Jump to content
The Education Forum

Larry Hancock

Members
  • Content Count

    3,028
  • Joined

  • Last visited

5 Followers

About Larry Hancock

  • Rank
    Super Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Oklahoma USA

Recent Profile Visitors

22,458 profile views
  1. What Ron, Vince and Jim said.... The first edition of the book was at least interesting, mysterious and intriguing...then he literally jumped off the cliff with the second, taking the first edition along with him on the dive.
  2. Dennis, actually Chuck Ochelli had to cancel last weeks show on In Denial and in particular on JFK and the Bay of Pigs due to health problems; we will reschedule as soon as he is feeling up to it. Just a note on the Castro assassinations, the first memo proposing assassination came from inside the CIA before the first Cuba Projet even began - J.C. King was a very early proponent. The order for the poison came from Bissell in mid-1960 so JFK obviously had nothing to do with that...the whole project was just so dysfunctional that they never got around to trying to deliver it for months.
  3. Unfortunately it becomes quite sad when you dig into the details of how the JCS was were briefed, what their staff assessments say and how little response the CIA made. For that matter Burke himself produced a list of over one hundred operational questions/issues- and at best CIA responded to only a handful. After their verbal briefings the JCS staff did do assessments but primarily of two aspects - the size and composition of the force (would the ships and transport craft be sufficient to land it) and the logistics of supplying and sustaining the beachead/lodgement. They judged that
  4. Jim, it appears that Bissell had a handful of wild cards that were in play right up to the days before the landings - for those interested in this I've been discussing it in my recent blog posts. Actually there were a couple of options including a squadron of fighter bombers on the Essex with the right weapons load for ground strikes- not just air cover. And beyond the Essex there was a supercarrier group built around the Independence that Burke deployed off Florida, towards Cuba, and never mentioned in any of the post landing dialogs and inquiries. More new information involves an
  5. Actually Dulles was only minimally involved in the operation discussions, doing little more than head nods or giving very general endorsements. J.C. King (Western Hemisphere) was far more involved in administration meetings, as was General Cabell. The primary briefing officer was Bissell. Col. Hawkins attended a limited number of meetings, generally to comment on the Brigade ground force which was his assignment. The air arm of the Brigade was very under represented with Bissell often speaking for them - a major mistake since he had no relevant experience (and had stonewalled the total sepa
  6. Well Richard, I will close out by simply saying the image discussed here is the same as that from a negative I obtained from AMKW and I received it as the photo she described as being of someone discussed as possibly being Oswald. My and others take on the resemblance is subjective. Clearly you have a different view and attitude about it. Your take is your own but I was simply trying to be helpful; I have attempted to contact AMKW about her collection but so far with no luck. I will post if I hear something from her but otherwise I'm done with this thread.
  7. Looks good Mark, if its not Oswald its certainly someone who could be mistaken for him.
  8. Well done Robin!! it is the top one you posted (that's why I was a little hesitant because I did remember that it had the two men in the foreground) This image blowup is at least as good and I think better than what I obtained and it appears to me the shirt may actually be an Oswald match, just an impression. It is important to reference the timing to the other photo though, because that puts the figure in the right time frame for the Rambler.
  9. I think so Rob although until I find it I'm not going to be absolutely sure....like many people I have recently been sorting and cleaning and its not where I first looked. As I recall it was this photo and I got a negative from AMKW, took it too a photo shop and had him crop it to just the area of interest and blow it up as far as possible while retaining some detail. As you can imagine the detail was enough to suggest it was a young male of the right age, hair cut, etc but not a lot else. From this view you can tell the individual was walking with or close to another and it is ind
  10. I would not be able to judge how fast they were moving but it appears to be a walk rather than a sprint. It would probably be a match for the pace, timing and direction of the fellow reported as going down to get picked up by the Rambler. I have the negative as I recall, and a blown up print...but of course this was all 25 years ago now and it has been discussed many times and appeared on line in the earlier years (it may also be on one of the two Trask books, can't recall for sure), its just not too good a photo and the guys are at a distance in it. I got the negative to see what a blo
  11. I worked in person with Anna Marie's collection for a good while in the 90's, and I actually have that photograph you refer to...it shows a man resembling Oswald going down the East side of the knoll, however he appears to be walking close to or with another man. I had it blown up to the extent I could at that time but it certainly was not clear enough for me to say more than the individual did resemble Oswald. Anna Marie had wanted to donate her collection to a local university in Wichita Falls but that may have proved impossible; I do have an old number and can call her...have not talk
  12. The great thing is that that we know a good deal more now about the operational details for a couple several reasons. First we now have all segments of the CIA IG report, with nothing restricted. Second, we have the all sections of the CIA Historians report, especially the last section which is quite polemic but very educational - perhaps more importantly the CIA Historian's report quotes and reference the Taylor Commission report/transcript in great detail and that has never been released up to this point. The historian was simply allowed access for his work. That is extremely importan
  13. Well to begin with, I would certainly say that this assessment is true " betrays a stunning failure by the CIA to have effectively communicated its plan to the president". As I said in the earlier post there was never a full operational brief for the President, many of the Cuba Project review meetings involved his new senior staff but not JFK himself. And in an effort to distance the US from the landings, he certainly did not directly oversee the operation during the final hours before the landings. Nor was he given detailed operational assessments by the the military operations leaders, mo
  14. Unfortunately Kornbluh was working from some of the earliest information available; we know a great deal more based on more recently released documents and materials. Kornbluh was also not privy to the remarks of the military operations chiefs which were made in the 90's when they had a chance to review the new materials themselves. It would really be a good idea to catch up on all the most recent resources that I cite in my 2020 book, including Grayston Lynch whose own book contains a great deal of good information - such as his remarks in regard to hearing only on the way to the landin
  15. JFK did approve a pre-landing D Day strike, however after the flap at the UN over the earlier air strikes and press exposure that those had indeed been launched from outside Cuba and were not defecting pilots, JFK asked that the air strikes be minimized. Bissell chose not to go into the tactical concerns of air cover over the beachhead and turned JFK's remark into a cancellation order. Bissell did not tell JFK or Bundy that the conservative post attack damage estimate was that up to half of the Cuban air force might be still operational - he simply ordered the strikes canceled. Given th
×
×
  • Create New...