Harry Dean: Memoirs

[Ernie Lazar]

To refresh our memories regarding what Paul has previously said -- and how he now wants to wiggle his way out of his own position, I highlight some key portions below.

Posted 26 February 2014 - 04:15 PM

Paul Brancato, on 26 Feb 2014 - 2:21 PM, said:

The only real dispute is whether released or unreleased files would show a deeper relationship with the FBI, and whether, if they did not show a deeper relationship, and/or did not provide direct corroboration of Harry Dean's story of the assassination plot and plotters, that the FBI files should then be considered proof that this plot as detailed by Harry Dean did not exist.

Let's see what Lazar uncovers. If nothing new is revealed we can then debate the general question of the ultimate veracity of Intelligence files. We read often that so and so destroyed this or that file. We know cops cover their tracks as best they can, and that is true everywhere. Its easy for me to conclude that the FBI, CIA, ONI etc deliberately misfile or otherwise hide from investigators any files that reveal illegal actions by their operatives.

Your make some thought-provoking points, Paul B.

If these newly released Los Angeles FBI files on Harry Dean fail to show a "deeper relationship with the FBI" (i.e. a relationship such as Harry described between himself and Wesley Grapp in his Confessions) then you would raise the question of whether this failure could be taken as conclusive proof of the falsity of Harry Dean's claim.

I have to admit that your idea sounds plausible. Certainly such a failure would be at least "strike one" for the Harry Dean story. So I completely agree with you that the contents of the Los Angeles FBI files are important.

You are also willing to raise the question regarding the FBI destruction of FBI files -- that cannot be automatically discounted.

My thinking is somewhere between. If there are FBI files that really do corroborate Harry Dean's story -- I personally don't expect to see them in 2014. If they exist, then I suspect that they cannot -- by law -- be released until 2017, when the JFK Act comes due. That's because Harry Dean's story identifies names and places.

My worry, as an advocate of Harry Dean, is that these Los Angeles FBI files might completely demolish the Harry Dean story. I have to be open to that possibility -- my mind is not closed.

For example, if all 60+ FBI serials and their hundreds of pages of FBI text contain nothing at all except complaints by the FBI that Harry Dean is a "very minor annoyance" who has to be continually reminded to stop claiming to be an FBI agent -- then, I would count that as "strike two" for Harry's story.

I personally expect to see something more than that -- some complaints, yes, but also some real questions and real answers between the FBI and Harry in some of those 60+ FBI serials. Time will tell. Thanks for your response.

Best regards,
--Paul Trejo

[Ernie Lazar]

1. Paul's tortured psychiatric analysis of what he claimed was a "forged" version of Harry's 11/63 letter to Hoover (which Paul based entirely upon Harry's defective recollection and upon Paul's own systematic bias and hatred toward the FBI as an institution and against Hoover as a person)

2. Paul's repeated falsehoods about FBI filing practices and FBI procedures pertaining to its informants

3. Paul's tortured and false interpretation of what Wesley Swearingen supposedly believed about both Harry's narrative and about Joseph Milteer

4. Paul's deliberate falsehoods about what Edwin Walker supposedly taught his troops in Germany about U.S. Presidents

5. Paul's deliberate falsehoods about what "the Birch Society" supposedly "published" and taught its members in 1959-1962 about President Eisenhower or other Presidents

6. Paul's entirely false account of Harry's meetings with Wesley Grapp in the summer of 1963

7. Paul's entirely false accusations against me such as claiming that I "continued" to "misrepresent" Paul's or Harry's position about some matter or I made statements which, in reality, I never made (such as me supposedly claiming that Harry and Paul had stated they had "proof" of Harry's meetings with Grapp -- when I never made any such statement and despite repeated challenges by me to provide substantiation for his false accusation, Paul refused to do so (for obvious reasons).

OK, I will deal with each of Ernie Lazar's false charges by the number:

1. Ernie's use of the word "tortured" indicates exaggeration, which is Ernie's strong suit. When Ernie has a weak argument (which is most of the time) he uses exaggeration to push it through. Harry and I were mistaken about the 11/1963 letter, and we admitted it. That ad;mission would be enough for normal people to accept, but obviously it's not enough for the obsessively biased.

2. Ernie likes to boast about how much he knows about FBI filing practices and FBI procedures for informants. This charge merely amounts to Ernie's continual bragging.

3. Again -- the word "tortured" shows his use of exaggeration. In fact, Wes Swearingen's own words -- shared with the entire Forum -- showed that he keeps an open mind with regard to both Don Adams and Harry Dean. But the closed-minded Ernie Lazar still fails to grasp how anybody can be open-minded -- and so he resorts to one-sided exaggeration yet again.

4. The details about what General Edwin Walker taught his troops in 1960-1961 through his Pro-Blue program are well-documented by the US Army itself in a 660 page report from Lt. Gen. F.J. Brown dated 22May61. Investigating Edwin Walker, the US Army found Walker guilty of preaching to thousands of troops that First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt and former President Harry Truman were "definitely pink."

Further, Walker violated the Hatch Act by trying to influence his troops to vote the way that he preferred. There is more. The 660 page report shows that Walker was a disgrace to his uniform, and the US Army rightly dismissed him from his command over the 24th Infantry Division in Augsburg, Germany in April 1961. Yet because of the politics of Robert Welch, Kent Courtney, the JBS and so on, Walker was welcomed as a right-wing hero when he quit the Army in November 1961.

5. Anybody who knows the well-publicized views of the John Birch Society regarding all US Presidents since FDR know very well that these paranoid Americans believed that these US Presidents were Communists and Communist-controlled. Those who doubt that historical fact deserve the smirks they receive.

6. As for Harry's meeting with Wesley Grapp, it was in 1964, not 1963. Furthermore, Ernie Lazar is in no position to jump to any conclusion that Harry's (and my) account is "entirely false" until all FBI records about Harry are in hand. Ernie still lacks some of those records, yet his mind is made up, and he wants you to close your minds, too, dear readers.

7. These false charges from Ernie Lazar today are themselves sufficient proof that Ernie continues to misrepresent Harry's position (and mine) regarding the murder of JFK. I still don't know what Ernie advocates -- all we can tell so far is what Ernie is against -- Harry and Paul. Why? We still don't know.

With utmost sincerity,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Posted 11 March 2014 - 12:22 PM

Paul Trejo, on 11 Mar 2014 - 11:56 AM, said:

Ernie Lazar, on 11 Mar 2014 - 09:10 AM, said:

Paul -- as I have repeatedly suggested:

1. Send Mr. Swearingen a new message today asking him whatever specific questions YOU think will best resolve our dispute.

2. Then let us know the answers which he gives to YOUR questions.

3. That way, I am not "in the loop".

4. FYI: I copied YOUR messages here in this thread and sent them to Swearingen...

HERE ARE MY CONTENTIONS -- SO PLEASE CONTACT SWEARINGEN IF YOU THINK I HAVE THIS WRONG:

1. Swearingen does NOT believe that Harry Dean was an FBI informant

2. Swearingen does NOT believe that Harry Dean's story about a "JBS plot" to murder JFK is credible

3. Swearingen does NOT believe that Milteer's comments are credible

4. Swearingen does NOT believe that Harry Dean was sharing information with Wesley Grapp in 1961, or 1962, or 1963...

Ernie, I have no intention of compromising my congenial correspondence with Wes Swearingen by subjecting him to your bickering manners.

Wes Swearingen has already made it crystal clear in his book what he believes -- and Harry Dean is not on his radar (nor is Don Adams). Wes Swearingen is in hot pursuit of a CIA-Mafia theory of the JFK murder.

Nevertheless, he is honest enough to admit that it is still "a matter of opinion." It's only you, Ernie, who want to shut down the debate ASAP.

Wes Swearingen has already told me (and I've shared it with this thread) that:

1. Wes Swearingen does NOT challenge Harry Dean's claims -- he simply finds no place for Harry Dean within his own current CIA-Mafia theory.

2. Wes Swearingen does NOT discount the possibility that the CIA recruited lunatics from the right-wing JBS in Southern California who could supply many resources and plenty of hatred for JFK.

3. Wes Swearingen does NOT discount the possibility that Joseph Milteer "might have heard something" about the JFK assassination.

4. Wes Swearingen knows that Wesley Grapp was not a SAC in Los Angeles in 1963 -- but only later than that. This makes sense, because as Wes Swearingen told me, if Harry Dean rode in a car with Wesley Grapp, even in early 1964, Wesley Grapp could not have been a SAC, since a SAC does no field work. (Besides, Ernie, try to keep up; Harry has already stated that his memory about the Los Angeles FBI is a bit blurry, and that he never met Wesley Grapp in 1961.)

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

To refresh our memories regarding point #3 of Paul's message above -- where Paul yet again LIES about Swearingen's position, by claiming that:

3. Again -- the word "tortured" shows his use of exaggeration. In fact, Wes Swearingen's own words -- shared with the entire Forum -- showed that he keeps an open mind with regard to both Don Adams and Harry Dean. But the closed-minded Ernie Lazar still fails to grasp how anybody can be open-minded -- and so he resorts to one-sided exaggeration yet again.

I again copy below Swearingen's reply to Paul's absurdly dishonest nonsense. I underline and italicize and use color to highlight the key points.

From: WESSWEAR <WESSWEAR@aol.com> To: Paul.Trejo <Paul.Trejo@mccombs.utexas.edu> Cc: ernie1241 <ernie1241@aol.com> Date: Tue, Mar 11, 2014 12:16 pm

Mr. Trejo,

Please let me explain one more time what I think of Dean's information. If you read my book TO KILL A PRESIDENT, you should know what my position is on who killed JFL. I have reliable witnesses. Dean has only his opinion, which he cannot support with reliable witnesses or physical evidence.

Dean claims to have been a FBI informant and to have ridden in a car with SAC Wesley Grapp. Dean could have talked to FBI agents in Chicago. That does not make him a FBI informant. As to Dean's informant status, FBI agent William McCauley of Los Angeles characterized Dean as a "mental case." There is no way McCauley would have had Dean as an informant. Dean may have talked to an agent in Los Angeles. This does not make him an informant.

As to Dean riding around in a car with SAC Wesley Grapp, that is absolutely preposterous. SACs do not do agent field work. JFK was killed in 1963. Grapp did not become SAC of Los Angeles until 1964.

Dean may, or may not have talked to various individuals and groups. These people may have been joking with Dean, especially if they thought Dean was a "mental case," just as FBI agent McCauley thought.

Dean's idea that some people he talked to were involved in the JFK assassination is as weak as his idea that he was a FBI informant and that he rode around in a car with SAC Wesley Grapp.

It is my opinion, after reading Dean's manuscript and hearing what you claim is true about Dean, that Dean is drastically in need of professional help. It is also my opinion that what Dean has claimed as fact is absolute fiction.

Sincerely,

M. Wesley Swearingen

Edited March 29, 2014 by Ernie Lazar

[Ernie Lazar]

So, again, as message #977 illustrates, beyond dispute, Paul ALWAYS falsely attributes positions and beliefs to people whom he thinks can be used to support Harry's narrative -- even when those people explicitly and categorically state that they DO NOT believe Harry's story.

Furthermore, as message #977 reveals, Paul routinely employs false and libelous comments to characterize his perceived opponents and critics. Paul is congenitally INCAPABLE of acknowledging indisputable FACT. As the previous message illustrates, Swearingen DID NOT have an "open mind" regarding Harry's story. Instead, as Swearingen stated in plain English, "It is also my opinion that what Dean has claimed as fact is absolute fiction."

So, we can believe Paul Trejo's false attribution of what Swearingen believes, OR, we can believe what Swearingen has explicitly written.

This example illustrates why Paul Trejo CAN NEVER BE TRUSTED to present accurate, truthful, factual information about ANY subject. And ALL of his libels about "obsessively biased", "exaggeration", "blind faith", "dishonesty", "closed mind" etc. etc. are actually Paul's description of HIMSELF!

Edited March 29, 2014 by Ernie Lazar

[Ernie Lazar]

With respect to Walker's Pro-Blue education program, I quote below from a few of the messages which I received from soldiers who served under Walker at that time:

1. JOHN SLATTERY

"Hi Ernie, I attended the Pro Blue roll out meeting at Flak Kaserne and have no recollection of anything negative about Eisenhower. Both General Walker and BG Maroon spoke to us on that Saturday morning and it was, in my opinion, a positive message about the US and most negative about the USSR."

2. CHUCK RANEY

"As far as the content of the Pro-Blue programs is concerned all I remember hearing was that Walker was very strongly anti-communist, anti-Soviet, anti-East German, etc. My impression was that he was almost reckless in his belief that we should go “toe to toe with the Ruskies,” as Slim Pickens says in Doctor Strangelove. I never heard anything concerning President Eisenhower, one way or the other. Sorry I can’t be of more help. Chuck"

3. LARRY ROMO

"I arrived at the 24th Div. in May of 1960 and was assigned a job as "commo man" in the Division Headquarters Company on Flak Kaserne. It was a job that simply required maintaining the radios in the vehicles of the headquarters company along with MP vehicles. It also included General Walker's 1960 Chevrolet. It was not a hard job as I simply had to replace any radio that wasn't working and take the non working radio over to the 24th Signal Company for repair. For General Walker's radio I had to arrange to have the vehicle itself over to have the radio repaired. When the Pro Blue program started I believe in 1961 no one really knew anything about it. As an enlisted man , we knew nothing about it. My first contact with it was an assignment along with another enlisted man to set up a microphone and rostrum for General Walker in a room where he planned on addressing the Executive Officers of the various units on the program. Both of us had to leave however when the meeting started and as I recall there was a guard at the door. I assume that, and similar meetings, were to kick off the introduction of the program to the troops. Shortly after that the enlisted men of the Division Headquarters company were summoned to watch a movie. It had nothing to do with President Eisenhower , but it showed various student demonstrations at colleges across the country including the University California at Berkeley . I don't recall what the demonstrations were about. I know it was to early for Vietnam reactions so I think it had to with other matters. In reflection I don't think the showing of the film had anything to do with what the demonstrations were about, but simply to show the "horrible" things that were happening at home. I do recall that it made all of us very angry to think we were over in Germany serving out country, meanwhile these "terrible" students were rioting at home. . In that regard, the film probably served the purpose in initiating the starting point of spreading the philosophy of the Pro Blue Program across the entire division and beyond.

The term "Pro Blue" really never came up, except one guy mentioned that once when he called the Pro Blue office, it was answered simply with someone repeating the phone number , not the name of the office. I believe the first time it really came to our attention was when the "Stars and Stripes" newspaper came out one day with the headline "WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE 24TH DIVISION" This was just before Gen. Walker was relieved. I realize this does not help you much, but it is what I recall. I am assuming that General Walker was relieved of duty well before the program became effective ,if it was even to become effective. I suspect the vast majority of the enlisted men of the Division, especially those in their late teens and early 20's like me, along with a large majority of the officers were more interested in doing our duty to the best of ability and then going home so we could get on with our lives than any political initiative thought up by our superiors. Best wishes on your project."

[Paul Trejo]

<snip>

Paul Trejo wrote: Harry Dean and I affirm today that the plotters who murdered JFK were hoping for the USA to invade Cuba and kill Fidel Castro -- first and foremost. Yet the "Lone Assassin" theory of J. Edgar Hoover (and promoted actively by LBJ, Earl Warren and Allen Dulles) would politically undercut that hope.

SWHT CERTAINLY MAKES THE CASE THAT THE LONE ASSASSIN THEME UNDERCUT THAT HOPE ALL RIGHT, BUT AS YOU KNOW I PRESENT THAT AS BEGINNING AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT, IN ORDER TO AVOID A POLITICAL CRISIS AND ALSO TO AVOID AN INVESTIGATION THAT WOULD LIKELY HAVE IMPLICATED AMERICAN INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS IN THE CONSPIRACY AS WELL AS SURFACED A GREAT MANY ONGOING INTELLIGENCE OPERATIONS...

-- LARRY

Larry, I find it interesting that your theory maintains that the "Lone Assassin" theme worked to undermine the rightist hopes and dreams to invade Cuba and assassinate Fidel Castro.

Of course that strategy had to be developed "at the highest levels of government," including LBJ, Allen Dulles, J. Edgar Hoover and Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren.

No matter what evidence the FBI uncovered about this massive and well-organized plot to murder JFK, the easiest way to control the public backlash would be to blame Lee Harvey Oswald alone.

Insofar as Fletcher Prouty (Mr. X) has already named General Edward Lansdale (General Y) as a key conspirator in the JFK murder plot in Dallas, this suggests a rupture inside Washington DC -- a rupture that would be decided against the right-wing.

Ever since Senator Joseph McCarthy and his famous era of McCarthyism -- claming that Communists had overrun the State Department and even the White House -- there have been radical right-wingers in Washington, in the Pentagon and the CIA, arguing for a right-wing tyranny as a response.

The John Birch Society made a lot of hay on this ideological apex of the Cold War. Insofar as the rightists influenced Ex-General Edwin Walker -- and they also influenced powerful men like H.L. Hunt and Clint Murchison -- perhaps they also influenced General Edward Lansdale.

If so, it is ironic that the "highest levels of government" in Washington that would squash their fervent hope to invade Cuba to eliminate Fidel Castro and force Communism out of Cuba.

If General Lansdale represented a rightist movement inside the Pentagon, we see from the actions of the Warren Commission that this hypothetical rightist movement was squashed by the "highest levels of government."

If so, then we behold a division in Washington at the peak of the Cold War. This has interesting implications for American history.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited March 31, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Larry Hancock]

Paul, actually the lone assassin arose out of an immediate need to deal with indications that American intelligence officers had been involved and also to ensure no broad investigation that would expose a host of CIA activities that went on in and around Oswald. While Hoover (unwillingly) and Warren (pressured by Johnson) went along with it the whole thing originated at the National Security Council level with Johnson taking the lead and Bundy following along. It probably involved a legal presidential national security directive which remains classified. I see no rupture at all and if you read NEXUS you will find my very specific view of how the assassination conspiracy began, who incited it and who carried it out. As I mentioned in one of my recent posts, its even possible that the tactical team was made promises about Cuba that were never intended to be carried out - some of them including John Martino wondered about that in later years.

On the other hand, of course there was a high level division over Cuba, which made JFK's back channel approach to Castro so extremely risky. As you see in SWHT my view is that was the final straw in triggering a limited move by select CIA officers such as Angleton and Harvey and Morales to address what they considered treason and a national security risk.

-- Larry

[Paul Trejo]

Paul, actually the lone assassin arose out of an immediate need to deal with indications that American intelligence officers had been involved and also to ensure no broad investigation that would expose a host of CIA activities that went on in and around Oswald. While Hoover (unwillingly) and Warren (pressured by Johnson) went along with it the whole thing originated at the National Security Council level with Johnson taking the lead and Bundy following along. It probably involved a legal presidential national security directive which remains classified. I see no rupture at all and if you read NEXUS you will find my very specific view of how the assassination conspiracy began, who incited it and who carried it out. As I mentioned in one of my recent posts, its even possible that the tactical team was made promises about Cuba that were never intended to be carried out - some of them including John Martino wondered about that in later years.

On the other hand, of course there was a high level division over Cuba, which made JFK's back channel approach to Castro so extremely risky. As you see in SWHT my view is that was the final straw in triggering a limited move by select CIA officers such as Angleton and Harvey and Morales to address what they considered treason and a national security risk.

-- Larry

According to my notes on your book, NEXUS, Larry, you remain at a high level of analysis -- that is, the ground-crew in Dallas remains fairly abstract, and your handling of Lee Harvey Oswald in NEXUS remains at an abstract level.

In many ways your findings harmonize with the findings of former FBI Agent Wesley Swearingen -- so that is a strong confirmation at the high level.

Still, my issue with Wesley Swearingen is precisely that he does not descend to the street-level, and he obviously neglects the Dallas ground-crew and its fine-tuned details.

What am I missing, do you suppose?

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited March 31, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Larry Hancock]

Well Paul, between SWHT and NEXUS I name some of the tactical people who I think were on the ground in Dallas, I specify the overall ambush scenario including diversions and blockages and I also specify my prime suspects for the people who organized the team and most likely directed it on the ground. What I do not do is state exactly who I think was shooting from what position which I don't know. I also get very specific on Ruby's role and who brought him into it and how and present several outlines of the day by day timing of the whole thing. In SWHT I spend a lot of time focusing on who I think contacted Oswald, how he was maneuvered, the things that were going on around him in Dallas etc. I also go into great detail drawing out the relationship between the CIA folks, the exiles and the criminal links that were involved. As far as I know I make one of the more specific "connect the dots"s scenarios between origin and execution that is on record - in particular I would refer you to the End Game chapter in SWHT. I won't pretend I can name all the individuals nor lay out the exact details of the tactical plan but for example I name the two fellows on Elm Street and I also present two specific possibilities for Oswald impersonators...you can find those photos on my web site...although it has been hacked a couple of times and I haven't looked recently.

Its certainly specific in a lot of places -- I really don't know how to answer your "what am I missing question", as I've said, if folks have specific questions, just email me, I really don;t

have the time to replicate the whole process here nor an interesting in debating scenarios. It's seems that Ernie and I are the only one's commenting on this huge thread

anyway ....? Larry

[Paul Trejo]

Well Paul, between SWHT and NEXUS I name some of the tactical people who I think were on the ground in Dallas, I specify the overall ambush scenario including diversions and blockages and I also specify my prime suspects for the people who organized the team and most likely directed it on the ground. What I do not do is state exactly who I think was shooting from what position which I don't know. I also get very specific on Ruby's role and who brought him into it and how and present several outlines of the day by day timing of the whole thing. In SWHT I spend a lot of time focusing on who I think contacted Oswald, how he was maneuvered, the things that were going on around him in Dallas etc. I also go into great detail drawing out the relationship between the CIA folks, the exiles and the criminal links that were involved. As far as I know I make one of the more specific "connect the dots"s scenarios between origin and execution that is on record - in particular I would refer you to the End Game chapter in SWHT. I won't pretend I can name all the individuals nor lay out the exact details of the tactical plan but for example I name the two fellows on Elm Street and I also present two specific possibilities for Oswald impersonators...you can find those photos on my web site...although it has been hacked a couple of times and I haven't looked recently.

Its certainly specific in a lot of places -- I really don't know how to answer your "what am I missing question", as I've said, if folks have specific questions, just email me, I really don't have the time to replicate the whole process here nor an interesting in debating scenarios. It seems that Ernie and I are the only one's commenting on this huge thread anyway ....? Larry

Larry, many thanks for your comments. I will review the END GAME chapter of your SWHT/2010 book and add remarks here.

Your SWHT/2010 is in my Top 5 list of JFK research books -- up there with Gaeton Fonzi's Last Investigation. I agree with most of what you say -- and my only key difference is to propose that Edwin Walker is being underestimated as a key player in the Dallas ground-crew. (Naturally this is where Harry Dean's memoirs could become useful to the pursuit of American history.)

As for the fact that we have few commenters here today, that is secondary, compared with the fact that we've expanded from 62,500 hits to 72,500 hits on this thread in the past six months.

We have few commenters but many readers, evidently.

Thanks again,

--Paul Trejo

Edited March 31, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

...I THINK WE ALL MAKE A FUNDAMENTAL MISTAKE IN ASSUMING THAT EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENED WAS ACCORDING TO PLAN - WE HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING EXACTLY WHAT THE DETAILED PLAN FOR THAT DAY REALLY WAS...

-- LARRY

On this point, Larry, I agree wholeheartedly. As the old saying goes, "there is many a slip twixt the cup and the lip."

The gap between the plan and the execution would be widest at the ground-level -- in Dallas itself.

Was JD Tippit supposed to die that very day? Wasn't Lee Harvey Oswald himself supposed to die that very day?

It seems that in many Dallas avenues there was improvisation and flying by the seat of one's pants. Look at all the witnesses who bit the dust -- including Lee Bowers, who was so close to the picket fence action.

The organization had to be enormous. Surely a disgruntled US General would have been invaluable in such planning. The main question I have today is whether General Lansdale or Ex-General Walker was closer to the the planning in Dallas itself.

It is not generally appreciated that Ex-General Walker carefully planned the attack on Adlai Stevenson in Dallas only one month before JFK's trip to Dallas. The Dallas press writers knew this very well, and there are plenty of stories in the Dallas press about it.

Walker was out of town during the actual attack (so he wasn't arrested) but he carefully organized his "troops" the night before in the same auditorium (with his own US Day in conmpetition with Adlai's UN Day). Walker and his "Friends of Walker" and "JBS" followers booby-trapped the auditorium itself -- which is a little-known fact, confirmed by Larrie Schmidt himself.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited March 31, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Larry Hancock]

Paul, for reference I'll give you a Cliff notes version of the "on the ground" scenario. I know this is way to minimalist to please a lot of folks but I'm not pushing it on anyone.

The actual attack in Dallas was carried out by a well trained paramilitary team which had been practicing and doing dry runs to infiltrate Cuba and carry out a sniper attack

on Fidel Castro for over a year. That group had evolved out of the earlier poison pill attempts and was very deeply compartmentalized out of JMWAVE, being run directly

by Rip Robertson and with oversight by David Morales and support by John Roselli. Both men were still working with William Harvey in 1963 and met with him in late spring

of that year. At that point in time Harvey had learned from Angleton of the back channel negotiations by JFK with Castro and I believe Harvey carried that word to Miami

where it was passed via Morales and Robertson to selected individuals in the exile community as well as to the Castro assassination team. Those early efforts by JFK went

into a bit of a limbo during the summer but reignited that fall and in NEXUS I go over the fact that some of Morale's Cuban counter intelligence team was assigned to

seriously investigate the back channel....that effort was carried out in Miami and Mexico City where those assets and Morales were both active. Specific plans to attack

JFK began at that point, Oswald was contacted and began to be manipulated as a patsy.

Jumping ahead to Dallas to get into the ground level of the operation, it was easy enough to infiltrate the shooting team into Dallas, compared to going into Cuba that

was a snap. The only thing they needed was somebody with good local intelligence about Dallas and the DPD, they got that via Jack Ruby and Roselli used his

own connections in LA to bring Ruby in for a minor role that turned major only after the plan fell apart. They money for Ruby came from LA, I discuss that at

length in the book. Actually Ruby also made a fine contingency second patsy since he had already tried to do business with Castro and had a track record

connecting him to Cuba already. That sort of thing had made him known to Roselli who was working in Havana during Jacks early travel to the casino's there.

The tactical team had already practiced complex attack scenarios and as I mentioned before, Veciana tells us that the Dallas scenario had all the elements that some

of them later used unsuccessfully against Castro in an attempt in Latin America. It involved blocking the route - I describe the use of an ambulance and very possibly

a pick up, perhaps with a bomb - the motorcade was late however and the blocking just missed, the ambulance was pulling out of the Elm/Houston intersection just as the

motorcade turned the cornor off Main. The pick up had diverted several of the cops in the plaza, particularly the two on the bridge, facilitating infiltration of the shooters.

Diversions were arranged behind the fence to draw people there and allow exfilitaration of the shooters. The two men on Elm performed a dual role, monitoring

whether the primary attack had to be aborted or not, presenting a diversion for the driver of the limo and just possibly in place if a car bomb had needed

to come into play. I posit to back up attack sites as well. As far as the patsy effort went, simply making sure a rifle that could be traced to him was found at the scene

of the crime tied him to the shooting, regardless of where he was ultimately found and his "legend" by that point pointed to Castro. The plan Veciana decribes was equilly

sophisticated including false documents and even photos showing the intended patsy associating with the parties to be framed. I should probably point out that Harvey's

basic notes on generic assassination projects note that it was always desirable to have a patsy in place connected to the Soviets and to place the blame on them.

As Martino tells us the plan aborted with his capture and the chance at planting additional material associating him with Castro was lost. In the book I discuss

the after the fact to insert at least some of that material into evidence and how that was frustration by the lone nut ploy. That's pretty much it in a nutshell, not all that

many people involved, a scenario that had been practiced and would even be used again, solid paramilitary craft.

-- hopefully that might structure reading of the relevant chapters in SWHT - which are not nearly as tightly organized as they would be if I were writing it now...sigh, Larry

I

[Paul Trejo]

Paul, for reference I'll give you a Cliff notes version of the "on the ground" scenario. I know this is way to minimalist to please a lot of folks but I'm not pushing it on anyone.

The actual attack in Dallas was carried out by a well trained paramilitary team which had been practicing and doing dry runs to infiltrate Cuba and carry out a sniper attack on Fidel Castro for over a year. That group had evolved out of the earlier poison pill attempts and was very deeply compartmentalized out of JMWAVE, being run directly by Rip Robertson and with oversight by David Morales and support by John Roselli. Both men were still working with William Harvey in 1963 and met with him in late spring of that year...that effort was carried out in Miami and Mexico City where those assets and Morales were both active. Specific plans to attack JFK began at that point, Oswald was contacted and began to be manipulated as a patsy.

Jumping ahead to Dallas to get into the ground level of the operation, it was easy enough to infiltrate the shooting team into Dallas, compared to going into Cuba that was a snap. The only thing they needed was somebody with good local intelligence about Dallas and the DPD, they got that via Jack Ruby and Roselli used his own connections in LA to bring Ruby in for a minor role that turned major only after the plan fell apart. They money for Ruby came from LA, I discuss that at length in the book. Actually Ruby also made a fine contingency second patsy since he had already tried to do business with Castro and had a track record connecting him to Cuba already. That sort of thing had made him known to Roselli who was working in Havana during Jacks early travel to the casino's there...Diversions were arranged behind the fence to draw people there and allow exfilitaration of the shooters....As far as the patsy effort went, simply making sure a rifle that could be traced to him was found at the scene of the crime tied him to the shooting, regardless of where he was ultimately found and his "legend" by that point pointed to Castro.

...

-- Hopefully that might structure reading of the relevant chapters in SWHT - which are not nearly as tightly organized as they would be if I were writing it now...sigh, Larry

Larry, I reviewed your END GAME chapter last night, and your summary above is fitting.

I don't know if you'll agree today, but in your chapter, END GAME, you make a statement in which I believe I can insert the claims of Harry Dean regarding Edwin Walker and the JBS in Dallas. Here's your specific statement regarding the CIA-Mafia conspiracy that you are tracing:

"What they did not have were two things: time and a Dallas intelligence network." (SWHT/2010, p. 299)

I want to pursue this opening with the words of Jim Garrison in 1968, to the effect that the JFK murder conspiracy would never have gone forward without assurances of cooperation from high-level people in the Dallas Police Department.

Your END GAME, Larry, tends to give the DPD a free pass by considering that the CIA-Mafia plot simply bamboozled them. Jim Garrison would not draw that conclusion, and neither would Penn Jones or his key witness, Deputy Sheriff Roger Craig.

Roger Craig noted that the area behind the picket fence at the Grassy Knoll was always controlled by the DPD, because it was a DPD parking lot. There was only one gate of entrance/exit into that parking lot, which was controlled by a rented key. The public had no access back there in 1963.

It's no accident that people (and cameras) saw uniformed DPD officers up on the Grassy Knoll when JFK was murdered. The question is, of course, how many Dallas players could be drafted into a plot to murder JFK.

William Turner offers a quick answer -- the DPD in 1963 was composed of radical right-wingers. One could not join the DPD in those days, says Turner (Power on the Right, 1971) without being a member of the Minutemen, John Birch Society, KKK or some other right-wing organization, e.g. the Friends of Walker.

Would it be difficult to find voluunteers from the DPD to join a JFK murder plot from among these types?

Insofar as the CIA-Mafia plot that you outline needed a "Dallas intelligence network" very quickly, then the rightist paramilitary people who actually lived in Dallas would stand up front and center. Here's where Ex-General Edwin Walker comes in. (And here's where Harry Dean's memoirs can fit in.)

So, I'd propose a couple of tweaks to your scenario, Larry -- starting with that "Dallas intelligence network." I'd insert Edwin Walker precisely at that point. I'd enlist DPD officers Roscoe White and/or JD Tippit on the ground at the Grassy Knoll (as "badge man"). Other off-duty DPD officers, members of the KKK, would also be on hand up there.

Wes Swearingen adds a notation to his CIA-Mafia plot as well -- that in Dallas at the time of the JFK murder in Dealey Plaza, there was a military man on leave taking movies of JFK passing by and being murdered. He hit the ground after the shots rang out. When he looked up, there were two DPD officers standing above him, demanding his film. They ripped it up and walked away.

In conclusion, Larry, I'd ask how you might conclude that Jack Ruby had paramilitary organizational skills that Ex-General Edwin Walker, with 30 years US Army experience, somehow lacked.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited April 1, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Larry Hancock]

COMMENTS BELOW IN CAPS:

Larry, I reviewed your END GAME chapter last night, and your summary above is fitting.

I don't know if you'll agree today, but in your chapter, END GAME, you make a statement in which I believe I can insert the claims of Harry Dean regarding Edwin Walker and the JBS in Dallas. Here's your specific statement regarding the CIA-Mafia conspiracy that you are tracing:

"What they did not have were two things: time and a Dallas intelligence network." (SWHT/2010, p. 299)

BY THAT PAUL, I MEANT THAT THE TEAM OUT OF FLORIDA DID NOT HAVE "FIELD INTELLIGENCE" E.G. A LONG TIME GEOGRAPHIC FAMILIARITY WITH DALLAS - ROADS, ROUTES, BUILDINGS, TRAFFIC - ALL THE ELEMENTS IMPORTANT TO ATTACK PLANNING. THEY ALSO HAD NO INSIDE CONTACTS WITH DPD OFFICERS WHO MIGHT GOSSIP ABOUT SUCH THINGS AS SECURITY PLANNING, ROUTES, TRAFFIC CONTROL ETC. JACK RUBY AND HIS WIDESPREAD KNOWLEDGE OF DALLAS AND CONTACTS WITH DPD OFFICERS PROVIDED EXACTLY THAT. HE WOULD ALSO HAVE BEEN FAMILIAR WITH OFFICERS WHO MIGHT BE APPROACHED FOR PERIPHERAL ASSIGNMENTS - KNOWINGLY OR UNKNOWINGLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE TACTICAL PLAN. OF COURSE AT THE TIME SOME OF THOSE LITTLE JOBS MIGHT HAVE SOUNDED TOTALLY INNOCENT OR UNRELATED TO THE MOTORCADE OR EVEN SECURITY...AFTERWARDS, ANOTHER STORY. JUST DOING SURVEILLANCE ON SOMEONE - LIKE OSWALD - COULD HAVE BEEN HANDLED THAT WAY. BY USE OF THE WORD INTELLIGENCE WAS STRICTLY IN REGARD TO TACTICAL INTELLIGENCE FOR THE TEAM AND THE ATTACK.

I want to pursue this opening with the words of Jim Garrison in 1968, to the effect that the JFK murder conspiracy would never have gone forward without assurances of cooperation from high-level people in the Dallas Police Department.

I KNOW GARRISON FELT THAT WAY AS DO MANY PEOPLE; I DON'T AND AS A MATTER OF FACT IN THE REAL WORLD THE MORE PEOPLE KNOW ABOUT A COVERT ACTION THE WORSE IT IS; REAL PROFESSIONALS DON'T WANT OR NEED A BIG SUPPORT NETWORK. I SHOULD ALSO POINT OUT THAT ANY TEAM BEING TRAINED TO GO INTO CUBA AND KILL CASTRO CERTAINLY WAS NOT COUNTING ON ANY EXTENDED LOCAL SUPPORT OR ASSURANCES FROM HIGH LEVEL PEOPLE.

Your END GAME, Larry, tends to give the DPD a free pass by considering that the CIA-Mafia plot simply bamboozled them. Jim Garrison would not draw that conclusion, and neither would Penn Jones or his key witness, Deputy Sheriff Roger Craig.

I UNDERSTAND PAUL, HOWEVER I DON'T GIVE THE DPD A TOTALLY FREE PASS IN TERMS OF CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL OFFICERS, BUT AS AN ORGANIZATION YES I DO. TALKING ABOUT THE DPD AS AN ENTITY IS SORT OF LIKE TALKING ABOUT THE CIA AS AN ENTITY, I DON'T FIND IT THAT USEFUL NOR DO I FIND ANY SIGN THAT IS THE WAY TRUE COVERT ACTION WORKS IN THE REAL WORLD. A LOT OF PEOPLE TALK AS IF IT HAPPENS THAT WAY BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THE ACTUAL HISTORY SHOWS...THAT IS WHY I STUDIED THE HISTORY OF POLITICAL ASSASSINATION IN NEXUS.

Roger Craig noted that the area behind the picket fence at the Grassy Knoll was always controlled by the DPD, because it was a DPD parking lot. There was only one gate of entrance/exit into that parking lot, which was controlled by a rented key. The public had no access back there in 1963.

WHILE I DO THINK CERTAIN OF CRAIG'S OBSERVATIONS ON NOVEMBER 22 ARE VERY IMPORTANT, THE PARKING LOT WAS NOT STRICTLY A DPD PARKING AREA....YOU NEED TO DO FURTHER HOMEWORK ON THAT AND A NUMBER OF FOLKS HAVE DONE THAT ALREADY. YOU SHOULD ALSO NOTE THAT NO DPD OFFICERS WERE ASSIGNED TO THAT AREA DURING THE MOTORCADE; SECURITY OTHER THAN THAT ON THE OVERPASS STOPPED AT HOUSTON. OF COURSE YOU ALREADY KNOW FROM SWHT THAT I DO PLACE "DIRTY" DPD OFFICERS - AT LEAST ONE - BEHIND THE FENSE, THAT IS IN SWHT, BUT THAT WAS A MATTER EASILY FACILITATED BY RUBY.

It's no accident that people (and cameras) saw uniformed DPD officers up on the Grassy Knoll when JFK was murdered. The question is, of course, how many Dallas players could be drafted into a plot to murder JFK.

William Turner offers a quick answer -- the DPD in 1963 was composed of radical right-wingers. One could not join the DPD in those days, says Turner (Power on the Right, 1971) without being a member of the Minutemen, John Birch Society, KKK or some other right-wing organization, e.g. the Friends of Walker.

Would it be difficult to find voluunteers from the DPD to join a JFK murder plot from among these types?

Insofar as the CIA-Mafia plot that you outline needed a "Dallas intelligence network" very quickly, then the rightist paramilitary people who actually lived in Dallas would stand up front and center. Here's where Ex-General Edwin Walker comes in. (And here's where Harry Dean's memoirs can fit in.)

So, I'd propose a couple of tweaks to your scenario, Larry -- starting with that "Dallas intelligence network." I'd insert Edwin Walker precisely at that point. I'd enlist DPD officers Roscoe White and/or JD Tippit on the ground at the Grassy Knoll (as "badge man"). Other off-duty DPD officers, members of the KKK, would also be on hand up there.

PAUL, I UNDERSTAND YOU WANT TWEAKS BECAUSE YOU HAVE YOUR MIND SET ON FITTING WALKER INTO THE CONSPIRACY, THAT'S FINE WITH ME BUT I DON'T FIND IT NECESSARY OR CREDIBLE.

Wes Swearingen adds a notation to his CIA-Mafia plot as well -- that in Dallas at the time of the JFK murder in Dealey Plaza, there was a military man on leave taking movies of JFK passing by and being murdered. He hit the ground after the shots rang out. When he looked up, there were two DPD officers standing above him, demanding his film. They ripped it up and walked away.

In conclusion, Larry, I'd ask how you might conclude that Jack Ruby had paramilitary organizational skills that Ex-General Edwin Walker, with 30 years US Army experience, somehow lacked.

YOU MISS THE ENTIRE POINT PAUL, RUBY PROVIDED INFORMATION AND CONTACTS TO THE PARAMILITARY TEAM. BUT TO EQUATE SOMEONE LIKE EDWIN WALKER WITH AN A PROFESSIONAL

CIA COVERT ACTION SPECIALIST LIKE RIP ROBERTSON IS SIMPLY LUDICROUS.....

[Paul Trejo]

COMMENTS BELOW IN CAPS:

...THE TEAM OUT OF FLORIDA DID NOT HAVE "FIELD INTELLIGENCE" E.G. A LONG TIME GEOGRAPHIC FAMILIARITY WITH DALLAS - ROADS, ROUTES, BUILDINGS, TRAFFIC - ALL THE ELEMENTS IMPORTANT TO ATTACK PLANNING. THEY ALSO HAD NO INSIDE CONTACTS WITH DPD OFFICERS WHO MIGHT GOSSIP ABOUT SUCH THINGS AS SECURITY PLANNING, ROUTES, TRAFFIC CONTROL ETC.

JACK RUBY AND HIS WIDESPREAD KNOWLEDGE OF DALLAS AND CONTACTS WITH DPD OFFICERS PROVIDED EXACTLY THAT. HE WOULD ALSO HAVE BEEN FAMILIAR WITH OFFICERS WHO MIGHT BE APPROACHED FOR PERIPHERAL ASSIGNMENTS - KNOWINGLY OR UNKNOWINGLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE TACTICAL PLAN.

OF COURSE AT THE TIME SOME OF THOSE LITTLE JOBS MIGHT HAVE SOUNDED TOTALLY INNOCENT OR UNRELATED TO THE MOTORCADE OR EVEN SECURITY...AFTERWARDS, ANOTHER STORY. JUST DOING SURVEILLANCE ON SOMEONE - LIKE OSWALD - COULD HAVE BEEN HANDLED THAT WAY. BY USE OF THE WORD INTELLIGENCE WAS STRICTLY IN REGARD TO TACTICAL INTELLIGENCE FOR THE TEAM AND THE ATTACK.

...IN THE REAL WORLD THE MORE PEOPLE KNOW ABOUT A COVERT ACTION THE WORSE IT IS; REAL PROFESSIONALS DON'T WANT OR NEED A BIG SUPPORT NETWORK. I SHOULD ALSO POINT OUT THAT ANY TEAM BEING TRAINED TO GO INTO CUBA AND KILL CASTRO CERTAINLY WAS NOT COUNTING ON ANY EXTENDED LOCAL SUPPORT OR ASSURANCES FROM HIGH LEVEL PEOPLE.

...I DON'T GIVE THE DPD A TOTALLY FREE PASS IN TERMS OF CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL OFFICERS, BUT AS AN ORGANIZATION YES I DO. TALKING ABOUT THE DPD AS AN ENTITY IS SORT OF LIKE TALKING ABOUT THE CIA AS AN ENTITY, I DON'T FIND IT THAT USEFUL NOR DO I FIND ANY SIGN THAT IS THE WAY TRUE COVERT ACTION WORKS IN THE REAL WORLD. A LOT OF PEOPLE TALK AS IF IT HAPPENS THAT WAY BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THE ACTUAL HISTORY SHOWS...THAT IS WHY I STUDIED THE HISTORY OF POLITICAL ASSASSINATION IN NEXUS.

WHILE I DO THINK CERTAIN OF CRAIG'S OBSERVATIONS ON NOVEMBER 22 ARE VERY IMPORTANT, THE PARKING LOT WAS NOT STRICTLY A DPD PARKING AREA....YOU NEED TO DO FURTHER HOMEWORK ON THAT AND A NUMBER OF FOLKS HAVE DONE THAT ALREADY. YOU SHOULD ALSO NOTE THAT NO DPD OFFICERS WERE ASSIGNED TO THAT AREA DURING THE MOTORCADE; SECURITY OTHER THAN THAT ON THE OVERPASS STOPPED AT HOUSTON. OF COURSE YOU ALREADY KNOW FROM SWHT THAT I DO PLACE "DIRTY" DPD OFFICERS - AT LEAST ONE - BEHIND THE FENCE, THAT IS IN SWHT, BUT THAT WAS A MATTER EASILY FACILITATED BY RUBY.

PAUL, I UNDERSTAND YOU WANT TWEAKS BECAUSE YOU HAVE YOUR MIND SET ON FITTING WALKER INTO THE CONSPIRACY, THAT'S FINE WITH ME BUT I DON'T FIND IT NECESSARY OR CREDIBLE.

<Paul Trejo wrote:> In conclusion, Larry, I'd ask how you might conclude that Jack Ruby had paramilitary organizational skills that Ex-General Edwin Walker, with 30 years US Army experience, somehow lacked.

YOU MISS THE ENTIRE POINT PAUL, RUBY PROVIDED INFORMATION AND CONTACTS TO THE PARAMILITARY TEAM. BUT TO EQUATE SOMEONE LIKE EDWIN WALKER WITH AN A PROFESSIONAL CIA COVERT ACTION SPECIALIST LIKE RIP ROBERTSON IS SIMPLY LUDICROUS...

Larry, I feel I should clarify some misunderstandings promptly.

(1) I'm not equating Edwin Walker with a younger specialist in CIA Covert Action. However, if we are to make comparisons, Edwin Walker during World War II commanded a sub-unit of the Canadian-American First Special Service Force. Walker served in combat just about continually during World War II and the Korean War, and had special operations training. I doubt that Jack Ruby had similar qualifications.

Even though there were some dirty cops who were in debt to Jack Ruby for this or that vice, that is a far cry from an honorable cop who believed in his politics strongly, who also admired and believed in the rightist politics of General Edwin Walker.

Your argument seems to be that Jack Ruby could organize the Dallas operation. I doubt that Jack Ruby was competent to run a small grocery store, much less a paramilitary operation. So, I'm not comparing Edwin Walker with Rip Robertson -- I'm comparing Edwin Walker with Jack Ruby. Given a choice, would CIA professionals trust a lightweight like Jack Ruby over a former US General?

(2) I'm certainly not painting the entire DPD with one brush. I believe most DPD officers had no idea what was going on that day. Yet there were some DPD officers -- and I won't call them "dirty," I'll call them ultra-rightist -- who believed it was patriotic to oppose JFK in any way possible. They wouldn't be bribed or blackmailed by Jack Ruby to participate -- they'd be motivated by their own politics.

And since you raised the history of political assassination, I'll also raise the case of the attempted assassination of De Gaulle in 1962, because extreme right-wing policemen were also involved in that attempt, according to De Gaulle himself.

(3) While others outside the DPD could rent that parking space behind the Grassy Knoll, it tended to be reserved for DPD officers, Sheriff Deputies, and other local government officials.

I'm aware that no DPD officers were assigned to that area during the motorcade -- yet that says nothing about off-duty policemen. Also, there was little to prevent policemen from wearing their uniforms before or after a shift -- i.e. while they were off-duty. Furthermore, if an off-duty policeman was doing something illegal, what better cover could he hope for than to wear his uniform?

(4) Finally, Larry, I'm not married to an Edwin Walker scenario in the JFK plot. If it's mistaken, I'd like to see that proved so that I can set it aside and move on. Yet the arguments I hear against it so far are unconvincing to ordinary logic. The evidence itself is underestimated, IMHO.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited April 1, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Larry Hancock]

Paul, I'm rushed for time but I'll be back later...

Quickly however, in no way am I stating Ruby ran the Dallas operation - I don't seem to be getting that across to you. I'm stating that he was a minor asset used to support and enable tactical operations in Dallas due to his connections and knowledge of the city. In regard to comparing Walker to Robertson, there simply is no comparison if you know anything about Robertson - plus the tactical team assembled to kill Castro was closely bonded to Robrertson as were a number of exiles. They trusted him, they accepted him; in no way would that translate to taking operational orders from an unknown individual with no field operational experience with them.

I'll provide a bit fuller response later - but to clarify, any points I make are in support of the scenario I've offered or an effort to explain it. In no way would I attempt to argue off of a Walker scenario and honestly I don't envision that anyone could ever offer you sufficient "proof" to shift you off of it. I'm certainly not attempting to do so.