Jump to content
The Education Forum

New Book!


Recommended Posts

Kenneth, we do agree on a few points -- namely, that LHO did not act to shoot General Walker (I) on his own; (II) with his own rifle; (III) on foot or bus; or (IV) bury his rifle....

Or any other way. Edit: I find it strange that you post a link below that contains a statement that the bullet fired at Walker was linked to LHO's rifle.

Kenneth, I don't believe that the bullet fired at Walker was linked to LHO's rifle, so, naturally, I would not have printed that.

I suspect that you mistook my quotation of somebody else as advocacy -- actually I was arguing against the official view.

The so-called Walker bullet was disputed by the FBI, General Walker and many others. The official conclusion of FBI ballistics experts is that there is no way to make any correlation between the so-called Walker bullet and the rifle attributed to LHO.

The way the Warren Commission handled that was by insisting that there was a positive correlation, as part of its "Lone Nut" theory of the JFK assassination.

So, actually, we seem to agree on that fine point.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

...

Wonder how she [Marina] was able to say it was a photograph of Walker's house? Hmmm......

Took the picture in Feb or early March? Before he 'ordered' the rifle from Klein's? Just one of the mistakes the writer made? If she took these photo's, why did he later make some at his employment place?

Any guess as to why Oswald would refer to Walker (Radical right wing, your words) as a fascist (radical left winger, my words) exactly the opposite of what Walker's politics were.

...

Basically I believe someone, perhaps a staffer on the Warren Commission, wrote this for her to fit the story the Warren Commission was going to tell. If any of the story about him having a rifle is true, it is apparently a rifle he had prior to February of that year, which would exclude the Manlicher Carcano If there is anything 'true' in this statement, it is insignificant to the assassination or the shooting at Walker.

Paul, my preliminary comment on all of this material, in general, I don't think that whoever put it together to be filed under Marina's name did a very good job. There are quite a few obvious mistakes and a lot that differs from other 'statements" attributed to her. Do you personally have an opinion as to who wrote this version?

Kenneth

Kenneth, in general it appears that you disbelieve the sworn testimony of Marina Oswald. I can't see why. I myself accept everything that Marina Oswald said while she was under oath.

I realize that before Marina was under oath she just denied everything willy-nilly -- i.e. when she was first taken into custody by the FBI. So, some people say that she was a L-I-A-R on that account. But IMHO that is actually normal behavior in a crisis like that.

Once the Secret Service took charge of Marina, and treated her with kindness and gentleness, she calmed down and cooperated fully. When she was under oath, she told the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Marina Oswald also believed in God. She was not a Communist. She was a Russian Orthodox believer who baptized her children in the Russian Orthodox Church. When she took her oath on the witness stand, she meant it. That's my take on the topic.

There are many ways that Marina could have known that the photograph was of Walker's house. The simplest explanation is simply that (1) the Secret Service told her; and (2) she recognized it from back in March, 1963.

As for Marina's photograph of the BYP and LHO's later variations, it's an interesting situation, and I have a simple theory about it.

(i) Marina said repeatedly that she took "one and only one" photograph of LHO with his pistol and rifle. She insisted on this, even as the Attorneys pushed the multiple poses in her face and insisted that she "had to" have taken them all. This is important.

(ii) LHO worked at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall at the time, which had sophisticated photography equipment -- adequate for military work.

(iii) It is an admitted fact that LHO created his fake ID for Alek J. Hidell at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall.

(iv) The simplest explanation is that Marina Oswald took "one and only one photo" and then LHO made the rest of the photos at his place of employment (abusing company equipment, and possibly getting fired for that very reason).

(v) Why would LHO do that? For plausible denial. If he was ever confronted with the photos, he could easily say, "That photo is a Fake, and I can prove it. That's my face, but it has been pasted onto somebody else's body." He could say that with confidence because it was the truth.

(vi) Photographer Jack White demonstrated to my satisfaction that the "body double" in the BYP photos was Roscoe White. The chin, the neck, the shoulders, the right wrist and the back-leaning stance -- these all belonged to Roscoe White. Now, LHO had first met former Marine, Roscoe White, at Atsugi Air Force Base.

As for the word Fascist, according to most authorities, a Fascist is a Radical Right winger, not a Left winger. Mussolini popularized the word. Also, it's my theory that in those days LHO was in thrall to the immoral George De Mohrenschildt, a hereditary baron of Tzarist Russia, who hated and despised Ex-General Edwin Walker for his behavior at Ole Miss in 1962. George used to call Walker "General Fokker" to LHO to make him laugh. We know this from George De Mohrenschild's 1977 manuscript, I'm A Patsy! I'm A Patsy!

I can understand your suspicion about Marina, Kenneth, because Marina's memory seems to confirm the bogus "Lone Nut" theory that J. Edgar Hoover had sold to LBJ, Allen Dulles and Earl Warren. It's very pat. Yet the explanation is simple, IMHO, namely, that in the early 1960's, women were generally not included in a man's world, and wives would be profoundly ignorant of their husbands' business.

This is probably one reason why the Warren Commission interviewed Marina Oswald and Ruth Paine far, far more than any other witnesses in 1964. They got this "ignoramus" opinion of LHO, and they exploited it to the hilt.

LHO lied to Marina just about constantly. LHO also lied to Ruth Paine continually. Therefore, their opinions and perceptions of LHO would greatly support a "Lone Nut" theory, because they had no knowledge of LHO's contacts or business activities (e.g. Mexico City).

You and I will have to agree to disagree again, Kenneth, on the status of Marina Oswald as a witness. Nobody wrote her testimony. Marina Oswald, I say, told the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth -- AS FAR AS SHE KNEW IT -- which was not very far at all.

You claim, Kenneth, that it contradicts other statements that Marina made. Would you care to offer an example?

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

GUY BANISTER FBI FILES

Today I received 632 pages of FBI material pertaining to Guy Banister. Half of that release consisted of 333 pages from his FBI personnel file but, unfortunately, dozens of serials were destroyed.

However, I did learn a few things which I never knew previously -- as follows.

Most biographical sketches of Banister (including John Simkins's summary on Spartacus) claim that Banister was born in Monroe, Louisiana. http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKbannister.htm

In reality, Banister was born in Vixen, LA (Caldwell Parish)-- which is so small, there are no population figures for it. The entire Parish had a population of less than 10,000 people.

Another interesting factoid: Every biographical account which I have read claims that Banister "retired" from the FBI.

Well -- yes and no.

The sequence of events was as shown below.

Keep in mind that Banister was SAC of the Chicago field office during this time period:

(1) In October 1954 = Banister was censured by the FBI "for offensive language and for submitting to the Bureau unsupported allegations..." Apparently, the "unsupported allegations" by Banister had something to do with a very lengthy letter which Banister wrote to FBI HQ concerning what Banister claimed was inadequate Bureau training of Agents and major flaws with respect to recruiting and retaining security and criminal informants.

(2) Shortly after Banister was censured, he was advised that he was being transferred to the Honolulu office. This, obviously, was an unmistakable demotion -- after having served as SAC of Chicago (with 500 employees).

(3) On November 13, 1954, Banister wrote a letter to Hoover declining the transfer to Honolulu and stating that he wished to retire effective December 31, 1954.

This background helps explain why, subsequently, when Banister wrote a personal letter to Hoover to request being placed on the Bureau's mailing list for all Hoover speeches and articles along with copies of Bureau publications, two things happened:

(1) First, the reply to Banister's request was from Helen Gandy (Hoover's long-time personal secretary). Gandy only got involved in situations where the Bureau wanted to distance itself from whomever had written to Hoover.

(2) Banister's request was rejected except for issues of the FBI's Uniform Crime Report.

This is quite significant because former FBI employees were routinely added to the Bureau mailing list which was known as the Special Correspondents List. The fact that Banister was not automatically added and he had to request Bureau publications and public relations materials, clearly indicates that he was in disfavor -- despite what some conspiracy theorists believe about his supposedly "close" relationship with Hoover.

Edited by Ernie Lazar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holy mackerel Paul, this caught my eye: "As for the word Fascist, according to most authorities, a Fascist is a Radical Right winger, not a Left winger."

Wow,

Simple Definition of fascism
  • : a way of organizing a society in which a government ruled by a dictator controls the lives of the people and in which people are not allowed to disagree with the government

  • : very harsh control or authority

Full Definition of fascism
  1. 1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

The only official definition of Fascism comes from Benito Mussolini, the founder of fascism, in which he outlines three principles of a fascist philosophy.
1."Everything in the state". The Government is supreme and the country is all-encompasing, and all within it must conform to the ruling body, often a dictator.
2."Nothing outside the state". The country must grow and the implied goal of any fascist nation is to rule the world, and have every human submit to the government.
3."Nothing against the state". Any type of questioning the government is not to be tolerated. If you do not see things our way, you are wrong. If you do not agree with the government, you cannot be allowed to live and taint the minds of the rest of the good citizens.

I could go on and on, but it is very clear that fascism is 'exactly' the opposite of 'patritotic American' (your definiton of Radical Right Wing)

So strange that someone could make such a simple semantic mistake.

I don't have time now, but i'll comment more on the rest of your comments later, but this one just blew me out of the water. Fascism is a lot closer to Democrats than to Patriotic Americans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in the 1960's, Birch Society writers presented what they considered to be a more accurate understanding of a political spectrum.

According to their new paradigm, all forms of collectivism and statism, authoritarianism, and totalitarianism belong on the left side of the political spectrum. So, Birchers declared that liberalism, socialism, fabianism, communism, fascism, and nazism should ALL be considered "left-wing" ideological positions.

Furthermore, the JBS stated that liberal ideology inevitably leads to some form of socialism and then ever-more-pervasive and intrusive government control of individuals---which eventually results in tyranny.

The JBS then stated that conservatism and libertarianism belong in the middle and center-right of a political spectrum while only anarchy should be placed on the extreme right. In this scheme of things, the JBS is described as moderate or center-right!

The underlying premise of this new political spectrum was simply to claim that all forms of tyranny and evil arise exclusively from left-wing instincts, whereas every decent and moral and desirable political idea originates exclusively from right-wing beliefs and values.

In short: the Birch Society developed a new and simplistic political spectrum as a means of creating an enemies list -- i.e. everything they despise is always placed on the left side of the spectrum.

At no point did the JBS (or its sympathizers who promote this new political spectrum) ever test their spectrum against actual historical empirical evidence -- such as the following:

(1) When you research the political campaigns of neo-nazis who have run for political office, their themes, ideas and policy proposals are predominantly RIGHT-WING — and in fact, the support they subsequently get (money, endorsements, publicity, votes, etc.) comes NOT from the LEFT, but from the RIGHT side of the political spectrum.
Take George R. Carlson for example. In 1980 (and again in 1984) Carlson ran for the GOP nomination for the 15th Congressional District seat in Michigan. Despite massive media publicity which pointed out his membership in the neo-nazi National Socialist Movement and in the National Christian Democracy Union, AND despite blistering attacks from, and disavowal by, all state Republican Party officials --- Carlson WON that 8/5/80 primary election with 55% of the vote. He lost the general election on 11/5/80 but he still got 32% of that vote (53,570 votes). Carlson’s candidacy was supported by Robert E. Miles, the head of the United Klans of America chapter in Michigan. [in the 11/6/84 general election, Carlson won 66,172 votes for the 15th CD seat.]
So, presumably, according to the JBS...
(1a) the majority (55%) of Michigan Republicans in Carlson's Congressional District in August 1980 were neo-nazi and LEFTISTS?
(1b) 32% of the general electorate in Carlson's Michigan district (i.e. 53,570) were neo-nazi supporters and LEFTISTS?
(1c) Carlson obtained his 55% primary vote, his financial contributions, his volunteers, and his endorsements predominantly from LEFTISTS and he campaigned on LEFTIST themes and proposals?
(2) When you review the recommended reading lists of neo-nazi and fascist groups, they often recommend and sell many of the SAME publications as the Birch Society or other extreme right-wing/conservative/patriot groups
For example: In 1964, the American Nazi Party recommended and sold John Stormer’s classic conspiracy book, “None Dare Call It Treason”—which the JBS effusively praised and sold in all its bookstores! [stormer, a Goldwater supporter, was a Republican Party official in Missouri!]
Incidentally, during the 1960’s, George Lincoln Rockwell invited John Birch Society members to attend a American Nazi Party recruitment meeting in Dallas TX. If “statist” and “collectivist” Rockwell was truly “extreme left” then why would he think that polar opposite adherents of anti-statist values (such as the JBS) would offer a fertile recruiting ground for ANP members and supporters?
(3) Furthermore, the founder and leader of the American Nazi Party (George Lincoln Rockwell) admired prominent right-wing heroes such as Sen. Joseph McCarthy. In 1952, Rockwell publicly supported Gen. Douglas MacArthur for President and he organized a pro-MacArthur rally in San Diego.
After Rockwell got out of the Navy, he went to work for right-wing organizations such as Robert Snowden's Campaign for the 48 States. [snowden later was a member of the Birch Society.]
In the preface to his autobiography, This Time The World, Rockwell wrote:
Acknowledgements: The author gratefully acknowledges the inspiration he received in his political career from three great Americans: Senator Joseph McCarthy, General Charles Lindbergh, General Douglas MacArthur.
Are those LEFT-WING heroes??
Let's not forget Robert Surrey. As EF readers doubtlessly recall, Robert Surrey and his wife (Mary) of Dallas TX were both John Birch Society members. They both were employed by fellow Bircher, Gen. Edwin A. Walker of Dallas.
In 1963, Robert Surrey and Edwin Walker entered into a partnership as co-owners of American Eagle Publishing Company. They published all of the standard Birch Society and right-wing conservative arguments against the UN, against the Council on Foreign Relations, against the Warren Supreme Court, and against the policies and programs of Presidents John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson.
Surrey also was President and Chairman of the Board of United White Christians Majority. The group was conceived by George Lincoln Rockwell to obtain funds for the American Nazi Party (ANP) from persons who might not wish to be directly associated with the ANP (in short, it was an ANP front-group).
In May 1968, Robert became Southwest Regional Coordinator and National Business Manager for the American Nazi Party. Many other Birch Society members or supporters involved themselves in neo-nazi activities and/or promoted neo-nazi themes including anti-zionism arguments.
How does one explain this if, as the JBS and their sympathizers contend, nazis are "collectivists" and belong on the LEFT side of a political spectrum? Why would any JBS member/sympathizer be attracted to nazi or fascist ideas?

(4) HITLER ADMIRERS IN THE UNITED STATES

The first postwar fascist organization in the United States was James Madole's National Renaissance Party. The FBI obtained a list of NRP members, financial contributors, and subscribers to the NRP newsletter. Among the persons who contributed money to the NRP were such extreme right racist and anti-semitic personalities during the 1950's and 1960's as those shown below. You may recognize some of these names because they appear as key figures in Dr. Caufield's discussion of the radical right movement in the U.S.

Joseph Beauharnais (IL)
Max Nelsen (IL)
William Wernecke (IL)
Peter Xavier (OH)
Edward R. Fields (KY)
Millard Grubbs (KY)
Matt Koehl (WI)
West Hooker (CT)
Robert Kuttner (CT)
Russell Maguire (CT)
Byram Campbell (UT)
Willis Carto (CA)
Hugh G. Grant (GA)
Ernest Elmhurst (NY)
Conrad Grieb (NY)
Charles Smith (NY)
Fred Weiss (NY)
In addition, well-known individuals like Eustace Mullins associated himself with the NRP as a speaker and writer. In the October 1952 issue of the NRP newsletter, Mullins wrote an article entitled "Hitler: An Appreciation". Mullins was a roommate (and lover) of Matt Koehl in both New York City and Chicago. Koehl later became the head of the American Nazi Party after Rockwell was assassinated.

The May 1956 issue of the NRP Bulletin published a reprint of a previous article that declared that Hitler was “the George Washington of Europe” and it contained the following comment: “What Hitler accomplished in Europe, the National Renaissance Party shall yet accomplish in America.”

Obviously, according to the JBS interpretation of a political spectrum, Madole and the NRP belong on the LEFT side of a political spectrum -- but the JBS has no explanation for why the NRP attracted so many EXTREME RIGHT WING adherents.

In a 1948 letter to W. Henry MacFarland, James Madole praised the anti-Communist and anti-Jewish activities of such well-known right-wing bigots as Gerald L.K. Smith, Gerald B. Winrod, and Elizabeth Dilling. I doubt that any sane person has ever claimed that these folks were left-wing in their political sympathies!

BOTTOM-LINE

Anybody can fabricate a political spectrum which uses totally bogus criteria for placing individuals and organizations on one specific side of the spectrum.

Anybody can use a bogus definition of "fascism" which makes absolutely no sense in terms of actual historical evidence and then claim that their definition applies "more to Democrats than to patriotic Americans".

Ultimately, the kinds of questions which must be asked and answered in order to place someone in their correct location on a political spectrum include:

* from whom does the individual seek support for their agenda?
* which authors and publications does the individual recommend as reliable?
* what political alliances does the individual try to make?
* from whom does the individual obtain money for their causes and objectives?
* what persons and organizations does the individual consider enemies whom should be vanquished and rendered impotent?
There is one specific tool which can assist fact-challenged persons to make rational evaluations, i.e. the voting scorecards compiled by well-known conservative and extreme right educational and interest groups such as FreedomWorks, Heritage Foundation, American Conservative Union, John Birch Society, and also by non-partisan sources such as National Journal and Project Vote Smart.
Obviously, each interest group (right wing or left wing) selects the issues which they believe are most important for evaluating whether or not someone is adhering to right-wing or left-wing values and positions.
So---check the scores which the right-wing groups give to every member of Congress. Check out which individuals consistently score very high every year on their scorecards. Also notice the individuals who score very low each year (i.e. the "leftists").
THEN, compare what neo-nazi and fascist and Hitler-admiring individuals and organizations favor or approve with respect to the issues evaluated by right-wing and left-wing interest groups and calculate the score which those alleged "leftist" neo-nazis would attain if they were members of Congress and let us know your result.
Edited by Ernie Lazar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holy mackerel Paul, this caught my eye: "As for the word Fascist, according to most authorities, a Fascist is a Radical Right winger, not a Left winger."

Wow,

Simple Definition of fascism
  • : a way of organizing a society in which a government ruled by a dictator controls the lives of the people and in which people are not allowed to disagree with the government

  • : very harsh control or authority

Full Definition of fascism

  1. 1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

fascism

The only official definition of Fascism comes from Benito Mussolini, the founder of fascism, in which he outlines three principles of a fascist philosophy.

1."Everything in the state". The Government is supreme and the country is all-encompasing, and all within it must conform to the ruling body, often a dictator.

2."Nothing outside the state". The country must grow and the implied goal of any fascist nation is to rule the world, and have every human submit to the government.

3."Nothing against the state". Any type of questioning the government is not to be tolerated. If you do not see things our way, you are wrong. If you do not agree with the government, you cannot be allowed to live and taint the minds of the rest of the good citizens.

I could go on and on, but it is very clear that fascism is 'exactly' the opposite of 'patritotic American' (your definiton of Radical Right Wing)

So strange that someone could make such a simple semantic mistake.

I don't have time now, but i'll comment more on the rest of your comments later, but this one just blew me out of the water. Fascism is a lot closer to Democrats than to Patriotic Americans.

Kenneth, again, I'm making a careful distinction between the Right Wing and the Radical Right Wing.

I admitted that while General Walker was a US General, that he was a Patriotic American.

I allege that when General Walker resigned from the US Army, forfeiting his 30-year Pension, he became the only US General in the 20th century to do so. I also allege that General Walker resigned because of his 1959 membership in the John Birch Society, because Robert Welch had printed that President Eisenhower was a "dedicated member of the Communist Conspiracy" who was guilty of "treason."

I showed that fact with quotations from Robert Welch's own book, "The Politician" (1959).

I made this distinction, Kenneth, that any Patriotic American who becomes converted to the doctrine that the President of the United States is a TRAITOR, can no longer qualify as a Patriotic American, but has now chosen to become a member of the Radical Right.

To be Radical in any direction -- Left or Right -- exceeds the boundaries of Patriotism. That's my position. I hope that's clear.

When we follow the Radical nature of Ex-General Walker's positions in 1961, 1962 and 1963, and we trace his political associations during that period, and the statements that he made, IMHO it becomes easier to solve the JFK assassination. My position is supported by this new book by Dr. Jeffrey Caufield, namely, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: The Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015).

I hope my position is now clearer to you.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holy mackerel Paul, this caught my eye: "As for the word Fascist, according to most authorities, a Fascist is a Radical Right winger, not a Left winger."

Wow,

Simple Definition of fascism
  • : a way of organizing a society in which a government ruled by a dictator controls the lives of the people and in which people are not allowed to disagree with the government

  • : very harsh control or authority

Full Definition of fascism

  1. 1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

fascism

The only official definition of Fascism comes from Benito Mussolini, the founder of fascism, in which he outlines three principles of a fascist philosophy.

1."Everything in the state". The Government is supreme and the country is all-encompasing, and all within it must conform to the ruling body, often a dictator.

2."Nothing outside the state". The country must grow and the implied goal of any fascist nation is to rule the world, and have every human submit to the government.

3."Nothing against the state". Any type of questioning the government is not to be tolerated. If you do not see things our way, you are wrong. If you do not agree with the government, you cannot be allowed to live and taint the minds of the rest of the good citizens.

I could go on and on, but it is very clear that fascism is 'exactly' the opposite of 'patritotic American' (your definiton of Radical Right Wing)

So strange that someone could make such a simple semantic mistake.

I don't have time now, but i'll comment more on the rest of your comments later, but this one just blew me out of the water. Fascism is a lot closer to Democrats than to Patriotic Americans.

Kenneth, again, I'm making a careful distinction between the Right Wing and the Radical Right Wing.

I admitted that while General Walker was a US General, that he was a Patriotic American.

I allege that when General Walker resigned from the US Army, forfeiting his 30-year Pension, he became the only US General in the 20th century to do so. I also allege that General Walker resigned because of his 1959 membership in the John Birch Society, because Robert Welch had printed that President Eisenhower was a "dedicated member of the Communist Conspiracy" who was guilty of "treason."

I showed that fact with quotations from Robert Welch's own book, "The Politician" (1959).

I made this distinction, Kenneth, that any Patriotic American who becomes converted to the doctrine that the President of the United States is a TRAITOR, can no longer qualify as a Patriotic American, but has now chosen to become a member of the Radical Right.

To be Radical in any direction -- Left or Right -- exceeds the boundaries of Patriotism. That's my position. I hope that's clear.

When we follow the Radical nature of Ex-General Walker's positions in 1961, 1962 and 1963, and we trace his political associations during that period, and the statements that he made, IMHO it becomes easier to solve the JFK assassination. My position is supported by this new book by Dr. Jeffrey Caufield, namely, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: The Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015).

I hope my position is now clearer to you.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Paul -- what, exactly, makes someone a "patriotic American"?

You seem to be saying that you can be accurately characterized as "patriotic" just by the fact that you wear a military uniform.

Many times I have seen you write that Walker became mesmerized by Robert Welch -- as if Welch performed some sort of Jedi Mind Trick on Walker.

According to you, Walker decided that the leaders of our country were Communist sympathizers or Communist agents or Communist dupes - and those leaders were consciously working to create a one-world socialist dictatorship -- solely because of Welch's Jedi Mind Trick!

Significantly, however, you have never presented any factual evidence to support that contention.

According to the Trejo scheme of things -- apparently Walker had no significant political beliefs before 1959. Then, voila! Walker's mind did a total somersault and totally succumbed to what Robert Welch wrote in his manuscript "The Politician".

I see two problems with your theory:

(1) First, you have never given us any verifiable factual evidence to establish that Robert Welch loaned a copy of The Politician to Walker -- and if so, on what date?

(2) Second, neither you or anybody else has ever presented compelling factual information regarding Walker's political beliefs PRIOR TO 1959.

It should be self-evident that there are reasons why political extremists become receptive to radical ideas and explanations and proposals.

They don't just wake up on a Tuesday and decide "Gee--I think I will become a right-wing extremist today" -- whereas, on Monday and previously, they were middle-of-the-road or moderate in their beliefs and interpretations.

Edited by Ernie Lazar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kenneth,

I believe I've dealt objectively with the history of Ex-General Edwin Walker in my three-part Smashwords offering, at these URLs:

https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/501625

https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/501629

https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/501646

Since I made a certain percentage of these books free to any viewer, I gather you've skimmed through a few pages of them. At only 99 cents each, I think they're accessible to most folks -- and they took me the better part of two years to pull together.

Yet if you request it, I'll post a 24-hour coupon for viewers like you to obtain a FREE copy -- one at a time.

I consider you a courteous gentleman of the old school -- firm in your opinions and yet respectful of others. I value your opinion and I'd like to know what you think of my histories of Edwin Walker -- whom I regard as one of the most important men in US history.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I admitted that while General Walker was a US General, that he was a Patriotic American."

a virulent racist who led riots against the admission of an african american student at the uni of mississippi is not by any stretch of the imagination a patriot or good american. he's just another wacko nut burger who is a little too crispy around the edges for his own good. please do not insult truly great americans by trying to associate walker with them. thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I admitted that while General Walker was a US General, that he was a Patriotic American."

a virulent racist who led riots against the admission of an african american student at the uni of mississippi is not by any stretch of the imagination a patriot or good american. he's just another wacko nut burger who is a little too crispy around the edges for his own good. please do not insult truly great americans by trying to associate walker with them. thank you.​

That was later in his career, Martin.

As I say -- while General Walker was a US General, he was indeed a Patriotic American. He was one of the victorious Generals of World War Two, and he was also one of the loyal and honorable US Generals of the Korean War.

While General Walker served his country, he served with distinction.

IMHO, it was only when General Walker became infected by the John Birch doctrine in 1959, which claimed that the past three sitting US Presidents had been Communist Traitors, did General Walker turn to dedicate his life to racist politics.

Yet this is the complexity of it -- General Walker was always a man of principles -- and he quit the US Army in such a way that he forfeited his 30-year US Army Pension. That makes no sense unless one regards him as a man of one-sided action.

It was because, IMHO, Robert Welch, the leader of the JBS, had published that President Eisenhower was a Communist Traitor, and that JFK was also a Communist Traitor, that General Walker decided to turn against the US Government -- first by resigning without an Army Pension, and then by joining the Radical Right of Racist US Politics, loudly opposing the Brown Decision of racial integration of public schools, and then leading a racial riot at Ole Miss University in late 1962.

It was, furthermore, that same tendency in politics that led Ex-General Walker further underground, to work with Guy Banister and Joseph Milteer to plot the framing of Lee Harvey Oswald in New Orleans, and the assassination of JFK in Dallas -- just blocks away from the Dallas Memorial Auditorium where his group planned and executed the humiliation of UN Ambassador Adlai Stevenson only one month before.

The connection is clear, IMHO. It is precisely because Ex-General Walker was committed to racist politics that he coordinated the Dallas plot against JFK. In that narrow sense I agree with you.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you look at it a certain way stalin and old adolf were me of principle, too. just the wrong principles.

To paraphrase shakespeare a hate-mongering racist nut job following orders is still a hate mongering racist nut job orders or not; it was in his DNA.

gonna hold your feet to the fire on this one because nowhere do i link his racist politics with his coordinating the plot against jfk. why would i do that when i don't believe he did any such thing. please do not put words in my mouth or twist my words in any way that makes it seem as if i am agreeing with you or supporting your cockamamie ideas in any way. let me make it plain to you: i agree with you on nothing.

Talkin' John Birch Paranoid Blues
By Bob Dylan

Well, I was feelin' sad and feelin' blue
I didn't know what in the world I was gonna do
Them Communists they was comin' around
They was in the air
They was on the ground
They wouldn't gimme no peace

So I run down most hurriedly
And joined up with the John Birch Society
I got me a secret membership card
And started off a-walkin' down the road
Yee-hoo, I'm a real John Bircher now
Look out you Commies

Now we all agree with Hitlers' views
Although he killed six million Jews
It don't matter too much that he was a Fascist
At least you can't say he was a Communist
That's to say like if you got a cold you take a shot of malaria

Well, I was lookin' everywhere for them gol-darned Reds
I got up in the mornin' 'n' looked under my bed
Looked in the sink, behind the door
Looked in the glove compartment of my car
Couldn't find 'em

I was lookin' high an' low for them Reds everywhere
I was lookin' in the sink an' underneath the chair
I looked way up my chimney hole
I even looked deep inside my toilet bowl
They got away

Well, I was sittin' home alone an' started to sweat
Figured they was in my T.V. set
Peeked behind the picture frame
Got a shock from my feet, hittin' right up in the brain
Them Reds caused it
I know they did, them hard-core ones

Well, I quit my job so I could work alone
Then I changed my name to Sherlock Holmes
Followed some clues from my detective bag
And discovered they was red stripes on the American flag
That ol' Betty Ross

Well, I investigated all the books in the library
Ninety percent of 'em gotta be burned away
I investigated all the people that I knowed
Ninety-eight percent of them gotta go
The other two percent are fellow Birchers, just like me

Now Eisenhower, he's a Russian spy
Lincoln, Jefferson and that Roosevelt guy
To my knowledge there's just one man
That's really a true American, George Lincoln Rockwell
I know for a fact he hates Commies 'cause he picketed the movie Exodus

Well, I fin'ly started thinkin' straight
When I run outta things to investigate
Couldn't imagine doin' anything else
So now I'm sittin' home investigatin' myself
Hope I don't find out anything, hm, great God

Dylan was barred from singing this on the Ed Sullivan Show; how could that be if the media are liberally biased

Edited by Martin Blank
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I admitted that while General Walker was a US General, that he was a Patriotic American."

a virulent racist who led riots against the admission of an african american student at the uni of mississippi is not by any stretch of the imagination a patriot or good american. he's just another wacko nut burger who is a little too crispy around the edges for his own good. please do not insult truly great americans by trying to associate walker with them. thank you.​

That was later in his career, Martin.

As I say -- while General Walker was a US General, he was indeed a Patriotic American. He was one of the victorious Generals of World War Two, and he was also one of the loyal and honorable US Generals of the Korean War.

While General Walker served his country, he served with distinction.

IMHO, it was only when General Walker became infected by the John Birch doctrine, which claimed that the past four sitting US Presidents had been Communist Traitors, did General Walker turn to dedicate his life to racist politics.

Yet this is the complexity of it -- General Walker was always a man of principles -- and he quit the US Army in such a way that he forfeited his 30-year US Army Pension. That makes no sense unless one regards him as a man of one-sided action.

It was because, IMHO, Robert Welch, the leader of the JBS, had published that President Eisenhower was a Communist Traitor, and that JFK was also a Communist Traitor, that General Walker decided to turn against the US Government -- first by resigning without an Army Pension, and then by joining the Radical Right of Racist US Politics, loudly opposing the Brown Decision of racial integration of public schools, and then leading a racial riot at Ole Miss University in late 1962.

It was, furthermore, that same tendency in politics that led Ex-General Walker further underground, to work with Guy Banister and Joseph Milteer to plot the framing of Lee Harvey Oswald in New Orleans, and the assassination of JFK in Dallas -- just blocks away from the Dallas Memorial Auditorium where his group planned and executed the humiliation of UN Ambassador Adlai Stevenson only one month before.

The connection is clear, IMHO. It is precisely because Ex-General Walker was committed to racist politics that he coordinated the Dallas plot against JFK. In that narrow sense I agree with you.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

As usual, Paul engages in total falsehoods.

(1) Robert Welch did not "publish" anything which stated that Ike was a Communist traitor. He composed a private letter starting in 1954 which grew to book-length over time. Each letter was numbered and loaned out to persons whom Welch thought might be interested in his evidence against Eisenhower AND whom would keep the content of his private letter confidential. After they finished reading the "letter", they returned it to Welch.

The first published edition of his manuscript was in 1963. In that edition (which was not published by the Birch Society; it was self-published by Welch), there was considerable editing of the original manuscript text to remove the most inflammatory (and defamatory) statements about Ike and about other figures whom Welch maligned in his "private letter".

(2) Robert Welch did NOT write "that JFK was also Communist traitor". Nor is Paul correct when he asserts that "John Birch doctrine...claimed that the past four sitting US Presidents had been Communist traitors".

The reason why Paul NEVER QUOTES anything to substantiate his comments AND why Paul never gives readers appropriate bibliographic citations so that they check all his accusations and statements -- is precisely because Paul knows he CANNOT provide such evidence.

(3) Furthermore, it is significant that Paul has never provided any supporting evidence for his contention that Walker "decided to turn against the US Government" -- because of anything Robert Welch wrote or said.

The problem with Paul is that he always assumes some cause-and-effect relationship between either unconnected events or between events which are merely coincidental.

Paul wants us to seriously believe that prior to 1959, when Walker was 50 years of age (!) Edwin Walker did not have a single political thought in his head and ONLY after being exposed (allegedly) to writings by Robert Welch did Walker become a right-wing political extremist.

Isn't it strange that neither Paul (or anybody else) has ever provided compelling factual evidence to substantiate that assumption, i.e. that Walker had NO political thoughts prior to 1959?

Edited by Ernie Lazar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you look at it a certain way stalin and old adolf were me of principle, too. just the wrong principles.

To paraphrase shakespeare a hate-mongering racist nut job following orders is still a hate mongering racist nut job orders or not; it was in his DNA.

gonna hold your feet to the fire on this one because nowhere do i link his racist politics with his coordinating the plot against jfk. why would i do that when i don't believe he did any such thing. please do not put words in my mouth or twist my words in any way that makes it seem as if i am agreeing with you or supporting your cockamamie ideas in any way. let me make it plain to you: i agree with you on nothing.

<snip>

Martin, if you look at US History, you'll notice a very peculiar thing about Ex-General Edwin Walker.

You want to portray Ex-General Edwin Walker as a pure racist -- but with your one-sided bias you can't explain the fact that it was General Walker himself, personally, who led the Federal Troops in Arkansas at Little Rock High School -- enforcing racial integration there in loyalty and obedience to President Eisenhower.

It wasn't until he was infected by the JBS "Black Book" did Edwin Walker turn against the Supreme Court and the White House.

I'm happy to disagree with any one-sided version of US History, Martin. My view accounts for both sides of this complex, 20th century American named Edwin Walker -- the only US General in the 20th century to spurn his 30-year Army Pension; and according to Dr. Jeff Caufield's new book, the mastermind of the JFK assassination.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you look at it a certain way stalin and old adolf were me of principle, too. just the wrong principles.

To paraphrase shakespeare a hate-mongering racist nut job following orders is still a hate mongering racist nut job orders or not; it was in his DNA.

gonna hold your feet to the fire on this one because nowhere do i link his racist politics with his coordinating the plot against jfk. why would i do that when i don't believe he did any such thing. please do not put words in my mouth or twist my words in any way that makes it seem as if i am agreeing with you or supporting your cockamamie ideas in any way. let me make it plain to you: i agree with you on nothing.

<snip>

Martin, if you look at US History, you'll notice a very peculiar thing about Ex-General Edwin Walker.

You want to portray Ex-General Edwin Walker as a pure racist -- but with your one-sided bias you can't explain the fact that it was General Walker himself, personally, who led the Federal Troops in Arkansas at Little Rock High School -- enforcing racial integration there in loyalty and obedience to President Eisenhower.

It wasn't until he was infected by the JBS "Black Book" did Ed

win Walker turn against the Supreme Court and the White House.

I'm happy to disagree with any one-sided version of US History, Martin. My view accounts for both sides of this complex, 20th century American named Edwin Walker -- the only US General in the 20th century to spurn his 30-year Army Pension; and according to Dr. Jeff Caufield's new book, the mastermind of the JFK assassination.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Another ASSUMPTION WITHOUT EVIDENCE presented by Paul.

How does Paul know that it is factually true that (as he wrote):

"It wasn't until he was infected by the JBS "Black Book" did Edwin Walker turn against the Supreme Court and the White House."
(1) The 1959 manuscript was NOT a "JBS" (Birch Society) publication.
(2) IF (and Paul has never even established this is factually true) -- but IF Edwin Walker received a copy of The Politician in 1959, then he would have received a loaned numbered copy of the "private letter" manuscript version.
By the way: In January 1959, G-2 (Army Intelligence) in New York City obtained excerpts from The Politician from Master Specialist Helen G. Morrissey in New York. G-2 sent those excerpts to the FBI's Boston field office. Morrissey became acquainted with Welch in 1957. Welch sent Morrissey a copy of the complete Politician manuscript in August 1958.
After reviewing the excerpts they received from G2, the FBI's Boston field office then asked Army Intelligence to send them a copy of the complete manuscript---which they did after Morrissey arranged for a third party to receive a copy.
Significantly, that full copy was NOT bound. It was just looseleaf pages of typewritten text--which is the same version that I received from Army Intelligence.
(3) In 1963, because of all the adverse publicity about it, Welch decided to edit his manuscript and then privately print it by himself. It became known at THAT time as "The Black Book" because the text was reproduced by photo offset printing and then spiral bound with black cardboard covers.
(4) So---as usual, Paul reveals that he does NOT have factually accurate knowledge about this subject. He wrongly attributed the original manuscript to the "JBS" -- when it was, instead, a private (typewritten) letter written by Welch starting in 1954 (5 years before the JBS came into existence) and then Paul falsely described what Walker MIGHT have received in 1959 as "The Black Book" -- which refers to the first PUBLISHED book version which came out in 1963 (4 years after Walker supposedly received his copy).
Edited by Ernie Lazar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

like all good nazi's he was only following orders. he said it was against his conscience.

"Walker, a supporter of the John Birch Society, was totally opposed to school desegragation. However, as commander of the Arkansas Military District he was forced to implement the orders of Dwight Eisenhower." Had he been insubordinate and refused a direct order from the C in C he would have been court martialed.

don't flatter yourself as a historian. your views account for a fictional creation that lives only in your own mind. oh and please disagree with your own one-sided version of American history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...