Paul Trejo Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 (edited) In the dark It is no doubt frustrating for any who were not there,especially those too young to understand or care at the time in history re; murder of J F Kennedy, also the so-called brilliant self promoting researchers and book writers, along with a document retrieving, older, and contrarian self proclaimed expert attaching themselves, like barnacles, to the hull of ship of history. ----- Into the light -- General Walker and the murder of President Kennedy by Jeffrey Caufield MD. I would also add, that Dr. Jeffrey Caufield's new book, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: The Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy, is a fresh, new approach to Conspiracy Theories (CT) in the JFK murder and very rare -- while at the same time it is perhaps the first CT -- namely, it's the 1965 CT of Harry Dean. Harry Dean was disappointed with the conclusion of the Warren Report as published in late 1964 -- with its fiction that LHO was the "Lone Nut" killer of JFK. As early as possible in 1965, January, Harry Dean arranged for an appearance on the Joe Pyne Show in Los Angeles -- to come out publicly and accuse General Walker of the plot to kill JFK. Harry Dean claimed to be an eye-witness to events in Southern California, where, as a member of the Minutemen and an active associate of the John Birch Society, and radical activists like Loran Hall, Larry Howard and Guy Gabaldon, Harry was invited to a closed meeting in which General Walker was the central figure, in September 1963. In that meeting, says Harry Dean, the radical rightist General Walker not only spoke about the forthcoming murder of JFK, but Walker also mentioned the name of the Patsy -- Lee Harvey Oswald -- to those present. It would be poetic justice -- a wonderful irony -- agreed all those present at that meeting, to use a Communist to kill a Communist. Harry Dean chimed in his own approval at the time, noting that he himself had been an officer in the FPCC in Chicago, and he could vouch for the Communism of the FPCC, and its danger. At the time of that meeting, Harry Dean regarded the meeting as an extension of the sentiments of the Minutemen, generally, that is, they spoke about killling JFK at every opportunity -- just blowing off steam. After Lee Harvey Oswald was really picked up for the JFK murder, however, Harry Dean's heart sunk. We can begin to put the pieces together more carefully now, using Dr. Caufield's new book, by linking Joseph Milteer with General Walker as Caufield will do -- along with all the evidence from NOLA discovered by Jim Garrison in 1966-1968, about Guy Banister. Regards, --Paul Trejo <edit typos> Edited January 2, 2016 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie Lazar Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 (edited) In the dark It is no doubt frustrating for any who were not there,especially those too young to understand or care at the time in history re; murder of J F Kennedy, also the so-called brilliant self promoting researchers and book writers, along with a document retrieving, older, and contrarian self proclaimed expert attaching themselves, like barnacles, to the hull of ship of history. ----- Into the light -- General Walker and the murder of President Kennedy by Jeffrey Caufield MD. I would also add, that Dr. Jeffrey Caufield's new book, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: The Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy, is a fresh new approach to Conspiracy Theories (CT) in the JFK murder -- while at the same time it is perhaps the first CT -- namely, it's the CT of Harry Dean. It was soon after the Warren Report was published in late 1964 -- as early as possible in 1965, January, that Harry Dean had arranged for an appearance on the Joe Pyne Show in Los Angeles -- to come out publicly and accuse General Walker of the plot to kill JFK. Harry Dean claimed to be an eye-witness to events in Southern California, where, as a member of the Minutemen and an active associate of the John BIrch Society, along with radical activists like Loran Hall, Larry Howard and Guy Gabaldon, he was invited to a closed meeting in which General Walker was the central figure, in September 1963. In that meeting, says Harry Dean, the radical rightist General Walker not only spoke about the forthcoming murder of JFK, but Walker also mentioned the name of the Patsy -- Lee Harvey Oswald -- to those present. It would be poetic justice -- a wonderful irony -- agreed all those present at that meeting, to use a Communist to kill a Communist. Harry Dean chimed in his own approval at the time, noting that he himself had been an officer in the FPCC in Chicago, and he could vouch for the Communism of the FPCC, and its danger. At the time of that meeting, Harry Dean regarded the meeting as an extension of the sentiments of the Minutemen, generally, that is, they spoke about killling JFK at every opportunity -- just blowing off steam. After Lee Harvey Oswald was really picked up for the JFK murder, however, Harry Dean's heart sunk. We can begin to put the pieces together more carefully now, using Dr. Caufield's new book, by linking Joseph Milteer with General Walker as Caufield will do -- along with all the evidence from NOLA discovered by Jim Garrison in 1966-1968, about Guy Banister. Regards, --Paul Trejo Paul, the problem is that all CT's "put pieces together" to form some kind of argument. That is the inherent allure of CT's, i.e. they attempt to make coherent sense out of and connect "dots" which are claimed to be factually accurate (often with no corroborative evidence). Significantly, nobody has found anything to support Harry's statements and assertions. In fact, nobody (including Harry) can even prove that there was a September 1963 meeting as you describe -- much less that Harry was a participant in that alleged meeting. Here is a new question for you (or anybody else): Has anybody been able to establish whether or not that Edwin Walker was in southern California during the first week of September 1963? 1. Perhaps you have seen something in his personal papers? 2. Although this is not conclusive, I did check the Los Angeles Times for the period (August 25th through September 10th, 1963) -- and there are no articles which mention that Walker was in southern California. 3. Walker's FBI file does not contain any references to him being in southern California in September 1963. 4. The only thing I have found thus far pertaining to Walker in early September, is a September 8th UPI wire service report from Greenville MS pertaining to Walker filing a $2 million slander lawsuit against Hodding Carter, publisher of the Greenville MS newspaper. ADDENDUM 5. I also found an AP article in the Abilene TX Reporter-News on August 29th, 1963 which showed a picture of Walker and the article stated he was in Austin TX on August 28th. Edited October 30, 2015 by Ernie Lazar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie Lazar Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 (edited) FROM: Paul Trejo message on October 18th: "So, IMHO, nobody has yet ever produced even one single recognizable photograph of Robert Allen Surrey so that I can say I know what he looks like." Scroll to the 11:41 portion of this video and you will see Robert Surrey -- who asked George Lincoln Rockwell a question. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8LWZDiNBVs Edited October 30, 2015 by Ernie Lazar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie Lazar Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) Another pic of Robert A. Surrey: http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=109189&relPageId=24&search=Echo_Surrey As I have repeatedly stated in many different messages about many different subject matters -- one cannot rely upon statements (or innuendos) made by Paul Trejo. Despite Paul's passionate arguments and the certitudes he expresses about all sorts of matters, careful research usually falsifies what he believes. Going back, briefly, to the alleged September 1963 meeting which Harry claims he attended. Briefly, here is why Harry's story is so suspect: 1. Harry wrote a letter to J. Edgar Hoover dated 11/19/63. According to Harry's story, he was aware of a major JBS plot to murder JFK but we are expected to believe that Harry did not think it was important to mention a single word about it to Hoover. 2. Furthermore, Harry does not even think it relevant to mention to Hoover (in that letter) that he (Harry) has been in routine contact with the supposed SAC of the Los Angeles field office (Wesley Grapp) starting in August or September of 1963. 3. AFTER the assassination of JFK, Harry wrote to, or telephoned, or was interviewed by Agents of the Los Angeles FBI office on several occasions. The specific dates: December 16, 1963, October 3, 1964, November 30, 1964 and December 9, 1964. In addition, on May 9, 1964, Harry was interviewed at length by an un-named southern California Police Department. The transcript of that interview is 22-pages of single-spaced typewritten text. In NONE of those communications with the FBI, or with the southern California Police Department, did Harry mention his alleged association with Grapp, nor did he mention the JBS nor did he mention any "plot" (by the JBS) to murder JFK. 4. According to Paul Trejo's eBook narrative: During September 1963, Harry says that he met with Guy Galbadon at his El Monte home. During some of those meetings, Loran Hall, Larry Howard, or David Robbins were also present. Harry described Loran Hall as "a leader in the fight against the international Communist conspiracy which was currently headed, as he saw it, by Fidel Castro and John F. Kennedy." Harry further opined: "This was my core team. I watched them like a hawk" AND "When nobody else was around Gabby would talk to me about the roles Loran and Larry would play in Walker's plan." 5. When Harry was interviewed (at his request) by FBI-Los Angeles Agent Ferd Rapp Jr. on 11/19/64, Harry told Rapp that: "He did not hear either of them [Loran Hall or Larry Howard] make any anti-Kennedy statements." During that same interview, Harry told the FBI that Loran Hall and Lawrence Howard "would be capable of entering into conspiracy with Oswald to commit the assassination. Dean stated that the possibility of Oswald's presence with the Cuban leaders appeared feasible to him and he wanted the FBI to be aware of this possibility in the event that it had not been previously checked out." [Los Angeles FBI file 105-12933, serial #23.] 6. Does anyone notice all of the anomalies here? (1) During September 1963, Harry claims that Loran Hall described JFK as a leader of "the international Communist conspiracy" but in November 1964 Harry claims he never heard Loran Hall make any anti-JFK statements! BUT...Loran Hall (and Larry Howard) "would be capable of entering into conspiracy with Oswald to commit the assassination." Why would that be the case if Harry never heard them make any anti-JFK statements? (2) In November 1964, Harry is wondering if the FBI might never have "previously checked out" the possibility of Loran Hall's and Lawrence Howard's involvement in the assassination! Huh? Harry claims he told the FBI about that plot in the summer of 1963 -- so why would Harry think in November 1964 that the FBI was not aware of their involvement? (3) Harry claims that, by September 1963, he has direct personal knowledge of a murder plot against the President of the United States and he even knows the specific names of the key conspirators -- but he does not mention a single word about the alleged plot to anybody ..... (3.1) through his correspondence to the FBI in Los Angeles (3.2) through his lengthy letter to J. Edgar Hoover, three days before the assassination (3.3) through personal interviews conducted with Harry by the Los Angeles FBI which are memorialized in his file, (3.4) through his extensive interview by a southern California Police Department or (3.5) through his phone conversations with various FBI Special Agents Do you really think this is plausible behavior for someone who claims that he had personal knowledge about the most momentous event in our country's history during that time period? Edited October 31, 2015 by Ernie Lazar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie Lazar Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 More about Robert A. Surrey: http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,3494.msg398939.html#msg398939 Originally, their surname was Surey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie Lazar Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 For those who might be interested -- Willis Carto has died. http://www.counter-currents.com/2015/10/remembering-willis-carto-july-17-1926-october-26-2015/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) Ernie, I do appreciate the opportunity to finally see the face of Robert Allen Surrey -- the author of the "WANTED FOR TREASON: JFK" handbill that appeared on the streets of Dallas on the morning of 11/22/1963 before JFK was murdered there. There's a fact that many people don't know about that handbill -- namely -- that it also circulated in Dallas one month prior to that date, on so-called US Day, when General Walker held a convention at the Dallas Memorial Auditorium on the night before UN Day, when Adlai Stevenson was to appear in the same auditorium. General Walker's people "booby-trapped" the auditorium, and obtained their instructions to utterly disrupt Adlai Stevenson's speech on the following night. This was (as Chris Cravens reported in 1990) in response to the John Birch Society instructions to "never allow a Communist to complete a speech in one's home town." The appearance of the "WANTED FOR TREASON: JFK" handbills before the Adlai Stevenson humiliation shows a tight coordination of General Walker with Robert Allen Surrey in all of Walker's political activities. Regards, --Paul Trejo Edited October 31, 2015 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 (edited) History has been reluctant to shine a spotlight on General Walker in the murder of JFK, despite the plethora of signs. Perhaps this is because saying that General Walker was the mastermind of the JFK murder is the same as saying that the Dallas Police were involved. Not all of the Dallas Police, of course, but mainly those of the Radical Right, and specifically those connected with the Minutemen in Dallas -- who were led by General Walker. Dallas Police and Dallas Deputies would cover for each other. That has been one of the best safeguards. I remember a poster at the Sixth Floor Museum in Dallas, that listed over 100 possible conspirators in the JFK murder. I noticed that in that entire listing, which ran the gamut from Rockefeller to the USSR, that the Dallas Police Department was absent. Yet nobody had a better control of Dealey Plaza on 11/22/1963. Nobody had more chances to seal the crime scene. Nobody had more control over the evidence and witnesses. Nobody had a heavier presence at the Grassy Knoll than the DPD and Sheriff's Department. The lack of historical detail on the DPD handling of the JFK murder is nothing short of remarkable. At most we have accounts of the "inept" handling by the DPD. I don't recall any accounts of a possible conspiracy by the DPD. Am I mistaken? Are there any that y'all know about? Regards, --Paul Trejo Edited November 4, 2015 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 OK, since it appears that nobody else here will keep the book review going, it's probably up to me to continue. So then I get to set the pace. So, I say we just move on to the next chapter. Continuing on to chapter 7, The Constitution Party Meeting, Indianapolis, October 1963, Jeff Caufield summarizes this important meeting of the Radical Right that included Joseph Milteer along with Kenneth Goff and Wesley Swift -- two leaders of the USA Minutemen. Caufield writes: "Thirty-five days before the assassination of President Kennedy, a consortium of the most violent-minded, far-right political extremists in America gathered at the Constitution Party meeting in Indianapolis on October 18, 1963, and there was talk of killing the president....Mary Davidson attended and was a principal in the broad-based assassination plots...If there existed an group of individuals in America with the motive, means and opportunity to assassinate President Kennedy it was this one, and the FBI knew all about it...Three weeks after the Constitution Party meeting, Joseph Milteer told Willie Somersett in a tape-recorded conversation that the president would be killed by a high-powered rifle that could be broken down, from an office building -- and that someone would be picked up right away to throw the authorities off. (Caufield, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy, 2015, p. 173) This was news to me; I was completely unaware of the Constitution Party meeting and its relation to Joseph Milteer. Regards, --Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 (edited) I find it interesting that Jeff Caufield identified segregationist Reverend Billy James Hargis as the official Chaplain for the Constitution Party. Edited November 7, 2015 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hancock Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 You'll find it in AGOG, just look under C in the index. Just kidding Paul, but we do mention the party, its cliques and both Milteer's association with it and as I recall Sommersett's remarks about covert goings on at some of its conferences. David Boylan provided us with some good material on the party. Stu and I discuss such meetings in conjunction with certain individuals in Florida and possibly California that were supposedly being formed with the intention of targeting national leaders and Jewish financial magnates. Sommersett even provided names in some of his informant reports. I think I would take exception to his characterization of those specific Constitution party cliques as the most dangerous groups...within the ultra right Stoner's very hard core inner circles and Wesley Swifts CI inner circles were far more dangerous in terms of actually carrying out attacks and not just talking about it. And of course that's just within the ultra right... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 (edited) BUMP Edited November 7, 2015 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie Lazar Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 (edited) A CASE STUDY TO ILLUSTRATE WHY ALL INFORMATION ONE FINDS DOES NOT HAVE EQUAL VALUE In the "Edwin Walker" thread, Paul Trejo recently replied to an inquiry by another reader regarding the Minutemen. In his reply, Paul cites former FBI Special Agent William W. Turner as his source of information. Paul describes Turner as follows: "Turner is a former FBI agent, and he offers his experienced account of the right-wing in the USA during 1950's and 1960's, and offers a special focus on the Dallas and the JFK assassination. Turner says, in effect, that it wasn't possible to be accepted as an officer in the DPD unless the candidate was a member of at least one right-wing organization -- the KKK, the White Citizens Council, the JBS or the Minutemen -- and if the candidate was a member of more than one, he had a much better chance of employment." The problem one confronts when evaluating information provided by any former FBI Special Agent is determining whether or not that Agent ever had access to the type of information (and the type of cases) which they claim to be knowledgeable about. In addition, there are other factors which need to be considered. As some EF readers may know, I was the first person to obtain the FBI files on former Special Agent W. Cleon Skousen and it was my research which was used by many authors to document the decades-old misrepresentations and fabrications concerning Skousen's FBI career. I also did the same thing with respect to former FBI Special Agent Dan Smoot. PAUL TREJO's RECURRING PROBLEM On many previous occasions, I have pointed out that the fundamental problem between Paul and myself is epistemological. As I have said repeatedly, Paul's methodology for ascertaining what is accurate and truthful is simply this: When he confronts data which he believes conforms to his larger argument, he immediately accepts it and he then describes his source with terms like "experienced" or "knowledgeable" or "expert". I am going to use Paul's reliance upon William Turner to hopefully illustrate why credibility of a source cannot just be assumed. William Turner was a Special Agent with the FBI from February 1951 until July 1961. In December 1960 he was censured and placed on probation. In June 1961 he was suspended without pay and eventually fired. After Turner completed his New Agent training, he was assigned to St. Louis, then San Francisco. In 1959, he was assigned to Seattle as a disciplinary transfer. While in Seattle he worked primarily upon bank robbery cases and wiretapping matters. In October 1960, he was transferred to Oklahoma City. Paul Trejo might appreciate the irony that Turner's SAC in OKC was none other than Wesley Grapp. Grapp gave Turner "unsatisfactory" performance reports and he described Turner as "a spoiled self-centered individual" . Grapp recommended that Turner should be placed on probation. Hoover accepted Grapp's recommendation and on 12/27/60 Hoover sent Turner a censure letter advising him of his probationary status. He also was suspended for 30 days without pay and he was then transferred to Knoxville TN. Turner complained to Attorney General Robert Kennedy and that ultimately resulted in six charges filed against Turner in June 1961 seeking his dismissal. The Civil Service Commission upheld 2 of those charges in October 1961 including "making untrue and unverified statements". A Federal Court upheld his dismissal and the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear his case. Now with respect to Paul Trejo's reliance upon Turner -- here are the problems: 1. Paul conflates two separate matters. He begins his sentence by describing Turner as a former FBI Agent and he then attempts to embellish Turner's credentials by referring to Turner's "experienced account of the right-wing in the USA during 1950's and 1960's and offers a special focus on the Dallas and the JFK assassination." 2. Turner never worked at FBI HQ. 3. Turner never worked in FBI Division 5 (the Domestic Intelligence Division formerly known as the Security Division). 4. Turner never worked in the FBI-Dallas field office. 5. During his FBI career, there is no data to indicate that Turner ever worked on any cases involving "the right-wing in the USA" 5. Turner never worked on any Minutemen cases so, obviously, he would have no clue regarding the number of MM members nationally or in Texas. 6. The FBI obtained MM membership lists from three different sources at three different times. The Bureau also received information from former MM members. For example: Victor Dale Horsfall, (a member of the MM who was with DePugh in the MM underground) had access to MM records. Horsfall advised the FBI in December 1969, that the actual membership strength was greatly exaggerated by DePugh and the true membership was probably unknown to DePugh. Horsfall stated about 150 people were sent MM literature on a regular basis and, therefore, he believed this to be the maximum membership. [HQ 73-17771, #2, which is 6/24/74 Los Angeles field report to HQ; section 1, page 16] The information which the FBI obtained from several different intelligence sources was pretty consistent. Like every other organization, one has to define what "member" means. Should "member" only mean somebody who pays dues regularly and perhaps is given a specific identification number? Should "member" only mean persons who actively and regularly participate in organizational activities? Should "member" include somebody who adopts the ideology of the organization and perhaps occasionally contributes money or supplies but who never formally "joins" the organization? Should "membership" include elderly persons who may subscribe to the organization's newsletter but whom, otherwise, has no other involvement? Should "membership" include the names of persons who expressed interest in joining but who never completed their application process OR if they completed the process but rarely attend meetings? ALL of these types of questions must first be answered before arriving at a rational and relevant understanding of the number of "members" of ANY organization--particularly given Paul's previous statements that there were "tens of thousands" of Minutemen members. With that background in mind, the best available evidence is that the total actual membership in the MM never exceeded 1500-2000 people. But the "activist" core membership (for lack of a better description, the "fanatics") were only about 100-150. Edited November 7, 2015 by Ernie Lazar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 (edited) Proceeding further into Jeffrey Caufield's new book, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: The Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy, Chapter 8, Lieutenant General Pedro del Valle and the Former Military Men in the Hardcore Underground, we finally encounter General Walker in the narrative. Caufield wishes to start with rightist US Generals as a group. This chapter is of special interest to me, since I perused all 90 boxes of General Walker's personal papers at UT Austin 2011-2012, and I know the contents rather well. Yet inside all of those boxes, there is nothing at all about any correspondence between General Walker and General Pedro del Valle, who was one of the most outspoken segregationists of his time. Yet Jeff Caufield has discovered in his coast-to-coast search, just such a correspondence between the two segregationist Generals. This would appear to be a significant advance in historical studies. As late as October 1962, General del Valle was accusing Presidents Truman and Eisenhower of treason, because the recognition of the State of Israel was a Jewish plot, he said. Also, General del Valle said that JFK had deliberately allowed nuclear weapons into Cuba, as an act of treason. In a stunning development, Caufield located a 1976 letter from rightist Woody Kearns to General del Valle, reminding him that the JFK assassination had already been the topic of a "confidential discussion" at the Constitution Party meeting in Indianapolis in October 1963, when both were present. Other US Generals named by Caufield in this chapter include General Charles Willoughby, General Albert C. Wedemeyer, General George E. Stratemeyer, General Bonner Fellers, and Admiral John G. Crommelin. Caufield writes: Grave discontent with the Kennedy administration was abundantly evident among the radical right in 1961. General Pedro del Valle, reflecting the prevailing feeling among the radical right, was particularly troubled by the Brown decision that outlawed segregation in the schools -- as well as President Kennedy's civil rights initiatives. He felt that President Kennedy's handling of the Cuban situation and his disarmament policies were treasonous. He was certain that Kennedy had intended to hand over the USA to the United Nations...By March 1963, del Valle indicated there was no recourse but "bloodshed and violence." (Caufield, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy, 2015, p. 197) By showing actual correspondence between General Pedro del Valle and General Walker -- and also General del Valle's correspondence with others in the hardcore Radical Right, this work by Dr. Jeffrey Caufield has significantly advanced our historical knowledge of the events and people surrounding the JFK assassination. Regards, --Paul Trejo <edit typos> Edited January 2, 2016 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie Lazar Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 (edited) Proceeding further into Jeffrey Caufield's new book, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: The Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy, Chapter 8, Lieutenant General Pedro del Valle and the Former Military Men in the Hardcore Underground, we finally encounter General Walker in the narrative. Caufield wishes to start with rightist US Generals as a group. This chapter is of special interest to me, since I perused all 90 boxes of General Walker's personal papers at UT Austin 2011-2012, and I know the contents rather well. Yet inside all of those boxes, there is nothing at all about any correspondence between General Walker and General Pedro del Valle, who was one of the most outspoken segregationists of his time. Yet Jeff Caufield has discovered in his coast-to-coast search, just such a correspondence between the two segregationist Generals. This is a significant advance his historical studies, IMHO. As late as October 1962, General del Valle was accusing Presidents Truman and Eisenhower of treason, because the recognition of the State of Israel was a Jewish plot, he said. Also, General del Valle said that JFK had deliberately allowed nuclear weapons into Cuba, as an act of treason. In a stunning development, Caufield located a 1976 letter from rightist Woody Kearns to General del Valle, reminding him that the JFK assassination had already been the topic of a "confidential discussion" at the Constitution Party meeting in Indianapolis in October 1963, when both were present. Other US Generals named by Caufield in this chapter include General Charles Willoughby, General Albert C. Wedemeyer, General George E. Stratemeyer, General Bonner Fellers, and Admiral John G. Crommelin. Caufield writes: Grave discontent with the Kennedy administration was abundantly evident among the radical right in 1961. General Pedro del Valle, reflecting the prevailing feeling among the radical right, was particularly troubled by the Brown decision that outlawed segregation in the schools -- as well as President Kennedy's civil rights initiatives. He felt that President Kennedy's handling of the Cuban situation and his disarmament policies were treasonous. He was certain that Kennedy had intended to hand over the USA to the United Nations...By March 1963, del Valle indicated there was no recourse but "bloodshed and violence." (Caufield, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy, 2015, p. 197) By showing actual correspondence between General Pedro del Valle and General Walker -- and also General del Valle's correspondence with others in the hardcore Radical Right, this work by Dr. Jeffrey Caufield has significantly advanced our historical knowledge of the events and people surrounding the JFK assassination. Regards, --Paul Trejo An interesting question for researchers is why Walker decided to not retain his correspondence with people like del Valle and other racists? Many of those letters were saved by his correspondents and they can be seen in the University of Oregon archives of personal papers of right-wing figures. Apparently, Walker never asked those individuals to destroy their copies. Another repository which has copies of Walker correspondence is Stanford University's Hoover Institution. For example, Bonner Fellers has a file of correspondence with Walker. So does conservative book publisher, Henry Regnery and Gen. Albert Wedemeyer. Norman Allderice's papers at Stanford contains folders on Walker, Friends of General Walker, the Walker Defense Fund, and Walker's speeches and testimony as well as other topics. Carl McIntire's personal papers at Princeton Theological Seminary contain several folders pertaining to Walker -- including 3 folders of correspondence. [incidentally, I discovered last year after being contacted by a Finnish historian who was doing research into McIntire's papers, that there is correspondence in McIntire's papers between McIntire and Edgar Bundy about me and my research into FBI files and what those files said about both Bundy and McIntire. They were both concerned about the derogatory references in FBI files to them and their organizations. I now have copies of their correspondence.] The Eagle Forum archives in St. Louis have Fred Schlafly's personal papers and there are numerous folders pertaining to Edwin Walker and to his aide, Arch Roberts. The Gerald L.K. Smith papers at the University of Michigan's Bentley Library has correspondence between Smith and Walker. So, in summary, there are lots of avenues left to explore with respect to Walker's beliefs and activities. Edited November 7, 2015 by Ernie Lazar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now