Jump to content

Some more coincidences


John Dolva
 Share

Recommended Posts

the FBI showed clearly on whose side they were. In this extract is a outlinf of a program to force Martin Luther King to commit suicide before being able to collect his Nobel Prize. To me, this sort of thing reveals something that is about as low as anyone can go. That such an organisation was allowed to run roughshod over peoples lives and seemingly get away with it condemns the ruling groupings. The idea that these people would balk at assassination doesn't seem so far fetched.

""In an internal FBI monograph dated September 1963 found that, given the scope of support it had attracted over the preceding five years, civil rights agitation represented a clear threat to "the established order" of the U.S., and that Martin Luther "King is growing in stature daily as the leader among leaders of the Negro movement ... so goes Martin Luther King, and also so goes the Negro movement in the United States." This accorded well with COINTELPRO specialist William C. Sullivan's view, committed to writing shortly after King's landmark "I Have a Dream" speech during the massive civil rights demonstration in Washington, D.C., on August 28 of the same year:

We must mark [King] now, if we have not before, as the most dangerous Negro in the future of this Nation from the standpoint of communism, the Negro, and national security ... it may be unrealistic to limit [our actions against King] to legalistic proofs that would stand up in court or before Congressional Committees.

The stated objective of the SCLC, and the nature of its practical activities, was to organize for the securing of black voting rights across the rural South, with an eye toward the ultimate dismantlement of at least the most blatant aspects of the southern U.S. system of segregation. Even this seemingly innocuous agenda was, however, seen as a threat by the FBI. In mid-September of 1957, FBI supervisor J.G. Kelly forwarded a newspaper clipping describing the formation of the SCLC to the Bureau's Atlanta field office - that city being the location of SCLC headquarters - informing local agents, for reasons which were never specified, the civil rights group was "a likely target for communist infiltration," and that "in view of the stated purpose of the organization you should remain alert for public source information concerning it in connection with the racial situation."

The Atlanta field office "looked into" the matter and ultimately opened a COMINFIL (communist-inflitrated group) investigation of the SCLC, apparently based on the fact that a single SWP member, Lonnie Cross, had offered his services as a clerk in the organization's main office. 14 By the end of the first year of FBI scrutiny, in September of 1958, a personal file had been opened on King himself, ostensibly because he had been approached on the steps of a Harlem church in which he'd delivered a guest sermon by black CP member Benjamin J. Davis. 15 By October 1960, as the SCLC call for desegregation and black voting rights in the south gained increasing attention and support across the nation, the Bureau began actively infiltrating organizational meetings and conferences.

By July of 1961, FBI intelligence on the group was detailed enough to recount that, while an undergraduate at Atlanta's Morehouse College in 1948, King had been affiliated with the Progressive Party, and that executive director Wyatt Tee Walker had once subscribed to a CP newspaper, The Worker.

Actual counterintelligence operations against King and the SCLC seem to have begun with a January 8, 1962 letter from Hoover to Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, contending that the civil rights leader enjoyed a "close relationship" with Stanley D. Levison, "a member of the Communist Party, USA," and that Isadore Wofsy, "a high ranking communist leader," had written a speech for King. 18

On the night of March 15-16,1962, FBI agents secretly broke into Levison's New York office and planted a bug; a wiretap of his office phone followed on March 20.

Among the other things picked up by the surveillance was information that Jack ODell, who also had an alleged "record of ties to the Communist party," had been recommended by both King and Levison to serve as an assistant to Wyatt Tee Walker. Although none of these supposed communist affiliations were ever substantiated, it was on this basis that SCLC was targeted within the Bureau's ongoing COINTELPRO-CP,USA, beginning with the planting of five disinformational "news stories" concerning the organization's "communist connections" on October 24, 1962. 21 By this point, Martin Luther King's name had been placed in Section A of the FBI Reserve Index, one step below those individuals registered in the Security Index and scheduled to be rounded up and "preventively detained" in the event of a declared national emergency; Attorney General Kennedy had also authorized round-the-clock surveillance of all SCLC offices, as well as King's home. 22 Hence, by November 8,1963, comprehensive telephone taps had been installed at all organizational offices, and King's residence.

By 1964, King was not only firmly established as a preeminent civil rights leader, but was beginning to show signs of pursuing a more fundamental structural agenda of social change. Meanwhile, the Bureau continued its efforts to discredit King, maintaining a drumbeat of mass media-distributed propaganda concerning his supposed "communist influences" and sexual proclivities, as well as triggering a spate of harassment by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). 24 When it was announced on October 14 of that year that King would receive a Nobel Peace Prize as a reward for his work in behalf of the rights of American blacks, the Bureau - exhibiting a certain sense of desperation - dramatically escalated its efforts to neutralize him.

Two days after announcement of the impending award, COINTELPRO specialist William Sullivan caused a composite audio tape to be produced, supposedly consisting of "highlights" taken from the taps of King's phones and bugs placed in his various hotel rooms over the preceding two years.

The result, prepared by FBI audio technician John Matter, purported to demonstrate the civil rights leader had engaged in a series of "orgiastic" trysts with prostitutes and, thus, "the depths of his sexual perversion and depravity." The finished tape was packaged, along with an accompanying anonymous letter (prepared by Bureau Internal Security Supervisor Seymore F. Phillips on Sullivan's instruction), informing King that the audio material would be released to the media unless he committed suicide prior to bestowal of the Nobel Prize.

"King, look into your heart. You know you are a complete fraud and a great liability to all of us Negroes. White people in this country have enough frauds of their own but I am sure that they don't have one at this time that is any where near your equal. You are no clergyman and you know it. I repeat you are a colossal fraud and an evil, vicious one at that. ...

King, there is only one thing left for you to do. You know what it is. You have just 34 days in which to do (this exact number has been selected for a specific reason, it has definite practical significant. You are done. There is but one way out for you. You better take it before your filthy, abnormal fraudulent self is bared to the nation."

Sullivan then instructed veteran COINTELPRO operative Lish Whitson to fly to Miami with the package; once there, Whitson was instructed to address the parcel and mail it to the intended victim. 26 When King failed to comply with Sullivan's anonymous directive that he kill himself, FBI Associate Director Cartha D. "Deke" DeLoach attempted to follow through with the threat to make the contents of the doctored tape public:

The Bureau Crime Records Division, headed by DeLoach, initiated a major campaign to let newsmen know just what the Bureau [claimed to have] on King. DeLoach personally offered a copy of the King surveillance transcript to Newsweek Washington bureau chief Benjamin Bradlee. Bradlee refused it, and mentioned the approach to a Newsday colleague, Jay Iselin."

___________________________

"Malcolm X was supposedly murdered by former colleagues in the Nation of Islam (NoI) as a result of the faction-fighting which had led to his splitting away from that movement, and their "natural wrath" at his establishment of a separate mosque, the Muslim Mosque, Inc.

However, the NoI factionalism at issue didn't just happen. It had been developed by deliberate Bureau actions, through infiltration and the "sparking of acrimonious debates within the organization," rumor-mongering, and other tactics designed to foster internal disputes. The Chicago Special Agent in Charge, Marlin Johnson, who also oversaw the assassinations of Fred Hampton and Mark Clark, makes it quite obvious that he views the murder of Malcolm X as something of a model for "successful" counterintelligence operations:

"Over the years considerable thought has been given, and action taken with Bureau approval, relating to methods through which the NOI could be discredited in the eyes of the general black populace or through which factionalism among the leadership could be created. Serious consideration has also been given towards developing ways and means of changing NoI philosophy to one whereby the members could be developed into useful citizens and the organization developed into one emphasizing religion - the brotherhood of mankind - and self improvement. Factional disputes have been developed - most notable being Malcolm X Little.""

_________________________________

I put together the following graph based on a number of graphs showing where COINTELPRO were focusing its attention. It clearly shows that, while a major threat to the rights of American citizens were from the shadowy organisations of the right, the FBI did most damage to the organisations on the left, that claimed to be fighting to protect those rights.

Article page 12 Time magazine October 26, 1962

"COMMUNISTS

Gee, Men

Last week in The Nation, former FBI Agent Jack Levine reported that nearly 1,500 of the Communist Party's 5,500 members are FBI informants -- almost one out of six. [actually almost one out of four: one out of 3.66 or 100 out of 366] Since members must pay party dues, this would make the FBI the largest single financial supporter of the Communist Party, USA. Concluded Levine : "The day will soon come when FBI informants, who are rising rapidly to the top, will capture complete control of the party." "

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It is sometimes recognised that 'researchers' tend to wear blinkers. I think ignoring or hoping that dealing with the true climate that Kennedy encountered when travelling to the south is one way of doing limited 'research'. However the whole truth , of which the following is part, is not going to alter irrespective of any wishes to the contrary. Naturally until it can be shown by reasoned argument that there is no connection here I will continue to push it.

Here is a snapshot of widely divergent psyches, one belonging to a group that did such things as lynch humans (personally I think the possibility that they might also murder presidents is real) and the other a collection of Kennedys sayings indicating to me the true humanity of the man.

This is a true clash of cultures. Bound to cause a spark or two.

::

"Cox owed his position on the federal bench to his friend and Ole Miss Law School roommate, James Eastland, chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Senator Eastland had the power to block President Kennedy’s appointment of NAACP counsel Thurgood Marshall to the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit—an appointment Kennedy very much wanted to make. Eastland bargained for his old friend, saying to Robert Kennedy, “Tell your brother that if he will give me Harold Cox I will give him the n.”

Robert Kennedy and Burke Marshall met with Cox prior to his nomination. Cox assured the Attorney General and the head of the Civil Rights division that he would enforce federal law as it had been interpreted by the Supreme Court. Satisfied with Cox’s assurance, President Kennedy nominated Cox for the federal district bench. As soon as his robe was on, however, Cox became a major obstacle to the Justice Department. In one voting rights suit brought by Doar, for example, Cox refused to let government lawyers inspect the public voting records of Clarke County. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals overruled that and many of Cox’s other decisions, but his manipulations caused considerable delay in the progress of civil rights in Mississippi."

___________________________________________

In 1961 a young president declared that "we would bear any burden, pay any price to secure the blessings of liberty.

Some words from Kennedy(from various speeches and writings, sorted in such a way to help me answer the question "what would Kennedy have done?"):

"Wisdom requires the long view.

Our task is not to fix the blame for the past, but to fix the course for the future.

I am reminded of the story of the great French Marshal Lyautey, who once asked his gardener to plant a tree. The gardener objected that the tree was slow-growing and would not reach maturity for a hundred years. The Marshal replied, "In that case, there is no time to lose, plant it this afternoon."

When written in Chinese, the word crisis is compounded of two characters-one represents danger, and the other represents opportunity.

To those peoples in the huts and villages of half the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required--not because the Communists may be doing it, not because we seek their votes, but because it is right. If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.

...will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, creed, color, or national origin. The contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin.

And if a beachhead of cooperation may push back the jungle of suspicion, let both sides join in creating a new endeavor, not a new balance of power, but a new world of law, where the strong are just and the weak secure and the peace preserved. All this will not be finished in the first one hundred days. Nor will it finished in the first one thousand days, nor in the life of this administration, nor even perhaps in our lifetime on this planet. But let us begin.

There are risks and costs to a program of action. But they are far less than the long range risks and costs of comfortable inaction.

Let both sides explore what problems unite us instead of belaboring these problems which divide us.

Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country

It is an unfortunate fact that we can secure peace only by preparing for war.

....not peace at the expense of freedom, but both peace and freedom.

....our success or failure, in whatever office we may hold, will be measured by the answers to four questions:

First, were we truly men of courage--with the courage to stand up to one's enemies--and the courage to stand up, when necessary, to one's associates--the courage to resist public pressure, as well as private greed?

Secondly, were we truly men of judgment--with perceptive judgment of the future as well as the past--of our own mistakes as well as the mistakes of others--with enough wisdom to know that we did not know, and enough candor to admit it?

Third, were we truly men of integrity--men who never ran out on either the principles in which they believed or the people who believed in them--men who believed in us--men whom neither financial gain nor political ambition could ever divert from the fulfillment of our sacred trust?

Finally, were we truly men of dedication--with an honor mortgaged to no single individual or group, and compromised by no private obligation or aim, but devoted solely to serving the public good and the national interest.

....................

Finally, whether you are citizens of America or citizens of the world, ask of us here the same high standards of strength and sacrifice which we ask of you. With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own.

....................

All my life I’ve known better than to depend on the experts. How could I have been so stupid, to let them go ahead?"

There appears to be a little bit of comment on Angleton occurring on the forum at the moment. Unfortunately it is often of the 'throw the baby out with the bath water' kind. Angletons business was deception. He was supremely good at it. The problem with good deception is that it takes careful scrutiny to assess it. Mostly I think one doesn't want to go to the trouble.

Some things to bear in mind with Angleton: All people go through stages. Angleton at 10 for example could not be said to be a master spy. Was the poet at Yale the master spy? The military man? Or the delusional old man? During this life span, no doubt this man said and did things that were true. similarly things that were not true. His adult profession was deceit. It started by looking at and trying to decode deceit. In the proces he became skilled at it. Did this then permeate all of his life , personal and 'public'. Or was he capable of coming home and leaving work at work for periods of time? I think it's reasonable to assume so. So, blanket statements such as 'Angleton is completely discredited' are incorrect. His job was to blur the distinction between what is clearly discreditable and what is clearly true. To arrive at the conclusion that much of his 'output' in life is discreditable is not a particularly magnificent thing. The thing to try to do is to understand him and through that gain some insight into how to read his many enigmatic acts. They need to be put in a historical context.: Which period in his life do they belong to? Whatever the act may be, how do we know about it? Is the knowledge of it verifiable? Whatever it may be, a comment, a writing, an act, what does it reveal in the sense of the unspoken, undone?

The most significant concept that Angleton brought to attention was the 'room full of mirrors'. How he himself used it is something else entirely. The 'idea' is quite separable from the fomulator of it. To not get lost in the room of mirrors, or deceived by a camouflaged orchid (another 'concept' he used to describe this room of mirrors) one needs to study Angleton. I get an impression that he was quite contemptuous of people in general and got a certain amount of 'jollies' from carrying on the way he did. This overlaps into his professional life more towards the end. He also seems to have had a desire to tell what he knew, possibly to even scores. The telling of the orchid analogy seems to be in typical 'mirror' style to be like this. I think that at that moment he was telling the truth (which is quite separate from the concept itself, which is true irrespective of who tells it) and that his forceful separation between on the one hand Nosenko and on the other Angletons greenhouse. The orchid analogy was a revelation.

My uinderstanding is that there is a movie happening shortly (de Caprio?) about Angleton. It would be good to get on the record as much clarity as possible before some of the lies are popularised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Leading on from Tippit topic

JEFFERSON LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY

--------------------------------

Company History:

Date Event

01-01-1800 JEFFERSON LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, DALLAS, TEXAS

01-01-1900 FIRST LICENSE ISSUED

11-23-1953 FORMERLY: COMMONWEALTH CASUALTY AND INSURANCE COMPANY DALLAS, TEXAS

10-06-1964 REINSURED BY TEXAS JEFFERSON LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY

DALLAS, TEXAS C/A CANCELLED 11/09/1964

By the end of the 1850s life insurance sales again began to increase, climbing to almost $200 million by 1862 before tripling to just under $600 million by the end of the Civil War; life insurance in force peaked at $2 billion in 1871 [Figures 3 and 4]. Several factors contributed to this renewed success. First, the establishment of insurance departments in Massachusetts (1856) and New York (1859) to oversee the operation of fire, marine, and life insurance companies stimulated public confidence in the financial soundness of the industry. Additionally, in 1861 the Massachusetts legislature passed a non-forfeiture law, which forbade companies from terminating policies for lack of premium payment. Instead, the law stipulated that policies be converted to term life policies and that companies pay any death claims that occurred during this term period [term policies are issued only for a stipulated number of years, require reapplication on a regular basis, and consequently command significantly lower annual premiums which rise rapidly with age]. This law was further strengthened in 1880 when Massachusetts mandated that policyholders have the additional option of receiving a cash surrender value for a forfeited policy.

The Civil War was another factor in this resurgence. Although the industry had no experience with mortality during war – particularly a war on American soil – and most policies contained clauses that voided them in the case of military service, several major companies decided to ensure war risks for an additional premium rate of 2% to 5%. While most companies just about broke even on these soldiers’ policies, the goodwill and publicity engendered with the payment of each death claim combined with a generally heightened awareness of mortality to greatly increase interest in life insurance. In the immediate postbellum period, investment in most industries increased dramatically and life insurance was no exception. Whereas only 43 companies existed on the eve of the war, the newfound popularity of life insurance resulted in the establishment of 107 companies between 1865 and 1870 [Figure 1].

just a thought on this. I wonder how the profits go for a life insurance company while people feel secure? Perhaps strife and insecurity is more profitable?

(what, if any, were ties between kkk orother right wing organisations to the JLIC?)

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

New York Times, November 19, 1961, page 1

KENNEDY ASSERTS FAR-RIGHT GROUPS PROVOKE DISUNITY

Attacks Birch Society and 'Minutemen' at a Party Dinner in Los Angeles, Spread of Fear Scored, President Says Real Threat Comes From Without, Not Within.

by Tom Wicker

LOS ANGELES, Nov. 18-- President Kennedy spoke out tonight against the right-wing John Birch Society and the so-called Minutemen in a speech at a Democratic Party dinner here. The President mentioned neither group by name but left no doubt whom he meant.

[in Atlanta, Senator Barry Goldwater, Arizona Republican, attacked

the "radicals in the White House." At a news conference, he called

President Kennedy the "wagon master" who is "riding on the left

wheel all the time."]

The President, in his talk at the Hollywood Palladium, also made his first public response to Edward M. Dealey, publisher of the Dallas Morning News. Mr. Dealey attacked the President at a White House luncheon for "riding Caroline's tricycle" instead of being "a man on horseback."

Some 'Escape Responsibility'

"There have always been those fringes of our society who have sought to escape their own responsibility by finding a simple solution, an appealing slogan or a convenient scapegoat," Mr. Kennedy said. Now, he continued, "men who are unwilling to face up to the danger from without are convinced that the real danger comes from within. They look suspiciously at their neighbors and their leaders," he declared. "They call for a 'man on horseback' because they do not trust the people. They find treason in our finest churches, in our highest court, and even in the treatment of our water. They equate the Democratic Party with the welfare state, the welfare state with socialism, and socialism with communism. They object quite rightly to politics' intruding on the military -- but they are anxious for the military to engage in politics." ...

Mr. Kennedy chose a region in which the John Birch Society has some of its strongest support to make his third and sharpest attack on what he called tonight "the discordant voices of extremism." In the first two speeches, at Chapel Hill, N. C., and Seattle, he also warned against left-wing and pacifist extremists. His remarks tonight were directed to far-right groups and individuals.

The reference to "armed bands of civilian guerillas" appeared to be directed at the Minutemen, individual groups of which are being organized and armed in some parts of the country. The organization is reputed to be particularly strong in California.

Los Angeles is regarded as almost the heartland of the Birch Society. Two Republican Representatives from its urban districts, John H. Rousselot and Edgar W. Hiestland, are avowed members. ..."

from Buckley post well worth reading: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...indpost&p=42926

"The National Review’s first target was Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon. Buckley attacked what he saw was the administration’s concessions to communism and the welfare state. Buckley described Eisenhower program as “essentially one of measured socialism”."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Smoot Report, Buckley, and General Walker

The first conspiracy publicised was promoted by the JBS through Dan Smoots 'the Smoot Report'

It pointed to a conspiracy that pointed at the percieved enemies of the USA foreign communism, but not at the enemies that the Birchers were engaged with such as domestic liberals, civil rights activists. In this way they pointed away from a suggestion that they were involved.

DAN SMOOT

"In 1962, Dan Smoot's The Invisible Government exposed as fronts for international Bolshevism a number of policy groups. Democracy was teetering. Smoot had unearthed the enemies in our midst: the Committee for Economic Development, the Advertising Council, the Atlantic Council (formerly the Atlantic Union Committee), the Business Advisory Council and the Trilateral Commission. Smoot, incidentally, reported to FBI headquarters in Washington before he was bitten by the bug to publish his neo-fascist newsletter, The Dan Smoot Report. "Somewhere at the top of the pyramid in the invisible government," he wrote, "are a few sinister people who know exactly what they are doing: They want America to become part of a worldwide socialist dictatorship under the control of the Kremlin" (Political Research Associates).

The rabble rousing of Welch, Manion, Smoot and other Birch Society celebrities was understandably disturbing to some of the political targets of the abuse."

READERS DIGEST

Reader's Digest? The "funny little magazine" dredges up another directorate often linked to such groups - the CIA. In the Eisenhower period, propagandists on the Agency payroll were featured on a regular basis in the Digest, including Allen Dulles, Carl Rowan, James Burnham, Brian Crozier and Stewart Alsop. The magazine remains a glib tool of CIA propaganda.

"An exception to the public apathy that met Welch's cultic bund was William Kintner, a former CIA officer who castigated critics of the extreme right in the the May, 1962 issue of Reader's Digest. Kintner maintained that the "campaign" waged against radical right havens like the John Birch Society began when "dossiers in Moscow's espionage headquarters were combed for the names of unsuspecting persons in the United States who might do the Kremlin's work." Anyone maligning the home corporate-military state was therefore a suspected Soviet agent hawking "disinformation.""

"Hey, Hey, JFK - How Many Birchers Gunned You Down Today?"

But the Birch Society's ambitions went far beyond control of small-town politics. Members taking objection to Kennedy's Communist "appeasement" policies went so far as to plot the overthrow of the government.

In 1962, Dallas officials of the John Birch Society attended a meeting with H.L Hunt, General Edwin Walker, Robert Morris (leader of the Defenders of American Liberty, president of Plato University in New Jersey and former chief counsel for the U.S. Senate Internal Security Subcommittee), and Larrie Schmidt, a veteran of two tours of Army duty in Munich who idolized Hermann Goering. Back home, Schmidt, his head wheeling with Bircher propaganda disseminated by General Walker back in Germany, took a position at United Press International. He had made plans while stationed in the Rhineland to start an organization he called CUSA, short for "Conservatism U.S.A."

By the summer of 1962, Schmidt organized a platoon of zealots from the Military Police and Counter-Intelligence Corps. Look magazine (January 26, 1965) reported that Schmidt "trained a small, disciplined band of soldier-conspirators to follow him stateside and do, he hoped, 'whatever is necessary to accomplish our goal.'" Schmidt's coup plan called for infiltrating conservative organization around the country, and marshalling them to overthrow of the Kennedy government. The core of this seditious secret army was to be the first organization drawn into Schmidt's plan - Young Americans for Freedom, the Birch Society offshoot that boasted some 50,000 members - by arrangement with Heidelberg-born Major General Charles Willoughby, true name Weidenbach, a YAF founder,..."

RONALD REAGAN

"The name Kennedy irritated the colons of good Birchers everywhere. Ronald Reagan, president of the Screen Actors' Guild and FBI snitch, under secret contract with MCA management, emerging political star in Hollywood, was closer to the mark. After the 1964 presidential election, Democratic Party officials crafted a plan to take on right-wing extremists in the public arena, including one of Reagan's support groups, Citizens for Constitutional Action a "conservative" grassroots organization that had backed Goldwater in his presidential run and thereby splinter the Republicans.

As it happened, both Goldwater and the John Birch Society received lavish support from J. Howard Pew, owner of the Sun Oil Company (Colby and Dennett, The Will Be Done, HarperCollins, 1995, p. 453).

The Republicans countered with measures tailored to ensure party unity. Reagan was cautioned not to allow himself to be defined as either a moderate or conservative. "During one secret strategy meeting," Curt Gentry (in The Last Days of the Late, Great State of California Putnam's, 1968) wrote, "John Rousselot, national public relations director of the John Birch Society, approached Stuart Spencer with a coldly pragmatic offer: the society would be glad to endorse Reagan or denounce him, whichever would help most" (p. 125). When Reagan was sworn in as governor of California on January 2, 1967, he was congratulated by Robert Welch himself. Welch proudly proclaimed that the Birch Society was, "in large part," deserving of credit for Reagan's electoral victory.

JBS, BUCKLEY, and the NATIONAL REVIEW

"The Birch Society was founded in 1959 by Robert Welch. Welch attended the U.S. Naval Academy and studied law at Harvard for two years. He was vice president of the James O. Welch candy company in Cambridge, Massachusetts. He was also vice chairman of the Massachusetts Republican Party Finance Committee in 1948. Welch made an unsuccessful bid for the office of Lt. Governor in the 1950 Republican primary. He was a ranking director of the National Association of Manufacturers, the subject of many a rancorous essay by George Seldes, who found NAM, in the 1950s, to be a hive of reactionary corporate intrigues. His funding came primarily from Texas oil billionaire H.L. Hunt - a Texas oil "patriot" and the sponsor of a vitriolic right-wing radio program, Lifeline, that aired in 42 states - Pew's Sunoco, and NAM's corporate constituents

According to Welch, both the US and Soviet governments are controlled by the same furtive conspiratorial cabal of internationalists, greedy bankers and corrupt politicians. If left unexposed, the traitors inside the US government would betray the country's sovereignty to the United Nations for a collectivist new world order managed by a 'one-world socialist government.'"

This was the game, substituting "fascist" with "socialist," reversing the perceived polarity of corporatism. The Birch Society "incorporated many themes from pre-WWII rightist groups opposed to the New Deal, and had its base in the business nationalist sector."

... the National Review, in the early days indistinguishable from Birch Society propaganda. It was edited by William F. Buckley, a close friend of Welch's. In the first issue, released on November 19, 1955, Buckley printed a "Publisher's Statement" in which he declared war on "the Liberals who run the country," echoing the rhetoric of the Birch Society. The Review, Buckley boasted, "stands athwart history, yelling Stop!" "

" William F. Buckley advertised himself as an independent thinker, journalist and publisher. But documents declassified by the Assassination Records Review Board have debunked his profiling. In Watergate "Plumber" Howard Hunt's Office of Security file, Dan Hardway of the House Select Committee found a number of documents concerning William F. Buckley. He was not merely a CIA agent. Buckley was a ranking officer, stationed for a spell in Mexico City to direct covert operations. Thereafter, Buckley attempted to conceal his CIA rank with Hunt's assistance. Documents subpeoned by Congress note that some articles published by the National Review were in fact written by the CIA's E. Howard Hunt (for instance, a review of The Invisible Government, by David Wise, a book highly critical of the Agency). When Buckley left the CIA to publish National Review, he maintained a subdued relationship with Hunt. (Jim DiEugenio, "Dodd and Dulles vs. Kennedy in Africa," Probe, January-February 1999, Vol. 6, No. 2).

WALKER,JBS

http://alexconstantine.50megs.com/the_early_days.html

"General Edwin A. Walker resigned from the Army in November1961 after he was chastised by the Pentagon for distributing Birch Society propaganda to his troops. He was temporarily relieved of command, pending an investigation. Walker - a Bircher, also the head of Committee for the Defense of Christian Culture, a group with chapters in Bonn, Germany established by a Nazi - ultimately buffooned his way into a number of footnotes in Camelot history. Lee Harvey Oswald reportedly attempted to kill him, and the general once made a bid for governor but finished last in the 1962 Democratic runoff. Dick Russell recalls, "Late in September, 1962, the general made headlines around the world. James Meredith was seeking to become the first black ever admitted to the University of Mississippi. It was a landmark moment in the fight against racial segregation. Meredith's entry was mandated by a federal court order, and when Mississippi governor Ross Barnett set out to block it, Kennedy ordered National Guardsmen deployed on Meredith's behalf. That was when General Walker called for ten thousand civilians to march on Oxford, Mississippi, in opposition. Walker was on the scene when rioting erupted against four hundred federal marshals escorting Meredith onto the campus." Two people were killed in the melee, and 70 were wounded. The next morning, "Walker was arrested by federal authorities on four counts, including insurrection, and flown for psychiatric observation to the Medical Center for Federal Prisoners at Springfield, Missouri." The Liberty Lobby, another fascist front, hastened to General Walker's defense, and blamed the Kennedys for waging a campaign against Walker to "reduce his prestige" and "asset value to the anti-Communist cause" (p. 309).

Back in 1957, General Walker was actually credited with furthering the cause of racial integration after he led federal troops integrating the schools in Little Rock, Ark. Actually, Gen. Walker led the troops only after President Eisenhower refused his resignation, historian Don E. Carleton, author of Red Scare, told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. "He did not want to carry out that order," Mr. Carleton said. "He did not believe in racial integration" (General Walker obituary, AP release, November 2, 1993).

Walker flew the U.S. flag upside down to express his rage over the perceived "communist" leanings of Kennedy and other government officials, according to Darwin Payne, a former Dallas newspaper reporter. "He was not a good speaker. He was a poor campaigner and finished last in a field of six [in the gubernatorial race], which was a surprise because he had so many ardent followers in the right wing," Mr. Payne says (Walker obituary)."

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this post from another topic typifies the success of the conspiracy as I see it.

"The nuclear test ban treaty, rapprochement with Cuba, plans to circumvent the Federal Reserve, plans to scrap the oil depletion allowance, his planned timetable for the removal of personnel from Vietnam, his unfavorable disposition towards the CIA post BOP and lastly, the extremely unlucky position he occupied* are far more persuasive reasons for his assassination than Bobby's alleged dealings with the underworld and anti-Castro Cubans."

While the series of questions on the Politics forum were under way, I did an analysis of where interest lay. Roughly the order was Tax, Bible, Foreign Policy , with Tax far outweighing the other two. Now Bible has caught up but foreign policy is way down.

The USA in 1963 was a country undergoing big changes. Basically it was a nation divided. The one topic that roused people to violent action was the segregation - integration issue of the south, which is where Kennedy was assassinated!

Contrary to any evidence the Civil Rights activists were painted red. Sullivan et al sought to drive King to suicide, Walker called for armed insurrection, Activists were being murdered, Sullivan hinted at a hand in Malcolm Xs assassination. The threat to the established economic structure that had been in place for so long affected whole states. The atmosphere this created, combined with the 'red menace' myth, was more than sufficient to drive those affected to considering assassinating the President. The external issues provided a convenient focus for diverting the attention of investigators. It was, and is successful. The difference now is that records that were not in the immediate kennedy investigation are now being released. The assassins are dead. The intense need to maintain the castro-mob-anti castro myths are over. I think it is time for investigators to turn their attention to the truth known instinctively by those involved back in the beginning and stop being puppets to the smoke screen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, the news of the death of Rosa Parks this week brings home once again just how divisive the issue of civil rights was in the US. To blacks, to those who sympathized with the cause of civil rights, Rosa Parks' refusal to give up her seat on a bus to a white man was in many ways just as important as Brown vs, Board of Education. Rosa Parks' actions led to a 381-day boycott of the Montgomery bus lines by blacks...and since the bus-riding population of Montgomery was estimated at 75% black, according to an estimate in one news article I read, the economic impact on the transit system was fairly severe.

But on the other side of the coin, for those of the conservative persuasion, Rosa Parks' action wasn't portrayed in terms of standing up for a higher cause. In the eyes of the right wingers, it was simple asnd straightforward: there was a law requiring blacks to surrender their seats to whites when asked [or told] to do so, and ROSA PARKS WAS A LAWBREAKER. The US was [is] a nation based upon the rule of law, and for justice to prevail, in the eyes of the right-wingers, the guilty must pay for their crimes. So Rosa Parks went to jail, and was fined $10.

The credo of the right-winger is, if the law is wrong, you don't BREAK the law, you go through the appropriate channels and CHANGE the law. But in 1955, most blacks were denied the right to vote in the South. Their ability to change laws that discriminated against them hinged entirely upon the benevolence of the white majority. And, as the governors of Alabama and Georgia and Mississippi and other segregationist strongholds demonstrated, the fountains of human kindness simply didn't flow that far. So the right-wing Americans outside the South saw the struggle as one not so much of segregation vs. integration, but of enforcing the law vs. breaking the law, and while they might have mouthed the words that they were against the idea of segregation, they were for law-and-order, and thus supported the means by which segregation was enforced. If I understand him correctly this is the background from which Mr. Gratz comes.

So the issue of civil rights in the 1960's wasn't quite as clear-cut as it seems looking back. The segregationists had 300 years of history, as well as the law, on their side. To the folks who participated in nonviolent protests, who marched, who refused to give up their seats on the busses, it was a matter of refusing to accept status as second-class citizens in an allegedly classless society, one whose founders had declared nearly two hundred years before that "all men are created equal." It was quite a gaping chasm is US society, one that nearly led to another civil war in 1962. Its importance in the history leading up to the events of November 22, 1963 should not be diminished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, the news of the death of Rosa Parks this week brings home once again just how divisive the issue of civil rights was in the US. To blacks, to those who sympathized with the cause of civil rights, Rosa Parks' refusal to give up her seat on a bus to a white man was in many ways just as important as Brown vs, Board of Education. Rosa Parks' actions led to a 381-day boycott of the Montgomery bus lines by blacks...and since the bus-riding population of Montgomery was estimated at 75% black, according to an estimate in one news article I read, the economic impact on the transit system was fairly severe.

But on the other side of the coin, for those of the conservative persuasion, Rosa Parks' action wasn't portrayed in terms of standing up for a higher cause. In the eyes of the right wingers, it was simple asnd straightforward: there was a law requiring blacks to surrender their seats to whites when asked [or told] to do so, and ROSA PARKS WAS A LAWBREAKER. The US was [is] a nation based upon the rule of law, and for justice to prevail, in the eyes of the right-wingers, the guilty must pay for their crimes. So Rosa Parks went to jail, and was fined $10.

The credo of the right-winger is, if the law is wrong, you don't BREAK the law, you go through the appropriate channels and CHANGE the law. But in 1955, most blacks were denied the right to vote in the South. Their ability to change laws that discriminated against them hinged entirely upon the benevolence of the white majority. And, as the governors of Alabama and Georgia and Mississippi and other segregationist strongholds demonstrated, the fountains of human kindness simply didn't flow that far. So the right-wing Americans outside the South saw the struggle as one not so much of segregation vs. integration, but of enforcing the law vs. breaking the law, and while they might have mouthed the words that they were against the idea of segregation, they were for law-and-order, and thus supported the means by which segregation was enforced. If I understand him correctly this is the background from which Mr. Gratz comes.

So the issue of civil rights in the 1960's wasn't quite as clear-cut as it seems looking back. The segregationists had 300 years of history, as well as the law, on their side. To the folks who participated in nonviolent protests, who marched, who refused to give up their seats on the busses, it was a matter of refusing to accept status as second-class citizens in an allegedly classless society, one whose founders had declared nearly two hundred years before that "all men are created equal." It was quite a gaping chasm is US society, one that nearly led to another civil war in 1962. Its importance in the history leading up to the events of November 22, 1963 should not be diminished.

________________________________________________________________________________

____

Its importance in the history leading up to the events of November 22, 1963 should not be diminished.

________________________________________________________________________________

______

And, as stated, such "Far/Far/Far--Right" organizations such as "FOR AMERICA" should be fullly investigated.

Especially when they operate out of the same bldg. in which LHO received financial aid upon his return from the Soviet Union.

Especially when one of the "Registered Agents" is an attorney from New Orleans, Louisiana who happens to be his Uncle.

Especially when another of the "Registered Agents" is is fact a partner with the above referenced Uncle of LHO, and who also happens to be the "Mr. Dunbar" representative of United Fruit from whom and attempt was made to raise 1 million dollars to overthrow the government of Guatemala.

Right-wing "Racism" and Right-wing "Politics" can often create a "common carrier".

Tom

P.S. The "Sumter" as in "Marks" is of course the common family name from the pride of "Ft. Sumter, SC", where General P.G.T. Beauregard of Louisiana expelled the Yankees.

And of course, the "Dunbar" is a direct descendent ot the sister of General P.G.T. Beauregard.

And the "Claverie" had a sister who married a Beauregard, thus giving LHO a distant cousin with this famous last name.

And of course the "Marks" had other descendents named "Malvern" Marks, named after the first of the line of the Marks family to fall at the early Civil War engagement "Battle of Malvern Hill". (Henry Clay Marks, Commanding Officer, Company "B", 10th Louisiana Infantry)

And lastly, the last of the family named "Malvern Marks" (Henry Malvern Marks) also resided in Ft. Worth, TX until his death in 1986.

Other than those items, (and a few others which encompass George DeMohrenschildt & William Pawley), I see no reason to consider "extremism" in politics or race relations as a potential motive in the assassination of JFK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, the news of the death of Rosa Parks this week brings home once again just how divisive the issue of civil rights was in the US. To blacks, to those who sympathized with the cause of civil rights, Rosa Parks' refusal to give up her seat on a bus to a white man was in many ways just as important as Brown vs, Board of Education. Rosa Parks' actions led to a 381-day boycott of the Montgomery bus lines by blacks...and since the bus-riding population of Montgomery was estimated at 75% black, according to an estimate in one news article I read, the economic impact on the transit system was fairly severe.

But on the other side of the coin, for those of the conservative persuasion, Rosa Parks' action wasn't portrayed in terms of standing up for a higher cause. In the eyes of the right wingers, it was simple asnd straightforward: there was a law requiring blacks to surrender their seats to whites when asked [or told] to do so, and ROSA PARKS WAS A LAWBREAKER. The US was [is] a nation based upon the rule of law, and for justice to prevail, in the eyes of the right-wingers, the guilty must pay for their crimes. So Rosa Parks went to jail, and was fined $10.

The credo of the right-winger is, if the law is wrong, you don't BREAK the law, you go through the appropriate channels and CHANGE the law. But in 1955, most blacks were denied the right to vote in the South. Their ability to change laws that discriminated against them hinged entirely upon the benevolence of the white majority. And, as the governors of Alabama and Georgia and Mississippi and other segregationist strongholds demonstrated, the fountains of human kindness simply didn't flow that far. So the right-wing Americans outside the South saw the struggle as one not so much of segregation vs. integration, but of enforcing the law vs. breaking the law, and while they might have mouthed the words that they were against the idea of segregation, they were for law-and-order, and thus supported the means by which segregation was enforced. If I understand him correctly this is the background from which Mr. Gratz comes.

So the issue of civil rights in the 1960's wasn't quite as clear-cut as it seems looking back. The segregationists had 300 years of history, as well as the law, on their side. To the folks who participated in nonviolent protests, who marched, who refused to give up their seats on the busses, it was a matter of refusing to accept status as second-class citizens in an allegedly classless society, one whose founders had declared nearly two hundred years before that "all men are created equal." It was quite a gaping chasm is US society, one that nearly led to another civil war in 1962. Its importance in the history leading up to the events of November 22, 1963 should not be diminished.

Mark, the segregationists did indeed use the law to the fullest to stop integration. Quite apart from the OVERT use of the courts to thwart integrationists in a lot of very imaginative ways (for example Tulane University in the end argued that it was a person and therefore not bound by federal laws demanding non-discrimination) Whether this, or Walkers capitalising on the oxford insurrection, is morally lawful is another question.

COVERTLY the Law in the guise of highway patrolmen, Sheriffs, FBI agents and SISS et al used any means at hand to control the negroes, by murder, economic subversion, turning a blind eye, etc.

This Lawlessness by Law enforcement bodies was apparent to many, but it went on nevertheless. It had a history, and an economic raison d'etre. Sad but true. Rosa and people like her, by assuming rights that many took for granted brought things to a head. At the heart of many of these issues is the economic relationships. A controlled low waged negro doesn't pressure the wages of the low paid white, and provides a pool of labor for the wealthy for the more menial tasks. Divide and rule rules...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

________________________________________________________________________________

____

Its importance in the history leading up to the events of November 22, 1963 should not be diminished.

________________________________________________________________________________

______

And, as stated, such "Far/Far/Far--Right" organizations such as "FOR AMERICA" should be fullly investigated.

Especially when they operate out of the same bldg. in which LHO received financial aid upon his return from the Soviet Union.

Especially when one of the "Registered Agents" is an attorney from New Orleans, Louisiana who happens to be his Uncle.

Especially when another of the "Registered Agents" is is fact a partner with the above referenced Uncle of LHO, and who also happens to be the "Mr. Dunbar" representative of United Fruit from whom and attempt was made to raise 1 million dollars to overthrow the government of Guatemala.

Right-wing "Racism" and Right-wing "Politics" can often create a "common carrier".

Tom

P.S. The "Sumter" as in "Marks" is of course the common family name from the pride of "Ft. Sumter, SC", where General P.G.T. Beauregard of Louisiana expelled the Yankees.

And of course, the "Dunbar" is a direct descendent ot the sister of General P.G.T. Beauregard.

And the "Claverie" had a sister who married a Beauregard, thus giving LHO a distant cousin with this famous last name.

And of course the "Marks" had other descendents named "Malvern" Marks, named after the first of the line of the Marks family to fall at the early Civil War engagement "Battle of Malvern Hill". (Henry Clay Marks, Commanding Officer, Company "B", 10th Louisiana Infantry)

And lastly, the last of the family named "Malvern Marks" (Henry Malvern Marks) also resided in Ft. Worth, TX until his death in 1986.

Other than those items, (and a few others which encompass George DeMohrenschildt & William Pawley), I see no reason to consider "extremism" in politics or race relations as a potential motive in the assassination of JFK.

I see Walker as a 'hot warrior' whom no-one had told the war was over, he simply latched on to the MacCarthy message and soldiered on.

It wasn't over with the Kennedy assassination. In a letter* to William Manchester on June 9 1967, Walker warns that he wants nothing to do with the Kennedys. He describes the Kennedy presidency as 'the administration of the two Kennedys'. An indication that he was not as intellectually impaired as he might have been portrayed by others is indicated by the overall structure of the letter. What stands out more is a kind of obsession regarding distancing himself from any incriminating suggestions re 'The Death of a President'.

Note that RFK had been assassinated 4 days previously!

In the letter Walker writes '...Robert F. Kennedy, who was the U.S. Attorney General and is now Senator,...'

Lining up for a plea of insanity??

(*Dallas City archives.)

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

THE DISMISSAL OF MAJ. GEN. EDWIN A. WALKER - A Special Report by Congressman Morris K. Udall

So many of you have written me regarding the dismissal of Maj. Gen. Edwin A. Walker that I have decided to write this report as a partial answer to your questions.

As you know, Gen. Walker was commander of the 24th Infantry Division in West Germany last April, when charges were made that his troop education and indoctrination program was following the pattern of the right-wing John Birch Society. He subsequently was relieved of his command following an Army investigation. Since then charges have been made that Gen. Walker was disciplined because he was a zealous anti-Communist.

Considerable light now has been shed on this case. During the week of September 3-9 Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee and answered the questions of Senator Strom Thurmond and other critics of the Army action. From his testimony and the subsequent release of the 973-page transcript of the Army's hearings on the case it now becomes clear that Gen. Walker was dismissed, not because he was a zealous anti-Communist, but because he engaged in political activity.

Two facts stand out: first that Gen. Walker advised his troops and their families to consult the so-called "A.C.A. Index" before voting in congressional elections last fall, and second, that Gen. Walker pleaded the military equivalent of the Fifth Amendment (Article 31 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice) when questioned about this. This article, like the Fifth Amendment, may be invoked when one believes his own testimony might "tend to incriminate" him.

For your information, the "A.C.A. Index" is a voting guide published by one particular faction on the American political scene. It can lay no more claim to infallibility or correctness than the "A.D.A. Index", published by the opposite extreme of the political spectrum. For Gen. Walker to urge his troops and their families to consult this guide before voting was to engage in overt political activity in clear violation of the spirit of the Hatch Act, which prohibits government personnel from participating in politics other than voting.

There were other points brought out, as well. For example, the testimony revealed that Gen. Walker is a member of the John Birch Society, an organization whose leader says former President Eisenhower, John Foster Dulles, Allen Dulles and other high officials of our government have been Communist dupes. Also, it was revealed that Gen. Walker made public statements which were derogatory of other present and former officials of our government. Such statements, of course, are wholly out of keeping for a military officer.

Three days before he left office last January former President Eisenhower said in a nation-wide television address, "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist." I believe Mr. Eisenhower's warning is pertinent to this situation. In the course of our history we have always maintained civilian control of our government by elected officials responsible to the electorate. I firmly believe that this must continue.

Everyone will agree, I think, on two propositions: 1) that military leaders have a right and duty to indoctrinate their troops in broad, basic principles of American history and government so they will know why they are asked to serve their country and fight for it if necessary, and 2) that military leaders have absolutely no business taking any part in political campaigns or seeking to influence their troops in matters which are partisan or political. One need only look at some of the South American and Asian nations to see that real democracy and liberty are missing when military leaders participate in elections or political decisions.

A non-political military establishment is one of the most vital, indispensable ingredients of the kind of democracy which distinguishes the United States, Britain and other nations of the free world.

This whole thing can be seen in true focus, I believe, if we suppose for a moment that the situation had been reversed. Imagine that Gen. Walker had called his troops together to "indoctrinate" them on Americanism. Suppose he had advised them that our country was in great danger of losing the cold war to the Communists, and that we could strengthen our nation for the future only if we had more federal aid to education, more urban renewal to eliminate crime and poverty in the cities, larger aid for undeveloped countries, etc. These are views which have been expressed by President Kennedy, ex-President Eisenhower and other Americans whose sincerity and patriotism cannot be questioned. Had this been the case, I think you would have joined me in expressing outrage at such military interference in these political questions. Yet, if what Gen. Walker did is right, another commander holding the views I have mentioned could properly "indoctrinate" his troops along those lines. On the basis of the facts presented I think there can be no doubt that the reprimand given Gen. Walker was warranted.

The above is from the University of Arizona Library Special Collections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this topic is turning up a number of interesting links. Tha M.A.D. topic reveals Walkers finger in the 'thought police' pie.

_________________________________

Through looking at the 'Caddy' topic a link to a Clyde Watts appears

"In 1963, Soule was chairman of the 12th Annual National Congress of Freedom. (Who's Who in the South and Southwest 1963 - 1964) General Walker's lawyer, Clyde Watts, was a speaker at this event. (NOTP; April 7, 1963). J. A. Milteer was also in attendance. (Weisberg; Frame-Up; p481)"

through this we have a link to Bannister, Martin, Hunt, Eastland, Milteer etc

_________________________________

In 1961: (from MAD files, link in MAD topic)

A Brigadier General C. J. Watts according to a Bufile from W.C. Sullivan notes General Watts being sued by MAD comics because he alledgedly made a statement that MAD helps the communist cause. Watts had sought out Sullivan in order to try to get help, specifically to see if a Matt Cvetic, or a Herbert Philbrick of the Communist Party could help.

Watts sought out Sullivan again, and Sullivan instructed SA Teague to deal with him. General Watts is the lawyer for General Walker of the appropriately named law offices of "Looney, Watts, Looney, Nichols & Johnson" of Oklahoma City.

__________________________________

Walker reported being shot at in april 63.

(Dallas City archives)

In June 1963 Walker apparently had no reason to consider Oswald as a suspect in trying to assassinate him, he was however involved in trying to set up a mr Duff in an attempt. In the dallas archives a document outlines how special investigators under instructions from General Watts from Oklahoma, came to Dallas to befriend Duff and arrange an attempt on Walker. So Walker was involved in plots against himself, and at that time did not appear to have knowledge of Oswald. Duff contacted Hosty who dealt with it.

__________________________________

Other documents from the MAD files indicate a flurry of letters that involved Sullivan and DeLoach.

__________________________________

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

this topic is turning up a number of interesting links. Tha M.A.D. topic reveals Walkers finger in the 'thought police' pie.

_________________________________

Through looking at the 'Caddy' topic a link to a Clyde Watts appears

"In 1963, Soule was chairman of the 12th Annual National Congress of Freedom. (Who's Who in the South and Southwest 1963 - 1964) General Walker's lawyer, Clyde Watts, was a speaker at this event. (NOTP; April 7, 1963). J. A. Milteer was also in attendance. (Weisberg; Frame-Up; p481)"

through this we have a link to Bannister, Martin, Hunt, Eastland, Milteer etc

_________________________________

In 1961: (from MAD files, link in MAD topic)

A Brigadier General C. J. Watts according to a Bufile from W.C. Sullivan notes General Watts being sued by MAD comics because he alledgedly made a statement that MAD helps the communist cause. Watts had sought out Sullivan in order to try to get help, specifically to see if a Matt Cvetic, or a Herbert Philbrick of the Communist Party could help.

Watts sought out Sullivan again, and Sullivan instructed SA Teague to deal with him. General Watts is the lawyer for General Walker of the appropriately named law offices of "Looney, Watts, Looney, Nichols & Johnson" of Oklahoma City.

__________________________________

Walker reported being shot at in april 63.

(Dallas City archives)

In June 1963 Walker apparently had no reason to consider Oswald as a suspect in trying to assassinate him, he was however involved in trying to set up a mr Duff in an attempt. In the dallas archives a document outlines how special investigators under instructions from General Watts from Oklahoma, came to Dallas to befriend Duff and arrange an attempt on Walker. So Walker was involved in plots against himself, and at that time did not appear to have knowledge of Oswald. Duff contacted Hosty who dealt with it.

__________________________________

Other documents from the MAD files indicate a flurry of letters that involved Sullivan and DeLoach.

__________________________________

Of course the fact that the one issue that people were regularly being assassinated for in the USA in the late 50s and early 60s, civil rights. Plus the fact that some of the direct connection to these assorted theories, such as Bannister, Walker, HL Hunt, the FBI, Byrd, and others, also have documented links to the anti segregation actions. Plus the fact that Walker held a deep contempt and resentment to the two Kennedys. Plus the fact that Kennedy was assassinated in the heart of the south. Plus the fact that main players instinctively thought 'civil rights'. Plus the fact that Walker led an armed insurrection against the Kennedy government aided by former FBI agents and other Law officers. Plus the fact that one of the people who profited by this was General Walker to the tune of millions of dollars.

And to my mind, most telling : Plus the fact that it is one of the only real issues of the times consistently ignored from within a few months of the assassination until today, the diversion of attention being LED by the JBS, Dan Smoot and General Walker. The reserch community willingly herded away by judicious leaks, stories, books, media reports, etc.

Of course this is all just circumstantial, unimportant and... er well.?? Un fashionable?

The good thing about it is that nowhere as much attention has lately been spent in disfiguring this information as that spent on the cuba, mafia, lone nut etc etc, and with the surge in interest and release of bodies of evidence such as the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission files (within which are documents linking bannister, Eastland, Walker FBI and others.) now is the time to revisit this side of things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

"A League of Their Own:

A Look Inside the Christian Defense League

By D. Boylan

The United States during the 1950s experienced an unparalleled growth of extremist organizations from the John Birch Society on the right to the Fair Play for Cuba Committee on the left. The heating up of the Cold War, the Supreme Court's decision to end segregation in 1954, and the establishment of a Communist Cuba in 1959 spurred this growth. One of the lesser known but more influential right wing fringe organizations that were formed during this period was the Christian Defense League (CDL). The CDL managed to meld anti-communism, anti-Semitism, anti-Castro activities, and a hatred of the "liberal" policies of the Kennedy Administration into a cohesive whole. It is in this context that the CDL will be examined.

The driving forces behind the rise of the CDL were Reverend Wesley A. Swift and Colonel William Potter Gale. It seemed inevitable that they would gravitate toward each other. Their religious beliefs were similar: both were adherents of what is now called Christian Identity, an updated version of the earlier British Israelite Movement that originated in the late nineteenth century. Christian Identity adherents believe that those of Celtic, Anglo-Saxon, Nordic, or Aryan origin were the true Israelites, "the sons of Adam", and that those of Jewish origin were "the sons of Satan."

The origin of the Christian Defense League is clouded. Some accounts credit its founding to the Reverend Swift, while Colonel Gale gives credit to Reverend San Jacinto Capt. Capt, a Baptist minister, was one of the early pioneers in the Identity Movement. Gale says "the idea of the Christian Defense League was entirely that of Reverend San Jacinto Capt. He proposed it to me [Col. Gale] who prepared the initial material in the form of a letter entitled, "The NAACP represents the negro; the ADL represents the Jews; who represents YOU — the white Christian?" "

--------------------

"The first indication that the Swift/Gale complex was interested in more than preaching religion came from George Harding in April 1963 when he informed the FBI that he was being recruited to become part of an eight man team to assassinate three hundred public officials in high positions of government. According to WCD 39 and WCD 1107 "Harding claimed that the leaders in the group were Dr. Wesley Swift, James Shoup and others.... The second in command was a Colonel William Gale...who was supposed to have been the youngest intelligence officer under MCARTHUR (sic)."

A related incident also occurred that April. Los Angeles physician Dr. Stanley Drennan approached Captain Robert K. Brown, who was also involved in anti-Castro activities during this period, stated that "while at Drennan's home, Drennan stated in general conversation that he could not do it, but what the organization needed was a group of young men to get rid of Kennedy and the Cabinet…Brown stated that he considered the remark crackpot; however …he gained the impression that Drennan had been propositioning him on this matter. Drennan, a member of the National States Rights Party and associate of William Gale." Drennan complained in a letter to Dean Clarence Manion, a prominent member of the John Birch Society, that on June 10, 1963 two Secret Service agents visited two of his friends at 7:30 am to inquire about his "patriotism, integrity, dependability, and emotional and mental stability. These people were twenty miles East of my dwelling while I was only two miles from where the President was riding in an open convertible sitting high on the back of the seat."

The Secret Service and FBI generated another report in August 1963 by the arrest of Gale's associate George King, Jr. King was overheard discussing the possibility of assassinating the president and was later arrested that month for the sale of illegal firearms. A later FBI field report, CO2-26104 #6419, stated "King is extreme right wing, hates Jews, was arrested by ATF O'Neil for illegal possession of firearms. Emotionally unstable. Arrested 2-29-68 again. This time for CCU, John Bircher, Christian Def. League (sic), Am Nazi Party, Christian Defense League."

There was yet another pre-assassination report (November 15, 1963) of a plot to assassinate "the President and other high-level officials" by a "militant group of the National States Rights Party." The FBI dismissed the report because they felt the subject was trying to make a deal because of pending criminal charges. This was not the well-documented November 9, 1963 report of Joseph A. Milteer's accurate prediction that Kennedy would be shot "from an office building with a high powered rifle." Milteer was also a member of the NSRP and ran for governor of Georgia on the Constitution Party ticket the same year that William Gale switched from the Constitution Party to the Republican Party to run for governor of California.

Evidence suggests that Gale and Milteer were acquainted. Both attended the gathering of the Constitution Party in Indianapolis, Indiana during October 18-20, 1963. Also in attendance were notable right wing extremists General Pedro Del Valle, Curtis Dall of the Liberty Lobby, Colonel Arch Roberts who was the architect of General Edwin Walker's "Pro Blue" program in the military, Richard Cotten, editor of The Conservative Viewpoint, Jack Brown, Klan leader James Venable[28], and Kenneth Goff, Constitution Party Committee member and leader of the paramilitary group Soldiers of the Cross, a Minutemen affiliate. Goff wrote an article for The White Sentinel, that Oswald "called me, before a meeting in a Dallas hotel about a year ago (December 1962) he poured out his pro-Communist venom….His Red record was no secret to those fighting Communism in the Texas area.""

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A curiosity: am just watching Letterman interviewing Woody Harrelson talking about his life and a book he is part of called 'Go Further' reminds me of an earlier post of mine about Jack Cassady and a drive from the south to cali.. Cassidy was a driver of 'the Bus' of the 'Merry Paranksters'. The bus name was 'Further'. The Merry Paranksters and Grateful dead, Ginsberg and others were involved in LSD use (koolaid acid tests) and counter culture living to a large extent aimed at exploring reality by ODing by 'sensory exhaustion'. This was a time also of MKULTRA and legal acid.

Guthrie, Keourac, Dylan, Ginsberg, Cassady, the beats, the hippies etc seems to have been a thing for the white youth to 'indulge' in. With Woody Harrelsons current life in Maui (solar power, grow your own, october fests and amsterdam) seems to be living a wealthy version of the Hobo..... Tramp?

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...