Larry Hancock

Brad, indeed you would not have seen it.....on the first occasion Debra managed to put it together again fairly quickly, however the next time around the hack was much worse...as far as my site went we never recovered some of the documents but I didn't even know that until people started asking me about stuff that was there and Deb and I started looking for it. In the end we moved my site to another server entirely - ditto with the JFK Lancer web site, not the forum part, that stayed like it was until its reconstruction. I know a bit about data comm but not web stuff so that is just my general impression - I would not swear to the exact sequence or extent of damage the first time, but the second time was the killer. As a forum user it was not all that visible until the thing went down completely. As to the nature of the hack my impression is that it was a deconstruction of the internal links rather than anything else....it was just taken apart at the seams. The Lancer WEB pages had to be rebuilt on the new server as did my site but the archives on the forum were a fundamental problem, perhaps those who reconstructed it would have a better technical explanation of the damage.

As to the moderation, I think most folks know that Debra had some health problems and for times during that period was not even able to participate in the forum. Unfortunately that was still the situation when it began to be seriously hacked or perhaps more accurately deconstructed - she was seriously just about to call it quits at that point but her health did improve later - hence the resurgence and the continuation of the conferences and of some Lancer publishing. Long story short it is amazing that the forum itself has been rebuilt; as you say, that would be a story worthy of Mr Gates....it should be a nice resource on a great number of topics. I certainly know there was stuff discussed there that I can only vaguely recall at this point.

Anyway, I hope that gives it some perspective, its about as much as I can remember - its been a tough road at points, that's for sure. Makes me wonder why I didn't just go back to rock collecting when I retired...

Brad, it was most definitely hacked, much of my own web site was hacked and taken out at the same time because it was on the same server. In fact it was hacked at least twice to my knowledge. The site also had several different administrators over its lengthy history, not just one. On the other hand, it is accurate to say that it was a private site, not group funded and there were no bones about some topics and some posts being sanctioned. Facts are good but opinions usually seem to win out so I'll leave it at that.

Well let's just say that if I were running for President disclosing my financials would be no problem...grin. In ten years you would see the sort of loss that would make any respectable businessman quake and my wife mutter about it. So, no, while its become something of a job now since I write about other Cold War and national security subjects but most definitely not for a profit. As to speaking, I'll fall back on the old political gambit about not running for office and if drafted/nominated not accepting. On the other hand, I can see it as a real quandary for folks who are published by Trine Day, especially with Kris having a big role in her conferences and promotions. Don't know if that is true now but it certainly was and generally speaking if your publisher asks you to help promote your book you are advised to do so and in some instances contractually bound to do so.

Agreed Tommy, I just didn't want the point to get lost that Judyth's story is becoming a sort of alternative history in many places and is being promoted by many people- and its a much broader story about sponsors, motives, a very elaborate conspiracy that really does affirm an version of history all her own. From that perspective its a much larger issue than whether James Files was a shooter or Beverly was there with a camera. Judyth is operating at a much different level ...

Wow, interesting thread...all about the issues of artificial history with Judyth, which she is currently and intensely and very successfully creating and then it goes off to something else entirely...

The ARRB investigated the activities of the 112th at great length; its Dallas detachment was not activated in any sort of security mode and interviews with its personnel determined that other than Powell, who was on leave, none were in the area. Unfortunately all the dialog about the MI group takes attention from the people with fake credentials who were behind there, acting in a tactical team effort just as Chris describes...and creating a diversion. Powell was never behind the fence, he was on Houston, went to the corner, spoke to Brennan, and then went inside the building. Unfortunately the HSCA interviewed the 112th officer who was acting as G2 rather than the officer they should have who was in charge of operations - and Jones just confused them more.

Sandy, I'm always very cautious about throwing around words like "lie". I don't know of anyone who actually accused Darby of lieing in regard to the print, however in my own conversations with Richard - who used to be a member here - many years ago, I gathered that there was an evolving process of showing prints to Darby, not just one print and there was an issue pertaining to a Wallace hand injury that came into play. Its way to vague for me to say anything firm which is why I would refer you to Richard who was possibly the closest one to it that you might talk with.. I do have to note that the whole context of the print came up as part of a much larger effort to prove in Wallace and Johnson in the crime.

At one point I had actually written a book length piece on Wallace and Johnson and their possible role - which also involved Loy Factor - you will find some of my initial research on Wallace still on the forum if you look in the areas on articles...well at least it used to be there. However after a couple of years work I had to pull back simply because I was uncomfortable with some of the pieces. That was many, many years ago which is why I won't depend on memory to discuss it. I'll leave that to others. I would certainly suggest you read Joan's book and talk with Richard B before reaching any conclusions.

Sandy, if you really want to explore this subject in detail I suggest you contact Richard Bartholemew who was part of the original Texas group and who could offer you a lot of background into exactly what was given to Darby and the process that was involved in his identification, which as I understand it was a bit more complex than just giving him one print. Walt Brown would also be someone for you to talk to as he was the spokesman for the group and ended up with much of the original material. I know that Joan talked at some length with Richard as I referred her to him. I'm sure Dawn has heard much of the original story about the work with Darby as well. I think those contacts would give you a lot more insight into his identification.

Yep, of course a DA could declare it to be one but you can imagine the political repercussions....

She will be in Dallas for the Lancer conference Jim, you can ask her there...and of course so can anyone else attending. And yes there is an extensive fingerprint chapter in

her book - which I have only skimmed at this point. I did see that the expert she used mentioned that the prints he was working from appeared good enough to go into the

FBI automated computer print system - but she has the same problem Stu and I do with MLK related prints. You have to have law enforcement involvement to use that system and

in turn they have to have an active case to refer the search against. At least that's what we have been told. Violating that rule annoys the FBI and somebody's privileges gets

pulled so the folks including AG's we have talked to are somewhat sensitive to its use.

Heavens no, I had not even thought of that....OK, we are doomed...on the other hand it might get to Putin and he might offer her sanctuary, her being at risk and all...

Unfortunately I suspect they will find somebody that will...they seem to be on a roll at the moment...certainly they are very, very busy.

JFK Lancer got one as well, As I have been mentioning in my blogs, Putin's media machine is busily reviving old school Soviet era propaganda practices....a quick internet search will provide some insight on the types of stories this Russian media outlet features - coverage from the Ukraine seems to be especially popular.

Glen, there is no doubt that Russo is a capable researcher, the concern is that he was given introductions to and pointed towards sources that would lead him down the Castro did it trail...that shows up in a video he helped with well after the original book. The question becomes not one of research but sources...well that and who you know that might help you a little too much, probably good to take a close look at where and how he got most of his more novel, insider type leads...

Glenn, Morrow is extremely dubious, bottom line is that he was really interested in the assassination, turned up some leads that were interesting during the Church committee era and actually stimulated some of the interest in advance of the HSCA....however he hit some dead ends in his research and began writing just to stir the pot. A good friend of mine was rather close to him and Morrow admitted that much of what he wrote was fiction, intended simply to stir interest. Considering his was the one of the very first JFK books I ever read and it did get me hooked he was successful with some of us but after much extended study of his leads they really didn't prove out....well one still has some points of interest for me but it sort of hits a brick wall for me just as it did for him. On Russo, well I think the consensus among some of us is that the got a bit too close to some of his intelligence contacts and they did a mind meld on him, turning him into a Castro did it diversion....

Sounds like a pretty accurate analysis.....I suspect he will indeed become a case study from several angles. Then again as he just said, he has the option of taking a very long, very nice vacation so I suppose it's not all bad.

Douglas, of course that's a true statement and one of the gravest risks is if a newly elected president fails to be fully briefed by his predecessor or to pay attention

to his predecessor's advice. My view is that one of the gravest transitions in decades took place with GWB's transition into the office. Far too detailed to go into

here but I deconstruct in Surprise Attack. To a large extent failures during that transition produced a failure to interdict the attacks of 9/11. Earlier failures during

the JFK transition led to the Bay of Pigs.

Transitions are always dangerous times...and our system has some endemic problems with them. Of course another grave risk is when one party decides to

absolutely obstruct and defeat anything a new administration might attempt, regardless of the consequences and regardless of what advantages that might

lend to international competitors.

But since this thread is so off course I'll add one more thing...personally I will take "Morning in America" any day over a constant drone about how things have never been worse -

I've been there, I've seen them worse......anybody campaigning strictly on fear and whining is not for me... totally different than campaigning on things that need to be fixed

or improved.....maybe my boys the Eagles said it best...Get Over It!

.--

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1H-Y7MAASkg

Indeed Tom, I don't think anyone really wants to revisit how big a role both the major corporations and the crime families had in forming Administration policy towards Cuba. It has to be noted that Nixon and some of his personal friends were very much involved in the Casino scene in Cuba, that Meyer Lansky actually brought Roselli down to clean up after a complaint from one of Nixons's buddies and perhaps most importantly that the first assassination attempt against Castro was by crime figures connected to Vegas (even though it went down in New York City) and very likely came from the Lansky/Roselli nexus. Not to mention that when the CIA was first getting started, the people they went to for covert assistance (David Phillips specifically) were the big New York, Texas and La. companies that had been doing business in Cuba.

Boy, fear is really in vogue this season.....neither Churchill nor JFK would be much impressed. And interestingly enough JFK assessed and laid out a whole series of very calculated "pay the price" escalations in regard to the Berlin Crisis the year after he was elected, including the nuclear option. Amazingly enough it worked out quite well, the Russians were very clear about what the price was and made none of their anticipated moves. The key is doing that before they move and letting them know the cost and consequences....as we failed to do a number of times throughout the Cold War and more recently....

If that little teaser about JFK and contingency plans got your interest, check out this link:

http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb310/

In late 1995, journalist and former HSCA investigator Gaeton Fonzi traveled to Cuba and interviewed Fabian Escalante, the former head of Cuban Counter Intelligence. The interview was part of a planned article for Esquire magazine. Escalante talked with Fonzi for hours about his role protecting Castro, and together they toured a museum devoted to artifacts of assassination plots against the Cuban leader.

The article was never published by Esquire. But, through the generosity of Fonzi's widow Marie, the Mary Ferrell Foundation is now making it available for the first time. It is entitled "And Why, By the Way, is Fidel Castro Still Alive?: The Inside Story of Cuban Intelligence. You will find the article through the link below.

We were happy to have Marie Fonzi speak at last year's JFK Lancer conference in Dallas and even happier that she will be returning to present again this November. She has some fascinating insights into what her husband did while working as one of the few experienced investigators to serve Congressional inquiries - as well as his personal thoughts about the people involved and his inside view of the HSCA practices.

https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Featured_Unpublished_Fonzi_Essay.html

Hi Brad, I'm from pretty much the same generation you are....just a note about the bomber reference (which I wrote about in some detail in Surprise Attack).

"I vividly remember one of my college professors telling his class about a B-29 bomber (same aircraft that dropped the two A-bombs on Japan) being forced to land somewhere on Soviet soil somewhere around the end of WWII. The B-29 contained a top secret bomb sight mechanism at the time. The Soviets copied the aircraft down to the rivets, secret bombsight & all. I was impressed."

Actually the B-29's were part of a conventional transit bombing missions over Japan with an agreed upon landing on Russian territory....the Russians then allowed the crews to leave but kept the planes and did copy them to create their first strategic bombers....well we assumed that is what they were going to do and built our entire early 50's air defense around that assumption. Instead the relatively small number of aircraft made were flown into Siberian bases and staged mainly for reconnaissance against our Navy and potential Navy attack missions. Its a very interesting story, since we were building SAC we thought they would build "SUSAC"....they actually did nothing comparable but focused on air defense. The gambit they used to make us think they were building a huge bomber force was a real classic, and drove us into the belief in a bomber gap, and the development of SAGE, an air defense system more expensive than developing the atomic bomb.

Its also very instructive to really dig into how cooperative military efforts with the Russians have worked out. During WWII they allowed us to stage bombers at bases in the West of Russia, but would not allow us to place fighters there - then they allowed the Germans to follow the bombers home to the bases and deployed no air defense, we lost lots of planes and some good crews in that operation. By that time momentum was beginning to swing and it was felt Stalin wanted no credit going to the Americans....it was an easy way to close out a project he had never been too excited about...

Another good reason to trust virtually none of the chat on the internet unless its from a relative or close friend and you check that they really sent it.....the internet is fast becoming one of the best psychological warfare tools known to both political operatives and the Russian intel community - which has a rich tradition of much more sophisticated propaganda than the US ever dreamed of conducting....and by the way, if you think the Russians are not smart enough to craft entire documents or server dumpss and sneak them into wikileaks, then you underestimate them...

And anybody thinking that buddying up to Putin could ever be a good idea....wow...just wow....I suggest a little reading on the history of international relations with the Russians....we learned a good deal about how that worked early in the Cold War, seems we are on the verge of forgetting all that now....its a cultural thing, not just political.

Well OK, I can't argue that one.....I suppose I was unfair in saying he only thought about business deals....

Ron, I think he was referring to the private email server she had when she was SecState.......of course she is far from the first to keep a private server and an officer server or even

use a party campaign server while in office for that matter but that's a separate point. I'm not sure Trump even understands the difference in servers though? This gets much deeper

into the issue....if you want to focus on the security issue as the Republican story line has been, you get to the point that a private server might already have been hacked, that the

Russians or someone else already hold the hack/data, server file etc. Appealing to them to feed it to the media, or for that matter to go ahead an hack any American's server or any

campaign server (the DNC's) shows that he thinks only in terms of one on one, matters....hey, hack one of my competitors and give it to me or just to the media, can only help me.

But in truth, I don't really think Trump even understood what he was saying, he just talks off the top of his head and has so little understanding of almost everything outside his

business or what he gets off twitter feeds that it just bites him in the rear when people that do understand the implications challenge him. Then its all just a joke.

Ron, if you look at Trumps other remarks he specifically mentions giving the information to the media and discusses how much the media would appreciate that.

My remark about the Russians helping the US by giving it to us was the primary point about intelligence but I'm pretty sure if the full server pull were turned over

it would probably reveals some clues about - and if not, you could well imagine the data could be manipulated for a host of different purposes. Again, Trump

may have been serious or he may have been joking, he is so uniformed about most things he discusses that its really hard to tell.

I will give him his due though, he's a salesman, I worked with and supported a lot of really good sales people and generally speaking they didn't have to master

what they were pitching, unless it was really deep tech. The pitch was important, the delivery was important, "craft is king" in those matters, which also goes for a lot

of radio and TV talk show folks as well...