Who was behind the assassination? - Part 2

Please note: The following essay was proof-read by Terry Wayne Martin prior to it being published on this blog.

In September, 2015, I published an essay on my blog entitled “Who was behind the assassination?” In the essay, I discussed evidence showing that Oswald and the TSBD Corporation likely had connections to the 112th MIG; and that individuals with connections to the 112th MIG were likely involved in the assassination. I also discussed evidence showing that individuals with anti-Semitic beliefs were involved in the assassination; and wanted to give the public the impression that Jews were behind the assassination. Over the past few months, I have come across a wealth of information that has reinforced my belief that these individuals were in fact involved in the assassination, which is why I decided to write this follow-up essay. Although I don’t pretend for even a nano-second that I have proven these individuals were the ones responsible for the assassination; and for framing Lee Harvey Oswald for the assassination, I nevertheless believe there is more than sufficient evidence to believe that this was in fact the case.

Oswald, Edward J. Coyle, and James Patrick Hosty

I would like to begin by discussing a curious individual named Edward J. Coyle. Coyle was an Army intelligence/counter-intelligence officer who worked for the 112th MIG in Dallas, Texas. According to Coyle’s obituary in the Las Vegas Sun News, he was a member of the Knights of Columbus (see here). The Knights of Columbus is a “Catholic fraternal service organisation” which was founded in the year 1882 (I return to the potential significance of this further on in the essay). As I discussed at Greg Parker’s inimitable research forum, Coyle was involved in the investigation of firearms theft from the Fort Hood Army base in Killeen, Texas, with FBI agent James Hosty prior to the assassination (see the thread entitled “My latest essay”). I also discussed the fact that Lt. Colonel Robert E. Jones; an Army intelligence/counter-intelligence officer assigned to the 112th MIG at Fort Sam Houston, San Antonio, Texas, informed the HSCA that Coyle was one of the 112th MIG’s liaison officers to the U. S. Secret Service in Dallas, Texas, at the time of President Kennedy’s visit there (ibid). 

In part one of this essay, I discussed the likelihood that Oswald was placed into the TSBD building as an employee under the false pretense that he was to keep an eye out on fellow TSBD employee, Joe Molina, on behalf of the FBI. I also voiced my belief that considering Molina had connections to gun runners, Oswald was probably instructed by the FBI to report back to them on any information he had concerning Molina’s involvement with gun running. It was for this reason; including the fact that Edward Coyle was involved with James Hosty in the investigation of firearm thefts from the Fort Hood Army base and the allegation by Lt. Colonel Robert Jones that Coyle was one of the 112th MIG’s liaison officer to the Secret Service during President Kennedy’s visit to Dallas, Texas, that I began to suspect Coyle was involved with Hosty and the FBI in placing Oswald into the TSBD. Let’s also keep in mind the likelihood that the TSBD had connections to the 112th MIG in Dallas, Texas.

In my opinion, a big clue that Oswald was working for Hosty (and Coyle for that matter) as an informant comes from what Hosty told both the Warren Commission and the Church Committee. When Hosty testified before the Warren Commission on May 5, 1964, he informed the commission that on the morning of the day of the assassination, he had conference with Coyle concerning a “case.” Hosty was referring to the theft of weapons from the Fort Hood Army base (ibid). Hosty pointed out to the Commission that the “case” was not “related” to Oswald. When Hosty testified before the Church Committee on December 13, 1975, he again felt it necessary to mention that the aforementioned conference with Coyle was not related to Oswald (ibid). Although the reader may disagree, it is my belief that the reason Hosty felt it necessary to tell both the Warren Commission and the Church Committee that the “case” was not related to Oswald, is because it was in fact related to Oswald in some way.

Most researchers are probably familiar with the so-called Hosty note. For those who are not, sometime in mid-November, 1963, Oswald purportedly left a note for James Hosty inside an envelope at the Dallas office of the FBI; which Hosty’s supervisor, J. Gordon Shanklin, ordered him to destroy (see here). Oswald supposedly left the note for Hosty after learning that Hosty had spoken to his wife at the residence of Ruth Paine. In his book “Assignment Oswald,” Hosty writes that in the note, Oswald wrote (words to the effect) “If you want to talk to me, you should talk to me to my face. Stop harassing my wife, and stop trying to ask her about me. You have no right to harass her” (see here). According to a receptionist working at the FBI building in Dallas, in his note to Hosty, Oswald threatened to blow up the FBI and the DPD if Hosty didn’t stop bothering his wife (see here).

But if either one of these stories are true, it seems unlikely to me that Shanklin would order Hosty to destroy the note. If Oswald really did threaten to blow up the FBI and the DPD in his note, the FBI could have used this to show that Oswald had violent tendencies; and to bolster the notion that he was capable of assassinating the President. I believe the note Oswald left for Hosty had to do with him being an informant for Hosty and the FBI. But what information could the note have contained? Many researchers are probably familiar with the theft of weapons from the National Guard Armory in Terrell, Texas, in mid-November, 1963. As researcher Greg Parker explains at the ROKC forum, on November 16, 1963, the FBI received information from an informant about a planned transfer of stolen weapons. On November 18, 1963, the DPD and FBI arrested two men; Donnell Whitter/Whittier (an auto mechanic who had once serviced Jack Ruby’s car) and Lawrence Miller for possession of weapons stolen from the aforementioned National Guard Amory (see here). Although I can’t prove it, I believe Oswald may have been the informant.

At this stage, the reader may be wondering what evidence there is pointing to a relationship between the FBI and the TSBD Corporation. In order to answer that question, let’s turn to Jack Charles Cason; the man who was the President of the TSBD Corporation at the time of the assassination. When Cason was interviewed by the FBI on June 9, 1964, he informed them he was a former commander of American Legion post No. 53 in Dallas, Texas  (see the thread entitled “Cason and the FBI” at Greg Parker’s ROKC forum). The significance of this is that the FBI and the American Legion were working together to combat communism in the United States. According to the American Legion’s website, FBI director J. Edgar Hoover made the following remarks; “The American Legion is a great force for good in this nation. We of the FBI need your help now even more than during the war years if the battle for a safe and secure America is to be won. Our enemies are massing their forces on two main fronts. One is the criminal front. ... We are nearer to the days of gang control than we were a year after World War I. Add to the forces that account for a serious crime every 20 seconds, day and night, the other encroaching enemy of America, and we have a formidable foe. I refer to the growing menace of communism in the United States” (ibid).

As Greg Parker has pointed out, the Church Committee discovered that the FBI used members of the American Legion as “confidential sources on subversive matters” (ibid). The reader should keep in mind that Joe Molina was considered a subversive (see here). Taking the Church Committee’s discovery into account, it seems quite likely that Cason was in cahoots with Hoover and the FBI. Although both Hoover and Hosty emphatically denied that Oswald ever worked as an informant for the FBI, I think most reasonable people will agree that their denial is perfectly understandable considering Oswald was accused of assassinating the President (WC Volume IV, page 469), (WC Volume V, page 98). If I were in Hoover’s and Hosty’s place, I too would deny that Oswald ever worked as an informant for me; as such an admission would not only have led to great shame and embarrassment, but may also have led many people to suspect that I was involved in a conspiracy with Oswald to assassinate the President.

Returning now to Edward Coyle, as I pointed out above, Lt. Colonel Robert E. Jones of the 112th MIG at Fort Sam Houston, San Antonio, Texas, claimed Coyle was one of the 112th MIG’s liaison officers to the U. S. Secret Service in Dallas, Texas, at the time of President Kennedy’s visit there. Of note here is that Secret Service agent, Winston G. Lawson; who was involved in the planning of the motorcade route through Dallas on the day of the assassination, informed the Warren Commission that he had been an Army CIC (Counter-intelligence Corps) officer during the mid-1950s (see the thread entitled “My latest essay” at the ROKC forum). According to Dallas Police Chief, Jesse Curry, it was Lawson who made all the “major decisions” concerning the President’s trip to Dallas (see here). The reader may be wondering why Lawson would admit to being an Army CIC officer if individuals with connections to Army intelligence/counter-intelligence and the 112th MIG were involved in the conspiracy to assassinate the President; and if he (Lawson) was a part of the conspiracy. The reader should consider that Lawson may have thought that by admitting he had been an Army CIC officer, the Warren Commission would think he had nothing to hide.

Although there is no proof (as far as I am aware) that Lawson was involved in the conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy, we should nevertheless keep in mind that he was involved with Army CIC; and that he may have been associated with Edward Coyle given that Coyle was one of the 112th MIGs liaison officers to the Secret Service in Dallas, Texas, during the President’s visit there. I should point out that although I believe Coyle was quite possibly involved in the conspiracy to assassinate the President (and to frame Oswald for the assassination), I don’t believe Hosty was involved in the conspiracy. I believe Hosty only thought that Oswald was to keep tabs on Molina; and to report back to him (Hosty) on any information he could uncover about Molina’s possible involvement in “subversive” activities as well as gun running.

William James Lowery, Johnny Calvin Brewer, and William Marvin Gheesling

In part one of this essay, I mentioned that long time FBI informant, William James Lowery, had been reporting on Joe Molina to the FBI, and that James Hosty was one of the FBI agents whom he would report information to. I also mentioned that at the time of the assassination, Lowery was running a shoe store called the Shoe Haven a mere three blocks to the West of the Texas Theater where Oswald was arrested by the DPD. As every researcher of the assassination should be aware, Oswald was allegedly seen by Johnny Calvin Brewer; the manager of Hardy’s shoe store, looking “funny” and “scared” as DPD squad cars were driving past the store with their sirens blazing in search of the man who killed officer J.D. Tippit. Brewer then allegedly saw Oswald enter the Texas Theater and followed him there (see the thread entitled “Brewer’s IBM friends” at the ROKC forum). During an interview with author Ian Griggs in 1996, Brewer claimed that two men from IBM were in the store with him when he allegedly observed Oswald looking “funny” and “scared” (ibid).

As far as I am aware, this was the first time Brewer ever mentioned the presence of these two men in the store with him. The reader should keep in mind that neither one of these men (provided Brewer’s story is true) ever informed the authorities that they were inside Brewer’s store at the time Brewer claims he observed Oswald. It is my belief that these mysterious “IBM” men were responsible for informing Brewer that they had seen a suspicious looking man with a gun sneak into the Texas Theater; and that he should alert both the Theater employees and the DPD. Researcher Lee Farley once made an excellent case that one of these men was the very mysterious and suspicious, Igor Vaganov (see here). What’s really interesting is that according to researcher William Weston, Vaganov was a “Nazi Ideologue” (ibid). At this point, we should keep in mind the evidence I discussed in part one of this essay showing that some of those involved in the assassination wanted to give the public the impression that Jews were part of the conspiracy to assassinate the President.

But what about the identity of the second “IBM” man inside Brewer’s shoe store? In my opinion, the other “IBM” man could have been Robert J. Radelat. Radelat was a “Cadet Executive Officer” of the Civil Air Patrol who, according to former Civil Air Patrol member, Frederick O’Sullivan, was employed by IBM in November, 1963 (ibid). Bear in mind that at the time of the assassination, the TSBD building was owned by David Harold Byrd; a co-founder of the CAP, and that Oswald joined the CAP in July, 1955. When Radelat was interviewed by the FBI on December 19, 1963, he denied knowing Oswald (ibid). If Radelat was in fact one of the two “IBM” men inside Brewer’s shoe store; and if he was responsible for luring Brewer to the Texas Theater to alert the DPD, this would certainly explain why he denied knowing Oswald.

The reader may be wondering why Brewer would admit to Griggs that there were two men from IBM in the store with him if they were responsible for luring him to the Theater. One possible explanation is that Brewer had been feeling guilty for lying about seeing Oswald looking “funny” and “scared” and then seeing him enter the Theater, so he decided to give Griggs a subtle clue as to what really happened by revealing to him that there were two men from IBM in the store with him when he allegedly observed Oswald. Others may think that Brewer was simply lying when he told Griggs two men from IBM were in the store with him, but I don’t see why he would. Besides, Brewer more or less told the Warren Commission that they were in the store with him (ibid). It’s also possible that the two men weren’t really from IBM; and were only pretending they were.

One thing I am certain of is that it wasn’t a coincidence that Johnny Brewer was the person chosen to lure DPD officers to the Texas Theater. I also don’t believe it was just a bizarre coincidence that William James Lowery was running his own shoe store a mere three blocks to the West of the Texas Theater and Hardy’s shoe store. I suspect that Brewer was quite possibly an FBI informant himself; and that he was well acquainted with Lowery. A couple of months ago at the ROKC forum, I started a thread entitled “Roy Lee Lowery” in which I discussed the likely involvement of Dallas Police detective, Roy Lee Lowery, in Oswald’s murder at the basement of the DPD. In that same thread, I pointed out the likely involvement of Dallas Police sergeant, Gerald Hill, with Lowery in covering up the involvement of Dallas Police Lieutenant, George E. Butler, in Oswald’s murder. As I have stated elsewhere, there is very good reason to believe that Hill framed Oswald for the murder of Dallas Police officer, J.D. Tippit, by pretending to remove the revolver (most likely) used to kill Tippit from Oswald during Oswald’s scuffle with Dallas Police officers inside the Theater. Although I haven’t been able to prove it yet, I strongly suspect that detective Lowery and William James Lowery were blood related.

As I mentioned in part one of this essay, on October 9, 1963, the FBI removed their FLASH (security watch) on Oswald which had been issued after they discovered Oswald allegedly tried to renounce his American citizenship whilst in the Soviet Union (WC Volume V, page 7). I also pointed out that in late September, 1963; William Lowery publicly revealed that he was an FBI informant. This surely meant that he could no longer be used as a confidential FBI informant. Of note is the fact that the FLASH was removed between the time Lowery publicly revealed he was an FBI informant, and the date on which Oswald obtained his job as an order-filler at the TSBD building; namely, October 15, 1963. It is my firm belief that the removal of the FLASH had to do with Oswald taking over from William Lowery in keeping an eye out on Joe Molina on behalf of James Hosty and the FBI.

If the FLASH had not been removed, then Oswald most likely couldn’t have been used as the patsy for the assassination; because the U.S. Secret Service most likely would have been alerted to the fact that he was working inside a building overlooking the motorcade route through Dallas (see here). The person responsible for removing the FLASH on Oswald was FBI supervisor, William Marvin Gheesling. Considering that individuals with connections to Army intelligence/counter-intelligence and the 112th MIG were involved in the assassination, I began to suspect that Gheesling may have been involved with these individuals. Although I haven’t been able to establish that he was, the reader should bear in mind that Gheesling was described by the HSCA as having considerable experience with regards to espionage, intelligence and counter-intelligence investigations for the FBI (see the thread entitled “William Marvin Gheesling” at the ROKC forum).

Let’s also bear in mind that Gheesling’s younger brother, Virgil Alex Gheesling Jr., had served in the U. S. Army (ibid). In his book “Assignment Oswald,” James Hosty describes Gheesling as a “war veteran,” but doesn’t specify what branch of the armed services he was a veteran of (ibid). Given that at least one member of his family served in the U.S. Army, it is entirely possible that Gheesling was a veteran of the U.S. Army. Gheesling’s brother Virgil was also an active member of the First Baptist Church in Hendersonville, Virginia (ibid). Gheesling’s sister-in-law (the wife of his brother, Charles Stanley Gheesling) was a “lifelong member” of the Bethesda Baptist Church in Union Point, Georgia (ibid). With this in mind, it stands to reason that William Marvin Gheesling was a Baptist himself. Of note is that Sgt. Gerald Hill was also a Baptist (ibid). Therefore, it’s possible that Hill and Gheesling knew each other.

Charles W. Webster, John Jacob Abt, and Dr. Robert John Morris

One of the most overlooked individuals of interest to me is Charles W. Webster; a professor of law at Southern Methodist University in Dallas from at least August, 1956. On the day of the assassination, Webster was at DPD headquarters; and despite allegedly being a Communist, he appeared to be on friendly terms with the right-wing DPD. Webster was a President of the St. Thomas More Society (an organisation of Catholic attorneys) in the Dallas-Fort Worth Diocese (see here). As I mentioned above, Edward Coyle was a member of the Knights of Columbus; a Catholic “fraternal service organisation.” Given their association with Catholic organisations, it’s entirely possible that Coyle and Webster knew each other before the assassination. According to researcher Greg Parker, “Webster had run for congress in 1960 with the support of the heavily infiltrated local communist branch which included Bill Lowery, the FBI informant” (see the thread entitled “John Abt and Lee Harvey Oswald” at the education forum).

In addition to his association with Lowery, Webster knew Dr. Robert John Morris; the ultra-right-wing attorney who served as the chief counsel of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Internal Security from 1951 to 1953 and from 1956 to 1958 (see the thread entitled “Robert John Morris” at the ROKC forum). Most researchers are probably familiar with the allegation that Oswald had asked for John Jacob Abt; an attorney for the Communist Party USA, to represent him following his arrest on the day of the assassination. Greg Parker put forward the idea that it was Professor Webster who recommended to Oswald that he contact Abt to represent him; and provided him with Abt’s name and phone number (see the thread entitled “Oswald's Alibi and the Reid Technique” at the ROKC forum). I believe he could very well be correct. According to Dallas Police Captain Will Fritz, Oswald asked for Abt on the day of the assassination (see here and here). However, this was almost certainly a lie, because during the infamous “midnight press conference,” Oswald made no mention of wanting Abt to represent him; merely asking for “someone to come forward” to provide him with “legal assistance” (see here).

Although the reader may believe that Oswald never asked for Abt at all, his mother Marguerite informed the Warren Commission that on the day following the assassination, Oswald told her he “requested to get in touch with Attorney Abt, I think is the name” (WC Volume I, page 149). Unless we are to believe that Marguerite Oswald was part of the plot to associated Oswald with Abt, I see no reason why she would make this claim. But if Webster recommended to Oswald that he contact John Abt to represent him, the obvious question is why. As stated previously, Abt was an attorney for the Communist Party USA; and had defended members of the party against the Smith Act (see here). For example, in January, 1955, Abt defended an African American member of the CPUSA named Claude Lightfoot, who was “arrested based on the Smith Act of 1940 and put on trial” (see here and here). For the uninformed reader, the Smith Act of 1940 made it illegal to advocate (or to belong to a group that advocated) the “violent overthrow” of the U.S. Government.

With the above in mind, I believe the main reason Webster recommended Abt as an attorney to Oswald was to give the public the impression that the assassination was a Communist conspiracy to “overthrow” the U.S. Government. After spending several years researching the assassination, one thing I am absolutely certain of is that the conspirators wanted to provoke a war between the United States and Cuba to overthrow Fidel Castro and his communist regime. Had it not been to the publicity of Oswald handing out Fair Play for Cuba committee leaflets in New Orleans, in August, 1963, he may never have been used as a patsy for the assassination. Perhaps the biggest clue that the conspirators wanted to provoke a war between the United States and Cuba is what John Thomas Masen; a gun store owner in Dallas, Texas, told an FBI informant. As researcher Mark Bridger explains, Masen claimed that beginning in the last week of November “an extended series of small commando raids” would be made against Cuba; followed by a “large scale amphibious assault against the Cuban Mainland” (see here).

Let’s now consider the following. As discussed in part one of this essay, on the night of the assassination, Army intelligence in Texas sent a confidential and provocative cable to the U.S. strike command at MacDill Air Force base in Florida; which had the capability of providing a swift retaliatory attack against Cuba. According to the cable, information “obtained from Oswald revealed he had defected to Cuba in 1959 and is a card carrying member of the Communist Party.” However, this was a lie, because Oswald never defected to Cuba; and was not a “card carrying member of the Communist Party.” The person named as the source of this information was detective L. D. “Don” Stringfellow of the DPD’s Criminal Intelligence Section; who was member of Jack Crichton’s 488th Military Intelligence detachment (a reserve Army intelligence unit). For information on Crichton, I direct the reader to part one of this essay.

Most researchers are probably familiar with the claim by Dallas Police Lieutenant Jack Revill (who was in charge of the DPD’s Criminal Intelligence Section) that shortly following Oswald’s arrest on the day of the assassination, James Hosty told him Oswald was a member of the Communist party and that the FBI knew he was capable of assassinating the President. For those who aren’t, Revill wrote about this in a report to his superior, Captain W. P. Gannaway, and repeated this claim before the Warren Commission (see here, and also WC Volume V, page 34). Revill’s claim that Hosty told him Oswald was a Communist was corroborated by detective Valarus J. “Jack” Brian; who worked under Revill in the Criminal intelligence Section (see here, and also WC Volume V, page 34). But are Revill and Brian credible? First of all, let’s consider that Hosty denied telling Revill that Oswald was capable of assassinating the President when he testified before the Warren Commission (WC Volume IV, page 463 and 464). Secondly, if Oswald was working as an informant for Hosty and the FBI (and we have good reason to believe he was), it makes no sense that Hosty would tell Revill that Oswald is a Communist or a member of the Communist Party.

It’s apparent to me that both Revill and Brian were lying. The question is why. Let’s consider that not only was detective L. D. “Don” Stringfellow working under Revill, but that Edward Coyle told the ARRB that every member of the DPD’s Intelligence section was involved with Army intelligence (see here). In fact, as mentioned in part one of this essay, Jack Crichton once claimed during an interview that there were “about a hundred men” in his 488th Military Intelligence Detachment, and that “about forty or fifty of them were from the Dallas Police Department.” We should also keep in mind that Jack Revill was drafted into the U.S. Army in the late 1950s; shortly after which he joined the Criminal Intelligence Section of the DPD (See here, and see WC Volume V, page 33). We should also keep in mind that detective Valarus J. “Jack” Brian had served in the U.S. Army from 1953 to 1955 as a Sergeant; shortly after which he went to work for the Criminal Intelligence Section of the DPD (see here, and see ibid, page 48).

The fact that both Revill and Brian went to work for the Criminal Intelligence Section of the DPD shortly following their involvement with the U.S. Army strongly suggests that during their time with the Army, they were both involved in intelligence/counter-intelligence work. In part one of this essay, I also discussed the fact that after Army intelligence officer/agent James W. Powell was trapped inside the TSBD following the assassination, he was interviewed by detective Brian. In my essay “Gerald Hill and the Framing of Lee Harvey Oswald,” I mentioned that apart from Gerald Hill himself, Brian was (as far as I am aware) the only law enforcement official who claimed that Hill was on the sixth floor of the TSBD when the spent shell casings were found; despite the likelihood that Hill had already left the TSBD (see under the subheading “Did Hill Lie about his location?”). In that same essay, I discuss evidence pointing to Hill’s complicity in framing Oswald for Tippit’s murder (which I believe was to ensure the DPD would pin the blame for the President’s assassination on Oswald); and that shortly following Oswald’s arrest inside the Texas Theater, Hill made the false claim to Bob Whitten of KCRA radio that Oswald had admitted to being an “active Communist” (see under the subheading “Hill’s possible motive”).

Returning now to John Abt, in his report on Oswald’s interrogations, Captain Fritz wrote that Oswald told him he belonged to the “Fair Play for Cuba organization” and that he belonged to the American Civil Liberties Union; and paid “$5.00 dues” apparently for membership in the ACLU (see here and here). I believe Fritz was lying. On the day following the assassination, H. Louis Nichols; the President of the Dallas Bar Association who visited Oswald in his jail cell, informed news reporters that Oswald told him if he couldn’t get John Abt to represent him, he wanted an attorney from the ACLU to represent him. Nichols also informed reporters that Oswald told him he was a member of the ACLU (see here). I return to Nichols further on in this essay. As I discussed in the thread entitled “My latest essay” at the ROKC forum, on November 1, 1963, someone claiming to be Oswald filled out an application form to rent Post office box 6225 in Dallas, Texas. In that same thread, I expressed my belief that this was Jack Ruby’s multi-purpose employee, Larry Crafard; whom we have good reason to believe was not only the Oswald lookalike who shot officer J.D. Tippit, but may also have been a sniper inside the TSBD (see my essay “Did Larry Crafard kill J. D. Tippit?” for more on Crafard).

Whoever filled out the application form to rent P.O. box 6225 listed the Fair Play for Cuba Committee and the ACLU as organisations for which the box was being rented (WCD 934). Someone claiming to be Oswald also sent a letter to the ACLU (with the return address of “Box 6225, Dallas, Tex”) asking to be “enrolled” as an “associate member” which the ALCU received on November 4, 1963 (WCD 1502, page 6). The FBI reported that the handwriting on the note was determined to be Oswald’s handwriting by the FBI laboratory (WCD 107, page 52). However, this could have been done by someone familiar with Oswald’s handwriting. As far as I am aware, there is no film footage of the real Oswald asking for an ACLU attorney; or claiming that he was a member of the ACLU.

It’s apparent to me that the conspirators wanted to associate Oswald with the ACLU. The question is why. Let’s consider the following. As author William A. Donohue writes in his book “The Politics of the American Civil Liberties Union,” the ACLU was involved in defending the rights of Communists (see here). With this in mind, there can be little doubt that many individuals with ultra-right beliefs would have considered the ACLU as being some sort of a Communist “front” organisation. As a matter of fact, according to Earl Browder; who had served as chairman and general secretary of the National Committee of the CP USA between the years 1930 and 1945, the ACLU functioned as a “transmission belt” for the Communist Party (see here). Let’s also consider that at least one of the co-founders of the ACLU; Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, was a Communist. Flynn served as the chairwoman of the National Committee of the CP USA from January, 1961, to September, 1964 (see here and here).

But perhaps the most important point to bear in mind is that someone claiming to be Oswald sent a letter to Arnold Samuel Johnson; the director of the “information and lecture bureau of the Communist party,” informing Johnson that “Through a friend, I have been introduced into the American Civil Liberties Union Local chapter” (WCE 1145). In the letter, Johnson was asked “Could you advise me as to the general view we had on the American Civil Liberties Union? and to what degree, if any, I should attempt to highten [sic] its progressive tendencies” (ibid). The return address on the letter was “P. O. Box 6225.” Johnson had been a representative of the ACLU; and in 1951, he was indicted for apparently advocating the overthrow of the U.S. Government in violation of the Smith Act (see here and here). Also of note is that when Johnson testified before the Warren Commission, the attorney that accompanied him was John Abt.

Taking all of the above information concerning Johnson and the ACLU into consideration, it is my belief that by associating Oswald with Johnson and the ACLU, the conspirators wanted to reinforce the belief that Oswald was part of a Communist conspiracy to assassinate the President and to “overthrow” the Government (let’s also remember that as mentioned above, the ACLU was listed as an organisation alongside the FPCC for which P.O. box 6225 was being rented). When John Abt testified before the Warren Commission, he was asked the following question; “Mr. Abt, did you learn that Lee Harvey Oswald was interested in having you represent him apparently because of some prior connection of yours with the American Civil Liberties Union?” Abt’s response was “No. My assumption was, and it is pure assumption, that [Oswald] read about some of my representation in the press, and, therefore, it occurred to him that I might be a good man to represent him, but that is pure assumption on my part. I have no direct knowledge of the whole matter” (WC Volume X, page 116).

Although Abt didn’t deny that he was involved with the ACLU when he testified, in his book “Advocate and Activist: Memoirs of an American Communist Lawyer,” Abt makes no mention of being an attorney for the ACLU. In fact, as Abt writes on page 19 of his book, he had joined the Chicago Civil Liberties Union (see here). As I mentioned above, one of the co-founders of the ACLU was Elizabeth Gurley Flynn; who served as the chairwoman of the National Committee of the CP USA from January, 1961, to September, 1964. When Arnold Samuel Johnson testified before the Warren Commission, he was asked who Elizabeth Gurley Flynn was. At this point, Abt interjected with the following; “Mr. Rankin, I have advised Mr. Johnson respectfully to decline to give any further information on this subject” (WC Volume X, page 100). One has to wonder why Abt advised Johnson to decline to give further information on Flynn. In my opinion, it was most likely because Johnson and Flynn were both associated with the ACLU; and because of rumours that Abt himself was associated with the ACLU.

As I pointed out previously, Greg Parker put forward the idea that it was Professor Charles W. Webster from Southern Methodist University who provided Oswald with John Abt’s name and phone number following his arrest on the day of the assassination. Provided this is true, it begs the question of who was the so-called mastermind behind this. One person who comes to mind is Dr. Robert Morris. As mentioned previously, Morris and Webster knew each other. On November 26, 1963, the FBI received a letter from an attorney named Clarence Carter Byrd from Florence, South Carolina, who informed them that he had seen Oswald state on television that he wanted John Abt as his attorney (see the thread entitled “Robert John Morris” at the ROKC forum). As far as I am aware, there is no television footage of Oswald asking for Abt. Therefore, Byrd was probably lying.

But why would Byrd lie? Let’s consider the following. Byrd was a veteran of the U.S. Navy; where he served as a Naval Intelligence Officer and was a Pearl Harbor survivor during World War II (ibid). Robert Morris had served in the U.S. Navy during World War II; during which he was a “commander of counterintelligence and psychological warfare” (ibid). Therefore, Morris and Byrd may have known each other. Furthermore, Byrd was a member of the central United Methodist Church (ibid). According to its website, Southern Methodist University was founded by what is now referred to as the United Methodist Church (ibid). Taking this into account with the fact that Charles Webster was a professor of Law at Southern Methodist University, it is entirely possible that Byrd and Webster knew each other. If Byrd did in fact know both Webster and Robert Morris, then this could explain why he lied to the FBI about seeing Oswald state on television that he wanted John Abt as his attorney.

In part one of this essay, I discussed the infamous “black border ad” which I believe was part of the ploy to give the public the impression that Jews were involved in the assassination. One of those responsible for the ad was Joseph P. Grinnan; an “independent oil operator” in Dallas and a member of the ultra-right-wing John Birch Society (see here and here). When Bernard Weissman testified before the Warren Commission, he remarked that “too many” members of the John Birch Society were anti-Semitic (WC Volume V, page 500). Of note is that Grinnan’s attorney was Robert Morris. At this point, the reader should keep in mind that Morris knew both Lawrence Howard of INTERPEN fame (whom I strongly suspect may have been the “dark complected” man seen by Dallas deputy Sheriff Roger Craig driving the Nash Rambler Station along Elm Street shortly following the assassination) and Dallas Police Lieutenant, George E. Butler (see the thread entitled “Robert John Morris” at the ROKC forum). As I discussed in part one of this essay, there is good reason to believe that Butler was involved in the plot to murder Oswald in the basement of the DPD; and that Butler informed the DPD he had information that Oswald was the illegitimate son of Jack Ruby.

Since Jack Ruby was of Jewish ancestry, the implication of Butler’s claim is that Oswald was also Jewish; and that Oswald was part of a Jewish conspiracy to assassinate the President. We should also keep in mind that according to Butler’s obituary in the “Oak Cliff Tribune,” he “was certain that Lee Harvey Oswald and his wife Marina were Communists agents, that Fidel Castro ordered the Kennedy killing, [and] that Oswald and Jack Ruby were probably in cahoots” (see here). As I discussed at the ROKC forum in March, 2016, there is good reason to believe that reserve Dallas Police Captain, Charles Oliver Arnett, and reserve Dallas Police sergeant, Kenneth Hudson Croy, were both involved with George Butler in Oswald’s murder; and that like Butler, Arnett informed the DPD he had information that Oswald was the illegitimate son of Jack Ruby (see the thread entitled “Kenneth Croy redux”). As I also discussed, Dallas Police detective Joseph R. Cody; who was an Army CIC officer and under whose name the colt cobra revolver Jack Ruby used to kill Oswald with was purchased, was also likely involved with Butler in Oswald’s murder (ibid).

Shortly following the assassination, former Army General Edwin A. Walker was interviewed by a German Newspaper called the “National Zeitung.” During the interview, Walker stated the following; “We have been talking about this Marxist assassin… this Oswald… Lee Oswald… I have just learned that John Abt from New York has offered to defend him in Court” (WCD 1543, page 12). Walker also remarked that “Mr. Abt is an American Jew who defends all big Communist cases” (ibid). As researcher Ed LeDoux kindly pointed out to me, in his aforementioned book, Abt wrote that he had a “German Jewish Childhood” (see here). So although Walker wasn’t lying when he referred to Abt as a Jew, his claim that Abt “offered” to defend Oswald in court was a lie; because Abt never made such an offer.

Although the reader may believe that Walker simply received false information, there is good reason to believe that this was a deliberate lie by Walker. First of all, let’s consider that Robert Morris had been one of Walker’s attorneys (see the thread entitled “Robert John Morris” at the ROKC forum). Secondly, let’s consider that Walker himself probably held anti-Semitic beliefs. When Walker testified before the Senate Armed Service sub-committee in early 1962, George Lincoln Rockwell (the founder of the American Nazi Party) was present (see here). According to a journalist named Tom Kelly, Walker assaulted him (Kelly) after he asked Walker if he would like to “disavow” Rockwell; this was after Kelly told Walker that Rockwell had praised him (see here). Furthermore, according to an article in the “Enquirer” of New York, Walker was “affiliated” with Rockwell and the American Nazi Party (see here).

Taking the above into consideration, it’s apparent that Walker had Nazi/anti-Semitic beliefs. Another point to keep in mind is that during his testimony before the Warren Commission, Walker referred to Ruby by his actual Jewish surname, Rubenstein, when discussing the possibility that Ruby was involved with Oswald in a conspiracy to assassinate the President. As a matter of fact, Walker told the Warren Commission the following; “I think the fact that Rubenstein shot Oswald suggests plenty. I am convinced he couldn’t have shot him except for one basic reason, and maybe many others, but to keep him quiet” (WC Volume XI, page 423). Although I don’t believe Walker had any direct involvement in the assassination, I nevertheless believe he had foreknowledge of it; and that he was part of the plot to give the public the impression that Jews were involved in the assassination. Also of note is that during the riots at Oxford Mississippi in September and October, 1962 (which Walker was involved with) Joseph P. Grinnan was reported to be a “volunteer aide” for Walker; and to “keep arms in his automobile” (see here).

In addition to what I have discussed above concerning why John Abt was recommended to Oswald as an attorney, I believe it also had to do with the fact that Abt was Jewish. I believe that by getting Professor Charles Webster to recommend to Oswald that he ask for a Jewish attorney who had defended members of the CP USA, people such as Robert Morris had hoped that this would give the public the impression that Oswald was part of a Jewish Communist conspiracy to assassinate the President. In fact, as I mentioned previously, I believe Robert Morris may have been the so-called mastermind behind the idea of recommending to Oswald that he contact John Abt to represent him. Let’s keep in mind that Abt argued against the McCarran Act before the U.S. Supreme Court in 1960; and defended the CP USA against it (see here and here). For the uninformed reader, the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Internal Security was created to study and investigate the administration, operation, and enforcement of the McCarran Act; and as stated previously, Robert Morris had served as its chief counsel from 1951 to 1953 and from 1956 to 1958. Although Morris was no longer its chief counsel in 1960, given his association with the Subcommittee, Morris was probably familiar with Abt.

Before concluding this section of the essay, there are a few more individuals I would like to discuss. The first is Richard Girnt Butler. Butler was a vile, racist, anti-Semitic individual who, according to researcher David Boylan, knew Lawrence Howard of INTERPEN fame. This is the same Lawrence Howard who was “very reluctant” to admit knowing Robert Morris (see here and here). Whilst I have not yet been able to determine if Richard Butler was related to Lieutenant George Butler of the DPD, given the likelihood that George Butler was involved in the plot to give the public the impression that Jews were involved in the assassination, I think it would prove to be most interesting if it can be determined that they were related.

The second individual I would like to discuss is Joseph Adams Milteer. The reader may be familiar with the fact that Milteer was recorded telling FBI informant, William Somerset, about a plot to assassinate President Kennedy from an office building with a “high powered rifle” before the assassination (see here). Like Richard Butler, Milteer was a racist and an anti-Semite. Before the assassination, Milteer had also “predicted” that there would be “a propaganda campaign put on how to prove to the Christian people of the world that the Jews, the Zionist Jews, had murdered Kennedy” (see here). As Dr. Jerry Rose writes in his article entitled “Wake up Christians! Milteer after the assassination,” following the assassination, Milteer made the following claim; “the Zionist Jews, Communists, had President John Fitzgerald Kennedy killed in Dallas, Texas, by Lee Oswald, November 22, 1963” (see here). Although I don’t believe Milteer had any direct involvement in the assassination, it’s apparent to me that he had foreknowledge of it.

The final individual I would like to discuss is the Jewish Bernard Weissman. As discussed in part one of this essay, it was Weissman’s name which was printed at the bottom of the infamous “black border ad.” The reader may be familiar with the so-called “Oxnard call,” where a woman speaking in a low voice predicted that President Kennedy would be assassinated at 12:30 pm Dallas time; exactly the time at which he was shot in Dealey Plaza. The reader may also be familiar with the fact that the caller initially predicted the assassination would occur at 12:10 pm. For those who are not familiar with the so-called Oxnard Call, I highly recommend reading Greg Parker’s fascinating research on it (see here). As both Parker and I believe, the caller was most likely in radio contact with the conspirators in Dallas; and that the initial plot to assassinate the President at circa 12:10 pm was aborted.

This now brings me back to Bernard Weissman. In my opinion, Weissman may have been the designated patsy for the assassination plot at circa 12:10 pm. If this were the case, and if Weissman didn’t turn up at the location along the motorcade route where he was supposed to be, then this could explain why the assassination plot at circa 12:10 pm didn’t go ahead as planned. Although I don’t firmly believe that Weissman was the designated patsy, there are some indications that he knew the President would be assassinated sometime between 12:10 pm and 12:30 pm. When Weissman testified before the Warren Commission, he claimed that he and his friend William Burley were to meet with Larrie Schmidt; the President of CUSA at a place called the Ducharme Club in Dallas; and that Burley was waiting to pick him up between 12:10 and 12:30 pm (WC Volume V, pages 515 and 516).

The reader should note that Weissman claimed Burley was waiting for him between the time of the initial prediction by the Oxnard caller as to when the President would be assassinated and the time the President was actually assassinated in Dealey Plaza. Although this could be just a bizarre coincidence, Weissman may have been trying to give the Warren Commission the impression that he couldn’t have been involved in the assassination. Whilst the reader may believe that Weissman couldn’t have been the designated patsy for the aborted 12:10 pm assassination plot because he was a right-winger, we should consider that there may have been a post assassination plan to give the public the impression that Weissman was a Communist pretending to be a right-winger. Another point to keep in mind is that as Warren Commission member Hale Boggs claimed during Weissman’s testimony before the commission, Jews in Germany were described (amongst other things) as being Communists (ibid, page 501).

Robert Gerald Storey Sr., H. Louis Nichols, and Joseph Brantley Brown Jr.

In the previous section of this essay, I discussed the possibility that Professor Charles W. Webster from Southern Methodist University had recommended John Abt as an attorney to Oswald; and that Webster was associated with William James Lowery and Robert Morris. Another person of interest whom Webster (undoubtedly) knew was attorney Robert Gerald Storey Sr. The reader may recognise Storey as being an attorney who was part of the “State Court of Inquiry” appointed by Governor John Connally to conduct an investigation into Oswald’s murder; and then report back to Connally on the findings (see the thread entitled “Robert Gerald Storey” at the ROKC forum). Storey was present during some of the testimonies by witnesses before the Warren Commission; such as the testimony of Jack Ruby. During the Infamous Nuremberg War trials (where several high ranking Nazis were tried for crimes during World War II), Storey was part of the prosecution team (ibid).

From 1921 to 1922, Storey served as a national executive committeeman of the American Legion (ibid). The potential significance of this is that (as mentioned above) Jack Charles Cason told the FBI during a post assassination interview that he was a former commander of American Legion post No. 53 in Dallas, Texas. From 1947 to 1959, Storey was the Dean of Southern Methodist University law School (ibid). As I mentioned above, Charles Webster was a professor of law at SMU from at least August, 1956. With this in mind, there can be no doubt that Storey and Webster were well acquainted. In Part one of this essay, one of the individuals I discussed was Louise Raggio; a friend of Lyndon Johnson who was Ruth Paine’s divorce attorney, and who (like her husband Grier Raggio) likely had ties to the 112th MIG in Dallas, Texas. Louise Raggio graduated from SMU with her law degree in 1952 (ibid). Therefore, there can be little doubt that Raggio and Storey knew each other.

According to researchers Harold Weisberg and Bruce Adamson, Storey had an office inside the Republic National Bank building; and as researcher Greg Parker pointed out, the Republic National Bank was identified as being a conduit of CIA funds since the year 1958 (ibid). Also of note is that Dallas district attorney Henry Wade told the FBI that Storey claimed he had either worked for or with the CIA in Europe (ibid). Storey was also a combat intelligence officer for the U.S. Air Force in London (ibid). Another person of interest who had office space inside the Republic National Bank building was Oswald’s so-called best friend, George DeMohrenschildt. In February, 1964, Weeden B. Nichols; the Vice President and building manager of the Republic National Bank Building in Dallas, Texas, informed the FBI that from September, 1954 to May, 1959, DeMohrenschildt occupied two rooms inside the building (WCD 555, page 9). 

As I discussed previously, on the day following the assassination, H. Louis Nichols; the President of the Dallas Bar Association, informed news reporters that Oswald told him if he couldn’t get John Abt to represent him, he wanted an attorney from the ACLU to represent him; and that Oswald told him he was a member of the ACLU. I previously expressed my belief that by associating Oswald with the ACLU, the conspirators wanted to reinforce the belief that Oswald was part of a Communist conspiracy to assassinate the President and to “overthrow” the Government. I believe Nichols was involved in this scheme. Let’s take into account the fact that Nichols was a member of the U.S. Army reserves (see here). As Greg Parker pointed out, the U.S. Army reserves were a “recruiting ground” for Army intelligence (see the thread entitled “Send Lawyers Guns & Money Pt2 at the ROKC forum). Another individual of interest who was a member of the U.S. Army reserves is Michael Paine (this was discussed in part one of this essay).

When H. Louis Nichols testified before the Warren Commission, he stated his business address was “1200 Republic Bank Building, Dallas” (WC Volume VII, page 326). According to Bruce Adamson, Nichols and Robert Storey Sr. knew each other (see here). Another interesting occupant of the Republic National Bank Building was attorney Eugene Murphy Locke. Locke was a friend of Lyndon Johnson who was the chairman of the State Democratic Executive Committee of Texas; and a member of both the Dallas and American Bar Association (see here and here). As researchers such as Gayle Nix Jackson have pointed out, on November 14, 1963, Secret Service agents Winston Lawson and Forrest Sorrels visited Locke at the Republic National Bank Building to discuss various aspects of President Kennedy’s visit to Dallas, which apparently included the motorcade route (WCD 3, page 61), (WC Volume XXI, page 546).

Returning now to H. Louis Nichols, when he testified before the Warren Commission, he claimed that he decided to visit Oswald in his jail cell after allegedly receiving a telephone call from “another lawyer who was a professor out at S.M.U.” who enquired if the Dallas Bar Association was doing anything about obtaining an attorney for Oswald (WC Volume VII, page 327 and 328). Although some may argue that this was Professor Charles Webster, if Webster and Nichols were in cahoots, it makes no sense to me that Webster would call Nichols to enquire if the Dallas Bar Association was doing anything about obtaining an attorney for Oswald. In my opinion, Nichols was lying to the Warren Commission to cover his real reason for visiting Oswald in his jail cell.

Let’s now take a look at another individual of interest; namely, justice of the peace, Joseph Brantley Brown Jr. Brown graduated from SMU law School in 1954, after which he spent two years in the U.S. Army (see here and here). Given the fact that Brown graduated from SMU law School in 1954, there can be little doubt that Brown was acquainted with Robert Storey Sr.; and he may have known Professor Charles Webster. Brown was also evidently a member of the Dallas Bar Association since 1954. The reader may be familiar with the fact that Brown’s father, Joseph Brantley Brown Sr., was the judge who presided over the trial of Jack Ruby for the murder of Oswald. Brown Jr.’s office was located at the Oak Cliff Courthouse at 410 South Beckley Avenue, Dallas (see here and here). According to Google Maps, this is right near the intersection of Beckley and 12th Streets.

The potential significance of this is that on the day of the assassination, Gerald Hill reported over the Dallas Police radio that he had a man in the car with him who could allegedly identify the man who shot and killed officer J.D. Tippit (WCE 705, WCE 1974). This man was supposedly Tippit murder witness, Harold Russell. However, as I discuss in my article “Gerald Hill and the Tippit murder scene - Part 2” at my blog, there is good reason to believe that Hill was lying when he claimed he had a witness in the car with him; and that the man in the car with Hill may actually have been the Tippit murderer. Contrary to what I have advocated in the past, I now believe that Hill may have dropped the Tippit murderer off at the Oak Cliff Courthouse to hide for a while after obtaining the revolver (WCE 143) used to kill Tippit from him.

As stated above, Brown’s father was the judge who presided over the trial of Jack Ruby for Oswald’s murder. During Ruby’s trial, Brown Sr. chose psychiatrist Robert L. Stubblefield as his “representative” for medical and neurological tests to be performed on Ruby to assess his sanity. The following is from the Memoirs of Brown Sr.; “It was about January 18^th [1964] that Mr. [Melvin] Belli came to me and said he wanted Ruby to undergo a thorough series of medical and neurological tests under court supervision. They would include spinal fluid studies and an electroencephalogram… I picked Dr. Robert Stubblefield, Chairman of the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical School in Dallas as my representative. Thus, I became the first judge in Texas to have a psychiatric consultant. I was forbidden to communicate with the jury who would find Jack Ruby legally sane or insane” (see here).

Although it may be just a bizarre coincidence, when Stubblefield was charged with giving former general Edwin Walker a psychiatric evaluation for his involvement in the riots at Oxford, Mississippi in September and October, 1962, Stubblefield’s attorney was Professor Charles Webster. One of the attorneys who represented Walker during the psychiatric evaluation was Robert Morris (see here and here). Therefore, there can be little doubt that Morris was acquainted with Stubblefield. During Ruby’s trial, Stubblefield claimed that he believed Ruby was legally sane when he shot Oswald (see here). When Ruby’s attorney, Melvin Belli, argued that Ruby was legally insane and asked Brown Sr. for a directed verdict of acquittal, Brown overruled him (see here).

Assuming that both Brown and Stubblefield were involved in a plot to give the public the impression that Ruby was legally sane at the time he shot Oswald, it begs the question of why they wanted the public to believe this. In my opinion, it may have been part of the scheme to give the public the impression that Jews were behind the assassination. As mentioned before, both Lt. George Butler and reserve Captain Charles Oliver Arnett informed the DPD they had information that Oswald was the illegitimate son of the Jewish Jack Ruby. By getting Stubblefield to claim that he believed Ruby was legally sane at the time he shot Oswald (and therefore knew what he was doing), I believe certain individuals involved in the conspiracy had hoped that the public would come to believe that Ruby was involved in a Jewish conspiracy with Oswald to assassinate the President; and that he (Ruby) shot Oswald to prevent him from implicating him in such a conspiracy. On a final note, it is interesting that Robert Morris criticised Melvin Belli for (amongst other things) his criticisms of Brown Sr. at the end of the Ruby trial (see here).  

Conclusions

After having spent many hours over the past few years reading through various DPD reports, FBI reports, Secret Service reports, Warren Commission testimony transcripts, and other reports and interviews, there are simply too many reasons for me to NOT believe that individuals associated with U.S. Army intelligence/counter-intelligence were behind the assassination. There is also too much evidence for me to NOT believe that certain individuals involved the conspiracy wanted to give the public the impression that this was some sort of a “Jewish Communist” conspiracy. Although some may argue this is a ridiculous assertion because they believe certain individuals with Jewish ancestry were involved in the assassination, let’s keep in mind that not all individuals of Jewish ancestry consider themselves “Jewish.” For example, Dan Burros; a man of Jewish ancestry, was a member of the American Nazi Party (see here).

As I mentioned before, one thing I am absolutely certain of is that the conspirators wanted to provoke a war between the United States and Cuba to overthrow Fidel Castro and his communist regime. I believe the reason this didn’t go ahead as hoped is because some individuals involved in the conspiracy (such as Lyndon Johnson) feared a war with Cuba would eventually lead to a nuclear war with the Soviet Union. Let me also clarify one thing; I don’t believe Lyndon Johnson was the so-called mastermind of the assassination. However, I strongly believe he at least knew President Kennedy would be assassinated. In volume three of his book “Lee Harvey Oswald’s Cold War: Why the Kennedy assassination should be reinvestigated” (a book I am very much looking forward to reading), Greg Parker will be presenting incriminating evidence against an individual with close ties to Johnson. Whilst I am confident that not too many people will agree with all of the conclusions I have reached in this two part essay, I nevertheless hope the reader has found this two part essay to be somewhat enlightening.

Acknowledgements

As always, the fantastic research by Greg Parker and Lee Farley has had a huge impact on my own; for which I am forever grateful to them. I would also like to thank Ed LeDoux for his research assistance; and the core group of researchers and posters at the ROKC forum who constantly give me motivation to continue researching this assassination, despite the many loathsome individuals who frequent other forums. Finally, I would like to thank Terry Wayne Martin for generously taking the time to proof-read this essay prior to it being published on this blog.