Tipping Point serialization now in progress on the Mary Ferrell Foundation site

[Larry Hancock]

Boom indeed...grin.  Yes Sturgis repeatedly failed to get through Batista security to get supplies to Castro, as did most of the other efforts to supply rebel groups.  This comes from the records of the revolutionary groups themselves who became desperate for weapons and supplies - their folks in the U.S. were not being very successful either.

Sforza's cover inside Cuba was as a professional gambler so that mandated lots of time in the Casino's, lots of networking with the locals and with the American employees....and of course put him in an excellent position to run a stay behind network of just those sorts of folks as Castro came into power. Its no wonder he ended up running the AMOTS when he came out.

Yes, the McWillie / Ruby connection was very deep and long lasting and most likely key to using Ruby in Dallas.  And Ruby's first use in regard to Cuba was much earlier, its easy to see why the WC wanted to stay away from the real depth of his connections to Cuba activities....

[Ron Bulman]

Finally finished part one.  I can't wait for the book to come out so I can highlight portions, ear pages and flag some with post it notes.

A few things that caught my attention.

In 1961 Angleton introducing Harvey to a British counter intelligence agent regarding "outsourcing".

I remember reading somewhere about some direct communication between Harvey and Angleton.  But a "bond" between Angleton, Harvey, and Morales takes implications here to a whole new level.  Angleton was Dulles most trusted subordinate.  If they were all still loyal to him after his firing and he was staying involved in certain operations...  Then you go into Harvey - Roselli and note Harvey and Helms were close.

The Arcacha Smith anti Castro fund raiser telethon I'd read involved Banister and others (Destiny Betrayed?) but not Phillips.  That Phillips ran Arcacha in 1960.

I remember reading first I think in Jeff Morley's work about Joannadies maintaining a residence in New Orleans in the summer of 63, while he lived in Miami.  Wondered about it being a safe house.  But this William Kent (Oswald was a "useful idiot") did too?  Both involved in propaganda.  As Phillips was propaganda also, any known connections between the three?  or am I getting ahead of myself? 

Carlos Hernandez, DRE mission leader.  I'm naïve.  I never realized the DRE ran missions (which you go into here some).  I thought of the DRE as propaganda, maybe fund raising or even weapons/supplies procurement, gun running.

The whole Castro - Donovan - Mc Cone, Lisa Howard Castro interview, McCone, Helms memo make me wonder.

Did Castro seeking rapprochement, and JFK seeming open to it seal his fate?

After the BOP, Cuban Missile Crisis, then this, with Carl Jenkins trained assassins laid off in essence by JFK...  resources might have been available to those who sought a change.   

Edited December 16, 2020 by Ron Bulman

[Larry Hancock]

Great, you are definitely pulling out some of the key points Ron (and yes, these sorts of details are why we decided an actual book that somebody could work with hands on would really be helpful). 

The bond between Harvey and Angleton is key, indeed a look at some of the final letters between the two before Harvey's death brings out that they were sharing something very special. And explains why Angleton was most likely responsible for the attempts to steal key papers from Harvey's home after his death.

Phillips connection to propaganda out of New Orleans is important, both as related to original Cuba project back in 60/61 and in regard to Oswald and both INCA and DRE in 1963. When you get to segment 4 you will find a lot more discussion about not just propaganda but several ways that SAS/JMWAVE were using Oswald and his "image".  Some of which explain Phillips stop off in Miami on the way back from D.C. in the fall.

You've already got a sense of why the work is titled "Tipping Point" - that develops in segment 4 as well.

Looks like you are well on your way.  

[David Boylan]

Ron,

William Kent was Joannides supervisor during the summer of 1963 using the pseudonym of Robert Trouchard . Kent reported to Phillips during the Cuba Project/BOP using the pseudonym of Douglas Gupton.

Here's Trouchard/Kent working with AMBUB-1, Jose Miro Cardona. Signing off as C/Ops is Stanley Zamka aka David Morales. He would often just signoff with a "Z".

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=65504&relPageId=2&search=trouchard

Here is Kent/Trouchard as Newby/Joannides' supervisor signing off on his fitness report.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=16078&search=inghurst#relPageId=8&tab=page

 

Edited October 17, 2022 by David Boylan

[Ron Bulman]

14 hours ago, David Boylan said:

Ron,

William Kent was Joannides supervisor during the summer of 1963 using the pseudonym of Robert Trouchard . Kent reported to Phillips during the Cuba Project/BOP using the pseudonym of Douglas Gupton.

Here's Trouchard/Kent working with AMBUB-1, Jose Miro Cardona. Signing off as C/Ops is Stanley Zamka aka David Morales. He would often just signoff with a "Z".

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=65504&relPageId=2&search=trouchard

Here is Kent/Trouchard as Newby/Joannides' supervisor signing off on his fitness report.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=16078&search=inghurst#relPageId=8&tab=page

Thank you David.  The muddier it gets the clearer things become it seems in some respects.  So Phillips, Kent and Joannidies were affiliated, working together in the summer of 63 in New Orleans.  With the approval, coordination, assistance of David Morales aka Stanley Zamka/Z, head of operations at JMWAVE in Miami?

[Larry Hancock]

Ron,  perhaps the most specific way I could put it would be that Kent and Joannides were both working on a variety of activities, which included activities with DRE as well as a number of other projects which involved various assets at JMWAVE.  Those activities all occurred under SAS control and ranged from propaganda to political action to counter intelligence against the Cubans at a number of points - ranging from the UN in New York, in New Orleans and down to Mexico City. 

Phillips was assigned to SAS in late summer and took up new projects while remaining in Mexico City and wearing two hats, local CI and SAS activities. 

JMWAVE provided a broad range of support for SAS, including propaganda, counter intelligence work, use of its Cuban Intel group and the AMOTS (under Sforza), maritime operations, etc.  Which is why you find these people interacting at so many levels and on so many projects - and crossing paths with Morales as Chief of Operations.  Just as one example you find Sforza, Morales and Phillips all associated with a SAS political action operation to bring Castro's sister out of Cuba and use her for propaganda purposes. 

David and Bill have opened up new doors into many of these activities, Jeff Morley others - including the one which relates to DRE and SAS, Kent and Joannidies.  That's the one that seems to make the CIA most nervous even now decades later, and the one that would most likely point directly towards Miami's knowledge of Lee Oswald.

[Pete Mellor]

On 12/16/2020 at 2:46 AM, Ron Bulman said:

A few things that caught my attention.

In 1961 Angleton introducing Harvey to a British counter intelligence agent regarding "outsourcing".

Yeah Ron, correct.

October '61 Angleton introduced Harvey to British CI (MI5) agent Peter Wright.

Wright went on to publish the book 'Spycatcher' in the 1980's which P.M. Margaret Thatcher attempted to ban.

[David Boylan]

15 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Thank you David.  The muddier it gets the clearer things become it seems in some respects.  So Phillips, Kent and Joannidies were affiliated, working together in the summer of 63 in New Orleans.  With the approval, coordination, assistance of David Morales aka Stanley Zamka/Z, head of operations at JMWAVE in Miami?

Ron,

I think John Newman describes it best. We are looking at an out of focus puzzle with pieces missing. We're left with finding new pieces and see if they fit this puzzle. I like this analogy and I'm stealing it!  🙂

And that's what Larry is doing with Tipping Point. Putting in those pieces.

Edited December 17, 2020 by David Boylan

[Larry Hancock]

The fifth and final segment of Tipping Point is now available on the Mary Ferrell Foundation.

 

https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Tipping_Point_Part5.html

 

This final segment focuses on the conspiracy in terms of its activities in Dallas, both on November 22, 1963 and during the weeks preceding the attack. It addresses the types of assets which were called into play and deployed in Dallas to support both the attack on President Kennedy, and the linkage of that attack to Cuba and Fidel Castro. Previous segments have developed the point that there the President was increasingly at risk during 1963. Active threats were known, both from the radical right (John Birch/NSRP rifle teams), and from radical Cuban exiles; those threats were reported to and communicated within the Secret Service. We now know that by October some of those threats were being taken seriously, but to date none of them show the range of assets, the level of local support activity, or the degree of planning which occurred in Dallas.  

 

How and why that level of support was uniquely available in Dallas emerges from the context laid out in the preceding segments, specifically in the connections between Jack Ruby, Cuban affairs, and certain members of the Havana and Las Vegas casino “crowd”. Segment 5 illustrates the danger of revealing the conspiracy which would have been inherent in a full exposure and coordinated investigation of Ruby’s history. It also demonstrates the extent to which a key portion of the plan for Dallas imploded with the capture of Lee Oswald, bringing Ruby into a totally new role.

 

Beyond the uniqueness of Dallas (both in terms of Lee Oswald and Jack Ruby) this segment also explores the tools and tactics of the assassination which reveal clear signs of what was a paramilitary attack employing standard infantry tactics and practices and carried out by well trained and experienced participants.  Deconstructing the attack also reveals that it was in no way designed to conceal a conspiracy. If anything it was carried out so as to reveal a multiple shooters and a level of tactical organization which would be expected from a coordinated team – not to cover itself by placing the blame on a single “lone nut”.  

 

The segment concludes with an examination of key elements in the chaos which followed the failure of the second element of the conspiracy (the framing of Lee Oswald as a Castro regime tool). That examination includes the follow up efforts of both those inside the conspiracy, and the senior officials in Washington D.C. who determined that national security demanded that a conspiracy neither be investigated nor exposed.  

[Anthony Thorne]

Larry, excellent work. Time for me to re-read from part one again.

One of your footnotes alters the name of Ian Griggs’ book, and two other footnotes get it right. I forget which footnote it was, on the next reading when I see it again I’ll note it if you haven’t caught it. Through all of Tipping Point I noticed maybe four typos at most, so great work in putting this together. I’ll still be buying the book when it appears.

I’m now wondering which particular figures high up were most keen on starting a war with Cuba and using events in Dealey Plaza to move them towards that goal. A knee jerk response says the Joint Chiefs, but I’m mindful that they had their own advisers and didn’t make decisions in a vacuum.

[Larry Hancock]

Thanks Anthony, if you can recall which section the misspelling is in it would help us locate and change it -its amazing how much editing we have already done as compared to something that goes through the purely commercial press, but we still have more to do.  We will be making a number of spelling and related corrections as we move it from the WEB version to the Word version needed to publish.

As to your question, at the moment the priority for a small group of us who continue to wrestle with this scenario is trying to drive even further down in the operational level and map how command and control would work for a two track effort in Dallas. Clearly it worked better on one track than the others since one failed. Resolving that failure  and this might be one path towards an answer to your question. 

In the interim I will spend some time on that question and offer some thoughts on my blog.  My initial observation - based on a number of NSC and JCS study papers of the period - is that the primary war the Chiefs wanted to fight was with China, and they wanted to use nukes to destroy its industrial/scientific base before it got atomic weapons. That was the same position taken against Russia at the end of WWII because the JCS studies demonstrated that there was no winning a nuclear conflict if the adversary hit first.

LeMay had not wanted to use SAC or nukes in the Korean War, he wanted to save that weapon for the total elimination of the Soviets and any nuclear threat from them.  And both Korea and later Vietnam would prove that even destruction of the industrial base of a front line Communist adversary would not mean absolute victory as long as China and Russia were able to backstop them.

The question you posed deserves an extended analysis and essay but the answer may well be "nobody",  The people who wanted the U.S. to fight a war were the Cuban expatriates (and some of them still thought they could do it on their own if the U.S. didn't keep obstructing them). 

Later in life Martino made some very limited remarks to family members to the effect that some of those involved in Dallas ultimately came to feel that they had simply been used, that promises of "big things"  had been given to them simply to get them to act. Given how often CIA surrogates were used in that fashion over the decades, I certainly could see that having happened with at least some of the individuals involved.  For others simple revenge and eliminating JFK and the Castro outreach may well have been more than enough.

[Eddy Bainbridge]

I think Tipping point is a terrific structure for future research. I have two observations.

 

Firstly concerning the cover-up. It appears to have moved terrifically fast from 'Foreign Conspiracy' to 'Lone Nut'. I say that from looking at the NPIC briefing board events, which indicate even that early the plan had changed. What was the 'Tipping Point' to swop between the two? 

 

Secondly ; The work of Vince Palamara casts a shadow over the Secret Service. 'Tipping Point' suggests a limited number of conspirators. Are the Secret Service exempted from involvement? or does suspicion only fall on a few individuals?

[Larry Hancock]

On the first point, my best guess is that the part of the conspiracy plan that was to link in Oswald with Castro and Cuba began to fall apart when Oswald himself realized he had been manipulated...that may have been when he walked away from the TSBD or equally likely when he heard the talk on the bus that JFK had actually been shot...it certainly had gone off the rails when he heard about more in the Taxi and was asked to be dropped off away from his apartment house.  Martino said the second part of the plot collapsed at the point where the officer was shot and Oswald was taken into custody.  Whatever was planned to glue together the Castro link didn't happen, if any professional pieces had been created they didn't get introduced and the connection was not what it needed to be to immediately stampede public opinion that weekend.  In fact only one newspaper carried a headline associating Oswald with Castro.  What pieces were left were not enough sell the Castro story and if you look closely the Castro linkage offered to the public was little different than what had existed after his New Orleans visibility.  The other pieces that come into play in the next few days were very hit and miss, with no solid foundation and easily dismissed (DRE tried, Martino tried, but nobody could provide witnesses, photographs, or even name credible sources or Cuban double agents)....so either there was a good professional plan to frame him with Cuban influence and it failed, or what was prepared was relatively weak in the first place.

The final tipping point was when the first set of story boards were shown, when it was clear there were multiple shooters and when it was obvious that other parties unknown had been associating with Oswald. That last thing you want during a national security crisis is a mystery like that - that can have terrible consequences.  I'd peg the next key point occurring by Sunday morning when a directive was issued to ensure this was a "lone nut" action. Which is what the FBI was told to write on Sunday afternoon, with minimal evidence and not a lot of enthusiasm.

As to the Secret Service, I would say there were two major shadows over them - one obvious one being that their were a lot of agents behaving unprofessionally, and they had been for some time.  That was really not unknown at the time, clearly a number of them did not respect JFK (Vince spells that out) and were not giving it their all...and even Clint Hill who did admire the first family went out clubbing with the guys in Fort Worth.

The other shadow is that JFK was known to be at risk and for reasons I don't claim to know for sure, reactions to the known threat were minimal.  They knew about the Bircher rifle teams but instituted no new protocols for sniper attack.  They knew about the dynamite bomb in Florida and instituted no now protocols in regard to motorcades or events.  They stayed with the same sort of practices that they had used for years - including older drivers with no special defensive driving training such a Greer. For that matter the Dallas trip was the first advance Lawson had ever led and his preparation was pretty much on the job. Could there have been something suspicious in that lack of response, possibly. Could it have been inertia and just lack of initiative, also possibly.

What I can offer is my assessment that any experienced infantry assault team would have had a very good chance of making the attack work, simply knowing the route, having done some basic research looking at photos of earlier motorcades, and having the type of local intelligence access I described in Segment 5. What extra precautions had been taken related to close in attacks, especially with a focus on the Trade Mart. Literally noting special had been done to increase security practices for the motorcade (or actually any of the motorcades of that fall) That despite of the fact that most recently,  in Tampa, kids threw candy into the limo and the agents realized that could easily have been a bomb...but no changes were made even after that). 

 

 

 

Edited December 22, 2020 by Larry Hancock

[Anthony Thorne]

Larry, thanks for your comments and I’ll add a couple of longer thoughts when I’m not typing on my phone.

Footnote 292, fourth paragraph, calls the Griggs book No Case to Offer. The other references you make to the book have the correct title, No Case to Answer.

[Larry Hancock]

Thank you Sir, I will share that with Rex asap. 

I envy people who can type on a phone at all, I have enough of a problem with a full sized keyboard....even a laptop keyboard gets to me if I shift position, have to reset myself and lock my hands into position on the keys.