Post by Rob Caprio on Mar 10, 2021 21:08:20 GMT -5
All portions ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2024
4.bp.blogspot.com/-_zemXxaNnmQ/UWYDSVj2pZI/AAAAAAAAGz0/jZyn98xT1Nc/s1600/Edwin_A._Walker.jpg
4.bp.blogspot.com/-G9VQlJ5MHUg/TnxfiGYLU8I/AAAAAAAAAD0/vUKwuZqtcKE/s1600/weissmanB2.jpg
3.bp.blogspot.com/_I4lZU0BrRsg/TQEwGdzPQbI/AAAAAAAAAH8/HqaTFVxOUL8/s1600/Walker+Home+by+LHO.jpg
gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/FBI-file-116-165494-Sec-3-pg.-110.png
gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/walker-to-blakey-9-12-78.png
We will continue our look at the General Edwin A. Walker (EAW) shooting. The Warren Commission (WC), as usual, had very little evidence to lead one to even make the claim that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) fired at EAW, let alone evidence to support the claim. We will look at this evidence and see what it shows us, but first a background on EAW will be helpful.
*******************************************
EAW served in the U.S. Army during World War II and the Korean conflict and reached the rank of Major General by the time of his release. His views were extreme right-wing in their nature and he even publicly called Eleanor Roosevelt and Harry Truman “pink” (meaning Communist). This caused a severe backlash although Mrs. Roosevelt’s husband was one of the most SOCIALIST presidents this country has ever had. The New Deal was a socialist program in the highest order.
He would finally be cashiered out of the Army by JFK as he supposedly violated the Hatch Act by telling his soldiers how to vote. The odd thing about this is if one reads about the Hatch Act, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatch_Act_of_1939), it does NOT apply to the U.S. military personnel so it makes one wonder how President John F. Kennedy (JFK) would have been allowed to use this to evict EAW from the Army if he had NOT resigned himself. Also consider EAW was in Germany at the time and NOT within the U.S.
Obviously President Eisenhower did NOT think badly of EAW, because he TURNED DOWN a resignation request he made on August 4, 1959, and instead gave him a command in Germany of more than 10,000 troops. EAW became a staunch supporter of the Pro-Blue program which was a severe anti-Communist group. He made this a mandatory indoctrination program for his troops and this is what was the real reason for his dismissal (acceptance of resignation) in all likelihood. One has to wonder why when the early 60s was still a hot-bed time for anti-Communism thinking. IF you have ever served then you know as a military person you are indoctrinated all the time with one thought or another, so why did this bother the Kennedy administration so much when it appeared NOT to bother Eisenhower in the least? My guess would be that it went PUBLIC in April 1961 when the Overseas Weekly did a front page story about him “brainwashing” his troops with John Birch Society (JBS) materials. Since the whole country had been brainwashed since the end of WWII about the evils of Communism I can only conclude that it was simply bad timing for EAW to have had this appear as the fiasco, and disaster of the Bay of Pigs, was also occurring at the same time.
Since we have been told the JBS is bad you may wonder why it is bad. This is from Wikipedia and can’t get any more clear in their values.
Quote on
The John Birch Society is an American political advocacy group that supports anti-communism, limited government, a constitutional republic[1][2] and personal freedom. It has been described as radical right-wing.
[1]Principles of the John Birch Society, 1962. "We believe that a Constitutional Republic, such as our Founding Fathers gave us, is probably the best of all forms of government"
[2]LectLaw "We believe that our system of government, a Constitutional Republic, is the finest yet developed by man."
Quote off
If you look at the statement one may wonder what is so bad about this organization? Weren’t most Americans anti-Communist in the early 1960s? I know the government sure was. Don’t most Americans believe in the Constitution and personal freedom? I would think so. Many Americans, even more so today, sure want a more LIMITED government too, but alas, this could be one of the things that made the John Birch Society “bad” to the government.
The JBS is also very anti-United Nations too (and currently calling for an audit of the Federal Reserve). In an interview with Jim Marrs in 1964 Walker said the following:
Quote on
The United Nations charter, which is only eight pages, should have been placed before [the American public] to study. Very few… have even seen the Fulbright Memorandum or the Walter Reuther Memorandum submitted to Attorney General Robert Kennedy upon his request… very few had even seen these papers or the U.N. declaration on racial discrimination, U.N. term for integration. This paper declares that the whole world will integrate. I do not know where such authority comes from or who it represents. I can realistically predict that no one living today will see six hundred million Chinese integrated with one hundred million Japanese, Turks integrated with Greeks, or Mohammedans with Isrealis… A cause for America first and last and always is essential to our existence. All organizations which are implementing such a cause are in the best interest of the country and are needed. The Birch Society is doing a great job in educating people and exposing such memoranda as I have referred to previously.
Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy, p. 256
Quote off
I don’t know, but if we just look at their statement and what EAW just said in that interview there is nothing bad in it. Obviously though, things are not always what they seem. We will leave it there.
The only reason I brought this up was to remind folks that many members of the Dallas Police Department (DPD) were also members in the JBS. Whether you agree with their outlook or not is irrelevant, all that matters is that they had this outlook, and that many of those on the right-wing side thought JFK was a Communist. This is important to remember when looking at the assassination and the actions taken later by many of these DPD members.
On November 2, 1961, EAW again offered his resignation from the Army and this time it was accepted. This meant the general would get NO pension for his 30 years of service. Two other events must be mentioned before we can move on to the shooting event of April 10, 1963.
Firstly, in 1962 EAW would run for the role of Governor in the state of Texas. He would lose by finishing last of the six Democratic candidates. The winner of this primary--John Connally—would eventually win the office
Secondly, in September 1962, EAW embroiled himself in the University of Mississippi segregation issue. African-American James Meredith was attempting to become the first non-white student in the university’s history. This caused a major storm in this deep south school and community. EAW would go on television on September 29, 1962, and say the following:
Quote on
This is Edwin A. Walker. I am in Mississippi beside Governor Ross Barnett. I call for a national protest against the conspiracy from within. Rally to the cause of freedom in righteous indignation, violent vocal protest, and bitter silence under the flag of Mississippi at the use of Federal troops. This today is a disgrace to the nation in 'dire peril,' a disgrace beyond the capacity of anyone except its enemies. This is the conspiracy of the crucifixion by anti-Christ conspirators of the Supreme Court in their denial of prayer and their betrayal of a nation.[10]
[10]"Walker Demands a 'Vocal Protest,'" New York Times, September 30, 1962, p. 69.
Quote off
A 15-hour violent riot would break out on campus on September 30 and leave hundreds wounded, two dead and six US Marshals shot. This would lead to EAW’s arrest on four federal charges including sedition and insurrection. Robert F. Kennedy (RFK) even had him put in a mental institution and demanded a 90-day psychiatric examination. One can wonder what EAW thought of the Kennedys at this time. In January 1963 he would not be indicted and he was free to go.
Now on to the assassination attempt.
EAW had many connections that had connections. For example, his aide who drove him had a brother by the name of Larrie Schmidt. Larrie Schmidt knew Bernard Weissman. Both Schmidt and Weissman would author the infamous “Welcome Mr. Kennedy to Dallas” ad that ran in the Dallas Morning News on 11/22/63. The ad was black bordered and ask twelve loaded questions about JFK. It ended with asking him why he was carrying on the “Spirit of Moscow” during his presidency.
Another aide of EAW’s, Robert Surrey, would produce the “Wanted for Treason” leaflets that would be handed out along the motorcade’s route. Surrey would tell researcher Penn Jones, Jr. years later that his best bridge playing partner was none other than FBI agent James Hosty. Hosty, you may recall, was assigned to LHO in the Dallas area and he allegedly flushed a note LHO left for him shortly before the assassination.
Another interesting connection was none other than Carlos Bringuier. He was the man who would get into an altercation with LHO for handing out pro-Castro pamphlets in New Orleans during August 1963. It seems LHO had earlier approached Bringuier and said he was ANTI-CASTRO. This brawl, if you want to call it that, would lead LHO to jail for a day. LHO would be visited by the FBI on his request while he was there. Bringuier and LHO would also do a radio debate about Communism and Castro.
Bringuier had served on the faculty of Christian Anti-Communist Youth University. Guess who else was on the faculty there? You got it – EAW. What a small world, huh? According to researcher Gary Shaw EAW was retained by the CIA to train and arm the Cuban exiles shortly after the Bay of Pigs Invasion.
The WC would claim LHO did surveillance on the EAW house as they claimed the DPD allegedly found three photos of his house in his belongings. According to WC photograph experts the background of the photographs led them to believe they could NOT have been taken later than March 10, 1963. Interestingly enough, one of the photographs would lead many researchers over the years to the conclusion LHO was framed. It is the one that shows a 1957 Chevrolet in EAW’s driveway. Why? Because CE-5 has a hole in it where the license plate of the car would have appeared.
In FBI reports, R.B. Stovall, a Dallas police detective who helped to confiscate LHO’s belongings from the Paine house in Irving was quoted as saying:
Quote on
…at the time he observed this photograph [the detective] surmised that Oswald had evidently taken the license plate number area out of the photograph to keep anyone from identifying the owner of that automobile. He advised he is positive the photograph was mutilated as shown in Commission Exhibit 5 at the time they recovered it at the Paine residence.
Quote off
According to the FBI Stovall’s partner, Guy Rose, would add:
Quote on
…he had noted that someone had torn out a section on the automobile, which area contains the license plate for the 1957 Chevrolet … He stated… that it had been mutilated at the time they had recovered the box containing the photographs.
www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=11711&relPageId=23
Quote off
So we see two DPD detectives, per the FBI, say that that the photo was INTACT when it was RECOVERED from LHO’s belongings. How can the WC, and its defenders, explain this then?
Mr. LIEBELER. I show you Commission Exhibit No. 5, which is a copy of one of the photographs that was found among these effects after the assassination.
*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. LIEBELER. Does that appear to be one of the photographs about which you were speaking?
*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; that's one.
Mr. LIEBELER. Are you absolutely sure about that?
Mrs. OSWALD. No; I don't remember when Lee showed me the picture that it was this. When I was first shown this picture, I remember that there was a license plate number on this car.
Mr. LIEBELER. When Lee showed you the picture, there was a license plate number on the car?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. LIEBELER. As shown in Commission Exhibit No. 5; is that right?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. LIEBELER. When you look at this picture you see that there is a black mark on the back of this, do you know what makes that black mark?
Mrs. OSWALD. No; but I think when the Commission showed me this picture the number was there.
Mr. McKENZIE. License plate?
Mrs. OSWALD. I would have remembered this black spot if it were there at the time the Commission showed me this, or the FBI. When the FBI first showed me this photograph I remember that the license plate, the number of the license plate was on this car, was on the photograph.
It had the white and black numbers. There was no black spot that I see on it now. When Lee showed me this photograph there was the number on the license plate on this picture. I would have remembered it if there were a black spot on the back of the car where the license plate would be.
Mr. LIEBELER. The original of this picture, the actual photograph, has a hole through it. That's what makes this black spot.
Mrs. OSWALD. This is from the negative?
Mr. GREGORY. This picture was made from the original photograph, rather than from a negative?
Mr. LIEBELER. Yes; it's simply a picture of a picture.
Mrs. OSWALD. When the FBI and Lee showed me this particular picture--Not this big size. This photograph--it was a smaller size.
Mr. LIEBELER. Yes.
Mrs. OSWALD. There was a license plate on this car.
Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember that very clearly?
Mrs. OSWALD. When Lee showed it to me, I remember very distinctly that there was a license plate on this car. When this business about General Walker came up I would have remembered this black spot.
Mr. LIEBELER. Or the hole?
Mrs. OSWALD. Or the hole in the original--I would have remembered it.
Mr. LIEBELER. And you remember, then, that the license plate was actually on that car when you saw the picture?
Mrs. OSWALD. This black spot is so striking I would have remembered it if it were on the photograph that Lee showed me or the FBI.
So we see from Marina’s testimony there was NO hole when either LHO or the FBI showed her the photograph before! How can this be? Is someone lying? Yes is the answer. The proof of WHO was lying would come with DPD Chief Jesse Curry’s book JFK Assassination File. In it, on page 113, there is a police photo of LHO’s belongings that shows the photo in question up front. Guess what it shows? It shows the Chevy’s license-plate number INTACT! This means ONLY one thing. The license-plate was removed while in CUSTODY OF EITHER THE DPD OR THE FBI. Since Marina said the FBI showed her the photo and it was still intact that means they are the ones that REMOVED IT in all likelihood. This is called TAMPERING WITH EVDIENCE.
Whose car was this? Why did the FBI feel the need to do this? These are questions that we don’t have answers for and we will never know for sure unfortunately, but there are some clues. As said in the previous post in this series, a Cuban exile by the name of Filipe Vidal Santiago of the group known as “Alpha 66” was known to drive a 1957 Chevrolet. As stated previously, research by Gary Shaw showed it is very likely EAW had been retained by the CIA to train Cuban exiles, thus, the car belonging to Santiago being there is by no means a stretch.
Also covered in the previous post in this series was the fact a volunteer worker, Charles Klihr (known to Walker as Clyr), was known to drive a 1957 Chevrolet too.
Mr. LIEBELER. I will spell it right in just a minute. K-l-i-h-r. 2046 Rosebud Street, Irving, Tex. Do you know that man?
General WALKER. Not that spelling. I know a Charles Clyr. As I know the spelling, it is C-l-y-r.
-------------
Mr. LIEBELER. How about that car, do you recognize that as his car?
General WALKER. I don't recognize that car.
Mr. LIEBELER. This gentleman that we may be talking about we may be talking about the same man, is a volunteer worker for you from time to time?
General WALKER. If it is the one I am referring to, he is in and out quite often, right. He and his wife have helped me quite a bit.
Mr. LIEBELER. But you aren't able to identify that car as being his?
General WALKER. No; I am not.
Mr. LIEBELER. Does that car appear to be a 1957 Chevrolet? Or aren't you able to tell by looking?
General WALKER. I am not able to tell. I am not very good on cars.
This troubled at least one person on the WC. In 1966 WC Attorney Liebeler wrote a letter to Charles Klihr about this issue. The letter said in part:
Quote on
The [Oswald} picture was mutilated by someone in such a manner that the license plate is no longer visible. When we noticed this during the investigation we asked the FBI to determine whose car it was. They asked [Walker aide] Surrey about it and he thought it was your car. I find no indication that FBI agents talked with you about the matter, however… I would appreciate it very much if you would let me know whether or not the FBI did interview you about this and if you were able to identify the car as your own.
Quote off
Needless to say Liebeler NEVER heard from Klihr. Why did the FBI do NO follow-up on this as instructed? Why did the WC and FBI NOT find it odd that EAW knew the man with a different last name? Who was this man really? Why did the FBI show NO interest in determining who owned this car in EAW’s driveway?
Jim Marrs did a great job of showing all the connections EAW had, including possibly links to both Ruby and LHO via a man named John Martin. He also goes over something in the book Farewell America (a book based on an investigation supposedly paid for by RFK) that was written by French intelligence agents that mentions EAW being flown to Mexico to hide out with H.L. Hunt for a month after the assassination. This book also claims LHO was introduced to both EAW and Clay Shaw in the late summer of 1963 by David Ferrie! Keep in mind, EAW’s name and telephone number appeared in LHO’s notebook. The WC would say:
Quote on
Although Oswald’s notebook contained Walker’s name and telephone number there is no evidence that they knew each other. It is probable that this information was inserted at the time Oswald was planning his attack on Walker.
Quote off
Isn’t it ironic that they can conclude LHO attacked EAW with NO evidence, but can’t conclude that he knew EAW with NO evidence? Another piece of evidence, if you want to call it that, that shows LHO shot at EAW supposedly is a letter that was found shortly after the assassination. The letter supposedly fell out of a book found among LHO’s possessions and was shown to Ruth Paine by the SS. They wanted her to identify it. I don’t know why they thought she could since she and LHO did not get along well and I doubt he would have shown it to her even IF he wrote it.
It would be determined by government handwriting experts that LHO wrote it and Marina said she remembered seeing it shortly after the EAW shooting. Supposedly LHO left it in the Russian book entitled Book of Useful Advice and it was discovered two weeks after the assassination when it fell out of the book. One can wonder why it took TWO WEEKS to fall out, but that is a question we can’t answer.
Evidence that puts further doubt on this story was given by Ruth Paine when she commented about the Dallas Police search of her home and she said, “Before I left they were leafing through books to see if anything FELL OUT but that was all I saw.” So again, based on this testimony, one can ask why did the note NOT FALL OUT EARLIER IF IT WAS REALLY THERE AS CLAIMED? Surely LHO did NOT have that many books in his belongings.
In the letter he NEVER MENTIONS EAW so one is left to assume what he was talking about IF they believe it is genuine. Also, since it does NOT mention EAW, and Marina knew nothing of his planned attack on him supposedly, how could she “watch for stories” about this particular incident and tie LHO to it? Also, the letter mentioned sending the information she somehow would know to watch for to the Russian Embassy. Why would the Russian Embassy care about his shooting of/at a right-wing Dallas ex-General? Does this make any sense to you?
Jim Marrs makes a great point on this as well. He wrote that the WC concluded that this letter , presumably by LHO, “appeared to be the work of a man expecting to be killed, or imprisoned, or to disappear”, but LHO had NO money, NO passport, and NO reasonable expectation of escape at the time of the EAW incident. Again, does this make any sense to you?
Finally, we get to CE-573. Over the years before his death in 1993 EAW said many times this bullet was NOT the bullet he held on the night of the shooting. He said *that* bullet was too mangled to even know what kind of bullet it was, but that it was a steel-jacketed type. Contemporary news reports concerning the shooting said the bullet was “identified as .30.06” and of course this means LHO could NOT have fired it. Further corroboration comes from the DPD reports of the incident. In NINE separate reports they too said the bullet was a STEEL-JACKETED type. All the ammo from the alleged murder weapon, CE-139, fired COPPER-JACKETED bullets. So again, we see LHO could NOT have fired the bullet at EAW.
EVEN IF we allow the tainted bullet in evidence, CE-573, into the discussion this bullet has NO link TO LHO at all. (Of course CE-139 has NO link to LHO either, but that is another post) Why you may ask? Because of the FBI’s own spectrographic analyses of CE-399 [magic bullet] and the two bullet fragments allegedly found in the president’s limo. In 1975 JFK researcher George Michael Evica looked at these reports and concluded the following:
Quote on
… the bullet recovered in the assassination attempt on General Walker does NOT match either CE 399 or two fragments recovered from President Kennedy’s limousine; the Warren Commission’s linking of Lee Harvey Oswald to the General Walker assassination attempt is SERIOUSLY weakened.
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=9891#relPageId=178
Quote off
Of course Hoover would term these reports “inconclusive” [one of the WC’s favorite words along with “mistaken”] when they were NO such thing. In science the results that matter are matches and non-matches. Here we see they COULD NOT MATCH the bullet in question—CE-573 that had NO chain of custody or evidence that it was actually recovered from EAW’s house—to the other supposed ballistics in this case [CE-399 and the other two fragments], thus, NO link exists. Period.
Could this happen so frequently IF LHO had actually committed the crime as they claimed? It is highly doubtful.
Portions of this post came from Jim Marrs’ book, Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy, pp. 256-262 and Wikipedia
4.bp.blogspot.com/-_zemXxaNnmQ/UWYDSVj2pZI/AAAAAAAAGz0/jZyn98xT1Nc/s1600/Edwin_A._Walker.jpg
4.bp.blogspot.com/-G9VQlJ5MHUg/TnxfiGYLU8I/AAAAAAAAAD0/vUKwuZqtcKE/s1600/weissmanB2.jpg
3.bp.blogspot.com/_I4lZU0BrRsg/TQEwGdzPQbI/AAAAAAAAAH8/HqaTFVxOUL8/s1600/Walker+Home+by+LHO.jpg
gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/FBI-file-116-165494-Sec-3-pg.-110.png
gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/walker-to-blakey-9-12-78.png
We will continue our look at the General Edwin A. Walker (EAW) shooting. The Warren Commission (WC), as usual, had very little evidence to lead one to even make the claim that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) fired at EAW, let alone evidence to support the claim. We will look at this evidence and see what it shows us, but first a background on EAW will be helpful.
*******************************************
EAW served in the U.S. Army during World War II and the Korean conflict and reached the rank of Major General by the time of his release. His views were extreme right-wing in their nature and he even publicly called Eleanor Roosevelt and Harry Truman “pink” (meaning Communist). This caused a severe backlash although Mrs. Roosevelt’s husband was one of the most SOCIALIST presidents this country has ever had. The New Deal was a socialist program in the highest order.
He would finally be cashiered out of the Army by JFK as he supposedly violated the Hatch Act by telling his soldiers how to vote. The odd thing about this is if one reads about the Hatch Act, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatch_Act_of_1939), it does NOT apply to the U.S. military personnel so it makes one wonder how President John F. Kennedy (JFK) would have been allowed to use this to evict EAW from the Army if he had NOT resigned himself. Also consider EAW was in Germany at the time and NOT within the U.S.
Obviously President Eisenhower did NOT think badly of EAW, because he TURNED DOWN a resignation request he made on August 4, 1959, and instead gave him a command in Germany of more than 10,000 troops. EAW became a staunch supporter of the Pro-Blue program which was a severe anti-Communist group. He made this a mandatory indoctrination program for his troops and this is what was the real reason for his dismissal (acceptance of resignation) in all likelihood. One has to wonder why when the early 60s was still a hot-bed time for anti-Communism thinking. IF you have ever served then you know as a military person you are indoctrinated all the time with one thought or another, so why did this bother the Kennedy administration so much when it appeared NOT to bother Eisenhower in the least? My guess would be that it went PUBLIC in April 1961 when the Overseas Weekly did a front page story about him “brainwashing” his troops with John Birch Society (JBS) materials. Since the whole country had been brainwashed since the end of WWII about the evils of Communism I can only conclude that it was simply bad timing for EAW to have had this appear as the fiasco, and disaster of the Bay of Pigs, was also occurring at the same time.
Since we have been told the JBS is bad you may wonder why it is bad. This is from Wikipedia and can’t get any more clear in their values.
Quote on
The John Birch Society is an American political advocacy group that supports anti-communism, limited government, a constitutional republic[1][2] and personal freedom. It has been described as radical right-wing.
[1]Principles of the John Birch Society, 1962. "We believe that a Constitutional Republic, such as our Founding Fathers gave us, is probably the best of all forms of government"
[2]LectLaw "We believe that our system of government, a Constitutional Republic, is the finest yet developed by man."
Quote off
If you look at the statement one may wonder what is so bad about this organization? Weren’t most Americans anti-Communist in the early 1960s? I know the government sure was. Don’t most Americans believe in the Constitution and personal freedom? I would think so. Many Americans, even more so today, sure want a more LIMITED government too, but alas, this could be one of the things that made the John Birch Society “bad” to the government.
The JBS is also very anti-United Nations too (and currently calling for an audit of the Federal Reserve). In an interview with Jim Marrs in 1964 Walker said the following:
Quote on
The United Nations charter, which is only eight pages, should have been placed before [the American public] to study. Very few… have even seen the Fulbright Memorandum or the Walter Reuther Memorandum submitted to Attorney General Robert Kennedy upon his request… very few had even seen these papers or the U.N. declaration on racial discrimination, U.N. term for integration. This paper declares that the whole world will integrate. I do not know where such authority comes from or who it represents. I can realistically predict that no one living today will see six hundred million Chinese integrated with one hundred million Japanese, Turks integrated with Greeks, or Mohammedans with Isrealis… A cause for America first and last and always is essential to our existence. All organizations which are implementing such a cause are in the best interest of the country and are needed. The Birch Society is doing a great job in educating people and exposing such memoranda as I have referred to previously.
Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy, p. 256
Quote off
I don’t know, but if we just look at their statement and what EAW just said in that interview there is nothing bad in it. Obviously though, things are not always what they seem. We will leave it there.
The only reason I brought this up was to remind folks that many members of the Dallas Police Department (DPD) were also members in the JBS. Whether you agree with their outlook or not is irrelevant, all that matters is that they had this outlook, and that many of those on the right-wing side thought JFK was a Communist. This is important to remember when looking at the assassination and the actions taken later by many of these DPD members.
On November 2, 1961, EAW again offered his resignation from the Army and this time it was accepted. This meant the general would get NO pension for his 30 years of service. Two other events must be mentioned before we can move on to the shooting event of April 10, 1963.
Firstly, in 1962 EAW would run for the role of Governor in the state of Texas. He would lose by finishing last of the six Democratic candidates. The winner of this primary--John Connally—would eventually win the office
Secondly, in September 1962, EAW embroiled himself in the University of Mississippi segregation issue. African-American James Meredith was attempting to become the first non-white student in the university’s history. This caused a major storm in this deep south school and community. EAW would go on television on September 29, 1962, and say the following:
Quote on
This is Edwin A. Walker. I am in Mississippi beside Governor Ross Barnett. I call for a national protest against the conspiracy from within. Rally to the cause of freedom in righteous indignation, violent vocal protest, and bitter silence under the flag of Mississippi at the use of Federal troops. This today is a disgrace to the nation in 'dire peril,' a disgrace beyond the capacity of anyone except its enemies. This is the conspiracy of the crucifixion by anti-Christ conspirators of the Supreme Court in their denial of prayer and their betrayal of a nation.[10]
[10]"Walker Demands a 'Vocal Protest,'" New York Times, September 30, 1962, p. 69.
Quote off
A 15-hour violent riot would break out on campus on September 30 and leave hundreds wounded, two dead and six US Marshals shot. This would lead to EAW’s arrest on four federal charges including sedition and insurrection. Robert F. Kennedy (RFK) even had him put in a mental institution and demanded a 90-day psychiatric examination. One can wonder what EAW thought of the Kennedys at this time. In January 1963 he would not be indicted and he was free to go.
Now on to the assassination attempt.
EAW had many connections that had connections. For example, his aide who drove him had a brother by the name of Larrie Schmidt. Larrie Schmidt knew Bernard Weissman. Both Schmidt and Weissman would author the infamous “Welcome Mr. Kennedy to Dallas” ad that ran in the Dallas Morning News on 11/22/63. The ad was black bordered and ask twelve loaded questions about JFK. It ended with asking him why he was carrying on the “Spirit of Moscow” during his presidency.
Another aide of EAW’s, Robert Surrey, would produce the “Wanted for Treason” leaflets that would be handed out along the motorcade’s route. Surrey would tell researcher Penn Jones, Jr. years later that his best bridge playing partner was none other than FBI agent James Hosty. Hosty, you may recall, was assigned to LHO in the Dallas area and he allegedly flushed a note LHO left for him shortly before the assassination.
Another interesting connection was none other than Carlos Bringuier. He was the man who would get into an altercation with LHO for handing out pro-Castro pamphlets in New Orleans during August 1963. It seems LHO had earlier approached Bringuier and said he was ANTI-CASTRO. This brawl, if you want to call it that, would lead LHO to jail for a day. LHO would be visited by the FBI on his request while he was there. Bringuier and LHO would also do a radio debate about Communism and Castro.
Bringuier had served on the faculty of Christian Anti-Communist Youth University. Guess who else was on the faculty there? You got it – EAW. What a small world, huh? According to researcher Gary Shaw EAW was retained by the CIA to train and arm the Cuban exiles shortly after the Bay of Pigs Invasion.
The WC would claim LHO did surveillance on the EAW house as they claimed the DPD allegedly found three photos of his house in his belongings. According to WC photograph experts the background of the photographs led them to believe they could NOT have been taken later than March 10, 1963. Interestingly enough, one of the photographs would lead many researchers over the years to the conclusion LHO was framed. It is the one that shows a 1957 Chevrolet in EAW’s driveway. Why? Because CE-5 has a hole in it where the license plate of the car would have appeared.
In FBI reports, R.B. Stovall, a Dallas police detective who helped to confiscate LHO’s belongings from the Paine house in Irving was quoted as saying:
Quote on
…at the time he observed this photograph [the detective] surmised that Oswald had evidently taken the license plate number area out of the photograph to keep anyone from identifying the owner of that automobile. He advised he is positive the photograph was mutilated as shown in Commission Exhibit 5 at the time they recovered it at the Paine residence.
Quote off
According to the FBI Stovall’s partner, Guy Rose, would add:
Quote on
…he had noted that someone had torn out a section on the automobile, which area contains the license plate for the 1957 Chevrolet … He stated… that it had been mutilated at the time they had recovered the box containing the photographs.
www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=11711&relPageId=23
Quote off
So we see two DPD detectives, per the FBI, say that that the photo was INTACT when it was RECOVERED from LHO’s belongings. How can the WC, and its defenders, explain this then?
Mr. LIEBELER. I show you Commission Exhibit No. 5, which is a copy of one of the photographs that was found among these effects after the assassination.
*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. LIEBELER. Does that appear to be one of the photographs about which you were speaking?
*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; that's one.
Mr. LIEBELER. Are you absolutely sure about that?
Mrs. OSWALD. No; I don't remember when Lee showed me the picture that it was this. When I was first shown this picture, I remember that there was a license plate number on this car.
Mr. LIEBELER. When Lee showed you the picture, there was a license plate number on the car?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. LIEBELER. As shown in Commission Exhibit No. 5; is that right?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. LIEBELER. When you look at this picture you see that there is a black mark on the back of this, do you know what makes that black mark?
Mrs. OSWALD. No; but I think when the Commission showed me this picture the number was there.
Mr. McKENZIE. License plate?
Mrs. OSWALD. I would have remembered this black spot if it were there at the time the Commission showed me this, or the FBI. When the FBI first showed me this photograph I remember that the license plate, the number of the license plate was on this car, was on the photograph.
It had the white and black numbers. There was no black spot that I see on it now. When Lee showed me this photograph there was the number on the license plate on this picture. I would have remembered it if there were a black spot on the back of the car where the license plate would be.
Mr. LIEBELER. The original of this picture, the actual photograph, has a hole through it. That's what makes this black spot.
Mrs. OSWALD. This is from the negative?
Mr. GREGORY. This picture was made from the original photograph, rather than from a negative?
Mr. LIEBELER. Yes; it's simply a picture of a picture.
Mrs. OSWALD. When the FBI and Lee showed me this particular picture--Not this big size. This photograph--it was a smaller size.
Mr. LIEBELER. Yes.
Mrs. OSWALD. There was a license plate on this car.
Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember that very clearly?
Mrs. OSWALD. When Lee showed it to me, I remember very distinctly that there was a license plate on this car. When this business about General Walker came up I would have remembered this black spot.
Mr. LIEBELER. Or the hole?
Mrs. OSWALD. Or the hole in the original--I would have remembered it.
Mr. LIEBELER. And you remember, then, that the license plate was actually on that car when you saw the picture?
Mrs. OSWALD. This black spot is so striking I would have remembered it if it were on the photograph that Lee showed me or the FBI.
So we see from Marina’s testimony there was NO hole when either LHO or the FBI showed her the photograph before! How can this be? Is someone lying? Yes is the answer. The proof of WHO was lying would come with DPD Chief Jesse Curry’s book JFK Assassination File. In it, on page 113, there is a police photo of LHO’s belongings that shows the photo in question up front. Guess what it shows? It shows the Chevy’s license-plate number INTACT! This means ONLY one thing. The license-plate was removed while in CUSTODY OF EITHER THE DPD OR THE FBI. Since Marina said the FBI showed her the photo and it was still intact that means they are the ones that REMOVED IT in all likelihood. This is called TAMPERING WITH EVDIENCE.
Whose car was this? Why did the FBI feel the need to do this? These are questions that we don’t have answers for and we will never know for sure unfortunately, but there are some clues. As said in the previous post in this series, a Cuban exile by the name of Filipe Vidal Santiago of the group known as “Alpha 66” was known to drive a 1957 Chevrolet. As stated previously, research by Gary Shaw showed it is very likely EAW had been retained by the CIA to train Cuban exiles, thus, the car belonging to Santiago being there is by no means a stretch.
Also covered in the previous post in this series was the fact a volunteer worker, Charles Klihr (known to Walker as Clyr), was known to drive a 1957 Chevrolet too.
Mr. LIEBELER. I will spell it right in just a minute. K-l-i-h-r. 2046 Rosebud Street, Irving, Tex. Do you know that man?
General WALKER. Not that spelling. I know a Charles Clyr. As I know the spelling, it is C-l-y-r.
-------------
Mr. LIEBELER. How about that car, do you recognize that as his car?
General WALKER. I don't recognize that car.
Mr. LIEBELER. This gentleman that we may be talking about we may be talking about the same man, is a volunteer worker for you from time to time?
General WALKER. If it is the one I am referring to, he is in and out quite often, right. He and his wife have helped me quite a bit.
Mr. LIEBELER. But you aren't able to identify that car as being his?
General WALKER. No; I am not.
Mr. LIEBELER. Does that car appear to be a 1957 Chevrolet? Or aren't you able to tell by looking?
General WALKER. I am not able to tell. I am not very good on cars.
This troubled at least one person on the WC. In 1966 WC Attorney Liebeler wrote a letter to Charles Klihr about this issue. The letter said in part:
Quote on
The [Oswald} picture was mutilated by someone in such a manner that the license plate is no longer visible. When we noticed this during the investigation we asked the FBI to determine whose car it was. They asked [Walker aide] Surrey about it and he thought it was your car. I find no indication that FBI agents talked with you about the matter, however… I would appreciate it very much if you would let me know whether or not the FBI did interview you about this and if you were able to identify the car as your own.
Quote off
Needless to say Liebeler NEVER heard from Klihr. Why did the FBI do NO follow-up on this as instructed? Why did the WC and FBI NOT find it odd that EAW knew the man with a different last name? Who was this man really? Why did the FBI show NO interest in determining who owned this car in EAW’s driveway?
Jim Marrs did a great job of showing all the connections EAW had, including possibly links to both Ruby and LHO via a man named John Martin. He also goes over something in the book Farewell America (a book based on an investigation supposedly paid for by RFK) that was written by French intelligence agents that mentions EAW being flown to Mexico to hide out with H.L. Hunt for a month after the assassination. This book also claims LHO was introduced to both EAW and Clay Shaw in the late summer of 1963 by David Ferrie! Keep in mind, EAW’s name and telephone number appeared in LHO’s notebook. The WC would say:
Quote on
Although Oswald’s notebook contained Walker’s name and telephone number there is no evidence that they knew each other. It is probable that this information was inserted at the time Oswald was planning his attack on Walker.
Quote off
Isn’t it ironic that they can conclude LHO attacked EAW with NO evidence, but can’t conclude that he knew EAW with NO evidence? Another piece of evidence, if you want to call it that, that shows LHO shot at EAW supposedly is a letter that was found shortly after the assassination. The letter supposedly fell out of a book found among LHO’s possessions and was shown to Ruth Paine by the SS. They wanted her to identify it. I don’t know why they thought she could since she and LHO did not get along well and I doubt he would have shown it to her even IF he wrote it.
It would be determined by government handwriting experts that LHO wrote it and Marina said she remembered seeing it shortly after the EAW shooting. Supposedly LHO left it in the Russian book entitled Book of Useful Advice and it was discovered two weeks after the assassination when it fell out of the book. One can wonder why it took TWO WEEKS to fall out, but that is a question we can’t answer.
Evidence that puts further doubt on this story was given by Ruth Paine when she commented about the Dallas Police search of her home and she said, “Before I left they were leafing through books to see if anything FELL OUT but that was all I saw.” So again, based on this testimony, one can ask why did the note NOT FALL OUT EARLIER IF IT WAS REALLY THERE AS CLAIMED? Surely LHO did NOT have that many books in his belongings.
In the letter he NEVER MENTIONS EAW so one is left to assume what he was talking about IF they believe it is genuine. Also, since it does NOT mention EAW, and Marina knew nothing of his planned attack on him supposedly, how could she “watch for stories” about this particular incident and tie LHO to it? Also, the letter mentioned sending the information she somehow would know to watch for to the Russian Embassy. Why would the Russian Embassy care about his shooting of/at a right-wing Dallas ex-General? Does this make any sense to you?
Jim Marrs makes a great point on this as well. He wrote that the WC concluded that this letter , presumably by LHO, “appeared to be the work of a man expecting to be killed, or imprisoned, or to disappear”, but LHO had NO money, NO passport, and NO reasonable expectation of escape at the time of the EAW incident. Again, does this make any sense to you?
Finally, we get to CE-573. Over the years before his death in 1993 EAW said many times this bullet was NOT the bullet he held on the night of the shooting. He said *that* bullet was too mangled to even know what kind of bullet it was, but that it was a steel-jacketed type. Contemporary news reports concerning the shooting said the bullet was “identified as .30.06” and of course this means LHO could NOT have fired it. Further corroboration comes from the DPD reports of the incident. In NINE separate reports they too said the bullet was a STEEL-JACKETED type. All the ammo from the alleged murder weapon, CE-139, fired COPPER-JACKETED bullets. So again, we see LHO could NOT have fired the bullet at EAW.
EVEN IF we allow the tainted bullet in evidence, CE-573, into the discussion this bullet has NO link TO LHO at all. (Of course CE-139 has NO link to LHO either, but that is another post) Why you may ask? Because of the FBI’s own spectrographic analyses of CE-399 [magic bullet] and the two bullet fragments allegedly found in the president’s limo. In 1975 JFK researcher George Michael Evica looked at these reports and concluded the following:
Quote on
… the bullet recovered in the assassination attempt on General Walker does NOT match either CE 399 or two fragments recovered from President Kennedy’s limousine; the Warren Commission’s linking of Lee Harvey Oswald to the General Walker assassination attempt is SERIOUSLY weakened.
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=9891#relPageId=178
Quote off
Of course Hoover would term these reports “inconclusive” [one of the WC’s favorite words along with “mistaken”] when they were NO such thing. In science the results that matter are matches and non-matches. Here we see they COULD NOT MATCH the bullet in question—CE-573 that had NO chain of custody or evidence that it was actually recovered from EAW’s house—to the other supposed ballistics in this case [CE-399 and the other two fragments], thus, NO link exists. Period.
Could this happen so frequently IF LHO had actually committed the crime as they claimed? It is highly doubtful.
Portions of this post came from Jim Marrs’ book, Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy, pp. 256-262 and Wikipedia