Jason Ward Posted May 4, 2018 Share Posted May 4, 2018 (edited) 16 hours ago, Paul Trejo said: This, in my humble opinion, is the center of the JFK Conspiracy -- namely, two key Dallas Officials, FBI agent James Hosty, and Secret Service agent Forrest Sorrels, refused to tell the truth in their reports to the PRS. Both told the PRS that they did not know the origins of this handbill, and both told the PRS that there were no dangerous people in Dallas to visit, warn or watch Hi Paul, Without question Hosty and Sorrels criminally denied the existence of any threats to the president from the extreme Right - even though Adlai Stevenson personally notified Kennedy that General Walker's capacity for violence was already apparent in the October 1963 Stevenson visit to Dallas. However, not wanting to tag their crusty reactionary friends as presidential threats is understandable, apart from any conspiratorial involvement in the assassination. It's also possible, IMO, that Hosty and Sorrels didn't want to put a fellow conservative on the list of security concerns because they expected merely protest and no violence (although in Walker's case - he was already very closely watched by the FBI for inciting domestic violence). Paul, I've seen you say that the CIA-did-it theorists should consider the plot and the cover-up separately. Different purposes. Different authors. Isn't it fair to say Hosty and Sorrels were really scared of getting blamed for the assassination, so much so that they lied and went overboard as to the non-existence of threats in Dallas pre-22NOV63? Isn't there evidence that the DPD was trying to throw blame on to the Feds - such as Curry's leak of the Revill memo? But does not wanting to get scapegoated for the assassination mean they were conspirators in the assassination??? 1. According to FBI agent James Hosty, he and the FBI joined the ATF in assuming any threat to JFK would come from General Walker's Minutemen. 2. Don't we get the impression that Hosty wants to name the DPD in a radical right wing Conspiracy Theory? Or is he retroactively trying to portray himself as a Kennedy liberal who held "John Bircher-type" conservatives in contempt? 16 hours ago, Paul Trejo said: Now, in 1964, shortly after the JFK Assassination, General Walker and Robert Surrey produced a book; a digest of Dallas Morning News and Dallas Times Herald newspaper clippings about JFK from November and December 1963. The nature of their politics explains the content of this book -- those newspaper clippings were solely and only clippings that speculated about a Communist Oswald. This was precisely what Walker and Surrey were obsessed to promote. Is there any reason to frame Oswald for the assassination except to blame a communist conspiracy? If Lone Nut was the planned explanation of the conspirators - why not choose a less provocative patsy like a homeless person, a recently released mental patient, a drug addict, or known problem criminal? Do you need a man who's lived in Russia and agitated for Castro if you plan to blame the president's death on a crazy loner? 3. Hosty defines a presidential threat as a specific known plan to cause harm 4. Hosty isn't happy with the Warren Commission ... and doesn't he seem less than impressed with Earl Warren personally? SOURCE 1-4 James P Hosty & Thomas Hosty. Assignment Oswald. Skyhorse edition (2011). the electronic edition lacks page numbers but the cited passages are free from Google Books: https://books.google.com/books?id=YXEhAgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=assignment+oswald+hosty&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj8wf6lg-3aAhUiw4MKHRFVAIcQ6AEIJzAA#v=onepage&q=communist&f=false Edited May 5, 2018 by Jason Ward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted May 5, 2018 Share Posted May 5, 2018 (edited) On 4/13/2018 at 9:36 PM, Jason Ward said: .............................. IN SUM, PERHAPS: 1245-1250 Truly has informed DPD that Oswald is missing as he says. Fritz learns this no later than his arrival at DPD, no later than 1258, even though I now throw open the possibility that Fritz arrives earlier at the TSBD, which makes sense given the short distance between Parkland and TSBD. 1258-1 Hulls found, as Mooney says. 1:06 The rifle is found, as Craig says, which in turn means the empty shell casings were found a bit earlier - as Mooney says. 1:06 [all witnesses refuse to identify the exact person who makes an] announcement that an officer is shot in Oak Cliff ----insert mysterious interregnum implied by mismatched testimony around time--- whereby Fritz goes by Decker's office and doesn't re-appear in a verifiable time and place until about 2:20 when Oswald is already in custody at DPD headquarters <this is a panic/heart-attack time for Fritz and Decker> 1:18 Citizen calls on Tippit's radio to say a policeman is shot dead next to his car IMPLICATION: By the time of WC testimony, the conspirators MUST show the rifle found at a time much closer to the DPD radio announcement at 1:18, therefore they must in testimony delay the time the rifle was found - 1:12 is the time they all agree upon. In turn, they must delay the time they hear about Oswald from Truly You've always known it, Paul - Tippit's murder is a monkey wrench in the plan and by the very fact that it is unplanned it becomes perhaps the Rosetta Stone to figuring out the assassination. On Nov 22 around 1, they are now off-script and ad-libbing because Tippit is killed. By the time of WC they are moving the times later (hulls discovered/rifle discovered/...and the police radio logs are correct.and Mooney's testimony about guarding the evidence PRIOR to 1pm is correct..and if in your CT Roy Truly is no conspirator...and there's no reason why Roger Craig would pick 1:06 out of his hat randomly, is there? information/news of Tippit's murder/even perhaps Fritz's arrival at TSBD that he wants to make sure is never contested)..... because they now have to GET CLOSE to matching the radio logs to cover up their ad-libbing. They have to move EVERYTHING closer to 1:18 - Truly, gun, shells, everything! THE KEY: Radio logs. All the mendacity is generated by having to match the radio logs for the WC, which they never planned on having to do, because Oswald was meant to be dead asap. All of ACT III was re-written on the spot and re-written sloppily - they meant ACT III to be Tippit offs Oswald. The end. No timeframe discussion needed. NOW, for the WC, they have to explain all kinds of timestamps they never planned on having to explain - when the gun was fund, when they heard from Truly and what they heard from Truly, when they heard of Tippit's death, et al., - all this was made up as they went along and it DOESN'T WORK in retrospect. Truly has wildly different timeframes because all the cops have moved everything later to justify their actions in light of the radio logs. Truly has no radio log he has to align with his testimony. Fritz knows this is very thin and dangerous ice he's now walking on so in WC testimony FRITZ pinpoints no time whatsoever, except his arrival time at TSBD. He relies on everyone else to testify to a 1:12 timestamp and other time references, which is closer to the 1:18 radio call about Tippit....which in turn is necessary because everyone remembers that the rifle and the news about Tippit come in rapid succession. Follow me? It means that Fritz & Company are moving to Oak Cliff before there's any established reason to go to Oak Cliff...as if..they knew beforehand that the next scene in the play had to move to Oak Cliff even if in the actual event there was no plausible reason to do so. ACT III had begun. In retrospect, in front of the WC, they can only explain why ACT III moves to Oak Cliff by moving all the TSBD action closer to the 1:18 radio call (remember they were expecting a 1pm radio call from Tippit saying Oswald was shot.) They now have an 18 minute problem. The scripted call from Tippit around 1 has been replaced by the uscripted call from a citizen at 1:18. The radio logs and TSBD timeframes as testified by Truly and Craig don't match up well - because in fact Fritz is changing the scenery to ACT III in Oak Cliff, just as if -according to script- Tippit had shot Oswald. Maybe he hopes Tippit has shot Oswald and he just hasn't heard about it yet. THEN --->total misfire--->Tippit is dead and they hear about it AFTER director Fritz is already moving ACT III to Oak Cliff. EMERGENCY conference with Decker required. ===***===***=== THEY HAD TO GET GOING TO OAK CLIFF whether there's a radio announcement or not. In the event, instead of Tippit calling in at 1 to say Oswald is dead, there was dead air. Dead air for 18 minutes. PROBLEM...they'd already established in a script that they find the shells, the rifle, and hear from Truly by 1:06. So they acted the script until the snafu of Tippit's missing radio call ignites timeframe chaos. In other words - the script is going right on cue....until....dead air....Where's the call from Tippit saying Oswald's dead? ...dead air.... (but the players nervously continue on script moving the action towards Oak Cliff) 1:18 FINALLY, a relevant transmission = Tippit is dead, not Oswald. Emergency. Immediate conference between Decker and Fritz required. In your CT, IIRC, Fritz already knows Oswald is the patsy when the day begins and on 22 November Fritz is acting at all times with this knowledge. However, by the time of WC testimony, his actions that day must look as if he has no idea who shot JFK until Truly says Oswald is missing. With (1) the missing critical scene where Tippit shoots Oswald and (2) with the off-script event of the Tippit shooting, ALL THE TSBD action has to happen later - 15-20 minutes later, because the Tippit shooting is reported 15-20 minutes later than the scripted transmission from Tippet they were expecting. If Oswald was supposed to be dead anyway by Tippit's gun, none of this timing question was going to matter. Dead president, dead assassin. Neat. Easy. ACCORDING TO SCRIPT: No one's going to go looking into the timeframe of all the TSBD events AND no one's going to go looking into the timeframe to explain how Oswald was caught because lone-cop Tippit caught Oswald singlehandedly just by good intincts. No need to methodically rebuild the TSBD timeframe to show how they were able to capture Oswald. ...But in the actual event they are playing it by ear, and by the time of WC testimony they have to explain how/when/why Tippit was shot and how/when they hear of Tippit's death, plus how/when/why they leave TSBD when they do, plus how/when/why they manage to catch Oswald at Texas Theatre...all of which in the actual event was done on the fly and off script, but now has to be sloppily half-way sorta explained to the WC and matched reasonably well to radio logs. THEREFORE, Fritz testifies to nothing about time frame. It's a giant quagmire for him because he's at the center of all relevant acts in the play; in fact he is the play's director. HOWEVER, other less involved characters can help Fritz out of this jam and establish the 1:12 time frame because they aren't so wrapped up in explaining their behavior, they just take orders...but Fritz has to explain WHY he gives the orders when he does. So he has no timestamp in his testomony. You've been right all along here - the timeframe tells us everything and Tippit's murder interacts with the timeframe by throwing it off by at least 20 minutes. Remember - the script is in effect and everything has pre-planned times such as the TSBD events...but...the 1o'clock scene fails to materialize when Tippit doesn't call saying Oswald is dead. Fritz knew it in his testimony, so he offers no timeframe, but makes darn sure everyone else makes a timeframe to explain Fritz's decisions and movements. Furthermore, I ask you to think deeper about the consequences of Tippit's unplanned murder on the day's script. Tippit killing Oswald was meant to be THE END...., ....THINK what NOT HAVING the expected call from Tippit announcing the assassin is dead, the case is solved, the play is over, the script is done, everyone can go home now.... ....means to a. the post-1pm actions on 22NOV and b. the WC testimony that has to explain the post-Tippit events and match it to the radio logs. Everything has for awhile spun out of control, now timeframes must be fixed retroactively from the original script to match radio logs in the aftermath of Tippit's death. Follow me??????? Jason An actor missed his cue, the actor, Tippit, was dead. Now it's ad-lib time and the messy WC testimony has to cover up the ad-libbing, AND...radio transcripts now must lead the given testimony. It was meant to be an open-and-shut case with no close radio log scrutiny, no Tippit murder, and certainly no absurd Ruby-murdering-Oswald in police custody. Without the unplanned Tippit murder and Ruby fiasco, the radio logs et al. never come in to play because who would care?....IMO. [Of course, if Tippit's murder was part of the plan, disregard everything in this post.] Compare to the testimony of the boy Mike Robinson overhearing the conversation in the men's room of DPD HQ documented by Walt Brown....the testimony that Oswald should be dead according to script, not Tippit. Jason, You are as much of a conspiracy theorist as the next guy, or gal. Your rantings of how you only present only evidence are absurd. Edited May 5, 2018 by Michael Clark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted May 5, 2018 Author Share Posted May 5, 2018 (edited) On 5/4/2018 at 5:10 PM, Jason Ward said: Hi Paul, Without question Hosty and Sorrels criminally denied the existence of any threats to the president from the extreme Right - even though Adlai Stevenson personally notified Kennedy that General Walker's capacity for violence was already apparent in the October 1963 Stevenson visit to Dallas. However, not wanting to tag their crusty reactionary friends as presidential threats is understandable, apart from any conspiratorial involvement in the assassination. It's also possible, IMO, that Hosty and Sorrels didn't want to put a fellow conservative on the list of security concerns because they expected merely protest and no violence (although in Walker's case - he was already very closely watched by the FBI for inciting domestic violence). Paul, I've seen you say that the CIA-did-it theorists should consider the plot and the cover-up separately. Different purposes. Different authors. Isn't it fair to say Hosty and Sorrels were really scared of getting blamed for the assassination, so much so that they lied and went overboard as to the non-existence of threats in Dallas pre-22NOV63? Isn't there evidence that the DPD was trying to throw blame on to the Feds - such as Curry's leak of the Revill memo? But does not wanting to get scapegoated for the assassination mean they were conspirators in the assassination??? 1. According to FBI agent James Hosty, he and the FBI joined the ATF in assuming any threat to JFK would come from General Walker's Minutemen. 2. Don't we get the impression that Hosty wants to name the DPD in a radical right wing Conspiracy Theory? Or is he retroactively trying to portray himself as a Kennedy liberal who held "John Bircher-type" conservatives in contempt? Is there any reason to frame Oswald for the assassination except to blame a communist conspiracy? If Lone Nut was the planned explanation of the conspirators - why not choose a less provocative patsy like a homeless person, a recently released mental patient, a drug addict, or known problem criminal? Do you need a man who's lived in Russia and agitated for Castro if you plan to blame the president's death on a crazy loner? 3. Hosty defines a presidential threat as a specific known plan to cause harm 4. Hosty isn't happy with the Warren Commission ... and doesn't he seem less than impressed with Earl Warren personally? Hi Jason, What is your your source for your claim that "Adlai Stevenson personally notified Kennedy that General Walker's capacity for violence was already apparent?" I'm aware that Adlai Stevenson personally warned Kennedy not to go Dallas because of the spitting incident -- however, I'm unaware that Adlai Stevenson had any clue that General Walker was behind those Dallas attacks. (A) Walker's modus operandi -- as a former US General -- was to make plans and instruct his troops -- and then let the troops complete the mission. Walker was not near the Dallas Memorial Auditorium on the night of the Adlai humiliation. As Larrie Schmidt told me, however, Walker organized and motivated all the players. While it was fairly common knowledge in Dallas that General Walker was the organizer of the Adlai humiliation, Adlai and his entourage were not from Dallas, nor did they have any friends in Dallas outside of the left-wing. Nobody in Dallas was going to share inside information with them. (B ) Also, General Walker cannot be called a conservative. He was a Radical. He advocated the overthrow of the Federal Government -- if not by elections, then by violence. Though General Walker was very closely watched by the FBI in Washington DC, as you say, you have also amply shown, Jason, that General Walker and his Dallas Minutemen were PROTECTED by James Hosty and Forrest Sorrels from detection by the Washington DC boys. (C) I maintain that the JFK murder (along with its LHO murder subplot) and the JFK Cover-up were two different plots, conducted by two different groups who were really at cross-purposes. The JFK Kill-Team wanted to blame all Communists. The JFK Cover-up Team wanted to calm the USA with a Lone Nut theory. (C.1) In my reading, the only reason that Hosty and Sorrels lied to the PRS about the non-existence of Radical Right activity in Dallas was to manipulate the Washington DC Secret Service PRS so that they would not send monitors to Dallas to watch the Radical Right. The PRS would have done a great job, and foiled the JFK Assassination. I see no other reason. Not fear, not worry, not anxiety. Their lie to the PRS was strictly intended to assassinate JFK. Period. That's my reading. (C.2) I find no evidence that the DPD was trying to throw blame onto the Feds until after the DPD was forced to accept the Lone Nut theory of the JFK murder. The DPD leadership, working with General Walker and other Radical Right in Dallas, had planned to blame the Communists for the JFK murder. But when the Washington DC JFK Cover-up unexpectedly took over, the DPD worried that they might take all the blame. So, in reaction to that, they began to blame the FBI. We see that in two phases: (i) the leak of Revill's memo to the WC; and (ii) the news from Waggoner Carr and Henry Wade to Earl Warren that Lee Harvey Oswald had an official FBI informant number. However -- these points were carefully swept under the rug by the Warren Commission, because there was no need for Dallas to panic. Dallas would not be blamed under any circumstances, in the interest of National Security during the Cold War. Dallas eventually calmed down. I do agree with you, Jason, that the worry of Dallas and their blaming of the FBI at the last minute betrays their collective sense of guilt for the JFK Assassination. According to your Numbered Points: 1. Dallas FBI agent James Hosty in his book, Axxignment Oswald (1996) claims that he worked closely with ATF Agent Frank Ellsworth, and agreed with Frank's suspicion of General Walker and the Dallas Minutemen. 1.1. Actually, however, Ellsworth reported this to the Warren Commission, while James Hosty repeated to the Warren Commission the lies he told the PRS, namely, that he knew of nobody in Dallas who was dangerous. So, we have James Hosty on pejury, by my reading. 2. I see no reason to believe that James Hosty would finger the DPD in a Radical Right Conspiracy. He is lying about his "liberal Catholic" love of JFK in his book -- he had secretly TURNED against JFK by his contagion with the Birchers in Dallas. 2.1. Remember that James Hosty co-wrote this book with his son -- and I feel confident that he always kept the truth of his treason away from his son. His son probably asked Hosty the most difficult questions -- which may explain why it took 3 decades for this book to appear. 2.2. In my reading, the main reason that Oswald was tagged as the JFK Patsy was due to the role of Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) in the Walker shooting on April 10, 1963. I have not seen any material evidence to move me from that position. I am open to new evidence. 2.2.1. Even if that analysis is incorrect, I still maintain that General Walker refused to tolerate that a Marine "defector" to Russia came back to Dallas with a Russian bride, to live less than 10 miles from his own home. 2.2.2. I think this was probably a distinct motive for General Walker to carefully and painstakingly pin LHO for the JFK Assassination. 3. It is not only James Hosty who defined a presidential threat as "a specific known plan to cause harm." That was the written definition by the Secret Service PRS. 3.1. Hosty was singing to the Warren Commission. This was his excuse for not naming ANYONE to the Secret Service PRS as dangerous in Dallas. 3.2. Yet in his book, Axxignment Oswald (1996), Hosty boldly proclaims the danger of LHO in Dallas, and how he knew it for a long time (exactly as he had boasted to DPD Lieutenant Jack Revill). 4. James Hosty lets his hair down in his book, Axxignment Oswald, and admits that he suspected LHO since October, 1963. He also blames the FBI for not taking his warnings seriously. 4.1. In his book, James Hosty shows that his emotions harmonize most fully with those of General Walker. The US Government is riddled with Communist sympathizers! This is a subtheme of his book. 4.2. In that same subtheme, Hosty suspects the Warren Commission of being part and parcel of a corrupt Washington DC Establishment. This included the Supreme Court Chief Justice -- Earl Warren. All best, --Paul Edited May 8, 2018 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Ward Posted May 5, 2018 Share Posted May 5, 2018 (edited) 5 hours ago, Paul Trejo said: What is your your source for your claim that "Adlai Stevenson personally notified Kennedy that General Walker's capacity for violence was already apparent?" I'm aware that Adlai Stevenson personally warned Kennedy not to go Dallas because of the spitting incident -- however, I'm unaware that Adlai Stevenson had any clue that General Walker was behind those Dallas attacks. Apologies, Paul, that was me oversimplifying the evidence in a way that you rightfully suggest may be misleading. I expediently married two known facts: General Walker organized the October 1963 assault on Adlai Stevenson (spitting, hit on the head with a sign, etc.) Adlai Stevenson warned Kennedy to avoid Dallas because of this Walker-sponsored assault I am aware of no evidence that Stevenson mentioned General Walker by name to JFK as part of this warning. The FBI and Secret Service in Dallas were aware that General Walker was behind the assault on Stevenson, as shown by sources printed in this thread, but there is no evidence that Forrest Sorrels and James Hosty reported this detail to Washington. The ATF was all over the Minutemen and was not so keen to protect them as Sorrells and Hosty, but their duty portfolio did not extend to presidential protection, so they may have likewise remained silent about Walker's role. Even so, Hoover had multiple tentacles of domestic intelligence and I think he'd be very interested in understanding the Stevenson incident. Did Hoover know Walker was behind the Stevenson incident before JFK went to Dallas? I will look into the reports he received right now as it's clear Hoover knew very well of the extreme right's capacity for violence and their hatred of Kennedy. Jason 1. The FBI has a bulky correspondence file related to General Walker and his fans: 2. Before General Walker became a person of interest in the Kennedy assassination, he was a person of interest to the FBI for other reasons: 3. Isn't it fair to call General Walker an earlier conspiracy theorist? This continues the discussion of DPD police chief Jesse Curry and his book, and his attempt to blackmail General Walker with his book. (side clue: who is AR indicated as the letter's typist?) Walker can't stand the Lone Nut theory and is a Warren Commission/DPD critic. 4. Walker is a FBI, Nixon, and UN critic who apparently the FBI decides in 1970 is now fit to ignore. Walker jumps the shark? SOURCES: 1 FBI files on Edwin Walker Walker, 116-165594, section 3 2 FBI cross-referenced files to General Walker, pp. 10 & 378, https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=145525&search=hoover_edwin+walker#relPageId=1&tab=page 3 & 4 FBI files on Edwin Walker, 82-2130 Edited May 5, 2018 by Jason Ward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted May 6, 2018 Author Share Posted May 6, 2018 (edited) Jason, These FBI documents are getting warmer, but are still fairly cold regarding the JFK Assassination and General Walker. 1. General Walker had hundreds of thousands of fans coast to coast. The Major Media recognized this, as with this Newsweek cover: Walker was considered so powerful a speaker (to the Choir) that a famous movie was made about him -- namely -- Seven Days in May -- which JFK and RFK liked so well, that they gave concessions to the producers to use the White House for some scenes. JFK and RFK were so worried about Ex-General Walker in early 1962, that when Walker appeared before the Senate Subcommittee on Military Preparedness in April, 1962, that JFK and RFK personally ordered no television or radio be allowed in the Senate room. (They later realized that they made a mistake, because Walker made a jackass of himself in those hearings. Walker could speak to the Choir, but not under cross-examination.) The point is that we today have tremendous difficulty grasping how famous General Walker was in 1962. This was his glory year. He could have had the world, if he played his cards right. His first step was Texas Governor, if he could take it. Chances are, if he had listened better to HL Hunt, he could have taken the office. Basically, Walker hardly campaigned at all! He didn't even write a platform! When the press asked him, "What is your platform, General?" Walker replied, "The State Constitution of Texas," and left it at that. So, he was a famous figure -- he was a famous speaker -- he thrilled his crowds, according to many writers. (He spoke something like Rush Limbaugh spoke during the Obama Administration.) Yet he was not a well-read politician. He was a General, and so he simply expected to be taken at his word. Oh, well. 2. The FBI was tracking General Walker very closely -- but they also relied on their local FBI offices. J. Edgar Hoover had a lot of good data from Louisiana and Mississippi -- but when it came to Texas. Hoover had less data -- this is (IMHO) because James Hosty had TURNED in 1962, and had begun to support General Walker himself. So did Forrest Sorrels. Dallas had a culture of Right-wing activity, and although it was illegal for Federal agents to join Radical Right groups that spoke about taking over the US Government -- the atmosphere in Dallas was intoxicating, evidently. James Hosty kept crucial data about General Walker away from the FBI Director. Upon reflection -- this contradicts my old belief, that FBI records will reflect my CT. Insofar as James Hosty withheld, or even destroyed, crucial information about General Walker in Dallas, then I may be waiting in vain to find any smoking gun within FBI documents by the FBI about General Walker. So, this is painful, but instructive for me. 3. Edwin Walker still thinks he has a chance in US Politics -- far beyond his useful years. He thinks a great deal of himself. By 1970 he is still sending letters to Senators and Presidents -- long after they have come to think of him as a "crazy old coot." 4. Edwin Walker sending advice to Richard Nixon is like a great-grandfather sending his great-grandson advice in college. Walker never knew when to quit. Why not? Because he was disoriented starting with Little Rock Arkansas in 1959, when he joined the John Birch Society, soon after it was formed. We must remember that Walker was gay all his life -- and yet he rose to the office of US Army General. This means that if he was in the closet throughout his military career (which he was) that he was even MORE in the closet after he became a General. Walker wanted to quit the US Military in 1959 -- but Ike denied his request and moved Walker to Germany. Walker was a US officer, so he followed orders as usual. The real problem with Germany was the Overseas Weekly newspaper guys needling Walker because he was gay. They never printed it, but they continually threatened to do that by their behavior and jeers. Germany was a living nightmare for Walker (except on the weekends). Why didn't Walker just Retire from the US Army, and move to Germany where he could come out of the closet? That's a mystery. He should have done that. Anyway, he was forced to give up his post by the PENTAGON, not by JFK. Walker started a shore flap on the Berlin border, and that was stupid. The Pentagon could not trust that sort of poor judgment so close to the Berlin wall. Walker was out. Walker could have Retired at that point, and then come out of the closet there in gay-friendly Germany. But he didn't. Instead -- and nobody can explain this -- he RESIGNED from the Army, which means he gave up his 30 year Army Pension. What the heck? There was no good reason for that. Walker's judgment had become impaired, IMHO, by four decades in the closet. He ran for Texas Governor in 1962, on the dime of HL Hunt. There were politicians in Washington who vowed to back him if he ran on the Republican Ticket, which even in those days was gaining the Conservative vote. Walker decided that a Dixiecrat style Democrat was what he wanted to be. Then, Walker completely make a fool of himself before the Senate Subcommittee in April 1962. He said he expected some great General (like MacArthur) to run to his side -- but not a single one did. He decided to start a massive race riot at Ole Miss in September, 1962, against the advice of HL Hunt, and even against the advice of Robert Welch, the leader of the John Birch Society. In his Grand Jury transcripts, still stored at UT Austin, he expressed joy at leading the students to riot against the Federal Troops that JFK sent to defend James Meredith's right to go to school there. The students rushed to him for advice, and he expressed elation because of the battle. Frankly -- after he left the US Army, Walker showed an increasing string of bad decisions. He was a nut by many measures. Yet he was still shrewd as a jungle lion when he came to fighting -- and he could still lead troops to battle. All best, --Paul Edited May 6, 2018 by Paul Trejo typos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted May 6, 2018 Share Posted May 6, 2018 6 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said: Jason, These FBI documents are getting warmer, but are still fairly cold regarding the JFK Assassination and General Walker. 1. General Walker had hundreds of thousands of fans coast to coast. The Major Media recognized this, as with this Newsweek cover: Walker was considered so powerful a speaker (to the Choir) that a famous movie was made about him -- namely -- Seven Days in May -- which JFK and RFK liked so well, that they gave concessions to the producers to use the White House for some scenes. JFK and RFK were so worried about Ex-General Walker in early 1962, that when Walker appeared before the Senate Subcommittee on Military Preparedness in April, 1962, that JFK and RFK personally ordered no television or radio be allowed in the Senate room. (They later realized that they made a mistake, because Walker made a jackass of himself in those hearings. Walker could speak to the Choir, but not under cross-examination.) The point is that we today have tremendous difficulty grasping how famous General Walker was in 1962. This was his glory year. He could have had the world, if he played his cards right. His first step was Texas Governor, if he could take it. Chances are, if he had listened better to HL Hunt, he could have taken the office. Basically, Walker hardly campaigned at all! He didn't even write a platform! When the press asked him, "What is your platform, General?" Walker replied, "The State Constitution of Texas," and left it at that. So, he was a famous figure -- he was a famous speaker -- he thrilled his crowds, according to many writers. (He spoke something like Rush Limbaugh spoke during the Obama Administration.) Yet he was not a well-read politician. He was a General, and so he simply expected to be taken at his word. Oh, well. 2. The FBI was tracking General Walker very closely -- but they also relied on their local FBI offices. J. Edgar Hoover had a lot of good data from Louisiana and Mississippi -- but when it came to Texas. Hoover had less data -- this is (IMHO) because James Hosty had TURNED in 1962, and had begun to support General Walker himself. So did Forrest Sorrels. Dallas had a culture of Right-wing activity, and although it was illegal for Federal agents to join Radical Right groups that spoke about taking over the US Government -- the atmosphere in Dallas was intoxicating, evidently. James Hosty kept crucial data about General Walker away from the FBI Director. Upon reflection -- this contradicts my old belief, that FBI records will reflect my CT. Insofar as James Hosty withheld, or even destroyed, crucial information about General Walker in Dallas, then I may be waiting in vain to find any smoking gun within FBI documents by the FBI about General Walker. So, this is painful, but instructive for me. 3. Edwin Walker still thinks he has a chance in US Politics -- far beyond his useful years. He thinks a great deal of himself. By 1970 he is still sending letters to Senators and Presidents -- long after they have come to think of him as a "crazy old coot." 4. Edwin Walker sending advice to Richard Nixon is like a great-grandfather sending his great-grandson advice in college. Walker never knew when to quit. Why not? Because he was disoriented starting with Little Rock Arkansas in 1959, when he joined the John Birch Society, soon after it was formed. We must remember that Walker was gay all his life -- and yet he rose to the office of US Army General. This means that if he was in the closet throughout his military career (which he was) that he was even MORE in the closet after he became a General. Walker wanted to quit the US Military in 1959 -- but Ike denied his request and moved Walker to Germany. Walker was a US officer, so he followed orders as usual. The real problem with Germany was the Overseas Weekly newspaper guys needling Walker because he was gay. They never printed it, but they continually threatened to do that by their behavior and jeers. Germany was a living nightmare for Walker (except on the weekends). Why didn't Walker just Retire from the US Army, and move to Germany where he could come out of the closet? That's a mystery. He should have done that. Anyway, he was forced to give up his post by the PENTAGON, not by JFK. Walker started a shore flap on the Berlin border, and that was stupid. The Pentagon could not trust that sort of poor judgment so close to the Berlin wall. Walker was out. Walker could have Retired at that point, and then come out of the closet there in gay-friendly Germany. But he didn't. Instead -- and nobody can explain this -- he RESIGNED from the Army, which means he gave up his 30 year Army Pension. What the heck? There was no good reason for that. Walker's judgment had become impaired, IMHO, by four centuries in the closet. He ran for Texas Governor in 1962, on the dime of HL Hunt. There were politicians in Washington who vowed to back him if he ran on the Republican Ticket, which even in those days was gaining the Conservative vote. Walker decided that a Dixiecrat style Democrat was what he wanted to be. Then, Walker completely make a fool of himself before the Senate Subcommittee in April 1962. He said he expected some great General (like MacArthur) to run to his side -- but not a single one did. He decided to start a massive race riot at Ole Miss in September, 1962, against the advice of HL Hunt, and even against the advice of Robert Welch, the leader of the John Birch Society. In his Grand Jury transcripts, still stored at UT Austin, he expressed joy at leading the students to riot against the Federal Troops that JFK sent to defend James Meredith's right to go to school there. They rushed to him for advice, and he expressed such joy at the battle. Frankly -- after he left the US Army, Walker showed an increasing string of bad decisions. He was just a nut by many measures. Yet he was still shrewd as a jungle lion when he came to fighting -- and he could still lead troops to battle. All best, --Paul The alternate lifestyle of Walker should be explored more thoroughly. It is amazing that he advanced as far as he did, and as a right winger no less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted May 6, 2018 Share Posted May 6, 2018 8 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said: Jason, Walker's judgment had become impaired, IMHO, by four centuries in the closet. All best, --Paul 4 centuries in the closet would impair anyone's judgement. 😭 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Brancato Posted May 6, 2018 Share Posted May 6, 2018 39 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said: Jason, These FBI documents are getting warmer, but are still fairly cold regarding the JFK Assassination and General Walker. 1. General Walker had hundreds of thousands of fans coast to coast. The Major Media recognized this, as with this Newsweek cover: Walker was considered so powerful a speaker (to the Choir) that a famous movie was made about him -- namely -- Seven Days in May -- which JFK and RFK liked so well, that they gave concessions to the producers to use the White House for some scenes. JFK and RFK were so worried about Ex-General Walker in early 1962, that when Walker appeared before the Senate Subcommittee on Military Preparedness in April, 1962, that JFK and RFK personally ordered no television or radio be allowed in the Senate room. (They later realized that they made a mistake, because Walker made a jackass of himself in those hearings. Walker could speak to the Choir, but not under cross-examination.) The point is that we today have tremendous difficulty grasping how famous General Walker was in 1962. This was his glory year. He could have had the world, if he played his cards right. His first step was Texas Governor, if he could take it. Chances are, if he had listened better to HL Hunt, he could have taken the office. Basically, Walker hardly campaigned at all! He didn't even write a platform! When the press asked him, "What is your platform, General?" Walker replied, "The State Constitution of Texas," and left it at that. So, he was a famous figure -- he was a famous speaker -- he thrilled his crowds, according to many writers. (He spoke something like Rush Limbaugh spoke during the Obama Administration.) Yet he was not a well-read politician. He was a General, and so he simply expected to be taken at his word. Oh, well. 2. The FBI was tracking General Walker very closely -- but they also relied on their local FBI offices. J. Edgar Hoover had a lot of good data from Louisiana and Mississippi -- but when it came to Texas. Hoover had less data -- this is (IMHO) because James Hosty had TURNED in 1962, and had begun to support General Walker himself. So did Forrest Sorrels. Dallas had a culture of Right-wing activity, and although it was illegal for Federal agents to join Radical Right groups that spoke about taking over the US Government -- the atmosphere in Dallas was intoxicating, evidently. James Hosty kept crucial data about General Walker away from the FBI Director. Upon reflection -- this contradicts my old belief, that FBI records will reflect my CT. Insofar as James Hosty withheld, or even destroyed, crucial information about General Walker in Dallas, then I may be waiting in vain to find any smoking gun within FBI documents by the FBI about General Walker. So, this is painful, but instructive for me. 3. Edwin Walker still thinks he has a chance in US Politics -- far beyond his useful years. He thinks a great deal of himself. By 1970 he is still sending letters to Senators and Presidents -- long after they have come to think of him as a "crazy old coot." 4. Edwin Walker sending advice to Richard Nixon is like a great-grandfather sending his great-grandson advice in college. Walker never knew when to quit. Why not? Because he was disoriented starting with Little Rock Arkansas in 1959, when he joined the John Birch Society, soon after it was formed. We must remember that Walker was gay all his life -- and yet he rose to the office of US Army General. This means that if he was in the closet throughout his military career (which he was) that he was even MORE in the closet after he became a General. Walker wanted to quit the US Military in 1959 -- but Ike denied his request and moved Walker to Germany. Walker was a US officer, so he followed orders as usual. The real problem with Germany was the Overseas Weekly newspaper guys needling Walker because he was gay. They never printed it, but they continually threatened to do that by their behavior and jeers. Germany was a living nightmare for Walker (except on the weekends). Why didn't Walker just Retire from the US Army, and move to Germany where he could come out of the closet? That's a mystery. He should have done that. Anyway, he was forced to give up his post by the PENTAGON, not by JFK. Walker started a shore flap on the Berlin border, and that was stupid. The Pentagon could not trust that sort of poor judgment so close to the Berlin wall. Walker was out. Walker could have Retired at that point, and then come out of the closet there in gay-friendly Germany. But he didn't. Instead -- and nobody can explain this -- he RESIGNED from the Army, which means he gave up his 30 year Army Pension. What the heck? There was no good reason for that. Walker's judgment had become impaired, IMHO, by four centuries in the closet. He ran for Texas Governor in 1962, on the dime of HL Hunt. There were politicians in Washington who vowed to back him if he ran on the Republican Ticket, which even in those days was gaining the Conservative vote. Walker decided that a Dixiecrat style Democrat was what he wanted to be. Then, Walker completely make a fool of himself before the Senate Subcommittee in April 1962. He said he expected some great General (like MacArthur) to run to his side -- but not a single one did. He decided to start a massive race riot at Ole Miss in September, 1962, against the advice of HL Hunt, and even against the advice of Robert Welch, the leader of the John Birch Society. In his Grand Jury transcripts, still stored at UT Austin, he expressed joy at leading the students to riot against the Federal Troops that JFK sent to defend James Meredith's right to go to school there. They rushed to him for advice, and he expressed such joy at the battle. Frankly -- after he left the US Army, Walker showed an increasing string of bad decisions. He was just a nut by many measures. Yet he was still shrewd as a jungle lion when he came to fighting -- and he could still lead troops to battle. All best, --Paul Several questions about this essay by Mr. Trejo: i was under the impression that one General did stand up for him - Lyman Lemnitzer. Am I mistaken? Also, in all the words I’ve read about JFK asking that Seven Days in May be made into a movie and filmed in part in the White House I’ve never seen Walker’s name mentioned. I thought it was his Generals (JCS) that he was worried about. Not to say they might have had Walker in mind. But don’t you think JFK had reason to fear his JCS? After all the movie is about a military takeover, not a crazy ex-General fomenting a coup. Where is the proof that it was the Pentagon and not JFK himself that pushed Walker out? I’ve never heard that before. Overseas Weekly never said anything about Walker being gay. Why do you assume that was behind the publication’s ‘needling’? I thought it was Walker’s extreme right wing views and troop indoctrination that they criticized. What can you show to buttress your claim that Hosty kept info on Walker away from Hoover? Is this in his book? I was not aware that Dallas Secret Service agent Forrest Sorrels was a supporter of Walker. How do you know this? one more question which might be slightly off topic but you mentioned it. You say that federal agents (FBI.? Or other agencies as well?) were not allowed to join right wing groups that advocated the overthrow of the US government. Why do you suppose that the same rule didn’t apply to the Communist Party? My questions are sincere, and I do hope you answer them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted May 6, 2018 Author Share Posted May 6, 2018 (edited) 22 hours ago, Jason Ward said: ...I am aware of no evidence that Stevenson mentioned General Walker by name to JFK as part of this warning. The FBI and Secret Service in Dallas were aware that General Walker was behind the assault on Stevenson, as shown by sources printed in this thread, but there is no evidence that Forrest Sorrels and James Hosty reported this detail to Washington. The ATF was all over the Minutemen and was not so keen to protect them as Sorrells and Hosty, but their duty portfolio did not extend to presidential protection, so they may have likewise remained silent about Walker's role.... Jason Hi Jason, That's my reading, also. Adlai Stevenson did not know that General Walker was behind the attacks on him. I'm surprised that Adlai's staff didn't bother to read the Dallas newspapers and magazines following the attacks -- but obviously they didn't. They trusted the local police to sort out the "troublemakers." That was a big mistake. They had no clue -- and Washington DC had no clue -- and the USA had no clue outside Dallas -- that General Walker had the run of Dallas and could do anything he wanted to do -- with the blessing of oil billionaire H.L. Hunt. As for Dallas ATF agent Frank Ellsworth, he knew about Walker and the Minutemen, too, probably from James Hosty himself. So, why didn't Frank tell the Secret Service? The answer is clear when we go back 55 years in time, to the culture of the day, when there was no Email, there were no personal computers, and the high-tech of the day was a local newspaper and a telephone booth. In those days, in business and in government, everything went by SOP (standard operating procedure). You didn't break that. You didn't go around people. You didn't go over people's heads. It was bad form. You could get fired for that -- or at minimum lose your reputation and the trust of people you depend upon. So, Frank Ellsworth (who in my opinion was innocent of any JFK plot) sincerely trusted Dallas FBI agent James Hosty to do the right thing. The SOP in 1963 was that the Washington DC Secret Service would send a teletype to the Dallas FBI and advise that they were planning to bring the US President to Dallas, so please submit the names of any dangerous people in the town. That was it. That was the whole SOP. It had worked for generations. It never broke down. Until Dallas, 1963. It would have worked, too, IMHO -- if only James Hosty and Forrest Sorrels had told the truth -- instead of selling out JFK to General Walker and his Minutemen. All best, --Paul Edited May 6, 2018 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Simpich Posted May 6, 2018 Share Posted May 6, 2018 I am very pleased to see that new chronos are being done of the original Warren Commission testimony about the Dallas cops and more -- I have done some too over the years - I will review the thread and offer my own thoughts in the days ahead! Just one quick heads-up - did you know that Forrest Sorrels believed that there was more than one gunman - and was friends with Orville Nix - and would meet with him and talk about it at some length - it is in Gayle Nix Jackson's first book. You could call Gayle and ask her more. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Ward Posted May 7, 2018 Share Posted May 7, 2018 (edited) 6 hours ago, Bill Simpich said: I am very pleased to see that new chronos are being done of the original Warren Commission testimony about the Dallas cops and more -- I have done some too over the years - I will review the thread and offer my own thoughts in the days ahead! Hi Bill, Many thanks for joining us! I count around 90 Dallas law enforcement witnesses who gave testimony to the WC. To keep this manageable and with some prompting by Paul Trejo, around 25 seem especially prominent - most of all because of their presence at the TSBD or Tippit's murder scene or the Texas Theatre. Strictly from their own words, I say of particular interest are Captain Fritz & Buddy Walthers; although they had a lot of helpers. Walthers is Superman on 22NOV63 because he appears on all the historical scenes. Sheriff Bill Decker is I suspect a critical figure as well, but he says almost nothing and I think everyone holds him in such awe that they ask him almost nothing. Postal Inspector Harry Holmes is, strictly in terms of his WC testimony, the Oscar® winner for best performance. Or, I should say, he is the Oscar® winner for best performance if you are looking for signs of mendacity and conspiracy. He's a terrible witness and a terrible actor. His testimony alone busts the case wide open to an almost obvious conclusion that Oswald was framed, in my reading. My perhaps sophomoric study of 20-odd cops as they testify before the WC is above in this thread. Do you have any disagreements? Anyone else to add to the list? 6 hours ago, Bill Simpich said: Just one quick heads-up - did you know that Forrest Sorrels believed that there was more than one gunman Isn't one of the columns of support towards implicating the Radical Right in the assassination the inescapable evidence that they Forever After insist on a conspiracy in Dealey Plaza? Insofar as Dallas law enforcement also insisted on conspiracy in their testimony - which many did - is it too much of a jump to align their motivations with the Radical Right?. Both General Walker's Minutemen / John Birch Society / White Citizen's Council types AND many in Dallas law enforcement wanted the communists blamed in a conspiracy. Capt Fritz, Sorrels, Hosty, et al., in my review of the evidence only reluctantly go along with the Lone Nut narrative. They make a lot of effort in WC testimony and later to let everyone know what they really think* - that Oswald is a KGB-trained assassin, supported by Castro financially and mysterious others in Dealey Plaza logistically. 1. Are the cover-up and the assassination perhaps more illuminating when studied as two separate modules? Are there two separate motives; one for the murderers and one for those who produced the cover-up? -Bill Simpich, State Secret, Chapter 6. {my added red line} https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/State_Secret_Chapter6.html 2. Is Captain Fritz the tactical commander on 22NOV63 delivering both the staged evidence against Oswald and the exceptionally quick arrest of the presidential assassin? -Bill Simpich, State Secret, Chapter 6 https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/State_Secret_Chapter6.html * or, what they really want us to think Edited May 7, 2018 by Jason Ward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted May 7, 2018 Share Posted May 7, 2018 9 hours ago, Paul Brancato said: Several questions about this essay by Mr. Trejo: i was under the impression that one General did stand up for him - Lyman Lemnitzer. Am I mistaken? Also, in all the words I’ve read about JFK asking that Seven Days in May be made into a movie and filmed in part in the White House I’ve never seen Walker’s name mentioned. I thought it was his Generals (JCS) that he was worried about. Not to say they might have had Walker in mind. But don’t you think JFK had reason to fear his JCS? After all the movie is about a military takeover, not a crazy ex-General fomenting a coup. Where is the proof that it was the Pentagon and not JFK himself that pushed Walker out? I’ve never heard that before. Overseas Weekly never said anything about Walker being gay. Why do you assume that was behind the publication’s ‘needling’? I thought it was Walker’s extreme right wing views and troop indoctrination that they criticized. What can you show to buttress your claim that Hosty kept info on Walker away from Hoover? Is this in his book? I was not aware that Dallas Secret Service agent Forrest Sorrels was a supporter of Walker. How do you know this? one more question which might be slightly off topic but you mentioned it. You say that federal agents (FBI.? Or other agencies as well?) were not allowed to join right wing groups that advocated the overthrow of the US government. Why do you suppose that the same rule didn’t apply to the Communist Party? My questions are sincere, and I do hope you answer them. Paul Brancato's observations are good ones and should be addressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Ward Posted May 7, 2018 Share Posted May 7, 2018 (edited) On 5/2/2018 at 4:51 PM, Paul Trejo said: However, we still have some important folks to review. Starting with General Walker himself, we then have Robert Alan Surrey, Robert G. Klause, Bernard Weissman, Revilo P. Oliver -- and some others. The Radical Right testifying before the Warren Commission Part II: Bernard Weissman Age: 27. Weissman halted his previous deposition because he wanted to seek he advice of a lawyer. Weissman appears before the WC with his lawyer, which is rare – others with a lawyer include General Edwin Walker & Robert Surrey. “Welcome Mr. Kennedy to Dallas” ad in the 22NOV63 Dallas Morning News is the subject of the testimony, according to WC attorney Jenner. While in the army, Weissman met Larrie Schmidt in Munich; together they made plans to start a “conservative organization” in Dallas. 4NOV63: Weissman arrives in Dallas. Larrie Schmidt calls Weissman in OCT63 to boast of Adlai Stevenson’s public humiliation in Dallas. General Edwin Walker has employed Larrie Schmidt’s brother, according to a letter Weissman receives from Schmidt. Weissman is “worried” about associating with General Edwin Walker because of potential negative publicity. William (Bill) Burley is a rommate of Weissman’s who is also pestered by Schmidt to come to Dallas. CUSA = Conservatism USA, a group founded by Larrie Scmidt in 1961, while still in the army in Munich. Walker’s command was about 70 miles away from Weissman in Munich, although Walker had left the army during the period discussed in Weissman's testimony.. AMBUS = American Business, meant to be the profitable business entity matched with the political CUSA entity. Weissman is part of a group that hung around the same Munich bar, The Gastatte Lukullus. This group of 5 is the “inner circle” of a planned conservative business-political effort: AMBUS/CUSA. Weissman, Schmidt and the CUSA group intend to “infiltrate” other conservative groups and takeover leadership, one day combining them into the CUSA. Weissman says Larrie Schmidt’s brother drinks too much and is “a moron,” who happily lives on $35 a week and a free room at General Walker’s house. Weissman speaks repeatedly of “the Walker organization,” and is asked to elaborate. Weissman was sick of “seeing America as a weak sister all the time,” under both Eisenhower and Kennedy. Weissman was asked to change his name by the conservatives because it seems Jewish. Weissman is Jewish. H L Hunt of Dallas is noticed in a magazine, Hunt is imagined as a supporter in the CUSA organizational planning. Weissman brought money to the Dallas Morning News to run the “Welcome Mr Kennedy to Dallas” anti-Kennedy ad. Joe Grinnan, John Birch Society officer and independent oil operator, hands $1462 to Weissman for the anti-Kennedy ad. Nelson B Hunt also funds the ad. Weissman wrote the ad copy along with Larrie Schmidt. Weissman and Schmidt create a fictitious “committee” as a named sponsor of the anti-Kennedy ad. “We didn’t want anything to happen in the way of physical violence to President Kennedy,” Weissman says. The “local liberals” were oppressing the conservatives in Dallas after the Stevenson incident, Weissman says. Weissman’s anti-Kennedy “Welcome Mr Kennedy to Dallas…” ad received perhaps 20 favorable responses and 40 unfavorable response letters to the PO box, and $22 contribution. Weissman was in Dallas for 3.5 weeks only and leaves days after the assassination because his name was printed in the anti-JFK "Welcome Mr Kennedy to Dallas..." ad Weissman did not know J D Tippit, Jack Ruby or Lee Harvey Oswald at any time. 22NOV63: Weissman says the radio is calling the attack on JFK a right wing plot. 22NOV63: Weissman and Schmidt are watching the events unfold on TV in a bar. “I hope he is not one of Walker’s boys,” Weissman says upon hearing of Oswald’s arrest Stanley Marcus, owner of Neiman Marcus and a “rabid liberal” according to Weissman, blames the radical right for the assassination in a 23NOV63 Dallas Times Herald article. Weissman says they [the liberals] “had us on the run,” in the aftermath of the assassination. Weissman wants to immediately inform the FBI about the ad and related details, but JBS leader Grinan says no. Weissman volunteers that his employer is on Beckley but this is purely coincidental to Oswald’s address on Beckley. Mark Lane is wrong to claim that Weissman met Ruby and Oswald in the Carousel Club, Weissman says. Weissman has never been to the Caousel Club and never knew Ruby nor Oswald. In a live radio broadcast, Weissman accused Mark Lane of obtaining false testimony. Weissman admits to a meeting with Robert Morris, General Walker’s lawyer. General Walker’s car has “wanted for treason” hadbills visible to Weissman, but Weissman has no connection to the handbills. Robert Surry, Robert Klause, J Monk, Ashalnd Birchwell, General Edwin Walker, and Clifford Mercer are not known personally to Weissman. Weissman seems to imply Jack Ruby may have been watching the PO Box published in the "Welcome Mr Kennedy to Dallas..." anti-JFK ad, but in any case affirms someone surveiled his PO box and followed him at the post office CONCERNS Why does Weissman worry on 22NOV63 that Oswald is “one of Walker’s boys?” Weissman presents himself as manipulated by Larrie Schmidt. Is this accurate or is he trying to shift blame? There are lots of bars mentioned in Weissman's testimony– at least 4. The Larrie Schmidt CUSA group is born in their Munich army buddies drinking spot. Is most of this something of a hairbrained drunken bar idea that somehow gets wrapped up in the assassination? Weissman describes himself as a domestic liberal and against racism. Is this believable considering his associations in Dallas with Walker's group and the John Birch Society? Overall, is Weissman's testimony perhaps most valuable for giving us an insight into the passionate, politically frustrated young men who are anti-communist & anti-JFK minded in 1963? Why does Weissman mention Jack Ruby as possibly watching Weissman's PO box? Is there a connection between Walker’s PRO BLUE conservative indoctrination program given to US troops in Germany and the formation of the CUSA group in Munich by Larrie Schmidt - which leads to the "Welcome Mr Kennedy to Dallas...." ad? Why was the Radical Right immediately blamed in the media for the assassination on 22NOV63 so much that Weissman feared for his safety? Was it merely an assumption or was there early evidence of a right wing plot? The replacement of the Radical Right with the Lone Nut commie sympathizer is a spectacular reversal in assassination coverage; does not one journalist continue to pursue the far right? Overall, isn't Weissman a small fry? Isn't he a rather naive, politically confused, easily manipulated pawn of Schmidt and others? Is his only purpose to the extreme right in providing a name to use in the anti-JFK "Welcome Mr Kennedy to Dallas" ad? 1. Bernard Weissman is the order placer and bagman for the Dallas Morning News 22NOV63 ad: 2. Are Weissman and Schmidt useful idiots to the extreme right; or are they merely idiots??? 3. Bernard Weissman. Is he ever heard from again after the Warren Commission? SOURCES: 1 Warren Commission Hearings and Exhibits, "Weissman Exhibit No. 1" 2 Dr Jerry Rose, "The Friends of General Walker." The Third Decade, Vol 5, Iss 5, p 16. July, 1989. 3 http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKweissmanB.htm Edited May 7, 2018 by Jason Ward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted May 8, 2018 Author Share Posted May 8, 2018 (edited) Hi Jason, Great work on Bernie Weissman. Your intuition about the CUSA boys being mainly useful "idiots" is right on. The notable exception is Larrie Schmidt. But back to Bernie. I was never able to contact him, personally, but Gayle Nix Jackson contacted him last year in connection with her new book, Pieces of the Puzzle. (2018) He added little, she told me, to his WC testimony. My perception of Bernie is similar to yours, especially your label of Bernie as an order place and bagman. Jerry Rose read too much into the scenario. "Hair-brained drunken bar idea" aptly describes CUSA for all of these US Army boys, aside from Larrie and Bernie. Larrie Schmidt was very much the leader, and Bernie was very much the follower in CUSA. Bernie Weissman wants to ensure that Jewish people don't get shortchanged in this beer drinking fantasy. The best summary of this entire episode of CUSA is still the LIFE Magazine article of January 1964 (IIRC) which consists of a ling interview of Larrie Schmidt. I'll try to find it tonight to post it. Bernie Weissman is indeed a small fry in the scenario, yet his WC testimony provided solid clues about the role of General Walker and his chapter of the JBS in Dallas in the JFK Assassination. Bernie Weissman directly links the WANTED FOR TREASON: JFK poster to the very station wagon owned by General Walker. This was eyesight testimony, and it was not contested by the WC attorneys. It wraps up the connection, IMHO. One thing is clear to me regarding CUSA -- they had no relationship with General Walker's Pro-Blue organization in Germany. CUSA was 100 percent the brainchild of Larrie Schmidt. The inspiration came immediately after the publication of the famous political treatise, Conscience of a Conservative, by Barry Goldwater. It was required reading for all CUSA members, but evidently only Larrie and Bernie read it. All best, --Paul Edited May 8, 2018 by Paul Trejo typos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Brancato Posted May 8, 2018 Share Posted May 8, 2018 On 5/4/2018 at 7:50 PM, Michael Clark said: Jason, You are as much of a conspiracy theorist as the next guy, or gal. Your rantings of how you only present only evidence are absurd. Completely agree Michael. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now