New Book!

[Paul Trejo]

Yes-- I should have written Walker's August 1961 testimony was before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee (in Executive Session) -- not the Senate Subcommittee on Military Preparedness. during the 1960's and 1970's) -- then, maybe Walker could have been listed as worthy of a visit by the FBI or Secret Service...

I don't think anybody has ever developed verifiable factual data to support your claim that Hosty "probably was fully aware" of the murder plot against JFK.

My first question, Ernie, perhaps you may have an opinion, is why the FBI would have any interest in the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee of August 1961, about General Walker, while General Walker was still a US General? (Walker resigned from the US Army on November 1st, 1961).

My second question is about Dallas FBI agent James Hosty, whom the Warren Commission repeatedly questioned about failing to tell the Secret Service PRS about Lee Harvey Oswald, whom he was personally charged with tracking, after Oswald had returned to Dallas from New Orleans.

Actually, Hosty had re-opened the FBI file on Lee Harvey Oswald in January 1963, and then transferred it to New Orleans upon news that Oswald had moved to New Orleans in April, 1963.

According to J. Edgar Hoover's testimony to the Warren Commission, James Hosty had reported that Lee Harvey Oswald was involved in FPCC activities in Dallas starting in February 1963, and FBI Headquarters investigated that claim, and found it to be incorrect.

J. Edgar Hoover personally saw to that, evidently, because the FBI was tracking the FPCC as a Communist front group. Hoover himself declared that Lee Harvey Oswald had no interaction with the FPCC in February 1963 -- even though James Hosty declared that Oswald was active in the FPCC at that time. That's another mismatch between the FBI Field and FBI HQ.

In any case, Hosty was interested in Lee Harvey Oswald since the beginning of 1963 -- and yet when Oswald began working at the TSBD building, which was on the JFK parade route, the fact remains that Dallas FBI agent James Hosty had failed to name Lee Harvey Oswald to the PRS when they were asking about possible dangerous people in Dallas.

So -- here is verifiable data that James Hosty deliberately withheld vital data from the Secret Service PRS -- that could be developed into further evidence that James Hosty knew far more about the plot to assassinate JFK than he ever admitted.

The question you raised, Ernie, is also a good one -- what did the FBI know about Robert Allen Surrey, and when did they know it? I myself have no doubts that Dallas FBI agent James Hosty knew good and well that Robert Allen Surrey (his bridge partner for years, according to Penn Jones) was the author of the handbill, WANTED FOR TREASON: JFK.

Yet James Hosty told the Secret Service -- and the Warren Commission -- that he had no idea who authored that handbill.

It seems to me that the Dallas FBI Field Office knew more about the JFK murder than the FBI HQ.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited August 30, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

Yes-- I should have written Walker's August 1961 testimony was before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee (in Executive Session) -- not the Senate Subcommittee on Military Preparedness. during the 1960's and 1970's) -- then, maybe Walker could have been listed as worthy of a visit by the FBI or Secret Service...

I don't think anybody has ever developed verifiable factual data to support your claim that Hosty "probably was fully aware" of the murder plot against JFK.

My first question, Ernie, perhaps you may have an opinion, is why the FBI would have any interest in the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee of August 1961, while General Walker was still a US General?

My second question is about the Warren Commission, which repeatedly asked Dallas FBI agent James Hosty why he failed to tell the PRS about Lee Harvey Oswald, whom he was personally charged with tracking, when Oswald returned to Dallas from New Orleans.

Actually, Hosty had re-opened the FBI file on Lee Harvey Oswald in January 1963, and then transferred it to New Orleans upon news that Oswald had moved to New Orleans in April, 1963.

According to J. Edgar Hoover's testimony to the Warren Commission, James Hosty had reported that Lee Harvey Oswald was involved in FPCC activities in Dallas starting in February 1963, and FBI Headquarters investigated that claim, and found it to be incorrect.

J. Edgar Hoover personally saw to that, evidently, because the FBI was tracking the FPCC as a Communist front group. Hoover himself declared that Lee Harvey Oswald had no interaction with the FPCC in February 1963 -- even though James Hosty declared that Oswald was active in the FPCC. That's another mismatch between the FBI Field and FBI HQ.

In any case, Hosty was interested in Lee Harvey Oswald since the beginning of 1963 -- and yet when Oswald began working at the TSBD building, which was on the JFK parade route, the fact remains that James Hosty failed to name Lee Harvey Oswald to the PRS when they were asking about possible dangerous people in Dallas.

So -- here is verifiable data that James Hosty deliberately withheld vital data from the Secret Service PRS -- that could be developed into further evidence that James Hosty knew far more about the plot to assassinate JFK than he ever admitted.

The question you raised is also a good one -- what did the FBI know about Robert Allen Surrey, and when did they know it? I myself have no doubts that Dallas FBI agent James Hosty knew good and well that Robert Allen Surrey (his bridge partner for years, according to Penn Jones) was the author of the handbill, WANTED FOR TREASON: JFK.

Yet James Hosty told the Secret Service -- and the Warren Commission -- that he had no idea who authored that handbill.

It seems to me that the Dallas FBI Field Office knew more about the JFK murder than the FBI HQ.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Yes-- I should have written Walker's August 1961 testimony was before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee (in Executive Session) -- not the Senate Subcommittee on Military Preparedness. during the 1960's and 1970's) -- then, maybe Walker could have been listed as worthy of a visit by the FBI or Secret Service...

I don't think anybody has ever developed verifiable factual data to support your claim that Hosty "probably was fully aware" of the murder plot against JFK.

(1) The answer to your first question is easy. The FBI had an ongoing and very close relationship with Congressional investigative committees. In fact, at various times, FBI employees were "loaned" to work for those committees. As a result, the FBI had advance knowledge of what persons were going to be subpoenaed to testify. In addition, many FBI employees who retired or resigned from the FBI, then went to work as investigators for those Congressional committees.

There were very practical reasons for why the FBI wanted advance knowledge about persons being required to testify.

(1.1) First, the FBI did not want investigative committees to unknowingly reveal the identity of FBI informants who were CPUSA members --as happened on several occasions -- thus rendering them useless to the FBI after they were publicly identified as Party members.

(1.2) Second, the FBI did not want investigative committees to always publicly identify every significant CPUSA member or require them to testify - because when the Party became cognizant that specific members were "persons of interest" to those committees, the Party assumed (correctly) that those Party members were likely to be investigated by the FBI or by military intelligence or by police dept "subversive" squads or by state un-american activities committees. Consequently, those CP members would no longer be given access to confidential Party information, or be allowed to attend all closed Party meetings, or be given important assignments for fear that they might be compromised. [in some instances, the FBI had mail covers, trash covers, and technical surveillance on Party members whom had access to confidential Party info - so if the Party became reluctant to share such info with publicly identified members, the FBI would lose its access to that info.]

In fact, when FBI informant Julia Brown testified before HUAC, she identified dozens of people in Cleveland whom she knew were Party members, because they attended Party meetings with her. Julia specifically mentioned one husband and wife in Cleveland. What Julia did not know is that the husband and wife were also FBI security informants -- so publicly identifying them as Communists ended their usefulness to the FBI.

(1.3) The FBI files on the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee (SISS) and on the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HUAC) are exceptionally large. Almost always, the Bureau obtained transcripts of all testimony before those committees (including Executive Session testimony not publicly released). The FBI wanted to make sure that all the names and subjects discussed in those hearings would be added to the FBI Central Records System. [When they came across a name unfamiliar to them, they usually opened a file on them. Sometimes testimony would refer to "FNU" or "LNU" (first name or last name unknown) - which then triggered an investigation.

And, of course, these principles also applied to congressional hearings into KKK or Black Panthers or related extremist organizations.

(1.4) When I submitted my FOIA request for the FBI file on SISS in 2013, I was told that the SISS file was 63,600 pages! The HUAC file is even larger.

(1.5) Lastly, among the reasons why the FBI was interested in the August 1961 Executive Session testimony of Walker was because (1) of his assertions regarding "Overseas Weekly" and (2) Walker's connection to the Birch Society. Keep in mind that, at this time, the Bureau was keeping apprised of developments regarding JBS beliefs and activities -- particularly anything that had national security implications.

(2) I am sure that you know Agent Hosty was disciplined with the approval of Hoover for various performance issues. In addition, he was transferred to another office. In fact, many FBI employees were disciplined as a result of internal review by the FBI as well as outside criticisms by the WC and others. A long time ago, I posted here in EF a copy of the FBI memo which listed every FBI employee who was censured and disciplined because of their mistakes in handling information related to Oswald and JFK's murder -- as well as other related matters.

Edited August 31, 2016 by Ernie Lazar

[Harry J.Dean]

Hey Lazar old fellow it's time to cut back and rest up, you're getting tired old chap, really,

take a complete read of Doctor Caufield's 2015 book, and be patient for the final release of

urgent documents that remain beyond your struggling abilities old fellow.

[Ernie Lazar]

Hey Lazar old fellow it's time to cut back and rest up, you're getting tired old chap, really,

take a complete read of Doctor Caufield's 2015 book, and be patient for the final release of

urgent documents that remain beyond your struggling abilities old fellow.

Well, Harry, if you are referring to the October 2017 documents, we already know what FBI documents are being released because NARA has published their final listing and none of those documents pertain to you or Walker or the JBS.

BTW-- NARA told me that they hope to make everything released in October 2017 available online - so nobody will need to pay anything to obtain those docs.

Edited August 31, 2016 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

Hey Lazar old fellow it's time to cut back and rest up, you're getting tired old chap, really,

take a complete read of Doctor Caufield's 2015 book, and be patient for the final release of

urgent documents that remain beyond your struggling abilities old fellow.

Hello Harry. It's refreshing to hear from you, the first person in US History to publicly charge that Ex-General Edwin Walker was the mastermind of the JFK assassination.

You made this public in January, 1965, after the disappointing results of the Warren Report in late 1964.

You did this on the Joe Pyne Show, in Los Angeles -- and it was in the context of Joe Pyne's series which featured Oswald's mother, Marguerite Oswald.

In the light of the ground-breaking new book by Dr. Jeffrey Caufield, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: the Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015), I predict that your historic, public, 1965 accusation of General Edwin Walker will go down in history as the pronouncement of a courageous soldier, sir.

I maintain full confidence that the fulfillment of the JFK Records Act in October, 2017, will fully vindicate your 1965 claims, and the world will finally recognize that Ex-General Walker (the only US General to resign in the 20th century, forfeiting his US Army pension) was actually the John Wilkes Booth of the 20th century.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited August 31, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Harry J.Dean]

Paul, Lazar reported that my Chicago FBI informant records have been destroyed ?. Is it possible

Los Angeles has done likewise ?. Bureau has exposed everything otherwise to deny and shoot

down my connection with them only after I abruptly quit that fearful existence in 1965. What

else can be expected, they still run the show.

[Ernie Lazar]

Paul, Lazar reported that my Chicago FBI informant records have been destroyed ?. Is it possible

Los Angeles has done likewise ?. Bureau has exposed everything otherwise to deny and shoot

down my connection with them only after I abruptly quit that fearful existence in 1965. What

else can be expected, they still run the show.

Harry – that is not entirely accurate.

1. In January 1980, pursuant to Federal Judge Harry Greene’s court-order, the National Archivist of the United States initiated an almost 2-year appraisal of FBI records. Their final report was released in November 1981. It was reviewed and approved by the Assistant Archivist for NARA and the Archivist for the Federal Records Centers.

2. The appraisal determined that the FBI had approximately 25 million case files. Various methods were used to determine what should happen to those files. FBI HQ and field office files with historical value were to be saved and ultimately transferred to NARA. The disposition of all other files was dependent upon evaluation of their content.

It should be noted that many HQ and field office “files” are very small – sometimes only 20-50 pages (or less) and HQ files routinely duplicate all information contained in the field office file. In fact, many HQ files repeat, verbatim, and word-for-word and line-by-line the preliminary report sent to HQ by field offices. In other words, FBI HQ clerical staff just re-typed the field office report into a HQ memo or report.

3. Obviously, nobody has the resources to evaluate 25 million case files in a few months or even a few years – but the process of determining what should happen to all those files began in 1982.

4. Harry’s Chicago field file was destroyed in May 1990. Neither Harry nor anybody else (with Harry’s permission) bothered to request it through FOIA. However, we do know what was contained in that file because on November 19, 1963, Harry sent a letter to J. Edgar Hoover in which he claimed to have been an “undercover agent” for the FBI in Chicago.

FBI HQ checked its records (HQ and field offices both maintain an Index to all of their current and former informants and confidential sources but HQ could not find any reference to Harry) – so, on November 22, 1963, Hoover sent a copy of Harry’s letter to both the Los Angeles and Chicago field offices.

Hoover instructed Chicago field to provide a summary to HQ and to Los Angeles (by 11/27/63) regarding what Chicago knew about Harry and, particularly, a summary of any contacts which Harry had with Chicago Agents. Hoover told Los Angeles that no reply would be sent to Harry until after Chicago replied so that Harry’s statements in his 11/63 letter to Hoover could be evaluated.

5. Chicago field replied to HQ on November 26, 1963. A copy of their summary memo is in Harry’s HQ file (as serial #2). As we now know, Chicago told HQ that Harry had originally contacted the FBI-Chicago office in August 1960 by phone without divulging his name. In a subsequent phone call in August, Harry told the FBI his name and his address in Whiting, Indiana. A confidential informant had told the FBI that Harry was a dues-paying member of the FPCC.

Chicago then told HQ that the FBI’s Indianapolis office made an inquiry about Harry to the Whiting Indiana Police Department. The Whiting PD Detective who responded stated that they had an active warrant for Harry’s arrest on bad check charges. The Whiting PD also acquired an identification record from the Detroit Police Department which revealed that when Harry lived in Canada in 1948, he had been committed as a mental patient and he had a criminal record in Canada for breaking and entering as well as three Detroit PD arrests on various charges.

6. In December 1960, Harry called Chicago-FBI again to report that he had resided in Detroit for the previous 2 months but he was now in Chicago again. However he did not want to reveal his local address. Harry then called FBI-Chicago several more times until June 1961.

7. It is very important to understand that every time Harry contacted Chicago-FBI, HE decided to initiate those contacts. HE decided what information he wanted to bring to their attention. The FBI did not solicit his contacts nor did they solicit any information from him.

8. Chicago concluded its summary memo by pointing out that on June 7, 1961, two Chicago Agents contacted Harry, “at which time he was told that this office did not desire his assistance.”

This is confirmed by Harry in his November 1963 letter to Hoover.

Harry told Hoover that he had used only the “telephone method in all my dealings with Agents, only near the end of my activities (not anticipated) did I meet with them…” Harry confirmed that the FBI had investigated his background and shortly before the July 1961 U.S. Senate hearings into FPCC, “I was told to quite [sic] giving information to the FBI by two Agents whom I met on Chicago’s north side in a street corner meeting pre-arranged of course, they made it clear that I was finished by reason of their findings concerning my past…”

9. FBI-Chicago then told HQ that all of this information “was furnished the Los Angeles Division by letter dated September 19, 1962.”

10. So—we have a complete record of what transpired between Harry and Chicago FBI and we have the confirming contemporaneous copy of Chicago’s 9/19/62 memo to Los Angeles field file (serial #3 in Harry’s Los Angeles file 105-12933)

SUMMARY:

The reason why Harry’s Chicago field file was destroyed can be surmised from examples where researchers (including me) have copies of FBI field office files which were later destroyed.

In short: the field file did not contain any significant information that had not already been sent to HQ and (often) to other field offices.

In his message above, Harry refers to his “informant records” – but we know with absolute certainty that Harry was never an FBI informant.

We know this for several reasons:

1. Harry was never assigned an informant symbol. Genuine informants are ALWAYS assigned a symbol to protect their identity.

2. ALL information which Harry provided to the FBI (by phone, by mail, or in person) was NOT recorded on the standard form used by all FBI Agents when they summarized their contacts with informants. Instead, ALL Harry’s information was recorded on the FBI’s general intake form (FD-71) also known as “Complaint Form”.

3. Genuine FBI informants were assigned a specific Case Agent (and sometimes one backup). However, when you review Harry’s contacts with the FBI, all of his contacts were random – i.e. Harry spoke to whomever was the on-call duty officer for incoming phone calls.

4. Genuine FBI informants had to report to their Case Agent on a regular schedule (usually once every 2 weeks at a minimum). Harry never had any sort of schedule. He just willy-nilly picked up the phone, or sent a letter, or showed up in person whenever HE felt like contacting the FBI.

5. Almost all of Harry’s “information” was just filed away and not acted upon in any way.

6. When you review the files which should contain memos which summarize information which Harry claims he provided to the FBI -- there are not only no references to that information, there are not even any references to Harry's file numbers (as the originating source for that information). If you check genuine informant files, there are ALWAYS cross-references indicated, i.e. files where the informant's info has been channeled.

7. Incidentally, as a result of an FOIA lawsuit which I have previously mentioned, Harry's HQ and Los Angeles files were released approx. 30 years ago with almost no redaction of very private and personal information regarding Harry -- including his arrest records aka rap sheet (which the U.S. Supreme Court stated could not be released on a living person) without their consent.

The identities of genuine living FBI informants and confidential sources are always protected unless they are already known due to court or legislative committee testimony which is public knowledge.

There are specific exemptions normally applied for "law enforcement records" and records which might reveal the identity of a confidential source.

The reason why Harry's name (and very personal information) was NOT redacted 30 years ago is precisely because he was never an FBI informant or confidential source and he initiated a self-promoting public relations campaign in the 1960's where he made false statements about himself and the FBI---so there was nothing for the FBI to protect!

There are many other ways to confirm that Harry was never an “informant” or “undercover agent” or “confidential source” or "political spy" – EVEN IF you do not want to believe the explicit statements by the FBI in their memos stating that his information was never solicited and he was never an informant.

Edited September 1, 2016 by Ernie Lazar

[Harry J.Dean]

Detailed facts and truth are found in the 1990 manuscript/Book titled CROSSTRAILS

[Ernie Lazar]

Detailed facts and truth are found in the 1990 manuscript/Book titled CROSSTRAILS

Wrong! Crosstrails is just a self-serving and self-promoting anecdotal memoir by Harry.

There is absolutely no verifiable corroborative evidence to support most of Harry's assertions. When all this was discussed in the Harry Dean Memoirs thread, there were lengthy arguments regarding the provenance of excerpts from Harry's letters to JFK, to J. Edgar Hoover and to FBI-Los Angeles.

Much of the controversy during that time concerned what Harry (and Paul Trejo) declared to be "forgeries" by the FBI.

Only much later, after Harry's Los Angeles and HQ files were released, was everyone able to see that Harry routinely typed his outgoing correspondence in all CAPS. Paul Trejo originally stated that the use of all CAPS was evidence of how the FBI was attempting to discredit and persecute Harry!

Significantly, at no time, did Harry ever volunteer the information that he routinely used all CAPS for his correspondence nor did he answer questions about that matter---because Harry knew admitting that would confirm the authenticity of the copies of his letters appearing in FBI files and it would discredit Paul Trejo's "forgery" argument. This is NOT the behavior of somebody who is being totally honest about himself or his past history.

[Paul Trejo]

Paul, Lazar reported that my Chicago FBI informant records have been destroyed ?. Is it possible

Los Angeles has done likewise ?. Bureau has exposed everything otherwise to deny and shoot

down my connection with them only after I abruptly quit that fearful existence in 1965. What

else can be expected, they still run the show.

Dear Harry,

Regarding JFK assassination facts, we have seen a biased FBI treatment of two FBI agents who are well known around the Internet, namely, FBI agent Don Adams, and FBI agent Wesley Swearingen, both of whom wrote books about FBI maltreatment because they knew facts about the JFK assassination that contradicted J. Edgar Hoover's "Lone Nut" theory.

Don Adams' book, From an Office Building with a High-Powered Rifle (2012) is a forceful affirmation of this new book by Jeff Caufield which we are discussing in this thread -- because Don Adams tracked Joseph Milteer personally when Adams was an FBI agent. However, the FBI refused to allow Don Adams to pursue his leads.

Wesley Swearingen's book, To Kill A President (2008) is even more forceful in his criticisms of J. Edgar Hoover. Swearingen is completely certain that there was a conspiracy to assassinate JFK, and that he knows the criminal players involved, as he was tracking them in Chicago through FBI channels -- but the FBI refused to allow him to make his information public -- nor would they recognize it officially.

We must add to this lineup the FBI maltreatment of Warren Commission and HSCA witness, Silvia Odio, who saw two men at her doorstep in mid-September 1963, along with Lee Harvey Oswald.

The FBI concluded, and told the Warren Commission, that Silvia Odio was mentally disturbed. Yet Sylvia Meagher and Gaeton Fonzi were among many experts who recognized Odio as a crucial witness to the events surrounding the JFK murder.

I myself, Harry, am fully convinced that the truth will come out next year, after Thursday 26 October 2017, when the JFK Records Act is finally fulfilled, and when the 3,300 pages of withheld US Government documents are finally released to the public.

Hang in there, dear Harry -- I believe that you will soon be vindicated, and that your January 1965 public revelation of a Radical Right conspiracy to murder JFK, promoted by Ex-General Edwin Walker (and including Loran Hall, Larry Howard, Gabby Gabaldon and John Rousselot), will finally be recognized by everybody. Dr. Jeff Caufield's new book is one step in this direction.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited September 1, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

Paul, Lazar reported that my Chicago FBI informant records have been destroyed ?. Is it possible

Los Angeles has done likewise ?. Bureau has exposed everything otherwise to deny and shoot

down my connection with them only after I abruptly quit that fearful existence in 1965. What

else can be expected, they still run the show.

Dear Harry,

Regarding JFK assassination facts, we have seen a biased FBI treatment of two FBI agents who are well known around the Internet, namely, FBI agent Don Adams, and FBI agent Wesley Swearingen, both of whom wrote books about FBI maltreatment because they knew facts about the JFK assassination that contradicted J. Edgar Hoover's "Lone Nut" theory.

Don Adams' book, From an Office Building with a High-Powered Rifle (2012) is a forceful affirmation of this new book by Jeff Caufield which we are discussing in this thread -- because Don Adams tracked Joseph Milteer personally when Adams was an FBI agent. However, the FBI refused to allow Don Adams to pursue his leads.

Wesley Swearingen's book, To Kill A President (2008) is even more forceful in his criticisms of J. Edgar Hoover. Swearingen is completely certain that there was a conspiracy to assassinate JFK, and that he knows the criminal players involved, as he was tracking them in Chicago through FBI channels -- but the FBI refused to allow him to make his information public -- nor would they recognize it officially.

We must add to this lineup the FBI maltreatment of Warren Commission and HSCA witness, Silvia Odio, who saw two men at her doorstep in mid-September 1963, along with Lee Harvey Oswald.

The FBI concluded, and told the Warren Commission, that Silvia Odio was mentally disturbed. Yet Sylvia Meagher and Gaeton Fonzi were among many experts who recognized Odio as a crucial witness to the events surrounding the JFK murder.

I myself, Harry, am fully convinced that the truth will come out next year, after Thursday 26 October 2017, when the JFK Records Act is finally fulfilled, and when the 3,300 pages of withheld US Government documents are finally released to the public.

Hang in there, dear Harry -- I believe that you will soon be vindicated, and that your January 1965 public revelation of a Radical Right conspiracy to murder JFK, promoted by Ex-General Edwin Walker (and including Loran Hall, Larry Howard, Gabby Gabaldon and John Rousselot), will finally be recognized by everybody. Dr. Jeff Caufield's new book is one step in this direction.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Notice that Paul makes bold statements about former FBI Special Agent Don Adams even though Paul has never independently researched the matter. Instead, as is his custom, Paul just accepts whatever adverse accusations are made. And, of course, Paul has never requested any FBI documents to ascertain what actually occurred.

Even more incredible, Paul says that the FBI "refused" to allow former Agent Wesley Swearingen to make his evidence public - despite the fact that Swearingen has published two books in which he makes whatever assertions he cares to make. With respect to revealing data from FBI investigative files -- that is not some arbitrary and capricious rule which was invented to deal with Swearingen. Instead, it is a federal law which pre-dates Swearingen's FBI employment by about 4 decades. ALL FBI agents sign a confidentiality agreement. But, again, this reveals how intellectually dishonest Paul is.

Then Paul repeats his whopper about what he thinks will be revealed when the final JFK documents are released in October 2017 -- even though we already know what FBI file numbers are involved -- so we know NONE of them pertain to Walker, Galbadon, Rousselot, or the Birch Society! What this proves, yet again, is that Paul is incapable of rational thought and incapable of drawing logical conclusions from primary source evidence.

Edited September 1, 2016 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

Anybody who has actually read the works of former FBI agents Don Adams and Wesley Swearingen knows that they both complained bitterly that -- while they were FBI Agents -- the FBI ordered them to both stop researching the JFK assassination, and refused to record their clear results.

It was only after they both retired from the FBI that they both wrote their memoirs.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited September 2, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

Anybody who has actually read the works of former FBI agents Don Adams and Wesley Swearingen knows that they both complained bitterly that -- while they were FBI Agents -- the FBI ordered them to both stop researching the JFK assassination, and refused to record their clear results.

It was only after they both retired from the FBI that they both wrote their memoirs.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

That is not the point Paul. Just because somebody writes or says something after they retire from the FBI does NOT mean it is accurate and truthful.

There are MANY instances where FBI employees and FBI informants claimed to have knowledge about cases or subjects which were beyond the scope of their assignments. What you do not seem able to comprehend is that individual FBI Special Agents did not always have access to classified information which was sent to HQ by other agencies, or developed by Agents from other offices.

Often, the FBI was highly compartmentalized -- by which I mean, Agents would be given access only to that information which pertained to their own assigned cases. I'm sure that (like in any large organization) there was rumor and gossip and anecdotal info circulated but, often, it was false.

I previously brought your attention to several examples. Perhaps the two most famous examples were former FBI Agents Cleon Skousen and Jack Levine.

Only AFTER Skousen died and researchers then had access to his FBI files was it possible to learn that Skousen had almost no exposure to internal security matters. His expertise while employed by the FBI was in police training schools, juvenile delinquency, public relations (including speeches before civic organizations and conducting tours at HQ), internal administrative matters (such as field office inspections and supervising clerical employees and editing FBI employee publications).

Nevertheless, most Skousen admirers fervently believe that Skousen was an "expert" about the communist movement because of his "experience" within the FBI -- because his admirers never bothered to perform independent research into Skousen's assignments and performance evaluations which is absolutely required in order to discover his actual experience.

Same thing with Jack Levine who made a sensational comment in 1962 about the number of CPUSA members who were FBI informants and he alleged that the FBI was the single largest source of Party dues payments. However, it turns out that Levine never worked in the FBI Division (#5) where the FBI assigned its internal security experts who had access to classified data.

Levine was employed by the FBI from September 12, 1960 through August 4, 1961 and then he resigned. Since FBI Agents usually have a minimum of 13 or 14 weeks of "New Agent" training classes before being assigned to a field office, that means Levine had a maximum of EIGHT MONTHS work experience within the FBI! Nevertheless even many respected scholars repeated Levine's false assertions in their own writings!

My point is this: Here is how YOU evaluate data:

1. You read a book or article written by a former FBI Agent who is critical of the FBI

2. You immediately conclude, without spending one nanosecond of independent research, that ALL assertions made by that Agent are accurate and truthful

3. You then cite the writings of those Agents repeatedly in your messages as if what they present is indisputable factual reality.

4. As a result, your statements become a circular argument.

A circular argument begins with an unproven (and often false) predicate but all subsequent analysis or discussion or conclusions are based upon the original unproven (and often false) predicate -- which means that the argument is tainted from its inception because nobody ever confirms the original predicate as being accurate and truthful.

Edited September 2, 2016 by Ernie Lazar

[Paul Trejo]

Well, Ernie, I'm expressing my opinion here, after a quarter-century of reading JFK conspiracy literature -- literally hundreds of different books with different theories.

The CIA-did-it theories have fallen flat with the fall of Probe Magazine (1999), Their arguments were obviously weak.

The LBJ-did-it theories have fallen flat when Bar McClellan (2011) argued foolishly that LBJ's ignorance about the JFK murder was his proof that LBJ was the mastermind.

The Mafia-did-it theories fell when Robert Blakey himself abandoned his own HSCA conclusions (1979). Yet that was no surprise because they were already debunked by NOLA DA Jim Garrison (1968).

This new book by Jeff Caufield, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: the Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015) has as one of its pillars Caufield's careful study of all of Jim Garrison's papers. Caufield argues that Jim Garrison's earliest work was a focus on the Radical Right -- but because of life-threatening pressure, he publicly moved to a CIA-did-it theory.

It is no accident that Caufield's new book also devotes a chapter to Harry Dean, who was the first person in US History to come forward publicly to accuse General Walker of masterminding the JFK murder. This was on the Joe Pyne Show of January 1965 (following the disappointing results of the Warren Report).

History will soon prove the case, with the fulfillment of the JFK Records Act (2017). In the meantime, these two former FBI Agents -- Don Adams and Wesley Swearingen have produced sincere expositions of their findings as FBI agents. The Internet is full of their comments, and also YouTube videos. It is up to the individual to determine who they will believe.

Jeff Caufield's new book harmonizes 100% with FBI agent Don Adams' findings that Radical Rightist Joseph Milteer was at the center of the cyclone in the JFK conspiracy. Jeff Caufield also makes a brilliant connection between Milteer and General Walker.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited September 2, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

Well, Ernie, I'm expressing my opinion here, after a quarter-century of reading JFK conspiracy literature -- literally hundreds of different books with different theories.

The CIA-did-it theories have fallen flat with the fall of Probe Magazine (1999), Their arguments were obviously weak.

The LBJ-did-it theories have fallen flat when Bar McClellan (2011) argued foolishly that LBJ's ignorance about the JFK murder was his proof that LBJ was the mastermind.

The Mafia-did-it theories fell when Robert Blakey himself abandoned his own HSCA conclusions (1979). Yet that was no surprise because they were already debunked by NOLA DA Jim Garrison (1968).

This new book by Jeff Caufield, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: the Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015) has as one of its pillars Caufield's careful study of all of Jim Garrison's papers. Caufield argues that Jim Garrison's earliest work was a focus on the Radical Right -- but because of life-threatening pressure, he publicly moved to a CIA-did-it theory.

It is no accident that Caufield's new book also devotes a chapter to Harry Dean, who was the first person in US History to come forward publicly to accuse General Walker of masterminding the JFK murder. This was on the Joe Pyne Show of January 1965 (following the disappointing results of the Warren Report).

History will soon prove the case, with the fulfillment of the JFK Records Act (2017). In the meantime, these two former FBI Agents -- Don Adams and Wesley Swearingen have produced sincere expositions of their findings as FBI agents. The Internet is full of their comments, and also YouTube videos. It is up to the individual to determine who they will believe.

Jeff Caufield's new book harmonizes 100% with FBI agent Don Adams' findings that Radical Rightist Joseph Milteer was at the center of the cyclone in the JFK conspiracy. Jeff Caufield also makes a brilliant connection between Milteer and General Walker.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

By definition, "an opinion" is.........."a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge."

When you express your opinion about Swearingen or Adams, you should have the intellectual honesty to candidly admit that you have NO CLUE if what they have written is accurate and truthful -- because your ONLY source of information about them is limited to what THEY have written or said about themselves and about their FBI experience.

[same thing happened with respect to Harry Dean. You just swallowed everything he said without engaging your critical faculties or performing any independent research in an attempt to corroborate his statements. Not even something as simple as finding out when Agent Wesley Grapp actually started working at the Los Angeles FBI field office---which (it turns out) was 6 MONTHS AFTER Harry claims he was meeting with Grapp the prior September!]

The actual reason you cite Adams or Swearingen is SOLELY because you think their opinions can be used to advance your argument. IF either Swearingen or Adams makes a statement which you believe does NOT advance your personal opinions, then you would NEVER cite them as experts about anything!

Edited September 2, 2016 by Ernie Lazar