New Book!

[Ernie Lazar]

I have almost finished reading the first chapter of Dr. Caufield's book. Although I have enjoyed reading it and I admire Caufield for the massive amount of research he has done there are factual inaccuracies and other deficiencies which need to be recognized.

When this thread was created, I notified about a dozen people about the September publication of Caufield's book. The individuals I notified fall into the following categories:

1. intellectually curious ordinary folks (whom I know have a general interest in the persons and groups discussed in this book--even if they have no particular familiarity with JFK assassination literature)

2. academics (including several historians and current doctoral dissertation students who have done extensive research into the Birch Society or the general radical right in the U.S.)

3. individuals who have direct personal and first-hand knowledge about one or more of the persons or organizations discussed in the book

It occurs to me that Caufield's book will probably be received differently by each category because they each come to this subject matter with different degrees of factual knowledge and different standards for what constitutes credible factual evidence. Category #2 and #3 readers probably will be more likely to recognize obvious errors in Caufield's book than category #1 folks.

With that thought in mind, I want to briefly mention a few things I noticed. Let me begin by stating that I am not, at this time, going to address the macro-argument presented by Caufield. What I am suggesting, however, is that extreme caution is required before believing everything presented in this book because some bold declarative statements or assertions made by Dr. Caufield are totally false or misleading. At this point, since I have only read a small portion of Caufield's book, I do not yet know how he intends to utilize all of the data he is presenting, i.e. how he will combine individual supposed factoids to make what he considers to be a plausible conclusion.

(1) Page 16: Former FBI Special Agent Dan Smoot

Dr. Caufield describes Smoot as "a former FBI man and an assistant to J. Edgar Hoover in the early 1950s."

Smoot was never "an assistant to J. Edgar Hoover". In April 1951, FBI Inspector Gerald C. Gearty sent a blistering 60-page report to J. Edgar Hoover regarding Smoot. Gearty recommended 4 actions be taken:

1. That he be transferred to another division
2. That he be placed on probation
3. That he be suspended for 10 days without pay.
4. That he receive a severe letter of censure."
[see HQ 67-263689, #144; 5/4/51 memo from H.L. Edwards to Mr. Glavin]

It is very possible that Dr. Caufield saw a 1950's issue of Dan Smoot Report in which Smoot described himself as having been an "Administrative Assistant to J. Edgar Hoover." I copy below the FBI memo about this matter.

It should be kept in mind while reading this memo that there were only two FBI Special Agents whose post-FBI use of this descriptive phrase became an issue – Dan Smoot and W. Cleon Skousen.

The memo is captioned: "Former Special Agent Howard D. Smoot: Use of Title Administrative Assistant"

"Purpose: To report results of a review of the personnel file of captioned individual and references in Bureau files to determine if former SA Howard D. Smoot, better known as Dan Smoot, was ever referred to in Bureau correspondence or biographical sketches as an Administrative Assistant to the Director.

"Former SA Howard D. Smoot entered on duty with the Bureau on March 23, 1942 and resigned on 6-15-51 while assigned to the Dallas office. He had worked in the Portland, San Francisco, Dallas and Cleveland offices prior to being transferred to the Bureau (HQ) in October 1946. After serving a short time in the Investigative Division, he was transferred on 2-15-47 to the Crime Records Section where he remained until transferred to Dallas for health reasons in November 1948. On May 15, 1951, Smoot was censured, placed on probation and transferred to the Savannah office because of his failure to inform the Bureau earlier of information in his possession concerning misconduct of others in the Dallas office, and for making unfounded charges against his SAC. Thereafter, he resigned."

"In June 1951, Smoot began working for `Facts Forum', a group financed and backed by the millionaire oil man H.L. Hunt, owner and operator of the Hunt Oil Company. Smoot resigned from 'Facts Forum' in July 1955 and thereafter operated privately as a commentator and publisher of a newssheet entitled 'The Dan Smoot Report'. This report was the subject of SAC Letter 59-17 (F) dated 3-24-59 which identified Smoot as a former Agent and instructed that inquiries concerning him and his paper be handled in a most circumspect manner."

"A thorough review of the three-volume personnel file of Smoot (67-263689) fails to reflect any reference to him as an 'Administrative Assistant' or an 'Administrative Assistant to the Director'. This title did not appear in any letter of appointment, transfer, censure or probation. No communication concerning speeches given by Smoot or any other official matter concerning him contained either of these titles. After Smoot left the Bureau, he was publicly described in newspaper articles as an Administrative Assistant to the Director. Files indicate he has continued to use this designation."

"Review of Bureau files: The specific matter concerning the use of the title 'Administrative Assistant' by Smoot was the subject of a memorandum dated 9-13-61 from Mr. Callahan to Mr. Mohr (original attached). It points out that the Bureau has never had an official position classification for SA's of either 'Administrative Assistant' or 'Administrative Assistant to the Director'. There were times in the late 1930's when Agent Supervisors at the Seat of Government were referred to as Administrative Assistants in outgoing correspondence in connection with speeches. A SAC Letter dated 7-9-47 advised that there was no such title for Agents as 'Administrative Assistant to the Director' or 'Administrative Assistant' and that such a title should never be used in referring to representatives of the Bureau." …

"Recommendation: For information. I recommend we continue the same policy as set forth above. It appears obvious that Smoot is attempting to use his prior service with the FBI as much as possible. He is a professional 'anticommunist' who is strictly out for money." … [HQ 62-102576, #125; 11/8/62 memo from D.C. Morrell to Mr. DeLoach; my emphasis in red type.]

In July 1962, Smoot replied to an inquiry by an Indiana resident concerning his FBI career. The inquiry asked Smoot about rumors that Dan had retired from the FBI due to a "nervous condition" according to an alleged report by a former FBI employee.

In his reply, Smoot said that other rumors had been circulated concerning his status including one that he was fired for stealing. Dan then wrote:

"All the rumors, including the one you heard, are false. After 9 years and three months in the FBI, I was still an Agent in good standing when I resigned voluntarily in June, 1951—under no kind of threat or pressure to do so. I resigned because I wanted to change my occupation and settle my family permanently in Dallas." [HQ 62-102576, #110; 7/10/62 letter by Smoot in reply to inquiry]

As demonstrated from the data summarized above, Dan lied by referring to himself as "an Agent in good standing" when he resigned.

To re-capitulate:

1. Dan received a censure letter from Hoover

2. Dan received a Special Efficiency Report which contained derogatory statements about his performance and which specifically told him he was on probation --- and Dan initialed the document to confirm he received it

3. In Smoot's 1994 letter to me about this matter, Dan admitted that even he assumed his transfer to Savannah was a "disciplinary transfer".

Dr. Caufield also describes Smoot on page 17 as "a prominent member of the John Birch Society, the Liberty Lobby and the Minutemen."

* Smoot never joined the JBS as a member. He did, however, endorse the Society AND

* From the final issue of the Dan Smoot Report dated March 1, 1971

“But now I am forced to make a change--or I will be forced to quit. The unrelenting weekly deadlines have taken their toll. I have been plagued with bad health of late.”

Robert Welch, head of the John Birch Society, has generously offered to incorporate The Dan Smoot Report into The Review of the News, [published by Welch] and, with that splendid weekly magazine, to fulfill my obligations to you whose subscriptions have not expired.

After rest and recuperation, I will resume writing and speaking as much as possible, but without the weekly deadlines. As frequently as I am able, I will write a Dan Smoot Report. It will be published as a distinct section of The Review of the News. So, you who want my writing will get it--plus a great deal more.

I hope you will give The Review of the News the same loyalty and support you have given my Report. Thanks, and may God bless you.”

* I have never seen anything which establishes that Smoot was a member of the Minutemen and, significantly, Dr. Caufield does not footnote this assertion.

Incidentally, during his FBI career, Smoot was censured 3 times for performance deficiencies.

(2) Page 18: Former FBI Special Agent George W. Wackenhut

Dr. Caufield describes Wackenhut as "a high-ranking member of the FBI's Domestic Intelligence Unit..."

Wackenhut ...

(-a-) never worked in the Domestic Intelligence Unit (aka Division) and

(-b-) nor was he ever a "high-ranking" FBI employee at any time during his career

(-c-) his FBI personnel file indicates that his entire career was spent working on criminal cases

(d) Wackenhut entered the FBI on 2/12/51 -- when he started his New Agent Training Class.

(e) After completing his standard New Agent training, he was assigned to the Atlanta Field Office on 4/10/51.

(f) On 3/17/52 he was assigned to the Indianapolis field office. He was assigned to the General Criminal Squad -- specializing in Interstate Transportation of Stolen Property Cases -- particularly forged check cases.

(g) Wackenhut resigned from the FBI effective 5/21/54

(h) After leaving the FBI, Wackenhut founded a detective agency (Special Agent Investigators, Inc.) in Miami in partnership with former FBI Special Agents, A. Kenneth Altschul, Edward L. DuBois Jr., and William Stanton; SAI was the predecessor of Wackenhut Corp. Wackenhut reportedly had a fist fight with his partners and he then took over the SAI company. At one time, he also headed the Miami office of Fidelifax, Inc. – a private investigation agency with 30 offices nationwide staffed by 45 former FBI Special Agents.

(i) A 4/13/62 memo from Domestic Intelligence Division Section Chief G.H. Scatterday to FBI Assistant Director Alex Rosen on Wackenhut Corp. discusses two former senior FBI employees whom had joined Wackenhut Corp.

Associate Director Clyde Tolson handwrote a comment on the memo about those two former employees: “Tracy and Glavin should know better than to tie up with such a group.” -- and Tolson observed “We should have nothing to do with this outfit” and “See that Wackenhut is not on any Bureau mailing lists.” Hoover added his handwritten comments to both of Tolson's comments: “I concur” and “I agree” respectively

Edited September 23, 2015 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

Former FBI Agent Dan Smoot's cozy relationship with the John Birch Society was a major turn-off for J. Edgar Hoover, who had an unwritten policy to forbid FBI Agents from being JBS members.

Since Hoover never formally investigated the JBS, naturally Hoover had no reason to infiltrate them. Their only sin -- which they repeated daily -- was to accuse sitting US Presidents of being Communists (which folly the resigned General Walker bought, hook, line and sinker).

If you already know their sin, why infiltrate them to investigate them? No real reason. Many JBS members were professional men -- lawyers, doctors, dentists, veterinarians -- the upper-middle class -- with Anticommunist ideals and higher-than-average expendable income to donate to people like Gerry Patrick Hemming, Loran Hall, Guy Banister and even the resigned General Walker.

But Hoover didn't foresee any real danger coming from this group. What harm could these middle-class, armchair-lieutenants possibly do?

BTW, Dan Smoot's famous Smoot Report, along with his book, The Invisible Government (1961) was among the first to name the CFR as a "Communist" organization, which included such nefarious members as John Foster Dulles, Allen Dulles, Dwight Eisenhower and Milton Eisenhower.

J. Edgar Hoover could only moan and groan in response.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited September 24, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[John Dolva]

Appreciate your comentary, Ernie.

I wonder if you can confirm or refute :

"Zack Van Landringham...

...was an administrative assistant to J. Edgar Hoover during WWII, for 2 1/2 years. He worked for the FBI in various states for a total of 27 years, retiring in 1958 to work for the Misssissippi Sovereignty Commission as Chief of the Investigative Division."

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=c830be8a73738aea708e465089fc015d&showtopic=5928&hl=assistant

[Ernie Lazar]

Former FBI Agent Dan Smoot's cozy relationship with the John Birch Society was a major turn-off for J. Edgar Hoover, who had a strict policy to forbid FBI Agents from being JBS members.

Since Hoover never formally investigated the JBS, naturally Hoover had no reason to infiltrate them. Their only sin -- which they repeated daily -- was to accuse sitting US Presidents of being Communists (which folly the resigned General Walker bought, hook, line and sinker).

If you already know their sin, why infiltrate them to investigate them? No real reason. Most JBS members were professional men -- lawyers, doctors, dentists, veterinarians -- the upper-middle class -- with Anticommunist ideals and higher-than-average expendable income to donate to people like Gerry Patrick Hemming, Loran Hall, Guy Banister and even the resigned General Walker.

But Hoover didn't foresee any real danger coming from this group. What harm could these middle-class, armchair-lieutenants possibly do?

BTW, Dan Smoot's famous Smoot Report, along with his book, The Invisible Government (1961) was the first to name the CFR as a "Communist" organization, which included such nefarious members as John Foster Dulles, Allen Dulles, Dwight Eisenhower and Milton Eisenhower.

J. Edgar Hoover could only moan and groan in response.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

1. There was no "strict policy" by Hoover to "forbid FBI Agents from being JBS members". That is merely your continued fabrication for which you have never provided one iota of factual evidence. Furthermore, Smoot resigned from the FBI in 1951 (7 years before the JBS was founded) and there is nothing to indicate that Hoover ever knew that Smoot was connected to the JBS in any way after his retirement. The only information Hoover received about Smoot (after 1951) was in relation to Smoot's claim that he had been an "Administrative Assistant" to Hoover because numerous people sent letters to Hoover inquiring about that.

2. Your second paragraph is equally absurd. Hoover believed that the "sin" of Welch and the JBS was not limited to any one specific accusation they made (as you claim). Instead, Hoover explicitly stated that the entire world view of right-wing extremists was the problem. He declared: "I think the extreme right is just as much a danger to the freedom of this country as the extreme left" because "They don't deal in facts".

That is why Hoover asked the National Commander of the American Legion to use its National Americanism Commission to help educate Americans and that is also why Hoover declared:

"The Communist Party in this country has attempted to infiltrate and subvert every segment of our society, but its continuing efforts have not achieved success of any substance. Too many self-styled experts on communism, without valid credentials and without any access whatsoever to classified factual data regarding the inner workings of the conspiracy, have engaged in rumor-mongering and hurling false and wholly unsubstantiated allegations against persons whose views differ from their own. This is dangerous business. It is divisive and unintelligent, and makes more difficult the task of the professional investigator."

That is also why in 1961, Hoover asked subordinates in the Bureau's Domestic Intelligence Division to analyze a suggestion made by Attorney General Robert Kennedy which proposed that the FBI sponsor anti-communism seminars at its field offices for high school and college students along the lines of what the Bureau did at the FBI National Academy for law enforcement officers from around the country. The Bureau’s Domestic Intelligence Division subsequently analyzed this proposal in a 10/28/61 memo. This memo contains a paragraph entitled “Arguments in Favor” – copied below. Notice the reference to the JBS.

“Unquestionably there are apparent arguments in favor of such a procedure, including the reaching of a large segment of the American public during their formative years and thus thwarting to a great extent current recruiting drives among youths by the Communist Party USA, and combating the growth of extreme rightists as exemplified by the John Birch Society.” [FBI HQ file 62-106364, serial #72, 10/28/61 memo from Mr. Sullivan to Mr. Belmont, page 1; my emphasis in colored italics]

There was no reason to "infiltrate" the JBS because nothing which the FBI wanted to know about the beliefs or activities of the JBS required infiltration. They obtained the information they wanted by relying upon public sources (such as media articles), incoming complaints or inquiries, and unsolicited reports from all sorts of people around the country. Furthermore, within a very short period of time after initiating a preliminary inquiry, the FBI understood that there was nothing falling under the jurisdiction of the FBI which would require "infiltrating" the JBS.

Nor is your description of "most JBS members" accurate. I suggest that you do some research into the studies made by Professor Fred W. Grupp regarding demographic characteristics of JBS membership.

Nor was Smoot's 1961 book, "the first to name the CFR as a 'Communist' organization'.

In 1952, Emmanuel Josephson wrote: Eisenhower Gives Us No `Change', America's Betrayal Continues

He declared:

"For the membership of the CFR holds in its highest ranks the top Communist agents and traitors…The role of the subversives in the CFR is obviously to indoctrinate their fellow members, as their masters wish to have them indoctrinated…The deliberate purpose to which the CFR has been dedicated since it was taken over by its present bosses in 1926, is to further the interests of the Rockefeller Empire (especially Saudi Arabia), of the Soviets, and of the alliance between the two entered into in the same year, which the author has named the Rockefeller-Soviet Axis."

"Evidence in the published records of Congress completely proves that the same CFR interests financed, through it subsidiary the Institute of Pacific Relations, the Communist Richard Sorge spy ring in Japan, that induced the Japs to attack the U.S. at Pearl Harbor, instead of following their original plan of attacking Russia. They thus precipitated another Rockefeller Crusade, the Roosevelt War…They were also responsible for the Korean `Truman War' and for our involvement in it, as well as blocking its victorious termination."

"The CFR's masters and agents are intent on keeping us continually at war as a means of sustaining the `capitalist' or Marxist super-capitalist (mis)-managed economies that they support, for the ultimate purpose of attaining super-Napoleonic world conquest and totalitarian dictatorship, which they seek as their concept of `perfect government'…So intent are they upon keeping us at war to fulfill their malevolent intent, that they persistently equip our Soviet enemies with all the materiel of war with which they are slaughtering our men through their creations: Lend-Lease, the Marshall Plan, the UN, NATO, the Point 4 Program and others."

Josephson also devoted a major portion of his 1952 book, Rockefeller Internationalist: The Man Who Misrules The World (New York City: Chedney Press, 448pp) to the “subversive” CFR.

In addition, Mary Davison wrote a series of anti-CFR pamphlets in 1960. Much of that material then was published in 1961 as a series of Open Letters in The Greater Nebraskan, which was the newsletter of Congress of Freedom, Omaha NE. Then Mary re-issued her “open letters” individually, and in collections, under the auspices of her newly formed organization, Council on American Relations, which subsequently became known as Council For Statehood. [see, for example, Open Letters #12 and #13 captioned “To The Constituency of the U.S. Senators”]

The Council on American Relations published at least 2 versions of Mary's collection of anti-CFR articles. One collection, in 1961, was entitled: "The Hidden Hand: Open Letters to a U.S. Senator". The last 35 pages of this edition (re: CFR) was entitled "Secret Government of the United States".

The John Birch Society's magazine, American Opinion, mistakenly credits Davison as having been the first person to articulate the CFR-conspiracy theory. [see, "New Books," American Opinion, September 1962, page 65].

Paul---while your messages are always entertaining (sort of), you only reveal your horrific ignorance every time you post one.

POSTSCRIPT:

During 1951, the Chicago Tribune ran highly derogatory articles and editorials discussing the influence of Cecil Rhodes’ functionaries (aka the “Roundtable conspiracy”) in U.S. society. As students of this subject know, the Roundtable Group is often described as the British antecedent of CFR and according to Gary Allen in None Dare Call It Conspiracy, Edward House met with influential Roundtable members in Paris in May 1919 and that meeting “committed the conspiracy to creation of the CFR” (p82) “whose job it would be to propagandize the citizens of America, England and western Europe on the glories of World Government.” (p79). Allen also describes CFR as “a subsidiary of the Roundtable Group…” (pg 82)

See following Chicago Tribune articles:

7/16/51, p1: William Fulton: Rhodes Ideals Slant State Department Policies: Key Posts Held by Oxford Scholars

7/17/51, p1: William Fulton: Rhodes Goal: Return US to the British Empire

7/17/51, p1: William Fulton: Rhodes Ideas Find Fertile Ground in UN: Scholars Advance British Schemes

7/19/51, p1: William Fulton: Rhodes Grads Flock to Jobs in Burocracy: Work to Advance Patron's Schemes

7/20/51, p1: William Fulton: Rhodes' Wards Hawk Global Scheme in US: Peddle Propaganda for "One World"

7/21/51, p1: William Fulton: Rhodes' Wards Head Global Foundations: Dole Out Cash to One Worlders

7/21/51, p1: William Fulton: Rhodes' Grads Influential in Eastern Press: Aid British Global Propaganda

7/22/51, p22: Muriel Howe: Rhodes Scholars and Communists

7/23/51, p1: Eugene Griffin: Canada Offers Fine Field to Rhodes' Wards: Exert Influence on the US

7/26/51, p1: Rhodes Scholar Rules Congress Reference Units: Bureau Branded Source of Propaganda

7/27/51, p1: Philip Warden: Rhodes' Wards Helped Britain Get US Billions: Channeled Flow of Gold Under Aid Program

7/28/51, p6: Phillip Dodd: Even Congress Not Immune to Rhodes' Ideas: 2 Scholars There Help Support Program

7/29/51, p7: Willard Edwards: Their Own Code Guides Rhodes Scholars in US: State Dept. Aid Gave Support to Alger Hiss

7/31/51, p13: OWI Propaganda Machine Linked to Rhodes Men: Influence Goes Back to Elmer Davis

10/17/51, p7: William Fulton: Original Aims of Rockefeller Fund Distorted

11/4/51, p1: Willard Edwards: Alien Interest Rife in Highest U.S. Echelons

OTHER ANTI-CFR AUTHORS (PRIOR TO 1961)

Conde McGinley: "Invisible Government Rules Both Parties" (8/15/52 issue of "Common Sense" newspaper published by McGinley’s Christian Educational Association, Inc., Union NJ)

Robert H. Williams: Council on Foreign Relations A Zionist Front—Ike’s Boss! (Union NJ: Common Sense, Christian Educational Assn newspaper, 1/1/58, pages 1-4)

“We have written much about the ADL and its parent B’nai B’rith, the American (?) Jewish Committee and a dozen other hard-core Zionist policy shapers. It is worthwhile to take a look at some of their fronts, especially the Council on Foreign Relations (which is interlocked with the Foreign Policy Association, the Institute of Pacific Relations, and some of the big Red tax-free foundations.) It is often called ‘Rockefeller’s Council on Foreign Relations’ but that is largely because its masters have used the naïve spoon fed Rockefeller boys to commit treason year after year against the interests of their country. This CFR was founded in 1919 at the Paris Peace conference chiefly by a handful of famous Jews—Zionist revolutionaries who surrounded and influenced Woodrow Wilson…Though the CFR was founded principally by certain Jewish revolutionaries—including some of the richest men in the world---the Rockefellers have been bled by it from year to year and have adopted Jewish internationalism in both politics and finance…The two important things to bear in mind in studying the CFR is (1) the power and influence of its members and (2) its subversive policies, activities and connections.”

Edited September 23, 2015 by Ernie Lazar

[Ernie Lazar]

Appreciate your comentary, Ernie.

I wonder if you can confirm or refute :

"Zack Van Landringham...

...was an administrative assistant to J. Edgar Hoover during WWII, for 2 1/2 years. He worked for the FBI in various states for a total of 27 years, retiring in 1958 to work for the Misssissippi Sovereignty Commission as Chief of the Investigative Division."

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=c830be8a73738aea708e465089fc015d&showtopic=5928&hl=assistant

No -- Van Landingham was not an "administrative assistant" to Hoover. He entered the FBI 07/30/31 as a Messenger and on 3/19/34 he became a Special Agent. He retired effective 09/30/58. If you want to see his FBI personnel file, the file number is HQ 67-16867. On 10/1/58 he became Chief Investigator for the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission.

I have an interesting anecdote about him. One day I was doing some research on the Sovereignty Commission website about some person (I forget whom but it was someone connected to civil rights demonstrations) and I came across a memo typed on a blank sheet of paper and signed by Van Landingham which was a summary about that person.

Totally by coincidence, that same week, I received the FBI HQ file on that same person and there was an identical memo in that FBI file about that person (word for word). What probably happened is that Van Landingham got in touch with one of his former buddies in the FBI and they provided him with a summary based upon public source material -- which the Bureau often did for their friends.

One more anecdote:

Van Landingham wrote a 4/20/60 memo to file concerning formation of a local chapter of the JBS in Jackson MS. Zack discussed the JBS with JBS member Bill Simmons of the Citizens Council of America. Simmons told Zack that “Medford Evans was a professor at the Northwest Louisiana College, Natchitoches, LA, but was fired because of his anti-integration policies.”

Edited September 23, 2015 by Ernie Lazar

[Ernie Lazar]

Appreciate your comentary, Ernie.

I wonder if you can confirm or refute :

"Zack Van Landringham...

...was an administrative assistant to J. Edgar Hoover during WWII, for 2 1/2 years. He worked for the FBI in various states for a total of 27 years, retiring in 1958 to work for the Misssissippi Sovereignty Commission as Chief of the Investigative Division."

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=c830be8a73738aea708e465089fc015d&showtopic=5928&hl=assistant

BTW - I show his birthdate as 9/14/06 (not 1907 as your link says).

[John Dolva]

Thank you Ernie, I've referenced your correction in my old thread re Zack.

I've tried to remember where I got the info re assistant to no avail. I thought it might have been in a file at the MSC. There's a lot there and I don't have time to check all. Interesting that the statement was there (wherever I got that from) at all given it's not true and that it is a recurring misinfo for a number of persons.

[Ernie Lazar]

A few more general observations re: Dr. Caufield's book -- in no particular order of importance:

1. DESCRIPTIONS

Regardless of our personal opinions about any person (i.e. whether we like someone or not; whether we agree with someone or not), all honest historical writing requires authors to accurately describe the subjects who are the focus of their narrative.

As an illustration, whether or not someone likes Richard Nixon or Bill Clinton should not prevent an honest characterization of them as human beings. If we are to understand what motivates people to behave as they do or why a person supports or opposes any particular public policy or why they associate themselves with certain people or organizations or causes while rejecting others --- then we must first understand them as human beings.

In the past, for example, I objected to articles which described Sen. Bernie Sanders as "an independent" or "a progressive" -- when the reality is that Sanders has been a socialist for his entire life. And there is nothing wrong with that.

That is why we should respect Dr. Caufield for stating the obvious (despite what Paul Trejo wants us to think) on page xvi when Caufield describes Edwin Walker as "an ardent racist". [Note to Paul: "ardent" means enthusiastic and passionate!]

But there are other descriptive comments by Caufield which are euphemisms or worse -- and they do not help us to understand the people discussed. For example, on page 9, Caufield describes Hunter Pitts Odell (aka Jack Odell) as merely a "civil rights activist and African American" -- while leaving out the fact that Odell was a Communist Party member. [Keep in mind that the CPUSA had a totally different analysis regarding the status or plight of black Americans compared to mainstream civil rights organizations such as NAACP or Congress of Racial Equality. Significantly, the CPUSA attacked and vilified African American civil rights leaders like Roy Wilkins and A. Philip Randolph. Also keep in mind that until 1957, the CPUSA proposed a totally different "solution" to our racial problems compared to mainstream civil rights organizations.]

2. INTELLIGENCE FILES

On pages 16-17, Dr. Caufield discusses Banister's files and he also mentions other countersubversive collections such as Church League of America (Edgar Bundy receiving some of J.B. Matthews files) and the American Security Council (Chicago) which "kept extensive files on subversives and performed name checks for employers."

The American Security Council had 2700 member institutions (as of 7/61 according to the American Legion's newsletter, Firing Line issue of that date) including “business firms, newspapers, foundations and universities. Its primary mission is the gathering, correlations, and dissemination of factual information on Communist strategy and tactics to its members. It also provides these fine services to government agencies, congressional committees, educational institutions, and ‘carefully selected writers and scholars’. Defense industries use the Council’s files as a source of information for their personal screening programs. ASC membership dues depend upon the size of the member institution, varying from $30 to $900 a year. The Council has the largest and most complete private files on Communism in the country at its main office in Chicago…These files, containing the names of over 1,000,000 individuals and organizations, provide information which the FBI cannot supply, since its files are secret. All Communist Party publications, 1800 daily newspapers, 6000 weekly newspapers, and 200 magazines are clipped for the files. ASC also maintains a Washington Bureau. Located at 800 17th St NE under the direction of Lee R. Pennington, a former FBI Inspector and former Director of the National Americanism Commission of the American Legion.” (American Legion Firing Line, 7/61, p30-31)

For anybody who would like to review the FBI file on ASC, I donated it to Internet Archive here:

https://archive.org/search.php?query=FOIA%3A%20American%20Security%20Council

For more on Bundy and Church League of America, see:

https://archive.org/search.php?query=FOIA%3A%20Bundy%2C%20Edgar

It should be noted that there were many very extensive private "countersubversive" collections in existence. For example, the files of Harry A. Jung (Chicago) were acquired by the American Security Council along with the files of former Cong. Fred Busbey.

Maj. General Ralph Van Deman is often described as "the father of military intelligence". After he retired in 1929, he started collecting data regarding subversives which ultimately consisted of over 150,000 index cards and thousands of publications. Upon his death, a portion of his files were donated to the U.S. Senate Internal Security Subcommittee and the remainder were donated to the San Diego Research Library.

For more about Van Deman see: https://archive.org/search.php?query=FOIA%3A%20Van%20Deman

For more about the San Diego Research Library: https://archive.org/search.php?query=FOIA%3A%20San%20Diego%20Research%20Library

The Western Research Foundation was co-founded by a former FBI SAC (Nat J.L. Pieper) as a successor to the California American Legion's Radical Research Committee. From 1966-1969, Jerry Ducote (a JBS member who was a Santa Clara CA County Sheriff's Deputy) burglarized 17 left-wing organizations including United Farm Workers (5/30/67), San Jose Peace Center (11/26/66), Palo Alto Peace Center (2/2/68), SNCC, American Russian Institute, People’s World, Ramparts magazine and several homes of anti-Vietnam activists.

Ducote stated that Western Research provided him with targets and details on how to burglarize them, and helped channel the documents he stole to such groups as Associated Farmers, the American Security Council, and the Santa Clara County Farm Bureau.

In 1950, Karl Baarslag was the "Director, Subversive Activities Research” for the American Legion. Per 6/55 issue of Facts Forum, Baarslag “served on the Communist desk of the Office of Naval Intelligence during World War II and is a former national Legion director of countersubversive activities.”

He later went to work for Edgar Bundy's Church League of America as Chief of Research. His files were acquired by Bundy and they are now available at New York University's Tamiment Library: http://dlib.nyu.edu/findingaids/html/tamwag/tam_148/dscref1325.html

As one FBI memo reports, FBI Assistant Director Cartha DeLoach "advised that Karl Baarslag is of the same stripe as Bundy. He is a ‘professional anti-communist’ and makes his living posing as an expert on communism. Baarslag has been fired by the HCUA, the SISS, and a number of other Senate committees and commissions. He is regarded on the Hill as a professional ‘bum’. For a number of months he worked for H.L. Hunt in Houston TX, however, he eventually was even fired by Hunt."

AND lest anybody think that all this research about political opponents was exclusively performed by right-wing extremists -- it should be remembered that U.S. labor unions funded the creation of Group Research, Inc. (Washington DC) to monitor the right wing and by the time GRI closed and donated its collection to Columbia University, their files filled 512 boxes!

3. FRANK CAPELL

On pages 17-18, Dr. Caufield writes that: "Capell was a great admirer of J. Edgar Hoover, and there are inferences from his correspondence with Hoover that Capell was a recipient of Bureau files." [The footnote for this entry refers readers to Frank J. Donner's book, The Age of Surveillance].

This contention is ludicrous on its face. First of all, Hoover never personally corresponded with Capell nor would he ever allow his name to be associated with someone like Capell.

Keep in mind the following (all of which was known to the FBI):

1. In September 1943 Capell was arrested for accepting a $1000 bribe when he was an investigator for the War Production Board Compliance Division. On 5/29/45 Capell pled guilty to 3 counts of conspiring to ask, accept, and receive bribes from two manufacturers accused of violating War Production Board rulings. He was sentenced to pay a $2000 fine on the first count and serve a term of one year and one day of each of two other counts. His prison term was suspended with two years of probation.

2. The FBI evaluation regarding Capell was stated in an April 1965 memo from Hoover to the U.S. Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach:

"The subject is the editor of the newsletter, The Herald of Freedom. He is an extremist in his attitude toward communism and uses his newsletter to expose people and organizations he considers communist and subversive."

3. In February 1965, the FBI field office in Los Angeles opened a new file on Capell as a consequence of his indictment on charges of being a co-conspirator to criminally libel California U.S. Senator Thomas H. Kuchel. Capell was fined $500 and sentenced to 180 days in jail (suspended), and 3 years probation.by the Los Angeles Superior Court for circulating a libelous affidavit falsely accusing Kuchel of being arrested for homosexual activity.

4. In the 1970's, Capell was an "intelligence analyst" for the JBS newsweekly, Review of the News - and we already know the Hoover/FBI attitude regarding the JBS.

Incidentally, since Dr. Caufield refers readers to Frank Donner's book as the source for his comment, it should be noted that while Donner wrote several significant books which discuss the FBI, it should be kept in mind that he was a Communist Party member and that ideological orientation colored his perceptions.

Edited September 23, 2015 by Ernie Lazar

[Ernie Lazar]

Thank you Ernie, I've referenced your correction in my old thread re Zack.

I've tried to remember where I got the info re assistant to no avail. I thought it might have been in a file at the MSC. There's a lot there and I don't have time to check all. Interesting that the statement was there (wherever I got that from) at all given it's not true and that it is a recurring misinfo for a number of persons.

John: Hoover did not really have any Special Agent assigned to work in the Director's office as an "Assistant" -- with one exception, i.e. in August 1944, Gordon A. Nease was "Confidential Assistant to the Director". In March 1947, his title changed to "Inspector, Director's Office".

Hoover's personal Secretary was Helen Gandy and, very often, replies to correspondence were sent out under her name when someone was regarded as obnoxious or not the type of person whom should receive a letter with Hoover's signature -- including political extremists and mental cases.

The other major subordinates in the food chain were the "Assistant Directors".

There was a position created entitled "Assistant to the Director" but it was not somebody sitting inside Hoover's office. Instead, it was someone who was given supervisory responsibility for more than one Bureau Division.

For example: in October 1951, Louis B. Nichols was "Assistant to the Director" responsible for administrative matters, outside contacts and public relations including speechwriting, reviews and articles under Hoover's signature and general correspondence and tours. The other "Assistant to the Director" at that time was D. Milton Ladd for all investigative functions (Domestic Intelligence and Investigative Divisions).

[Paul Brancato]

Ernie - would you clarify what you meant at the end of point 1 - Descriptions - in post 668 when you say that the Communist Party criticized black civil rights leaders like Roy Wilkins? How was their agenda different than the NAACP in the late '50's?

[Paul Trejo]

<snip>

Paul---while your messages are always entertaining (sort of), you only reveal your horrific ignorance every time you post one.

<snip>

First, Ernie, thanks for the corrections -- I updated my post, changing "strict policy" to "unwritten policy" and from "the first" to "among the first".

Also, your history about Emanuel Josephson in 1952 was very interesting -- proving that attacks on the CFR go back to the Eugene McCarthy era.

Your meticulous attention to detail is probably appreciated by many -- but your continuing insulting manner is still personally offensive, so please continue to work on that.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

Ernie - would you clarify what you meant at the end of point 1 - Descriptions - in post 668 when you say that the Communist Party criticized black civil rights leaders like Roy Wilkins? How was their agenda different than the NAACP in the late '50's?

Paul -- it might be more convenient if you read the chapter of my JBS Report pertaining to the civil rights movement (link below) --- particularly the sections on the Negro Soviet Republic and on A. Philip Randolph -- both of which contain information which addresses your question.

https://sites.google.com/site/ernie124102/jbs-3

Briefly, however, the position of the Communist Party USA from the 1920's forward was that African Americans were an oppressed racial group and that they should be allowed to form their own nation within our "black belt" states aka Negro Soviet Republic. So, instead, of assimiliating into our society, they would exist separate from it.

This position always conflicted with the objectives of mainstream black organizations who wanted full equality and due process for blacks within U.S. society. The entire thrust of Thurgood Marshall and the NAACP Legal Defense Fund was to eliminate all vestiges of "separate but equal" standing within American society whether in public buildings, parks, hospitals, restaurants, education, and, of course, ability to vote etc. African American attorney Charles Hamilton Houston was a giant in our nation's history of dismantling Jim Crow laws and he trained Thurgood Marshall. You may have seen the PBS special about his career.

Ex-Communist Louis Rosser testified before the House Committee on Un-American Activities in San Francisco on12/1/53. During his testimony, Rosser explained the CPUSA position on A. Philip Randolph during World War II, particularly in relation to Randolph’s activities in support of a Fair Employment Practices Committee. This data may also be seen in the 1954 report of the House Committee on Un-American Activities entitled “The American Negro in the Communist Party”, page 29.

“The Communist Party said that he [Randolph] had to be muzzled, and he was coming to Los Angeles in 1942, and I and Pettis Perry were given the job of working out a plan how we could discredit Randolph…So he was getting a medal that the NAACP gives each year to some outstanding American Negro, white, or any nationality in the field of human relations, and he was getting it for his work on integration of Negroes into industry…We wrote a speech that praised the Soviet Union, that called for the opening of the second front and that said Randolph was a traitor to his country…But it [the speech] gave the Party not only the opportunity to discredit this Negro leader, but it gave the Party the opportunity to reach the top negroes in America with the program of the Communist Party at that time.” [The speech was delivered by Charlotta Bass, whom Rosser described as a CPUSA fellow-traveler “who already was close to the Communists”.] In reality, she was a secret Communist.

The CPUSA also attacked NAACP Executive Secretary Walter White and his successor Roy Wilkins. Numerous FBI files on the CPUSA and on "Racial Conditions" and on other subjects contain scores of examples where CP officials vilified Walter White, Roy Wilkins, A. Phillip Randolph and other well known leaders of our civil rights movement and most mainstream civil rights organizations.

Radicals always seem to possess an especially virulent animosity toward people whom they view as their competition which is thwarting their ability to successfully dominate and control whatever movement or cause they are interested in -- whether civil rights, labor unions, anti-war groups, education of the American public, or whatever. It is interesting, for example, that the Birch Society reserves some of its most potent venom for William Buckley Jr.

[Ernie Lazar]

<snip>

Paul---while your messages are always entertaining (sort of), you only reveal your horrific ignorance every time you post one.

<snip>

First, Ernie, thanks for the corrections -- I updated my post, changing "strict policy" to "unwritten policy" and from "the first" to "among the first".

Also, your history about Emanuel Josephson in 1952 was very interesting -- proving that attacks on the CFR go back to the Eugene McCarthy era.

Your meticulous attention to detail is probably appreciated by many -- but your continuing insulting manner is still personally offensive, so please continue to work on that.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Well, Paul, whether I am polite and patient with you or whether I use what you consider "insulting" messages, does not seem to have had much impact on you during our debates over the years. As I have stated on many occasions, a lot of what you profess is "truth" or "fact" is nothing more than your personal opinion. And that is entirely ok except that you present your personal opinion in a form which makes it seem that anybody who takes exception to what you believe is an idiot.

[Paul Trejo]

On page 11 of his new book, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: The Extensive New Evidence of a Radical-Right Conspiracy, Jeff Caufield links Guy Banister into the Little Rock High School drama of 1958, with General Edwin Walker at the center of that cyclone.

In 1957 President Eisenhower had sent Federal Troops to Little Rock, Arkansas, to enforce Earl Warren's Brown Decision to integrate all US public schools (a decision that is still controversial in some States to this very day), and Ike sent General Walker to lead those troops.

General Walker was in Little Rock, Arkansas for two full years (9/1957 through 9/1959), keeping the peace. He did a good job there. Yet that was the home-town of the famous General Douglas MacArthur, and a beacon of traditional white privilege. Many Right-wing figures descended upon General Walker in Arkansas.

General Walker's own mother was a dedicated follower of the segregationist Reverend Billy James Hargis, and in her many letters to Edwin she included sundry arguments from Hargis' segregation-slanted Bible radio program. Others who strove to influence General Walker in Arkansas include H.L. Hunt and Robert Welch.

Yet Caufield presents us with a new dimension -- Guy Banister from NOLA also visited Little Rock, in this very context of US public school integration. Caufield writes on page 11:

The Arkansas legislature decided to use the same strategy that linked integration to Communism that had been successful for the State of Louisiana. They called on Guy Banister to appear before the Special Education Committee...on December 16-17, 1958. Banister told them that the Little Rock school integration crisis was a result of the "subversive influence in this part of the country." (Caufield, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy, p. 11)

After two years of this intensive Right-wing propaganda campaign, General Walker caved in and, in 1959, submitted his resignation to the US Army, citing, "a fifth column conspiracy" that prevented him from doing his duty. President Eisenhower denied that resignation, and rewarded Walker's success at Little Rock High School with the biggest promotion of Walker's career. But I'm getting ahead of the story.

The key for Chapter One of Jeff Caufield's new book is his placement of Guy Banister in the environment of General Walker in 1958, in the context of the politics that General Walker would adopt for the rest of his life.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited September 24, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Kenneth Drew]

In general I would agree with the idea of not confusing the crime and the coverup. However, when it comes to the actions of certain individuals on the day of the crime, such as pre autopsy surgery, change of autopsy venue, I find it hard to believe that these decisions were made by people who were unprepared for the events of the day.

i'd also like to point out to Paul Trejo, and perhaps Mr. O'Neil, that drawing a line between the non-governmental far right wing and parts of our government, such as Hoover and Dulles, as if the private folks are more right wing than the heads of our intelligence agencies or our Joint Chiefs, is ridiculous. Hoover was just as much a racist as Banister. Caufield quotes a few sources that claim that Banister was in close touch with Hoover all through his 'retirement'. That makes sense. They were both in the business of smearing civil rights leaders with the Communist brush, a la McCarthy.

Caufield and Trejo seem very concerned with giving credit to Garrison while making sure to point out how mistaken he was to suspect the CIA. To hear Caufield tell it, Garrison protected the racists because he was one of them. This is the same kind of argument that 'Mafia did it' promoters use to explain why Garrison ignored the evidence pointing at Marcello.

I am curious what proof Caufield will offer. showing Hoover had preknowledge of a right wing assassination plot.

Paul I agree that it seems very hard to believe that all the events that transpired immediately after the assassination were only done on the spur of the moment to prevent the public thinking it was a Cuban or Soviet plot. That there just happened to be a spare 'gray' coffin on Air Force One. That secondary transportation for that coffin, separate from the bronze coffin seems to have been pre-planned. That plans were in place to insure that Jackie was not in the room with the body while it could be moved to the other coffin. All this was put together by Hoover within just a couple hours after the shooting? While I'm willing to give Hoover due credit, I hardly see him as a 'Mastermind". How was it already set up to have two autopsy teams at different facilities? I find it difficult to believe that Edwin Walker had that kind of influence.