The Ochelli Effect 8-6-2025 Larry Hancock

a Wednesday Wednesday. And you know what's funny, I'm real happy to have Larry Hancock with us. And I know Larry, I told you Harry Hancock. That's hilarious. Larry Hancock, whose name I've said a thousand times, and I don't know how many times I've screwed it up, but I don't think it's that many. Anyway, Allergies getting in my way

on a and you know, everybody requests Larry. It is usually very highly informative, sometimes extremely entertaining when we're talking to Larry, and I'm extremely grateful to probably have him as the longest running He's not a guest on this show. He's a co host basically, and I'm happy to have him along anytime, but here in August for God's sake, of twenty twenty five. It's been a while, and I got to say every single time he's on, I learned something,

so I know you guys too. Go to Larrydshancock dot com. Of course, we're going to focus on some issues that might relate to one of Larry's latest books, and one of the best, really, even though I highly recommend them all, The Oswald Puzzle, which is co authored with David Boyle, in whose name I pronounced differently every time I say it, and I'm hoping that they'll be presenting at Lancer in

some fashion this year. Well, I'll be there, and I was even talking for a little bit, and we went to air late in order so that I could discuss a few issues with Larry just before with what I plan to present, because he's probably the only guy who woman to take advice from. And I might do something a little weird Atlanta this year and we'll see how it's received. Anyway, Hey, why not? You got to take a shot Larry. How are you this Wednesday evening? First of all, I'm.

I'm not sure he got all of what he wanted, but part of what was denied to him by Brett Kavanaugh finally not too long ago, you know, being given to him as in the Joe and Needy stuff, right, And there was a bit of celebration, There was a bit of understanding, it seemed like, and then everybody kind of went back to sleep as per normal, or they tried to convolute it with other events that involved let's say,

government transparency, criminal Acts Intelligence. Maybe yeah, I'm trying to avoid saying Epstein, But what am I going to do? The Epstein files? The you know, show us the show us the files, show us the information. And the general public now is kind of a sleep on JFK because well, they're giving us MLK files on they need to give us the Epstein files. They already gave us the JFK files,

and that's happening. And I'm just being blunt here and trying to summarize in case, you know, nobody's keeping score at home. Seems like, what do you think of this? And what is happening here? Because I'm seeing what Jef's writing. I'm seeing that he's still doing you know that podcast. He's had a lot to say. Some of his supporters have written supportive articles about this. I know what my thoughts are after looking over what has been released, and

you might be able to tell. I'm thinking there's more they should have given him. But you know, you can leave it there and say, first of all, what the hell took so long? Because you know, and you've got to be read into this. I'm not going to waste Larry's time by explaining to you. Although Larry could probably give you a quick summary about you know what it is I'm talking about here. Why is Joe Needy's important for various reasons and everything else? And why was he

covered up? There might be multiple reasons for that, and what the hell is the difference when it comes to it. He's not a shooter, He's not Oswald. But you know, Okay, here we go, Larry. I know I've thrown you a terribly wobbly spitball here, but I'm conn I believe you could at least get a base hit out of this. So, by all means, where should we take this for people that are somewhat read into it, because that's all the people that are going to want to hear this. Yeah.

then we can't talk about it yet because you haven't read. Yeah, just just that level of the the community trying to respond to all of this at one time, it has not been very effective. The only the only really insightful, straightforward, pithy response I've seen to it is Malcolm Blunt's article about you know, yes there is something here, Yeah, there's some things that we could do, and Malcolm essentially challenging all the people that were saying it's a nothing burger

because it was not at all nothing burger. But Malcolm kind of stands alone in that regard. The the research community is not following the story the lead that Jeff produced and that's that's a bit depressing. Now agreed to follow his lead. You've got to know a lot, You've got to have a lot of context. But but there are people that do have that, and if if they're following, I guess the good news is if they're seriously following it, they're following it to the extent that they're not talking

about it because they're too busy. And the people that just get on boards and chat and like bring up the same things over and over again haven't changed. They're not engaging at all with it. Really, So yeah, I think my general response is there's a lot of potential and just the administrative file that Jeff got, there's a lot of potential in getting the operational files that that points to that might tell us some really serious and

props even incriminating stuff. But the one thing that puzzles me is all of us conspiracy folks have said for years, Oh, you're not going to find a report that says this is how somebody killed the president. You know, a file, a document. Yeah, we looked at it, we investigated it's here. You know, you're not going to found that sort of thing. And now when we get the joint Edies file. Everybody is going, well, now the CEEIA didn't give us the smoking gun, or are we expecting it? I don't think so.

to cooperate as a general condition. Because we've seen this shift in the in the research community, we've seen the shift in the general public. Nobody wants to work with anybody. You disagree with me, you're out. God. Uh okay, that's just the culture. I'm not even pointing a finger in any left or right direction. I'm saying that's the culture, but also the culture of communication, keep it keep it real, pithy, so much so that it doesn't carry very much information,

but must make a strong declaration. This just seems to be the cultural shift in my mind. So you know, the younger people are not going to do any better the older people that are setting the ways they're not

going to do any better. The people that refuse to use a computer mostly are dead now, but still right, nobody is going to cooperate correctly, and nobody is going to communicate correctly, and that means they're not going to receive or send correctly at this point to make an actual point with context and texture or am I just you know, being picky about you know, modern tech and getting my grumpy old man on even though I'm only

in my fifties here, Larry, I mean going. You can tell me I can handle it.

to talk to me and have a question. Let's say it's about Oswa, Mexico City, and you know it's really if you don't have the full story, the full background, the field context, you and I can't really discuss it. So the best I can do is refer refer them to the book, because otherwise I'm not doing them a favor. They're not going to get what they want. You know, are they going to get a yes or no? Was

he there? Was he not there? Yes or no is not a good answer, you know, a on these complex subjects, you you can't you can't compress it to a character limit. It's so No, you're absolutely right. And interestingly, I see even on forums that I visit a lot shorter post where people seem to compel to say, oh, I agree with you, or I agree with that post, or I don't agree with that post, or you know, let me post something I posted fifty times before in response to this,

just so you're forced to read it again. You know, the threads get derailed, and there's just no coherent dialogue on these things that are really complex history. You know, you don't discuss history with you know, soundbites just doesn't work that way.

They just don't. So they're not absorbing any of the nuances and understanding that you know, a connection to or a somebody who's working for, or somebody who's a contract agent, or somebody who's an asset, whether knowing or unknowing, these are nuances and differences in these narratives that nobody's picking

up on anything new. They are just you know, repeating their own positions and therefore paying no attention to any progress that's being made or redefining of any terms, people's positions or anything else that could be had even in their own paradigms. If they just realized something might have changed here, we might have learned something new. Collectively. Well, see there's my problem right there. Nobody thinks there is a collective. There's only the camps and the compartmentalized algorithm,

and that is where people are living. And I'm not just talking about on the computers, I mean in their personal lives and their willingness to engage. And you know, I mean people talk about the Socratic methods still, but they don't use it. Nobody gets together and has a discussion anymore, where a actual debate. They think a debate

is when you lose. That's not the purpose of a debate. Actually, you know, I mean, yeah, everybody likes the win and loss, and we're Americans, we love that sort of conflict, but that's not the full purpose of a debate. And that's not how you're going to learn anything, because if you

think you know it already, what's the purpose of learning anything. See, here's the problem, right, And I'm talking about psychology as opposed to even the technology here or again, you know, I accept, No, you mean a grumpy old man truck. You're just saying these kids don't know what the doing. I'm not even saying the kids, because I see this in people older than me, younger than me, my age. It doesn't matter. It's across the board, it seems like.

And I think that's one of the major problems. But let's put that aside. Can you talk to me about what it is that people could see here if they were willing to listen, if they were willing to see the progress a couple of points. Maybe not you know, the same points that Jep's making, but maybe you see some progress here. Malcolm sees some progress. And Malcolm Brunn is one of the best brains on this case that we have that people should really have utilized differently earlier on,

but didn't. Only a few very intelligent people did. Just in praise to Malcolm Brunt right here, Okay, because I don't want to just say nice things about people when they're gone. Okay, here we go. What is your thought about that? What is it that we could learn here if we were willing to pick up and you know, follow the newly presented pieces of evidence here that obviously had some import because they hit it for over a decade.

They sent the guy to the Supreme Court, who basically killed it in court for Jeff to begin with, and without the special circumstance of his connection to Representative Luna and a few other pieces of luck, Jeff might have never seen this while he was alive. Let's be honest. Other researchers have died waiting to get documents and Jeff might have done the same, even though he starts out as a reporter, as a guy trying to put together a story as you know the author, or that it's

a long journey Jeff's been on. Some people have been on longer ones, I admit. But let's talk about what it is that he may have finally loosed that we could take further in your mind.

in Miami of being a potential CIA deep asset. You know, this guy is just your every day you know, works for cleaners, he works in manual labor. They report him to the CIA, they report him to the FBI, and for two years they try to investigate this guy to see what his real alliances are. How do we know about this Well, actually, in Dallas, Walter Heypman, FBI subversive desk guy in Dallas, is still working on this case in November twenty second, nineteen sixty three, a year after

it started. Because this guy's now living in Dallas and they're still investigating him, and they don't finish that investigation for another eight months after the assassination because Heypman is pulled off to work on the JFK inquiry. So this is like a trivial person, you know, not visible in the media, not with an obvious political He's just a kind of a suspect. We don't know if he's Procastro, we don't know if he's anti Castro. But it's minutia and we have a paper trail on that within the

CIA and the FBI. And yet what we find with Oswald, even though they know about Oswald and the Cubans have been telling him about Oswald and running their own propaganda, which Jeff is confirmed that disappears within the CIA. Now, their their position has always been, oh, well, we didn't,

it's not in the case officers materials. We didn't. We disclaim all the knowledge of this because this guy Joannides is not the Howard that they were talking to that they told you, Jeff, He's not you know, he's not even in our files. He's not different guys, you must be wrong. They must be wrong. Now we know that's all not true. That information was being passed in great detail, and it starts not showing up in places we should be able to look for it because these people have

day jobs. It's a bureaucracy. I was just looking at a case file on the headquarters file on the student director that goes into great detail. In fact, there's one entry registrate that says, oh, there were these students that were on the air in New York City and they've been to Cuba and they were promoting the Cuban experience. And yes, the DRE is going to is going to

respond to it, you know, counter this media. Well, heck, we have a major media confrontation in New Orleans between Oswald and Vre that goes into multiple venues over several weeks. That doesn't even show up in this dre case file.

to my mind, there's more than one Howard. This is what the thing is. Howard is almost like a title, not even a person. Okay, in my mind, that's what it suggests. Now. I have not thoroughly gone through this as well as some others, but that's what I see there.

That's what I see the potential for for certain. In addition to that, do we get at any of the Joe and Needy stuff involving is then later on interactions in the investigation, or do we have to piece that together, you know, because they told the House Select Committee, Okay, you know what do you want? We want people that had no connection to any of the events in nineteen sixty three, and they were lied to. I'm probably gonna have to turn my mic down because I think I

hear the dogs getting upset about something. But anyway, the thing is, this is a series question here, right, the after action and the Howard issue. If you don't mind, just go back over that Howard thing real quick because they might have missed it. And yeah, talk to me about this House Select Committee thing and Joan's involvement. And again I'm gonna kill my mic quickly just to keep the dogs out because I want them to hear you marry more than anything. God.

for join Edes. By the way, there was a cover for Joines to operate as Howard, which was the name

that was used with the Cubans. It was that the name on the address that the Cubans were given to send information to, So that that was resolved in the admin file there you know, as to whether or not it was you know, kind of a soft file situation where it was only known at jam wave and maybe it was lonely a local AVOs and not a headquarters alias, and debate that all day long, but the file itself shows that clearly a backstop cover had been put in place,

including a driver's license for joint eds as the Howard that the Cubans were were contacting and providing information to. So that got resolved, which is a big deal because now that's not even it's not even argument. What what, of course is not resolved is that what was given to Morley is just the admin file. And you don't find operational level activities in an admin file. At best. You might find some promotions, some you know, job endorsements

or evaluations. You know, we're talking about a regular business admin file. So no one would have expected or should have expected anything explosive in that. In fact, it's kind of amazing that that backstop cover showed up there tom of the driver's license.

had to go to that process. So he had been assigned as a case officer, fairly routine staff job, even though at a high level, I mean, because he's not operating just individuals. He's operating groups. The our student director as a group, not an individual. He's a case officer at a higher level than most. But he's being assigned to something beyond that. That's really special that we don't we don't know what it is. We know it's something

new going on. It wave and that provides us a lot of ground to look because we know what join ed specialties are, we know what he does, we know what he's capable of, so we can start matching to that too. Oh, what where should we look for operational files? What might he have been engaged in that justice getting started and kicked off in the late spring of nineteen sixty three. That's that's super secret that he had to get a new clearance for. That's way beyond just his case officer activities.

access to funding resources, et cetera. There's a lot of things that can be drawn from this, right, So that is a positive and it's great. What it doesn't give us the whole story, and it doesn't assign to us even a beginning explanation in my mind for what happened with the HSCA or am I wrong about that?

overall how to help the HSCA do his job. Actually, you would probably want to pick somebody from headquarters, somebody who has real expertise with the c AA record systems, you know, not join It is not a very good personnel pick to do that job. So one of the things that immediate the question has raised is, you know, we've all talked about the fact, why would you pick James Angleton to be the CIA liaison to the Warrant Commission,

you know, to help the Warrant Commission. You know, Angleton being counter intelligence CI sigg you know, not not the most helpful sort of person in the world. Ankleton's skills are covering things up, not exploring things. But and so here we have again a CI officer picked whose skill

set really doesn't match the job. So then you raise the question of just like Angleton might have known something that he wanted to make sure it didn't get shared with the Warren Commission, perhaps Joe and Edies knows something that we want to make sure it doesn't get shared with the HSCA. Oh, what might that be the CIA's interest in Lee Harvey Oswald.

on the record. And indeed, Joe Eddies might be positioned well because of his intimate knowledge of what the HSCA was actually after. The Warrant Commission only wanted to know about Oswald. If you take a look at the subcommittees that were laid out, the investigative groups. Okay, sorry, but where you have a junior and a senior council, you have four groups, and three of them have the name Oswald and the damn title of the group. They were

all after Oswald. With the Warren Commission. Okay, the HSCA didn't do that. They broke it down a little differently and went after very particular things. So indeed Joe Edens might have been positioned to take care of the one particular thing that they were going after at the time. And he's available, he's not busy with other things because,

as you said, his health was bad. So actually he might be the right man for that job, just like Angleton was the right man for the CIA job with the Warren Commission, to control the flow, to make sure that only certain things would reach them, whether they are evocative, provocative, et cetera. But only certain things would reach them because really, at the end of the day, they're there to filter things properly. Both of them.

The goal of exposing information and an inquiry is on their side, the goal of controlling information on an inquiry is on my side. So the job descriptions aren't quite meshing. And I would say, yeah, I think both of them fit exactly the profile for shielding information whether than open. Yeah, they're in a position to keep doors closed, not to open doors. And and their activities absolutely with their respective

commissions show that you know that there intentionally. We know that Angleton was intentionally and demonstrates that he was intentionally closing doors, especially in regard to Mexico City, Joe and Eddies. When asked directly some questions related that would relate to the ERE, and Oswald absolutely closed the door. He did not volunteer the fact that, oh, yeah, I can get you that information because I happen to have it. So yeah, Actually in this case, darn looks like we agree.

the castrow plots. There is no awareness. I mean this, The CIA is a mythical organization that is, you know, run the up and up in nineteen sixty four on the Naples at their report. Right by the time the HSCA is full swing of its work, seconding up in the seventies we already know the public even knows the CIA might not be behaving. You know, bout boards all

the time. Oh, we have a different context, a different dat of information, so a slightly different you'll set, a slightly different familiarity is required of that control officer that's called in between Angleton and Joanne's, who is supposed to be a liaison to help but also has to control for his side what's going to be fed. It's a different context. Joannes can fed stuff to the HSCA make them happy, they couldn't be fed to the Warrant Commission,

and vice versa. You know, things that seem very benign in nineteen sixty four no longer look benign in nineteen seventy four or seventy six or any of that time period. Do you think that that's an important thing to realize here when comparing those.

total agency. But when we get to the HSCA, you know that a lot of that's come out because of the Church Committee. That's no longer shocking. That's no longer Oh yeah, we know the CIA does assassinations, big deal. We know they have media people in their control, and we know they do domestic property. Okay, we know all that, all right, So what's the big secret By the time we get to HS the HSCA, you know, like, where would the explosive part be at that point in time,

because the CIA has already been suffering. Uh, and it probably has to do specifically with the agency Lee Harvey Oswald.

it's a different landscape for a different skill set required. Okay, you know, the guy who makes your French fries might not be able to form your potato, but if they're part of the same process, Okay, So I want to shut up now and let you continue on this and kind of, you know, give us the ultimate conclusion here in short form, as best you'd like, you know about what it is this progress represents. And I do want people to read Malcolm Blunt's article, but I don't have

a link to it available right away. I will find one, or maybe you could pass me one. Larry and we'll put it in the show notes. But I want to get to that point where it's like, Okay, now that we've gone through this and tried to explain some context and some reality is connected to what was actually handed over, what does it mean ultimately or what should it mean going forward?

return from Russia from its own people. It had withheld it from its people in Mexico City, and when Lee Harvey Oswell was there and being queries were being made about him, the only reason that happens is if the CIA does have an operational interest in him, whether or not there already using him knowingly for something, have an idea about a notional idea about using him for something. There's every reason for us to accept the fact that

there were operational interests, possibly in several different venues. There's several given the image that he had created for himself in New Orleans, given the fact that he had volunteered to the FBI to provide information on the FPCC. Both the FBI and the CIA have operations going on something

called Amsanta related to the FPCC. Every reason to think that over a course of some ninety days there could have been different types of operational interest within the agency in Lee Harvey oswelld Okay, there's just our job now would be to pursue that. Because we know what was going on within the agency, we know the kind of things that we're doing. There are places we could look to try to find evidence of that, unless that's been

taken away. But that's an important lead. But I think the more important lead, and where this all really comes down to is let's take that as a given, as a hypothesis. Lee Harvey Oswell is of operational interest. He's an operational interest as of late August through September, through October and November. And there may be an evolving interest in him, you know, immediately in New Orleans propaganda wise, with the DRE evolving into something more in regard to

Mexico City. But there's an operational interest in him within the CIA.

who's going to hijack him? Where would you turn to look for somebody that would know about that operational interest and be in a position to say, Aha, actually, if we pass this guy, and if we use them, and we take their plan the air propaganda and we make it ours. Let's take let's say that they were already working on the Gilberto Alvarado story of Cuban's contracting Oswald to kill JFK giving him money, which David Phillips maintained

to his death, say that was already project. That's great, we can hijack that, we can make them a patsy. We can turn this whole thing against Cuban a heartbeating and problem solved. Where would that hijack occur? You know, of all the potential characters that have been offered, all the scenarios that have been offered for this conspiracy, who wouldn't know enough about that operational interest to hijacket My point be obviously somebody within his CIA and somebody that's

involved in that operational interest. That's where the hijack has to occur. So just what I'm going to toss out is this gives as a real direction. Look, we've made apotheses about all this before, but now it's giving us a real suggestion of Yeah, we were thinking we were looking in the right place. Now we should look more closely.

a complex thing for me to try to read. I really want you to restate that question in the chat rooms that you're listening live quickly though, because Larry's almost out of time with me. Yeah, please, because I don't know if you want to ask the question about you know, he had just come back from Greece. It just come back from Greece. There's one part one thing that looks like a question there, and then there's some other things.

But there's a bit more chat going on in the room, so I'm not sure which thing he wants to ask here, so please enter it back in the chat room. The exact question, well, just a couple.

regime change skills, just like David Phillips did. But both of these are former case officers who have advanced through the ranks and have specializations in propaganda, especially black propaganda, something that should be very much on our minds in the fall of nineteen sixty three.

I'm referring to it even to begin with? Or no?

furnished to the above agent or permanent FBI retention. The undersigned was not present during the interview, but it should be noted that Joe and Needes in all caps had open heart surgery about the time he received the above letter, and that was from solely there and this is dated. Let's see when is this day to day? Seventeen August nineteen seventy eight. Anyway, it's a bit of a complexity there. I don't know how you would answer that anyway. In short, if you want.

out of this confirmation. For sure, you got some more context, but it's still as yet incomplete, as per usual. I mean, this is almost where Yeah, I kind of go along with the people that go yeah, yes, same old, but it's not because it's part of what was being held back for a long time, no matter how long you know, morally sued to get the documentation. This is part of what he wanted, but it's not everything. And that seems to be the name of the game with all this, right.

You know, it's like, we interviewed him about the letter. Well, where's the letter. I need to see that.

I would say it would be new. I know, there's I guess the bottom line is there's a lot of talk these debates about solely because of what John Newman is writing about solely, and perhaps this relates, you know, something new about the fact that Solely would let Joe and Edes be interviewed. But again, I'm sorry, I just I don't have another context to just make a reasonable observation.

in my hands. You probably know who I'm imitating some listeners, But anyway, I have this one document right here. It proves this, and it never does because in and of itself shows nothing, and you have to take it and have the other context to be able to know what's

going on altogether. And I'll tell you what, after reading millions of pages, as I'm sure you have, Look, you're not going to memorize the specifics on everything or trust your memory anymore on everything because it gets blurred after a while.

item number two in the letter. It's sort of like Solely is going by the way, you guys realize that you know he has had open heart surgery, He's probably not at his best. You know, this is a polite way for the for Solely to go back and say, well, yeah, he's an old guy's retired and he said searcher recently, and yes he was grumpy. You know, get a life. I saw that somewhere else. It's that much as coming back to me. But it's still not coming back to me what the interviewed him about.

who were being investigated as being moles. But so, yeah, that that part makes perfect sense to me and to that to that extent, in all honesty, Joan Edes, We've we've looked at Joann edes entire career has not been looked at in the same fashion that say, David phillips entire career has been looked at, because Joe and Ed's up to this point had been a and the CIA

had managed to make him a rather trivial figure. I will say, there are all sorts of people now that we know of that our major figures in regard to the JFK assassination as persons of interest or suspects. You know, that includes Morales more Joe and Edes now that that we didn't even know about, or that the HSC that the CIA effectively stonewalled for years, so we wouldn't even be able to investigate their entire the background, right.

and what does that meant to do? Maybe you give up after a while. You know, if you keep digging for treasure and you got holes all over your yard, you're gonna stop digging in your yard after a while. It's just pretty simple. You can't walk across the yard anymore. Anyway, Larry, I really appreciate you taking the time today and we

went over a little bit. Sorry about that. But would you this is my final question for you, just real quickly, would this have changed anything or do we already see an update maybe to the Oswall puzzle or an addendum?

participating in. They direct us towards this new super secret operation that was forming at the same time. Both Phillips and joann Edes appear to have been assigned to it, or to assign We know what Phillips was assigned to at that point in time, it was the new Autonomous Operations Special Operations under des Fitzgerald, and if join Edes, if that was the operation that joann Edes was assigned to, There's a huge range of possibilities and some very dark

possibilities that are going on there. So not so much on what's in the eye puzzle, but what might have been going around the Oswald puzzle. And as I said, even raising the possibility for at least some speculation on a scenario of this time exactly who and when and how they hijacked Oswald.

Every time I try to get out, they pulled me back in. Larry is suffering that and he's not even Italian. Anyway, we'll we'll, we'll get into that more in the in the future. And thanks Larry for taking the time to do this. Maybe a little follow up, you know, if you get a chance to take a look at this, who knows, maybe it'll be the seed of something interesting for you, and maybe you'll be able to add to it, because you know, your mind those to different places sometimes.

I mean, I look at things, I put them in context. I try to follow up on each thing. First of all, I define things, and this is my oversimplified explanation. I want to know what that letter says, since they mention it. I want to know who the person is that's mentioned. So I go and I study those things, and it seems like a sidetrack, but it's not. It's to put total context so that I'm reading this as if I'm

knowledgeable on every subject in the paragraph. Even That's why it takes me time to figure things out, because sometimes I'm familiar with the people and sometimes I'm not. Sometimes I'm familiar with the subject, sometimes I'm not. Sometimes I'm familiar with the kryptonym, sometimes not. And this is the process I go through, probably not the most efficient way. And you know, I would like to see a well

trained AI that can do it. But as smart as those things are, they don't get very far with this. You still people, So I mean, there may be technology that's you know, in certain industries that I haven't seen yet, but as far as what the public has seen so far, there is not a researcher AI for JFK. Not yet. Maybe we'll get there, Larry, Maybe maybe we'll become unnecessary.

than any human can handle. Cool, right, which means AIS and science and astronomy, geology, physics, cool AIS in the areas we cover maybe not so cool right.

you know this is the thing. I was recommending it before it came out because well, I had an idea what was in it, and it was necessary. Here's the thing, it's required reading. But I got a shelf full of Larry Hancock books and not a one of them is something you waste your money on, whether it's nexus, or it is creating chaos, or it is surprise attack. His

co authors have changed a few times. Occasionally his wife has given him the title of the book, But the content and the context of those books is an incredible education on the behavior of the security state, whether it's about UAPs they call them now, or it's about you know, spheres of influence, the intelligence agencies, the JFK assassination. You have a serious library that Larry has put out all by himself, and I'm really proud and happy to have him on here and grateful.

Amazon dot com. Why the Vietnam War by author Mike Swanson, Revelation Conversation Chili dot Com.

was a continental republic. In the decade that followed, it became an imperial superpower. Generals such as Curtis LeMay not only wanted to invade Cuba, but knew that there were short range missiles on the island aren't with nuclear warheads that they could not destroy because they were on mobile launchers. Their invasion could have led to a Third World War,

and they wanted to go to war anyway. The War State by Michael Swanson reveals why, and we'll show you what President Kennedy was up against.