Walker letter writing campaign

[Greg Parker]

edit

Edited November 2, 2012 by Greg Parker

[Lee Forman]

Hi Greg.

Maybe you saw this before...some is clearly his take on it. As per Sam Pate, the handbills had started prior to Kennedy's arrival. It would be interesting to see one.

- lee

http://www.psychohistory.com/htm/eln01_leader.html

Americans from all parties were furious with Kennedy for various pretexts. Many began calling for a new Cuban invasion, agreeing with Barry Goldwater's demand that Kennedy "do anything that needs to be done to get rid of that cancer. If it means war, let it mean war."20 Kennedy was accused of being soft on Communism for living up to his no-invasion pledge to the Soviets, and when he then proposed signing a Limited Nuclear Test Ban Treaty with them, his popularity dropped even further.21

The nation's columnists expressed their fury towards the president, and America felt death wishes toward Kennedy for not starting a war with Cuba

political cartoonists pictured Kennedy with his head being chopped off by a guillotine (above). Richard Nixon warned, "There'll be...blood spilled before [the election is] over,"22 and a cartoon in The Washington Post portrayed Nixon digging a grave. Many editorialists were even more blunt. The Delaware State News editorialized: "Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus. His name right now happens to be Kennedy let's shoot him, literally, before Christmas."23 Potential assassins all over the country-psychopaths who are always around looking for permission to kill-saw all these media death wishes as signals, as delegations to carry out a necessary task, and began to pick up these fantasies as permission to kill Kennedy.24

Kennedy's aides warned him of an increase in the number of death threats toward him. His trip to Dallas, known as the "hate capital of Dixie," was seen as particularly dangerous. His aides begged him to cancel his trip. Senator J. William Fulbright told him, "Dallas is a very dangerous place...I wouldn't go there. Don't you go."25 Vice President Lyndon Johnson, writing the opening lines of the speech he intended to make in Austin after the Dallas visit, planned to open with: "Mr. President, thank God you made it out of Dallas alive!"26 Dallas judges and leading citizens warned the President he should not come to the city because of the danger of assassination. The day before the assassination, as handbills were passed out in Dallas with Kennedy's picture under the headline "Wanted For Treason," militants of the John Birch Society and other violent groups flooded into Dallas, and hundreds of reporters flew in from all over the country, alerted that something might happen to the president.27

[Harry J.Dean]

Hi Greg.

Maybe you saw this before...some is clearly his take on it. As per Sam Pate, the handbills had started prior to Kennedy's arrival. It would be interesting to see one.

- lee

http://www.psychohistory.com/htm/eln01_leader.html

Americans from all parties were furious with Kennedy for various pretexts. Many began calling for a new Cuban invasion, agreeing with Barry Goldwater's demand that Kennedy "do anything that needs to be done to get rid of that cancer. If it means war, let it mean war."20 Kennedy was accused of being soft on Communism for living up to his no-invasion pledge to the Soviets, and when he then proposed signing a Limited Nuclear Test Ban Treaty with them, his popularity dropped even further.21

The nation's columnists expressed their fury towards the president, and America felt death wishes toward Kennedy for not starting a war with Cuba

political cartoonists pictured Kennedy with his head being chopped off by a guillotine (above). Richard Nixon warned, "There'll be...blood spilled before [the election is] over,"22 and a cartoon in The Washington Post portrayed Nixon digging a grave. Many editorialists were even more blunt. The Delaware State News editorialized: "Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus. His name right now happens to be Kennedy let's shoot him, literally, before Christmas."23 Potential assassins all over the country-psychopaths who are always around looking for permission to kill-saw all these media death wishes as signals, as delegations to carry out a necessary task, and began to pick up these fantasies as permission to kill Kennedy.24

Kennedy's aides warned him of an increase in the number of death threats toward him. His trip to Dallas, known as the "hate capital of Dixie," was seen as particularly dangerous. His aides begged him to cancel his trip. Senator J. William Fulbright told him, "Dallas is a very dangerous place...I wouldn't go there. Don't you go."25 Vice President Lyndon Johnson, writing the opening lines of the speech he intended to make in Austin after the Dallas visit, planned to open with: "Mr. President, thank God you made it out of Dallas alive!"26 Dallas judges and leading citizens warned the President he should not come to the city because of the danger of assassination. The day before the assassination, as handbills were passed out in Dallas with Kennedy's picture under the headline "Wanted For Treason," militants of the John Birch Society and other violent groups flooded into Dallas, and hundreds of reporters flew in from all over the country, alerted that something might happen to the president.27

Lee

Lloyd de Mause and class has it right, everyone should read his " The Emotional Life Of Nations " that

you have refered to above. Thats the way things were, and was the free-wheeling drive of all my

former former associates explained in my writing.

My manuscript/book has pic's of the handbills certainly others must have copies.

Harry

[Jim Root]

Greg

Very interesting!

Before I comment further I was wondering if you had a copy of "The Oveaseas Weekly" weekly article that "uncovered" General Walker's indoctrination of his troops?

The article itself has eluded me and (although it has been several years since I last tried to find a copy of the original) my interest is once again peaked by your post. Your letter written by Mary Helen Bregel is of specific interest to some of my beliefs about an Oswald Walker connection.

Jim Root

[Greg Parker]

edit

Edited October 27, 2012 by Greg Parker

[Greg Parker]

Greg

Very interesting!

Before I comment further I was wondering if you had a copy of "The Oveaseas Weekly" weekly article that "uncovered" General Walker's indoctrination of his troops?

The article itself has eluded me and (although it has been several years since I last tried to find a copy of the original) my interest is once again peaked by your post. Your letter written by Mary Helen Bregel is of specific interest to some of my beliefs about an Oswald Walker connection.

Jim Root

Sorry Jim, I don't have it.

I take it from your "" around uncovered that you believe this was all part of an operation involving Walker?

The Overseas Weekly started in 1950 and had a history from the start of exposing the misdeeds of top brass. It was even banned from sale on bases at one time, but succeeded in having that overturned.

It was started by Marion Rospach, her former husband, Cecil von Rosbach, who worked for the State Dept in Munich, and a few former GIs. At the time of the Walker story, Marion was the only one still with the paper.

The company they formed was called The International Media Co... which they incorporated in Delaware. We all know about Delaware corporations, I hope.

After the paper started to make money, the International Media Co started two other publications, The Overseas Family and The Overseas Traveler, as well as branching out into color photo processing and an importing firm.

[Steve Thomas]

Jim,

Greg

Very interesting!

Before I comment further I was wondering if you had a copy of "The Oveaseas Weekly" weekly article that "uncovered" General Walker's indoctrination of his troops?

If you go to this newspaper archive:

http://www.kennedyassassinationarchive.com/Default.aspx

Click on the advanced search tab and type in Overseas Weekly, you'll pull up a number of entries.

I haven't run across the article itself yet, but a number of papers quote from it.

One said that the Overseas Weekly article was published April 12, 1961.

Steve Thomas

[Jim Root]

Steve

The April 12, 1961 date conincides with the date that I have. I have heard that a copy of the article exists in the files of the Socialist Party headquarters that was located in New York but have been unable to get a physical copy. This thread has prompted me to renew my efforts. Will see if they prove successful.

From the Warren Commission report:

"After receiving the first letter postmarked February 5, (1961) the Embassy on February 28 forwarded a despatch to the Department informing it of Oswald's letter and its reply to Oswald. At that time, the Embassy also inquired of the Department whether Oswald would be subject to prosecution on any grounds if he should return to the United States and, if so, whether Oswald should be so informed. The Department was also asked whether there was any objection to returning Oswald's"

Oswald makes reference to a December letter to the US Embassy in Moscow. No record of that letter has ever been found.

We have about nine weeks from the "official" letter that Oswald wrote requesting he be allowed to return to the US and the Overseas Weekly article. This is either coincidence or something to be considered when examining the future accusations made by the Warren Commission dealing with the assassination attempt on the life of Walker.

What is a fact is that the Overseas Weekly article follows, to a rather exact degree, Oswald's earliest attempts to return to the United States and that Oswald would be (at a minimum) accused of attempting to assassinate General Walker after the assassination of JFK.

For myself the inability of the CIA to identify how Oswald traveled from London to Helsinki plays into this story as well because Walker was traveling in Europe at the same time. The information that Antti Hynonen gathered from the archives of FinnAir show that Oswald very well could have taken an alternate route (that matches the potential Walker routes) from London to Helsinki that would have allowed him to arrive in Helsinki on the same plane that other London passengers would have arrived on. The interest here is (as Chris Mills said in 1993) was there a person of signifigance on the plane with Oswald?

The use of NSA"s Meredith Gardner and Frank Rowlett, who were both associates of John B. Hurt (Raleigh Call?), to investigate possible Oswald links to intelligence (to me) points towards an intelligence operation that may have been orchestrated at the highest levels of government designed to insert Oswald into the Soviet Union. If Walker played a roll in this insertion we have an interesting relationship that continues right up to the day after the assassination of John F. Kennedy (Walker interview with Deutsch National und Soldaten-Seitung) that should not be ignored.

Within this scheme, the return of Lee Harvey Oswald from the Soviet Union would have created havoc within the intelligence community but a havoc known only to those at the top on=f the intelligence pile. If so the sacrifice of General Edwin Walker (to the "right wing movement) would have been necessary to protect and to provide plausible deniability to the potentially embarassing revelations that Oswald might be able to divulge. At the same time Oswald's movements, upon his return would need to be monitored at the highest levels of intelligence (which they were, see Jefferson Morley's article, What Jane Roman Said)

http://www.history-matters.com/essays/fram...RomanSaid_1.htm

While this began as speculation on my part, the facts that I have gathered over the years continue to support this thesis. The letter from Mary Helen Bregel would serve to help build the legend of Walker the "Right Wing Nut" even before Oswald arrived back in the United States. That Oswald could later be tied to persons associated with Mary Helen Bregel is another coincidence that can support and easily be accounted for within this scenario.

Jim Root

[Greg Parker]

edit

Edited October 27, 2012 by Greg Parker

[William O'Neil]

One of the great (As yet) untold stories, is that of the many right- wing women in and around people like Walker, Banister, and the Hunt's, Mary Helen Brengal was one of them, tho she came to her senses and turned on them in the end. She died a week after we interviewed her, nice lady.

- Bill

[Greg Parker]

edit

Edited October 27, 2012 by Greg Parker

[Duke Lane]

One of the great (As yet) untold stories, is that of the many right- wing women in and around people like Walker, Banister, and the Hunt's, Mary Helen Brengal was one of them, tho she came to her senses and turned on them in the end. She died a week after we interviewed her, nice lady.

- Bill

It is amazing to me to read some of the writings of "responsible" people, "loyal Americans" all, in the early '60s, especially those of Professor Revilo Pendleton Oliver, a member of the 30-man Council of the John Birch Society, and in particular his Marksmanship in Dallas article that appeared in the Society's "American Opinion" magazine of February 1964 and written "around" Christmas 1963.

Here is a noteworthy excerpt to provide some insight into the perspective of some of America's leading citizens, from the highly-educated and erudite - even genteel - mind of Professor Oliver:

The maxim,

de mortuis nil nisi bonum

, has long been a favorite dictum of Anglo-Saxons (for some reason, it is seldom cited on the continent of Europe). Reference books usually attribute it to one of the Seven Sages, Chilo, who lived in the early part of the Sixth Century B.C.; but that is a mistake. In his precepts for prudent conduct, roughly similar to Benjamin Franklin's, Chilo urges us not to

malign

the dead (

ton tethnekota me kakologeîn

). He was interested in our own integrity, not the comfort or reputation of the deceased, and the precept is on a par with his advice that we should not utter idle threats in a quarrel because that is womanish.

Whatever the source of the phrase so glibly and frequently quoted these days, the notion that one should speak only good of the departed is compounded of various sentiments. It undoubtedly had its origin in man's deep-seated and primitive fear of the dead — a fear lest the Manes may somehow hear what we say and, if angered, use their mysterious powers to work harm upon us. That residual awe is supplemented by our infinite pity for the dead, and our hope that after life's fitful fever they sleep well. Pity is reinforced by the strong impulse toward generosity and kindness that, although biologically inexplicable, is found in all decent men. And that kindness is directed in part toward the living, for even the most odious and despicable beings may be survived by someone who grieves for them. Even Nero had one concubine who loved him. Acte wept for him and saw to it that his body was decently buried. And we honor her for it.

The dictum has become a fixed convention. We all know the story of the old men in a rural community who attend the funeral of one of their contemporaries. Having known the old reprobate all his life, they stand silently in a circle, tongue-tied, uneasily shuffling their feet, eyeing one another and searching their memories, until one is at last able to say, "Well, when Jake was a boy, he was mighty nigh the best speller in the sixth grade."

As an expression of courtesy and personal kindness, the dictum is unexceptionable. In politics and history it is utter nonsense — and everyone knows that it is. Were the dictum taken seriously, history would be impossible, for no page of it can be written without recording the follies and the crimes of the dead. Not even the sentimental innocents who now, under expert stimulation, blubber over the "martyred President" believe in the dictum de mortuis — at least, I have yet to hear one of them utter a lament for Adolf Hitler, although Adolf is certainly as defunct as Jack and therefore presumably as much entitled to post-mortem consideration.

Taboos are for barbarians, who indulge in tribal howling and gashing of cheeks and breast whenever a big chief dies or an eclipse portends the end of the world. We are a civilized race.

In memoriam aeternam

Rational men will understand that, far from sobbing over the deceased or lying to placate his vengeful ghost, it behooves us to speak of him with complete candor and historical objectivity. Jack was not sanctified by a bullet.

The defunct Kennedy is the John F. Kennedy who procured his election by peddling boob-bait to the suckers, including a cynical pledge to destroy the Communist base in Cuba. He is the John F. Kennedy with whose blessing and support the Central Intelligence Agency staged a fake "invasion" of Cuba designed to strengthen our mortal enemies there and to disgrace us — disgrace us not only by ignominious failure, but by the inhuman crime of having lured brave men into a trap and sent them to suffering and death. He is the John F. Kennedy who, in close collaboration with Khrushchev, staged the phony "embargo" that was improvised both to befuddle the suckers on election day in 1962 and to provide for several months a cover for the steady and rapid transfer of Soviet troops and Soviet weapons to Cuba for eventual use against us. He is the John F. Kennedy who installed and maintained in power the unspeakable Yarmolinsky-McNamara gang in the Pentagon to demoralize and subvert our armed forces and to sabotage our military installations and equipment. He is the John F. Kennedy who, by shameless intimidation, bribery, and blackmail, induced weaklings in Congress to approve treasonable acts designed to disarm us and to make us the helpless prey of the affiliated criminals and savages of the "United Nations."

I have mentioned but a few of the hundred reasons why we shall never forget John F. Kennedy. So long as their are Americans, his memory will be cherished with execration and loathing.

If the United States is saved by the desperate exertions of patriots, we may have a future of true greatness and glory — but

we will never forget how near we were to total destruction in the year 1963

. And if the international vermin succeed in completing their occupation of our country, Americans will remember Kennedy while they live, and will curse him as they face the firing squads or toil in brutish degradation that leaves no hope for anything but a speedy death.

Professor Oliver was deposed before Warren Commission counsel Albert Jenner to learn more of the evidence cited in his "Marksmanship" article, which Oliver freely admits is little more than "reasonable inferences drawn by reasonable men," based upon statements substantiated simply by dint of being in print or spoken by some notoriety. The deference and high-minded debate offered to Oliver by Jenner is singular indeed.

One can almost see the smoke dissipating in the mirrors, none of which is evident in Oliver's writings or speeches of the period: it is spoken as pure, unadulterated and certain fact, by a man of such high credentials (higher, certainly, than the average man or woman, Bircher or not) who "must know" the things of which he speaks with such conviction and sincerity. One only wonders what had taken the ubermenschen of the International Communist Conspiracy so long in reaching their goal of world domination (and most importantly, that of the USA) while their ever-so-obvious machinations (to the likes of Oliver et cie.) were superbly - and successfully! - orchestrated, undetected and masterfully hidden from virtually everyone else. Since nobody else as intelligent and educated as Oliver had detected them, clearly they, too, were "part of the plot."

That is, almost everyone out there but them. (Oddly, LBJ was not seen as a continuation of the same undermining of American values, or at least not identified as such.)

We are reminded that these are the same people who lambasted both Harry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower as "witting and willing tools of the International Communist Conspiracy" (yet whose later tepid endorsement JBS was able to secure for its circularized "The John Birch Society: A Report" that appeared also in 64/65).

John Kennedy compared with Adolph Hitler, JFK's memory to be "cherished with execration and loathing" by all who called themselves "American" (a narrow few, to be sure!), who was - even as he breathed his last - planning to sell out America lock, stock and barrel to Mother Russia, and thus better off dead, the only regret seeming to be that a "Communist" accomplished it instead of a true and upright Patriot.

... And still the question is posed: "Who Shot JFK?"

[Jim Root]

Greg

I have been able to track down the author of the April 12, 1961 Overseas Weekly article and he has graciously replied to my questions.

His memory has a PR Colonel being the driving force behind the Pro Blue Program (I believe it was Colonel Arch Roberts although the author does not give that name).

The author says that the "col" and Walker sponsored a talk by a person (he believed was) named Willie Schramm who advocated a first strike against Soviet forces in Czechoslovakia. John Dornberg ( the editor of Overseas Weekly) first assigned a "sexy reporter" named Phyllis Senter to "prowl the division headquarters" for several months gathering information for the story.

The author goes on to state that the "the Svengali for Pro Blue" was that colonel in public affairs. He got all the birch literature displayed in the division library and cafeterias and arranged the speakers."

The author of the OW article concluded with these words that I found interesting:

"I think we're lucky that nutcase never launched his tank units across the border!!"

Two points that can be ascertained from the authors information:

1) The research phase of the article would have began before Oswald applied to return to the US. Sometime before January 1961 Pro Blue was already in place and operating within the 24th Division.

2) Edwin Walker, while a willing participant in the program, was not the driving force behind the program.

Jim Root

[William O'Neil]

Jim ; The ''Col'' was indeed Archabald Roberts. I went through his papers at the Univ. of Oregon (Knight Library Special Collections). He was not the originator of the idea, Walker seems to have been , but he did put together the Pro-Blue program for him. Roberts was a staunch suporter of Walker's and in the end, it cost him his carrer. Bob and Ted worked together after the service until they had a falling out a few years later over ego. Roberts is still alive and publishing a RW rag, the name of which escapes me.

Bill

[Jim Root]

William

From the information that you gathered at the Univ. of Oregon, would it be possible to piece together a timeline for Walker's Pro Blue Program?

I find this subject of great interest.

Jim Root