Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

Within my seminar topic Serendipity the movie "Seven Days in May" has come up. It seems at least some of us have seen the movie or in my case have seen the movie and read the book.

I "discovered" the book after reading Marina Oswald's Testimony. She was asked about what books her husband had been reading at the time of his attempt on the life of Walker and the assassination of the President. Her lack of skill in the English language precluded her from knowing exactly what he had read. I followed up by searching out the best seller list for the period and the title, "Seven Days in May" caught my attention because of what I thought was an obvious analogy to the U-2 incident and the 7 days of denial by the Eisenhower administration.

It seems that author Fletcher Knebel had access to John F. Kennedy. Some believe that Kennedy was actually involved in helping with the novel because of it's accurate discription of the route that would be taken by the Washington elite to "Mount Thunder" in the event of a nuclear attack.

I was surprized to find that General Edwin Walker's name was mentioned in the book as a man that, in a prior time of history (the book was futuristic) might have supported a military take over of the United States.

I have often wondered if Oswald read the book.

The Nov. 19, 1963 issue of Look Magazine has a large picture of Khrushchev on the cover. In the upper right hand corner it highlights a review of the new movie, Seven Days in May. The review is interesting and quotes Kennedy with an ofhand remark about generals that he knows that might attempt such a plot.

Nov. 18, 1963 is the date, as I understand it, that the route the Kennedy motorcade would take in Dallas was announced to the public.

I have often wondered if Oswald read this magazine. I do believe, strongly, that he would have been attracted to it because of the Khruschev picture on the cover.

The book/movie is a story about the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of staff plotting to overthrough the government. I have often wondered if Kennedy might have been attempting to give a warnig to his own Chairman (within the story that his friend had written) with just enough detail and with a title that may have been directed toward Maxwell Taylor.

Jim Root

Edited by Jim Root
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Because I believe good posts are not being as readily accessed in the seminars forum, and because I believe Jim Root's Serendipity is an important and relevant topic, I am reposting from there to here:

When you say "one had the power to do so, the other did not (Diem)," are you comparing Taylor and Lansdale, or Diem and Thieu?  Who is the one and who is the other?

Tim

I guess you could look at it either way. I was actually refering to Lansdale and Taylor.

Jim Root

From Beschloss, The Crisis Years, pgs 652-653:

"Ngo Dinh Nhu warned South Vietnamese generals in August that the Limited Test Ban might foretell wholesale American 'appeasement' of communism and that Saigon must be ready to stand alone. Diem declared martial law. Nhu's shock troops raided pagodas in five cities and arrested 1,400 Buddhist monks and nuns. Harriman concluded that the U.S. could no longer support the Diem-Nhu govt. On Saturday, August 24, he and Roger Hilsman...drafted a cable...signed by George Ball authorizing Lodge in Saigon to set the wheels in motion for a coup. The message informed the new envoy that the 'U.S. government cannot tolerate a situation in which power lies in Nhu's hands.' If Diem refused to remove him and redress the Buddhist problem, 'we must face the possibility that Diem himself cannot be preserved.' Lodge was asked to carry this message to 'key military leaders' and also to 'make detailed plans as to how we might bring about Diem's replacement should this become necessary.'

Harriman and Hilsman wanted to send the message immediately to prevent Nhu from strengthening his position. Rusk, McNamara, McCone, and Bundy were all out of town....

On Monday morning at the White House, Kennedy was astonished when McNamara, McCone, and Taylor all loudly objected to the sending of the cable. Taylor charged that an 'anti-Diem group centered in State' had exploited the absence of principal officials to send out a message that would otherwise have never been approved. They did not receommend that the President embarrass himself by revoking the cable. Forrestal offered to resign and take the blame. Kennedy snapped, 'You're not worth firing....' Robert Kennedy noted that after what he called 'that famous weekend,' Harriman seemed to age ten years.

Kennedy later told Charles Bartlett, 'My God, my government's coming apart!' Robert Kennedy recalled that week as 'the only time, really, in three years that the government was broken in two in a disturbing way.' He later said, 'Diem was corrupt and a bad leader...but we inherited him.' He thought it bad policy to 'replace somebody we don't like with somebody we do because it would just make every other country as can be that we were running coups in and out.'

General Taylor had sent a cable to Saigon saying that 'authorities are now having second thoughts' about Diem. This infuriated the President, who did not wish to appear as if he was waffling. Lodge replied, 'We are launched on a course from which there is no respectable turning back: the overthrow of the Diem government....' Kennedy cabled Lodge, 'I know that failure is more destructive that an appearance of indecision.... When we go, we must go to win, but it will be better to change our minds than fail.'"

In this we see that Taylor and Lansdale, along with Nixon's V.P. candidate and former JFK senatorial opponent Henry Cabot Lodge, were of a single mind with regard to support for Diem. In October, JFK issued the order for withdrawal of U.S. troops. The policy was due for overall review the weekend of November 23-24, but by then Diem and Nhu had been murdered and Kennedy's body (supposedly) was lying in state in the East Room of the White House. By November 26, NSAM 273 reversed JFK's policy on Vietnam.

Tim

Tim

Food for thought:

The Pentagon Papers

Gravel Edition

Volume 2

Chapter I, "The Kennedy Commitments and Programs, 1961," pp. 98-127

(Boston: Beacon Press, 1971)

"The report Nolting sent on Taylor's final meeting with Diem also contains some interesting material....It leaves the impression that Diem was still not really anxious to get American troops deeply involved, despite his favorable reaction at the meeting of the 24th, which, in turn, was a reversal of his reaction at the meeting on the 19th. Because of this, the impression left by the whole record is that Taylor came to the conclusion that some sort of ground troop commitment was needed mainly because of what he heard from Diem's colleagues and his military people, rather than from Diem himself.

...From MAAG Chief McGarr, Washington received an account of Taylor's meeting with "Big Minh," then Chief of Staff, later Head of State for a while after Diem was overthrown. It is interesting because it was one of the very few reports from Saigon in the available record suggesting that the Diem regime might be in need of more than administrative reforms. Minh complains that the Vietnamese army was "losing the support of the people" as indicated by a "marked decrease in the amount of information given by the population." He warned, further, that "GVN should discontinue favoring certain religions . . ." But McGarr stressed the administrative problems, particularly the need for an "overall plan." His reaction explicitly concerns what he saw as the "military" aspects of Minh's complaints. But Ambassador Nolting's cables and the main paper of the Report show a very similar tendency to take note of political problems, but put almost all the emphasis on the need for better military tactics and more efficient administrative arrangements.

....Big Minh was pessimistic and clearly and frankly outlined his personal feeling that the military was not being properly supported. He said not only Viet Cong grown alarmingly, but that Vietnamese armed forces were losing support of the people. As example, he pointed out marked decrease in amount of information given by population. Minh said GVN should discontinue favoring certain religions, and correct present system of selecting province chiefs. At this point Minh was extremely caustic in commenting on lack of ability, military and administrative, of certain province chiefs. Minh was bitter about province chief's role in military chain of command saying that although Gen. McGarr had fought for and won on the single . . . command (issue) which had worked for a few months, old habits were now returning. Also, on urging from Gen. McGarr he had gone on the offensive, but province chiefs had not cooperated to extent necessary. He discussed his inability to get cooperation from GVN agencies on developing overall plans for conduct of counterinsurgency. Minh also discussed the need to bring sects back into the fold as these are anti-communist. Although above is not new Minh seemed particularly discouraged....When analyzed, most of Minh's comments in military field are occasioned by lack of overall coordination and cooperation. This re-emphasizes absolute necessity for overall plan which would clearly delineate responsibility and create a team effort....

From "Instruments of Statecraft: U.S. Guerilla Warfare, Counterinsurgency, and Counterterrorism, 1940-1990"

"Upon taking office, Kennedy brought Lansdale to the White House for a meeting of top Pentagon, State Department, and National Security Officers, and-apparently to their horror-intimated there that Lansdale could be the next U. S. ambassador in Saigon. The new administration's Undersecretary of Defense, Roswell Gilpatric, reminiscing on his dealings with Lansdale years later for an archive oral history project, explained that although Lansdale was an outcast with his military peers, and perhaps even less esteemed by the State Department, the White House was impressed with him:

"Lansdale was not in favor . . . during my period, with either the military or with the State Department. He was in the doghouse with both of them. And I was convinced they were wrong. I was convinced he was not a wheeler dealer; he was not an irresponsible swashbuckler, and I finally succeeded in getting him his star as a general-very difficult . . . he was the object of some distrust. I thought and still think he was a very able person.... Anyway, he remained active, both in connection with Southeast Asia and Cuba, up until the time I left in January of '64.

"Although General Lansdale's boundless self-confidence that a small nucleus of bold, brave, brilliant Americans led by himself could "turn around" asubversive insurgency survived the long decline of his protege Ngo Dinh Diem, Lansdale would not return to Vietnam until the Johnson administration'sbuildup of U. S. ground forces was well underway. Although publicly acclaimed for his counterinsurgency savvy, by 1964 the military's professional counterinsurgents began to tire of Lansdale's simplistic approach. General Maxwell Taylor, who had replaced Henry Cabot Lodge as ambassador in June 1964, shared McGeorge Bundy's low opinion of Lansdale's schemes, and together they refused to have Lansdale in a position of authority inSaigon. In 1961, Taylor had been asked by President Kennedy to pick up the pieces after the Bay of Pigs invasion, and he chaired a committee of inquiry that was brutally critical of CIA incompetence. Lansdale's handling of his post-Bay of Pigs assignment to kill Castro, in the same gung ho spirit as the invasion, may have been perhaps too much for Taylor to stomach."

Taylor had a tremendous capacity to minipulate situations to his own benifit. Lansdale was no match for Taylor's palace intrigue. Lansdale was moved out of Vietnam and involved in Cuba where he lost credibility. In the meantime, Diem dies, Kennedy dies and Taylor has a "brush fire" war.

Jim Root

Jim,

Your writings on the subject of Max Taylor are masterful. Your citing the above relevant passages from the Pentagon Papers has indeed convinced me that there is alot more to the story of Max Taylor than I previously realized. I have generally viewed him favorably, due to my view that the Kennedy administration was struggling mightily to free its choicelessness from the bonds of the absolutist nuclear policies of Mutual Assured Destruction (M.A.D.) and the rigidity of Massive Retaliation. In that environment, any approach was preferable to nuclear "brinksmanship." In this sense, Taylor was well-suited to Kennedy's efforts, and Kennedy himself shares some of the blame for creating an environment better suited to "brushfire wars." Nevertheless, without Kennedy around, Taylor was unfettered in his enthusiasm and influence.

I have always been intrigued by the role of brothers during this period of the late 1950s and early 1960s: The Kennedys, Dulleses, Bundys, Rostows, to name a few. That said, Max Taylor, along with Walt Rostow, had strongly advocated for greater support in Vietnam as early as the fall of 1961. As McNamara said, "Such steps, they noted, would mean a fundamental 'transition from advice to partnership' in the war." [in Retrospect, p. 38] But these proposals were always viewed by Kennedy as a substitute, a cultural sublimation, for the likelihood of what would otherwise be nuclear war. We don't read nearly enough in these analyses of the Bundys and Rostows. But as for Max Taylor, he went from greatly admired by the Kennedys early in the administration, to despised less than three short years later.

I appreciated you picking up the theme of Seven Day In May in this regard. That movie also parallels closely the environment in the U.S. that deadly autumn of 1963, when JFK ratified the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. As I said previously:

One of my very favorite movies, Seven Days In May, was showing on cable this past weekend; I watched it twice. During the key confrontation between the president and the Chairman of the JCS, when the president suggests that the general stand by the constitution and run for the office in a year, the general's retort is that the president is too much a "weak sister" [like Shanet's unfitness framework] to last that long. The president then makes the argument: to paraphrase, the president asks "Did it occur to you that if the Soviets saw the U.S. govt. taken over by a military coup, you wouldn't have to wait for them to attack?" That is a reasonable recitation of the geopolitical reality existant in 1963; if the Soviets believed that the U.S. had been taken over by a military coup, they would have concluded that the preemptive first strike so long resisted by JFK was now imminent. This is an interpretation of the "40 million dead" argument used on Warren that is not generally recognized. Usually, analysts have seen the argument as being that if we admitted that it was a Cuban plot we'd have had no choice but to invade Cuba, which would then trigger nuclear war. The Seven Days In May analysis provides a better explanation of the condition with which Earl Warren was presented. LBJ was covering up a military coup.

In addition to the quote from Ted Dealey about the president being a "weak sister," there is also the Dealey phrase: "we need a man on horseback." The mention of General Walker in the same sentence with McCarthy is also telling. It's important that we not forget the environment and cultural mindset with which JFK struggled. Within hip Pentagon circles, as noted by David Halberstam, it was recognized that "Kennedy was afraid of the nuke." They discussed a trip to a silo at which the President had literally "blanched" at the site of the missile. This ties directly to Shanet's "unfitness" framework, in which a president who lacked the constitution to convincingly play the game of nuclear "brinksmanship" had to be removed for the nation's good, necessitating the 25th amendment. I recommend the book "The Best And The Brightest" to anyone interested in this area. I unfortunately shed myself of shelves full of books a few short months ago, full of personal notes and annotation, and can therefore not cite the above passage's page number. The book opens with a great scene involving Robert Lovett and his recommendation of McNamara for Secretary of Defense, after being offered the position himself.

Tim

Within my seminar topic Serendipity the movie "Seven Days in May" has come up.  It seems at least some of us have seen the movie or in my case have seen the movie and read the book....  It seems that author Fletcher Knebel had access to John F. Kennedy.  Some believe that Kennedy was actually involved in helping with the novel because of it's accurate discription of the route that would be taken by the Washington elite to "Mount Thunder" in the event of a nuclear attack.  I was surprized to find that General Edwin Walker's name was mentioned in the book as a man that, in a prior time of history (the book was futuristic) might have supported a military take over of the United States.  I have often wondered if Oswald read the book....  The book/movie is a story about the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of staff plotting to overthrough the government.  I have often wondered if Kennedy might have been attempting to give a warning to his own Chairman (within the story that his friend had written) with just enough detail and with a title that may have been directed toward Maxwell Taylor.

Jim Root

Edited by Tim Carroll
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tim

Thank you for the kind words. After a decade of research I appreciate the opportunity to have this forum as a sounding board for some of what I have discovered and to receive constructive criticism that provokes positive discussion in this field.

Let me share part of an e-mail I received a few years ago from the daughter of a member of the First Special Services Force (FSSF) in WWII:

"Dad Told me more stories about Maxwell Taylor. He simply said he was a highly trained spy who was trained to be put into any situation to gather intelligence. He would be able to blend into any situation in Europe. He was fluent in several languages including German and Italian. He taught the FSSF undercover and covert techniques for gathering intel. They then went on missions into Rome for entire afternoon/evenings. He and a forceman would go to local gathering reas such as restaurants or other events and find out what people thought about the Germans, troop movements, and any other info the could gather."

Her father was a member of the 3rd Regiment, commanded by Col. Edwin Anderson Walker. In other communication she speaks about how the three, Taylor, Fredricks and Walker seemed to be old friends. In fact Taylor was a teacher at West Point while Fredericks and Walker were students.

Serendipity was written to show that the days Oct 8 - 10, 1959 may be significant to the Warren Commission coverup. The facts that Walker was, at least, in the area, that Oswald alledgedly shot at Walker and that a trail can link Walker with Taylor is a curious path to travel.

I am surprized that my potential linking of John B. Hurt, who was involved in intelligence, to Maxwell Taylor has not generated a little more discussion. Especially if Lee Harvey Oswald did attempt to contact a "John Hurt" while he was in custody.

Jim Root

Link to post
Share on other sites
I am surprized that my potential linking of John B. Hurt, who was involved in intelligence, to Maxwell Taylor has not generated a little more discussion.  Especially if Lee Harvey Oswald did attempt to contact a "John Hurt" while he was in custody.

Jim

Oswald's attempt to reach Hurt has been largely neglected, and certainly a connection between Hurt and Taylor is significant. I am not as persuaded that the Taylor-Walker connection in 1959 relates meaningfully to the events in Dallas in 1963, but I will look into that and reread your posts on that as well. As you can tell, you're getting to me.

Tim

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tim

The Walker Taylor connection begins in 1927 and lasts, officialy, till about 1962.

Jim Root

Jim:

I don't at all understand the reference to the Walker-Taylor connection beginning in 1927. I reread your seminar, Serendipity, discussion of which I'm sorry we're not able to continue on this forum. You make a series of points about the ramifications of Oswald's U-2 expertise and defection. They are, abbreviatedly:

1) "The downing of the U-2 in many ways weakend Khrushchev's position in Moscow" (totally embarassing Khrushchev by exposing his weakness for years). It also embarassed Eisenhower, who was misled to believe that he could not be caught in his own lie, and could not provide an apology when was.

2) If Oswald's defection encouraged the Soviets to believe that Oswald was not an agent, then the information he had supplied at Atsugi, Japan became more believable. (This point is negated if one believes subsequent evidence that the U-2 was never shot down, that it was sabotaged with bad fuel for an unauthorized mission, the farthest ever undertaken)

3) "The WS117L program was in full swing and the technology of the U-2 was outdated anyway. I find the launch of TIROS I on April 1, 1960 the most intriguing piece of my thread." The U-2 became less important with the launch of the Corona satellite in August, 1961. I kept looking for a mention of "TIROS I," but couldn't find it. Nevertheless, I consider the superseceding Corona satellite very pertinent to the Naziesque moment of final solution, when a preemptive first strike would be most effective. Regardless, the U-2 was not rendered obsolete in areas lacking SAM missiles, such as in Cuba. The entire collusion between Kennedy and Khrushchev for the deployment of missiles to Cuba, and the private guarantee that they wouldn't be discovered until after the 1962 mid-term elections, was undermined by the delayed installation of the SAM sites due to rainy weather, failing to keep discovery of the medium and intermediate range missile sites by U-2 until after the agreed-upon timeframe.

4) "The cancellation of the Paris Summit (would the Soviets sign anything anyway without an agreement on Berlin)." The sabotage of the Paris Summit was a terrible blow to Eisenhower as well. The fact that the U-2 had been overflying the Soviet Union for years put the lie to the missile gap fears which had stimulated so much business for the Military Industrial Complex. Ike was all for that deception as long as the strategic superiority paved the way for peace; once that was undone there was nothing left for him but to warn of the MIC's undue unfluence.

5) "Support in electing John F. Kennedy to the Presidency or reversing the policies of Eisenhower and MAD, however you may want to look at that."

Point #5 is key to the Max Taylor stuff, and his Uncertain Trumpet transcendence of MAD, which attracted Kennedy so. However, I'm missing the thread that makes sense of a Taylor-Walker connection going back to "1927."

Tim

Edited by Tim Carroll
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tim

I will try to add more tomorrow about the various issues you have brought back up.

The Taylor Walker connection....imagine for a moment.....Oswald, who I do not believe was a "nut" in the Warren Commission sense, is connected to the

U-2 "downing." Walker had passed information to Oswald which allowed him to enter Russia through the only embassy in Europe that he could (Helsinki). Walker has done covert intellegence missions for Taylor over the years and has been the "star" (general) that Walker has followed up the military chain of command. As a result of the U-2 incident Kennedy is elected President. Kennnedy brings Taylor into the top position in the military (Chairman of the Joint Chiefs) in reward for his information/service (U-2 downing, Cuba, etc.) during the campaign. Kennedy becomes disinchanted with Taylor. Oswald takes a shot at Walker. Taylor knows where Oswald is working and directs motorcade past that point. Oswald is a "patsy" because he went to Russia.

Jim Root

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tim

I will try to add more tomorrow about the various issues you have brought back up. 

The Taylor Walker connection....imagine for a moment.....Oswald, who I do not believe was a "nut" in the Warren Commission sense, is connected to the

U-2 "downing."  Walker had passed information to Oswald which allowed him to enter Russia through the only embassy in Europe that he could (Helsinki).  Walker has done covert intellegence missions for Taylor over the years and has been the "star" (general) that Walker has followed up the military chain of command.  As a result of the U-2 incident Kennedy is elected President.  Kennnedy brings Taylor into the top position in the military (Chairman of the Joint Chiefs) in reward for his information/service (U-2 downing, Cuba, etc.) during the campaign.  Kennedy becomes disinchanted with Taylor.  Oswald takes a shot at Walker.  Taylor knows where Oswald is working and directs motorcade past that point.  Oswald is a "patsy" because he went to Russia.

Jim Root

Sorry to have "brought back up" things that you apparently feel were previously covered. As I said, I went back and reread in an effort not to require such revisiting, or tolerance of my slowness. Nevertheless, I will go forward with my questions, pre-apologizing for not getting it. Please indulge me:

What was the 1927 Taylor-Walker connection?

Do you believe the U-2 "downing" resulted from information passed to the Soviets by Oswald?

Do you believe that the U-2 was downed by the Soviets at all? (In other words, was there a SAM missile involved?)

Do you believe, electorally, that there is any foundation for the statement, "As a result of the U-2 incident Kennedy is elected President?"

Do you believe that then-Senator Kennedy conspired with Taylor on the "U-2 downing" and that Taylor's appointment as Chairman of the JCS was a "reward," as you say, for said "downing" in 1960 "during the campaign?"

Do you believe that Taylor, because he "knows where Oswald is working," directed "the motorcade past that point?"

If, as you say, "Oswald is a 'patsy' because he went to Russia," what was Oswald doing working out of Banister's offices in New Orleans? The defection hardly explains who Alek Hidell was, or why he mail-ordered a useless rifle readily obtainable in Texas with no evidence trail.

Is all of this Taylor stuff reflective of your earlier remark that these matters come down to one person? If Walker was such a protege of Taylor's, why was Walker doing anything so transparent and problematic as propagandizing troops in Germany against Kennedy during that administration? And what purpose would Taylor have in that? You are clearly implying that the Taylor-Walker connection was existent right up to Nov. 22, 1963; what conspiratorial purpose was served by Walker's incitement to riot at 'Ole Miss and his resultant commitment to a mental institution? Is there any evidence of the Taylor-Walker link subsequent to the presidential assassination from any statement ever made by Walker, or anywhere else, for that matter?

Tim

Edited by Tim Carroll
Link to post
Share on other sites

Great thread.

I have become very swayed by Jim Root's evidence.

The Brinksmanship of Oswald. It smacks of a spychief beyond anything the civilian agency could conjure up. Thank you Jim for posting the relevant Pentagon Papers passages. I think many of us formed our initial impression of Maxwell Taylor from these texts. He replaced Henry Cabot Lodge as ambassador to Saigon in 1964, and many have puzzled over that...the role of Maxwell Taylor in melding the civilian agencies with the military agencies is well known.

When General Ed Walker's attempted murder by Oswald is taken into account, the Taylor/Walker/Oswald approach rises to the top.

I ask how Oswald could have been expressed into and out of the USSR without something like this Walker scenario to assist.

Even is Oswald was a totally free agent defector (which is almost impossible) both sides would have marked him as a US originated asset. It would have been very logical for the KGB to assume Oswald was a US false defector reporting back to the Pentagon. After he came back to Texas it would have been just as logical for the US to see him as a product of two years of Soviet brainwashing.

Brinksmanship on the order of the Bay of Pigs and the Cuban Missile Crisis called for the use of a false man, a man who could be quickly branded a disloyal American communist, but on closer inspection would end curiosity.

To frame a counter-intelligence 'false man' who may or may not have been a Kremlin agent....

What evidence is their that Oswald was supplying news to the Russians in Atsugi?

Shanet

Was Lyndon covering up a military coup?

"Serendipity" glimpses the world of security classifications and clearances for cabinet level executives, including the President, the concept of clinical instability, and unfit incapacity, where an Army chief called the elected President a "weak sister," blackmail, electronic eavesdropping and brinksmanship.

.

Edited by Shanet Clark
Link to post
Share on other sites
When General Ed Walker's attempted murder by Oswald is taken into account, the Taylor/Walker/Oswald approach rises to the top. 

Shanet:

It is a huge, and probably mistaken leap, to buy into the story of "General Ed Walker's attempted murder by Oswald." The record shows no such thing, until after Marina got worked over. The entire story, and the lack of supporting evidence, fails the smell test. If only she could trust that this is a nation of laws and justice, and that she could feel free to speak openly.

Shanet: If you find the idea that Taylor and Walker were running Oswald, what would be your answers to the following questions?

What was the 1927 Taylor-Walker connection?

Do you believe the U-2 "downing" resulted from information passed to the Soviets by Oswald?

Do you believe that the U-2 was downed by the Soviets at all? (In other words, was there a SAM involved?)

Do you believe, electorally, that there is any foundation for the statement, "As a result of the U-2 incident Kennedy is elected President?"

Do you believe that then-Senator Kennedy conspired with Taylor on the "U-2 downing" and that Taylor's appointment as Chairman of the JCS was a "reward" for said "downing" in 1960 "during the campaign?"

Do you believe that Taylor, because he "knows where Oswald is working," directed "the motorcade past that point?"

If "Oswald is a 'patsy' because he went to Russia," what was Oswald doing working out of Banister's offices in New Orleans? The defection hardly explains who Alek Hidell was, or why he mail-ordered a useless rifle readily obtainable in Texas with no evidence trail.

If Walker was such a protege of Taylor's, why was Walker doing anything so transparent and problematic as propagandizing troops in Germany against Kennedy during that administration? And what purpose would Taylor have in that? What conspiratorial purpose was served by Walker's incitement to riot at 'Ole Miss and his resultant commitment to a mental institution? Is there any evidence of the Taylor-Walker link subsequent to the presidential assassination from any statement ever made by Walker, or anywhere else, for that matter?

Tim

Edited by Tim Carroll
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tim's questions and my responses in all caps --- I'm yelling at Tim:

It is a huge, and probably mistaken leap, to buy into the story of "General Ed Walker's attempted murder by Oswald." The record shows no such thing, until after Marina got worked over. The entire story, and the lack of supporting evidence, fails the smell test. If only she could trust that this is a nation of laws and justice, and that she could feel free to speak openly.

RIGHT, THE THING IS A PUT UP JOB OSWALD EITHER DIDN'T DO OR MAYBE DID IT UNDER ORDERS BUT IT LOOKS LIKE A FAKE FRAME TO PIN THE LONE NUT THING ON OSWALD--MARINA'S TESTIMONY IS WORTHLESS TO ME, WHE WAS VERY SCARED AND VERY COACHED

Shanet: If you find the idea that Taylor and Walker were running Oswald, what would be your answers to the following questions?

What was the 1927 Taylor-Walker connection?

cOULD BE SOMETHING THERE, I DON'T KNOW THEIR BIOS THAT WELL

Do you believe the U-2 "downing" resulted from information passed to the Soviets by Oswald?

POSSIBLY, ITS NOT OUT OF THE QUESTION, ITS THE KIND OF THING THAT COMES UP WHEN YOU HAVE DEFECTORS, U2S, RADAR AND MK-ULTRA, IT IS A PLAUSIBLE COUNTER INTELLIGENCE SCENARIO THAT OSWALD WAS TURNED BY THE RUSSIANS. HE WORKED ON U2 STUFF AND DEFECTED OVER, SO WHO KNOWS MOTIVATION?

Do you believe that the U-2 was downed by the Soviets at all? (In other words, was there a SAM involved?)

GOOD QUESTION, A HIT WAS A KILL AT 90,000 ALTITUDE, SO I THINK IT IS POSSIBLE HIS HYDROGEN FUEL WAS SHORTED AND HE STARTED COASTING DOWN. HE WOULD CLAIM HE WAS HIT OF COURSE. BUT WAS HE HIT, I DOUBT IT, WAS HE SET UP TO BREAK THE SUMMIT, YES, THAT IS A VERY REASONABLE COUNTER INTELLIGENCE AND BRINKSMANSHIP APPROACH.

Do you believe, electorally, that there is any foundation for the statement, "As a result of the U-2 incident Kennedy is elected President?"

NO, I DON'T THINK JFK HAD ANY BIG PART OF THE MOTIVATION OR WAS IT FORESEEN HE WOULD BENEFIT, NOR WAS IT KEY TO 1960 ELECTION, THE U2.

Do you believe that then-Senator Kennedy conspired with Taylor on the "U-2 downing" and that Taylor's appointment as Chairman of the JCS was a "reward" for said "downing" in 1960 "during the campaign?"

JIM HAS BEEN PRETTY STRONG OVERALL, BUT I TOO HAVE TROUBLE WITH ALL THIS. OSWALD AS A PUT UP DOUBLE AGENT AND DISPOSABLE COMMUNIST PATSY, NONE OF THAT IS CLOSELY LINKED TO GARY POWERS, EXCEPT MAYBE THAT HE GAVE UP THE RADIO SECRETS--THATS WHAT THE MAPS OF MINSK INDICATE, THAT HE WAS GIVEN THEM CHAPTER AND VERSE ON THE RADAR CAPACITY---BUT NO I DONT THINK KENNEDY GAVE TAYLOR ANYTHING OF A POLITICAL NATURE FOR THE DIRTY TRICK OF BRINGING DOWN POWERS U2....

Do you believe that Taylor, because he "knows where Oswald is working," directed "the motorcade past that point?"

LIKE TO SEE MORE ON THIS AS WELL, JIM IS CERTAINLY SUGGESTING THIS OPERATIONAL STUFF IS STEMMING FROM TAYLOR

If "Oswald is a 'patsy' because he went to Russia," what was Oswald doing working out of Banister's offices in New Orleans?

WORKING BOTH SIDES, NEVER LEFT THE ONI, TURNED BUT PRETENDS TO BE NOT TURNED, WHO KNOWS, BUT HE IS THERE, A OP/PROGRAM

The defection hardly explains who Alek Hidell was, or why he mail-ordered a useless rifle readily obtainable in Texas with no evidence trail.

FOLLOWING ORDERS

If Walker was such a protege of Taylor's, why was Walker doing anything so transparent and problematic as propagandizing troops in Germany against Kennedy during that administration?

ALLIES, WALKER WAS UNDENIABLY THE ECCENTRIC AND LOUD ONE

And what purpose would Taylor have in that? What conspiratorial purpose was served by Walker's incitement to riot at 'Ole Miss and his resultant commitment to a mental institution? Is there any evidence of the Taylor-Walker link subsequent to the presidential assassination from any statement ever made by Walker, or anywhere else, for that matter?

GOOD POINTS BUT WE REALLY DO HAVE TO REASON BACK FROM THE FRAME THAT SETTLED ON OSWALD, LARGELY BECAUSE OF THE WALKER EVENT.

AN ARMY SPY CHIEF AND STAFF CHIEF COULD DO THINGS A CIA DI WOULD NEVER DREAM OF. THE WHOLE POINT OF THE ASCENT OF THE MIL/IND COMPLEX IS THAT THE CLOSED AND CLASSIFIED PERPETUAL WARTIME POWERS OVER INTELLIGENCE REMAIN EIGHTY PERCENT IN THE HANDS OF MILITARY.

RUNAWAY CORPORATE MILITARY FIGURES, DEFENSE CONGLOMERATED INCREASE IN EARNINGS WAY BEYOND ANY PRIVATE FIRM.

REVOLVING DOOR BETWEEN GENERALS ADMIRALS AND CEO/CFO AT THE PENTAGON AND AEROSPACE INDUSTRY......MORE LATER//////

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tim's questions and my responses in all caps --- I'm yelling at Tim:

Shanet:

You don't have to yell; I'm old but not hard of hearing.

I will go through my questions and your responses to them, and paraphrase what I understand your answer to be in direct terms in red:

It is a huge, and probably mistaken leap, to buy into the story of "General Ed Walker's attempted murder by Oswald." The record shows no such thing, until after Marina got worked over. The entire story, and the lack of supporting evidence, fails the smell test. If only she could trust that this is a nation of laws and justice, and that she could feel free to speak openly.

RIGHT, THE THING IS A PUT UP JOB OSWALD EITHER DIDN'T DO OR MAYBE DID IT UNDER ORDERS BUT IT LOOKS LIKE A FAKE FRAME TO PIN THE LONE NUT THING ON OSWALD--MARINA'S TESTIMONY IS WORTHLESS TO ME, WHE WAS VERY SCARED AND VERY COACHED. My point exactly.

What was the 1927 Taylor-Walker connection?

COULD BE SOMETHING THERE, I DON'T KNOW THEIR BIOS THAT WELL. But does the chronological math make sense to you?

Do you believe the U-2 "downing" resulted from information passed to the Soviets by Oswald?

POSSIBLY, IT'S NOT OUT OF THE QUESTION, ITS THE KIND OF THING THAT COMES UP WHEN YOU HAVE DEFECTORS, U-2s, RADAR AND MK-ULTRA, IT IS A PLAUSIBLE COUNTER INTELLIGENCE SCENARIO THAT OSWALD WAS TURNED BY THE RUSSIANS. HE WORKED ON U-2 STUFF AND DEFECTED OVER, SO WHO KNOWS MOTIVATION? The question had nothing to do with motivation. But it is covered better in the next question/answer.

Do you believe that the U-2 was downed by the Soviets at all? (In other words, was there a SAM involved?)

GOOD QUESTION, A HIT WAS A KILL AT 90,000 ALTITUDE, SO I THINK IT IS POSSIBLE HIS HYDROGEN FUEL WAS SHORTED AND HE STARTED COASTING DOWN. HE WOULD CLAIM HE WAS HIT OF COURSE. BUT WAS HE HIT, I DOUBT IT, WAS HE SET UP TO BREAK THE SUMMIT, YES, THAT IS A VERY REASONABLE COUNTER INTELLIGENCE AND BRINKSMANSHIP APPROACH. My point exactly.

Do you believe, electorally, that there is any foundation for the statement, "As a result of the U-2 incident Kennedy is elected President?"

NO, I DON'T THINK JFK HAD ANY BIG PART OF THE MOTIVATION OR WAS IT FORESEEN HE WOULD BENEFIT, NOR WAS IT KEY TO 1960 ELECTION, THE U-2. My point exactly.

Do you believe that then-Senator Kennedy conspired with Taylor on the "U-2 downing" and that Taylor's appointment as Chairman of the JCS was a "reward" for said "downing" in 1960 "during the campaign?"

JIM HAS BEEN PRETTY STRONG OVERALL, BUT I TOO HAVE TROUBLE WITH ALL THIS. OSWALD AS A PUT UP DOUBLE AGENT AND DISPOSABLE COMMUNIST PATSY, NONE OF THAT IS CLOSELY LINKED TO GARY POWERS, EXCEPT MAYBE THAT HE GAVE UP THE RADIO SECRETS--THATS WHAT THE MAPS OF MINSK INDICATE, THAT HE WAS GIVING THEM CHAPTER AND VERSE ON THE RADAR CAPACITY---BUT NO I DONT THINK KENNEDY GAVE TAYLOR ANYTHING OF A POLITICAL NATURE FOR THE DIRTY TRICK OF BRINGING DOWN POWERS U2.... My point exactly.

Do you believe that Taylor, because he "knows where Oswald is working," directed "the motorcade past that point?"

LIKE TO SEE MORE ON THIS AS WELL, JIM IS CERTAINLY SUGGESTING THIS OPERATIONAL STUFF IS STEMMING FROM TAYLOR. But do you consider it likely that the Chairman of the JCS was involved in such a local and particular detail as Jim asserts, that "Taylor knows where Oswald is working and directs motorcade past that point?"

If "Oswald is a 'patsy' because he went to Russia," what was Oswald doing working out of Banister's offices in New Orleans?

WORKING BOTH SIDES, NEVER LEFT THE ONI, TURNED BUT PRETENDS TO BE NOT TURNED, WHO KNOWS, BUT HE IS THERE, A OP/PROGRAM. So it's not as simple as just the defection.

The defection hardly explains who Alek Hidell was, or why he mail-ordered a useless rifle readily obtainable in Texas with no evidence trail.

FOLLOWING ORDERS. My point exactly.

If Walker was such a protege of Taylor's, why was Walker doing anything so transparent and problematic as propagandizing troops in Germany against Kennedy during that administration?

ALLIES, WALKER WAS UNDENIABLY THE ECCENTRIC AND LOUD ONE. But would he be methodically in league with the Chairman of the JCS, working on the smallest details, and yet act out in such a manner?

And what purpose would Taylor have in that? What conspiratorial purpose was served by Walker's incitement to riot at 'Ole Miss and his resultant commitment to a mental institution? Is there any evidence of the Taylor-Walker link subsequent to the presidential assassination from any statement ever made by Walker, or anywhere else, for that matter?

GOOD POINTS BUT WE REALLY DO HAVE TO REASON BACK FROM THE FRAME THAT SETTLED ON OSWALD, LARGELY BECAUSE OF THE WALKER EVENT.

AN ARMY SPY CHIEF AND STAFF CHIEF COULD DO THINGS A CIA DI WOULD NEVER DREAM OF. THE WHOLE POINT OF THE ASCENT OF THE MIL/IND COMPLEX IS THAT THE CLOSED AND CLASSIFIED PERPETUAL WARTIME POWERS OVER INTELLIGENCE REMAIN EIGHTY PERCENT IN THE HANDS OF MILITARY.

RUNAWAY CORPORATE MILITARY FIGURES, DEFENSE CONGLOMERATED INCREASE IN EARNINGS WAY BEYOND ANY PRIVATE FIRM. All the more reason not to stretch to explanations of incompetence and stupidity.

REVOLVING DOOR BETWEEN GENERALS ADMIRALS AND CEO/CFO AT THE PENTAGON AND AEROSPACE INDUSTRY......MORE LATER////// ?????? So what was all the YELLING about?

Your friend,

Tim

Edited by Tim Carroll
Link to post
Share on other sites

Darn; I keep hitting the button too hard, or something, because the above comments were double posted.

Edited by Tim Carroll
Link to post
Share on other sites

Shanet, Tim

I cannot tell you both how much I appreciate your critical approach to my thoughts/research. Shanet has suggested the Sierra Nevada Pale Ale and Tim and I know the place.

Let me first say that I recently spent about 6 - 7 hours explaining my hypothisis and the information that I have uncovered while trying to support/prove/disprove said hypothisis with several people at the Univ. of Wisconsin.

I have used the anology of a puzzle in some of my postings because it is appropriate. While looking at a particular piece to a puzzle we usually concentrate on that single pieces edges and how it might fit to an adjoining piece. While we may have a picture of the completed puzzle (the assassination took place) each individual piece does not complete a picture or even a distingushable part of the picture. It is not until all the pieces come together that we recognize that without the last single piece the puzzle will never be complete. But keep in mind that any one piece could be the last piece in any one attempt to complete our puzzle.

For years I have attempted to attach significance (where it would fit) to each piece, but without the ability to show you the whole picture I have found it is difficult for you to understand the roll each piece plays.

How's that for a disclaimer?

Attempting to answer your questions (not in order of course):

"Do you believe that then Senator Kennedy conspired with Taylor ..."

No, I believe that the then out of the military General Taylor may have shared information with the Kennedy campaign with the intent of gaining influence (which he did in some way, becoming Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff)

Do you believe, electorally, that there is any foundation for the statement, "As a result of the U-2 incident Kennedy is elected President?"

Yes, by looking at the negitive. If the U-2 incident does not occur and the Paris summit becomes a historical reality with some sort of (test ban/Berlin) treaty/resolution photo opp with Khrushchev, Eisenhower and NIXON standing together promising peace in our time....Nixon very well wins the election he, in reality, lost in one of the closest elections in US History. Looking at it honestly, in your own mind, would the few votes necessary to sway that election have been there if the Paris Summit was a success? Would Kennedy's position of labeling the Eisenhower Administration soft on Communism worked if the US and the Soviet Union were in fact entering into a warmer relationship within the framework of the Paris Summit? Would the American public be inticed into voting for a continuation of the administration if additional summits/successes were espoused by the Nixon campaign of 1960? Was the U-2 incident just another coincidence leading to Dallas, Nov. 22, 1963?

What was the 1927 Taylor-Walker connection?

The connection begins as a student/teacher relationship. Taylor and Walker were both at West Point in their respectful capacities from 1927 - 1931. There careers are parallel. For example: from the Arlington National Cemetary Website dealing with Maxwell Davenport Taylor:

"He was chief of staff of the European Command in 1949, and commander of the United States forces in Berlin, 1949–1951; He was promoted to temporary Lieutenant General and permanent Major General in August 1951; He was then Assistant Chief of Staff for Operations, G–3, and Deputy Chief of Staff for operations and administration, 1951–1953; He was promoted to temporary General in June 1953. He then was commander of the Eighth Army in the final operations of the Korean War in 1953 and then initiated the Korean armed forces assistance program, in 1953 and 1954. He commanded United States Forces, Far East, and the Eighth Army 1954–1955, and was Commander in Chief, United Nations Command, 1955; He was Chief of Staff of the United States Army, 30 June 1955–30 June 1959 and opposed dependence upon a massive retaliation doctrine, pushing for an increase in conventional forces to ensure a capability of flexible response, guided the transition to a "pentomic" concept, and directed Army participation in sensitive operations at Little Rock, Lebanon, Taiwan, and Berlin."

Walker played a major role in each item listed in red or blue (and that is just 1949 to 1957). Is that just coincidence.

If Walker was such a protege of Taylor's, why was Walker doing anything so transparent and problematic as propagandizing troops in Germany against Kennedy during that administration?

Look at the dates. Think for a moment, Nosenko first made contact with the CIA in the days immediatly following Oswald's return to the US and then defected, with information about Oswald's non affilliation with the KGB in tow, right after the assassination. Does this allow you to speculate that the pieces may fit the need to deny Oswald. It would also mean Oswald would have been very important to somebody. It may be coincidence but we could also then ask, "If the USSR would need to be able to plausibly deny Oswald would the US need to do the same?" The Walker "Pro Blue Program" begins in the days immediatly following the State Departments decision which says that Oswald must leagally be allowed back into the US. Although the process would take over a year to complete, Walker has been so distanced and even would be institutionalized that if Oswald could "finger" him as the man who passed the Oct. 9, 1963 Helsinki Embassy memo information to Oswald, it could be deflected from both the Kennedy adminsistration and, more importantly to General Taylor's connection to Walker.

In my opinion, Walker was tasked by his friend, General Taylor, to infiltrate the far right movement in America and was unaware that Oswald returned to the US until he saw his picture on the television after the assassination. Walker actions are interesting. Apparently he made everyone on the plane he was traveling aware of his presence when th enews was first announced. Then, after arriving at the Captain Shreve Hotel he became so nervous that, I believe, he made contact with a German newspaper that printed a story about Oswald's assassination attempt upon him days before the FBI and Marina Oswald connected on the story. After Oswald was dead, Walker denied making the statements attributed to him in the paper. I also believe that it is possible that "high officials" in the administration were aware of Oswald's movements in Dallas and suspected that he was involved with the assassination attempt on Walker. Hence the letters exchanged between McCloy and Walker that were left in a public place for easy discovery within a month of the attempt on Walker's life. I do not believe Walker knew the reason for those letters, just that they were additional cover for his "right wing" bonifides. McCloy was needed on the Warren Commission from the date of those letters on if for no other reason than to make sure his involvement with this whole series of events was buried.

Do you believe that Taylor, because he "knows where Oswald is working," directed "the motorcade past that point?"

Completly plausible that someone had to know and influenced the motorcade planning. Hosty informs the FBI and State where Oswald is working on Nov. 5, 1963 and the route was scheduled around Nov. 8, 1963. People in government knew where Oswald was which makes route selection a key piece of evidence that needs to be researched for this point of view (who had access to the Hosty info at the State Department and did it "move up the latter." No matter what you believe about the assassination, conspiracy or lone nut, both require Oswald to be in the School Book building. Taylor may have had as great a motive as anyone on the planet to see Kennedy dead, old fasion greed and power and he had the capability to pull it off as well.

Do you believe the U-2 "downing" resulted from information passed to the Soviets by Oswald?

I believe that the downing of the U-2 was a planned operation. Weather Oswald supplied all the information or the information was supplied in his name I leave open. If the Soviets had an opportunity to interview Oswald in Moscow/Russia and were to come to the conclusion that he was not capable or stable enough of a person to be a US agent the information "he" supplied would become more believable (orchid man interview with James Jesus Angleton)

Even Posner suggests that Oswald may have had contact with Soviet agents while in Japan. I can go in a couple of different directions here and arrive at the same "big picture." Suffice it to say that: fact, Oswald was a radar operator at U-2 bases. Fact, Oswald defected to the Soviet Union. Fact, Francis Gary Powers was captured alive in the Soviet Union after his U-2 went down. Fact, the Paris Summit did not happen. It would take me hours to explain WS 117L in connection with why the U-2 may have been a planned operation along with Tiros/Midas, Corona and Samos projects, the Army Missile Program, Walker, Taylor, etc., etc.

Do you believe that the U-2 was downed by the Soviets at all?

Yes. The U-2 incident did in fact occur. We can speculate on the details but it did in fact happen, one way or another.

If "Oswald is a 'patsy' because he went to Russia,"....

I believe that Oswald may have been watched very closly by intelligence agencies of both countries for the same reasons as were stated above about Nosenko and Walkers behavior that begins with Oswald's announced intention to return to the US. In the high stakes world of intrigue that surrounded the Cold War period both sides, in my picture, would have a great interest in maintaining contacts with this man because they just were not sure who he really was. "Oh what a tangled web we weave when at first we do deceive."

When it is all said and done I believe that Oswald's actions, before the assassination of Kennedy, could easily be viewed as a man who may have been haunted by what role he was playing in life. Suppose he had been used, unwittingly, to pass U-2 information to the Soviets. Would he, as a normal person, have guilt after the U-2 went down and the Paris Summit was cancelled? He seemed to show some remorse for this in his speech at his cousins Jesuit college. Would he become a bit parinoid and attempt to create false identities to conceal his activities from the people he may have believed were watching him (especially after the attempt on the life of Walker). Hidell and mail order rifles may have been the feeble attempts of a man who felt he was in fact a "patsy" to deal with the world that he was living within. Picture his mind.....not the accused assassin, but Lee Harvey Oswald the defector that had returned to the United States that may well have taken a shot at General Walker and might at any moment be arrested for that crime.

Jim Root

Edited by Jim Root
Link to post
Share on other sites
Attempting to answer your questions (not in order of course):

Jim Root

Jim,

The detail and effort of your response deserve a comparable response. I have learned on this forum that if I put off responding to a post as important as yours, the response ends up down the road somewhere and the chain of communication is lost somewhat. So I've reserved this space, but this is not my complete response, which I will work on through the next 6-8 hours. Please don't take this as complete until manana.

Example of a simpler issue which I can readily take exception: Do you believe that the U-2 was downed by the Soviets at all? "Yes. The U-2 incident did in fact occur. We can speculate on the details but it did in fact happen, one way or another." But Jim, the question was, do you believe that the U-2 was "downed?" In other words, was it sabotaged before takeoff, as opposed to being shot down by a SAM, which might imply the benefit of inside radar information. If it was not shot down, that implication isn't there.

"Do you believe that then Senator Kennedy conspired with Taylor ..."

"No, I believe that the then out of the military General Taylor may have shared information with the Kennedy campaign with the intent of gaining influence (which he did in some way, becoming Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff)." So Jim, it's your take that Taylor's Uncertain Trumpet doctrince of Flexible Response, which greatly suited JFK's need to escape the confines of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) was secondary to the receipt of politically beneficial inside information?

Do you believe, electorally, that there is any foundation for the statement, "As a result of the U-2 incident Kennedy is elected President?"

"Yes, by looking at the negitive. If the U-2 incident does not occur and the Paris summit becomes a historical reality with some sort of (test ban/Berlin) treaty/resolution photo opp with Khrushchev, Eisenhower and NIXON standing together promising peace in our time....Nixon very well wins the election he, in reality, lost in one of the closest elections in US History. Looking at it honestly, in your own mind, would the few votes necessary to sway that election have been there if the Paris Summit was a success? Would Kennedy's position of labeling the Eisenhower Administration soft on Communism have worked if the US and the Soviet Union were in fact entering into a warmer relationship within the framework of the Paris Summit? Would the American public be inticed into voting for a continuation of the administration if additional summits/successes were espoused by the Nixon campaign of 1960?" What makes you think that peace with the Soviets, after so many years of demonizing the godless communists, would have been helpful in the realm of domestic political politics. After the Bay of Pigs fiasco, when Kennedy's approval ratings soared, he remarked: "It's just like with Ike; the worse you do the more they approve." I'm not sure it's a supportable political calculus that a successful Paris Summit would have helped Nixon's electoral chances. It would have made him look even softer on communism; and what would the consequences have been to Nixon's performance as chief political officer on the Bay of Pigs planning?

"Was the U-2 incident just another coincidence leading to Dallas, Nov. 22, 1963?" Huh?

If Walker was such a protege of Taylor's, why was Walker doing anything so transparent and problematic as propagandizing troops in Germany against Kennedy during that administration?

"Look at the dates. Think for a moment, Nosenko first made contact with the CIA in the days immediatly following Oswald's return to the US and then defected, with information about Oswald's non affilliation with the KGB in tow, right after the assassination.... Although the process would take over a year to complete, Walker has been so distanced and even would be institutionalized that if Oswald could "finger" him as the man who passed the Oct. 9, 1963 Helsinki Embassy memo information to Oswald, it could be deflected from both the Kennedy adminsistration and, more importantly to General Taylor's connection to Walker." So your answer is just a guess that Walker was Oswald's Helsinki contact, and the nutty behavior leading to institutionalization was a buffer from culpability?

"In my opinion, Walker was tasked by his friend, General Taylor, to infiltrate the far right movement in America and was unaware that Oswald returned to the US until he saw his picture on the television after the assassination. After Oswald was dead, Walker denied making the statements attributed to him in the paper. I also believe that it is possible that "high officials" in the administration were aware of Oswald's movements in Dallas and suspected that he was involved with the assassination attempt on Walker. Hence the letters exchanged between McCloy and Walker that were left in a public place for easy discovery within a month of the attempt on Walker's life. I do not believe Walker knew the reason for those letters, just that they were additional cover for his "right wing" bonifides. McCloy was needed on the Warren Commission from the date of those letters on if for no other reason than to make sure his involvement with this whole series of events was buried." You seem to be saying that Walker was as much a patsy as Oswald. What are these "letters exchanged between McCloy and Walker?" And what evidence is there that there was an actual "attempt on Walker's life?"

Do you believe that Taylor, because he "knows where Oswald is working," directed "the motorcade past that point?"

"Completely plausible that someone had to know and influenced the motorcade planning." Yes, plausible that the motorcade route involved knowledge of Oswald's workplace, but that hardly means that the Chairman of the JCS would pesonally be involved in such a local matter.

"It would take me hours to explain WS 117L in connection with why the U-2 may have been a planned operation along with Tiros/Midas, Corona and Samos projects, the Army Missile Program, Walker, Taylor, etc., etc." I'll look forward to that explanation.

You've even explained the 1927 reference, which at first glance seemed off to me. You do seem to be implying that Taylor played Walker to a degree, the realization of which began to dawn on Walker during the last stages of the assassination events.

Tim

Edited by Tim Carroll
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...