Jump to content
The Education Forum

Larry Hancock

Members
  • Posts

    4,095
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Larry Hancock

  1. Tommy, after chasing tramp stories for years I find nothing to substantiate that and much to question it. What we do know from

    the record is that Bowers held a train coming from downtown Dallas (after the had started clearing trains through the yards) based

    on seeing a single tramp in a hopper car. We have no word at all from him on seeing that tramp taken into custody much less

    three tramps out of a box car. But we do know the train was coming from down town headed out across the overpass....which means

    if the tramps were in a boxcar they would likely have gotten on somewhere downtown while train traffic was being held for the

    motorcade...and they would have gotten on a train heading back through the Plaza (which if they were somehow participants in

    a conspiracy makes as little sense as Oswald getting on a bus headed right back through the Plaza). They would already have been

    well away from the crime scene, why go back. And why would explosives have been in that box car?

    We also know that Bowers first day statement contains nothing about the arrest of three tramps...or even of the one he had reported to

    police...seems like the other things he had seen like cars cruising the parking lot were more auspicious to him.

    If we want to speculate about explosives in the Plaza, I'll save mine for a back up radio controlled car bomb up just beyond the access

    ramp to the freeway. Or maybe somebody with a railroad squib (firecracker) behind the fence used as a sight/sound diversion.

    -- Larry

  2. As far as the TSBD goes, at one time that idea did interest me but the more I think about it, the less sense it makes.

    First off, the quantities of weapons being sought by the exiles were reasonably small, which makes sense given that

    they had relatively small groups of fighters. And they were not really heavy arms, just light stuff. You could transport

    it in a trunk or a U Haul trailer, no rail transport required (much like the trail Hall and Howard ran through Dallas). Even

    the explosives that were brought down from Chicago to New Orleans for the aborted air strike on Cuba were carried

    and stored in a trailer. A low profile compared to moving stuff into a warehouse in downtown Dallas.

    So that pretty well speaks to the weapons that DRE and JURE were shopping for... Its pretty clear now that

    the Army guys at Fort Hood were pulling Ellesworth's leg with stories about tanks being taking out the back

    door of the base... What we really have are quantities like the take from the Armory break in, all of which were carried

    on one or two car trunks.

    As far as the sanctioned group, Artime's autonomous effort, they were getting major shipments of weapons, planes, boats

    etc, but thanks to the work of researchers like Gary Murr, we now know the details of that it it wasn't going through Dallas -

    although the CIA did maintain transhipment points, they were down in the coastal cities.

    All in all the TSBD doesn't make much sense given what we know now about the actual mechanisms of supply for sanctioned

    covert operations and it just wouldn't be necessary for the smaller independent buys.

    -- Larry

  3. Hi Tommy, sorry not to have responded earlier but I only check in here periodically and missed your question.

    If you have SWHT I got into considerable detail on this in Chapter 12, the good news is that we have an extensive

    document trail on several areas of the exile efforts to buy guns in Dallas as well as the sting that was organized

    against it, in particular Masen's efforts to find guns for them. The original informant on all this was George Nonte at

    Fort Hood. He went to Army intel with Masen's efforts to get guns from Fort Hood and that report was circulated

    within the 112th. Independently, We have the exact names of who Masen's potential Miami and Dallas customers were.

    Independently, Ellesworth of ATF was targeting Masen, who had become known for his gun and explosives sales.

    However initially Ellesworth did not know and was not told of the Army intel info, which was shared with the FBI but

    not the ATF. That is most likely because the FBI had a particular interest in getting ahead of the Cuban exiles in

    potential attacks on Cuba and they had some local office folks on that beat - unfortunately although we know about

    that now, very few of the documents relating to their per-assassination inquiries have become available.

    So, in a long winded answer, no I don't think the 112th was hearing from Oswald. On the other hand I think its very

    possible that Oswald was being either directly or indirectly run against Cuban exiles in Dallas in regard to gun

    dealing - not sure how we will ever prove that but its would be consistent with his activities in New Orleans. Now if there

    was a surveillance team observing the comings and goings at the Harlandale house *as has been rumored), that might be

    another story. If the Dallas FBI field office files still existed and we could get our hands on them....but since that

    was all per-assassination, they don't seemed to have been sucked up in the records collection and are most likely long gone.

  4. Blakey's remark about the legal justification for the FBI involvement is rather interesting (destruction of government property). Actually in a weekend call to Johnson's aide, Wakter Jenkins, Hoover told Jenkins that the Bureau had found a legal basis for the FBI taking over the investigation. He cited Section 241 (which relates to conspiracy). specifically to two or more persons who conspire to oppress, threaten or intimidate - and conviction carries a maximum sentence of ten years. Not murder of course but a bit stronger than property damage.

    Of course that was early days, on Saturday morning, Wonder why Hoover had to give up on that legal angle - perhaps someone thought it best not to proceed down that line of justification...

    Larry

  5. Stephen, we do have limited question and answer at the end of each presentation but we have a very full slate of speakers this

    year and that time is limited. The presentations are not debates and we refer detailed discussions to the other venues that are

    available - there is plenty of time for everyone to talk to the presenters but the presenters are not compelled to talk with anyone,

    that's there choice. That has been very important for many of the witnesses and other participants that we have - this year we

    have at least two of those folks and we want it to be a friendly environment. This is not to suggest that Peter and Jim would be less than civil to each other but If anyone is looking for a extended or "pointed" discussion they'll have to look out in the hallway or in the bar.

    Such discussions certainly occur, I've had a couple of my own, but they don't happen during the presentations.

    -- Larry

  6. Mike, I don't know if you have done much hunting but whether you call it "pointed" or "sharp nosed", its pretty much the same thing - you may not have seen Mark Oakes video interview with Wright but he makes it pretty clear that what he saw was a hunting round...that was why I mentioned a 30.06 because that's a 30 caliber bullet commonly seen in the area of Texas/Oklahoma where I great up. And nobody is going to confuse it

    with CE399. Also, as described by Wright in the interview, it was essentially pristine and had not hit anything - unlike CE399.

    And his statement does not conflict with everyone else because Mark interviewed another person who saw it at the hospital and

    described the same thing.

    You can have the bullet be whatever you want it to be though... its certainly to bad it as well as some of the other key

    evidence was taken out of Dallas before being photographed... Larry

  7. Lee, I hate to jump in on this just as you are leaving, but two comments seem to be in order. First, its anecdotal but I have to remark that virtually any boy/man growing up down here in the southwest is not going to have much trouble in distinguishing between a sharp nosed hunting round and a blunt nosed bullet. You grow up that way, just as you grow up having some idea of calibers of weapons and bullets - hey dad, when do I get to trade my .22 for a 30.06 so I can go deer hunting.

    Second, as to what got put into reports by whom, I'm afraid you are asking a bit much for the procedure of the time. Did anybody write reports that really captured who and when took Oswald's billfold into custody....? What about reports that would resolve the handling of the bullets in the TSBD, where's that comment about picking up the bullets and then putting them back down in the TSBD. And perhaps my favorite, we have a photo of a forensics kit down across Elm but there is no report about any investigation for bullets down there....and that did happen. Heck, it goes beyond the police, Lee Bowers doesn't even mention anything about reporting the tramps or their arrest - which we spend so much time talking about.

    Everybody gets to pick their own scenario though - to me it looks like a sharp nosed hunting bullet came out of Dallas and ended up in

    Rowley's possession - and then morphed into CE399 just when they needed to make the Oswald/lone nut story stick.

    -- Larry

  8. Stephen, actually there was a very successful joint FBI/CIA project going on against the FPCC including sending FPCC members into Cuba for intelligence collection. You will find AM/SANTA discussed in some detail in the more recent editions of SWHT. I've also discussed it and

    Oswald's probable connection in some of my blog posts. There is extensive research being done on Tilton and a number of other folks

    not generally heard of in the JFK literature and hopefully you will see it in print within the next year or so - not from me. I think it will become clear that much of the intelligence activity going on around Oswald in the summer and fall had to do with projects targeting the FPCC- that would be in both New Orleans, a new program targeting Latin America and an operation against the Cuban embassy in Mexico City - which was issuing Cuban entry visa's based on FPCC recommendation. Thoughtfully, Oswald took his own FPCC credentials to Mexico to assist in his attempt - turned out not to be good enough since a recommendation from the national organization was required but hey, you do the best you can with what you've got...they might have taken the bait.

    -- Larry

  9. Bill, I would note in regard to the Pentagon's concern/question at that point in time, when an immediate state of war might have been in play and when missiles could have been incoming, the answer from a military perspective was correct. Legally, national command authority, the authority to order implementation of the SIOP rested only with President Kennedy and the Secretary of Defense and given that McNamara went to the Pentagon and had direct access to the comm system that would have issued that order...and the Joint Chiefs would have executed it, he and they would have had to act for the President in military matters. If they had gone out of contact for some reason, we now know that the SIOP decision would have come down to the SAC commander.

    It does not appear that Johnson did anything to execute immediate communications with the Pentagon or to assume his role as national command authority; heck, he didn't even know where the SIOP codes were in Dallas and had to be told the officer had made it onto the plane. In that exchange it appears he had little interest or perhaps didn't even understand or appreciate that issue at all. .

    As an aside I'd like to see Mr. White's sources (and Johnson didn't need to be given anything, as next in line for national command authority he was already it) and something that would indicate that Johnson ever read or had any real understanding of the contingency plans or even the SIOP. If he did he showed no sign of it on Nov. 22. Johnson may have been copied, whether he read anything or had any serious discussions on it with Clifton is a very interesting question..

    -- Larry

  10. HI CHRIS, AS WEI PAUL I WILL PUT COMMENTS IN CAPS SO THEY CAN BE EASILY LOCATED…

    But on this subject, I am currently reading 'Harvey and Lee' and thinking about it vis-a-via SWHT

    and Nexus. I cannot say I am convinced yet by the "two completely different Oswalds who were combined

    around the age of 13"? But the circumstantial evidence does start to pile up, and the research looks strong.

    CHRIS, CERTAINLY I’M AN ADMIRER OF JOHN’S RESEARCH AND THERE IS A TON OF GOOD, RELEVANT MATERIAL IN THE BOOK.

    I THINK WERE WE HAVE TO BE CAUTIONS IS TIEING TOO MANY THREADS TOGETHER OR INDEED TIEING THEM ALL TO DALLAS.

    I’M ALSO TROUBLED BY THE FACT THAT SOME OF WHAT I READ DOESN’T SEEM TO FIT WITH WHAT I’VE READ ABOUT INTELLIGENCE

    PRACTICE (WHICH MAY JUST MEAN I DON’T KNOW ENOUGH). FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU WANT TO PUT A TRULY DEEP, LONG TERM AGENT

    IN PLACE YOU EITHER HAVE TO RECRUING THEM “IN COUNTRY” VERY EARLY AND TRY TO NURTURE THEIR DEVELOPMENT INTO SOME

    POSITION THAT IS GOING TO GET YOU GREAT INTELLIGENCE OR AT LEAST INFLUENCE LATER ON. ANOTHER OPTION, THE ONE JOHN

    DISCUSSES WOULD BE TO TAKE A YOUNG, NATIVE LANGUAGE SPEAKER, AND MOVE THEM IN COUNTRY, HELP THEIR CAREER AND AGAIN,

    PUT THEM IN A PLACE WHERE THEY WILL GENERATE SOME VALUE (YOU ALSO HAVE TO MAINTAIN THEIR POLITICAL

    ALLEGIANCE – USUALLY WITH DEEP AGENTS IN THE US OR BRITAIN IT WAS DEEP IDEOLOGICAL BELIEFS OR SOME HEAVY CASH

    THAT DID IT). ANYWAY WE HAVE NUMEROUS MODELS FOR THAT SORT OF DEEP AGENT GAME – BUT NONE OF THEM REALLY RELATE

    TO OSWALD IN RUSSIA. AFTER ALL, IF YOU WANT A GUY TO PLAY DEFECTOR, THEN HE NEEDS TO BE A STRAIGHT UP NATIVE

    AMERICAN WHO PITCHES AN IDEOLOGICAL CONVERSTION – OR PERHAPS A TECHNICAL SPECIALIST WHO GOES OVER AND IS

    HONEY TRAPPED AND PLAYS ALONG. WE HAVE EXAMPLES THERE TOO. WHAT WE DON’T HAVE IS ANYTHING ELSE THAT REALLY LOOKS

    LIKE OSWALD. WITH HARVEY AND LEE YOU HAVE ONE NATIVE LANGUATE SPEAKER WHO COULD PLAY A RUSSIAN NATIONAL BUT YOU

    DON’T USE HIM IN THAT ROLE AND YOU HAVE ANOTHER WHO IS AN OBVIOUS AMERICAN……AND YOU USE HIM HOW?

    SO, LONG WINDED ANSWER TO SAYING I BELIVE THERE COULD WELL HAVE BEEN (AND ACTUALLY WERE) SPY GAMES BEING

    PLAYED AROUND TWO OR EVEN MORE “OSWALD’S” OSWALD AS A “CHARACTER” CAN BE PLAYED BY MANY PEOPLE IN MANY

    LOCATIONS, SOME DON’T EVEN HAVE TO LOOK LIKE HIM. AGENCY TRADECRAFT CALLED FOR USING DUPLICATE VEHICLES

    WITH THE SAME ID (AIRPLANES, CARS ETC) IN MULTIPLE PLACES AT THE SAME TIME TO CREATE AN CONFUSION

    FACTOR – WELL MULTIPLE OSWALD S WOULD DO NICELY FOR THAT AS WELL, AND OZ HIMSELF DOESN’T EVEN HAVE TO

    KNOW ABOUT IT. HOOVER KNEW ABOUT SUCH GAMES AND THE CIA PLAYED THEM AS WELL AS ANYBODY ELSE…EVEN BETTER

    SINCE THEY OFTEN FOOLED THEMSELVES WITH COMPARTMENTALIZATION.

    Larry, in our correspondence together, you have noted more than once that Oswald could have been doubled

    pretty easily and at a late stage when the prep for the assassination was already underway. Where do

    you sit on the subject of "Oswald as long-term CIA/ONI/FBI mole/dangle/etc?"

    I HAVE NO DOUBT HE WAS A LONG TERM DANGLE, SOMETIMES KNOWINGLY AND SOMETIMES NOT. IN SWHT I WRITE

    ABOUT THAT DANGLE ROLE STARTING AS EARLY AS ATSUKI. ONCE HE VOLUNTEERED AS A DANGLE, AND ONCE PEOPLE

    KNOW ABOUT IT, HE WOULD BECOME ATTRACTIVE TO MANY SORTS OF AGENCIES AND PEOPLE OVER TIME. YOU SEE

    NAGELL BEING USED IN THAT WAY BY MULTIPLE PARTIES. TO CLARIFY THINGS A BIT, I BELIVE OSWALD KNOWINGLY

    AND UNKNOWINGLY WAS USED IN THAT ROLE FROM JAPAN ON. PERHAPS HE THOUGHT IT WAS OVER WHEN HE CAME BACK

    FROM RUSSIA BUT HIS MANUSCRIPT “FLIP” SHOWS HE WAS RECRUITED BY SOMEONE – ONE DAY HE WRITING ABOUT HATING

    CPUSA FOR BEING THE TOOL OF THE RUSSIANS AND NEXT THING YOU KNOW HE’S WRITING THEM AS A VOLUNTEER AND

    ASKING FOR GUIDANCE ON POSSIBLY GOING UNDERGROUND. I DON’T KNOW HOW MUCH CLEARER A SIGN YOU COULD

    HAVE THAN THAT.

    Angleton certainly seemed perfectly placed to throw Oswald under the "patsy" bus, even if he wasn't

    the one to originally dangle him to the Soviets or whomever. I don't want to digress from Nexus,

    but I feel it's a relevant connection to your work.

    CHRIS, I THINK THE FACT THAT WHITTEN WAS INITIALLY ASSIGNED RATHER THAN ANGLETON IS PRETTY

    SIGNIFICANT. IF, AS I BELIVE (AND AS PHILLIPS FINALLY STATED) A SMALL NUMBER OF US INTELLIGENCE

    OFFICERS HAD ESSENTIALLY “STOLEN” OSWALD AS A PATSY FOR THEIR CONSPIRACY, THAT ACTUALLY BECAME CLEAR

    AT SOME LEVELS WITHIN A COUPLE OF WEEKS AFTER THE ASSASSINATION. I’VE WRITTEN ABOUT THAT, OTHERS ARE

    WRITING MORE NOW. BY THAT TIME THE AGENCY HAS TWO SPECTACULAR PROBLEMS, COVERING UP THEIR KNOWELDGE OF

    OSWALD PRIOR TO THE ASSASSINATION (YOU CAN IMAGINE THE HEADLINES ON THAT ONE) BUT MORE DEEPLY COVERING

    UP THE FACT THAT THE BEST PEOPLE TO TRULY AND FULLY PATSY OSWALD WOULD BE PEOPLE WHO KNEW ABOUT HOW HE WAS

    INDEED BEING DANGLED AND WHERE AN INVESTIGATION WOULD LEAD. ANGLETON WAS THE IDEAL CHOICE FOR A COVER UP.

  11. HI PAUL, I’M PUTTING MY RESPONSE IN CAPS JUST SO IT STANDS OUT, MY EMAIL EDITOR IS A BIT LIMITED IN OPTIONS

    Larry, I had a few questions for you from my notes so far.

    1. On Location 1660 (of the Kindle book), you noted that "We can regard this (William Harvey's ZR/RIFLE notes and the Agency's previous activities) as a lesson learned in being able to detect the hand of CIA involvement in political murders. No fingerprints would be left, no employees would be present, surrogates would be involved and any obvious leads or evidence would point to the enemy, the Russians or their fellow travelers."

    Analyzing the films and photos of Dealey Plaza for "familiar faces" has become an admittedly fascinating cottage industry. Do you believe that anyone involved with the CIA would have put themselves into such a vulnerable position as to be photographed and/or spotted on the scene? It's tempting to believe that this was such a big operation that people wanted to be around to send JFK off. But given your views in the book, wouldn't the people involved be totally unrecognizable, especially those standing "in the clear" for spotting or communications purposes?

    IN TERMS OF THE TRUE CIA PARAMILITARY PROFESSIONALS, THE LAST PLACE I WOULD NORMALLY EXPECT TO FIND THEM WOULD BE STANDING ON THE STREE WATCHING – MANY REASONS FOR THAT BUT ONE IS THAT I SUSPECT THEY HAD BACKUP PLANS AND FALL BACK ATTACK POINTS – MUCH AS VECIANA DESCRIBES IN THE ABORTIVE CASTRO ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT HE WAS INVOLVED WITH LATER IN LATIN AMERICA. WE REALLY NEED TO GIVE THESE FELLOWS THE CREDIT THEIR EXPERIENCE AND EXPERTISE DESERVES. MY ONE CAVEAT ON THAT IS THAT IT IS JUST POSSIBLE THAT ONE OR TWO OF THEM HATED JFK TO AN EXTENT THAT IT MIGHT HAVE LED THEM TO DO SOMETHING THEY OTHERWISE WOULD NOT DO – A POSSIBLE EXAMPLE WOULD BE RIP ROBERTSON WHO WAS KNOWN FOR BEING WILLING TO GO OVER THE TOP.

    ANYONE WHO LITERALLY HAD TO BE IN AN EXPOSED POSITION WOULD BE SOMEONE WHO NOT ONLY COULD NOT BE TIED TO AGENCY CONTACTS BUT WITH A REPUTATION FOR ACTUALLY BEING HOSTILE AND INDEPENDENT FROM THE AGENCY…AND OF COURSE ALSO EXCEPTIONALLY KNOWN FOR RISK TAKING…WHICH OF COURSE BRINGS HARGRAVES AND VIDAL TO MIND.

    2. On Location 1687, you wrote that "Unfortunately both Lansdale's "out of the box" psychological warfare plans and his generation of minutely detailed "task lists" and "action schedules" would lead to his being viewed with total distain by participants from virtually all the agencies involved."

    From Location 1777: "Former JMWAVE personnel cite the fact that Lansdale "drove Harvey up the wall"; he would demand detailed operational schedules months in advance, leaving to room (sic) to adjust for variables such as personnel, weather, conditions of the beaches, etc."

    I have always felt that Lansdale was like Shackley in that both were viewed by the "real" operators more as pencil pushers who were too concerned with record-keeping and politics. And I cannot imagine either being given real access to an assassination plot that was going to exist through oral communication in person and over the phone. With apparently no written records. Did you feel that either were involved or even knew about the plot?

    I AGREE WITH YOU PAUL, NEITHER HAD THE OPERATIONAL HISTORY TO ESTABLISH ANY REAL CONFIDENCE WITH THE TRUE PARAMILITARY FOLKS – ESPECIALLY SHACKLEY. NO, I THINK THE PEOPLE WHO CAME UP WITH THE ACTUAL TACTICAL PLAN AND DROVE THE ATTACK WERE JUST THE SORT OF GUYS YOU WOULD EXPECT – GUYS THAT HAD DONE THAT SORT OF THING ROUTINELY BEFORE, KNEW HOW TO MAKE IT HAPPEN AND MORE IMPORTANTLY TRUSTED EACH OTHER IMPLICITLY IN AN ACTUAL COMBAT ENVIRONMENT.

    And going back to the question of "familiar faces in Dealey Plaza", one of the most common discussions is that of Prouty's comment about seeing Lansdale from the back as he supposedly passed the Three Tramps. Doesn't the above analysis put a fork in that possibility? If Lansdale couldn't be trusted with the plot, what in the world was he doing given hidden signals on camera to someone?

    THIS GETS INTO THE MOST DICY PART OF ‘FACES IN DP” SINCE YOU CANNOT EVEN SEE THE GUYS FACE. FRANKLY I THINK ITS JUST SPECULATION (I KNOW THAT DOESN’T WIN ME A LOT OF FRIENDS). ANYWAY, READ PROUTY’S EXTENSIVE ARRB INTERVIEW AND THEN PONDER THE INDETIFICATION IN TERMS OF THAT DIALOG.

    3. On Location 2565, you wrote that "If for some strange reason, (Lisa) Howard had not been on Angleton's radar before the Helms memo, she certainly would have been by the middle of May."

    Given that you state that the Lisa Howard visits with Fidel Castro were setting up for a reproachment between Castro and JFK, do you feel that Angleton was using William Harvey to "prime the pump" so to speak with Morales and Rosselli? In other words, was Angleton feeding very explosive information down to people who would A: help communicate it to the wider anti-Castro Cuban movement and B: potentially put together a plot to attack JFK in some way?

    YES ON ALL POINTS BUT WITH JUST A LITTLE CAVEAT. I DEFNITELY THINK ANGLETON WENT TO HARVEY TO WORRY HIM, INSTIGATE HIM, ETC. IN OTHER WORDS HE WENT TO HARVEY BECAUSE HE KNEW HARVEY WAS THE KIND OF GUY TO PERSONALLY MAKE SOMETHING HAPPEN AND HAD THE RIGHT INTERNAL (AND EXTERNAL) CONACTS TO DO SO. BUT ANGLETON’S GENERAL MO WAS LIMITED TO LARGELY JUST THAT – GO INTO HELMS OFFICE OR PREVIOUSLY DULLES OFFICE AND JUST SIT THERE AND RAISE ISSUES, EXPRESS WORRIES, TALK ABOUT SOMEBODY DOING SOMETHING…AND THEN WALK OFF. CREATING FEAR, WORRY AND DISCONTENT SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN INTEGRAL TO HIS PERSONALITY. HOWEVER, AFTTER DUMPING THE ISSUE I CAN ALSO SEE HIM JUST WALKING AWAY AND LETTING THINGS JELL. THAT WAS HIS STYLE AS WELL. WHEN HE SAID HE DIDN’T HAVE ANY IDEA WHO STRUCK JOHN IT WAS MOST LIKELY THE LITERAL TRUTH.

    James Jesus Angleton certainly saw a lot from his vantage point as head of C/I for the CIA and his connections to the FBI. Do you view him more as an observer or a manipulator vis-a-vis the JFK plot?

    DEFINITELY AS A MANIPULATOR – BUT ALSO VERY DEFINITELY A KEY FIGURE IN THE CIA STONEWALLING AFTER THE FACT. THERE IS NO DOUBT IN MY MIND HE WAS USED TO REPLACE WHITTEN TO SUPPRESS ANYTHING DANGEROUS TO THE AGENCY THAT MIGHT SURFACE DURING THE INQUIRY. PLUS THE FACT THAT WITH ANGLETON’S OVERWHEALMING OBSESSION WITH THE KGB MASTER PLAN, IN SOME SENSE HE WOULD BE THE IDEAL GUY TO POINT FIGURES AT CASTRO AND THE SOVIETS AFTER THE FACT…WHICH OF COUSE HE DID.

    I'm sure more questions will come up as I finish and mull over your excellent book. My main thoughts are around the timing involved around the JFK-Castro reproachment and when assets starting coming into place to organize the assassination plot and set Oswald up as a patsy.

    TIMING IS REALLY A MAJOR INDICATIOR, ONE CLUE IN THE DOCUMENTS IS THAT THE AGENCY ITSELF (DIECTOR, MEXICO CITY, JM/WAVE-AMOTS) DON’T REALLY PAY MUCH ATTENTON TO THE FOLKS INVOLVED IN THE CASTRO/KENNEDY BACK CHANNEL DURING MUCH OF 1963…AND THEY KNEW IT WAS IN PLAY. YET SUDDENLY, IN THE FALL, THEY START GENERATING SOME SERIOUS PAPERWORK ON THE CUBAN SIDE. IT APPEARS TO ME THAT EVERYBODY REALIZED JFK COULD MOVE QUICKLY AND THAT THEY WERE IN A REAL TIME CRUCH TO DEAL WITH IT. AND OF COURSE FOR THE PLOTTERS, THAT MEANT THAT COME OCTOBER, THE GAME WAS NOT ONLY ON FOR REAL BUT THERE WAS A SHORT WINDOW FOR ACTION.

  12. 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.

  13. 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

  14. 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

  15. Gene, Jim may but I don't....what I see, and I've been studying early Vietnam covert ops for a couple of years now, is a massive disconnect (like so many that would continue) in military operations, command and control and inter-service coordination. No planning just typical SNAFU. And Johnson just flat jumped all over it for his own political agenda - look strong for the voters. You quickly see lots of people start to tell Johnson there may be a mistake going on, but once he stakes a position Johnson just doesn't want to hear it and everybody quickly realizes that.

    As for the NSA intelligence, if you really dig into it that too is all too common - when senior command takes a position, junior command goes along to get along. Very much like the FBI investigations we are so familiar with. Based on the article I described its clear that some military historians are researching just that but NSA is a tougher nut to crack than any other agency, bar none.

    If you would really like to dig into it I would dig into how such a mistake could happen militarily, I'd recommend Black Ops Vietnam by Robert Gillespie, it provides some great context - also The Secret War Against Hanoi by Richard Schultz Jr.

    -- Larry

  16. Look up "connected" in the dictionary and you find de Torres - at least it often feels that way.

    The strangest thing to me was Johnson sending out Fortas as a secret representative - you just have to love

    that, actually Fortas was lucky he didn't wind up somewhere in SE Asia. But fortunately Johnson was able

    to turn to McNamara instead (well not fortunately for all those around my age of course).

  17. Jim, you are probably all over this already and it may be too late but I pulled the following from a blog post I did a few months ago on Johnson's patter of response to national security incidents; I post it hear because it mentions a couple of other sources....

    I've been reading some additional material that gives us insight into Johnson's responses to crisis during his time as President. The crisis in the Dominican Republic provides one example and later his reaction to reported attacks in the Gulf of Tonkin another. In regard to the coup in the Dominican Republic, Johnson reacted quickly (on incorrect and insufficient information from the CIA) and jumped to his constant position that Communist advances must always be opposed - forcefully. Prados covers Johnson's response in his book on the NSC, "Keepers of the Keys." In the days following Johnson's initial orders, and as the US military response escalated, it became embarrassingly clear that both the CIA and Johnson had been wrong in seeing the coup as a Communist controlled event. Even the press began to call him out on his earliest statements. But Johnson bulled his way forward, escalating military action on one front and beginning his own personal effort to cover decision.

    In fact, just as he had with the JFK investigation, he sent Abe Fortas (his personal lawyer) to the Caribbean to consult with ousted politicians and produce supportive information for Johnson's position - Fortas even operated under two different aliases on the trip. And in the end, certainly knowing that he had been wrong, Johnson stood by his stand but remained very sensitive about it, even ordering Jack Valenti to assemble material showing his strong leadership during the crisis.

    Certainly all of that begins to sound pretty familiar. And when you dig into studies of the Tonkin Gulf incident, used by Johnson to seriously escalate American military action in Vietnam - you see much the same thing, and a whole bunch more cover up (in which Johnson was heavily assisted by McNamara). Anyone interested in the details and an analysis of the purported attacks on US destroyer patrols (one real and the second, non-existent) should refer to Eugene Windchy's 1971 book on the Tonkin Gulf incidents and of course Peter Dale Scotts "The War Conspiracy" from the following year.

    But perhaps what is more interesting is that by 2012, Johnson's actions and the extent of the following cover up (of the fact that the US destroyers Maddux and Turner Joy did not come under massive attack on August 6) is now well documened, even in some US military history. My January 2012 issue of Air Force Magazine contains a fine article by John Correll on "The Encounters in the Tonkin Gulf".

    In that article he relates that within hours a message had been sent to the White House that the early reports of attacks were now "doubtful" (for one thing support air craft had seen no evidence at all of attacking torpedo boats) but he notes within those same hours Johnson had reached his own conclusions and "It became clear that he was in no mood for discussion." He describes Johnson "chomping at the bit" to attack, based on political reasons and how the American response to Johnson's action was highly enthusiastic.

    Correll goes into considerable detail, which I won't repeat here, of the Pentagon's own investigation of the incident - they were uneasy with the reports from the beginning. Much of the final solution did not occur until 1996, when released documents allowed historians to prove that no attack had actually occurred - see Edwin Moise's Tonkin Gulf and the Escalation of the Vietnam War.

    And it was not until 2005 that certain radio intercepts were released which showed that an NSA field investigation had "deliberately skewed the notion that there had been an attack." The NSA group very selectively used 15 out of some 122 available intercepts, selecting only those that fit the official story. And as late as 2003 McNamara himself was forced to admit the attacks had not happened.

    Perhaps the worse part of the whole story goes back to Johnson himself, who used the Gulf of Tonkin Congressional resolution to back his immense commitment of the American military to Vietnam. Johnson is quoted as later telling Undersecretary of State George Ball that "Hell, those dumb, stupid sailors were just shooting at flying fish!"

    Of course you don't find much of this in the history books but it all seems to indicate one thing, you can rely on the fact that as President, Johnson would always rush to the conclusions that would profit him, he would brook no objections and apparently he was always able to enforce the pressure needed to make it play for the public, even when he himself knew better.

  18. 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

  19. 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

  20. John, some very interesting links - anyone doing serious reading on this subject will find that Birdsong and his Highway Patrol units were actually functioning more as a state Army than anything else, they could be brought in essentially as a special action force independent of local law enforcement and in several instances were used in just that way. I imagine it is surprising for many readers today to find a highway patrol force being used as they were.....and Birdsong did indeed act much more like a military commander.

    Apart from essentially paramilitary deployment of the highway patrol, the following from one of your links is even more surprising:

    "An example: Some collegians and two of their teachers got off a bus on July 5, 1961, in the semitropical antebellum river town of Natchez, which is in the southwestern corner of Mississippi, sitting on great bluffs, at a bend in the river. Billy had been sheriff of Adams County a year and a half then. The students and their two faculty chaperones were from Adelphi College in New York, and they were traveling on an interstate carrier out of New Orleans. From nearly the moment they stepped into the Trailways bus terminal at 5 p.m., they were watched. Even though Natchez was a tourist town, famous for its plantation "pilgrimages," site of the South's oldest slave-owning cotton aristocracy, they would have been watched: They were suspiciously young, traveling in a group, northern accents. But even more so in this case, since right away they'd begun asking impertinent questions about the terminal's segregated waiting rooms. That evening, Sheriff Billy Ferrell sent a Teletype under his special teletypewriter number, NTZ-44. He sent it to General T. B. Birdsong, commander of the Mississippi Highway Patrol (he used to be a colonel, but now he was a general), and also to the director of the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission, which was a state-sponsored and tax-supported agency whose charter was to spy on the civil rights movement. The Sov-Com was based in Jackson, the capital city, two and a half hours away. this afternoon on a bus from new orleans la seven white males and females combined entered this city and county. . . . these subjects have been constantly under surveillance since their arrival by officers this department. they have mailed two letters since their arrival. It was clear from the wire and from typed reports written in subsequent days by investigators of the Sov-Com that the desk clerk at the Eola Hotel had listened in on the group's phone calls and had reported to the sheriff. It was clear the postmaster was in on it, and so, too, the editor of the local newspaper, with whom the travelers naively thought they might arrange an appointment. subjects told desk clerk at local hotel that they was exchange students touring the country to find out all local customs prior to their shipment to overseas countries, the wire said. The authorities in Jackson wired back to Billy: ok will advise all consern. The collegians and their teachers left town on a bus the next morning. They were headed toward Little Rock, Arkansas, via Vicksburg, Mississippi. It was known they intended to stay at either the Albert Pike or the Marion Hotel in Little Rock. The constabularies up there would be alerted that a Barbara Wexler (w/f, address 14 grange lane, levittown, new york) and a Gail Yenkinson (w/fm, same add) and an Emilio Rivera (same add and supposed to be a proffessor at this college), along with the others, were on their nosy way."

    Stu and I ran across highway patrol intelligence activities all over the place - and the extent to which they had networked not only local law enforcement but others as described in the above excerpt is frightening. We live in a time when there is a lot of fear of federal intelligence collection but I can tell you that state and even local community intelligence networks can be equally invasive and when they do it there is nobody to turn to and absolutely no oversight. As a further example, one related to Memphis, in AGOG we explore an incident where a Mississippi Democratic Freedom party meeting was penetrated by intelligence informants from the Highway Patrol, the FBI, and from a Congressional committee. It became clear that the highway patrol had informants in a number of black political organizations (but didn't care about the Klan), that could be said for the Congressional committee as well. What could be said at least was that the FBI had informants in both the black groups and the Klan.

    And of those three groups, it was the Congressional committee head who again and again proved to be putting a massive, sensational spin on the informant information - in some cases far worse than Director Hoover, whose agents had to investigate and deconstruct the Congressional statements. When you have that sort of thing going on it shows you are really in big trouble.

    -- Larry

  21. John, we do include an appendix in AGOG where we write about the military intelligence context at some length, especially about the role of the 114th MIG group. That stuff was quite mysterious for a long time but there have been some very good historical studies about the growth of the domestic mil intel program, not only in response to antiwar activities but also given the tasking of the military in response to the major urban riots and protests starting in the middle of the decade. Like the FBI domestic programs, its strong stuff - and having lived through it, I can say virtually nobody had the least comprehension of the weight of resources that were brought into play.

    As to Dulles, its fascinating but as I recall, actually RFK requested that he do some survey work in the south in regard to the civil rights situation and he did prepare a report. Quite amazing that RFK would call on him, at least to me.

    On a side note, in regard to the FBI, the FBI eventually generated an actual report for the State of Mississippi showing how many state and local law enforcement officers were active Klan members....a very long and scary list.

    As to Birdsong, the name is familiar but I can't bring up any recollection of what happened with him eventually.

    -- Larry

  22. Greg, I have gone though one batch of 112rh files and as you are likely aware Col Jones (who was actually not the operations officer for the 112th but rather G2, a position calling for lots of report reading) stated when interviewed that his message of November 22 relating Oswald to the Hidell name was based in 112th Oswald file documents which had been received from the its Regional office in New Orleans. The file included material from Oswald's leafleting at the WASP as well as local agent reports. I'm going to check my Lancer CD on the 112th to see if those documents are included there, they are not in my paper files - but I sent all the major documents to Lancer for production onto the CD.

    It seems to me that Col. Jones based his communications of Nov. 22 simply on seeing both names in the Oswald file.

    Now comes the embarrassing part, I have a distinct memory of seeing at least one memo from New Orleans where there is speculation as to whether or not Oswald and Hidell might be one and the same person, basically as a ploy (perhaps not strictly an alias). When I read it I recall thinking that somebody in NO was on the money, although it was more speculation than a firm conclusion. Unfortunately that's only a memory, its not something I wrote about and hence nothing I would have filed away in paper, simply a memory. Possibly some of the NO specialists like Jim or Joan might recall it - or perhaps its just a faulty memory of mine.

    So, I won't actually dish up the crow for myself quite yet, but I'm getting the ketchup ready... Larry

  23. Ian, I've got a bunch of documents from the 112rh including everything we could find related to weapons thefts and investigations plus

    the various spot reports and materials from Nov. 22.

    As far as Oswald, his file with them started in their New Orleans office when one of their agents picked up a brochure from Oswald's leafleting

    near a Navy ship. Their file included certain NO FBI office memos including ones speculating on Hidell and Oswald, and Hidell being an alias.

    That's what seems to have triggered their communication on Oswald to Dallas. PD.

    From what I've learned over time in regard to how secret the FBI keeps its informant files, I very much doubt that the 112th would have been informed if Oswald had been supplying info or even if he was being monitored as a dangle. The Bureau is very good at keeping informant files separated from "personality" files and they have multiple tiers of informant, prospective informant, etc classifications so that they can skirt the issue if asked by other agencies. Again, I would suspect that normal office files in Dallas or NO or the file that was sent Hosty would have nothing about Oswald as any class of source or informant, that would be secured in the separate counter intelligence, subversive, informant files which were compartmentalized even within the offices - which of course is exactly where the Oswald file in NO was described as found when Oswald requested an FBI agent come meet him after his arrest.

    -- Larry

  24. John, as to your first question, AGOG is the result of Stu and I revisiting the MLK assassination - it begins with our inquiry into a host of documents, many not collected into the MURKIN headquarters file, about a series of plots and planned attacks against Dr. King. It goes on to examine the people and network behind that and the possibility that elements of it were connected to the murder in Memphis. You can see the details at the book web site:

    http://www.theawfulgraceofgod.com/

    We do explore the broader scope of Cointelpro in the book although its certainly not the focus; we also detail the dramatic escalation of domestic military intelligence activities during the period as well as CHAOS. I would certainly agree that Cointelpro White Hate was only a part of the picture and not nearly as pervasive as the complex of government activities spanning the gamut from white hate through black hate to the anti war movement. There are some very good books on the subject, but I doubt a great many people have read them - one of the most revealing for me was James Davis's Spying on America / The FBI's Domestic Intelligence Program.

    As to Dulles's role, the answer would be not that much, on the other hand I've taken more of a look at Angleton's role and covered some of that in Nexus; of course at times it gets really hard to separate Angleton's official role from all his vest pocket agenda's and activities.

    -- Larry

  25. Ian, there was a meeting about gun running on the morning of Nov 22 and Ellsworth was invited, Army intelligence and the DPD were all over the Terrell armory theft, Masen's involvement, the Fort Hood connection etc. Its very probable that Ruby was acting as a middleman in the armory theft and its also possible that looking for weapons trade going to the Cuban exile shoppers in Dallas was on Oswald's watch list. Fortunately we now have documents and research by some diligent folks on all this. Ellesworth was working one end via Masen and had no idea that the 112th was all over it based on informant information on Cuban exile gun prospecting in Dallas...

    If you happen to have SWHT check out chapters 11 and 12 for details. Chapter 11 sort of gives the gist of it with a Ruby quote - "Cuba, the guns, New Orleans, everything!". It was all very much on Jack's mind.

    -- Larry

×
×
  • Create New...