Larry Hancock

I'll look forward to that Tom,  it looks like we may be going down a common trail and a connection between Bannister and Bringuier makes perfect sense to me - in fact given Bannister's interest in the Cuban community and in uncovering Castro agents it would be more strange if there was not a connection.   Garrison's find of the FPCC leaflets with the Camp Street address pretty much says it all if we choose to listen...

Its also interesting that one of Bringuier's associates, Carlos Quiroga, had been suspected of being a Castro agent by the CIA,  was cleared and then considered as a CIA employee.  Of course Quiroga was the fellow sent to "test" Oswald but we only have his and Bringuiers word for that and it appears that rather than testing Oswald he might well have been carrying a stack of FPCC leaflets to Oswald for his later leafletting.  Would be really interesting if those had the Camp Street address...     I'm not at all sure that Bringuier was that distant from Bannister's office, what I am sure is that its unlikely we have the truth of matters from either he or Quiroga.

I'd go with B.....the CIA needed to obfuscate all its activities around New Orleans in the summer...including reports coming from the DRE and memorandum of meetings with DRE leadership that Jeff also documents.  

Shaw was with the Trade Mart for a number of years, in fact the helped found the organization in 1947,  the year after he left his WWII service.  In addition he traveled internationally in activities related to both domestic goods sales and imports and had numerous international contacts. In addition he was in contact with other Trade Mart groups around the country, from coast to coast.  Interestingly, like Phillips he was also involved with theatrics, being a published playwright.

Its also important to note that contract work assumes an effective cover where the individual spends most of his time in the role related to his cover...Phillips continued to run a newspaper following his recruitment.  The whole point is to look totally involved in the cover job....which provides the context for the spotting and recruitment.   So...the busier the better, more opportunities.

In considering Shaw as a CIA contract employee it might be interesting to compare him to another contract employee who we know a good deal about - David Phillips.  Phillips was recruited by the CIA for the range of contacts he had as publisher of the the South Pacific Mail, at the time the largest English language newspaper in the region.  His initial role was as a "spotter" and recruiter for CIA sources within communist groups, that evolved into case officer work with those recruits.

His next contract role was as a media and propaganda specialist in the Guatemala project and following that he was actually inserted into Cuba, still as a contract employee, using the cover of his own media marketing and promotions consultant.  That role allowed him a broad series of contacts, this time focused on spotting and establishing contacts within anti-Castro groups. 

It was only after having his cover blown inside Cuba and coming back to the United States that he was offered an actual job with the Agency, again in a propaganda role in the new Cuba Project launched in the spring of 1960.

Of course that tells us nothing specifically about Shaw but perhaps it gives us some clue as to why he was brought on as a contract employee and the possibility that he too might have been used as a "spotter", among other roles.

Ron, there appears to be a much stronger connections between David Phillips and events in New Orleans, starting in 1960.   At that time Phillips was in the Cuba Project as a propaganda officer; by the summer of 63 Fitzgerald had pulled him back into SAS for a new round of propaganda duties supporting AMWORLD, targeting the FPCC and focusing largely on Central American countries where AMWORLD was intended to gain support.   New Orleans was ideal for that given its Central American ties in trade, health care, etc.  And there was already a tool in place there - with INCA.

Its always important to separate the different functions,  propaganda vs. counter intelligence, vs. just basic collections vs political action - and keep them all separate from paramilitary operations.  Of course Morales specialty was paramilitary orations and to some extent CI.  Its also important to recall he was the military advisor to DRE, which gives us a critical connection between New Orleans and SAS/WAVE.

Tom, first off on the new propaganda campaign check pages 82-83 for the campaign that had already begun under DRE...which seems to generally receive little attention, and then check the references to INCA in the detailed Index available on MFF:

https://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/2021/TippingPoint_ExpandedIndex.pdf

Although the campaign (which DRE started but which SAS was likely going to take further) aborted with the assassination it was being geared up to start in the 4th quarter of 63 and conducted quite deniably though cut outs.  We know specifically that was one of the tasks given to Phillips when he was brought into SAS by Fitzgerald in 1963. The campaign was to target FPCC and Castro influence inside the US and it was to be conducted in parallel with the new AMWORLD project and he was the only person in Mexico City cleared for that project.

I give several examples of both proprietary (funded, owned or financed by the CIA itself) as well as commercial covers used in deniable operations in Shadow Warfare.  Some of the best examples come from SE Asia and from the AMWORLD project which we are lucky enough to know about in detail....in the latter you find a whole series of covers used in purchasing weapons, supplies, boats, etc.  There is also a record of how deniable funds are transferred for such activities. 

The third type of "cover", used primarily for collections or logistics (moving people under cover) involves individuals placed inside companies doing business in areas where the CIA initiated projects.  Well placed Sr Execs would use their local contacts to collect desire economic and political information and use the companies assets such as boats or planes to move CIA personnel under cover.  Several examples of that with the bit Ag companies operating across Central and South America.

As to Justice Dept "agreements",  those we know about were normally done in DC, at very high levels.  I give several examples in SW but perhaps the most egregious had to do with an agreement which allowed the CIA not to report drug dealings by Contra associated surrogates and supporters during its Nicaragua operations.   I really doubt that you would find such agreements with Justice actually negotiated below  HQ level.

If you want to discuss any of this in more detail just email me at larryjoe@westok.net

Gerry,  I misled you a bit,  David has developed enough material do to a detailed WAVE organization chart (which is actually an extension of the Miami station/Cuba Project org chart circa 1960) and I've used pieces of it in my recent books. He has not actually done a formal chart although bits and pieces have gone into our recent presentations and interviews on different subjects.  It would be a handy thing to have, especially in a form that shows the evolution of the various positions from 1960 -1963 but it would be a lot of work and I'm not going to volunteer him for that. 

Since he's not shown up here yet, the name William Kent should go along with Joannides as in regard to New Orleans, the DRE and new propaganda programs in 1963....Kent following Joannides.  Kent is the follow who reportedly described Oswald to his daughter as a "useful idiot".  Start on page 78 in Tipping Point for several pages and you will also come across an important new name not much discussed (yet) - William Moore, Deputy Chief of Station at WAVE in 63.

By statute the CIA is allowed to collect information on foreigners inside the United States who may be acting against CIA personnel or activities,  if that means observing them meeting with or in contact with US citizens that would simply be part of the collections - after all foreigners engaged in real spying would most likely be in contact with Americans or somehow penetrating US companies, agencies, etc.  Of course it is also expected that once a real spy or agent would be identified CIA would bring the FBI into the picture and potentially hand it off to them, we do have examples of that ala "Tumbleweed".

The best way to really dig into what is and is not allowed this is to read the National Security Acts of 1947 and that of 1948 on the CIA itself and then read the Title 50 code on clandestine operations.  I deal with that at in some detail in Shadow Warfare.

If Bannister's company was going to be used as a collections cover it would most likely mean putting CIA assets to work under the cover of being with his business and then task them to observe suspects potentially in contact with foreign agents, including a variety of suspect Cuban refugees, immigrants or even suspect double agents in the anti-Castro community.  Of course that would make most sense at the times where such suspects could post a threat to CIA operations, which in 61/61 would have been the evolving Cuba Project.

Of course using Bannister's company as a cover for meetings and contacts related to developing propaganda against Cuba would not have any real restriction at all...

On your question, well actually you need to read Tipping Point (free on MFF) but for the moment I will leave it for David Boylan to address since he did the work on it and the name is part of an extensive organization chart of SAS/WAVE which he had developed and should get the credit for given the depth of his research (which I allowed met to use in Tipping Point).

The "cover mechanism for gathering foreign intelligence" is pretty standard CIA speak....it could be applied to the way they used Meheu in DC - but he was not a cover per se but rather a domestic operations asset targeting foreigners.  It could be applied to the way they used international trade mart employees like Shaw - and more than one ITM personnel were used domestically for foreign intel collection.  Its perfectly within the CIA's legal mandate to use domestic companies for collections work targeting foreign visitors  or contacts. 

Given New Orleans position on the Gulf and the amount of trade and communications going through there it was an attractive location for collections and propaganda...which is why you find CIA officers traveling there and at least two SAS/JMWAVE employees actually in residence there for times during 63.

And in all of this its important to remember that all this is simply part of standard CIA practice, the day job for lots of people in both Western Hemisphere and assigned to special projects like those targeting Cuba and Castro.

A side note on that spiral bound copy of SWHT, gosh that was early on - no doubt some things I would probably leave out now and a ton that was added to the later editions, especially 2010.  On the other hand it did contain the Tywman transcript of at least one day of his Hargraves interviews.  Which I had to pull from later editions due to Noel's concerns over possible legal action.

Ben, you will find a good bit about the "new" propaganda campaign being built around Oswald's media image in New Orleans in Tipping Point (on MFF) although I don't think I went back to revisit the earlier Bay of Pigs era abortive effort.   Actually I've come to think that New Orleans may indeed be more crucial to understand how Oswald ended up as a patsy in Dallas than the events in Mexico City.

Its pretty interesting to revisit Garrison's take on Oswald's allegiances in New Orleans, which most of us haven't looked at in awhile, if ever, and to recall that the Clinton incident occurred well after Oswald's  Cuba/Castro support media appearances.

http://22november1963.org.uk/jim-garrison-oswald-banister-new-orleans

You may very well be right on shielding INCA, which rather than some fly by night group, appears to have had an ongoing but distanced role in creating and circulating anti-Castro though Central America.  In fact it appears to have been part of a brand new and significant campaign build around Oswald's NO image - a campaign which was just about to launch across the Caribbean at the time of the assassination - including a commercial record of his radio interviews.

Several likely ties between Bannister, certain DRE members like Bringuier and the new propaganda campaign. If Garrison had really exposed INCA in that role he would have exposed the use of domestic "political" groups for CIA organized propaganda, not something that would at all please the CIA given how phobic they got over his even identifying relative minor single CIA assets. Perhaps even beyond their fear of a  Shaw inquiry exposing the use of international trade organizations for collections, courier work and likely more substantive CI on occasion. 

Tom, it would be in the 2010 edition which shows on both paperback and Kindle from Amazon.  Hopefully the Kindle will work for you as we have had repeated problems putting up the Kindle version on Amazon...still, it does seem like its for sale now so maybe they finally got it right.  When you get the book drop me a note and I'll help you find the material.

For me one of the important things to remember about Bannister is that he was interested in everything from an anti-Communist viewpoint which means he was as deeply into racial matters as anything Cuba related.  His connections reached into the NSRP, the Klan and even what you might call neo-NAZIS. There are some excellent articles on that in Jerry Ross's 3rd and 4th Decade magazines which are available for reading on MFF and I really recommend that. 

Bannister seems to have been a sort of nexus for a variety of folks on the ultra right including the INCA folks, and one of his specialties was infiltration and "collections", hence his extensive files.  With so much traffic, so many connections and so many interests his business would have provided a great cover - simply due to the scope of its activities and contacts.  

Interestingly, many of his contacts and associates in the anti-Castro community were themselves separate sources to the FBI, the CIA and in some instances both.

In regard to "other information you can provide on CIA use of corporations, QKENCHANT, domestic propaganda ops etc." my work on CIA cover operations is largely found in my book Shadow Warfare - which deals with both the practices and risks of various types of Agency covers. 

I cover the CIA clearance request for Bannister's office as well as related indications that it was intended to be a cover...and may have even been used as a meeting place ....for a Phillips anti-Castro Cuba propaganda campaign (very likely using INCA as at least one outlet) in the paperback edition of SWHT.

It is also likely, as has been reported previously, that it was to serve as a cover for a variety of propaganda related activities in support of the Cuba Project....which would be consistent with David Phillips appearance there at that point in time. 

Well done Pete,  clearly a mental confabulation on my part...I do hope Jamey read my post though, after decades in the Plaza I thought it was worthwhile to call out things folks often miss on the standard walking tour...

Jamey,  after having led tours there during Lancer conferences for  years I would suggest a few things  you might not think about:  1) At Bowers tower examine the lines of sight as to what he could and could not see given the number of cars that were parked up against the fence on both the extensions of the fence.  2) Go to the locations mentioned by Ed Hoffman and take a look back over the bridges considering the cars being parked and again estimate what he would and would not have been able to see, 3) Walk over the RR overpass and examine shooting angles from the bridge and the other knoll,  4) Take a look at both manholes, the one up behind the fence line at the corner of the bridge and the one down by the street and ponder what it would take to shoot from each location, 5) Stand on the sidewalk (not in the street) in the vicinity of the final head shot and visualize where JFK would have been facing at that point, you will be surprised by how much Elm Street curves by that point, 6) Start across the street from the TSBD and walk down the street away from it thinking about how much detail you can see in the windows at various distances, 7) Examine the views from the East and West sides of the TSBD and think about a shooter on the West side, especially from a window on the actual West end of the building, 8), check the views at the cornor of Elm and see how much difference there is between a view from the TSBD or from the Daltex, 9) stand on the overpass bridge in the area occupied by Sam Bowers and see what and how the things the RR workers mention line up with the report of cigarette butts and mud on a bumper line up with their remarks,  and finally, 10) reread the statement of the grounds keeper (Emmett Hudson"), the Newman's etc and take a close look at what shots heard from "behind them" actually implies.   Not to make things too busy but they are all worthwhile things to do when you are there in person.

Some of us spent considerable time researching companies in the DalTex;  the best source was a Dallas cross connect directory from that period which lists telephone numbers by street address.   I wrote about a few of the more interesting companies at some length in the final (Marilyn Belt; Dallas Uranium and Oil), paper back addition of Someone Would Have Talked and you might find my blog posting on DUO of interest:

https://larryhancock.wordpress.com/2011/12/27/dallas-uranium-and-oil-update/

.........make sure you read all the reader responses to the blog posts for more details...

And as it turned out in the end,  the one share owned by Hoover was the result of a promotional effort where several prominent individuals were issued shares simply as a business promotion by the State of Colorado where DUO was registered -

"The reason for Hoover having a single share is that he was one of a number of well known state and national figures who received a single share as a promotional mailing - if you dig far enough on my blog you will find some great research by one of my readers discussing that mailing program, intended to promote new Colorado businesses...why was DUO filed as a business in Colorado, that frustrated us for quite a time until Alan Kent tracked them down.  My guess was that it was to keep it out of state to conceal some of the stock multiplication sales that were being carried out.  Its important to note that DUO itself didn't bring attention to itself in the promotional mailing, it was a Colorado promotion of business in the state.

I've enjoyed doing a few recent shows with Robbie and look forward to joining him again before too long.....and it would indeed be good to have Bart back here.

Well after 30 some years on this I probably know more than I can remember...grin.  Creating Chaos is actually a study of the different levels of political warfare as the US conducted it during the first Cold War and how Putin moved into it in this century as well as other players such as China and Iran.  

The reason it explores Mexico City is that serves as an excellent example of how the US managed to very effectively conduct a deep level of political action due to a positive relationship with the Mexican government at the time, something Jeff Morley has written about extensively.  The extensive phone tap and related surveillance operations have now been thoroughly documented in Mexico City the extensive CIA Mexico City history as well as related CIA documents.

Yes on both State Secret and Creating Chaos.

Basically the CIA had installed telephone taps on lines coming out of the Cuban embassy and those lines had to be either monitored in real time or tape recorded - it would be just like having another phone or phone/tape recorder connected to your telephone at a wiring point you were unaware of....its not an electronic bug but literally parallel wire tap.

The CIA has also managed to arrange that dozens of telephone lines for embassies and other targets be tapped in a similar fashion and a Mexico City telephone exchange switch...again, a physical tap going to recorders with someone later transcribing the calls.

Because they were physical wire taps,  someone could actually place a call to the telephone system as if they were the originator. 

To answer your question, either people listening to the phone tap or recorders on the tap would simply record everything that occurred on the telephone line - including the dialed digits, the ring back tones from ringing and any conversation that resulted from the call being answered.

Gerry,  I think your description of the Oswald calls is right on the money; we can never know for sure at this point but the agencies called seem consistent with issues Oswald was concerned with,  ranging from legal to health for Marina and the family.

And yes, the Mexico City call could have been made to a direct outside line at the Russian embassy.  I'm not sure if the Russians allowed such a thing given security protocols but its certainly not impossible.   Bill Simpich and I have done a lot of studies in regard to the embassy lines, taps etc in Mexico City and there is also a related question - and that is where the call itself originated as  well as where it was recorded. 

The Cuban embassy was subject to a number of US taps, both inside the building at times and at other times physically outside the building where the building wires were connected into the telephone network.  Mexico city CIA operatives monitored both types of taps...and since they were indeed taps, a call could have originated from a CIA monitoring point via the tap and on  to the Russian embassy.  It would not have to come from inside the Cuban embassy.  

In turn the Russian embassy was served off a telephone exchange/switch where a whole series of taps were made within the switching equipment and taken directly to recorders. That set up was done by the CIA with Mexican govt. permission and was a huge operation with a number of targets, not just the Russians. 

I'd refer you to Bills writing about this but the basic point is that calls could be made and conversations recorded totally from outside the embassy building themselves; I also write about it in some detail in my book Creating Chaos.

As an example.

That's getting very close....basically a larger office building would have a small switchboard to route incoming calls to the desired department or individual.  Of course many individuals at the business or office would have their own outside lines as would departments - so they could receive and make calls on their own.  The major departments would most likely have listed telephone numbers in the directory and then there would be a general number for the business or agency.   By the 1960s key systems were already coming into play so a secretary might have a key system and take calls for a department or office that did have a listed number, they they would tell the right individual to pick up on a line. The Key System served as a mini-switchboard and also might have a published number in the directory.

An exchange is actually a telephone switch which automatically routes dialed calls, at that time exchanges were named and the prefix was part of the number.  Depending on size an exchange (switch) might have a switchboard for operator assistance, charged calls etc or, if smaller. multiple exchanges might all be routed to a set of operators at a large switchboard.  You would get to that telephone company switchboard by dialing operator assistance from within the exchange and the operators would provide help or assist with calls.

It appears that Oswald generally was having to call agencies at their listed numbers and then most likely try to get the operator to assist with directing him to the right department or individual.

In  your examples, if  you had the the heart consultants actual direct line you would be able to dial right through the telephone exchange switch to their phone and ring it..of course the number would more likely be that for their office/secretary and you would would end up at a small switchboard or key system where they would forward you to the consultant's own phone or just let him know he had a call to pick up on an extension.

If you just had a number for the hospital where the heart doctor had an office you would definitely to to a building switchboard (through the telephone exchange switch) and then be connected to their office number where the secretary would do the same as described above.  

Basically exchanges are automatic switching systems and if someone has a direct line which is connected to that switch you can ring them directly with no intervention.   Switchboards come into play if you need assistance from the telephone company or if you are dialing a number for a business or agency which does not list all its direct lines and  there is an operator at a small switchboard or key system that routes you on to internal numbers which are connected to the office switchboard/key system.

Hope that helps, Larry

As far as I can tell a lot of the competition was about access - primarily to witnesses, but also to leads and for that matter conspiracy oriented rumors.  Motivation to come up with leads or people that had not been truly investigated, to interview them (and one researcher did not necessarily trust another interview skills, as I have been told). 

Those willing to go to Dallas and dig deeply were to some extent competing with each other,  for leads, for interviews and to get the stories that appeared to have been suppressed. 

As to planting false leads, from what I can tell there were locals who were not in sympathy with the researchers,  who thought they were making something out of nothing and who were willing to mess with them on occasion, some who were just natural "jokers" who liked to pull chains.  Individuals like Penn who were highly visible and writing on the assassination a lot were easy targets.  But even in later years we have had bogus documents planted on us, documents circulated but never with any provenance, coming from unknown parties who do know something about the assassination and even about document formats.

Some people just have a strange sense of humor...

And in case I did not make it clear before,  Mary Ferrell definitely did not trust the Warren Commission report and was quite a skeptic of it and the FBI's work...which drove her to become one of the first document collectors and geeks, looking for things that had been left out of the official story.

Given that I did have some direct interaction with Mary I will share the following observations - first and foremost I would view her as a "critic", she wanted all the information she could get from any source and examined it with a clinical degree of challenge and skepticism.  I have to imagine that was fueled from her legal office experience.  Actually many if not all the serious first generation critics were skeptics...skeptical of government explanations and of the Warren Commission.

In addition it was quite common to find anti-administration political leanings tied to general skepticism about the government in general.... then not everybody automatically jumped to iron clad positions as they do now but skepticism itself was considered healthy.

As to her views on the assassination, I have no idea what they were other than the official story was implausible and needed to be questioned.  I've seen her in a room listening to everyone from David Lifton to John Armstrong and doing no more than asking questions.  Very penetrating questions.

I would also note that it was not necessary for the government to create confusion in the research community.  I know of at least one instance where Penn Jones (who was eager for just about any conspiracy story) was sent on a wild goose chase by another first generation researcher.  My impression is that there was a bit of competition for interviews and leads and everybody did not necessarily play nicely with everybody else.