Jason Ward Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said: Jason, This question remains important, in my opinion. I've been banging my head against the wall of this Forum for more than five years, offering every stitch of evidence that I can find. Some people have suggested that I write a book about it -- but that's work for which I have no time. Rather than summarize my scores of reasons for my position, let me turn the question around, please. Please tell me some reasons that you've heard which would convince somebody that General Walker could not be the leader of the 1963 Radical Right in the USA. All the reasons I have seen so far have been superficial, in my reading. Regards, --Paul Trejo Hi Paul, 1. As I mentioned a month or so ago when I first posted here, you have a demand for evidence that I appreciate and which I think is much higher than the CIA-did-it crowd. If Ruth Paine's entire family is in the CIA, that is of zero relevance to the question of whether Ruth Paine is in the CIA. If David Ferrie once flew a load of guns for the CIA, this does not mean David Ferrie is in the CIA. If Shaw and DeMohrenschildt and 10000 other guys occasionally pass information to the CIA from their international travels and connections, this does not mean they are in the CIA. If Oswald spoke better Russian than Marina this is of zero relevance to whether Oswald was a part of US intelligence. Just because a bunch of Cubans say they're violently anti-Castro and are willing to invade Cuba if it means they get to cash in on the CIA cash windfall, this does not mean they are in the CIA - it doesn't even mean they are passionately anti-Castro. The Cubans are all running a scam for CIA money in my view. 2. The entire CIA-did-it CT is based on all or most of the logical fallacies I mention above. Basically, wherever there is missing evidence, the excuse becomes "well, it's the CIA, of course there's no evidence." Convenient. 3. But because I watched your posts for the last few years, I finally felt convinced enough to join in and explore your Radical Right CT. Not that your posts are perfect, not that your CT is free of problems; rather, overall the evidence you supply is documented. There is no citing other conspiracy theorists as "evidence" in your CT - yet if you ask a committed CIA-did-it guy for evidence he will actually cite another conspiracy-minded researcher. If Mark Lane or Summers or Garrison or Douglass put something in print - that is evidence to these guys. It's ridiculous. 4. So, I engage with you because I think your approach and methods are closest to the scientific method and closest to the Federal Rules of Evidence, both of which to me present the Gold Standards of persuasiveness. 5. In answering your question, I say there is no evidentiary reason why Walker could not be the author of the assassination. He hates Kennedy and wants the US to turn back the clock 50+ years; he in fact believes if Kennedy goes on then America dies. On 22Nov a dozen or more FBI offices immediately pin down the Radical Right because they alone have the stated objective of getting rid of JFK. "The CIA" (whoever this nameless group is) has no such motive and no expected benefit. So, your Walker-as-prime-mover idea is stronger than "the CIA" blanket term, which sloppily stands for practically anyone who has ever worked for the government or been in the military. Because of the Martin film and because of Walker's knowledge of Oswald only the conspirators know, Walker is unquestionably a conspirator himself. 6. The only other prime candidate for running the show I can see would be the Hunt family. I see Walker post-1963 as the true Walker; I mean he's really kind of helpless and unloved without a sponsor like Hunt. I don't see Walker as self-animated as you do; I think he requires a big spender or big military behind him to be effective. Assassinating the president is desperate and a big gamble - I can only see the likes of extremists Hunt and Walker thinking times are desperate enough to take such a huge risk. From the CIA perspective, assassinating the president is just insanity - and these guys are hyper-rational; the farthest from insane. I believe the CIA would nembutal JFK or poison his cigar if "the CIA" wanted him dead; I in no event believe they'd get in bed with losers like Oswald and Ruby and try a big fireworks show like Dealey Plaza. The people who killed JFK had no easy and regular access to JFK, which forced them to pull a dangerous stunt like the Dallas show. So, Walker is as good as any on the Radical Right in terms of the likely author, and perhaps more so. But there are others... Jason Edited September 21, 2017 by Jason Ward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now