Challenge for Paul Trejo -- Why would the US Government cover up a Gen. Walker conspiracy?

[Michael Clark]

13 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Sandy,

I had presumed that you subscribe to the CIA-did-it CT.  

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

And who is NOT getting tired of that?

 

Paul Trejo wrote: "During my more than five years on this Forum I have always admitted that I don't have final proof of my Walker-did-it CT -- but that in itself is no proof that it is WRONG -- it is simply awaiting the final proof."

And who is NOT getting tired of your Nostradamus-like predictions, ten times daily.

Edited August 21, 2017 by Michael Clark

[Michael Clark]

40 minutes ago, Jason Ward said:

Sandy, 

I think you're failing to recognize that at 12:29 in Dallas before any shots are fired the presumption is that any assassination attempt on Kennedy would come from the Right.  

Jason

Jason, There are other threats at that time, including the Mafia, corrupt and threatened Democrats, Castro, Industrialists and even ant-Catholic elements.

Mike

Edited August 21, 2017 by Michael Clark

[Jason Ward]

3 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

Jason, There are other threats at that time, including the Mafia, corrupt and threatened Democrats, Castro, Industrialists and even ant-Catholic elements.

Mike

Threats or imagined threats we've added later?   Hoover knows the difference.

1 - Mafia. Why and how is the mafia able to immediately get the hardass right wingers in the Dallas Establishment draping LHO in a commie hard left identity?

2 - Corrupt Democrats.   The civil rights movement in 1963 means there are conservative Democrats and conservative Republicans who are nearly identical, then there are northern  liberal Democrats.   I assume you mean conservative Democrats are a threat?   Senator Byrd's faction?   Ok, maybe, but I place them in the Hard Right General Walker camp anyway.   The southern racists are largely Democrats until LBJ flips them to GOP.

3. Castro.  Hoover, Castro, and cabinet level administration officials know Castro is itching for a detente with America and that there is already a back channel unofficial effort from JFK in this effort.   Castro sees JFK as his best hope, and Hoover and the American Right see this too.  Again, the clincher:  why would Castro so intensely insist on offering up a fake commie hard Left scapegoat like Oswald?  Remember Hoover sees the Hard Right in Dallas (DPD) go into full-time painting a non-commie as a commie.  This can only mean they want scrutiny cast away from themselves and onto the Hard Left.

4. Industrialists and anti-Catholics are on Walker's team.   These are the Hard Right.

...

***Hoover knows Oswald is no commie. Hoover knows there is a conspiracy because of the medical evidence available at 1pm.   Hoover sees the over-the-top PR effort to paint Oswald as a communist.   Hoover concludes someone's trying to falsely blame the Hard Left for the assassination.   The most likely ones interested in blaming the hard Left would be the __________________________________?***

Anything official happening in Dallas is automatically from the Hard Right.  Hoover knows this.

 

 

Jason

[Michael Clark]

3 hours ago, Jason Ward said:

Threats or imagined threats we've added later?   

 

Jason

It is Walker who is becoming the later-day imagined threat. His support of a few score men to an army of perhaps a million men is being imagined right here on the Education Forum, by two people.

Walker is typical fall-guy material. He is a disgraced, homosexual malcontent with no family and unknown encestry. Like the fall-guy for the USS Iowa incident, blame a gay guy, or make him gay and blame him.

[Jason Ward]

28 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

It is Walker who is becoming the later-day imagined threat. His support of a few score men to an army of perhaps a million men is being imagined right here on the Education Forum, by two people.

Walker is typical fall-guy material. He is a disgraced, homosexual malcontent with no family and unknown encestry. Like the fall-guy for the USS Iowa incident, blame a gay guy, or make him gay and blame him.

 Hi Michael, thanks for your remark . 

 Your point is not without some merit. However, I invite you to take a look at the popularity of the hard right wing in 1963 as something similar to the popularity of Trump in 2016. It's something the mainstream media and intellectuals did not admit and cannot explain.   Do me a favor and go to the Internet archive and look at the thousand plus items they have there related to General Walker. This guy was a lightning rod of popularity for the segregationist right-wing Southerners who were feeling under assault the same way that the Trump supporters felt like they were under assault by globalism in 2016.  These are Charlottesville people and they are always underestimated in terms of size.

 A couple more things is that in my view it's not necessarily General Walker per se as much as the generic extreme right, such as you recognize in your own CT. Paul I think differs with me about that. Second of all I am not really defending this whole Walker radical right idea as much as I'm playing devil's advocate. A couple weeks ago I would say exactly the same thing as you say in this last post. Look at the Internet archive and look at the popularity of the KKK and the Minuteman and of the Birchers and so forth in 63; we're dealing with the same forces that killed Medgar Evers and MLK.  There were in fact a dozen or more voluntary leads from people in the right wing who pinpointed Walker as someone to look at in the two or three days following the assassination.  

 

Nice talking to you again, Jason 

Edited August 21, 2017 by Jason Ward

[David Andrews]

19 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

David,

In 1963, Ex-General Walker had already won millions in court cases by suing the Associated Press and many of the newspapers that had printed the AP stories about his Ole Miss episode.

So, the common perception in Dallas (and with Gerry Patrick Hemming and Loran Hall) was that Ex-General Walker already was rich.   (Only in 1967 would Earl Warren's Supreme Court finally decide against Walker and for the AP, and send Walker away empty-handed, pleading for his US Army Pension to be restored.)

Since Dallas was a Right-wing city, the factor remains that in 1963 Ex-General Walker was well-respected in Dallas -- even by people like the Sheriff, the Chief of Police and the Mayor.   

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

 

Look at the photos of Walker's house in the Kennedy years.  Then look up the house today on Zillow.  That's rich.  That's Clay Shaw rich, and more.

A dozen years after the assassination, instead of becoming POTUS or Texas governor, or even mayor of Dallas, Walker wasn't allowed to skate on two lousy morals beefs, even though the complainants were DPD.  The fact that he did it twice says something.  So does the fact that he had to do it at all.  Clay Shaw never had to go that far for a thrill. 

Nobody even gave Walker high office in the JBS. 

All the chasing he did to get his once-renounced military pension restored is telling of his financial need.  Getting it was a sop thrown to him so he'd slink back into obscurity.

P. S. There's two components to "If you're so smart, why ain't you rich?"  The predetermining one is smart.  

 

Edited August 21, 2017 by David Andrews

[Paul Trejo]

2 hours ago, David Andrews said:

Look at the photos of Walker's house in the Kennedy years.  Then look up the house today on Zillow.  That's rich.  That's Clay Shaw rich, and more.

A dozen years after the assassination, instead of becoming POTUS or Texas governor, or even mayor of Dallas, Walker wasn't allowed to skate on two lousy morals beefs, even though the complainants were DPD.  The fact that he did it twice says something.  So does the fact that he had to do it at all.  Clay Shaw never had to go that far for a thrill. 

Nobody even gave Walker high office in the JBS. 

All the chasing he did to get his once-renounced military pension restored is telling of his financial need.  Getting it was a sop thrown to him so he'd slink back into obscurity.

P. S. There's two components to "If you're so smart, why ain't you rich?"  The predetermining one is smart.  

 

David,

The house on Turtle Creek Boulevard in Dallas in which Ex-General Walker lived in from 1961-1969 was set up for him by HL Hunt.  It was the same neighborhood in which HL Hunt set up his close relatives.

In my theory, one of the reasons that Ex-General Walker resigned from the Army in 1961 and gave up  his Army Pension when he surely could have retired with honors, is that he was convinced that he could become a self-made millionaire like the segregationists HL Hunt and Reverend Billy James Hargis.

Ex-General Walker wanted to become a wealthy public speaker like Robert Welch or the young HL Hunt -- or at least like Billy James Hargis.  He had big dreams.

One of Walker's dreams, that he shared with HL Hunt, was becoming President of the USA, by first becoming Governor of Texas.  Remember that HL Hunt had bankrolled the Presidential campaign of General Douglas MacArthur, who had been fired by Harry Truman.   Hunt and Walker likely thought they could build up this mythos that Walker was "fired by JFK" like MacArthur was fired by Truman. 

The truth is that JFK offered Walker another job in Hawaii, but Walker turned it down.  CIA-did-it CTers regularly overlook that fact.  The alleged "firing" by JFK was part of the Hunt-Walker fabrication.

The facts show that Edwin Walker was a capable speech-writer, and he copyrighted about six speeches in 1961-1962.  When he gave these speeches, it is reported (Cravens, 1993) that he would get a standing ovation every minute, with final applause lasting up to five minutes.  He knew very well how to rally the Radical Right.  Here's a brief example on YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYyONwsHqbw

Anyway, Walker was on his way to greatness until three great mishaps in 1962: (1) he made a fool of himself before the Senate Subcommittee on Military Preparedness by complaining of Conspiracies in Washington DC, extending to the Pentagon; (2) he lost the Texas race for Governor, coming in last place; and (3) he led a racial riot at Ole Miss (against the advice of Robert Welch and the JBS) and got himself tossed into an insane asylum by JFK and RFK.

It is hard to defend JFK and RFK from that rash action, but to be fair about it, the Ole Miss racial riot was fomented during the Cuban Missile Crisis, so JFK and RFK were on their very last nerve.

Anyway -- General Walker's lawyers won him $3 million in lawsuits following his acquittal from the Ole Miss episode -- and so HL Hunt gave Walker plenty of credit.  However, when the Supreme Court judged in favor of the Associated Press (1968) the world came crashing down on Ex-General Walker.  He had to start begging for his Army pension back.

One of the best sources about Ex-General Walker is the hard-to-find 1993 thesis by Chris Cravens, Edwin Walker and the Right Wing in Dallas 1960-1966.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited August 21, 2017 by Paul Trejo
clarity

[Sandy Larsen]

13 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Sandy,

I had presumed that you subscribe to the CIA-did-it CT.   At least, you seem to defend those who do.  So, when I said, "neither do you," have any proof of your CT, it that was the context.

It seems instead that you have no firm CT at all -- and so of course you don't need any proof -- since you defend nothing.   Right?

Paul,

I do hold certain beliefs, all of which are evidence based (of course). But my CT is incomplete, which is one reason I am here... so I can learn and hopefully fill in the blanks.

I am careful not to make statement that cannot be backed up by evidence. And I try to make it clear when I am hypothesizing.

I've noticed that you have a tendency to hypothesize without making it clear you are doing so. Like when you said that that the FBI knew for a certainty by 3 PM that Walker was behind the assassination. That is a definitive statement that has virtually no evidence to support it. In my opinion it would be classified as a guess.

Throwing out guesses as though they are facts is potentially damaging, as people may actually take them as facts.

 

13 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

During my more than five years on this Forum I have always admitted that I don't have final proof of my Walker-did-it CT -- but that in itself is no proof that it is WRONG -- it is simply awaiting the final proof.

The evidence that I have is very wide, and comprises more than five years and more than 5,000 posts on this Forum.  Granted, many of those posts are simply self-defense of positions I've held.  Yet some positions I've also learned on this Forum from others, for example, Harry Dean, David Lifton, Bill Simpich and other solid CTers (who do defend a CT).

Your alleged "proof" that my Walker-did-it CT "cannot be valid" amounts to a fallacy of logic.  

Naturally I disagree with your assessment regarding my proof.

 

13 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

J. Edgar Hoover saw that the Radical Right in Dallas killed JFK, and he chose to sweep that under the rug -- and LBJ chose to support that decision, and obliged Allen Dulles and Earl Warren to support that.

J. Edgar Hoover was the author of the Lone Nut theory of Lee Harvey Oswald.  That is not my original CT, that was first announced by Professor David Wrone of Wisconsin University in 2002.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

 

[Paul Trejo]

28 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Paul,

I do hold certain beliefs, all of which are evidence based (of course). But my CT is incomplete, which is one reason I am here... so I can learn and hopefully fill in the blanks.

I am careful not to make statement that cannot be backed up by evidence. And I try to make it clear when I am hypothesizing.

I've noticed that you have a tendency to hypothesize without making it clear you are doing so. Like when you said that that the FBI knew for a certainty by 3 PM that Walker was behind the assassination. That is a definitive statement that has virtually no evidence to support it. In my opinion it would be classified as a guess.

Throwing out guesses as though they are facts is potentially damaging, as people may actually take them as facts.

Sandy,

My CT is more than a guess.  It's based on released FBI records of J. Edgar Hoover's phone calls on 11/22/1963.

In those phone calls, including one to RFK, J. Edgar Hoover says flatly that: (1) LHO was not a Communist; and (2) LHO was not an officer of the FPCC.

That's real evidence, Sandy.  That's not a guess.  (I've posted these FBI documents multiple times over the years.  Have you seen them?)

Also -- as I've repeated often -- it's not my original claim that Hoover insisted on a Lone Nut theory of LHO by 3pm on 11/22/1963 -- that distinction belongs to Professor David Wrone of Wisconsin University (2003).

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited August 21, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

4 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Paul

...Naturally I disagree with your assessment regarding my proof.

Sandy,

I say your alleged "proof" against my CT is a logical fallacy.  It isn't a proof -- it's just your opinion stated as a proof.

For example, you claim that "Nobody at the time knew for sure what Oswald's politics were."

That doesn't stand to reason, because J. Edgar Hoover knew that the Fake FPCC in New Orleans was run out of 544 Camp Street by Guy Banister, who had for a long time been a chief for the FBI.  J. Edgar Hoover took great pride in knowing all his chiefs, and he knew very well that Guy Banister was now among the Radical Right.   (Radical Rightists were not allowed to be employees of the FBI.)

Knowing that Lee Harvey Oswald was in cahoots with Guy Banister would immediately tell J. Edgar Hoover that LHO was part of the Radical Right.  OBVIOUSLY.

Based on LHO's amateur behavior, and Guy Banister's superior experience and age, Hoover could not miss the fact that Banister was manipulating LHO.

Obviously, that's just my opinion -- but it does  justice to the intelligence of J. Edgar Hoover.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited August 21, 2017 by Paul Trejo
clarity

[Sandy Larsen]

8 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Sandy,

My CT is more than a guess.  It's based on released FBI records of J. Edgar Hoover's phone calls on 11/22/1963.

Paul,

I didn't say that your whole CT is a guess. I said that your one bold statement was a guess, that J. Edgar Hoover certainly knew by 3:00 PM that General Walker and his minutemen were behind the assassination.

 

[Paul Trejo]

46 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Paul,

I didn't say that your whole CT is a guess. I said that your one bold statement was a guess, that J. Edgar Hoover certainly knew by 3:00 PM that General Walker and his minutemen were behind the assassination.

Sandy,

OK, now I see.  So, you advise me to begin every one of my sentences with "In my humble opinion..."?

I do a lot of that already -- and I have often repeated that everything I write in the Forum -- except for quotes and citations -- consists of my own opinion.

Honestly, I think I've said this more than any other member of the Forum -- IMHO.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited August 22, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Sandy Larsen]

On 8/20/2017 at 9:53 PM, Jason Ward said:

Sandy, 

I think you're failing to recognize that at 12:29 in Dallas before any shots are fired the presumption is that any assassination attempt on Kennedy would come from the Right.

 

Jason,

No, I didn't fail to recognize that possibility.

Regardless, that has no bearing on my proof that the Walker-did-it theory isn't viable. There would have been no reason for the federal government to cover up Walker's crime had Walker been behind the assassination.

 

Edited August 22, 2017 by Sandy Larsen

[Paul Trejo]

11 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Jason,

No, I didn't fail to recognize that.

Regardless, that has no bearing on my proof that the Walker-did-it theory isn't viable. There would have been no reason for the federal government to cover up Walker's crime had Walker been behind the assassination.

Sandy,

I think you underestimate the perceived wealth and power of Ex-General Walker in a Rightwing city like Dallas.

In any normal US city, Edwin Walker would have been prosecuted for organizing the attack on Adlai Stevenson (which is well-documented).

But in Dallas, Edwin Walker got away with it.

Edwin Walker had lots of power, and lots of wealthy backers.   The Dallas Minutemen were only one tiny part of the US Minutemen, and they were heavily armed.   The FBI did not have a full list of their members -- which some estimated in the thousands.

Did the US Government want to call out the Military -- just to attack Ex-General Walker?

It was far easier for Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren to deny Edwin Walker his $3 million of court case winnings, and send him home empty-handed.

So, Hoover and LBJ most importantly removed the Invasion of Cuba from the end result of the JFK assassination by using the Lone Nutter theory.  IT WORKED.

You punish a former US General with great care and respect.  That's what Hoover, LBJ, Warren and Dulles did -- IMHO.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited August 22, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Sandy Larsen]

23 hours ago, Jason Ward said:

Hoover already knows the radical right is gunning for Kennedy.   The fact that the radical right in Dallas are immediately blaming the Radical Left as early as Oswald's arrest proves to Hoover that the Radical Right is behind this.

Huh? It proves no such thing. The radical right blamed the radical left because Oswald appeared to be a communist or Marxist.... i.e. a member of the radical left.