Tuesday, 29 April 2014 15:21

Master Class with John Hankey, II: The Debate Debacle: An Introduction

Written by

Seamus Coogan continues his critique of John Hankey's claims and exposure of his mistakes and misrepresentations.

If you have not caught Part I, you will see John Hankey has featured in three previous CTKA articles. Including this new batch of essays, he now has a grand total of six studies detailing his myriad pratfalls.

Last year Hankey and Gary King were pestering Jim DiEugenio for a live debate concerning CTKA’s articles on Hankey. They appeared to be at odds with Jim’s appearance on Black Op Radio discussing my article. Indeed, for some rather callow folk it appears that Jim’s discussing my article means I did not write it and Jim did. I take it as a compliment. I always aim to be as diligent as Jim DiEugenio.

Jim appeared on Black Ops Radio simply because I did not want to go on. Jim is an old hand with interviews, and I felt he would better present my case. Furthermore, Len Osanic and Jim go way back and they are adept at each other’s styles. Clearly, Hankey’s work had me riled. Quite clearly, John has no idea of how things work here at CTKA.

Jim did a lot for of my first ever CTKA piece. Because he and John Kelin had to edit some fifty thousand words of text and then HTML format the finished article. As I had little access to Jim Hougan, and the best Watergate literature, Jim helped me out with the faux Nixon, Hunt, and Bush stuff Hankey used. This is not unique. Should Hankey ever write for CTKA (something of a longshot, admittedly) he would get Jim’s helpful expertise, as all contributing writers, in particular baby faces as I was, received. Now, depending on the topic I occasionally help people out with their first time articles. It is a small community and it is what we do.

The Ballad of the Rejected Prima Donna

If we count, the introduction t the debate by Fetzer and John Hankey’s presentation, the show is nearly two hours long. What is funny about all of Hankey’s cries of victimization is the fact he can jump on any crank supporting radio show, write on any crank blog, and debate his case. What perturbs Hankey however, is that this crank nexus is shallow. His ideas are just as good as the next hack that comes along.

CTKA is highly regarded by genuine JFK researchers. Serious researchers do not engage with the likes of John Hankey, nor his pals at the “Oswald Innocence Project.” Apparently, John Hankey really wanted to be a name. He fooled himself into believing he was one until he got snapped out by those who really understand the field and really are careful about the facts of the JFK case. I have likened his behaviour to that of some deluded amateur singer shot down on X-Factor. As a result of his rejection, he certainly made a name for himself. Just not in the deluded way he had imagined.

To save you the pain of listening to Hankey’s rather loose interpretation version of a debate, I have listed the highlights as I heard them. So sit , grab a coffee, tea, or beer, and giggle along with us.

Name the Time and Date

Radio host Gary King really wanted to make a splash for the 50th by having Jim or I debate John Hankey. We were very busy at the time. Indeed, we both emailed him saying when either of us were able that we would be more than willing to debate him. I did not have the energy for it debate preparation, and the last thing I wanted at the time was to do more JFK stuff. Sure, anything involving Hankey is some fun, but in many ways, it is also exhausting because of the sheer amount of crap shovelling.

Then I eventually got a second wind and prepared for the debate. But I noticed someone affiliated to Hankey and King had put a profile of me on Zimbio as the DCI of the CIA. I suspected something was up, and after listening to Gary’s show, I felt his promises of a moderated debate were empty and Hankey would run rough on him. I was out of there… at least until now. If John wants a piece, I will give him all the CTKA he can handle.

Hell, I will even find a decent neutral venue for us to chat if he so wants. Sorry John and Gary but after being named as head of the CIA by your rabid pals it just would not feel right to cooperate with you. At the end of this overlong piece, (which you can blame on almost two hours of Hankey’s rant) I was left with a host of questions I would like to have answered in a debate with him.

Questions for a Debate With Mr Hankey

Were I to debate the man, I would like the following questions to be tabled for moderation. I will probably kick myself for not remembering more; however, he has made so many calls it is impossible to keep track of them all. These questions come from CTKA’s original reviews and essays, not to mention Hankey’s new rants. I anticipate this list will grow.

Hankey’s Deletions

  • Why did Hankey (JH) drop his Roman numerals line for “J” equalling three (i.e., Barbara III GHWB’s plane in WWII) did CTKA have anything to do with this?
  • Why has JH never admitted splicing interview footage of Governor Connally?
  • Why has JH dropped the angle of Connally being involved in the assassination, but when he was debating Jim on the Murder Solved forum, he still backed it. Where is that position now and did CTKA force his re-evaluation?
  • Why has JH apparently dropped the bogus body alteration in the plane idea he pushed in “JFK II” and “Dark Legacy.”
  • Why has JH not explained how it was he who proved it was GHWB in the Hoover/Bush memo before Joseph McBride in 1985 - 1988?
  • Why did Hankey insist the Bay of Pigs was launched from around Cal Say when it was launched from Guatemala and Nicaragua? Why did he drop this angle?
  • Why has Hankey dropped the Nixon/LBJ phone call as evidence of Nixon discussing the plot.
  • Why does Hankey rely on a known unreliable source like Paul Kangas?

John Hankey on Literature & Documents

  • How could JH say I misquoted Gaeton Fonzi on Murder Solved when it was clear JH had never even read Fonzi’s book “The Last Investigation?”
  • Why did JH say David Talbot’s book “Brothers” confirmed JH’s thesis of mafia/CIA plots against Castro when Talbot used sources known since the 70’s?
  • Was JFK II, cited in Talbot’s book?
  • Why did Hankey say he only made one mistake concerning the CIA in Guatemala a few years ago but now admits two more errors with Nixon while denying all the rest? Yet, he now denies he made a mistake about Guatemala again?
  • Why did Hankey confuse “Rush to Judgement” with” Plausible Denial” in a written piece after all these years of chattering on about the latter?
  • Why is JH so special he can read the supposedly hidden messages behind the Hoover/Bush memo when Mark Lane and Joseph McBride cannot?
  • If the Hoover/Bush memo was so important, why didn’t GHWB track it down and destroy it as head of the CIA, before it ever got out?

Prescott Bush/George Bush and Dealey Plaza

  • What evidence does JH have for George Bush being part of a hit team in Dealey Plaza? Surely, he is not using the photo?
  • Why didn’t George give a false job if he was arrested as Jim Braden (Eugene Hale Brading) was?
  • If PB were the architect of Kennedy’s demise, why would he entrust the mission to his son as who then faced arrest?
  • Where is the evidence his son trained covert operational mechanic?
  • Marita Lorenz is dubious as she has never mentioned meeting or seeing GWHB, nor did Frank Sturgis or Hunt.
  • The CIA did not use just two boats in the BOP invasion as JH said. Did GHWB name the others?
  • When has CTKA said GHWB was not involved with the CIA?
  • Why did JH misrepresent Joseph Trento and Bill Corson concerning Zhou En-Lai and PB?
  • Why did Hankey change the dinner dates and reasons behind the dinner Mellon arranged for Dulles and let PB tag along with?
  • Why did JH give fake identities to members of GHWB’s fellow Skull and Bones peers?
  • Why has JH dropped his Skull and Bones angle? Did CTKA have anything to do with it?
  • Why did JH say no Kennedy family members have spoken out about a plot to kill Kennedy when a cousin had, not to mention Talbot’s book. Had Hankey read “Brothers” at the time?
  • What evidence does JH have for Allen Dulles only getting the job as head of the CIA simply because he was a Nazi sympathizer?
  • Why does he ignore evidence of Dulles extensive history in intelligence work?
  • What evidence did JH have for their being no CIA operatives in the Nixon Whitehouse?
  • Why does JH call Jim DiEugenio “Jim Deeyouhayneo.”
  • Why have Mark Lane and the late Fletcher Prouty, while believing Bush was involved in the BOP never said he was running the operation?
  • Where is the documented evidence of GHWB running the Bay of Pigs?
  • Where did Mark Lane say he had never heard of George Bush?

The Prouty/Lane Blame Game

  • Why does JH blame Lane and Prouty for his own mistakes, when there are numerous other sources Hankey has used, yet, he does not blame for his information.
  • Why does JH criticise CTKA on irrelevant points and arguments; nevertheless, he feels free to includes actor Bruce Willis’ opinions on a conspiracy to kill JFK?

Miscellaneous Questions for Mr Hankey

  • Why could John Hankey not correct or answer one by one all the questions I asked of him at Murder Solved?
  • What evidence other than CTKA disagreeing with his analysis does JH have to prove we are CIA? Has he heard of libel?
  • Why does JH think that misappropriating Operation 40 with Alpha 66, and Operation Mongoose are irrelevant?
  • Why did JH claim he has been researching for 49 and 50 years at least 2-3 years before the 50th anniversary?
  • When has CTKA ever endorsed Barr McClellan, or Johnson and Hoover being plotters in the crime?
  • Why does JH blame CTKA for distributing his video when it was widely available years before CTKA reviewed it and Hankey was promoting it?
  • Why would Lisa Pease want to distribute JH work?
  • Why did JH not admit to sending his video to Alex Jones?
  • Why did JH hide his reply to Jim DiEugenio’s 20 mistakes he observed in the first half of his debate at "Murder Solved" on his website; furthermore, why did he delete Jim’s 20 point argument?
  • Why did JH feel the need to misrepresent Jim making up a comment JH actually made on Black Ops Radio?

Part 1

Part 3

Part 4

"The Dark Legacy of John Hankey"

"Onwards and Downwards with John Hankey"

Hankey/DiEugenio Debate Murder Solved

DiEugenio's Review Update of "Dark Legacy"

Coogan Reply to Fetzer at Deep Politics Forum

Last modified on Saturday, 22 October 2016 18:20
Seamus Coogan

Seamus Coogan is one of a number of JFK assassination researchers hailing from New Zealand and Australia.  He has devoted considerable effort to ferreting out and exposing unfounded and sensationalistic or far-fetched conspiratorial hypotheses.  His most notable contributions include those on John Hankey's JFK II, on Alex Jones, and on the Majestic Papers.  He  has also reviewed numerous books for this site.

Find Us On ...


Please publish modules in offcanvas position.