New Book!

[Paul Trejo]

...So my point continues to be that is does NOT seem reasonable to propose that Edwin Walker had the skills to plan, execute and cover-up a massive criminal conspiracy and totally thwart every city, county, state, and federal law enforcement and military intelligence agency as well as voracious investigative journalists who were dealing with, arguably, the biggest story of the postwar period -- AND -- furthermore -- Walker was able to execute his superhuman plot with NOBODY contemporaneously being aware of it within the circles he operated AND NOBODY within his circle of extreme right soul-mates became aware of it after-the-fact...

Well, Ernie, I have always proposed that the resigned General Walker had nothing to do with the JFK Cover-up.

I always keep the JFK Assassination and the JFK Cover-up separate and isolated, in planning and execution.

Nor do I claim that General Walker "thwarted" the FBI. On the contrary. I have consistently said that J. Edgar Hoover figured out General Walker's plan only one hour after Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) was arrested.

As soon as LHO was arrested (2pm CST), officials in Dallas flooded the FBI with reports that LHO was: (1) a Communist; and (2) a director of the FPCC.

Only one hour later (3pm CST) J. Edgar Hoover telephoned RFK and announced that LHO was: (1) not a Communist; and (2) not a director of the FPCC.

In other words, the plot to kill JFK as planned by General Walker (in my theory) was totally busted in a single hour by Hoover. Hoover knew for a fact that the FPCC in New Orleans with which LHO was associated was a Fake. Hoover knew for a fact that the Communist Party card that LHO presented in Mexico City was a Fake. This is because Hoover had excellent FBI records.

In other words, if J. Edgarr Hoover had wanted to bust the resigned General Walker on 11/22/1963, he certainly could have done so.

iMHO, Hoover refused to do so, because he feared riots in the streets of the USA, from New York to California. The FBI could not handle these riots. Also, our Cold War was raging with the USSR, and the USSR would have exploited this fact internationally.

Instead of busting the Walker plotters, Hoover told all of his closest colleagues, including McGeorge Bundy, about the entire plot, and proposed his solution, namely, the "Lone Nut" theory of LHO. If LHO was a "Lone Nut," then there would be no reason for a National Panic.

General Walker was punished in other ways. For example, the $3 million pool of newspaper lawsuits Walker won as a result of the Ole Miss riots (which was still on appeal) was completely canceled by Earl Warren. Soon after that, the resigned General Walker was reduced to begging the US Army to restore his pension.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited September 15, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

...So my point continues to be that is does NOT seem reasonable to propose that Edwin Walker had the skills to plan, execute and cover-up a massive criminal conspiracy and totally thwart every city, county, state, and federal law enforcement and military intelligence agency as well as voracious investigative journalists who were dealing with, arguably, the biggest story of the postwar period -- AND -- furthermore -- Walker was able to execute his superhuman plot with NOBODY contemporaneously being aware of it within the circles he operated AND NOBODY within his circle of extreme right soul-mates became aware of it after-the-fact...

Well, Ernie, I have always proposed that the resigned General Walker had nothing to do with the JFK Cover-up.

I always keep the JFK Assassination and the JFK Cover-up separate and isolated, in planning and execution.

Nor do I claim that General Walker "thwarted" the FBI. On the contrary. I have consistently said that J. Edgar Hoover figured out General Walker's plan only one hour after Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) was arrested.

As soon as LHO was arrested (2pm CST), officials in Dallas flooded the FBI with reports that LHO was: (1) a Communist; and (2) a director of the FPCC.

Only one hour later (3pm CST) J. Edgar Hoover telephoned RFK and announced that LHO was: (1) not a Communist; and (2) not a director of the FPCC.

In other words, the plot to kill JFK as planned by General Walker (in my theory) was totally busted in a single hour by Hoover. Hoover knew for a fact that the FPCC in New Orleans with which LHO was associated was a Fake. Hoover knew for a fact that the Communist Party card that LHO presented in Mexico City was a Fake. This is because Hoover had excellent FBI records.

In other words, if J. Edgarr Hoover had wanted to bust the resigned General Walker on 11/22/1963, he certainly could have done so.

iMHO, Hoover refused to do so, because he feared riots in the streets of the USA, from New York to California. The FBI could not handle these riots. Also, our Cold War was raging with the USSR, and the USSR would have exploited this fact internationally.

Instead of busting the Walker plotters, Hoover told all of his closest colleagues, including McGeorge Bundy, about the entire plot, and proposed his solution, namely, the "Lone Nut" theory of LHO. If LHO was a "Lone Nut," then there would be no reason for a National Panic.

Walker was punished in other ways. For example, the $3 million pool of newspaper lawsuits Walker won as a result of the Ole Miss riots (which was still on appeal) was completely canceled by Earl Warren. Soon after that, the resigned General Walker was reduced to begging the US Army to restore his pension.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

I am using "cover-up" in the more generic sense that all criminals attempt to prevent law enforcement (as well as journalists or other interested parties) from knowing who (1) planned (2) financed and (3) executed the crime they committed.

You are using "cover-up" as part of your more general hypothesis concerning complicit individuals and institutions and organizations who knew the identity of the responsible parties but they created an elaborate false disinformation campaign to divert attention from the real culprits.

With respect to the FBI and Walker:

The problem with your hypothesis is that there is not one single document anywhere which anybody has found that lends support to your imaginative conclusion nor is there any document which indicates that Hoover refused to arrest Walker "because he feared riots in the streets of the USA, from New York to California."

And, incidentally, with respect to your comment that: "The FBI could not handle these riots" -- there is no reason for them to worry about that because they had no responsibility or authority for "handling" riots. That was entirely a local law enforcement matter.

The FBI was acutely aware about Walker's background, his beliefs, and his activities. Unlike most FBI files, Walker's HQ main file contains not one, but two separate "correlation summaries" pertaining to Walker. The FBI only created that type of summary when they had reason to believe that an individual might, at some point, be the subject of potential prosecution for some matter falling under FBI jurisdiction OR when the FBI wanted a quick-reference summary concerning all information existing about a specific person which was contained in numerous different files. [I have identified no less than 124 FBI files that contain memos pertaining to Walker.]

Significantly, nobody has ever found anything in any FBI file to support your contentions.

Edited September 14, 2015 by Ernie Lazar

[David Andrews]

(9) Further, Jack Ruby suggested that "Unfortunately for me, for me giving the people the opportunity to get in power, because of the act I committed, has put a lot of people in jeopardy with their lives." I interpret this to mean that by killing Lee Harvey Oswald, this allowed the John Birch Society and Edwin Walker to gain a foothold in Dallas, and therefore in US politics.

Paul,

It strikes me from your own remarks in this post that Walker and the JBS already had a "foothold" in Dallas. Elsewhere, Ruby on news cameras alluded to LBJ as having come into power nationally due to the assassination and, by implication, through Ruby's silencing of Oswald. So is there an LBJ-Walker axis, if only in Ruby's mind?

Yes, David, I believe that in the paranoid mind of Jack Ruby, there was a Walker-LBJ connection, since both men were Texas Gentiles.

Jim Root also emphasized the Jewish background of Jack Ruby's paranoid fantasies. Well, to be fair to Ruby, the 1960's were not very far removed from 1945 and the discovery of Auschwitz and other Nazi concentration camps and genocide sites. Jewish Americans in the 1950's and 1960's were understandably paranoid after those unspeakable revelations.

So, Jack Ruby was stunned when he noticed that the "Black-bordered Ad" in the Dallas Morning News (WELCOME, MR. KENNEDY, TO DALLAS) was signed with a Jewish name -- Bernard Weissman. In his Warren Commission testimony, Bernard Weissman did express his belief that Jack Ruby was stalking him at his post office box (which number was printed in the Black-bordered Ad) on the day after the JFK murder. Bernie was petrified by this stalker.

Jack Ruby feared above all that somebody would blame the Jews for killing JFK, and then that would start more concentration camps. He expressed this fear.

OK, since I've admitted that I believe Jack Ruby was to some degree paranoid (as Edwin Walker was to some degree paranoid) -- that must be turned back against my own theory that Jack Ruby named General Walker and the JBS as his prime suspects in the JFK murder. Was this only a paranoid fantasy?

I also admit at this point that I agree 100% with the account of Jack Ruby given by Seth Kantor in his book, Who Was Jack Ruby? (1978). In that book, Kantor uses his polite personal relationship with Jack Ruby to assert that: (1) Ruby had absolutely nothing to do with the JFK murder; and (2) Ruby assassinated Lee Harvey Oswald at the request of specific DPD officers -- in vengeance for the murder of J.D. Tippit, his good pal, who died at the hands of Oswald-the-cop-killer.

That means that if (and only if) Jack Ruby knew who killed JFK, he could only have received that data from those DPD officers who were inside the plot. In the forefront of this theory I name Roscoe White, whose wife once worked for Jack Ruby (and who admitted to his son Ricky White that he was a JFK shooter).

Finally, I believe that the only reason Jack Ruby would drop the name of LBJ in the context of JFK murder would be to take the heat off of the DPD policemen who were the truly guilty ones (by their own admission, e.g. Roscoe White) and who were also watching Jack Ruby hour after hour in his Dallas jail cell.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

There has been a trend in member posts recently to accept Seth Kantor's writing on Ruby at face value. My recollection is that in past threads (perhaps as far back as when I started reading in 2006), Kantor's veracity and allegiances were under question. I could be wrong, but the impression is strong with me.

Given the amount of Ruby phone contacts with organized crime figures before the assassination and Oswald's killing, it seems a mistake to write Ruby off as a nut, despite his emotional problems and verbal flailings in testimony. The idea that Ruby acted to avenge Tippet in order to curry favor with DPD seems like disinformation, and is unsupported by any of the various motives Ruby gave, including the Tom Howard-inspired "Spare Jackie" defense and the "Jew with guts" paranoia. These posturings may well have been parts of Ruby's psyche - but then why was he stalking Oswald at DPD during the arrest hours and pretending to be a reporter at the midnight press conference?

Are we not of the anti-lone-nut party?

Edited September 14, 2015 by David Andrews

[Paul Trejo]

There has been a trend in member posts recently to accept Seth Kantor's writing on Ruby at face value. My recollection is that in past threads (perhaps as far back as when I started reading in 2006), Kantor's veracity and allegiances were under question. I could be wrong, but the impression is strong with me.

Given the amount of Ruby phone contacts with organized crime figures before the assassination and Oswald's killing, it seems a mistake to write Ruby off as a nut, despite his emotional problems and verbal flailings in testimony. The idea that Ruby acted to avenge Tippet in order to curry favor with DPD seems like disinformation, and is unsupported by any of the various motives Ruby gave, including the Tom Howard-inspired "Spare Jackie" defense and the "Jew with guts" paranoia. These posturings may well have been parts of Ruby's psyche - but then why was he stalking Oswald at DPD during the arrest hours and pretending to be a reporter at the midnight press conference?

Are we not of the anti-lone-nut party?

Great question, David. Yes, your strong impression has deep roots. The Warren Commission concluded that Seth Kantor was a L-I-A-R.

Seth Kantor, a newspaper man in Dallas for most of his career, swore under oath that he saw Jack Ruby at Parkland Hospital when JFK was there, and that Jack Ruby asked Seth Kantor, 'Do you think I should close the Carousel Club this weekend out of respect for the JFK murder?' Seth Kantor replied, 'Yes, I think you should.' At that point, Jack Ruby quickly went back to the newspaper office to cancel his Weekend Advertisement, and put up a CLOSED notice at his striptease club.

However, the Warren Commission could not accept any timeline that portrayed Jack Ruby at Parkland Hospital at any time when JFK was there. So, that was that. Seth Kantor was branded a L-I-A-R.

The problem was that any Jack Ruby presence at Parkland Hospital began to smack of something other than a "Lone Nut" scenario for Lee Harvey Oswald. So, Seth Kantor was a threat to the "Lone Nut" theory. (For example, in 1968 Jim Garrison abused Kantor's testimony to claim that Jack Ruby was actually at Parkland Hospital for the purpose of planting the Magic Bullet CE-399.)

Now, Seth Kantor flatly disagreed with Jim Garrison. As implied by Seth Kantor, Jack Ruby was a Dallas pimp and drug pusher who would blackmail as many DPD police as he could, to ensure that he could operate illegal drug and vice operations in Dallas -- and so Jack Ruby habitually followed the DPD to every large gathering of DPD officers.

Two of Jack Ruby's Dallas operations were two high-class bordellos, which raked in high cash profits. Yet Jack Ruby was always strapped for cash. This makes sense, though, because Jack Ruby only operated these bordellos, and he did not own them, but somebody in the Mafia was reaping the profits.

So, yes, Jack Ruby was always making telephone calls to his Mafia contacts in Chicago, California, Nevada, Louisiana and so on. In the opinion of Seth Kantor, this doesn't mean that Mafia was part of the JFK murder, nor even part of the Lee Harvey Oswald murder. In the opinion of Seth Kantor, Jack Ruby knew absolutely nothing about the JFK murder: unless he heard it from the DPD.

Somebody might think this is "disinformation" because Kantor flatly contradicts Jim Garrison and almost every CIA-did-it theory. Yet Kantor was convinced -- based on his personal relationship with Jack Ruby over many years in Dallas -- that Jack Ruby killed Lee Harvey Oswald only to satisfy his pals in the Dallas Police Department.

Notice that the Warren Commission called Seth Kantor a L-I-A-R for completely different reasons than Jim Garrison did with his CIA-did-it theory. So Seth Kantor got the shaft from both the right and the left. (I strongly recommend Kantor's 1978 book, Who Was Jack Ruby?).

We are indeed members of the Anti-Lone-Nut party, David -- however there are at least four ways to interpret that data. The theory that Walker-did-it is clearly one Anti-Lone-Nut theory -- yet it remains far removed from the theory that the CIA-did-it, or that the Mafia-did-it, or that LBJ-did-it.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited September 14, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[David Andrews]

There has been a trend in member posts recently to accept Seth Kantor's writing on Ruby at face value. My recollection is that in past threads (perhaps as far back as when I started reading in 2006), Kantor's veracity and allegiances were under question. I could be wrong, but the impression is strong with me.

Given the amount of Ruby phone contacts with organized crime figures before the assassination and Oswald's killing, it seems a mistake to write Ruby off as a nut, despite his emotional problems and verbal flailings in testimony. The idea that Ruby acted to avenge Tippet in order to curry favor with DPD seems like disinformation, and is unsupported by any of the various motives Ruby gave, including the Tom Howard-inspired "Spare Jackie" defense and the "Jew with guts" paranoia. These posturings may well have been parts of Ruby's psyche - but then why was he stalking Oswald at DPD during the arrest hours and pretending to be a reporter at the midnight press conference?

Are we not of the anti-lone-nut party?

Great question, David. Yes, your strong impression has deep roots. The Warren Commission concluded that Seth Kantor was a L-I-A-R.

Seth Kantor, a newspaper man in Dallas for most of his career, swore under oath that he saw Jack Ruby at Parkland Hospital when JFK was there, and that Jack Ruby asked Seth Kantor, 'Do you think I should close the Carousel Club this weekend out of respect for the JFK murder?' Seth Kantor replied, 'Yes, I think you should.' At that point, Jack Ruby quickly went back to the newspaper office to cancel his Weekend Advertisement, and put up a CLOSED notice at his striptease club.

However, the Warren Commission could not accept any timeline that portrayed Jack Ruby at Parkland Hospital at any time when JFK was there. So, that was that. Seth Kantor was branded a L-I-A-R.

The problem was that any Jack Ruby presence at Parkland Hospital began to smack of something other than a "Lone Nut" scenario for Lee Harvey Oswald. So, Seth Kantor was a threat to the "Lone Nut" theory. (For example, in 1968 Jim Garrison in abused Kantor's testimony to claim that Jack Ruby was actually at Parkland Hospital for the purpose of planting the Magic Bullet CE-399.)

Now, Seth Kantor flatly disagreed with Jim Garrison. As implied by Seth Kantor, Jack Ruby was a Dallas pimp and drug pusher who would blackmail as many DPD police as he could, to ensure that he could operate illegal drug and vice operations in Dallas -- and so Jack Ruby habitually followed the DPD to every large gathering of DPD officers.

Two of Jack Ruby's Dallas operations were two high-class bordellos, which raked in high cash profits. Yet Jack Ruby was always strapped for cash. This makes sense, though, because although Jack Ruby only operated these bordellos, and he did not own them, but somebody in the Mafia was reaping the profits.

So, yes, Jack Ruby was always making telephone calls to his Mafia contacts in Chicago, California, Nevada, Louisiana and so on. In the opinion of Seth Kantor, this doesn't mean that Mafia was part of the JFK murder, nor even part of the Lee Harvey Oswald murder. In the opinion of Seth Kantor, Jack Ruby knew absolutely nothing about the JFK murder: unless he heard it from the DPD.

Somebody might think this is "disinformation" because Kantor flatly contradicts Jim Garrison and almost every CIA-did-it theory. Yet Kantor was convinced -- based on his personal relationship with Jack Ruby over many years in Dallas -- that Jack Ruby killed Lee Harvey Oswald merely to satisfy his pals in the Dallas Police Department.

Notice that the Warren Commission called Seth Kantor a L-I-A-R for completely different reasons than Jim Garrison did with his CIA-did-it theory. So Seth Kantor got the shaft from both the right and the left. (I strongly recommend Kantor's 1978 book, Who Was Jack Ruby?).

We are indeed members of the Anti-Lone-Nut party, David -- however there are at least four ways to interpret that data. The theory that Walker-did-it is clearly another Anti-Lone-Nut theory -- yet it remains far removed from the theory that the CIA-did-it, or that the Mafia-did-it, or that LBJ-did-it.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Again, discrediting of Kantor unrelated to the Warren Commission has been aired here in years past. Ruby had strong involvement with Cuban arms traffic, which suggests intel connections. If he acted to avenge Tippit, would he not have use it as a defense, leaving out any DPD influence?

My point is that your portrayal of Ruby as a lone nut detracts from other factors in Ruby's life and involvements. Can I get a witness? I'm shouting for it like Marvin Gaye.

Edited September 14, 2015 by David Andrews

[Paul Trejo]

Again, discrediting of Kantor unrelated to the Warren Commission has been aired here in years past. Ruby had strong involvement with Cuban arms traffic, which suggests intel connections. If he acted to avenge Tippit, would he not have use it as a defense, leaving out any DPD influence?

My point is that your portrayal of Ruby as a lone nut detracts from other factors in Ruby's life and involvements. Can I get a witness? I'm shouting for it like Marvin Gaye.

No doubt you can get a witness, David, from the many CIA-did-it theorists out there, however, their "witness" will probably only repeat theories that are up to fifty years old, and have got us nowhere.

Let's review the data. It is a fact that Ruby had strong involvement with Cuban arms traffic, however, the CIA-did-it theorists have long claimed that this suggests CIA connections. Notice how vague that is?

In fact, those who want to claim the CIA-did-it usually portray the following people as CIA "operatives:" Jack Ruby, Frank Sturgis, Gerry Patrick Hemming, Loran Hall, Johnny Roselli, John Martino, David Ferrie, Jack S. Martin, Fred Crisman, Thomas Beckham, Marita Lorentz, Carlos Marcello, Santos Trafficante, Sam Giancana and various Cuban nationals who hoped to topple Fidel Castro.

Take a step back, however, and review that list objectively -- and notice that not one single one of them was a CIA officer. Not one. Instead, every single one of them was a street thug, a criminal or a mercenary.

While I would never deny that the CIA used street thugs for various operations -- it is strictly incorrect to claim that every street thug who ever served some CIA officer was always working for the CIA no matter what else he or she did.

This is the weakest link in the Jim Garrison/Joan Mellon chain of evidence. Almost all their suspects are merely street thugs. Sadly, the CIA-did-it theories tend to be supported largely on this weak evidence.

(I openly admit that Howard Hunt and David Morales were two CIA officers who confessed to some role in the JFK murder. Hunt said his role was "minor". I believe him. Morales was a highly trained assassin, and I suspect he supported the Walker Dallas plot with extreme technical acumen. But IMHO the shooters were Radical Right Dallas cops, and not David Morales, who was possibly a technical advisor, and almost certainly in charge of the "Impersonation" of Lee Harvey Oswald in Mexico City.)

The reason that Jack Ruby didn't cite revenge for J.D. Tippit in his defense, was probably that the DPD instructed him to avoid that defense, because of the real circumstances of Tippit's death. Mike Robinson would testify that Roscoe White killed J.D. Tippit -- probably because Tippit was boasting uncontrollably that the head-shot to JFK was his own work. This could be confirmed by photographic evidence that Tippit was really Badge Man (as demonstrated by Don Phillips in 2009 in his book, A Deeper, Darker Truth: Tom Wilson's Journey into the Assassination of John F. Kennedy).

The "J.D. TIppit revenge" defense would have cast a floodlight on the relationship between Jack Ruby and the DPD -- and that would have cracked the JFK case wide open in 1964. But that would have also started riots in the streets from New York to California.

All of the movements of Jack Ruby -- including his gun-running for Cuban "freedom fighters" after the fall of Cuba -- were always in the service of the Mafia. Even if the CIA sometimes funded those operations, Jack Ruby always did those deeds for the Mafia -- only the Mafia.

Your call for a witness is a good one, David. I would like to see what others continue to claim about Jack Ruby, and what their evidence might be. I've read about this topic as much as most folks here, and I see extremely weak evidence linking Jack Ruby to the CIA.

Jim Garrison was simply wrong about it.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited September 15, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

I recently sent NARA an exhaustive list of deceased persons whom were connected, in some way, to Edwin Walker. However, when I finished my research, I could not find any definitive proof that the following individuals were deceased -- and I know some are probably still living.

If anybody here has specific birth/death info on any of these persons - please let me know:

Name

Birthdate (if known) or other info

Bradford John Angers

Circa 1930

William B. Burley III

Jerry Des Marais

Circa 1928

Robert Edward Hatfield

Circa 1932

Frank Boaz McGehee

12-08-28

Michael Ralph Paine

06-25-28

Ruth Hyde Paine

Aka Ruth Avery Hyde

09-03-32 274-28-6302

Larrie Henry Schmidt

12-29-36

Richard G. Van Buskirk

Bernard W. Weissman

11-01-37

Edited September 14, 2015 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

I recently sent NARA an exhaustive list of deceased persons whom were connected, in some way, to Edwin Walker. However, when I finished my research, I could not find any definitive proof that the following individuals were deceased -- and I know some are probably still living.

If anybody here has specific birth/death info on any of these persons - please let me know:

Name

Birthdate (if known) or other info

Bradford John Angers

Circa 1930

William B. Burley III

Jerry Des Marais

Circa 1928

Robert Edward Hatfield

Circa 1932

Frank Boaz McGehee

12-08-28

Michael Ralph Paine

06-25-28

Ruth Hyde Paine

Aka Ruth Avery Hyde

09-03-32 274-28-6302

Larrie Henry Schmidt

12-29-36

Richard G. Van Buskirk

Bernard W. Weissman

11-01-37

The following people are still alive: Ruth Paine, Michael Paine, Larrie Schmidt and Bernard Weissman.

IMHO they have more first-hand information about the participation of General Walker in the JFK assassination than anybody in the world.

Larrie Schmidt's data is, IMHO, entirely bound up with his brother, Robbie Schmidt, who lived with General Walker in Dallas in 1963 -- but he refused to tell me anything about his late brother, out of respect for his memory.

Bernard Weissman seems to be hiding from the world.

Ruth Paine seems willing to talk to those few JFK researchers who can restrain themselves from calling her a L-I-A-R with regard to the "Walker Letter" which she produced as evidence to the Warren Commission. I believe that Ruth Paine told the truth, and I'd love to interview her.

Michael Paine seems to be hiding from the world.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited September 14, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

I recently came across the following message posted in a Google discussion group (in 2013) by someone using the screen name "Rusty Harrison".

Of course, I have no clue if any of this is accurate -- but I thought I would share it for whatever it is worth:

Hello I'm new to this forum but I do know a lot more about the shot fired at

Gen Walker than most people. You see my best friend for the last 32 years

was Robert Surrey’s eldest son, David Surrey. Many years ago he shared

with me his knowledge of the events leading up to Kennedy’s assassination.

David died in August of COPD in Farmers Branch. Last year I videotaped

David telling his story about his childhood experiences during this time.

This spring David’s brother Bill came and paid David one last visit before

his death. I videotaped Bill concerning the events he remembered also.

As you know, Robert Surrey was the PR man for Gen. Edwin Walker. When Mr.

Surrey testified before the Warren Commission, he lied about being at home

when the shot was fired at Gen Walker’s house April 10, 1963. The

entire Surrey family was at Walker’s house that evening stuffing

envelopes with campaign material. The kids were paid for each envelope

that they stuffed. When they had finished, Roberts wife Mary Kessler, took

her two daughters Karen and Julie along with Roberts two youngest sons

Bill and Richard back home, leaving Robert and David there at Walker’s

house. Robert and David Surrey were present when the shot was fired at

Walker. Mary received a call from Robert shortly after they arrived home

concerning the shooting and Robert had them all come back over to the

Walker house. Once it was clear the shooting had stopped, Robert took his

son David out with him to look for whoever did the shooting (that is what

he told David). A few blocks away Robert pulled his car over (a 1961 Ford

Sunliner white with a black top) and parked behind another car with 2 men

in it. His Dad got out of the car and walked up to the car in front of

them. David heard them talking about if they got him. At first David

thought they were talking about the shooter. He later realized they were

talking about Gen Walker

Robert Surrey always took one (and only one) of his sons with him when he

slipped into the Johnson Printing press room at night or to visit Lee H

Oswald among other things. He did that as a cover for his activities.

David went to Oswald house on at least two occasion with his father. One

was at the Neely house in Oak Cliff and the other time was at the Paine

house in Irving.

In the fall of 1963 David went out with his Dad to shoot rifles out in the

country. This was along Spring Creek in Richardson where the Owens meat

packing plant is. David was introduced to Oswald at that time and they

fired both Robert’s and Lee’s guns that day. But they did something

unusual for that period in time, they picked up ALL shell casings. In

1963 no one picked up shell casings unless they were going to be reloaded,

which they didn’t do.

Bill also went out with his Dad for target practice. Being younger than

David he didn't remember who the other man(men?) were. And they too

picked up all of the shell casings. But, Bill did remember meeting Oswald

at a house in Louisiana with his parents.

So Robert Surrey, the man who printed the “Wanted for Treason”

handbill which was handed out by H L Hunt (amongst others) downtown was

also out in the woods shooting high powered rifles with Lee Harvey Oswald

leading up to Kennedy’s assassination. David was with his Dad when he

printed the "Wanted For Treason" handbill.

There is a very good chance then that the men that Robert was talking to

that night were the Schmidt brothers mentioned in Dick Russell's book

Edited September 15, 2015 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

I recently came across the following message posted in a Google discussion group (in 2013) by someone using the screen name "Rusty Harrison".

Of course, I have no clue if any of this is accurate -- but I thought I would share it for whatever it is worth:

Hello I'm new to this forum but I do know a lot more about the shot fired at Gen Walker than most people. You see my best friend for the last 32 years was Robert Surrey’s eldest son, David Surrey. Many years ago he shared with me his knowledge of the events leading up to Kennedy’s assassination. David died in August of COPD in Farmers Branch. Last year I videotaped David telling his story about his childhood experiences during this time. This spring David’s brother Bill came and paid David one last visit before his death. I videotaped Bill concerning the events he remembered also.

As you know, Robert Surrey was the PR man for Gen. Edwin Walker. When Mr.Surrey testified before the Warren Commission, he lied about being at home when the shot was fired at Gen Walker’s house April 10, 1963. The entire Surrey family was at Walker’s house that evening stuffing envelopes with campaign material. The kids were paid for each envelope that they stuffed. When they had finished, Roberts wife Mary Kessler, took her two daughters Karen and Julie along with Roberts two youngest sons Bill and Richard back home, leaving Robert and David there at Walker’s house. Robert and David Surrey were present when the shot was fired at Walker. Mary received a call from Robert shortly after they arrived home concerning the shooting and Robert had them all come back over to the Walker house. Once it was clear the shooting had stopped, Robert took his son David out with him to look for whoever did the shooting (that is what he told David). A few blocks away Robert pulled his car over (a 1961 Ford Sun-liner white with a black top) and parked behind another car with 2 men in it. His Dad got out of the car and walked up to the car in front of them. David heard them talking about if they got him. At first David thought they were talking about the shooter. He later realized they were talking about Gen Walker

Robert Surrey always took one (and only one) of his sons with him when he slipped into the Johnson Printing press room at night or to visit Lee H Oswald among other things. He did that as a cover for his activities. David went to Oswald house on at least two occasion with his father. One was at the Neely house in Oak Cliff and the other time was at the Paine house in Irving.

In the fall of 1963 David went out with his Dad to shoot rifles out in the country. This was along Spring Creek in Richardson where the Owens meat packing plant is. David was introduced to Oswald at that time and they fired both Robert’s and Lee’s guns that day. But they did something unusual for that period in time, they picked up ALL shell casings. In 1963 no one picked up shell casings unless they were going to be reloaded,which they didn’t do.

Bill also went out with his Dad for target practice. Being younger than David he didn't remember who the other man(men?) were. And they too picked up all of the shell casings. But, Bill did remember meeting Oswald at a house in Louisiana with his parents.

So Robert Surrey, the man who printed the “Wanted for Treason” handbill which was handed out by H L Hunt (amongst others) downtown was also out in the woods shooting high powered rifles with Lee Harvey Oswald leading up to Kennedy’s assassination. David was with his Dad when he printed the "Wanted For Treason" handbill.

There is a very good chance then that the men that Robert was talking to that night were the Schmidt brothers mentioned in Dick Russell's book

This is extremely interesting material in the context of the new book by Jeff Caufield, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: The Extensive New Evidence ... New Evidence of a Radical-Right Conspiracy. The story in this form is brand new to me -- I've never seen it in print before today.

I'm interested in a Unified Field Theory of the JFK assassination -- i.e. all of the eye-witness testimony that can be confirmed, without exception. If (and only if) this story by David Surrey, son of Robert Allen Surrey, can be confirmed, then we have a further confirmation of the theory of Jeff Caufield, namely, that the Walker shooting was a Fake Assassination attempt, intended to boost General Walker in public opinion.

This was also the opinion of William J. Fritz, Jr., in his book, The Kennedy Mutiny (2002), and also of novelist Don DeLillo in his novel, Libra, 1988.

Now, if (and only if) this story by David Surrey is true, then even this does not necessarily mean that the "Walker letter" as produced by Ruth Paine was a deliberate lie, but rather, it still remains possible (and even probable) that Lee Harvey Oswald continued to lie to Marina Oswald, and left her this misleading note as he went about to enact his role in General Walker's conspiracy.

By the way, in The Kennedy Mutiny we read that General Walker chose this opportunity to make a "dry run" of the Fake Assassination attempt on JFK in a major US city later in the year. This scenario supports Gary Wean's theory of the JFK murder beginning as a Fake Assassination attempt.

(We also saw this same theory in the September 1975 Tattler Investigative Special issue on the JFK assassination. http://www.pet880.com/images/19750909_Loren_Hall_01.JPG )

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited September 15, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[William O'Neil]

Interesting! I recall Hemming saying that Walker was not alone that night as well. He never named that person, wonder if he was referring to Surrey. If this is true, it has huge implications. It also means Walker and Surrey lied about that night.But verifying any of this will be difficult at best.

Bill

[Paul Trejo]

Interesting! I recall Hemming saying that Walker was not alone that night as well. He never named that person, wonder if he was referring to Surrey. If this is true, it has huge implications. It also means Walker and Surrey lied about that night.But verifying any of this will be difficult at best.

Bill

Right, Bill -- the implications are huge. It also suggests that Hemming and Surrey both knew the same facts -- suggesting a relationship between Gerry Patrick Hemming and Robert Allen Surrey!

Here again we encounter a new dimension of the Radical Right in the context of the JFK murder.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

[David Andrews]

"If (and only if) this story by David Surrey, son of Robert Allen Surrey, can be confirmed, then we have a further confirmation of the theory of Jeff Caufield, namely, that the Walker shooting was a Fake Assassination attempt, intended to boost General Walker in public opinion.

"This was also the opinion of William J. Fritz, Jr., in his book, The Kennedy Mutiny (2002), and also of novelist Don DeLillo in his novel, Libra, 1988."


False. DeLillo has Oswald and a fictional character shoot at Walker for real. I am unsure myself if Oswald shot at Walker, but I disagree with the motives DeLillo ascribes to Oswald, which are of the "Hunter of Fascists" variety.

Edited September 16, 2015 by David Andrews

[William O'Neil]

An excerpt from General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: The Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy: available at JeffreyCaufield.com and everywhere.

The Schmidt Brothers, Oswald, and the Walker Shooting Incident

On December 29, 1977, Earl Golz, the reporter for the Dallas Morning News who covered Kennedy’s assassination from the beginning, wrote to General Walker in response to materials that Walker had sent to Golz and Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill, perhaps relative to the HSCA investigation that began in 1976 and concluded in 1978. (Although, O’Neill did not serve on the HSCA.) The letter is as follows:

Dear Mr. Walker,

I received a copy of the material you sent to Tip O’Neill and others. It may open some eyes and I hope it does. I am especially interested in Marina’s message on the back of the photograph which you say was dated five days before the shot fired at you by her husband.

A friend of Larry [sic] Schmidt’s recently told me that Larry and his brother, who he says was then associated with you, had accompanied Oswald in the brother’s car to the scene of the shooting. Larry Schmidt supposedly has protected himself since that time by placing written accounts of this story in safe deposit boxes around the country.

I also wonder if you know there is any truth to the story that Delessips [sic] Morrison had a hand in forcing you to retire as an army general in West Germany. If his name rings a bell as an agent of JFK in such a mission, this may open some new doors. Morrison was reactivated into the military as a favor to JFK, I was told, in an effort to get you in the Blue Book controversy. He was killed in an airplane explosion over Mexico about four months after the assassination.

Yours Truly, Earl Golz

[Paul Trejo]

"If (and only if) this story by David Surrey, son of Robert Allen Surrey, can be confirmed, then we have a further confirmation of the theory of Jeff Caufield, namely, that the Walker shooting was a Fake Assassination attempt, intended to boost General Walker in public opinion.

"This was also the opinion of William J. Fritz, Jr., in his book, The Kennedy Mutiny (2002), and also of novelist Don DeLillo in his novel, Libra, 1988."

False. DeLillo has Oswald and a fictional character shoot at Walker for real. I am unsure myself if Oswald shot at Walker, but I disagree with the motives DeLillo ascribes to Oswald, which are of the "Hunter of Fascists" variety.

Well, you're right, David. I keep getting Don DeLillo and Will Fritz mixed up in my memory. In Will Fritz's version, General Walker converted Lee Harvey Oswald as one of his followers in early 1963.

Looking back, in Don DeLillo's version, Guy Banister and David Ferrie were the evil geniuses who manipulated Lee Harvey Oswald. For Don DeLillo, "Bobby Dupard" was the black ex-Marine who knew Oswald in Atsugi, and was now living with his sister in one of the projects in Ft. Worth. They met again in a laundromat and talked about politics for a few weeks. Then, in November 1962 they decided to kill Edwin Walker.

This would have been only a month or so after the Ole Miss riots of 1962, and Walker's exit from the Springfield Mental Hospital in early October 1962. Nobody else was involved -- just Oswald and "Bobby". Oswald bought the weapons over the mail, and spied on Walker's home in Dallas, and had Marina take two poses of him wearing black and holding his weapons and leftist newspapers.

After George and Jeanne figured out that Oswald was Walker's shooter and were preparing to move to Haiti, DeLillo portrays Oswald in a goodbye party, handing George his "Hunter of Fascists, Ha Ha Ha" Backyard Photograph.

The JFK Fake Assassination plot in DeLillo's Libra wasn't Walker's plot (as it was in Will Fritz) but a Banister-Ferrie plot.

I note here, however, that DeLillo agrees with Ron Lewis (Flashback: The Untold Story of Lee Harvey Oswald, 1992) that Banister and Ferrie somehow found out that Oswald was Walker's shooter, and used this fact to help manipulate Oswald.

Granted, DeLillo's book is fictional -- but he ties together so many historical facts from the 1962-1963 period that the plausibility of his account is undeniable.

All bets are off, however, if David Surrey's story can be verified -- namely -- that Robert Allen Surrey had a personal relationship with Lee Harvey Oswald, and they went to a shooting range together, along with David, and if young David Surrey actually picked up the empty shells from Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited September 16, 2015 by Paul Trejo