Thomas Graves

Question for moderators: Is the near-simultaneous posting, by one member (in this case Michael Clark), of the same document on three different threads within the rules of the Forum? Question for Michael: Will you now "cover" my legitimate question with your same "torture" document post, above, but of course with the notation "I should have mentioned that this document is part of the recent release," as you so covered my rebuttal to you on another Angleton-Nosenko type thread? -- T.G. Shall we have an oh-so-clever "bumping war"? Bump's in your court.

Probable against-the-rules "bump"; duly-noted and "screen-captured." -- T.G.

expanded with duly noted edit

Good on you, Michael! By the way, are you still counting the number of my edits? (Talk about a full-time job!) I feel badly about "baiting" you unto doing that, but hey, that's what The Agency told me to do ... -- T.G.

Yeah, Michael, I got that. Written in 1970, three years after (possible mole?) Richard Kovich and the Leonard McCoy - John Hart clutch had deviously subverted and controverted the true and accurate work and conclusions of Bagley, Scotty Miler, JJA, et al., regarding false defector Yuri Nosenko. BFD (Bunk Finely Disseminated) You are aware, aren't you, that former Army Intelligence analyst John Newman, author of Oswald and the CIA, has read Bagley's works and is sufficiently impressed by them to have given some presentations based on Spy Wars and Spymaster (the latter co-written with former KGB general, Sergei Kondrashev), and has even been able to convince the Venerable Bede, himself -- Peter Dale Scott -- that Nosenko was a false defector? In retrospect, then, given the situation that Bagley, Miler, and JJA, et al., were in vis-a-vis a possibly "programmed" Nosenko (who almost "broke" once btw), one could reasonably and humanely say that their subjecting him to a rather austere living environment, and ... gasp ... questioning him over and over again on certain points, and maybe even ... gasp ... doing so at all hours of the night and day, ... was justified, yes? I'll try to find and post here Bagley's detailed refutation of the "torture" claims, so in the meantime, why don't you just take an extra dose of that Gas-Ex , Michael? Because in my humble opinion, you're really starting to stink the place up. -- T.G.

Michael, It's likely that you, sir, are full of beans. Warning: almost a sentence fragment coming up: As are (or were, if deceased) Harrington, Leonard McCoy, John Hart, Bruce Solie, and Cleveland Cram, et al. Why don't you take some Gas-Ex and then read Bagley's Spy Wars, or at least his 35-page PDF Ghosts of the Spy Wars. Paul Brancato finally read the latter, and almost kinda thanked me for having suggested it to him, iirc. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08850607.2014.962362 Totally blew me away. -- T.G.

Yes, Paul, you're right. It was probably just an overreaction to James' insinuating that I'm a fascist and that I support genocide. Shall I delete it? Regardless, do you have anything of substance to say about my post? -- T.G.

James, What does any of this have to do with (admittedly corrupt, but hey what do you expect after 70 years of institutionalized cronyism?) Yeltsin's retaining a couple of American political advisers in 1996 to help to help him spiff up his image and improve the palatability of his message in an election campaign? As regards what I read, I try to limit myself to those news sources which have, regardless of their left-or right bias, "High" factual reporting according to mediabiasfactcheck. com. Needless to say your beloved Global Research based "Information Clearing House" isn't one of them because GR itself is categorized as being "Conspiracy and Pseudoscience" and as having only "Mixed" factual reporting. Finally, regarding that evil, evil Tennent H. Bagley, if he were alive he'd probably say to you, "If it's true as you say, James, that 'the Cold War died in 1985,' why then did the Soviets/Russians continue to wage so many "active measures" and "strategic deception" counterintelligence operations against us and our allies?" -- T.G. PS Genocide? You wanna talk genocide? Okay then, how about what EDIT ALERT: your buddy Stalin did to the Ukrainians in the 1930s, James? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor (To give just one example.)

Yes, He's pretty good at "turning the tables" like that, too, when he gets in a tight spot. -- T.G.

Paul, Please freshen my memory. Which one was that? Something to do with evil, evil, evil de Vosjoli and that evil, evil, evil "Brandy"? Which past grievances on this forum should I forget about, and in regards to whom? -- T.G. You mean you don't come to the world famous JFK Assassination Debate Forum to debate, but to learn, Paul? Fantastic! Have any idea how much teaching, aka debating, showing, linking, baiting, cajoling, and outright arguing with you and others I had to do to get you to read "Ghosts Wars," Paul? (I'm proud of you, by the way, and I truly mean that; I didn't think you would ever read it.)

Good work, "Davy." I learned a long time ago that it's best "not to confuse James with the facts," because all you do is expend a lot of energy proving or disproving something to him (which he rarely if ever acknowledges, btw), and then he disappears for awhile, be it a month, a year, or five years, only to come back to the Forum eventually and reassert the same wrong "fact," all over again. I mean, I mean, I mean, to my way of thinking, it's almost as though Vladimir Putin trained him to do that! -- T.G.

How have I "baited" James on this thread, Paul? I mean, maybe I have, I don't know. Is that a bad thing to do? If so, does he ever do that sort of thing? What's the official definition of "to bait," in the context of an Internet forum on a controversial subject, anyway? To trap somebody through rhetoric and logic into a position which they are unable or unwilling to try to defend? Don't they teach that in high school debating classes? -- T.G. PS How about James' insisting on another thread a few months ago that Rudolf Hess was not a spy for the Soviets, and telling me quite rudely, "You don't know enough about the Hess spy case to be able to debate it intelligently with me, so I'm going to leave now," or words to that effect? Given that little pleasantry by James, what do you think about his subsequent disappearing and refusing to reply to me when I posted a few days later that I'd done some research and found out that many historians, including our very own John Simpkin, now believe that Hess was a long-term spy? Which James is yet to respond to. You tell me, Paul, was that "baiting"on James' part, or did I end up winning that little debate?

James, In case you haven't noticed, life is chock-a-block full of "either/or" choices. "Would you like another serving of apple pie a-la mode, or another half-gallon of chocolate pudding, Jimmy? I'm sorry, sweetie, but you can't have both this time. Aww, don't cry, honey. Doctors orders, not mine." Bummer, huh? So, I ask you once again, James: Would you have preferred to see the Communist Party's candidate, Gennady Zyuganov, win the 1996 Russian presidential election? Yes, or No, James? Da? Really?? "Zyuganov enthusiastically supported the (2014) annexation of Crimea by Russia as well as the (2014) pro-Russian insurgency (in eastern Ukraine)." -- Wikipedia Also, James, did Boris Yeltsin hire those evil, evil American advisers, or did your favorite bugbear, the The Deep State / National Security State/ Military Industrial Intelligence Cabal, force them upon him? (Don't run away and hide, now, like you do all too often.) -- T.G.

Cute avoidance reaction, James. Unbearable stress always make you yawn? Regardless, guess what??? I just now skimmed those two precious articles I promised you I would read! So, lemme ask you a question: Would you have preferred that the Communist had won that Russian election, James? Why? -- T.G.

James, I know you aren't paranoid or anything, but have you considered the possibility that, as regards your precious newspaper articles, that I am neither "underhanded" (isn't that a synonym for "dishonest," James?) nor "untrustworthy" (isn't that another synonym for "dishonest," James?), but that I am just pain too lazy and/or bogged down with other things to have read them, yet? Or is that a too mundane, and therefore implausible, explanation for you? I promise that I will, though, James, but probably not the article you posted from the "Global Research" affiliate or subsidiary or whatever it is. See my earlier post as to why that is the case. In the meantime, please don't flatter yourself by fantasizing that my life resolves around that highly gaseous planet, "Jumbo-Duh." Somewhere, way WAY WAY out there in the outer solar system. -- T.G.

James, Maybe you've even worse than Morley, come to think of it. I mean, if that's even possible. Where in the hell have I ever even suggested that Phillips and Dulles were "fine people"? As regards the "evil things" they undoubtedly did in their jobs, do you think they were up against Boy Scouts or The Little Sisters Of The Poor in trying to fend off and/or subvert the KGB and the GRU? I gotta ask you James, does Vladimir Putin pay you, or do you spread the garbage you do for free? -- T.G. PS It's interesting that, in the Part 2 video that I watched, you couldn't even bring yourself to clap for John Newman at the end of his recent "Spy Wars" presentation in San Francisco. Was it because he'd convinced Peter Dale Scott that Yuri Nosenko was a false defector, after all?

DiEugenio posted: Then, (after supporting Boris Yeltsin during the 1993 crisis in the Kremlin -- T.G.) Bill Clinton went even further with directly intervening in the 1996 election with advisors and tons of money. I guess Bagley does not mention this so you do not know about it. How about this then: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/46233.htm >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> James, You gotta be kidding me. INFORMATION CLEARING HOUSE? I mean, I mean, I mean .... isn't that put out by ... gasp ... GLOBAL RESEARCH? Oh My God, I think I'm gonna die this time. Somebody bring me an oxygen tank, quick! https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/global-research/ -- T.G.

James, You haven't read that "CIA guy's" book yet, have you? And you never will, will you? Undersized gonads, James, or "don't need to"? Already got the straight skinny from the likes of RT and Oliver Stone? -- T.G.

James, Sorry, ... uhh ... you showed me what? Up? Hysterical Laughing Out Loud! OMG, Gimme a minute to catch my breath! ........ Okay, .... whew! Dang, I almost passed out from lack oxygen there for a minute..... ....... Regardless, (gasp, ... gasp ...) care to return to that thread in which we were talking about Rudolf Hess? How about Nosenko, then? Wanna "debate" some more on Nosenko, James? Fedora? Okay, then, how about how the KGB uncovered Popov? Penkovsky? Aww, come on, James. I promise not to work you over too bad.... I mean, you do have medical insurance, don't you?

Huh? Regardless, the part I deleted was a very interesting, indeed, accusation coming from James "Full Disclosure" DiEugenio. (sarcasm) -- T.G. Post Script: James is nearly always almost as bad in that regard as is his (in my humble opinion) intellectually dishonest "bud," Jefferson Morley, is in his abomination "The Ghost". Seen my one-star review of it on Amazon, yet?

Geez Tommy, would these qualify as Bagley's "active measures". As per Varnell, the CIA redid the plan at JFK's request in mid March. He thought it looked too much like a World War II operation. This information is contained in the declassified Kirkpatrick Report. Which is still the best compendium of information on the Bay of Pigs that I know of. (See Peter Kornbluh, Bay of Pigs Declassified, pp 125-27) James, Where do you get your "info"? ZeroHedge? Or is it too far to the Right for you? -- T.G.

Wow, I didn't realize that Castro's hit men and/or the Ruskies "triangulated" like that. -- T.G.

Cliff, Funny, I thought we were talking about someone whose name is mentioned in the title of this thread, and whether or not the cumulative, synergistic effects of 90-years of Ruski "active measures" counterintelligence operations, interwoven with 58 years of highly successful "strategic deception" counterintelligence operations (both types waged against the U.S. and, uhh ....THE WEST in general), could have, you know, kinda "paved the way," "plowed the field," "sown the seeds", however you want to put it, and enabled a bigger impact on the way our 2016 Presidential Election turned out than some of the most recent "active measures" active measures waged against us (e.g. the actions of Cozy Bear, Fancy Bear, Guccifer 2.0, Julian Assange, Putin's legions of professional Sanint Petersburg-based trolls, et al.,) ... would have had, otherwise, i.e., without the said "plowing of the fields"? But somewhere along the way, our widdle "debate's" God-given internal dialectics turned it into something more "whataboutism"- like in nature. "But, but, Tommy, our homegrown and evil, evil,evil Deep State has been screwing the Ruskies for eons!" Imagine that. -- T.G.

James, OMG. I mean, I mean. When you say "bombed the Kremlin," are you referring to the 1999 "Russian Apartment Bombings" (which bombings, none of them within Moscow's city limits and therefore nowhere near "The Kremlin," by the way, which killed 300 Russian citizens and led to the imposition of martial law, the assumption of the presidency by Putin, etc, etc, and which bombing were traced to Putin's favorite charity organization, the FSB (you know, the successor, along with the SVR, to the KGB, the NKVD, the MGB, the ...) ? Is that what you're referring to? -- T.G.

Bummer, dude. And evil, evil, evil America was the only country whose "businessmen" screwed with them? Nothing to say in response to my highly informative post, Cliff? I thought we were talking about the efficacy of Russia's and the U.S.'s counterintelligence ops against each other. The biggest success for the former, imho, went down on 11/08/2016 in the latter country. -- T.G.