Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Skorzeny Papers


Recommended Posts

  • 8 months later...
  • Replies 37
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

On 6/28/2018 at 8:33 PM, Larry Hancock said:

I'm about a third of the way through a detailed study of the book and certainly am interested.  I'll hold off on a full commentary because its going to take a bit to digest - one thing that makes a book like this exceptionally difficult is the new style of citation where everything at the end is simply cited as to book page number.  You really have no easy idea of exactly which point or even sentence is referenced to what source.  If your publisher insisted on this there are things you can do, like actually mentioning books or authors within the copy for key points, but you really have to work at it. 

So far I've run into one source that he does use that I have spent a huge amount of time on myself - since it was the first book that really started my own research - and unfortunately in the end found it to be highly unreliable.  I hate that sort of thing. It has to do with a rather important CIA contact which he ties to Skorzeny. 

At this point - after skimming all the book and now being into a detailed reading  I agree with Paul on his assessment in regard to the incomplete JFK assassination tie. I am finding the early material in the book to be most interesting in the manner that Skorzeny was of interest first to the US Army and then to the OPC and finally the CIA as part of the larger effort to put together an anti-Communist counter to what was anticipated as an imminent Soviet move west in the years right after WWII.

Hi Larry - I’m wondering what you have gleaned from Ganis’s November presentation, and from his book. Also wonder if you saw my newspaper quotes related to Skorzeny on the thread ‘Interesting Interview with a Cuban Exile’? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul, I spent about four months after the conference digging into Ralph's book and to various leads and sources he cites;  we had hoped Stu Wexler was going to be able to work directly in Ralph's files (which Ralph was nice enough to offer) but the successful congressional passage of the Cold Case legislation which Stu and his class developed has completely consumed Stu...as has their upcoming trip to DC to pursue funding and implementation of that new law. That has largely taken Stu away from our joint  projects including such as the Wheaton Names research, which has remained my highest JFK research priority.

To cut to the chase, in my further work I found nothing in the Skorzeny material that was nearly as concrete or with the kinds of solid directions to a Dallas conspiracy as we have been finding with the Wheaton names work.  I did investigate all the Cuban references in Ralph's book and found nothing much there beyond the fact that within the Cuban exile community almost all the individuals were approaching and talking to anyone who might offer any sort of advice or support over a several year period.  It may just be me but I've seen so much of that by now that I didn't find it all that unique or especially suggestive.

I'm staying open minded on the subject and and a Skorzeny connection  and had planned to return to it again with the publication of new data and what I understood to be new sources in Hank's book, but now that it has been delayed once again until November I won't be jumping back this for a  time it seems.

I know this probably isn't what you wanted to hear and I understand that my conservatism on such things probably annoys folks at times but after more than 25 years the bar to hold my attention is pretty high - and at the moment the only thing that is passing over that bar for me is our Wheaton Names research and the increasing indications that the official story of Oswald in Mexico City is highly questionable.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

Paul, I spent about four months after the conference digging into Ralph's book and to various leads and sources he cites;  we had hoped Stu Wexler was going to be able to work directly in Ralph's files (which Ralph was nice enough to offer) but the successful congressional passage of the Cold Case legislation which Stu and his class developed has completely consumed Stu...as has their upcoming trip to DC to pursue funding and implementation of that new law. That has largely taken Stu away from our joint  projects including such as the Wheaton Names research, which has remained my highest JFK research priority.

To cut to the chase, in my further work I found nothing in the Skorzeny material that was nearly as concrete or with the kinds of solid directions to a Dallas conspiracy as we have been finding with the Wheaton names work.  I did investigate all the Cuban references in Ralph's book and found nothing much there beyond the fact that within the Cuban exile community almost all the individuals were approaching and talking to anyone who might offer any sort of advice or support over a several year period.  It may just be me but I've seen so much of that by now that I didn't find it all that unique or especially suggestive.

I'm staying open minded on the subject and and a Skorzeny connection  and had planned to return to it again with the publication of new data and what I understood to be new sources in Hank's book, but now that it has been delayed once again until November I won't be jumping back this for a  time it seems.

I know this probably isn't what you wanted to hear and I understand that my conservatism on such things probably annoys folks at times but after more than 25 years the bar to hold my attention is pretty high - and at the moment the only thing that is passing over that bar for me is our Wheaton Names research and the increasing indications that the official story of Oswald in Mexico City is highly questionable.

 

Thanks Larry. The stories I found in old newspapers in places like Drew Pearson, Walter Winchell columns come without documentation of course, and were not in the Skorzeny book. Presumably the columnists who wrote these short paragraphs or sentences were given the info by unnamed sources. Nevertheless they are interesting. To summarize, a 1953 column saying that Skorzeny in Madrid was a trusted agent of US Intelligence, a 1960 column saying that he and 47 commandos were prepared to attempt a kidnapping of Castro, approved by Allen Dulles but called off by Kennedy and his advisors, a 1961column saying that Skorzeny offered to form a Supra-national commando group made up of Spanish and French volunteers under the direct command of the head of NATO. They are unsourced tidbits for sure, but very suggestive. I sourced them in the Cuban Exile thread more carefully, and found other similar articles saying the same things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on the original sources that Ralph provided it can be confirmed that  Skorzeny was a "source" albeit only on some specific topics but primarily via the US Embassy and its CIA station to the Air Force who was looking for German rocket scientists. He was cultivated by embassy officers out of the Madrid office for several years specifically to assist in searches for targeted German personnel and assets who were considered to potentially hold valuable technological knowlegde. He also volunteered the use of former commandos for training, for American personnel, for French personnel and for others...the US. used him on one occasion and the Army officer involved was not overly impressed that the training was better than standard Ranger training of the time. It looks pretty likely that certain ultra right French officers may have used him for training more frequently. 

As far as the offer to kidnap Castro with approval, I don't find anything at all other than what I would consider wild newspaper sources to support that....and Ralph does a good job of showing that Skorzeny was doing a fine job of trying to market himself and his contacts to one and all....did he make such an offer, maybe,  but I very much doubt the CIA took it seriously...the sources Ralph provided suggest the CIA was OK with his being cultivated as a source for limited purposes, but as an asset beyond that I'm just not seeing it.

On the other hand, its my understating Hank plans to offer much more detail on such things...so I'll have to wait for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
On 3/27/2019 at 2:21 PM, Larry Hancock said:

Based on the original sources that Ralph provided it can be confirmed that  Skorzeny was a "source" albeit only on some specific topics but primarily via the US Embassy and its CIA station to the Air Force who was looking for German rocket scientists. He was cultivated by embassy officers out of the Madrid office for several years specifically to assist in searches for targeted German personnel and assets who were considered to potentially hold valuable technological knowlegde. He also volunteered the use of former commandos for training, for American personnel, for French personnel and for others...the US. used him on one occasion and the Army officer involved was not overly impressed that the training was better than standard Ranger training of the time. It looks pretty likely that certain ultra right French officers may have used him for training more frequently. 

As far as the offer to kidnap Castro with approval, I don't find anything at all other than what I would consider wild newspaper sources to support that....and Ralph does a good job of showing that Skorzeny was doing a fine job of trying to market himself and his contacts to one and all....did he make such an offer, maybe,  but I very much doubt the CIA took it seriously...the sources Ralph provided suggest the CIA was OK with his being cultivated as a source for limited purposes, but as an asset beyond that I'm just not seeing it.

On the other hand, its my understating Hank plans to offer much more detail on such things...so I'll have to wait for that.

Larry - Hank is no longer with us. Any updates on when we might expect to see his research?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I asked Alan about it a few weeks ago and he said some other issues were being addressed before finalizing the publishing version of the manuscript; he didn't say more and I don't know that the November availability date is at risk but a limited slide would be understandable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI the November delivery date is a year and a half delayed already. FWIW 

1 hour ago, Larry Hancock said:

I asked Alan about it a few weeks ago and he said some other issues were being addressed before finalizing the publishing version of the manuscript; he didn't say more and I don't know that the November availability date is at risk but a limited slide would be understandable.

Larry - have you ever heard that Clay Shaw and Hjalmar Schacht were friends? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not ringing a bell for me Chuck but I'm afraid my close attention to Shaw is years in the past - certainly I couldn't offer anything positive on that.  I doubt that it would change what I did write about Shaw, Ferrie and Bannister in SWHT though.

As to friends of Shaw, its a tangent to your question but I recall  years ago one of the attendees at the Lancer conference (from Kansas, an amateur photographer and movie theater owner) came to the conference with a set of photos including one a couple which showed he and his wife and Shaw together in a club in New Orleans.   Shaw had been very friendly to them as tourists - and interestingly at the time of the introduction had been using his alias, which was written on the back of the photo.  Would have been quite valuable to Garrison if he had it during his investigation....long story but we could never obtain rights to use the photo and it was just one of those tantalizing pieces of evidence that faded away after a couple of years of his coming to Dallas. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

    Have just heard (on Youtube) - and been impressed by - Major Ralph Ganis' passionate   Lancer summary of the motive for the JFK hit, and am rereading the book, sans the supporting pictorial docs. Not by his nominating the  Rometsch/Bobby Baker fiasco, but by his reconstruction of the reasoning of what he calls "the National Command structure" in their  terrible decision to terminate the JFK presidency, of which CIA, and perhaps Skorzeny, were mere instruments. Hence the continuing power of the coverup.

    The evidence is there: JFK was in conflict with not just CIA and Joint Chiefs, but his Cabinet and many advisers...on Vietnam, on Cuba, on Indonesia in particular(he was due to visit in '64 I believe), on N-testing and detente. With de Gaulle, he envisaged a truly free world tolerant of neutral nationalists, even of the left, and tripartite governments in the Non-aligned world. Though revered by a frightened world, to Cold Warriors and the Warfare Economy, he had to go.  

     I await sadly for Hank Albarelli's treatment of the Skorzeny Papers, and thank Major Ganis for his...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, David McLean said:

    Have just heard (on Youtube) - and been impressed by - Major Ralph Ganis' passionate   Lancer summary of the motive for the JFK hit, and am rereading the book, sans the supporting pictorial docs. Not by his nominating the  Rometsch/Bobby Baker fiasco, but by his reconstruction of the reasoning of what he calls "the National Command structure" in their  terrible decision to terminate the JFK presidency, of which CIA, and perhaps Skorzeny, were mere instruments. Hence the continuing power of the coverup.

    The evidence is there: JFK was in conflict with not just CIA and Joint Chiefs, but his Cabinet and many advisers...on Vietnam, on Cuba, on Indonesia in particular(he was due to visit in '64 I believe), on N-testing and detente. With de Gaulle, he envisaged a truly free world tolerant of neutral nationalists, even of the left, and tripartite governments in the Non-aligned world. Though revered by a frightened world, to Cold Warriors and the Warfare Economy, he had to go.  

     I await sadly for Hank Albarelli's treatment of the Skorzeny Papers, and thank Major Ganis for his...

I’m with you on this. 

I wish I could figure out where Mae Brussell came up with Clay Shaw and Hjalmar Schacht being friends. Ganis is not sure that Slorzeny’s wife Ilse was Schacht’s niece, but she did call him ‘uncle’. So there is no doubt whatsoever that Skorzeny and Shacht moved in the same circles. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I once read (can't remember where) that Prouty was Mae Brussell's mentor.  Prouty could have gone to jail (or worse) if he was linked to some of Mae Brussell' s writings. And , as long as Mae Brussell never mentioned (publicly) that she worked with Prouty, Prouty would continue to work with her. I believe Prouty knew who killed JFK and those responsible for the Big Event wanted him out of the country at the time of the Big Event. Prouty did write about how he was put on a mission outside of the US during the Big Event.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, B. A. Copeland said:

Campbell, in his most recent show, touches upon the alleged “Skorzeny as QJ/WIN” theory (among other very interesting points):

#156~ August 2, 2019: A. "Jim Garrison & The 'Clay Bertrand' Conundrum." B. "DISINFO ALERT: The Skorzeny Aberration."

The closing part about QJWIN and Skorzeny - many factual errors by the quote experts and the moderator. Mr. X is really misinformed and easy to debunk. Campbell has read the documents released by CIA. So why does he not mention that one of the key CIA docs identifying QJ/WIN as Jose Marie Andre Mankel even says att the end of the revelation that now they have revealed all pertinent info on QJ/WIN other than his REAL NAME. Even Larry Hancock, a very careful and I would say conservative researcher, says that the cryptonym appears to stand for both an individual and a highly sensitive covert operation, with offices in several locations including California! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...