Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Communication Breakdown


Recommended Posts

FWIW there is also this interesting insight on the last page of the Taylor biography An American Soldier (p. 389):

"His working style, however, did not make for close confidants. His practice was to employ whatever staff was available to him to marshal all the facts bearing on a problem, but then to work it out for himself. This method was in contrast to the preference of many people to thrash out a problem in discussion; it also tended to inhibit compromise."

It sounds like Taylor had a problem delegating authority or working with others. If an important problem was presented to him, he liked to handle it himself. This may have applied even if there was a shared decision as to what to do. He saw himself as the one to do it.

Ron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 262
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Ron wrote and quoted:

[...]

It sounds like Taylor had a problem delegating authority or working with others. If an important problem was presented to him, he liked to handle it himself. This may have applied even if there was a shared decision as to what to do. He saw himself as the one to do it.

____________

Not so sure I agree. From the public standpoint; when one hears about, or decisions from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Of Staff, the collective decision making is over. The ONLY thing left to discuss; will the budget stand it! He's got the opinions he's sought (probably to support his own contentions and military experience). These guys had/have huge staffs, in my estimation if there is any delegation problem, it's the opposite of the above - they tend to delegate too much...

David Healy

Edited by David G. Healy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

These guys had/have huge staffs, in my estimation if there is any delegation problem, it's the opposite of the above - they tend to delegate too much...

Speaking of staff, that included L. Fletcher Prouty. He worked for Taylor, and worked with Lansdale. He knew both men. As far as I can tell, Prouty first IDed the guy walking past the tramps as Lansdale in 1990, in a letter to Jim Garrison. Taylor and Lansdale had both died 3 years before. Now it's interesting to me that Prouty, knowing both men, would look at that photo, which looks more like Taylor than Lansdale, and say, "Hey, that's Lansdale!" I can't help but wonder if Prouty, rather than saying what would sound too incredible or preposterous (the Chairman of the JCS in Dealey Plaza?), did what was necessary to draw attention to the photo, and then let the wheels turn as they may. It pretty well works for me, but only after James pointed out who the man really looks like. As James said, he didn't mention it before because he was afraid people would laugh at him. Maybe Prouty felt the same way.

Ron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of staff, that included L. Fletcher Prouty. He worked for Taylor, and worked with Lansdale. He knew both men. As far as I can tell, Prouty first IDed the guy walking past the tramps as Lansdale in 1990, in a letter to Jim Garrison. Taylor and Lansdale had both died 3 years before. Now it's interesting to me that Prouty, knowing both men, would look at that photo, which looks more like Taylor than Lansdale, and say, "Hey, that's Lansdale!" I can't help but wonder if Prouty, rather than saying what would sound too incredible or preposterous (the Chairman of the JCS in Dealey Plaza?), did what was necessary to draw attention to the photo, and then let the wheels turn as they may. It pretty well works for me, but only after James pointed out who the man really looks like. As James said, he didn't mention it before because he was afraid people would laugh at him. Maybe Prouty felt the same way. (Ron Ecker)

Even though both men (Lansdale and Taylor) point to conspiracy, the implications of it being Taylor seem to be more sinister than Lansdale. In a way, as a conspiracy of shadowy government types, I guess we would expect Lansdale to be there.

If this man walking past the tramps is indeed Taylor then that throws a whole new light on things. I know a lot of people respect Fletcher Prouty and I don't wish to sully his name, but maybe he wanted to point researchers to a conspiracy but not one that included Max Taylor.

Given some of the research Jim Root is doing, I can understand why Prouty steered clear of putting Taylor into the mix. That convoluted world of codebreakers, soviet moles and mind control I believe is a way of understanding what Oswald was all about, and may reveal who was behind his fake defection and his ultimate fate of being a patsy for the murder of the President.

Food for thought.

James

Edited by James Richards
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Greg Burnham has send me this letter from Major General Victor H. Krulak to Fletcher Prouty concerning the photograph in Dallas of the man who could have been Lansdale.

VICTOR H. KRULAK

15 March 1985

Mr. Fletcher Prouty

Alexandria, Virginia

Dear Fletch:

As I read your interesting letter it is plain that you have not wanted for interest or achievement in your life. It has to have been exciting and rewarding too.

Mine has been a lively existence too. I had much to do with Vietnam from '64 to '68, and was loudly disenchanted with what went on and how. I recorded it as part of my book First to Fight that came out a few months ago.

I've also spent ten years in the newspaper business (a most useful education) and now write a syndicated weekly column. I wrote another book, Organization for National Security that resulted in my testifying before a Senate committee.

All taken together, a stirring life.

As to your chronicle concerning the JFK assassination period, I remember your going to Antarctica. I was in the Pentagon at the time of the tragedy but have no recollection of where Lansdale was.

The pictures.-- The two policemen are carrying shotguns, not rifles. Their caps are different (one a white chinstrap, one black). One has a Dallas police shoulder patch, one does not and their caps differ from that of another police officer in photo 4. Reasonable conclusion -- they are either reservists or phonys. And, as you know, city cops don't have anything to do with Sheriff's offices.

As to photo no. 1. That is indeed a picture of Ed Lansdale. The haircut, the stoop, the twisted left hand, the large class ring. It's Lansdale. What in the world was he doing there? Has anyone ever asked him and who was the photographer? Why did he take the pictures? What did he do with them?

I have examined my own records and find no clue that would help. Suffice to say, it is a fascinating proposition.

I am returning your pictures.

Best regards always.

Sincerely,

[signed, Brute Krulak]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Burnham might also want to send a copy of the letter to Krulak. It might refresh Krulak's memory, since he apparently didn't keep a copy. Quoting Gerry Hemming in another thread:

As an aside, Gen. V. "Brute" Krulak took a fall off a ladder last week at his home near San Diego, but is recovering nicely. As to his identifying Lansdale as the "suit" passing by the "tramps", Krulak denies ever even hinting at said statement.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...