Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

Paul,

At one time you had corresponded with Gary Schoener who at that time had possession of the original “John T Martin” film. Since you have a connection with Gary, will you try get a hold of the film so we can all have a chance to study it?

Trying your link to Martin Shackelford's famous list yields this: “Sorry, the page you were looking for in this blog does not exist.”

...

This film appears to be an important piece of evidence, especially for your “theory”. I can think of at least three possibilities: (1) There was in fact a connection between Walker and Oswald before the assassination. (2) Somebody tried to fabricate a connection. (3) The John T Martin film is a very unlikely coincidence.

Tom

Tom, yes, I will again attempt to obtain Gary Schoerner's copy of the Jack Martin Film. I agree that it's a potentially important bit of evidence for any theory that attempts to show Edwin Walker at the center of the JFK murder.

As for yesterday's link -- it worked for me at one time, but later not even for me -- so I replaced it with a working link. In any case, your reposting of a previous post reproduced the Martin Shackelford text about the Jack Martin Film in its *entirety*, so thanks for that.

As for your three options, Tom, here are my replies:

(1) The connection between Walker and Oswald never entailed that they met each other. Walker was famous amongst the ultra-right-wing, and Oswald wrote about him in his journals on that basis only. Walker claimed that he knew that Oswald and one other mystery person tried to kill him on 10 April 1963 -- and Walker even told the Warren Commission that he suspected Michael Paine was Oswald's accomplice. Walker, a Dallas resident, would have known about Lee Harvey Oswald from local newspaper articles about him. When some US government official (Walker offers no name) told Walker the next Sunday that Oswald was his shooter, Walker apparently made secret plans to get revenge on Lee Harvey Oswald -- and never actually met Oswald, as far as I can tell.

(2) If somebody tried to fabricate a connection between Walker and Oswald using the Jack Martin Film, they did a GREAT job, IMHO. Yet the person who actually brought the Jack Martin Film to Harold Weisberg and Gary Schoener during their 1968 speaking engagement at Minnesota University, was a young man in his mid-twenties, who claimed to have served under General Edwin Walker in Germany 1960-1961, and who was a Minuteman in 1963. How would a "fabricator" get such a specific person to deliver the Film to Weisberg and Schoener, specifically? The proposed "fabricate" solution raises more questions than it answers.

(3) The best benign explanation about the Jack Martin Film is that it was merely a coincidence -- this Edwin Walker worshipper just "happened" to be in New Orleans on the day that Lee Harvey Oswald was staging a PHONY arrest for the police record in the context of his PHONY branch of the FPCC in New Orleans, completely controlled from the offices of Guy Banister, who was also a Minuteman and also a leader in the John Birch Society, as well as a frequent speaker at right-wing venues in the South, along with Edwin Walker. Just a coincidence? I don't think so.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Paul,

At one time you had corresponded with Gary Schoener who at that time had possession of the original “John T Martin” film. Since you have a connection with Gary, will you try get a hold of the film so we can all have a chance to study it?

Trying your link to Martin Shackelford's famous list yields this: “Sorry, the page you were looking for in this blog does not exist.”

...

This film appears to be an important piece of evidence, especially for your “theory”. I can think of at least three possibilities: (1) There was in fact a connection between Walker and Oswald before the assassination. (2) Somebody tried to fabricate a connection. (3) The John T Martin film is a very unlikely coincidence.

Tom

Tom, yes, I will again attempt to obtain Gary Schoerner's copy of the Jack Martin Film. I agree that it's a potentially important bit of evidence for any theory that attempts to show Edwin Walker at the center of the JFK murder.

As for yesterday's link -- it worked for me at one time, but later not even for me -- so I replaced it with a working link. In any case, your reposting of a previous post reproduced the Martin Shackelford text about the Jack Martin Film in its *entirety*, so thanks for that.

As for your three options, Tom, here are my replies:

(1) The connection between Walker and Oswald never entailed that they met each other. Walker was famous amongst the ultra-right-wing, and Oswald wrote about him in his journals on that basis only. Walker claimed that he knew that Oswald and one other mystery person tried to kill him on 10 April 1963 -- and Walker even told the Warren Commission that he suspected Michael Paine was Oswald's accomplice. Walker, a Dallas resident, would have known about Lee Harvey Oswald from local newspaper articles about him. When some US government official (Walker offers no name) told Walker the next Sunday that Oswald was his shooter, Walker apparently made secret plans to get revenge on Lee Harvey Oswald -- and never actually met Oswald, as far as I can tell.

(2) If somebody tried to fabricate a connection between Walker and Oswald using the Jack Martin Film, they did a GREAT job, IMHO. Yet the person who actually brought the Jack Martin Film to Harold Weisberg and Gary Schoener during their 1968 speaking engagement at Minnesota University, was a young man in his mid-twenties, who claimed to have served under General Edwin Walker in Germany 1960-1961, and who was a Minuteman in 1963. How would a "fabricator" get such a specific person to deliver the Film to Weisberg and Schoener, specifically? The proposed "fabricate" solution raises more questions than it answers.

(3) The best benign explanation about the Jack Martin Film is that it was merely a coincidence -- this Edwin Walker worshipper just "happened" to be in New Orleans on the day that Lee Harvey Oswald was staging a PHONY arrest for the police record in the context of his PHONY branch of the FPCC in New Orleans, completely controlled from the offices of Guy Banister, who was also a Minuteman and also a leader in the John Birch Society, as well as a frequent speaker at right-wing venues in the South, along with Edwin Walker. Just a coincidence? I don't think so.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

deleted and moved

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Paul, since you didn't really answer Question #1, let me rephrase it for you--

Why did George de Mohrenschildt hate Edwin Walker so much that he and his friends encouraged Oswald, as you claim, to kill Walker?

Because de Mohrenschildt, a Russian-born baron whom British Intelligence believed was a Nazi agent, loved black people so much and hated Walker for being a high-profile and powerful racist?

Because "The Baron" loved the United States' democratic process so much and was afraid that right-wing Walker would lead a putsch against the government?

Because "The Baron" was so afraid that Walker would start a Far-Right-versus-Far-Left civil war?

Once again, why would the conservative "Baron", whom British Intelligence believed was a Nazi agent, hate ultra-conservative Edwin Walker so darn much that he and his friends would encourage Oswald, as you claim, to kill Walker?

Answer: If George de Mohrenschildt and his right-wing buddies actually encouraged Peaceful "Marxist" Oswald to try to kill Walker, it makes more sense to me that they so in order to make him appear to be Violent "Marxist" Oswald in some future event (which might even have been unknown to them).

--Tommy :sun

Well, Tommy, I thought I answered Question #1 fully, so let me take a second shot at it.

George de Mohrenschildt (DM) hated Edwin Walker because he saw the rise of Adolf Hitler in Germany, and the devastation that this blind racism caused to Germany (in addition to the devastation it caused to European Jews, and to Europe generally).

George DM did support the Nazi Party temporarily -- hoping to get his family's large Estate back if the USSR could be defeated. The Nazi Party failed to defeat the USSR. The Nazi Party further failed to keep Berlin from being bombed into little bits of rubble. The Nazi Party failed in all its missions.

So, even though George DM supported the Nazi Party in 1940, he also turned againt the Nazi Party after 1945. That's important. In order to make that change of politics, George DM tried very hard to become an AMERICAN. That means that he bent over backwards to erase his former, European prejudice against Black people. George DM's testimony to the Warren Commission, and his booklet to the HSCA, repeat again and again how fair-minded George DM could be, especially with regard to minority races, and to Black people in general.

In other words, George DM (for whatever reasons) became a LIBERAL, at least on the subject of racial equality. It is interesting to note that the testimony that his wife, Jeanne DM gave to the Warren Commision, showed that she herself didn't even like New York because there were so many colored people. She admitted she felt more comfortable in Dallas, where most people were white, and where white people could congregate freely in wealthy society, without colored people. George DM did not challenge his wife on the topic, but he, himself, would strident about racial equality.

Now -- the friend of George DM, Volkmar Schmidt, said that shortly after that engineer's party in Dallas, Lee Oswald went out and bought himself some weapons, and then tried to murder Edwin Walker. Volkmar said that he often felt "a little bit responsible" for that, but he emphasized, "I certainly didn't tell him to shoot Walker." So, he came to forgive himself.

My point is that the question of HATING Edwin Walker and KILLING Edwin Walker must be separated. George DM wanted to be sure that Lee Harvey Oswald HATED General Walker -- and so he would call him, "General FOKKER," when in Lee Oswald's presence.

Lee Oswald had already expressed his sympathy with the Civil Rights movement. The one thing JFK did that Lee Oswald strongly approved was his positive stand on Civil Rights for Black Americans. This was a point of agreement between Oswald and George DM.

Whether George DM wanted Lee Harvey Oswald to KILL Edwin Walker must be a moot point. The Saturday after the shooting, in response to the many Dallas news reports about the Walker shooting, George and Jeanne DM were so worried that they paid a 10 PM visit to the Oswald home -- got them out of bed -- and Jeane DM searched for any weapons. She found Oswald's Manlicher-Carcano with a scope on it. That was when George DM guessed that Oswald had taken a 'pot-shot' at Edwin Walker, and Oswald didn't deny it -- but then George laughed to break the ice, and they all laughed. (Actually, there are differing versions of that story in the Warren Commission volumes.)

Did George DM tell Lee Oswald to KILL Edwin Walker? All we can opine with some certainty is that Lee Harvey Oswald BELIEVED that Edwin Walker (and Volkmar Schmidt and Michael Paine and the yuppie engineers in Dallas) WANTED him to kill Edwin Walker.

The writing on the backyard photograph of Oswald in the possession of George DM, "Hunter of Fascists, ha ha", and signed by Lee Harvey Oswald himself, lends itself to a tragic conclusion.

So, Tommy, the flaw in your question as worded is your assumption that because George DM was a Nazi supporter in the 1940's, that he could never change his mind and become Liberal after he moved to the USA, in order to fit in better with American Society. We must also remember that George DM was fairly close to the family of Jackie Kennedy -- a very LIBERAL family. George DM changed.

If you can't accept that a rightist Baron could convert and become a Liberal oil-engineer in the wake of World War Two, then there's no reason to continue this specific debate.

As for any "Marxist" angle, that doesn't really enter into the legitimate picture. That was always a "front" for Oswald, and never figured into any of the language used by George DM, Volkmar Schmidt or Michael Paine. They had no interest in that. They might not have wanted to see Edwin Walker killed (but they wouldn't have minded seeing him dead, I suppose) and they certainly wanted to have no part in any murder plot -- but Lee Harvey Oswald also liked to shock people -- and I think he did this act on his own to shock his "liberal" friends.

Edwin Walker, however, believed that the Liberals (read Communists) in Dallas conspired with Lee Harvey Oswald to shoot Walker dead.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Why did George de Mohrenschildt and his buddy Volkmar Schmidt want Oswald not to be angry at the US government for the Bay of Pigs Invasion, but angry at Edwin Walker, instead, for what he'd done at 'Ole Miss?

Did they think that Oswald's anger towards the government was psychologically unhealthy for him, and that he would be much better off channeling his anger towards Walker, instead?

Or was it because de Mohrenschildt and Schmidt, great liberals according to you, had actually supported the Bay of Pigs Invasion? You know, to give "freedom" back to the Cuban people?

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is surely just a supposition that Volkmar Schmidt and DeM and Michael Paine were liberals, and convenient for Trejo's theory. No use arguing him out of it though. Challenges to Trejo's logic and 'facts' cause him to double down, not to question.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thomas - I agree that your questions about why DeM and Schmidt would encourage Oswald to turn his attentions on Walker instead of JFK are good ones. My reading of Schmidt's testimony is that he was part of setting up Oswald, at least after the fact. It seems so painfully obvious to me that is the case, and way too convenient, especially since Schmidt seems to be saying that he felt almost guilty in causing Oswald to eventually become the killer of JFK. Why do I feel its a setup? For the simple reason that it plays so well into the WC false conclusion that Oswald was the lone shooter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is surely just a supposition that Volkmar Schmidt and DeM and Michael Paine were liberals, and convenient for Trejo's theory. No use arguing him out of it though. Challenges to Trejo's logic and 'facts' cause him to double down, not to question.

File cabinets full of information (even MAPS) on Pro-Castro Cubans in Ruth Paine garage.
Buddy Walthers - Spartacus Educational
spartacus-educational.com/JFKwalthersB.htm

This information can be verified by Billy Courson, who was Buddy's partner at that

... Buddy also told Decker about a family of anti-Castro Cubans living in the Oak

..... they "found six or seven metal filing cabinets full of letters, maps, records and

...+++++++++

Ruth spook and not under Morales rogue control. Golly Mather under Walker/Morales control ??

HOW ABSURD.

#######################################

CTKA

58. The chief witnesses against Oswald were Ruth and Michael Paine.

As Walt Brown notes in his book, The Warren Omission, the Paines were in the witness chair on a combined nine days. In total, they were asked well over 6,000 questions. In fact, Ruth was asked the most questions of any single witness. (See Brown, pgs. 262-63) Yet, except for Senator Richard Russell, not one commissioner ever posed any queries as to who they really were, what they did in this case, and why the Commission used them so extensively. (DiEugenio, Destiny Betrayed, Second Edition, p. 195) But there is a telltale piece of evidence about all that. It appears that Allen Dulles solicited old friends of his from the Eastern Establishment to give the couple public endorsements as early as December of 1963; which was well before any witnesses were called, Or the Commission's case took shape. (ibid)

But Dulles went even further about this connection. In private, he commented that the JFK researchers "would have had a field day if they had known...he had actually been in Dallas three weeks before the murder...and that one of Mary Bancroft's childhood friends had turned out to be a landlady for Marina Oswald." (ibid, p. 198) The Mary Bancroft Dulles was referring to had been an OSS agent he had run during World War II. Mary was a lifelong friend with Ruth Forbes, Michael Paine's mother.

To make a long story short, both Ruth and Michael Paine came from family backgrounds that are intertwined with the power elite and the CIA. For instance, Ruth's sister, Sylvia Hoke worked for the Agency in 1963, a fact the CIA and Ruth tried to keep from Jim Garrison. Sylvia's husband worked for the Agency for International Development, which was closely affiliated with the Agency. Later in life, Ruth admitted to a friend her father worked for the CIA also. And during the Contra war in Nicaragua, many American Sandinista sympathizers on the scene saw Ruth's activities there as being CIA sponsored. (ibid, pgs. 197, 199) There is also evidence that a man fitting the description of Michael Paine was at a restaurant adjacent to SMU trying to sniff out students who were sympathetic to Castro. Further, there were early reports that Dallas deputy Sheriff Buddy Walthers, in his search of the Paine household, discovered several "metal filing cabinets full of letter, maps, records, and index cards, with names of pro-Castro sympathizers." (ibid, p. 198) There is also evidence that the Paines played a role in manufacturing the case against Oswald. For instance, they claimed the Minox spy camera found in Oswald's belongings really belonged to Michael. (ibid, p. 207.) For a survey of the case against the Paines see, James DiEugenio's Destiny Betrayed, Second Edition, pgs. 155-56, 194-208. (Also, click here for a visual essay). This declassified record makes the Paines appear fishier than an aquarium.

59. There is no mention of Carl Mather of Collins Radio in the Warren Report.

Carl Mather and his wife were good friends with Officer Tippit and his wife Marie. In fact, they went over to the Tippit home to console Marie at about 3:30 PM. (Joseph McBride, Into the Nightmare, p. 527) What makes that so interesting is what happened about 2 hours earlier.

In Oak Cliff, on Davis Street horns were blaring and police cars moving within an hour of the assassination due to the murder of Tippit in that area. A veteran auto mechanic named T. F. White saw a man in a car looking suspicious, like he was trying to hide himself. This was in the parking lot of the El Chico Restaurant across the street from his auto garage. Which was about six blocks from the scene of the Tippit murder. White went over to the car and got a better look at the man and took down the license plate. When he got home that night and watched TV, he told his wife that the man in the car was Oswald. (ibid, p. 526)

When reporter Wes Wise heard about the story, he got the license plate number checked out. It belonged to Carl Mather. Thus began the mystery of how either Oswald, or a double, got in a car after the assassination with a license plate belonging to Tippit's friend Mather. To make it worse, Mather worked for a CIA related company called Collins Radio. Collins did work for the White House, had contracts in Vietnam and worked with Cuban exiles on ships used in raids on Castro's Cuba. (ibid, pgs. 527-28)

That the Warren Report does not mention this pregnant lead is incredible.

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is surely just a supposition that Volkmar Schmidt and DeM and Michael Paine were liberals, and convenient for Trejo's theory. No use arguing him out of it though. Challenges to Trejo's logic and 'facts' cause him to double down, not to question.

[...]
File cabinets full of information (even MAPS) of on anti-Castro Cubans in Ruth Paine garage.

[...]

[emphasis added by T. Graves]

Dear Steven,

In your great haste to type your longish and somewhat rambling and often off-topic posts, please try to at least get your facts straight.

According to the Spartacus page on Buddy Walthers (which you referenced!), file boxes full of information on pro-Castro sympathizers (not anti-Castro Cubans as you claimed) were allegedly found in Mrs. Paine's garage.

http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKwalthersB.htm

Important differences, don't you think?

--Tommy :sun

PS Please also try to write complete, grammatically correct sentences. Doing so would greatly help to make your posts more... intelligible.

Thank you.

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Paul, since you didn't really answer Question #1, let me rephrase it for you--

Why did George de Mohrenschildt hate Edwin Walker so much that he and his friends encouraged Oswald, as you claim, to kill Walker?

Because de Mohrenschildt, a Russian-born baron whom British Intelligence believed was a Nazi agent, loved black people so much and hated Walker for being a high-profile and powerful racist?

Because "The Baron" loved the United States' democratic process so much and was afraid that right-wing Walker would lead a putsch against the government?

Because "The Baron" was so afraid that Walker would start a Far-Right-versus-Far-Left civil war?

Once again, why would the conservative "Baron", whom British Intelligence believed was a Nazi agent, hate ultra-conservative Edwin Walker so darn much that he and his friends would encourage Oswald, as you claim, to kill Walker?

Answer: If George de Mohrenschildt and his right-wing buddies actually encouraged Peaceful "Marxist" Oswald to try to kill Walker, it makes more sense to me that they so in order to make him appear to be Violent "Marxist" Oswald in some future event (which might even have been unknown to them).

--Tommy :sun

Well, Tommy, I thought I answered Question #1 fully, so let me take a second shot at it.

George de Mohrenschildt (DM) hated Edwin Walker because he saw the rise of Adolf Hitler in Germany, and the devastation that this blind racism caused to Germany (in addition to the devastation it caused to European Jews, and to Europe generally).

George DM did support the Nazi Party temporarily -- hoping to get his family's large Estate back if the USSR could be defeated. The Nazi Party failed to defeat the USSR. The Nazi Party further failed to keep Berlin from being bombed into little bits of rubble. The Nazi Party failed in all its missions.

So, even though George DM supported the Nazi Party in 1940, he also turned againt the Nazi Party after 1945. That's important. In order to make that change of politics, George DM tried very hard to become an AMERICAN. That means that he bent over backwards to erase his former, European prejudice against Black people. George DM's testimony to the Warren Commission, and his booklet to the HSCA, repeat again and again how fair-minded George DM could be, especially with regard to minority races, and to Black people in general.

In other words, George DM (for whatever reasons) became a LIBERAL, at least on the subject of racial equality. It is interesting to note that the testimony that his wife, Jeanne DM gave to the Warren Commision, showed that she herself didn't even like New York because there were so many colored people. She admitted she felt more comfortable in Dallas, where most people were white, and where white people could congregate freely in wealthy society, without colored people. George DM did not challenge his wife on the topic, but he, himself, would strident about racial equality.

Now -- the friend of George DM, Volkmar Schmidt, said that shortly after that engineer's party in Dallas, Lee Oswald went out and bought himself some weapons, and then tried to murder Edwin Walker. Volkmar said that he often felt "a little bit responsible" for that, but he emphasized, "I certainly didn't tell him to shoot Walker." So, he came to forgive himself.

My point is that the question of HATING Edwin Walker and KILLING Edwin Walker must be separated. George DM wanted to be sure that Lee Harvey Oswald HATED General Walker -- and so he would call him, "General FOKKER," when in Lee Oswald's presence.

Lee Oswald had already expressed his sympathy with the Civil Rights movement. The one thing JFK did that Lee Oswald strongly approved was his positive stand on Civil Rights for Black Americans. This was a point of agreement between Oswald and George DM.

Whether George DM wanted Lee Harvey Oswald to KILL Edwin Walker must be a moot point. The Saturday after the shooting, in response to the many Dallas news reports about the Walker shooting, George and Jeanne DM were so worried that they paid a 10 PM visit to the Oswald home -- got them out of bed -- and Jeane DM searched for any weapons. She found Oswald's Manlicher-Carcano with a scope on it. That was when George DM guessed that Oswald had taken a 'pot-shot' at Edwin Walker, and Oswald didn't deny it -- but then George laughed to break the ice, and they all laughed. (Actually, there are differing versions of that story in the Warren Commission volumes.)

Did George DM tell Lee Oswald to KILL Edwin Walker? All we can opine with some certainty is that Lee Harvey Oswald BELIEVED that Edwin Walker (and Volkmar Schmidt and Michael Paine and the yuppie engineers in Dallas) WANTED him to kill Edwin Walker.

The writing on the backyard photograph of Oswald in the possession of George DM, "Hunter of Fascists, ha ha", and signed by Lee Harvey Oswald himself, lends itself to a tragic conclusion.

So, Tommy, the flaw in your question as worded is your assumption that because George DM was a Nazi supporter in the 1940's, that he could never change his mind and become Liberal after he moved to the USA, in order to fit in better with American Society. We must also remember that George DM was fairly close to the family of Jackie Kennedy -- a very LIBERAL family. George DM changed.

If you can't accept that a rightist Baron could convert and become a Liberal oil-engineer in the wake of World War Two, then there's no reason to continue this specific debate.

As for any "Marxist" angle, that doesn't really enter into the legitimate picture. That was always a "front" for Oswald, and never figured into any of the language used by George DM, Volkmar Schmidt or Michael Paine. They had no interest in that. They might not have wanted to see Edwin Walker killed (but they wouldn't have minded seeing him dead, I suppose) and they certainly wanted to have no part in any murder plot -- but Lee Harvey Oswald also liked to shock people -- and I think he did this act on his own to shock his "liberal" friends.

Edwin Walker, however, believed that the Liberals (read Communists) in Dallas conspired with Lee Harvey Oswald to shoot Walker dead.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Why do you suppose George de Mohrenschildt and his buddy Volkmar Schmidt wanted Oswald not to be angry at the US government for the Bay of Pigs Invasion, but angry at Edwin Walker, instead, for what he'd done at 'Ole Miss?

Was it just a parlor game to see if they could mess with Oswald's mind?

Did they think that Oswald's anger towards the government was psychologically unhealthy for him, and that he would be better off channeling his anger towards Walker, instead?

Or was it because de Mohrenschildt and Schmidt, although great liberals according to you, might have actually supported the Bay of Pigs Invasion?

--Tommy :sun

bumped

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, Tommy, one point at a time:

(1) George de Mohrenschildt, Volkmar Schmidt and Michael Paine wanted Oswald to lighten up about JFK and the Bay of Pigs, and transfer his anger instead to Ex-General Walker for the Ole Miss racial riot. This is what Volkmar explicitly said, for his part.

You ask, why? The reason should be fairly plain -- these three men were part of a tiny Liberal circle in Dallas -- mostly young engineers along with George De Mohrenschildt, a rich, international playboy, who always played at being younger than he was.

They were LIBERALS. They were annoyed by Lee Harvey Oswald's continual ranting about "how bad it all is out there," but especially they were annoyed by Oswald's typical US Marine rhetoric about how JFK really messed up the Bay of Pigs.

(By the way, this report that Lee Oswald nagged everybody about the Bay of Pigs, was also confirmed by Silvia Odio in her report of Leopoldo's phone call. "Leopoldo" phoned her and told her that "Leon" Oswald said that the Cubans didn't have any guts because JFK should have been assassinated after the Bay of Pigs. The story is true to form. I realize that many people think that Sylvia Odio is lying -- but Gaeton Fonzi believes her, and I believe her.)

So, George DM, Volkmar Schmidt and Michael Paine were LIBERALS. They liked JFK. They weren't proud of the Bay of Pigs, but they thought that the racism displayed by Edwin Walker only a few months before their February dinner party, was a far bigger threat to the American way of life than the Bay of Pigs fiasco. They wanted Lee Harvey Oswald to join their political views. They worked fairly hard to convert him.

(2) It wasn't ONLY a parlor game to see if they could mess with Oswald's mind. That was only PART of the reason. They were impressed with Volkmar Schmidt who claimed to have special talents in the field of psychology, because both his parents were psychologists (as I recall). He had a special trick that he wanted to show off to everybody. Lee Harvey Oswald would be his guinea pig. But that wasn't the ONLY reason.

My reasoning, based on the actual words of Volkmar Schmidt and George DM, is that they truly believed that Edwin Walker's crimes were WORSE than anything JFK had done. They were LIBERALS.

Like most people, they would like to convince OTHER people of their political opinions, if they only could. So, PART of the interest was this parlor game -- and PART of the interest was political -- it was a question of JFK versus Edwin Walker -- the Liberals vs the Ultra-conservatives.

As for the Bay of Pigs invasion -- it is confusing on poliitcal grounds. There are at least three groups:

(i) Some (like the CPUSA and pacifists) wish the Bay of Pigs never happened, no matter the outcome.
(ii) Others (like most Americans) wish the Bay of Pigs never happened, only because the USA painfully LOST.
(iii) Still others (like Edwin Walker) wanted to revive the Bay of Pigs and try again.

Speaking of George DM, Volkmar Schmidt and Michael Paine, I find no evidence that they were sympathetic to Communism, Fidel Castro or pacifists (i). Yet I also find no evidence that they wanted to join Edwin Walker's call for a new Bay of Pigs Invasion (iii).

My viewpoint is that they were ordinary LIBERALS (ii) who didn't like to see the USA lose, or made fun of, or even belittled, like the extreme left and the extreme right would do.

Whether or not these three would have approved of the Bay of Pigs if the USA interests had been victorious, I can't say with certainty, but I'm pretty sure it was the humiliation of the loss at the Bay of Pigs that upset these three, like most Americans. But that was no longer of topmost interest to these three. Instead, Edwin Walker and his Dixie platform to keep US colleges all-white was their main, LIBERAL concern. They wanted Lee Harvey Oswald to join them.

But -- like Edwin Walker -- Lee Harvey Oswald was a man of ACTION. Oswald couldn't just accept the THEORY of a political view -- he had to ACT on it. Just as Edwin Walker could not do other than ACT on his JBS beliefs at Ole Miss, so did Lee Harvey Oswald act on his new-found LIBERAL beliefs by trying to kill Edwin Walker on 10 April 1963.

That's where the massive evidence leads me, Tommy. If you see another scenario, then I ask you to present your evidence.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to post
Share on other sites

The flaw in your argument Paul is that you can't really know what DeMohrenschildts political sympathies were. But you can be sure he was CIA connected. There is ample proof of that. And his Haiti sojourn, his ties to the Bushes, his 'friendship' with Oswald, all more telling than his earlier history. So your logic, that he was a nazi but turned liberal because of his experiences, is simplistic, but is also supportive of your theory. I think his letter to George Bush, while the latter was CIA director, asking for his help, is downright weird. Can you work that into your theory? What do you think he was afraid of? Just an old paranoid suffering from electroshock, or an old CIA hand hung out to dry?

My point in all this, is that none of us can say for sure what he was doing with Oswald. It certainly wasn't simple friendship, but George wanted us all to think it was. I used to think his manuscript was truthful. No longer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The flaw in your argument Paul is that you can't really know what DeMohrenschildts political sympathies were. But you can be sure he was CIA connected. There is ample proof of that. And his Haiti sojourn, his ties to the Bushes, his 'friendship' with Oswald, all more telling than his earlier history. So your logic, that he was a nazi but turned liberal because of his experiences, is simplistic, but is also supportive of your theory. I think his letter to George Bush, while the latter was CIA director, asking for his help, is downright weird. Can you work that into your theory? What do you think he was afraid of? Just an old paranoid suffering from electroshock, or an old CIA hand hung out to dry?

My point in all this, is that none of us can say for sure what he was doing with Oswald. It certainly wasn't simple friendship, but George wanted us all to think it was. I used to think his manuscript was truthful. No longer.

Well, Paul B., you presume that I'm only guessing at the motives of George DM and Volkmar Schmidt, but I'm not. One only needs to read the Warren Commission interviews of George DM to see that I'm not making any of this up.

Also, one should also read George DM's short "book" that he wrote before he (allegedly) committed suicide. What I'm telling everybody here is simply an echo of what George DM actually said. Read it yourself if you don't believe me.

George DM was no longer a Nazi. He did, probably, spy part-time for the CIA, on a contract basis. For example, George and his wife made a story in some newspapers when they literally WALKED to Mexico City from Dallas. They kept on walking and settled on a beach, and then an island, where they took photographs and made drawings of CUBA. The WALKING to Mexico was extolled by the newspapers as a venture for health and athletics -- but the newspapers didn't speak about the drawings angle. Police eventually came around and told George DM to stop what he was doing and go home. So, probably George DM -- who was something of a geologist -- was doing a geo-political study for the CIA with regard to the US opposition to Communist Cuba and Fidel Castro.

I want to emphasize that Liberals are not Communists. American Liberals can be very anti-Communist. I realize that to the far-left, any form of anti-Communism is the same as being a Nazi. Perhaps that's your position. It's just like, to the far-right, any form of anti-Fascism is the same as being a Communist. That's the problem with the extremists on the left and the right -- they can't appreciate NUANCES.

As for George DM's letter to the CIA asking for "help," this sounds very much like Harry Dean's letter to JFK in 1961 and his letter to J. Edgar Hoover in 1963, asking for a "pardon." Both Harry Dean and George DM had guilty consciences.

George DM had the guilty conscience of being INDIRECTLY responsible for the murder of JFK. His role was that he pushed Oswald over the edge when it came to General Edwin Walker. Remember what Edwin Walker said in 1968, when RFK was assassinated, and I quote:

"If authority, in the hands of the Attorney General and the Justice Department, had not seen fit to free Oswald and his associates in the attempted assassination of Edwin A. Walker -- there is no reason to doubt that President John F. Kennedy and Senator Robert F. Kennedy would be alive today." (Edwin Walker, newsletter to the "Friends of Walker," speaking of himself in the third person, 6/12/1968)

There again we see another "near-confession" from Edwin Walker with regard to Lee Harvey Oswald and JFK's murder.

Also, Paul B., you say that George DM wanted us all to think that his "friendship" with Oswald was simple "friendship," but that's inaccurate. In his Warren Commission testimony George DM said only that he "felt sorry" for Lee Oswald, and especially Marina Oswald, since they were so poor. He also said that 'no Government would be stupid enough to trust Lee Harvey Oswald with anything important.' He also said that Oswald would use words (from Marxism) without knowing their meaning -- so Oswald was pathetic.

All the Russian Exile community in Dallas (who were all anti-Communist) felt a duty to take care of Marina Oswald -- one of their own. They were all upset that Lee Harvey Oswald told them to go away -- and he refused to let Marina learn English. But George DM (who was Russian) was able to control Lee Oswald. So perhaps the best explanation for their relationship was that the CIA offered George DM a contact for a lucrative oil development deal in Haiti's government, worth a quarter-million dollars in 1963 (which is like $2.5 million in today's money) to monitor Oswald.

All George DM had to do was keep an eye on Lee Harvey Oswald and keep him out of trouble. George DM utterly FAILED in that duty, and as a consequence he LOST his lucrative oil deal in Haiti, and he died a penniless pauper, abandoned by his wife and children. He also lost his balance at the end, and had electroshock, and Volkmar Schmidt said that he looked terrible at the end -- a mere shell of his former, buff, tennis-playing form.

So, George DM wondered how he had fallen so far -- from a rich playboy down to a homeless street urchin who barely paid his rent. He wrote to CIA Director George Bush for some sort of "help" because after all, he had been of service to the CIA in the past. There was nothing Bush or anybody could do.

The best thing for George DM to do would be to CONFESS HIS CRIMES. He tried to do that with his final "book", and he did mention that engineer's party in Dallas in February 1963 -- but he also failed to give all the details. For example, he claimed he could not remember the name of the "hypnotist," Volkmar Schmidt, and guessed that he might have been "Jewish". He did not want to harm his good friend Volkmar Schmidt, and George DM knew very well that if they hadn't toyed with Oswald's mind at that party, that Edwin Walker would have had one less reason to take REVENGE on the "Communists" in his mind.

George DM knew that Edwin Walker killed JFK. So did J. Edgar Hoover. So did Allen Dulles. So did Earl Warren. So did LBJ. But they decided that if the American Public found out, that there would be riots in the streets of America. So, for National Security reasons, they backed Hoover's Lone Shooter legend which still persists down to this very day.

Finally, Paul B., with regard to George Bush Sr., I see no convincing evidence that he had ANYTHING to do with the JFK murder -- and one might as well speak of the Martians in that context. It's totally irrelevant based on the material evidence.

FOCUS ON THE GROUND CREW! Delve into their testimony and their biographies 1961-1963. The full solution to the JFK murder will be found there.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to post
Share on other sites

As for George DM's letter to the CIA asking for "help," this sounds very much like Harry Dean's letter to JFK in 1961 and his letter to J. Edgar Hoover in 1963, asking for a "pardon." Both Harry Dean and George DM had guilty consciences.

+++
Dean's letter is to someone he dosent know,Hoover.

De Moh's letter is to his old friend, George Herbert Walker Bush.

DE Moh had in his 6 volume phone book the nick name "POPPY" of Bush ,which few knew.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

On September 5, 1976, De Mohrenschildt had written a letter to the Director of the
Central Intelligence Agency, George H. W. Bush asking for his assistance.
Letters
YOUR OLD FRIEND de mohrenschildt
Link to post
Share on other sites
[...]
... George DM knew very well that if they hadn't toyed with Oswald's mind at that party, that Edwin Walker would have had a reason to take REVENGE on the "Communists" in his mind.

[...]

Very confusing.

Who were the "Communists" in Walker's mind against whom Walker would have taken revenge if Oswald hadn't taken a shot at him?

True liberals and staunch integrationists like George de Mohrenschildt, Volkmar Schmidt, Michael Paine, and and the young "yuppie" oil engineers of Dallas, Texas, who had attended Volkmar Schmidt's party?

Please explain.

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is nothing whatsoever irrelevant in questioning George Bush senior's possible involvement in the JFK assassination. Bush was working with CIA by the late fifties, despite his denial of that. I don't have all the names on the tip of my tongue, and don't write for posterity here. But the circumstantial evidence is there. Bush lied when he was up for CIA director, which we know because the rather famous Hoover memo to 'George Bush of the CIA' was written to him, and not to the other CIA agent named George Bush, who denied under oath to Congress that he was the recipient of the Hoover memo. Bush was involved with the Bay of Pigs operations through his Zapata Oil company (with ships used for Bay of Pigs operations called Zapata and Barbara) and possibly a funder of Operation 40, one of whose members later himself also became a CIA director. Jack Crichton, Bush's partner in funding Operation 40, is also a prime suspect because of his Dallas connections, including to the motorcade pilot car, to the continuity of government underground communications center in Dallas, and as head of the local military intelligence unit which, like the Secret Service, stood down. Bush had more than a casual relationship with DeMohrenschildt, as proven by the aforementioned letter to his 'old friend'. Bush ran the Iran Contra operations as Vice President, using his long standing contacts with the group of anti Castro Cubans such as Felix Rodriguez and Rafael Quintero. As Peter Dale Scott points out, there is a direct continuity between BOP and Iran-Contra. Bush was even responsible for a false lead in the few days after the assassination suggesting the possible involvement of a Mr. Parrot. And then there are the long standing ties of the Bush family to the Dulles and Foster families, and to Richard Nixon. All this stuff is published and provable, even if it is only circumstantial. And of course, I choose not to ignore that the Bush crime family benefitted from the elimination of the Kennedy family like no other.

There is no false paper trail leading to Bush other than the remarkable Hoover memo, and few writers who explore the possibility of his involvement. It's the secrecy surrounding this that particularly makes me suspicious.

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...