Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team

Recommended Posts

Len, here I am doing "teasers" and you actually want the details...grin.

OK, here we go - the example I mentioned involved an informant who provided information to investigator who appears to have worked for a couple of subcommittees, but the one in question was McClellan's, the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. McClellan's interest were far ranging and his had "broad investigative jurisdiction over government operations and national security issues". During the late 60's McClellan place a focus on civil rights groups - in the interest of national security of course. For example, he use his investigations to try and rabble rouse fears about the planned Poor People's March on Washington - Gerry McKnight writes on that in detail in The Last Crusade.

McClellan was so aggressive in this that he ran with very sketchy stuff, as long as it sounded like what he feared, and passed information widely within law enforcement and to the press on occasion. One of the problems with that sort of thing is that it would sensitize law enforcement and sometimes produced preemptive reactions which created just the situation that was feared. The same thing happened with deep FBI provocateurs, the violence at the Chicago democratic convention was triggered at leas in part by reports circulated to CPD by the FBI....which later proved totally unfounded, but that's a whole different story.

-- Larry

Edited by Larry Hancock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry, the bit about Highway Patrol as a military force made me think broader of the KBI, the JBS,the Southern Intelligence Network put together by the Southern States with MSC type State Organisations, not forgetting that the LSC was organisationally a centre, nor their relationship with the various Citizens Councils. One may argue they were an alternative Government with all the Departments necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry, knowing what you do now, does this make you take a second look at what Guy Banister was doing and what role LHO played in New Orleans?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David, its interesting from the standpoint that Bannister's activities in regard to civil rights may have been more a reflection of the standard Hoover/Bureau focus on Communist infiltration of the civil rights movement. His volunteering to do investigations is certainly in line with his overall interest (and the scope of his files) on communist activities.

Now having said that, we know that the Bureau routinely used a number of the private agencies set up by retired FBI personnel for covert intelligence collection (a very neat solution for legal and illegal domestic intel activities - so the Bureau can't get a wire tap approved, well hey, who do they trust who could make that happen - even if it can't used it in court, still helpful in investigations). It would be silly to think Bannister did not have and maintain contacts to the local field office, too much to gain on both sides.

So, let's say the FBI has this this guy with a very interesting background, he's been to Russia, he's interested in Castro and the FPCC and he's shown that he will talk to agents on occasion and has promised to report any suspicious contacts - given his interests he's a great dangle. But the Bureau can't have him come directly to their agents often or even monitor him...too easily noticed. How to keep track of him without becoming too obvious - well hey, how about old Guy.

.....so step back a step or two are what would be the Bureau's primary concerns in 1963. Number one would be those Cubans they are supposed to try to prevent buying guns and staging attacks on Fidel. And then their is Director Hoover's personal favorite, finding and busing the commies who are infiltrating and using the civil rights people - perhaps dangling a commie into one of their voter registration drives would be a good start?

Yes, it causes me to remember that at any given point in time Oswald's interests may have been his own but that he was surrounded with people who had their own priorities and agendas. Just as we see a radical switch in Dallas (first he's writing his manuscript saying how much he hates Communism and how the CPUSA is a Russian tool and then zip, he's back to letter writing to the SWP and CPUSA) and in New Orleans its all about the Cubans and then comes the trip out of town and he's in a voter registration line. I think all of that makes absolute sense, not having anything to do with anything other than Oswald was most definitely a lone nut, operating outside any greater context.

-- Larry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what exactly did your last post add to this thread? Do you think having revived it gives you some sort of ownership rights?

Like I said, "Don’t be dickish Danny Dunn"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

So, let's say the FBI has this this guy with a very interesting background, he's been to Russia, he's interested in Castro and the FPCC and he's shown that he will talk to agents on occasion and has promised to report any suspicious contacts - given his interests he's a great dangle. But the Bureau can't have him come directly to their agents often or even monitor him...too easily noticed. How to keep track of him without becoming too obvious - well hey, how about old Guy.

...

-- Larry

Larry, I recall Jim Garrison exclaiming that Lee Harvey Oswald showed no interest in the FPCC until after he came into contact with Guy Banister and David Ferrie at 544 Camp Street. It was not an accident that Oswald stamped that address on his FPCC flyers. Guy Banister had an intense interest in the FPCC long before Lee Harvey Oswald showed an interest.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul, Bannister was certainly not the only one. In SWHT I detail the intelligence communities interest in the FPCC going back to its foundation (and there is a very good chance that at least one of the early founders was part of a false flag operation by the CIA). David Phillips was doing false flag against the FPCC as early as 1961. But most interesting is the fact that by 1963 the FBI and CIA were cooperating in the AM/SANTA program to use FPCC members, inserted into Cuba, as information sources.

Add that to the fact that Bannister's agency had been security checked by the CIA as early as 1961, that Dave Phillips most likely used it as a cover for some of the propaganda work that he was doing in NO and that it was routine practice for the FBI to use PI offices of former agents as domestic cut outs - well yes indeed I think there was a connection between Bannister and Oswald - but I don't see Bannister initiating it; I see FBI counter inelligence as the driver and as the CIA entering the picture as it progressed.

-- Larry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul, Bannister was certainly not the only one. In SWHT I detail the intelligence communities interest in the FPCC going back to its foundation (and there is a very good chance that at least one of the early founders was part of a false flag operation by the CIA). David Phillips was doing false flag against the FPCC as early as 1961. But most interesting is the fact that by 1963 the FBI and CIA were cooperating in the AM/SANTA program to use FPCC members, inserted into Cuba, as information sources.

Add that to the fact that Bannister's agency had been security checked by the CIA as early as 1961, that Dave Phillips most likely used it as a cover for some of the propaganda work that he was doing in NO and that it was routine practice for the FBI to use PI offices of former agents as domestic cut outs - well yes indeed I think there was a connection between Bannister and Oswald - but I don't see Bannister initiating it; I see FBI counter inelligence as the driver and as the CIA entering the picture as it progressed.

-- Larry

Larry, it seems to me that the combination of Guy Bannister, David Ferrie (CRC), Ed Butler (INCA) and Carlos Bringuier (DRE), along with the oversight of David Atlee Phillips (CIA), who was a sponsor for INCA and DRE, were managers of Oswald in an effort to portray Oswald in the news media (newspaper, radio, TV) as an FPCC officer.

Do you agree so far?

Further, Lee Oswald seems to be more than willing to cooperate with this venture. This suggests to me that he is operating on a different story, motive or interpretation of events than the motive implied by his later role as a patsy, i.e. as the Communist who killed JFK.

According to George De Mohrenschildt, Oswald's verbal behavior in late 1962 was the typical Marine complaint that JFK seriously failed the USA and the Cuban Exiles at the Bay of Pigs. (This is why De Mohrenschildt drafted Volkmar Schmidt at a Dallas party to transfer Oswald's hostility from JFK to General Walker in January, 1963). In any case, when Loran Hall called Sylvia Odio in September, 1963, he told her that Oswald accused the Cubans of having no guts, because they should have shot JFK after his failure at the Bay of Pigs.

My point is that, although Oswald seems to have held this opinion all year long. (Although, Oswald also tried to please his friends, which may be why he joined a plot to shoot General Walker, as much evidence suggests). Apparently, Oswald's loyalties changed depending on his associates.

When associating with Cuban Exiles and their American supporters in New Orleans, it is likely that Oswald would revert to his typical Marine complaint and blame JFK for the Bay of Pigs. If this is true, then Oswald's motivation for his FPCC masquerade would have been a paramilitary and Cuban Exile plan to infiltrate Cuba to perform services for Guy Bannister (CRC), David Ferrie (CRC), Ed Butler (INCA), Carlos Bringuier (DRE) and David Atlee Phillips (CIA).

It is possible that his New Orleans handlers had a double-motive, of which Oswald was aware of only one motive. It seems likely to me that Oswald's New Orleans handlers would have preferred -- first and foremost -- that Oswald infiltrate Cuba and kill Fidel Castro. This was their highest hope, and this is probably what they told Oswald. He would be a hero; he would be showered with money; he would be famous; he might be elected President one day. (Or as he told Marina during that period, "One day I'll be Prime Minister of the USA;" a statement she thought was bizarre.)

If, indeed, Oswald were to succeed in that optimistic mission, Oswald would have transformed from a loser (who was on the lam for shooting at General Walker) into a wealthy American hero. All his sins would have been forgiven. HOWEVER -- if he failed in that mission, the effort was not wasted, because the second motive of his New Orleans handlers was that Oswald would be perfectly framed (by newspaper, radio and TV) to be the perfect Communist patsy.

Does this sound plausible to you, Larry?

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul, I certainly would agree with parts of the above including Oswald's activities changing fairly continually depending on who he was associating with and what games were being played around him. Of course having said that it gets awfully complex on a week by week basis starting around August. And it was in August that his "handling" started to shift from his being dangled in various FBI and CIA directions (including gun deals, exile camps, and even civil rights/Communist infiltration tangents) towards a focus strictly on being dangled to selected Cuban exiles...from the point where he starts to plan to move back east in early September until Nov. 22, the focus is on exiles and Cuba. Even Nagell could not figure out why telling Oswald the truth about his exile contacts didn't get him to back off - but Nagell didn't know that Oswald had been recruited into a much more serious spy game rather than simply bumbling along from one interest to another.

I would also agree that he may have been an infiltration agenda; however unlikely that would be in reality - that certainly would have fit with AMSANTA.

We probably diverge in that while he certainly was directed towards Bannister and Bannister considered him "one of ours", that was in the very early phase of a propaganda project against Cuba and I feel does not translate directly to the Dallas plot. Of course my logic for all of that is in SWHT, in far too much detail to attempt to deal with here.

-- Larry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul, I certainly would agree with parts of the above including Oswald's activities changing fairly continually depending on who he was associating with and what games were being played around him. Of course having said that it gets awfully complex on a week by week basis starting around August. And it was in August that his "handling" started to shift from his being dangled in various FBI and CIA directions (including gun deals, exile camps, and even civil rights/Communist infiltration tangents) towards a focus strictly on being dangled to selected Cuban exiles...from the point where he starts to plan to move back east in early September until Nov. 22, the focus is on exiles and Cuba. Even Nagell could not figure out why telling Oswald the truth about his exile contacts didn't get him to back off - but Nagell didn't know that Oswald had been recruited into a much more serious spy game rather than simply bumbling along from one interest to another.

I would also agree that he may have been an infiltration agenda; however unlikely that would be in reality - that certainly would have fit with AMSANTA.

We probably diverge in that while he certainly was directed towards Bannister and Bannister considered him "one of ours", that was in the very early phase of a propaganda project against Cuba and I feel does not translate directly to the Dallas plot. Of course my logic for all of that is in SWHT, in far too much detail to attempt to deal with here.

-- Larry

Larry, I'm glad you agree with most of my scenario. I've not yet read your book, Someone Would Have Talked (2010), but I'm currently in the process of obtaining a copy. I have a few more observations and a question:

(1) August was the time that Oswald was being properly sheep-dipped, so to speak.

(2) It is almost as though the month of August, 1963 had been formally scheduled to get Oswald into the New Orleans newspapers, radio and television, always portrayed as a controversial FPCC officer of a local FPCC chapter.

(3) On 5 and 6 August 1963 Oswald visisted Carlos Bringuier at his clothing store -- twice -- so that other people could see him there.

(4) On 9 August 1963 Oswald and Bringuier faked a fight on Canal street so the police would come and get their names in the paper.

(5) The address, 544 Camp Street, printed on those FPCC flyers, was an obvious confession of linkage with Guy Bannister.

(6) On 10 August 1963 Oswald requests and obtains an interview with FBI Agent John Quigley, who destroys his notes after the interview.

(7) For days afterwards, newspaper articles trickle forth about Oswald the FPCC Castro-lover.

(8) On 17 August 1963 Oswald appears on the WSDU radio show, Latin Listening Post, and taped a 37 minute segment posing as Oswald the FPCC Castro-lover.

(9) On 19 August 1963 Oswald accepted Bill Stuckey's offer to debate Carlos Bringuier (DRE) and Ed Butler (INCA) on television program, Conversation Carte Blanche.

(10) On 21 August 1963, Oswald appears on television as Oswald the FPCC Castro-lover.

August was a month of news media propaganda, always portraying the same character -- an FPCC officer. Oswald never did anything like this before or afterwards. As September began, Oswald prepared to travel to Mexico, and Marina said he took all his newspaper clippings about his fight, his radio appearance and his TV appearance, as street-credentials to help him get into Cuba.

The reason seems obvious to me -- the entire reason for all of Oswald's behavior in August 1963 was to prepare street-credentials to help him get into Cuba. He did not work with socialists or communists in this effort -- he worked with two of the most right-wing activists from among the Cuban Exile community -- Carlos Bringuier and Ed Butler. Ed Butler was a professional propaganda expert. Bill Stuckey took advice from Ed Butler, so probably most or all of this propaganda scenario was dreamed up by Ed Butler (INCA).

Naturally, both the DRE and INCA got their local funding from the CIA, and specifically from David Atlee Phillips.

Yet as soon as the sheep-dipping is completed, Oswald has no more use for New Orleans. Now all of his focus turns to Mexico -- where he will actually attempt to deploy the street-credentials that he spent August trying to create (with the help of his extreme right-wing associates).

This is why we can't forget that Oswald is also seen with Guy Bannister and David Ferrie in the period immediately preceding this. These two characters are both extreme rightists, i.e. racists, members of the KKK, the John Birch Society and the Minutemen. These are Oswald's actual steady companions.

He is not being 'dangled' anymore, IMHO, but his contract is clear as a bell. Oswald will either succeed in getting access to Cuba to further serve CRC, INCA, DRE and CIA interests (and in this regard I want to read more about AMSANTA in your book), or else Oswald will be transferred to the patsy role in a Dallas job scheduled for November 1963.

When did the Cuban Exiles become such a large part of Oswald's career? Evidently the minute he arrived in New Orleans. But who were his initial contacts who could introduce him? None other than Guy Bannister and David Ferrie, obviously. Ferrie knew Oswald previously, and Bannister was a fellow Minuteman officer with ex-General Edwin Walker.

This is why Nagell could not understand Oswald -- Oswald was unphased when he "learned" that his Cuban Exile companions were not Communists but Anticommunists -- because he already knew that! Nagell had been fooled (as were many) to believe that Oswald was actually a genuine FPCC officer.

If we diverge about how the New Orleans plot becomes transformed into the Dallas plot, Larry, it is probably because my theory proposes the following: (1) the Dallas plot actually comes first; and (2) the New Orleans plot is actually a secondary plot that was conceived in Dallas in the first place.

If my theory is correct, then Edwin Walker's New Orleans connections should be explored more fully. What do you think,Larry? Does this scenario sound plausible to you?

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul, I'm with you through the first 60 percent or so. One caveat though, Oswald was dangled towards a lot of disparate groups

over the course of 1963 and his attentions are constantly redirected. At the beginning of the year we have someone who has written

a strongly anti-Communist, anti-CPUSA manuscript - yet within months we have his writing to both organizations and pledging his support and

even asking if he should go underground. We have him infiltrating exile groups and then switching to the FPCC. Along the way he gets dangled into the civil rights organizing arena briefly, spends some time exploring port facilities and options for getting into or out of Cuba via boat and by the time he gets to Dallas he's dabbling with the ACLU.

I don't think his own personal focus is that clear, he is "dangling" before a great many factions and being observed while doing so - propaganda games are going on around him and there may have been more to come.

While I agree that there were other plots against JFK in the mill, some from the ultra right and some that might have occurred if Dallas had not, I don't think that an ultra right plot hijacked Oswald. On the other hand, I find it very possible that there was knowledge that Oswald was in play, so to speak and that the frame was targeting Castro.

We do have a lot of agreement about New Orleans though, after you read SWHT let's restart the conversation. And on the side, I certainly do think NO was the place in which the real plotters came across Oswald, that was one reason why the NO investigation was so dangerous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason I think that NO can be the HQ is through a gradual study of the MSC files and getting the feel and then the documents that shows that the Louisiana Sovereignty Commission and its leaders was the hub of an extensive network and in looking at it inevitably coming up with POI's like Walker, Banister, Arcacha Smith, Surrey, Zack Van Landringham, Birdsong, and I always feel I wouldn't be at all surprised to find a Brian Jones-Alabama-SOF editor connection that connects to the very groups that were most militant like the White Camellias.etc. In a way NO was the head office, Mississippi the work space and Alabama the supply room. (With possibly Oklahoma,Kansas and Florida with particularly significant resources.). (Dallas was a good place because it wasn't any of those.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason I think that NO can be the HQ is through a gradual study of the MSC files and getting the feel and then the documents that shows that the Louisiana Sovereignty Commission and its leaders was the hub of an extensive network and in looking at it inevitably coming up with POI's like Walker, Banister, Arcacha Smith, Surrey, Zack Van Landringham, Birdsong, and I always feel I wouldn't be at all surprised to find a Brian Jones-Alabama-SOF editor connection that connects to the very groups that were most militant like the White Camellias.etc. In a way NO was the head office, Mississippi the work space and Alabama the supply room. (With possibly Oklahoma,Kansas and Florida with particularly significant resources.). (Dallas was a good place because it wasn't any of those.)

John, would you please post links to any Louisiana Sovereignty Commission documents that name ex-General Edwin Walker, Guy Banister, Robert Allen Surrey, Sergio Arcacha-Smith or Colonel Thomas Birdsong?

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason I think that NO can be the HQ is through a gradual study of the MSC files and getting the feel and then the documents that shows that the Louisiana Sovereignty Commission and its leaders was the hub of an extensive network and in looking at it inevitably coming up with POI's like Walker, Banister, Arcacha Smith, Surrey, Zack Van Landringham, Birdsong, and I always feel I wouldn't be at all surprised to find a Brian Jones-Alabama-SOF editor connection that connects to the very groups that were most militant like the White Camellias.etc. In a way NO was the head office, Mississippi the work space and Alabama the supply room. (With possibly Oklahoma,Kansas and Florida with particularly significant resources.). (Dallas was a good place because it wasn't any of those.)

John, would you please post links to any Louisiana Sovereignty Commission documents that name ex-General Edwin Walker, Guy Banister, Robert Allen Surrey, Sergio Arcacha-Smith or Colonel Thomas Birdsong?

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

sorry

>The reason I think that NO can be the HQ is through a gradual study of the MSC files and getting the feel of them, then the documents from the MSC files shows that the Louisiana Sovereignty Commission and its leaders was the hub of an extensive network and in looking at the MSC files inevitably coming up with POI's like Walker, Banister, Arcacha Smith, Surrey, Zack Van Landringham, Birdsong, and I always feel I wouldn't be at all surprised to find a Brian Jones-Alabama-SOF editor connection that connects to the very groups that were most militant like the White Camellias.etc. In a way NO was the head office, Mississippi the work space and Alabama the supply room. (With possibly Oklahoma,Kansas and Florida with particularly significant resources.). (Dallas was a good place because it wasn't any of those.)<

edittypo

Edited by John Dolva

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×