Larry Hancock, Someone Would Have Talked (2nd edition)

[Myra Bronstein]

Hi Larry,

I'm reading your book now, and I really appreciate the layout. The summaries for each chapter are great, the testing and research points are a very good idea (in fact I hope it sets a precident and other authors do it), and the material is arranged in a very logical way. In fact I read a few chapters then couldn't help myself and read thru all the summaries and appendices. Now I'll go back and read the rest. Congratulations and thanks for adding so much to our knowledge of President Kennedy's murder.

My question: It doesn't appear that you mention Nixon in the book. Do you personally think he had any role in the assassination?

Thanks.

Myra

[Larry Hancock]

Myra, thanks very much for the kind words - one of the advantages of doing the first generation of the book as essentially a giant research paper was that it gave the publisher and I both the opportunity to step back and take another look at what we could do to improve the focus and readability, both major issues with any work which attempts to pull in as many elements to provide a historical context. I know it could still be better but I think the combination of the format plus what is being done to support it with an interactive web site offers a lot of potential for this type of work.

As to your question on Nixon, I don't really see him personally involved or even having foreknowledge, although I suspect a few of his long time friends and supporters with organized crime associations may have. He may also have heard some of the gossip after the fact from these same associates.

I have a different interpretation of his Bay of Pigs reference than many, I actually belive that he was well aware that the initial planning (which he participated in) called for elimination of left wing elements of any new government in Cuba, even if that meant a "black list" of leftist exiles. And he knew that senior CIA officers were aware of that - you can imagine what that would have done to the Agency in the Church Committee era; acknowledging that the US government and the CIA were supporting assassination of elements of the exile community and had elimination black lists would put us in the same light as what the Soviets had done throughout Eastern Europe (whether or not Nixon knew CIA had developed black lists and assassination plans for Guatemala is another question). So, you can imagine the leverage that would have given Nixon over the CIA, and possibly over other individuals (especially the senior congressmen who had held intelligence committee oversight).

I suspect that if one were to probe for individuals at higher levels, beyond those called out in the book, that the right direction is to pursue the direction pointed out in the last appendix - a dedicated "cadre" (to use Angleton's term) of devout anti-Communists within the Agency - and some fellow travelers - including the folks who saw ample opportunity to make money on side deals for weapons and drugs. The sort of weapons deals that Underhill was tracking can't all be made with hard Yankee dollars, which brings up other mediums of exchange with that offer even higher margins, ala Iran-Contra. All for a good cause of course. And then John's Mockingbird people have to cover that up too.

-- Larry

[John Simkin]

Has the book received any newspaper reviews?

Is Gary Mack going to stock it in his museum?

[Larry Hancock]

John, I'm not aware of any newspaper reviews; we have sent out two rounds of press releases and plan

another significant release for this week but no particular response for the first rounds.

I have done three radio shows so far.

At this poiint we have been focusing on web activities and initial book distribution, still working to get stock

in as many outlets as possible. I know some review copies have been sent out but have no idea

about the Sixth Floor per se.

-- Larry

Has the book received any newspaper reviews?

Is Gary Mack going to stock it in his museum?

[Evan Marshall]

John, I'm not aware of any newspaper reviews; we have sent out two rounds of press releases and plan

another significant release for this week but no particular response for the first rounds.

I have done three radio shows so far.

At this poiint we have been focusing on web activities and initial book distribution, still working to get stock

in as many outlets as possible. I know some review copies have been sent out but have no idea

about the Sixth Floor per se.

-- Larry

Has the book received any newspaper reviews?

Is Gary Mack going to stock it in his museum?

I'm not reading it right now because I have contractual agreements for books and articles that I have to get written very soon. Certainly Larry's 1st version was a superb book and one of a handful I found of value. Too many conspiracry books want to use a shotgun approach to find the "real killers".

Others are impossible to finish-I've been a published writer since the mid 70's and too many books make better sleeping potions.

[Myra Bronstein]

Myra, thanks very much for the kind words - one of the advantages of doing the first generation of the book as essentially a giant research paper was that it gave the publisher and I both the opportunity to step back and take another look at what we could do to improve the focus and readability, both major issues with any work which attempts to pull in as many elements to provide a historical context. I know it could still be better but I think the combination of the format plus what is being done to support it with an interactive web site offers a lot of potential for this type of work.

As to your question on Nixon, I don't really see him personally involved or even having foreknowledge, although I suspect a few of his long time friends and supporters with organized crime associations may have. He may also have heard some of the gossip after the fact from these same associates.

I have a different interpretation of his Bay of Pigs reference than many, I actually belive that he was well aware that the initial planning (which he participated in) called for elimination of left wing elements of any new government in Cuba, even if that meant a "black list" of leftist exiles. And he knew that senior CIA officers were aware of that - you can imagine what that would have done to the Agency in the Church Committee era; acknowledging that the US government and the CIA were supporting assassination of elements of the exile community and had elimination black lists would put us in the same light as what the Soviets had done throughout Eastern Europe (whether or not Nixon knew CIA had developed black lists and assassination plans for Guatemala is another question). So, you can imagine the leverage that would have given Nixon over the CIA, and possibly over other individuals (especially the senior congressmen who had held intelligence committee oversight).

I suspect that if one were to probe for individuals at higher levels, beyond those called out in the book, that the right direction is to pursue the direction pointed out in the last appendix - a dedicated "cadre" (to use Angleton's term) of devout anti-Communists within the Agency - and some fellow travelers - including the folks who saw ample opportunity to make money on side deals for weapons and drugs. The sort of weapons deals that Underhill was tracking can't all be made with hard Yankee dollars, which brings up other mediums of exchange with that offer even higher margins, ala Iran-Contra. All for a good cause of course. And then John's Mockingbird people have to cover that up too.

-- Larry

Thank you Larry. It's just that Nixon's presence in Dallas on Nov 22 was so...convenient. And he was Kennedy's losing opponent, and Prescott's boy.

I can see where you think bay of pigs meant "bay of pigs." I hope I'm paraphrasing you correctly. After all, it was a genuine scandal, crime, failure, and so on. And with many of the same folks involved in Watergate and Bay of Pigs, quite the hot potato. I'm still struggling with Watergate. It could seem like a setup to get rid of Nixon, or an attempt of Nixon's to get something on the CIA. I just don't know.

[Larry Hancock]

Myra, it does seem like a convenient coincidence but it is true that Nixon was serving as a counsel

for Pepsico and had just completed work on a contract, giving him an actual business reason to be

there. Not to mention that Pepsi Corporate would take the opportunity to display their "connections" to

the bottlers. It's probably worth noting that Johnson himself had been in Dallas earlier that week speaking at the Pepsi event and that there were a number of "celebraties" in town for it. The press even captured Nixon out on the town with a fellow Hollywood female star one evening that week.

In regard to the Bay of Pigs thing, its important to recall that Nixon would have known about Hunt who was a major figure in the early days of organizing the exiles and who was also ultra right...we know Hunt suggested an assassination project on Castro (being told not to worry, things were being taken care of) so I speculate that Nixon was well aware of the huge can of worms that Hunt could open up on the CIA and on D.C. in general if he ever decided to go public with all he knew and had heard. Certainly Hunt was a huge exposure for the CIA, making him a perceived point of leverage for Nixon.

However, I'm not giving up the option that Hunt was a plant into the Nixon administration in the first place and loyal to the CIA all the way....Nixon might have thought he would turn on them but I'm betting he didn't realize the deck was stacked. We often wonder if Hunt was intentionally exposing the operation, the only thing I can say that there are enough other examples of Hunt's poor security and equally poor tradecraft that I'm willing to accept that he just flat screwed up.

-- Larry

Myra, thanks very much for the kind words - one of the advantages of doing the first generation of the book as essentially a giant research paper was that it gave the publisher and I both the opportunity to step back and take another look at what we could do to improve the focus and readability, both major issues with any work which attempts to pull in as many elements to provide a historical context. I know it could still be better but I think the combination of the format plus what is being done to support it with an interactive web site offers a lot of potential for this type of work.

As to your question on Nixon, I don't really see him personally involved or even having foreknowledge, although I suspect a few of his long time friends and supporters with organized crime associations may have. He may also have heard some of the gossip after the fact from these same associates.

I have a different interpretation of his Bay of Pigs reference than many, I actually belive that he was well aware that the initial planning (which he participated in) called for elimination of left wing elements of any new government in Cuba, even if that meant a "black list" of leftist exiles. And he knew that senior CIA officers were aware of that - you can imagine what that would have done to the Agency in the Church Committee era; acknowledging that the US government and the CIA were supporting assassination of elements of the exile community and had elimination black lists would put us in the same light as what the Soviets had done throughout Eastern Europe (whether or not Nixon knew CIA had developed black lists and assassination plans for Guatemala is another question). So, you can imagine the leverage that would have given Nixon over the CIA, and possibly over other individuals (especially the senior congressmen who had held intelligence committee oversight).

I suspect that if one were to probe for individuals at higher levels, beyond those called out in the book, that the right direction is to pursue the direction pointed out in the last appendix - a dedicated "cadre" (to use Angleton's term) of devout anti-Communists within the Agency - and some fellow travelers - including the folks who saw ample opportunity to make money on side deals for weapons and drugs. The sort of weapons deals that Underhill was tracking can't all be made with hard Yankee dollars, which brings up other mediums of exchange with that offer even higher margins, ala Iran-Contra. All for a good cause of course. And then John's Mockingbird people have to cover that up too.

-- Larry

Thank you Larry. It's just that Nixon's presence in Dallas on Nov 22 was so...convenient. And he was Kennedy's losing opponent, and Prescott's boy.

I can see where you think bay of pigs meant "bay of pigs." I hope I'm paraphrasing you correctly. After all, it was a genuine scandal, crime, failure, and so on. And with many of the same folks involved in Watergate and Bay of Pigs, quite the hot potato. I'm still struggling with Watergate. It could seem like a setup to get rid of Nixon, or an attempt of Nixon's to get something on the CIA. I just don't know.

[John Simkin]

My copy of “Someone Would Have Talked” arrived yesterday. As I have a copy of the first edition I started reading the appendices first. Here are my first questions. I have also posted the same questions in the appropriate thread on the forum. Hopefully, you will post the same answers on both threads as it will help researchers trying to build on your work in the future.

Appendix A: Johnson's Daily Log for August 21, 1963.

I assume you published this because of LBJ's meeting with Bobby Baker and Fred Black. I see that also at the meeting was N.A. Storm of North American Aviation. Why do you think this document is important? Does it refer to the Bobby Baker scandal or to some other deal that LBJ was doing with these men. Black was of course a partner in the Serve-U-Corporation that had a vending machine contract with North American Aviation.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2099

Appendix B: Crossing Paths in the CIA.

You have done a great job tracing the connections of those in the CIA who were probably involved in someway with the assassination of JFK: David Sanchez Morales, Ted Shackley, William Harvey, Carl E. Jenkins, Rip Robertson, Henry Hecksher, David Phillips, Tracy Barnes, Desmond Phillips and E. Howard Hunt.

1. Interestingly, you have discovered evidence that Edwin Wilson was at JM/WAVE in 1963. He is still alive and is feeling bitter about being betrayed by his CIA colleagues about his involvement in illegal activities in Iran. Did you try to interview him for your book?

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=5743

2. Of those that you mention as being at JM/WAVE, I know least about Henry Hecksher. For example, he is the only one of this crowd that I don’t have a page on. You refer to an obituary of Hecksher written by Alfonso A. Narvaez. Is this available online? Do you plan to post it on your website?

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=8772

3. It seems highly significant that Hecksher, like virtually all the CIA officers listed above, was involved in the PB/SUCCESS Project in Guatemala in 1954. It seems it became the constant reference point for the CIA when they considered the possibility of removing the head of a government. Should it be so surprising that the same people should be brought in when it was decided to remove JFK from office?

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=5945

[Larry Hancock]

Here we go John:

#1 I feel the meeting in question is extremely important because it created a documented, official paper trail that would have illustrated Baker using Johnson's personal influence (this is not just a DC cocktail party handshake but a scheduled meeting, albeit brief, in the VP's office) to support his use of Johnson's patronage in deal making. The meeting occurs in the timeframe in which Baker, Black and their Vegas partners are putting together the Serve U Corp government contractor deals.

Having this meeting accessable to Congressional investigation was a huge risk when the Baker scandal blew up and the investigations began. Of course Baker could always have used it to expose Johnson but more importantly Fred Black would have been well aware of the significance and a few remarks under oath - he had been scheduled to testify - could easily have made Johnson front page news and effectively contaminated him beyond political recover since he was very much on the edge at that point anyway.

When you combine that with the fact that Fred Black was John Roselli's confidant and long time friend - enough so that Roselli stayed with Black when testifying to the Federal committees I think the potential exposure of Johnson (call it access, call it leverage, call it blackmail) is immense. Not to mention that Black, Baker, Johnson and Hoover all lived within approximately a block of each other. If one is seeking something specific that could bring Johnson into a conspiracy, I feel this would be it....

#2 Am aware of that...unable to comment.

#3 The Obit should be on the WEB site now as an illustration, should be in B but have not checked myself since the site went up. Lots of new documents in there for the appendices and some for the chapters but I haven't heard much feedback on them yet.

#4 You will also want to refer to the charts that deal with relationship between these CIA officers, I hope they will be a handy guide for readers since the relationships are complex and cover many years. In this regard I think that the last appendix on a small Clique within the CIA is important and have begun to refer to this network as the "cadre"...to take a term from Angleton.

-- Larry

[Pat Speer]

Larry, I was just taking a look at some of the new documents on your site. On one of the Jenkins documents, it lists his experience, including his stint in the USMC. Do these coincide with Oswald's experiences in any way? Was Jenkins ever at Atsugi?

[Larry Hancock]

No Pat, it appears that Jenkins was never in Japan...his duties were more in SE Asia. If you check a couple of the new charts on the site I think they lay that out pretty well too.

However one "new" individual was stationed in Japan and although he may or may not have crossed paths with Oswald he very likely did with Richard Case Nagell....that would be Henry Hecksher aka Bob.

And he was on Cuban affairs in 1962 - 1963....going on to a lead role in AMWORLD.

-- Larry

Larry, I was just taking a look at some of the new documents on your site. On one of the Jenkins documents, it lists his experience, including his stint in the USMC. Do these coincide with Oswald's experiences in any way? Was Jenkins ever at Atsugi?

[John Simkin]

#3 The Obit should be on the WEB site now as an illustration, should be in B but have not checked myself since the site went up. Lots of new documents in there for the appendices and some for the chapters but I haven't heard much feedback on them yet.

If you click on the documents in this section you get the message "file not found".

[Larry Hancock]

Thanks John, Francesca reported that yesterday and the webmaster is going to work on it today.

We've been doing some structural changes to the site and that may have broken the links in B; I checked

some of the other appendices and they seemed to load OK. If anyone finds a broken link please email me

and I will work with the webmaster to fix it.

We've are uploading some new documents that Pat provided, they will go as new documents in Chapter 1.

They are interesting in that it appears someone was carrying on the Castro threat early in 1964 and attempting

to shift it to Johnson.

Hopefully we will also post a very interesting piece by George Michael Evica - his presentation at the Lancer

conference dealt with Carcanos, Cunningham and Interarmco and the quantity of Carcano's which the CIA

had been shipping to clients. It suggests that the Carcano might have had much more significance than we

realized and that (wild speculation on my part) the Kliens Carcano may have been a substitution to cover up a Cuban Carcano

connection. It also has some implications for the mysterious death of Garrett Underhill discussed in the last appendix.

-- Larry

#3 The Obit should be on the WEB site now as an illustration, should be in B but have not checked myself since the site went up. Lots of new documents in there for the appendices and some for the chapters but I haven't heard much feedback on them yet.

If you click on the documents in this section you get the message "file not found".

[Myra Bronstein]

Larry,

Do you think that John Roselli was in Dealey Plaza on Nov 22, '63?

I'm sorry if you gave your viewpoint in the book and I spaced it. You have a lot of material on Roselli, and I didn't read the book in a linear fashion.

Thanks.

Myra

[Larry Hancock]

Hi Myra, the short answer is no I don't think he was - for several reasons. First, there are surveillance records which pretty clearly show that he was trying to get out from under the FBI just before the assassination and that effort (referred to as "Roselli's run" in the book) succeeded and put him in Vegas - when next found immediately after the assassination he is in Vegas at his favorite hotel.

I feel the reason for this move may have been a last minute contact with Jack Ruby, Ruby's appearance in Vegas at the same time Roselli would have arrived was documented in several reports but the WC managed to avoid inserting it into Ruby's official time line. We do know that a call from Roslli's hotel on Sunday triggered the move to get Belli to defend Ruby (with a cover that the contact and funds were to be cut out through Early Ruby) and I suspect that came from Roselli himself - Belli's partner said he knew the caller and it was somebody he had known from Havana and casino contacts there.

Roselli's key role seems to have been handling the Ruby end and some other support activities through his crime contacts; as he super sharp manager there was no need nor reason for him to be in Dallas to do that and he certainly would not have been part of the tactical plot - the thought that he was scheduled to be a shooter at his age and with his lack of skill or practice just doens't wash.

One of the open issues for research that the book does list is an effort to obtain the physical FBI surveillance reports on Roselli for the months immediately before the assassination. If they are available I have not been able to locate them and they could help a lot; clearly from the records we have he was under surveillance on a daily baisis with his comings and goings tracked by FBI agents in LA and Vegas. aAnd the FBI knew about his CIA contacts and Cuban activties - also missing on the Roselli surveillance are any reports at all from the Miami office. Anther key in tieing Roselli into things would have been more background work on Alex Gruber who was most likely a cut out used to get money to Ruby in Dallas.

So....can't say for sure he was not in Dallas but what we know at this point does not confirm that he was while his presence in Vegas right before and right after is confirmed.

-- and you didn't miss it in the book...I don't think I put in a firm conclusion one way or the other.... Larry