Larry Hancock

William, Phillips was most definitely Bishop. I devote a chapter to offering proofs for that in the book.

However, a good number of the actions taken by Phillips as Bishop and the activities engaged in under the Bishop alias had to do with Phillips own private agenda and not his postion, role, or internal job/reporting within the CIA. The same can be said for David Morales.

Which is why I belive making a statement that "Bishop" was Veciana's CIA case officer is not accurate as far as the agency and Phillips official duties is concerned. And just as misleading as thinking it would have been official US policy and a CIA task to incite Alpha 66 raids against Russian ships and personnel in Cuba at the time Bishop was pushing Veciana and Alpha 66 into those activities.

-- Larry

William, I've seen nothing in the documents that reflects that Phillips was officially a case officer for Viciana; in fact Veciana was very much at odds with the CIA and makes it clear that he wanted no on ongoing relationship with CIA. On the other hand Veciana was much more positive about Army intelligence and indeed did have an informant number and an assigned army contact officer inside Military Intelligence. Veciana is on record in his conversations with Army Intel that he and Alpha 66 want no more to do with CIA than they have to in order to get some minimal support - and then they steal what they really need. And it is possible to determine who official case officers were in most cases as that is in the CIA records, for example Barker was case officer for Sturgis. In most cases there are good records of CIA exile contacts including recruiting files and polygraph testing for secuirty (crypt for that is "flitter"). More of these type

records are becoming available daily in new CIA file releases following the ARRB work. I'm working on requests for some today as a matter of fact.

Anyway, Veciana's attitude toward CIA is consistent with his stating that Bishop never represented himself as CIA and as a matter of fact distanced himself completely from CIA and claimed only to represented 'businessmen" interested in Cuba - very similar to the approach to Sierra by the businessmen from Las Vegas.

My contention is that understanding people like Phillips and Morales means understanding that they had their own private agenda's, their own private networks and contacts and in fact their own private war which was often at odds with the Kennedy administration and sometimes with CIA HQ as well. There is also some good indication that people like Phillips and Morales may have intentionally picked up on exile assets that either told the CIA to kiss off or that CIA dropped because they did not like some of their associates - in several cases those associates were linked to gambling interests and the old Hanvana casino connections.

Phillip's "Bishop" persona is an example of that as far as I can tell. In many cases this also complicates the situation a great deal as some operations - say the Alpha 66 raids against Russian targets - were totally at odds with authorized projects while in other cases I think that individuals may have assumed they were taking sanctioned orders from the CIA or US government when in fact they were taking orders based on the private anti-Communist wars Morales and Phillips were conducting. I try to give as many examples of that as I can in the book - one example is that Phillips himself was cited by the Church committee for his lack of authorization related to an assassinations project in Chile.

So, in my view Veciana was definitely working with and for Bishop but that was something not handeld under any official case officer relationship between Phillips as a CIA office and Veciana.

-- Larry

A most interesting letter Dave, that one is really going to make me think. Do we have any sign of whether or not Hall was really known to or in regular communication with Rey? Seems sort of unusual politics for the ultra right wing Hall to be tight with the more left leaning Rey?

Of course Hall was quite a "talker", no doubt about that. On another side note, other than the trailer load of weapons that Howard helped him score in California, any other indications that Hall had ever managed to obtain any quantities of weapons.

And by the way, I would be totally open to the idea that Hall was planning on dropping the weapons off in Dallas for Masen to convert to full auto.

-- Larry

William, I spend a great deal of time on Masen, Nonte and the overall gun running sting by Ellesworth in my book. And I agree there is a case to be made that Ruby may well have been involved in a minor gun deal with some weapons stolen from a Natl Guard storage building. I present as much evidence as I could dig up for that in the book.

The case in regard to Nonte gets much more complex because Ellsworth did not realize that Nonte had gone to military intel on his first appraoch from Masen about gun sales (they two were actually going into business with another man in a black powder business). MI turned it over to the FBI and the FBI was using Nonte in a sting against Masen at the same time Ellesworth was running his sting on Masen - but of course the FBI never tells anybody about such things so he was in the dark.

Anyway, the FBI documents on this one are very comprehensive and all the documents are on the CD.

Perhaps the most incirminating evidence bringing Ruby into it is a travelers check frome one of the army guys at the facility where the guns were stolen, the timing is ideal for it to be a pay off and it went through Ruby at the Carousel.

-- Larry

I can't tell you who the female reporter was but I do know that one of the reporters present for the exchange was Otis H. King.

I have his signed description of the event and of Ruby's quote which was "Ask the man who is up there now" in response to the question as to "What's behind this Jack."

Mr. King was alive as recently as two years ago and had just published a book on his experience as one of the Marine surviviors of Batann and Corregidor. At that time he lived in the Dallas area. His book is tittled Alamo of the Pacific and was published by Branch-Smith of Forth Worth.

His impression was that Ruby was certainly quite serious about the remark.

-- Larry

Just for reference, I'd recommend a book "Dirty Dealing" by Gary Cartwright which probably contains more actual detail on what Harrelson actually did where and when than anything I've come across.

Certainly I wouldn't take his word on anything... it's possible that he might actually be more beliveable under the influence of Cocaine though?

However there is one loose end that somebody should resolve and I've had no luck myself.

In his murder trial for killing Sam Degelia the prosecution introduced an eyewitness, one Jerry O'Brien Watkins who supposedly at one time had posed as a CIA agent and tried to buy weapons for anti-Castro exiles in Miami, a scam that apparently involved Harrelson. There is good evidence that Harrelson had ties to exiles doing smuggling and other stuff in Florida after the assassination, perhaps some of the old OP 40 alumnae.

It would be very interesting to know if he had any such connections prior to the assassination. I've talked to Cartwright and he just doesn't remember anything more on this as it was a minor detail in his book - however he says that the statements and testimony would still be in the trial records down in south Texas, not sure whether it would be Edinburgh or McAllan.

If somebody could tie Harrelson to exile gun running and contacts immediately before the JFK assassination it could make things more interesting. It is pretty clear though that between 1960 when he was arrested for a petty crime in California and the mid-60's when he was driving big cars and wearing expensive clothes he did something to get a serious rep as a contract hit man. It's also clear that even after his very first arrest he had a habit of lieing about big crimes he had committed.

-- Larry

William, this exchage is probably just wasting space but yes, I do look for need some form of "corroboration" for anything I deal with on this subject - not that I always find it. Corroboration can come in a lot of forms, in the case of the second document you posted (and for some reason I can't seem to get you focused on that one) it could be as simple as showing that Bush was spending time in Miami in 1960-61. It could also be as simple as a statement from the person who originally found the document saying when, where and under what circumstance they found it. We question the chain of evidence all the time when we look at the cover-up, the same has to apply to material we use.

You provided some very interesting new documents on the Kirknewton incident and you know that I didn't just write those off, it was possible to find several types of corroboration for them and they point in some very important directions - but when I talk about those directions now I still have to call it speculation because I don't have the information that is redacted in the basic documents - maybe some day we'll be able to convert it to something solid.

I didn't get involved in this to convince anyone except myself, when I do write something down I go as far as I can in showing everyone what I feel is solid and what is speculation and I think I'm pretty hard on myself that way. I'm equally hard on evaluating what others write and I plan to stay that way. In the end everybody had to be their own jury on this case so your'e free to use the standards you wish and so am I. Which says about all I have to say I suppose.

-- Larry

William, I'm not sure any of these folks care enough about us or take any document or story that comes up serously enough to argue it one way or the other - now if it was about Johnson it would be different and Valenti would jump all over it.

And as I said it's the second document that interests me much more than the first because appears to put Mr. Bush in the thinck of things in Miami - something which certainly has not come up before.

But in either case if we could figure out how and where they came from it might lead us to something even more interesting. Any way, I'm certainly going to keep my eye out for such items in the FBI collections and anyone that is looking at State Dept documents should as well... we have a good record in finding memos over on that side that have appearently disappeared from other Agencies files.

-- Larry

William, yes I am aware of it - I'm pretty much aware of all the dirt that has been published on the Bush family and especially George Sr. - after October Surprise, Iran Contra and Mena, well enough of that.

My question is a lot simpler than that - I don't care who publishes what in a magazine article or on the internet, what I'm interested in is primary source information (where the document was found and how it was corroborated in the first place). In particular I need to know where the second document you have posted on your WEB site originated and how you vetted it to ensure that it is a real document. Actually I'd like to know the same about the first document on Bush as well but that is more curiosity.

Once I know where the second document came from it will help me find out why it does not appear to be in the NARA collection and may also help me understand other things as well - as why Hoover would identify FBI informants in other agencies by name, a very strange thing for him to do.

If the document can be proven to be real and not a one that has been manipulated, especially in the last paragraph, it will also raise a lot of interesting questions about involvement with a Pro-Castro group.

If you can't provide the source or verify the second document that's fine and I'll keep trying to validate it myself.

-- Larry

Thanks William but my only real question is about the two Bush documents, the one referencing to Miami and a pro-Castro group.

I would like to verify that its indeed in the NARA collection - as well as the first "Mr Bush of the CIA" letter - because neither one of them shows on a search as far as I can find. If neither one is actually I'd like to ask the NARA folks why not - but to do that I need to know details on who found them where and when.

-- Larry

Hi William, there are several things about the document that interest me and I would like to verify its provenance - which is why I needed the NARA document number. I'm also curious if Berenice has a separate source or took it from your site, that could help locate it at NARA and see if there are any other related memos such as a reply from State to Hoover.

Some of the things that interest me are the fact that Hoover seems to be writing the memo to the State Dept in regard to some advice from the State Department to the FBI's Cuban Affairs coordinator in Miami - I'd like to know more about the FBI having a Cuban Affairs Coordinator in Miami as that is new to me.

Also, after reading hundreds of FBI reports which shield the identify of their "sources and informants" with numbers such as T-3 etc I'm sort of interested in Hoover's disclosure to the State department of names and details of FBI sources within other agencies - especially the fact that these are supposedly employees of CIA nd DIA. It just seems atypical of Hoover who was not normally free with information - it's also sort of strange to have a CIA employee volunteering information to the FBI rather than passing it through his own agency - plus giving his actual name since normally CIA folks even use crypts in internal communications other than personnal matters, expecially field agents/case officers.

If you could share the source of the document or if you have a NARA cover sheet for it I'd certainly appreciate seeing it.

-- thanks, Larry

Bernice, do you have a RIF number for that document - part of it looks very familiar to me but the bottom part does not. I'd like to see if I can veryify it in the CIA segregated files or in a NARA search but a RIF number would really speed that up.

Thanks, Larry

John, I have to say I do find the Stockdale incident very interesting but there is a lot of speculation going on without some important data.

First, nothing in Adele's background mentions his earlier association with Hancock in Automatic Vending (even though Hancock was apparently a pall bearer at Stockdale's funeral). There is no mention of his other vending machine venture that got him into legal trouble concident with his appointment as ambassodor and we have no details about that or how it ever came out? It is a bit unusual to see someone give up an appointment as Ambassador - that usually costs plenty of money in campaign contributions, what was going on with Stockdale's businesses and finances that brought that about?

As a close friend of JFK and a former business associate of Hancock it is very possible that Stockdale felt very badly about the Baker Serve U Corp scandal which was doing so much damage to the Administration - Stockdale could easily have ended up even being called as a witness on that. One of the big open issues that never got resolved was Hancock's real role in Serve U Corp beyond being apparently no more than a front for the company and not really involved in its business affairs. There is just a lot that we don't know about things that may have been affecting Stockdale in late 1963, aside from the murder of a close friend. One of the questions that crossing my mind is why no reporter did a better job with the Stockdale death, especially given his known association with some of the people involved in the exploserve Serve-U corp scandal? Another is why he was apparently talking to lawyers right before his suicide?

I'm certainly not suggesting Stockdale might not have had some suspicions (although I really have a problem with him knowing anything specific about a threat to JFK and keeping it to himself for months). In any event, if he shared anything with the Kennedy family I find it very consistent that they gave him no response at all. There is a clear pattern of Kennedy family participation quashing any real investigation of conspiracy and in acutally removing evidence - that has been documented elsewhere. There is a scenario that does explain that and I have addressed it in my book, it involves the secret war on Cuba, the Castro assassination attempts and national security. Whether or not we will ever know more about that than we do now is a good question, there are some good researchers pursuing that angle though.

On Stockdale, it's surely a lead worth pursuing but somebody needs to go back to the basics and investigate Frates, Gaither, Stockdale's personal and business situation etc. I just don't think we have enough data for conclusions.

-- Larry

Hi William, here goes:

1) Martin may call Cain a hitman, I would be interested in specifics of any murders linked to him; in any case that would still not necessarily qualify him as a skilled rifle class marksman which he would need to be as a DP shooter.

2) I'm familiar with Escalante as a source and with his remarks on Diaz Garcia, I was not aware of any specific remarks he made about a Cain/Garcia meeting and will go back to look for that...thanks. Actually I would find that very consistent though in that both men are very reasonable candidates for the first Roselli organized Castro attempt. Putting them together in 63 would be another story though, we have data on Garcia then which puts him in the right places with the right people...I'd like to see something on Cains movements in 63.

3) That's a good photo showing the construction site, problem is that is is a very long way to make out facial details including glasses in a person looking out a window several blocks away; as I said, I've gone there by myself and with others and just don't find that level of detail believable although I really would like to have Carr as a data point. I'd like to see further work trying to duplicate all of Carr's observations done in DP, it deserves some real field work.

-- Larry

Sorry, I see that you did cite the newspapers as sources but were there any others than the articles you referenced? I was also curious as to whether or not the articles made it clear why Stockdale might have contacted that particular reporter - John B. McDermott - did they have a history with each other, something of the nature that might cause Stockdale to consider the reporter as a confidant?

-- thanks again, Larry

Thank you for posting these details... could you give us some sources and references for them as I find them fascinating and would like to read further in the source material.

-- Larry

Well William, I surely wouldn't dispute the problems with gathering hard evidence; I still need to see a) some evidence that Cain was skilled with a rifle and had been practicing enough in 1963 to have passable skills, the same thing I would need to see for Roselli.

Aside from that though, I'm very open to the Diaz Garcia connection with Cain early on, I think there is some very good evidence to tie Diaz Garcia to the Dallas plot - as I elaborate in my book - and I would love to see anything concrete you have on the early Garcia/Cain meeting and any association after that. In fact I'd love to see any details that you might have on Garcia in 1963.

As to Carr and his observation, I'm afraid that his report or any other commentary about it has to face up to the reality of what can be observed from the site he claimed; if you or anyone else can go to Dallas and confirm that by actual experiement I would be the first to jump in line to use Carr as a data point. So far what I've done on the ground in Dallas just doesn't allow me to do so.

-- Larry

John, I don't know that I've posted on Cain here before - Lancer forum participants can probably save the time of reading this though.

At this point there are a good number of CIA, FBI and Chicago PD documents available on Cain which give an view into his Cain's politics and activities including his attempts to provide information to the CIA (which were declined) and to the FBI and CPD (where he was used as an informant, particularly on Cuban exile activities in Chicago). He had clearly been working with exiles on the NE side of Chicago from the early days after the Castro victory all the way through the genisis of the Sierra organization (he was reporting on that to the FBI in 1963 and even associated Roselli with it). On the other hand as far as I can tell thre is no concrete evidence that he was a praciticed or skilled marksman (which his half brother confirmed to us in comments last November in Dallas), a trainer of Cuban exiles military or a shooter in Dallas. Personally I have a real problem matching him to the description given by Carr because I have a real problem with the detail Carr relates given his distance. In my view Carr's statement on this individual is as open to question as Brennan's description of the expression on the face of the man in the 'snipers nest'.

On the other hand there is some very suggestive information including that provided by his brother that Cain was used as an asset in the very earliest Giancana organized assassination plot against Castro...operating through Miami with a cover as a newsman and then on into Cuba. It's also clear that the connections and associations Cain had earlier developed while trying to start an intelligence/security company in Mexico were of value to Giancana when he left Chicago to pursue opportunities outside the U.S. Going to Mexico City with Cain made a lot of sense for Giancana.

Beyond that, I'm eagerly awaiting his brothers book.

-- Larry

John, I certainly do not see Phillips as either the organizer of the Dallas conspiracy nor as the prime mover in building any sort of a frame of Lee Oswald. My current belief is that Phillips was very likely manipulating Lee Oswald in a relatively minor role in a new CIA propaganda project targeting the FPCC outside the United States, specifically in Mexico. As to the mechanics of that and whether it involved Oswald himself, an impersonator or perhaps even both are beyond me.... several different scenario's are possible. I think it's pretty safe to say that whatever the plan was it was built on the "performance" and image that Oswald had built in NO only a short while before and which had been well documented by Phillips covert "media network'. There is also some reason to think that this game involved CI/SIG assets in MC and at HQ which were independent of the other MC office staff. Whatever it was though became hugely dangerous for Phillips and the CIA as a whole after Nov. 22.

At a minimum, Phillips - as others in the CIA and FBI and individuals in New Orleans - knew there was a lot more to Oswald than the official Lone Nut story. It's also pretty clear that Phillips jumped on the "lets tie Oswald to Castro" bandwagon with the whole Alvarado incident (which Phillips undoubtedly knew to be bogus) and had the nerve to cover up his games in MC (his letter to the FBI stating that as of February 64 the CIA had full photo files on every American entering the Cuban embassy in Sept and Oct of 63 is raw hubris, almost daring them to ask for the photos of Oswald going in and out). The fact that such photos were never provided certainly does raise the issue of an imposter or of an Oswald associate/handler.

Whether or not Phillips had shared information on Oswald in advance with Morales, whether or not he had signed up for some propoganda/media role in promoting Castro as a conspiracy sponsor is an open question. Remember, his speciality was propaganda/media control/counter intel not black ops or tactical matters, he had no military experience at all. I think it's safe to say that Phillips knew all along that the WC story was bogus, at a minimum he knew there had been a conspiracy and that his final words point in the right direction.

Beyond that it's also important to remember that much of his work - such as with Veciana - was on his own initiative. He was not Veciana's CIA case officer, his manipulation of Veciana and Alpha 66 and other groups he was in contact with was at on his own agenda and generally directily opposed to that of Headquarters and certainly the Administration.

Sorry for the rambling, it's a big subject and certainly not one I have any final word on beyond what I've sketched out above.

-- Larry

John, neither Stockdale nor Smathers was an officer or a stockholder or seemingly involved in any way with Serve U - Bakers vending company. Both Smathers and Stockdale of course were politically connected in DC, Stockdale very active in Democratic politics. There is speculation that either of them or Smather's associates could have introduced Baker to Hancock who did become Serve U President.

Stockdale and Hancock had been running a vending machine company in Florida - Automatic Vending - which seems sort of a model for Serve U, focused on govt. contracts. However Stockdale did not join Serve U and took a Kennedy appointment as Ambassador to Ireland. Upon his return to Florida he became consultant to another vending machine company which had contracts at Cape Canavaral. Shortly after his JFK appointment, Automatic Vending had been sued for improper actions in getting a contract at Aerodex but the suit was eventually dismissed.

All in all there is nothing to indicate that either Stockdale or Smathers had any ties to Serve U and Stockdale's friends seem to have felt his suicide immediately following Kennedy's death was personal grief due to his identification and admiration with/for JFK. If there is something more mysterious about it nobody has connected any real dots to date and the speculation seems to be built entirely around the timing of his suicide.

That's about all I can find on the subject, Larry

Hi John, here goes"

1) As far as I can tell Black was being investigated along with Howard Foundries on charges of kickbacks or some sort of bribery in regard to a government contract. I have found no evidence that this led to any criminal convictions but I don't know the exact outcome or conduct of the investigation. I do know that this was going on in 1964 at the time in which Black was convicted on tax evasion but had his conviction thrown out over the issue of the illegal FBI wire taps. Black remained very influentical through the early 70's and later maintained an apartment at the Watergate Hotel during the time of the Congressional investigations. Roselli stayed with Black during some of his time giving testimony.

2) I don't know when or if Black died; I do know that Rappleye and Becker interviewed him extensively following his 1990 release from serving time over tax evasion and that they got as about as much as he is likely to say - he did deny the warning call to Roselli that had been reported by Edith Daigle.

3) As to Stockdale, I don't think he was President of Serve-U-Corp, he had been involved in Florida with another vending machine operation along with Gene Hancock who did become Serve-U-Corps President (although as far as investigators could tell he really didn't do anything and the stockholders handled all the paperwork). The best source for all this and the ins and outs of Serve U Corp is a little paperback The Bobby Baker Affair by G.R. Schriebier - he went through all the Committee paperwork on the investigation and did a lot of digging.

-- Larry

John, I'll try to address your points and not miss anything.

First, Black certainly did not implicate Johnson in any testimony however Black did launch his own leagal nitiative based on the fact that the FBI had placed wire taps on him illegally and he aggressively used this action as a tool to avoid any statements at all. Of course given that the investigators never located the evidence of the Johnson meeting with the Baker/Black/NA folks the issue might have only come up if Black and introduced it. Given that the investigation was essentially gutted upon Johnson's assuming the Presidency it became a moot point in any case.

I was aware of the Torbett information but as with virtually everything in Torbett it's hard to use it as a reference since there are no sources.

Roselli's time in Guatamala is covered in pages 148-155 of All American Mafioso which I heartily recommend. The authors had a great deal of difficulty exploring this period but point out that whatever role Roselli was playing, his apparent sponsor was Standard Fruit (the same Standard Fruit that sponsored the INCA propaganda efforts out of New Orleans). Apparently Roselli assisted Standard Fruit in political and labor competition against its rival United Fruit. Of course all

this was circa the late 50's after the earlier CIA regime overthrow and after Roselli's activities in Havana. I think it might be a mistake to see him as working with the CIA on any official basis there although he certainly might have taken advantage of some personal connections. It appears it was about big money though as most of Roselli's "consultant" work was...

As to the Black interview you mentioned, no I haven't seen that and in truth I didn't pursue the Howard Foundries incident beyond Johnson's obvious concern about it as mentioned in the Johnson tapes.

-- Larry

John, Antii has some good dates there....actually I've looked into this myself, partially because of John Martino's remark that they did have advance details of the motorcade and that was important to them.

However, the whole route thing is no great mystery in my opinion. The President's plane had to land at Love field, every major public appearance in Dallas involved a motorcade down Main street and that brings you into Dealey Plaza. So from the beginning it was safe to plan for an attack on Main or in DP, which is why the Oswald impersonator showed himself at so many places on Main both before and after Oswald got the job in the TSBD e.g. Oct 4 at the Adolphus, Oct 31 at the Statler Hilton, Nov. 7 at the Allright Parking Garage and Nov. 16 at the Southland Hotel.

The only real variable was how the motorcade would exit the Plaza and that depended on the location of the luncheon, finding out that as early as possible and finding out the sequence and personnel in the cars were the final pieces of the puzzle . However after Nov. 18 there was no longer an issue of making it look like Oswald was setting up for Main street, the issue became one of framing him in the TSBD since the President was known to be going down Elm to Stemmons.

As Antti points out there were articles several days before with a verbal description of the streets to be taken including Houston and Elm and although one newspaper carried a wrong map, another carried a correct one.

However as soon as the luncheon location became known known the overall route was relatively easy to figure out. Something much harder to get would have been details on vehicle sequence, vehicle occupants, exact placement of security cars, etc. The individual with an inside track on all that was Jack Puterborough, backed up by Cliff Carter, Johnson's closest aide.

....Larry

Ron, do a yahoo map search with that street address and you wil

find the Cabana was immediately ajacent to Stemmons - off the

south side of the access road and probably not too far from where

the "Volkand" photo was taken on Stemmons. Undobutedly it had a

wonderful view of the highway and downtown Dallas.

There's no way to ever prove it but certainly it would have been an ideal

place to monitor and control the car bomb...with zero risk.

-- Larry

From some initial feedback and a Dallas historical link it appears the

Cabana was right off Stemmons - in fact the locals talk about it

being "on Stemmeos".

It was quite the place circa 63/64...reportedly the Beatles stayed there while on tour in 1964. Much later it became - for a time - the "Bill Decker Jail" for

minor offense prisoners...hmmm....

No specifics yet but it seems likely some rooms did have a good view

of the freeway.

--Larry