Larry Hancock's Blog, page 11

Foreknowledge

A recent reply to one of my blog posts raised the question of “foreknowledge” of a plot against JFK and the idea that there was possible “collusion” by omission by senior government figures aware of a threat to President Kennedy but noting to act against it. That is certainly a complex question, worthy of a book or at least an extended research paper – neither of which I’m going to do myself. However I would offer the following observations related to foreknowledge at two different levels based on my own research and writing.

First, both the FBI and Secret Service were very much aware of real threats against JFK as of the fall of 1963. The FBI investigated source reports of verbal threats from its sources both within the ultra right (the Minutemen and the National States Rights Party) and from radicals within the anti-Castro Cuban exile community. The threats on the right were the most specific, including details on the formation of rifle teams and on the possibility of an attack in Washington, only week or so before the Texas trip a NSRP tip suggested a possible attack in Dallas. Of course by that time there were warnings about violence coming from virtually all quarters including Congresspersons and Dallas business leaders. The FBI provided warnings to the Secret Service about threats from those radical groups, we know of some of them related to both Chicago and Miami.

In turn the Secret Service did act against the Chicago threat, engaged with the CIA to act against threats in Miami and Tampa and with the Dallas Police to interdict an anticipated threat from violent right wing protests in Dallas (there were actually very special and extensive security preparations in Dallas, unfortunately centered on the planned speech at the Trade Center rather than the motorcade).

There were also very special actions taken in Miami, where threats of both IED type bombs and sniper attacks were known. Those actions involved the CIA’s local office, including its Cuban counter intelligence service led by Tony Sforza – a name which appears in Tipping Point. Certainly it would be fair to say that the CIA and specifically its Cuban operations group were ware of threats to the President and at least in some instances acted against them. They were also aware of violent threats from within exile groups they were working with. especially from the leaders within the CRC and within the military arm of the DRE.

Of course readers of Tipping Point will quickly realize that knowledge could have been a bad thing, if certain of those CIA officers decided to encourage those threats rather than act against them….and there is no real sign of the latter. That remains one very likely area of dangerous foreknowledge, but not at the highest levels of the agency, rather at the more dangerous operational levels.

The second, higher level, is much harder to deal with – particularly if you understand the convoluted and confusing process of political assassination I explored in NEXUS. Basically it was not at all uncommon for the highest senior officers in both the military and the intelligence community to talk about threats to national security and we can document that some of them viewed JFK’s policies on Laos, Vietnam and Cuba in that light.

Such remarks were certainly nothing new, I’ve written about that level of disagreement being so intense during the Eisenhower Administration that Ike explored legal action against several of his sitting and former Joint Chiefs, Truman had acted even more directly against such opposition. There is no lack of evidence for talk about “getting rid” of JFK, however that historically such talk was in the context of organizing political action to make sure he was not re-elected and that was becoming intense in 1963. Its hard to think that anyone participating in such talk would immediately jump to thoughts of a plot to kill him being in process.

Of course we know there was similar talk within the CIA, at the highest levels and down through CIA operations, most especially within Cuba related operations. But to know whether a particular individual was talking about politics or obstruction within the Administration (for example convincing Bundy or the Chiefs to be more hawkish directly with JFK or to challenge his decisions in regard to Vietnam or Cuba) or subtly suggesting something more violent is a good bit like retroactive mind reading.

That’s especially true given senior officer’s penchant for being nebulous in their remarks and seeking deniablity at all times. I’ve documented more than one occasion where the word “eliminate”, used in a political action sense, was incorrectly translated down the line of command to “kill”. A very dangerous situation indeed.

So….was there foreknowledge of threats, absolutely, was there action against certain of them…yes. Was there foreknowledge of the specific plot I describe in Tipping Point at senior levels, I doubt it.

However those same senior levels within the CIA were indeed aware of a threat to JFK from within the Cuban exile radical community – from their own sources and indeed from a very public warning by Fidel Castro himself. And there is no sign at all they acted against that threat.

Because of that I would agree there was a certain level of collusion though non-action, but I would put it specifically within the CIA, which can be shown to have been either unable or unwilling to prevent foreign political assassinations by its surrogates on more than one occasion, even with advance warnings. In this instance it was a domestic political assassination.

Puzzled and Perplexed

Its not an unknown state of mind in regard to the JFK assassination; I’ve been there many times over the last thirty plus years of delving into it. What has led me back into it at the moment is the response to Tipping Point.

Given that it was serialized online for over three months and now has been out in print for some time, I would have expected more questions than I’ve received – especially given that it introduced a number of new names into the equation, proposed a set of specific activities involving the CIA’s SAS group and JMWAVE’s activities in and around Lee Oswald in the fall of 1963 and got pretty specific about the actual conspiracy and the attack in Dallas. Its the furthest out on the conspiracy limb I’ve gone and usually when you do that the results are pretty predictable.

While there have been a few good questions about the new names and connections introduced in the book, I would have expected more given that the associations are quite complex and evolved significantly over a number of years – especially among those I’ve designated as actual participants. In other words, when you add that much history you expect it to be challenging for readers and I have no claim to have simplified matters to the point of being crystal clear in my writing.

Beyond that, in Someone Would Have Talked I closed a number of chapters with suggestions as to very specific pieces of research I thought would move matters forward. Somewhat surprisingly in many instances those leads did prove out and new research produced material that appeared in both NEXUS and finally in Tipping Point. However following Tipping Point I’ve hit a bit of a wall and am not sure what specific new research is viable in terms of moving further – not that there are not lots of open questions and leads, but with close to sixty years having past I’m not sure which of them are viable or that I should recommend. On the other hand, if some of you have decided to pursue certain leads I’d love to hear about it and any progress you have going forward.

So in pursuit of both issues – outstanding questions and new research directions, I’m soliciting questions that remain in reader’s minds or specific leads they think have potential in terms of the people and historical material still available. For reference those could come out of any of the major sections of Tipping Point:

Realty Check

The Cuba Backstory

Enter Lee Oswald

People in Motion

Context for Conspiracy

The Conspiracy / Operating in Dallas

Feel free to either post your thoughts on this thread or email me direct (which may be best given that provides more room for extended discussion) at larryjoe@westok.net

Unidentified Update

Its been brought to my attention that its become increasingly difficult – at the moment totally impossible – to get a copy of my book Unidentified / The National Intelligence Problem of UFO’s via Amazon. First off I apologize for that. Its very frustrating for any author, and at the moment I have multiple problems (with different publishers) in making Kindle versions of books available via Amazon, or with print version availability.

If you are interested in obtaining a copy of Unidentified you may do so by emailing or calling Debra Conway, the publisher, at the following:

debraconway@jfklancer.com or 817-371-1260

She does have copies available.

I remain very much involved with research into UFOs (Unidentified Aerial/Aerospace Phenomena) and am involved with two research teams at the moment. One team is investigating the physical and flight characteristics of UFOs over several decades. Perhaps the most interesting thing about that to me is that neither the size nor shape (including some horrendously un-aerodynamic shapes) appear to have any relationship to aspects such as acceleration or G loading.

In addition, despite all the current furor over recent Navy incidents, we have had measured examples of that highly unconventional performance for decades now:

Fort Hood Sightings, 1949

https://minotb52ufo.com/

It strikes me that we have not really considered the implications of either the continuity of that technology or the contrast in the activities of UFOs specifically in the vicinity of atomic installations as compared to their other appearances. In the early decades UFOs were frequently reported approaching and actually engaging with both commercial and in particular military aircraft – something not seen in their much more circumspect appearances at atomic weapons facilities.

In contract certain characteristics, such as daylight appearances and actual formation flights of UFOs have changed considerably over the decades.

I’m involved with study teams working on both these issues, but the tasks involve a great deal of data manipulation and analytics, there are no shortcuts to a scientific approach.

For those interested in the subject and particularly in a scientific approach, I urge you to take a look at the SCU and explore this link:

https://www.explorescu.org/

I think you might find our upcoming June virtual conference especially interesting.

https://scu.regfox.com/2021-scu-aapc

Tipping Point Availability plus Incomplete Justice

I wanted to let everyone know that the print version of Tipping Point should now available on Amazon for the U.S, Canada, UK, France, Germany, Italy and other European nations. That has been confirmed by Amazon so if you look in those stores and have a problem ordering please let me know so we can pursue it.

We do have a Kindle EBook version prepared and are now working on uploading that to Amazon, hopefully it will be available soon.

For those who have the print version of the book and who might want a printed copy of the Index (which I often do when I’m seriously researching or studying a book) I do have that file available and can send the Index to you if you drop me a note at larryjoe@westok.net.  It is a separate file from the book and of course only specifically associated with the print version of the book.

PS – if you have already read and enjoyed Tipping Point, a positive review on Amazon would be most appreciated!

As to an update on shows, as I mentioned in my last post Stu Wexler and I did the Ochelli Effect with Chuck Ochelli and you can find a recording of the show here:

https://ochelli.com/category/larry-hancock/

Next Thursday both Stu and I will be back with Chuck to discuss the RFK assassination.  We didn’t do a book on that for various reasons but for reference I do have an almost book length, extremely well illustrated, research paper on the Mary Ferrell web site.  You can find it serialized under Incomplete Justice:

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

Hopefully my friend Gary Murr will also be joining us with Chuck, to help us with information from John Hunt’s magnificent research work on the RFK assassination.

The Bay of Pigs Revisited

It’s once again the anniversary of one of the most abject failures of American covert action – and yes I did state that correctly, under President Kennedy’s directives the insertion of an anti-Castro force into Cuba was to be extraordinarily covert. His orders were that the fighters be landed, but that if the initial effort at the Bay of Pigs met military opposition the the force was to be inserted elsewhere. His overall guideline was the same as that of the initial sponsor of the Cuba project – President Eisenhower – had demanded, the hand of the United States was not to be seen in the effort. JFK also ordered that the leaders of the force be specifically briefed that there would be no direct American military action in support of the landing or their moved to topple the Castro regime.

Kennedy met with the senior Cuba Project officers as well as personally with the Navy Admiral in charge of providing security for the Cuban Brigades transport across the Carribbian. He made the rules of engagement quite clear, defined the Navy security role, stressed absolute “deniablity”, and ordered that back up plans were prepared in the event the insertion was opposed.

The sad thing is that you likely will not read any of that in the routine anniversary stories of the landings. To a large part that is true because the full story of the entire Cuba Project and the disaster at the Bay of Pigs has really only emerged during the past two decades and the new documents and the real history of the full Cuba Project has not made its way into either the mainstream history books or the mainstream press.

Which means the general public – or at least the section of it interested in history – has little idea of the initial regime change effort pursued by the Eisenhower Administration, its total failure or its conversion to something entirely different in the first months of the Kennedy Administration. Shockingly, even the CIA field commanders involved in the Bay of Pigs had no idea how badly they and the President were misled by the actual project chief, Richard Bissell during that period.

The CIA Inspector who evaluated and wrote a devastating critique of the effort certainly did, however his report was suppressed and Bissell was allowed to substitute is own rebuttal, ensuring the depth of his mistakes became thoroughly obfuscated – even from his subordinates. Decades later, when shown the actual documents and records relating to the landings they could only register shock and disdain, openly calling project chief Bissell a liar -clearly misleading both them and the President.

But the real history goes much further than that tragedy of leadership, the records and oral histories we have now suggest that Bissell and the senior Navy officer on the project were talking a number of actions not communicated to the President. Actions which placed a squadron of armed ground strike aircraft on the carrier Essex, the command ship intended only to escort the transports and landing craft to Cuba. Nothing in JFK’s plan called for that type of American air strike capability. Nor did it call for the super-carrier group the Admiral also dispatched off the Cuba shores – a force with the capability of sufficient direct military action to destroy Cuban armed forces across the island.

In addition JFK was not briefed on a number of things we now know about, but which still don’t make it into the official histories – such as a number of efforts to insert rifle teams to assassinate Fidel Castro during the weeks before the landing. Or the effort run out of the Navy base at Guantanamo which placed a key group of exile fighters directly outside that facility, with a huge store of explosives and no obvious target or mission other than a false flag attack on the base itself. Something which could have triggered a massive Navy retaliation strike from the carrier groups off Cuba.

Its taken decades of work by very good historians to reveal the sort of information you will not find in the anniversary articles on the Bay of Pigs. Fortunately I was able to take advantage of their work, and of some of my own new research, to tell a much fuller story of both the Cuba Project and the Bay of Pigs – its part of my book In Denial / Secret Wars with Air Strikes and Tanks.

If you are interested, my publisher has even gone so far as to extend a special offer during the anniversary of the Bay of Pigs landings. You can find the book and the offer on Amazon at:

Domestic Terrorism

A couple of weeks ago my friend (and co author) Stu Wexler and I spend two hours with Chuck Ochelli discussing the Martin Luther King assassination – our most recent research and study of that murder is in our book Killing King. Its most definitely a different view of that tragedy than you find in most books on the subject, if you are interested you can find the exchange online at:

 https://ochelli.com/hancock-collection-killing-king/

However Killing King was actually our second book on the MLK assassination, our first work was The Awful Grace of God, a much broader look at the context and multi-year backstory of the activities which ultimately led to Dr. King’s death.

During the conversation with Chuck, we did touch on the point that much of that story involved a deep dive into both the racial and religious terrorism of the late 1950’s and 1960’s. Telling the full story of the King murder had taken us into the networks, alliances, political covers and extremely sophisticated practices of several groups – some ostensibly religious, others political, but in both instances with what could only be called a terrorist (and hidden) core.

Going beyond the background in The Awful Grace of God, Stu had researched and authored a much broader look at the interconnections of religious and racial terrorism in his book America’s Secret Jihad.

The outcome of our two hour conversation was an invitation for us both to come back on the air this week, and divide a two hour segment to specifically address our work on domestic terrorism and its relevance to contemporary events. I’ll lead off with context and Stu will follow on to extend to story into today’s headlines.

If that sounds interesting, join us on the Ochelli effect this Thursday evening, April 15. I virtually certain it will be a lively session.

Tipping Point now in Print on Amazon

Tipping Point is now available for order in the print version on Amazon.

The print versions contains additional commentary and elaboration based on feedback on the serialized version as well as new information, including discussion of one new and possibly significant CIA officer who has never really been on the radar before this (thanks to the ongoing work of David Boylan). It also contains an index which should prove very useful to serious readers  – the indexing does include a number of crypts as well).

Rex is working on getting the Kindle version up on Amazon as well and hopefully it will be available soon. He will also be adding an overview of the book and some early comments by some familiar names in the JFK community. 

The Amazon link does allow some preview of both the book and the index.

As always, good reviews from readers are always most welcome.

All proceeds from the sales will go to the doument colletion work of the Mary Ferrell Foundation and there are some exciting things in progress in that work.

UFO Studies

Contrary to popular opinion, in the years following WWII UFO’s were taken quite seriously and were the subject of ongoing intelligence investigations by both the American military services. Despite dismissive public statements, a wave of UFO incidents in Scandinavia was publicly investigated by regional nations and covertly studied by both American and British intelligence. Official reports from those inquiries as well as from the early years of American UFO incidents concluded that something very real was going on, that the Soviet Union was most likely behind it and that it did indeed pose a threat – very possibly involving reconnaissance for strikes on America’s most strategic facilities.   

I cover those years and what the intelligence community was actually doing – as compared to stating publicly in press releases – in my book Unidentified. 

Yet despite UFO’s being taken quite seriously in those years, no military action occurred and no actual proof of threatening behavior or damage was found. From a national security perspective, without the existence of a proven threat, UFO reports became to be seen as a diversion of resources and serious investigation faded away. Investigative groups were disbanded or in some instances converted into public relations vehicles, devoted to simple explanations and public reassurance.

Over the next several decades UFO reports became a subject for collection and investigation by private groups, as well as an ongoing topic for the entertainment industry.  While a few scientists made serious efforts to investigate them, it became clear that there were very real career risks for professionals choosing to engage with a subject which had migrated largely into the movies and on to grocery store tabloid covers.

As it turns out scientific interest in the subject, while fading, did not entirely die.  And with a handful of high profile contemporary incidents, it has returned – in the form of a new organization and a series of new scientific studies. The organization is the Scientific Coalition for UAP (unidentified aerospace phenomena) Studies – you can read about it here (and yes I’m involved with SCU):

https://www.explorescu.org/

The group is devoted not simply to collecting reports, as has been common, but to in depth scientific studies of incidents which involve quantifiable data for physical or statistical analysis. You can get a feel for those studies by taking a look at the following link, which evaluates the unconventional flight and maneuvering characteristics of a relative recent incident involving U.S. Navy ships and aircraft:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7514271/

SCU has a number of ongoing studies in progress, addressing the flight and maneuvering characteristics found in some of the best close up observations which appear in official Air Force and law enforcement reports. For myself I’m involved with a team doing statistical analysis of incidents involving the American atomic warfare complex over several decades.  It’s a fascinating task, but to do it scientifically involves a great deal of data collection, number crunching and graphical/statistical analysis.

If the subject is of interest to you I would recommend exploring the SCU web site, its activities and the upcoming conference.

https://scu.regfox.com/2021-scu-aapc

It will be a virtual event this year, relatively inexpensive, and a good way to update yourself on what is in progress in terms of scientific study of  a what has always been a fascinating (if controversial) subject for many of us.

State of the JFK Releases 2021

One of the more common, and ongoing, questions related to the JFK Assassination concerns the records that have remained classified for decades, and to the legislation passed back in the 1990’s which directed the release of still classified documents.

I’ve commented on that in this blog and in my books, especially on the possibility that major revelations exist to be revealed in restricted documents – “nope”. That possibility would assume that there had been a secret, in depth investigation of potential conspiracy (something open ended beyond Lee Oswald) and targeted with early leads well developed and with serious intent.

Decades of research – and actual document releases – has shown that not to have happened. In fact we now know that the FBI was ordered to wrap up its investigation and begin writing the report demonstrating Lee Oswald as the sole individual involved some 48 hours after the murder of President Kennedy. Released documents clearly show that in a number of instances, orders were given not to pursue leads which were not directly related to Lee Oswald, and to “repudiate” any witnesses that might offer contradictory information.

But enough of that, I’ve said all that before and demonstrate it with numerous examples of the obfuscation which did occur (something that actually did not escape the Warren Commission and which was one of the first things commented on when the follow on HSCA inquiry began).

Regardless of all that, legislation is in place demanding release of all assassination documents, deadlines have passed and a new deadline is coming up in 2021. So what is the state of the releases? Thanks to the obsessively detailed research of my friends Rex Bradford and Jeff Morley, you can find the answer to that question in a brand new study posted at the Mary Ferrell Foundation.

Just follow this link:

https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/State_of_JFK_Releases_2021.html

UFOs

It’s absolutely true that most of my research and writing has focused either on either political assassinations or issues of national security, including how the two can become intertwined in terms of crisis response – a subject examined in my book Surprise Attack.

So where do UFOs come into either topic area, and why did I do a book on them (admittedly they have been a long term personal interest of mine). The reason is simple – in terms of both  Cold War history and national security, they illustrate some of the most fundamental practices, and pitfalls, of what is known as strategic intelligence (sometimes referred to as “threat and warnings”) intelligence.

A study of UFOs, beginning during World War II and continuing to the present, provides a perfect platform for exploring how various elements of the intelligence community work in terms of collections, analysis, and assessment – as well as how they interact with the bureaucracy that drives decision making on any issue of national security.  That’s really quite important because generally speaking the system is far more complex and does not work at all like most of the public thinks it does.

That lack of understanding intelligence community operations creates many problems with all sorts’ subjects, including a tendency to drift into “conspiracy” when in many instances the real issues have to do with systems, career/departmental positioning, and even office/agency politics.

My UFO book (Unidentified / The National Intelligence Problem of UFO’s) deals with the historical involvement of the military services, intelligence agencies and the FBI with UFO reports – primarily from military and law enforcement personnel. That involvement is actually very well documented and provides a totally different view of internal communications and a very serious response, in direct contrast to public statements on UFOs. Beyond that I go into an extended illustration of how a practice called Indications Analysis can be used to evaluate long term patterns of UFO activity – focusing on the U.S. Atomic Warfare Complex.

If you are interested in the subject, you might want to take in a recent interview that I did with Chuck Ocelli on the book – it’s part of his ongoing series on my research:

Hancock Collection Unidentified

Next Thursday he and I will be doing another session on national security, focusing on Creating Chaos, my book on political and hybrid warfare.  We will be talking about the evolution of political and cyber warfare in the 21st Century, the total dysfunction of the current American War Powers Act and the failure of the American Congress to address legislation dealing with political warfare, cyberwarfare and increasingly deniable hybrid warfare.

In that regard I just can’t get my mind around the fact that we have, year by year since 2014, moved further into a new era of cold warfare and remain effectively in denial about it (certainly in terms of Congressional action) for the practical purposes of funding, and more importantly legal authorizations for defensive actions.