittee was called to order) the resigned General Edwin Walker gave many speeches in Dallas and throughout the South -- and he attracted very large crowds.

Reports of those speeches say that Walker would get a standing ovation every 60 seconds on average -- and would enjoy a thunderous five-minute standing ovation at the end of his speeches. The press had portrayed Walker as a Media Wizard. Newsweek magazine put Walker on their front cover in December 1961, with the caption, "Thunder on the Right!" Walker was compared with MacArthur by some, and with McCarthy by others. No wonder that JFK and RFK were concerned.

So great was the concern on the part of JFK and RFK that they insisted that the Senate Subcommittee hearings be held behind closed doors -- with no TV or Radio allowed. After the end of the Hearings, however, they deeply regretted their decision, because the resigned General Walker gave such a pitiful performance that JFK and RFK then wished that the American People had been permitted to witness the fiasco live and uncut.

The resigned General Walker could perform very well in front of crowds of True Believers. (This was portrayed in the 1964 movie, Seven Days in May, by Burt Lancaster). But when Walker faced cross-examining Senators, he would lose his temper, bluster, stutter, ask his lawyers for help, and generally put his foot in his mouth. One of the saddest episodes of those Hearings was having to endure Walker complain on and on about that OW reporter, Siegfried Naujocks.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Reports of those speeches say that Walker would get a standing ovation every 60 seconds on average -- and would enjoy a thunderous five-minute standing ovation at the end of his speeches. The press had portrayed Walker as a Media Wizard.

Isn't that contrary to the impression we are given earlier about Walker being a terrible public speaker, nervous twitches, not being able to put two coherent sentences together?

Everything depends upon what you research.

Going back as far as Walker's time as commanding officer of the so-called Devil's Brigade (First Special Services Force), soldiers under his command commented upon Walker's poor speaking voice and his excitability or other unattractive traits.

Walker replaced Brig. Gen. Robert T. Frederick as C.O. of the Devil's Brigade. Frederick described Walker as "an outstanding soldier" when Walker served under him.

However, during the 1960's, when Frederick was a private citizen, he attended several of Walker's speeches -- including a 1962 Walker speech at Stanford University. When interviewed by John Nadler (for his book, A Perfect Hell: The Forgotten Story of the Canadian Commandos of the Second World War) -- Frederick described the Walker speech "rambling on and on and on" and Frederick characterized Walker as "irrational".

Sgt. Bill Story who served under Walker in Germany, remembered Walker as someone “who under strain, spoke in the same high-pitched and garbled manner that years later he used before a Senate Investigative Committee”. Story also said Walker was “a dirty unshaven man in a G.I. raincoat and a pulled down knit cap who looked like a tramp and was an altogether miserable character.”

Another soldier (Gus Heilman) who served under Walker recounted an incident which should be considered because Paul Trejo is on record claiming (absurdly) that Walker was NOT a racist.

Heilman reported that when an African American Red Cross official was visiting and he entered the Officer’s Mess, “Walker sent over an orderly to tell him that he would not be allowed to eat there…that he must eat in the public rooms.”

I guess it does depend upon what you research and the opinion the researcher wanted to prove. Based on the statement (in blue below) which is within the same time frame apparently he was giving a 'brilliant' speech. So it seems as if "the opinion is within the eye of the beholder"

Between the months of November 1961 (when Walker resigned from the US Army) and April 1962 (when the Subcommittee was called to order) the resigned General Edwin Walker gave many speeches in Dallas and throughout the South -- and he attracted very large crowds.

Reports of those speeches say that Walker would get a standing ovation every 60 seconds on average -- and would enjoy a thunderous five-minute standing ovation at the end of his speeches.

Sorry -- but you are conflating two entirely different types of evidence. One group is merely attending one speech given by someone whom they may admire (for his political views) but they have no personal experience with the speaker. The other group worked under or with Walker for varying periods of time and they often had intimate knowledge about Walker's personality and behavior.

[Kenneth Drew]

Once again -- and for the final time, Ernie. Walker was the man who led the race riots at Ole Miss University on 30 September 1962.

Walker did that to prevent a Black American, James Meredith, from attending that college, though he was fully qualified.

Walker was an outspoken enemy of Civil Rights in the USA.

That said, Edwin Walker was NOT a Grand Dragon of the KKK. Edwin Walker was NOT a member of the America Nazi Party.

It is worthwhile to pinpoint exactly where Edwin Walker -- the outspoken enemy of Civil Rights in the USA -- truly stood on the wide political spectrum of US politics in 1963. That is, if we truly want to know US History.

Walker was on the Extreme Right. Yet his position was very specific. He was not a KKK member. He was not a Grand Dragon, and he turned that offer down (and you have no idea what went on in his mind when Walker turned it down, Ernie, so come off your high horse). He was not an American Nazi.

The question of the JFK assassination is about politics in 1963 -- not in 2015. In the context of 2015, yes, we all can say with clarity that Edwin Walker was a racist. In the year 1963, Edwin Walker was playing his cards to be nominated for US President (yes, this JBS buffoon truly was that arrogant).

If you can't see the nuance of that point, Ernie, then I'm finished with your posts on this thread. You're becoming a bore.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Paul, I've spent a few minutes telling Ernie where and why he's wrong on a few points, so let me do that for you also:

You said:

"Walker did that to prevent a Black American, James Meredith, from attending that college, though he was fully qualified."

No he wasn't . It was 1962. One qualification for U Mississippi that year was that you had to be white. Meredith did not meet that requirement. Now I'm not arguing 'right or wrong' just reality for 1962.

"Walker was an outspoken enemy of Civil Rights in the USA." No he wasn't. He was for all White people being entitled to all rights they were entitled to and all blacks being entitled to all rights they were entitled to. His argument was more along the theme of 'status quo'. Most people in the US held that opinion in 1962. Doesn't make it right or wrong, just reality.

"yes, we all can say with clarity that Edwin Walker was a racist." Not true. I sure wouldn't say that. Just because he was satisfied with society as it existed, doesn't mean it was for 'racial' reasons.

As you pointed out: "The question of the JFK assassination is about politics in 1963 -- not in 2015." It's a different world. Racism is much worse today than anything that was around in 1962-63,

[Ernie Lazar]

No Paul, you previously definitively stated your judgment that Walker was not a racist. Your original judgment was not based upon his speeches but, rather, because you told us that he never joined the KKK or similar groups.

You also wrote: "Walker naively thought that colored people should all know their place in White Society, and keep that place."

I have no clue what you meant by "naively". He was a racist for his entire life! And he believed "integration is illegal".

Maybe there are two different Paul Trejo's who contribute messages in EF?

I also asked you for AFFIRMATIVE evidence to demonstrate Walker's NON-racist character, but you produced NONE.

I repeat my previous challenge:

• Does ANYBODY know of ANY local, state, or national civil rights organization or civil rights leader which Walker endorsed or praised?
• Did ANY civil rights organization EVER invite Walker to speak before their conventions?
• Did ANY civil rights organization or publication endorse Walker in Texas when he ran for Governor?
• Did Walker EVER state (in his entire lifetime) anything POSITIVE about civil rights groups OR
• Did Walker EVER make ANY financial contribution to a civil rights organization in Dallas, in Texas, or nationally?
• Did Walker EVER affirm or defend statements made by J. Edgar Hoover or by the FBI regarding our civil rights movement?
• Did Walker EVER refute or challenge racist comments made by his associates and friends or any of their defense-of-white-privilege arguments?

Your grandstanding is becoming silly, Ernie. Nobody doubts that the resigned General Walker, the man who led the Ole Miss riots of 30 September 1962 would ever, ever, ever be a friend of the Civil Rights movement, or vice verse.

My point was simple -- Edwin Walker never used the "N" word. Edwin Walker wanted to be US President. Edwin Walker avoided intimate contact with the KKK and ANP -- precisely for that reason.

Edwin Walker deliberately preached to the White Citizens Councils all over the South -- yet never used the "N" word there.

Walker was "working his base" as they say in politics today. He did believe that colored people should stay in their place -- without power. That's racist in 2015, yet the truly outspoken racists in 1963 would use the "N" word in public speeches -- and would openly propose that all Black Americans should be shipped back to Africa. That's not a joke -- that's reality.

So -- one must know where to draw the line. Surely the NAACP always held Edwin Walker to be a nuisance. Yet George Wallace and the KKK were far more fearsome to them.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

If I understand your position regarding how to determine racist sentiments, it continues to be the following:

The most important criteria for making fair determinations are:

(1) does someone use the n-word in their writing or speeches? AND

(2) does someone belong to the KKK or ANP or similar explicitly racist organizations?

According to the Trejo Theory of Racism -- if the answer to questions 1 and 2 is "NO" -- then the subject under scrutiny CANNOT fairly be described as racist.

So I repeat my previous challenge to Paul:

I suggest giving a random scientific sample of black Americans copies of articles and speeches authored/published by Walker AND then also give them a list of the organizations which Walker helped to create or which he endorsed AND a list of organizations and publications which Walker associated himself with (as a speaker or contributor of articles in their publications).

THEN, let's ask 1000 black Americans what THEY think about Walker, i.e. ask THEM, "Was Edwin Walker a racist?" And let's see the result and compare that result to Paul's assurances.

"I suggest giving a random scientific sample of black Americans copies of articles and speeches authored/published by Walker" sounds fair. Now there are a couple of stipulations: First they all have to be from 1963 and have no knowledge of any event that has occurred since that time.

The problem with your thinking is that you are thinking in today's terms, while Paul is talking about what was happening in the early 60's and he's talking in terms of the realities in that time frame.

Under those conditions, I think most blacks would say he was an average American. I have seen nothing of Walker's activities that make me inclined to think he was any different than the average white American living in the southern US in the 50's and 60's. One thing you're missing Ernie, is that blacks didn't have a 'race card' to play back then. Most of the racism that exists today is only as a result of someone playing a race card. The 'race card' being a Democrat invention. The average white citizen in the US today is no more or no less racist than the average black citizen of the US today.

Your comments are preposterous. The "average American" did not travel around the country giving speeches to white supremacy organizations -- nor did the "average" public figure do so.

Nor did the "average American" work with white supremacists to create a right-wing paramilitary group designed to take the place of the Klan nor was the "average American" offered the position of Grand Dragon of the KKK in Texas.

Nor was the "average American" being reported to the Secret Service by the FBI on a form which checked off the category, “Subversives, ultrarightists, racists, and fascists who meet one or more of the following criteria” – and then marking box © which is: “Prior acts (including arrests or convictions) or conduct or statements indicating a propensity for violence and antipathy toward good order and government.”

Nor did the "average American" accept an invitation to speak to the Pasco County (FL) Federation For Constitutional Government – a front for the United Florida Ku Klux Klan of Dade County.

Nor did the "average American" submit letters-to-the-editor to Conde McGinley's anti-semitic and racist newspaper (Common Sense) which the House Committee on Un-American Activities described as "almost exclusively a vehicle for the exploitation of ignorance, prejudice and fear" and as "a clearinghouse for hate propaganda throughout the country."

Nor did the "average American" assert (as Walker did) that “I’ll bet you will find more good Americans in the Ku Klux Klan than in the Americans For Democratic Action.” -- particularly when you consider that the KKK was on the Attorney General's List of Subversive Organizations.

Nor did the "average American" make comments which caused J. Edgar Hoover to observe in a handwritten comment on a memo: "Walker is nuts!"

Edited August 30, 2015 by Ernie Lazar

[Ernie Lazar]

No Paul, you previously definitively stated your judgment that Walker was not a racist. Your original judgment was not based upon his speeches but, rather, because you told us that he never joined the KKK or similar groups.

You also wrote: "Walker naively thought that colored people should all know their place in White Society, and keep that place."

I have no clue what you meant by "naively". He was a racist for his entire life! And he believed "integration is illegal".

Maybe there are two different Paul Trejo's who contribute messages in EF?

I also asked you for AFFIRMATIVE evidence to demonstrate Walker's NON-racist character, but you produced NONE.

I repeat my previous challenge:

• Does ANYBODY know of ANY local, state, or national civil rights organization or civil rights leader which Walker endorsed or praised?
• Did ANY civil rights organization EVER invite Walker to speak before their conventions?
• Did ANY civil rights organization or publication endorse Walker in Texas when he ran for Governor?
• Did Walker EVER state (in his entire lifetime) anything POSITIVE about civil rights groups OR
• Did Walker EVER make ANY financial contribution to a civil rights organization in Dallas, in Texas, or nationally?
• Did Walker EVER affirm or defend statements made by J. Edgar Hoover or by the FBI regarding our civil rights movement?
• Did Walker EVER refute or challenge racist comments made by his associates and friends or any of their defense-of-white-privilege arguments?

Your grandstanding is becoming silly, Ernie. Nobody doubts that the resigned General Walker, the man who led the Ole Miss riots of 30 September 1962 would ever, ever, ever be a friend of the Civil Rights movement, or vice verse.

My point was simple -- Edwin Walker never used the "N" word. Edwin Walker wanted to be US President. Edwin Walker avoided intimate contact with the KKK and ANP -- precisely for that reason.

Edwin Walker deliberately preached to the White Citizens Councils all over the South -- yet never used the "N" word there.

Walker was "working his base" as they say in politics today. He did believe that colored people should stay in their place -- without power. That's racist in 2015, yet the truly outspoken racists in 1963 would use the "N" word in public speeches -- and would openly propose that all Black Americans should be shipped back to Africa. That's not a joke -- that's reality.

So -- one must know where to draw the line. Surely the NAACP always held Edwin Walker to be a nuisance. Yet George Wallace and the KKK were far more fearsome to them.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

If I understand your position regarding how to determine racist sentiments, it continues to be the following:

The most important criteria for making fair determinations are:

(1) does someone use the n-word in their writing or speeches? AND

(2) does someone belong to the KKK or ANP or similar explicitly racist organizations?

According to the Trejo Theory of Racism -- if the answer to questions 1 and 2 is "NO" -- then the subject under scrutiny CANNOT fairly be described as racist.

So I repeat my previous challenge to Paul:

I suggest giving a random scientific sample of black Americans copies of articles and speeches authored/published by Walker AND then also give them a list of the organizations which Walker helped to create or which he endorsed AND a list of organizations and publications which Walker associated himself with (as a speaker or contributor of articles in their publications).

THEN, let's ask 1000 black Americans what THEY think about Walker, i.e. ask THEM, "Was Edwin Walker a racist?" And let's see the result and compare that result to Paul's assurances.

"I suggest giving a random scientific sample of black Americans copies of articles and speeches authored/published by Walker" sounds fair. Now there are a couple of stipulations: First they all have to be from 1963 and have no knowledge of any event that has occurred since that time.

The problem with your thinking is that you are thinking in today's terms, while Paul is talking about what was happening in the early 60's and he's talking in terms of the realities in that time frame.

Under those conditions, I think most blacks would say he was an average American. I have seen nothing of Walker's activities that make me inclined to think he was any different than the average white American living in the southern US in the 50's and 60's. One thing you're missing Ernie, is that blacks didn't have a 'race card' to play back then. Most of the racism that exists today is only as a result of someone playing a race card. The 'race card' being a Democrat invention. The average white citizen in the US today is no more or no less racist than the average black citizen of the US today.

Wrong! Victims of racism or bigotry are much more qualified to determine and speak about the character and values of someone than non-victims.