Larry Hancock

Paul, you seem to think that many of us have not checked both Morales and Hemming inside out including personal connections beyond the CIA and beyond JMWAVE?   I assure you many very good investigators have.  I've talked to his best friend Ruben who was consistently in touch with Morales and discussed who influenced Morales, who he networked with socially and who he did business with after retirement.  Of course if you find some new connection we would love to hear about it.  As to Hemming, if  you check him out thoroughly you find him soliciting basically any name he could come up with for money, with letters, TV appearances (he was very convincing on TV).  In that regard Walker would be just one of a great number of people Hemming tried fund raising with...you do know that Hemming complained bitterly about Hall following along behind him and hitting up all the same people he was hitting up for money, including several in Dallas...he was bitter about not getting anything and then having Hall come along and pester them more - making them even less responsive.

Anyway, I should be smarter than to let you lead me back into these exchanges...grin...so I will be and just say if you find anything new on Morales and Walker please post it.  Or even Hemming and Walker, but lots has already been written in regard to those contacts though so please make sure it is truly new. 

The actions in Laos with the Hmong went on for a number of years....actually in 1963 JFK authorized equipping the Hmong with artillery for the first time. Earlier in 1962 he had authorized a major offensive involving the Hmong and large scale covert air strikes; the attack was scheduled to go in virtually in tandem with the landings in Cuba. When that turned into a fiasco JFK canceled that Laotian offensive.  In later years, once Shackley moved to Laos he became the driving force and involved the Hmong in a series of disastrous offensives, they did OK when fighting the native insurgents but once the North Vietnamese deployed in force, with tanks and artillery, they were merciless in grinding down the Hmong and first Shackley and later Kissenger literally sacrificed the Hmong....neither man showed any guilt or remorse at all.

Well I think we have our answer,  the production company is indeed a general freelance firm that does all sorts of specials for the cable channel market.  If you check Karga 7 you see it ranges from Spy World to Booze Traveler so they do stuff that will sell, that's it.  They did Hunting Hitler and that is the connection to Baer.  Checking his bio you see he does all sorts freelance work leveraging his CIA background and would have been very visible to a company like Karga 7 because of the sort of call list the media maintains.  Another example of leveraging your resume in retirement...grin.

Robert Booker "Bob" Baer (born July 1, 1952) is an American author and a former CIA case officer who was primarily assigned to the Middle East.^[1] He is Time's intelligence columnist^[1] and has contributed to Vanity Fair, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post.^[2] Baer is a frequent commentator and author about issues related to international relations, espionage and U.S. foreign policy. Currently he is a reality television host on the History Channel's program "Hunting Hitler."^[3] He is an Intelligence and Security Analyst for CNN

As a former case officer he has some qualifications to look at Oswald as an asset but given the range of work he does I don't see him spending that much time on it.  It was likely an extension of his Hunting for Hitler series gig and he's just giving it a shot without any particular background in the subject. And as we know, if you just "dip into" this case its easy to take one of the easy outs. Per Pat's view though, he appears to have gotten a lot of mileage from his Agency background - and is public with it.  Given that probably remains on good terms with the Agency and might have referred to some of the Agency preferred sources on JFK....oh lets say something written by Gus Russo, admittedly tight with the CIA and an ongoing proponent of Oswald did it for Castro themes.  Just spit-balling on that of course...but it would take Baer in the direction he appears to be headed.

One thought is that its simply a matter of History channel filling a topical slot with the lowest possible production costs.  That is suggested by the apparently limited "investigation" time involved.  The really interesting question would be how they found and selected Baer and company?   If you do a search on JFK assassination you don't turn him up.  Has he been on air before  or done something in the media to get him on a CIA talking head list (the media does prepare such things, its a call list for when certain stories come up).  If so Baer might just have taken it as a gig, been told he could only spend so much time and done a quick search online search and come up with it.  I haven't looked at the credits, who was the script writer, the producer, etc. Any clues there...are they the same folks that do other topical specials. They know their viewers are entertainment oriented rather than history oriented - that's was clear some time ago.  But how and why they would pick Baer rather than someone like Newman who certainly has superior intelligence credentials, maybe the answer is there. 

Sounds like a good point to disagree on Paul.  Probably impossible to resolve but it would be interesting to judge that clout by the news impact that Walker made on his trip to Miami in the summer of 1963.  I've mentioned that to you before, don't know if you have done any checking. I spent some time reading all the Cuba related newspaper articles out of the Miami paper for that year and a few years before - thanks to the collections work of a good friend of mine down there. As I recall there was only very minor mention of his visit deep in a couple of editions and the only net result was that it made him a target for a good deal of unsuccessful fund raising - since he had little enough money even for his own political ambitions - by various anti-Castro figures who themselves had little money.  Hence a few trips and drop-bys in Dallas. I just can't see that impressing Morales, even if he had time to read the papers - given the depth of his operational activities, his new training tasks for AM/WORLD and his frequent travel to Mexico City during that period.  In any event I just wanted to assert my assessment and we can leave it at that.

I have this vision of JFK research just imploding much like a fusion reaction when this particular group of "experts" come together.  Not that I don't love Jim but...

Thanks Michael, and I was a phone guy for quite a while as well...from transmission engineering to physical plant cost studies. Worked for Continental Telephone for eight years after coming out of Autovon switch maintenance in the service.  As to Johnson and Hoover direct access, probably not happening...as you can imagine beginning that evening Secret Service protection was intense and the story is that Johnson wondered out on his patio at one point that evening and one Agent almost drew down on him fearing another attack was in progress.

Johnson was a sneaky fellow though, earlier that fall he had eluded his protective detail and borrowed a car to have a clandestine meeting with his lawyer in regard to the Baker inquiry that was in progress.

I don't see much chance of un-monitored calls between Johnson and Hoover early on, or personal contact.  One reason for that is that we do know of one call that Manchester saw in the call log, from that evening to Hoover, that was later erased out of the log itself.  That suggests that there was no plan in place and as with the Sat morning call, later the transcript had to be altered and the tape itself erased.  Given that I would doubt any back channel was in place at that point or we would not have major loose ends like that.

Best wishes on the new job!  Larry

All we have are approximations, from Manchester and the phone logs - Hoover apparently went home at around his regular time as hard as that is to believe - he was there when he received the call from Johnson who called from his office phone, something around six thirty eastern as I recall.  Johnson ultimately went to his residence, arrival about ten or so and he was accompined by several people, friends mostly who had flown back on AF1 with him.  They stayed with him most of the night.  My copy of Manchester is not ready to hand but it does give good detail on Johnson's movements...I put a good deal of that into Chapter 15 of SWHT if you have that.

Not sure what your overall question is, but Johnson moved into the White House rather quickly - far too quickly for JFK's friends who thought he was being an ass about it. 

Linking Oswald to Alpha 66 is a stretch unless you take it to the house on Harlandale....which had as many DRE visitors as Alpha 66.  I think "riddled" with Alpha 66 informers is a stretch although the FBI had at least one informant there - the fellow who assured them Oswald had never been there...ha...  And of course you would have had to assume the Alpha 66 guys who Oswald was associated with were openly talking about the Dallas attack....which is unlikely.  Nothing suggests that Oswald was deep inside any such tactical action...not to say he could not have been patsied by one. All in all this is a return to an old saw that has been around for ages and never proved out...so they best have something new or it will suggest Pat may be on target.  Its always interesting to have an ex CIA guy as your investigative lead, CIA support for the WC and the HSCA worked out so well. 

I think we all pretty much get your interpretations at this point Paul.  As Bill Simpich did in a separate thread on Mexico City, I feel compelled to note that I also disagree with your interpretations of my work.  I think I've made that clear in the past but as  you continue to post in a evangelistic fashion I think it has to be said. I went to a great deal of trouble to discuss exactly what I think DA Garrison came close to exposing in New Orleans, which I'm not going to repeat here since anyone can read it and I don't think its necessary to belabor it.  The thought of Roselli or Morales as being subordinate somebody like Walker is actually sort of laughable to anybody who understands the character of either man, Morales was a guy who made it clear in internal CIA documents that he didn't trust Howard Hunt on anything and would never trust him operationally, just to cover that base and provide some true insight into Morales.

Yep, especially that auto- un- redacting app....wondering if he got that from a Russian hacker?  

And about that "entrenched" thing, its it just me or is it a little unethical or at least ill mannered not to mention that others have been studying this same data for decades...I mean if it were a book you would be obligated to offer citations. If  Bob has been entrenched then he has to know about his predecessors.  Although its good to know a CIA guy has been right there in the trenches with us...or maybe along side of us ...or ....

Well yeah, pretty much that....then again maybe it was just a staggering discovery for old Bob since its been common knowledge to pretty much anybody reading about the subject for some decades now.  Once can only imagine what similar discoveries await!

I certainly second Vince ...and I'm tempted by Pat.  If the History channel was no so universally terrible with its programs I'd be even more suspicious.  But when one of the three personalities remarks that they spent "two weeks" on their active investigation its hard to give it even enough credibility to be disinformation?

I suggest not eating anything immediately before watching...

Michael, in case Robert does not show up to answer....that was one of the early mysteries of the day and involved a test call relating to the national emergency airborne command post aircraft to a military base in Texas.  Silver Dollar was the call sign for the aircraft.  Thanks to dedicated research by Larry Haapenan we know all about it now, as it happened the aircraft was on a training flight and was doing circuit tests (as was normal) to locations near where the President was traveling.  I suspect a google search will get you all the details, both Larry and I have presented on it numerous times over the years since he did his reasearch.

It certainly doesn't appear that the picked a crew with much background in this....you wonder why not considering how many experienced people are available...its like they were starting from scratch.

If I'm reading correctly according to one of the three "The active investigation took about two months".  Sort of leaves one speechless...

George, actually the military was very hesitant to go where JFK wanted it to go, I don't know if  you have read Shadow Warfare but I go into that resistance in considerable detail.  This particular instance was indeed new and unique in that JFK had created an integrated structure with the Joint Chiefs staff giving advice, CIA in support with its own ideas and Lansdale over it all - something which everybody hated.  I don't think the JCS had any intention or desire to go into covert operations and certainly not domestic activities, their staff was just responding to a project directive and doing what they were requested to do - conceptualize provocations and forward them to the Cuba project. Of course at the same time the CIA itself was blowing up things inside Cuba, and had blown up department stores earlier.

I'm afraid this is just one of those subjects far too broad to effectively discuss in these limited spaces so I think I had best back off at this point - other projects are calling me. As to the full interplay between the CIA, the military, Lansdale, the CIA etc, I've written about that extensively in NEXUS and Shadow Warfare and I'll just leave it at that. 

George, actually the Joint Chief staff study was part of a larger effort of JFK's to move covert military operations away from the CIA entirely.  He had issued a directive for that, it was already in progress in Vietnam and his move of the Cuba project under Lansdale - leaving the CIA purely in a supporting role - was all part of that transition.  The CIA was very much aware that it was being moved out of high level control of such operations, they had forfeited that at the Bay of Pigs. The specific reason the staff study was done and reviewed by JFK was that he was taking control over covert action at a much more detailed level and quashing parts of it - while expanding others, like approving covert military missions into North Vietnam and shipping artillery to the Hmong in Laos.

Steve, not sure about the Russian back-channel thing although we do know that the compromise over the missile crisis was literally described by key Cuban exiles as a physical shock and a wake up call.  Many of them are quoted in saying that it confirmed that JFK was a traitor, to both the US and Cuba.  We also know that immediately afterwards certain exile cliques began to plot assassination against JFK...that's pretty clear. What is unclear is whether any of those individuals ended up in the Dallas attack.

As to the Fort Benning trainees, yes I suspect one or more were recruited into the Dallas action.  Most of them went from Benning into the Artime AM/WORLD project - and people involved in that were Robert Kennedy's first suspects, we know that from his phone call immediately after he heard of the shooting in Dallas.

My thought would be that would be either confabulation on Veciana's part, another way to disguise his knowledge that it was Phillips and he knew Phillips was CIA - or that Phillips was using an associate.  Interestingly enough we know of another American who was quite close to Phillips in Cuba (Paul Bethel), who was also an actor and who was the one who passed the first warnings to Phillips that Cuban intel was on to him.  That individual was later employed by JM/WAVE; he had worked for AIDE in Cuba, which suggests that he may have been under a government cover even then.

Steve, I think "projection" captures what I was saying far better than the way I said it...sigh...then again if one word will do I usually use a couple of dozen...

I don't view Dallas in isolation, actually I view it as a product the rampant fear and paranoia of the Cold War - part of the same fear that did lead the US into not just an armed struggle in places like Korea and Vietnam but at least as dangerously into deniable, covert warfare against what was seen as a world wide communist movement - but which in most cases was simply an independence movement involving anti-colonialism and post war nationalism. The degree of fear (which included the fear of losing economic hegemony) was tremendous - triggered by Stalin but fueled by Kennan and in particular John Foster Dulles.  While everyone around here probably sees Alan Dulles as the worlds biggest villain, I look towards brother John. 

To the point...people like Kennan and the Dulles brothers drove Eisenhower into a position where the world was black and white and in an existential struggle....JFK was one of the very few with the vision and courage to get beyond that.  He could actually see value in neutrality (which is were he was about to push Castro in the fall of 63).  That was the reason he was able to start separating India from Russia. The problem was that was viewed by many as so naive as to be virtually traitorous.

Which is why I believe that the move towards the attack in Dallas actually began in the summer of 1963 with word being circulated on the Castro contacts and while it solidified in October with confirmation down from Angleton about JFKs totally independent and back channel negotiations with Castro. Sadly we can almost date that since we now have documents showing that JM/WAVE and Mexico City suddenly and with no prior interest became focused on at least one individual who was part of that covert dialog between JFK and Castro.

See...one more example of where I could have just said Yes but wasn't able to...

Agreed, I tend to think it was Phillips using Melton...

Thanks George,  although I think I would still take the same position. The report proposed simulations, mock attacks and other activities that could be blamed on the Cubans.  The intention would have been to do such things without causing American casualties - planning that sort of detail would have come later and might well have gone bad anyway, no doubt one of the reasons the proposals never really went anywhere, especially with JFK.  What I would agree on is that the Joint Chiefs were all for open warfare with Cuba and what they wanted were orders to engage, they continued practicing large scale, undeniable invasions during the summer of 1963 - with JFK's full approval.

And the Joint Chiefs warned the CIA about their Bay of Pigs invasion plans, telling them directly that if even a single Cuban aircraft remained destroyed and was in the air to challenge the landing it would likely be a disaster - which it was.

I didn't post here to persuade anyone from their views, I posted to make the point that the provocation practices called out in Northwoods were not unique - and to emphasize the point that the CIA had been in the business of doing things such as provocations and political assassinations for years, they had highly experienced military personnel in operations who had studied the history of such assassinations, including deniable assassinations and didn't need any staff reports to tell them how to orchestrate provocations, or put together deniable assassination plots. We even know who some of those officers were and what they were doing in 1963 - and how much they hated JFK and considered him a security risk and probably a traitor.

Tracy, I don't think there is any doubt the CIA was in contact with Veciana however if you will check all the documents listed in the link below I think its pretty clear that they talked to him, they monitored him and they monitored Alpha 66.  I don't see any sign of an "asset" type connection for him while in Cuba or while he was organizing Alpha 66.  He appears to be very independent.  I'm not sure about that JMATE sabotage thing, it seems inconsistent and might be a product of name confusion, even the CIA got confused with the multiple Cuban names.

https://www.maryferrell.org/php/cryptdb.php?id=AMSHALE-1

On the other hand, Phillips might have gone further with Veciana in Cuba (and even afterwards) on his own, if so its not reflected in the documents we have and normally it would be in Vecian's background file, no reason for it to be concealed.

To Paul's question, Phillips used the alias Andrew Merton but never "Melton".  On the other hand, operating on his own under commercial cover he could have used any number of names at his own discretion - operational cover names show up in project and activity reports but we don't have any of those on Phillips in Cuba.  So, he may have used Melton and we just don't see it or he may have used it for his own purposes and not as part of any reporting - a fairly common practice.

Thanks Tracy, based on that I offer the following - strictly speculative and based on my own belief that Phillips did first contact Veciana in Cuba, where Phillips himself wrote that he used an alias to connect with counter revolutionary groups including one in particular which was seeking to assassinate Castro. Of course Phillips was working under commercial cover, as a contract CIA employee, not fully on staff as he had been previously and certainly not as a case officer. Basically he was collecting intelligence, particularly political intelligence on the Castro regime and its opposition.

Given that, two things strike me. The first is that the level of contact with Veciana would have been more tenuous than what we see back in the states, Veciana would have been a source and not much more. That could mean some limited training, after all Phillips had previously been a case officer and had done recruiting and agent handling. How he could have handled polygraphing in Cuba eludes me but Phillips was an actor at heart, perhaps it was all staged - including the purported truth serum and poison pill - to impress and to test Veciana.

So why would Veciana have held back on such information at the time of his HSCA interview....actually the reason might be quite simple. If he had decided not to identify Phillips, for whatever reason, he would have had to go with a story that the fellow he know in Cuba had represented himself as acting for commercial interests and not have been a CIA officer.  Of course he would have looked incredibly stupid to mention the polygraph, truth serum, the training and the poison pill in that context. Obviously such things would have screamed CIA, even back in Cuba.

Now that he has admitted he knew that Phillips was CIA, he can add that in...

Of course all that is a guess on my part but it would make things more consistent.   Larry