Guy Banister and the CIA

[Larry Hancock]

There has been a good bit of talk about Whitten not being satisfied and being pulled from his assignment to be replaced by Angleton....but as far as I know that did not include complaints about his own report being edited or managed.  It does seem hard to believe that he could have totally missed the areas which are not mentioned or explored in the report - the only thing that really makes sense is that he was directed to focus extremely tightly on it, while thinking he would have a chance to explore the other leads like the FPCC connection in more detail, and then got pulled from the assignment.

Others are likely far better prepared to comment on his remarks on the assignment, which I recalls as being being pretty bitter about it...

[Gene Kelly]

On 9/14/2022 at 10:12 AM, Larry Hancock said:

Gerry,  it was up to the FBI to investigate both Oswald and Marina in regard to possible future contacts with Russian agents, or more likely Communist sympathizers or activists in the U.S..  The FBI did that directly and was of course also monitoring mail coming from overseas from Russia to Oswald, mail to the Russian embassy, etc, etc...and of course later mail to the FPCC as an identified subversive organization.  I think its fair to say that the FBI really did try to investigate Oswald and they filed a number of reports on him in Texas and later in New Orleans. 

As to the CIA, we have no indication they "investigated" Oswald in the same manner in an ongoing basis.  In fact we don't know that Domestic Ops via Moore and his contact with de Mohrenschieldt did much more than verify that Oswald did return to Texas as expected.  It seems likely that Moore got some feedback on Oswald's arrival in Forth Worth and his appearance within the White Russian community but I've never seen any sort of Domestic Ops investigative file on Oswald so I don't think CIA was duplicating the FBI contacts and tracking of Oswald (including his various moves, addresses, jobs, etc).

Larry

I am a bit late to the party here, but in reading thru this particular thread - as far as J. Walton Moore's interests and who was investigating whom - it struck me that CIA and FBI would be more interested in monitoring Marina (not Lee).   Ater all, she is a Russian national with family ties to their intelligence agencies, is suspiciously linked with a returning defector, and had all the appearances of a KGB "honey trap" while in Russia.

One would think that all of the various agencies (INS, ONI, FBI, CIA, NSA) would be much more suspicious of her.  Also, the White Russian community may have "liked" her more than Lee, but I'd think their suspicions would be heightened as well, which is why I don't buy their posturing as a protective cocoon for Marina, nor do I accept the standard rationale that they all just wanted to improve their Russian fluency.

Happy holidays!

Gene

[Larry Hancock]

Actually Hosty said repeatedly that Marina was really his first interest and was more suspect for potential security listing.  The FBI investigative files show that after their return both Lee and Marina were checked out against all the FBI's standard sources within the Communist leaning groups and they found no evidence at all of contacts or links that might lead back to either - which is why neither was placed on the subversive list. 

Practically speaking though, Marina had no access to information or even groups that would be useful for collections or even agitation.  There were formal rules for listing individuals on the index and FBI memos discuss this in regard to both of them.  To get elevated treatment Marina or Lee would have needed to became associated with subversive groups or individuals, or show up in reports from subversive sources.

Of course Lee did in New Orleans, which got him listed on the security index then.  Given the mail intercepts and ongoing monitoring of their movements I don't know that the FBI ignored either of them - as far as the CIA, without Moore's full file on Oswald its impossible to say what the CIA thought during the early months of their return.

[Gene Kelly]

Thanks ... and good points about Hosty (as always). 

My thinking was more along the lines of Gerry Down's questions about J. Walton Moore, and how he was using George D.  When you pointed out that you had studied de Mohrenschildt at some length - and while he remained in contact with Oswald, the Russian community was more interested in Marina.   I recall reading somewhere (a close associate's characterization) that George being the eternal ladies' man, he was probably flirting with Marina, as opposed to "handling" Lee.  So that got me to thinking that J. Walton Moore - who should've (ideally) been less interested in Lee - wasn't.  Puzzling ... unfortunately, we don't know much about Moore, and he kind of disappears from the story after 1962. 

Staying more on-thread (Bannister, CIA), Emilio Americo Rodriguez sure seems like a person of interest, given his close associations.  Plus, he was recruited by the one and only Henry Hecksher.  And Arnesto and Emilio Rodriguez were at Oswald's arraignment.  Then there's the individual who wrote the 1960 investigative report on Bannister's firm (GB&A), Elphege Oswall Dumond ...  what a name. That Emilio worked closely with David Morales and Tony Sforza in Havana, and later at JMWAVE, is a red flag.  When David points out that Morales' intelligence team of AMOTs was run by Rodriguez and Sforza in Havana, that sets off alarm bells for me.  

Gene

[Larry Hancock]

I suspect there is a good bit about the Oswald's in Moore's working files, which might not have gone to HQ central files (a really big problem for us since the HQ files are largely what got collected).   However I have no doubt that Moore did report on Oswald and that represents some of what is withheld in CIA files.  What would be most interested would be who was being copied on his reports on Oswald.  The fact that there are still withheld documents for Moore is pretty revealing since what he was doing was perfectly legal and SOP, the fact that there are no Moore files on Oswald in evidence needs to get more attention than it ever has.

As to Emilio,  yes, David and I consider him a critical link from Oswald in New Orleans to CIA SAS operations around Oswald, most likely Foreign Intelligence as far as Emilio goes - with a propaganda operation being carried out separately and most likely including Phillips who had been reassigned to SAS.  We think this is one of the biggest stories that needs to be developed and as you point out, it reveals why some of our deepest conspiracy suspects would have known all about Oswald and why he would have become an ideal target as a patsy, one not requiring nearly as much work to establish Castro/Cuba linkages since that was already done.

Two really big stories here and both very dangerous for CIA headquarters starting the evening of Nov. 22.

[Joe Bauer]

Gene , Larry, any thoughts about the Tucker Carlson "CIA did it" bombshell broadcast last week?

I ruffled some forum member feathers in disparaging Carlson's personal integrity and proposing my take that I don't trust the motivation behind his presenting the story and more believing that no serious bolstering follow up will occur than believing it would.

In your opinions what kind of new substantiating testimonial or documentation revelations would it take for you to continue to believe the main aspects of Carlson's claim?

And conversely, what future developments of the story would make you at least begin to doubt it?

 

 

[Larry Hancock]

At this point I begin to wonder if he was doing much beyond expressing beliefs or ideas he has heard over the years, possibly even from his father.   Larry S is doing an outreach to his producer to try and probe whether or not Carlson really has anything actionable or for that matter is pursuing his remarks himself.

Until I see some evidence of that I'm tending to take it more and more as a sound byte, albeit one from someone with a lot of "reach".  Carlson certainly likes hot topics and champions them very effectively - note all the time he spent with UFOs this past  year or so. 

Bottom line, unless or until I see some sign that he has a source who has seen a document, talked to a person with information that could be investigated or taken the whole thing seriously enough to pursue it apart from his broadcast I'm going to be much more interested in the leads that are discussed in this thread.

[Gene Kelly]

Hey Joe

I don't know much about Tucker Carlson, and don't follow Fox News.  At first blush, it seems he is just throwing that claim out there for attention and to stimulate controversy.  It appears he has a penchant for that with other topics.  Interestingly, his bio includes the following:

He then went to Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, graduating in 1991 with a BA in history. Carlson's Trinity yearbook describes him as a member of the "Dan White Society", an apparent reference to the American political assassin who murdered San Francisco Mayor George Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk.  After college, Carlson tried to join the Central Intelligence Agency, but his application was denied, after which he decided to pursue a career in journalism with the encouragement of his father, who advised him that "they'll take anybody".

Tucker aside, it's no new revelation to me that certain CIA factions were behind the assassination.  We've all been circling around that theme for many years, and the Agency certainly had the means, motive and opportunity.  After all, JFK was on a path to radically restructure the CIA - after he learned of their duplicity with the Bay of Pigs (and other policy matters) - and he was significantly curtailing their ability to wage paramilitary operations and unilaterally direct foreign policy.  When you read the first few Chapters of Jim DiEugenio's Destiny Betrayed, Jim makes it abundantly clear who orchestrated JFK's murder (and why).  Kennedy was reversing the Dulles brothers' self-interest decisions ... in Indonesia and with Sukarno, in the Congo, and in Laos and Vietnam.  When one reads what Dulles and Howard Hunt later said and wrote about Kennedy - all of which was misinformation and propaganda slander - it's difficult not to conclude that these individuals (and their cronies within the maverick Agency) conspired to whip up a Cuban exile frenzy and devise a plot to kill Kennedy and simplistically blame it on a pro-Castro Communist/Marxist lone nut.    

I am reminded of the Gary Underhill story, and how he alleged that he knew who was behind the assassination, and that "they" knew that he knew, and so he feared for his life. Underhill alleged that a "Far East" faction was responsible. I would note that is where Howard Hunt got his OSS start, operating behind enemy lines in China’s Yunnan province. Underhill was found dead six months later in what was questionably termed a suicide. William Turner looked into the death of Underhill and wrote about it in 1967 in Ramparts magazine.  Tying in this thread to Walton Moore and the Domestic Operations Division, refer to a 2005 EF thread, where the following was shared by Bill Kelly: 

Underhill's connection to the CIA was via the Domestics Contacts Division, the same branch as J. Walton Moore in Dallas, who handled both DeMohrenschildt and Hugh Aynesworth. There's also records related to Moore's WWII OSS assignment to China with Charles Ford, which certainly qualifies as part of the far east group.

So, it's hard not to suspect the CIA in this entire story. But I don't think it's necessarily a "bombshell".  Knowledgeable people have known or suspected that for a long time.     

Merry Christmas!

Gene

[Joe Bauer]

Thank you Larry and Gene.

Both your response postings are really interesting, reasonable and make sense to me.

[Tom Gram]

On 12/22/2022 at 10:38 AM, Larry Hancock said:

If you take a careful look at some of the designations in the document (Special Agent in Charge, etc) I think you are seeing the FBI station chief in LA signing off on a background check on Emilio ordered out of FBI HQ in DC pursuant to a standard CIA request at the time Emilio was being cleared for a new set of responsibilities on his return to the US - which included foreign intelligence work against Cubans domestically and in Mexico.

Standard practice for agencies to use the FBI investigations group in background checks for clearances.  As to why LA, I suspect Jean Paul is right right in that the LA office handled surveillance on the Cuban consulate in LA, as well as some matters related to Mexico including international travel.

 

So what I’m thinking is going on here is that the LA field office of the FBI conducted security checks for the CIA - and the LA CIA office was not involved. Would you agree?

The reports looked strange to me because they are on a different form than what I’m used to seeing in FBI investigative files - but it looks like the Form 646 used for the report on Banister for example is an FBI document: 

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/2022/104-10109-10379.pdf

Dale B. Whiteside was thus the FBI SAC in LA, and Elphege Dumond was one of the LA FBI agents who traveled around the country conducting special investigations on behalf of the CIA. I’m not sure why the CIA would redact Dumond’s name for so long if he was just an FBI agent doing background checks, but it seems like that’s what happened here.

I found out that Whiteside looks to have been chief of the Presidential Secret Service detail in the 40s, which is interesting. I can’t find anything on Dumond. 

https://noelmaurer.typepad.com/aab/2007/12/the-sumner-well.html

http://etheses.lse.ac.uk/3304/1/Parkes_Welles_of_Loneliness.pdf

A few questions I still have are:

1. What does OOC mean for “type of report”

2. What does F-SB/2 mean for “character of case” 

3. What other CIA background checks were conducted by the LA FBI, and where are the FBI and CIA copies of those files? 

4. Where can I find career background information on Whiteside and Dumond - or even just anything confirming their job titles with the FBI?

5. Where are the CIA CCD/NC project files discussing the proposed New Orleans private detective agency cover operation?

6. How did GB&A become a candidate for this operation? 

And the big question I have is still:

7. What is the name of the detective agency furnished by OS officer Jim O’Connell as an alternative to GB&A? 

[Larry Hancock]

Tom, I wish I could answer your detailed questions but we would need an experienced FBI officer of the period to do that, at one time the forum had such a resource and he was extremely familiar with FBI document practices.  I'm afraid he is long gone at this point though. We are sadly lacking in first hand knowledge of routine, standard practices of both the FBI and CIA at this point and its really frustrating that we don't have solid resources who could answer questions about what we see on routine correspondence/documents. 

What I can tell you in general is that it was quite routine for the FBI to be requested to do background checks on any individual being considered for security clearances in the military or other agencies, and as far as the CIA was concerned for special operational assignments/approvals.  That background check could be far ranging in terms of geography.  I recall the folks at the bank in my home town being impressed when the FBI showed up as part of a background check on me when I was in the military and being evaluated for a security clearance.

As to the reason for Emillo being  evaluated, David could probably provide more detail but but this was at a period in time when he was coming out of deep covert operations inside Cuba and soon to be posted to extremely key positions in CIA field intelligence and counter intelligence activities.  Before being given those sorts of tasks I have no doubt CIA security would want a new background check on him in regard to connections, business and social connections inside the U.S. 

David has posted a good bit of background on him here and I think the security check is just one more indication of the importance of the role he would come to play in the CIA and by 1963 at SAS/WAVE.

[Guest]

Edit : removed my response, I used wrong reply and doc

 

 

Edited December 26, 2022 by Jean Paul Ceulemans

[Guest]

F-SB/1 was FPCC, so perhaps related or this is where this project started.... (not sure), this was of interest in the Chicago area first (1961 ?) I believe, but expanded...

The system IMO was a coding for companies or organisations t/b investigated by the Security Branch (SB) like QKENCHANT, what specific it was... don't know...  compartmentalization... they didn't know this themselves....

I have seen this type of coding going back to C-SB/x etc 

They get a request, handle it and that's it for them.  Always going up and down the chain, never sidesways, hard to track? But sometimes it works when trying to look for the previous/next "project" number (you have probably tried this already, just mentioning it), arriving e.g. at the Fair Play For Cuba Committee.  

So IMO In this case it's just a short code for Bannister's company

OOC I have seen in different situations/combinations/meanings, could relate in general to a company and/or cover operations IMO

Searching in comination with QKENCHANT (the general project) could get some more results (especailly on the agents and/or offices involved)

https://www.maryferrell.org/php/cryptdb.php?id=QKENCHANT

I know, a lot or "IMO", need more time... 

Just wasted a couple of days on reading a book I ordered (The Faux Baron), I had high hopes, nope...  

Edited December 26, 2022 by Jean Paul Ceulemans

[Tom Gram]

On 12/26/2022 at 5:02 PM, Jean Paul Ceulemans said:

F-SB/1 was FPCC, so perhaps related or this is where this project started.... (not sure), this was of interest in the Chicago area first (1961 ?) I believe, but expanded...

The system IMO was a coding for companies or organisations t/b investigated by the Security Branch (SB) like QKENCHANT, what specific it was... don't know...  compartmentalization... they didn't know this themselves....

I have seen this type of coding going back to C-SB/x etc 

They get a request, handle it and that's it for them.  Always going up and down the chain, never sidesways, hard to track? But sometimes it works when trying to look for the previous/next "project" number (you have probably tried this already, just mentioning it), arriving e.g. at the Fair Play For Cuba Committee.  

So IMO In this case it's just a short code for Bannister's company

OOC I have seen in different situations/combinations/meanings, could relate in general to a company and/or cover operations IMO

Searching in comination with QKENCHANT (the general project) could get some more results (especailly on the agents and/or offices involved)

https://www.maryferrell.org/php/cryptdb.php?id=QKENCHANT

I know, a lot or "IMO", need more time... 

Just wasted a couple of days on reading a book I ordered (The Faux Baron), I had high hopes, nope...  

Thanks Jean Paul and Larry. 

Do you have a source on F-SB/1 referring to the FPCC? I thought the “character of case” designations were just generic descriptors of the topics being investigated, like IS-C (internal security, Cuba), etc.

Since the investigation request for GB&A came down from the CIA, I’m curious if the case designation will give some information about what the CIA might have been interested in.

On the Emilio Rodriguez report for example the CoC is OA-IB/3 - which like you said tells us that Rodriguez was being investigated for operational approval. The report also has “OOC”  listed for category of report, which makes me think OOC just means “outside organization case” or something like that. 

Unfortunately I haven’t had much time or energy lately to do any deep research, but I’ll poke around too when I get a chance. 

I’d really like to see the LA FBI Field Office files. I need to check the NARA database to see if there were any file numbers turned over besides their main JFKA file. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Tom Gram said:

Thanks Jean Paul and Larry. 

Do you have a source on F-SB/1 referring to the FPCC? I thought the “character of case” designations were just generic descriptors of the topics being investigated, like IS-C (internal security, Cuba), etc.

Since the investigation request for GB&A came down from the CIA, I’m curious if the case designation will give some information about what the CIA might have been interested in.

On the Emilio Rodriguez report for example the CoC is OA-IB/3 - which like you said tells us that Rodriguez was being investigated for operational approval. The report also has “OOC”  listed for category of report, which makes me think OOC just means “outside organization case” or something like that. 

Unfortunately I haven’t had much time or energy lately to do any deep research, but I’ll poke around too when I get a chance. 

I’d really like to see the LA FBI Field Office files. I need to check the NARA database to see if there were any file numbers turned over besides their main JFKA file. 

Looks I made a mistake on the F-SB/1.   Gonna have to check some things to sort this out, I know at the time I was searching files on Cuba and a (possible) stay-behind network.  Somehow F-SB/1 and FPCC got connected in my searches, strange... I probably got distracted (lot's and lot's of side-information making it hard to stay on track sometimes)....