QUOTE (John Simkin @ Dec 5 2004, 09:02 AM)
QUOTE (Antti Hynonen @ Dec 3 2004, 07:26 AM)
Shanet and others,
Check out this page on John Simkin's Spartacus site, and also read the Angleton, and other links on this page.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/SSnosenko.htmThanks for the publicity. I have been meaning to update my page on Nosenko for some time. I have done so this morning. It is worth following the links from this page. It is especially important to look at the role Anatoli Golitsin played in this.
I think the Nosenko case is a much under-researched area of the JFK assassination.
Yuri Nosenko was deputy chief of the Seventh Department of the KGB. His main responsibility was the recruitment of foreign spies. In June 1962 Nosenko made contact with the CIA in Geneva. He said he was in urgent need of money and was willing to sell secrets to the West. He added he did not want to defect because he was unwilling to leave his wife and children behind in the Soviet Union.
Nosenko, like Anatoli Golitsin, who had defected in December, 1961, he provided evidence that John Vassall was a Soviet agent. However, most of his evidence undermined that given by Golitsin. This included Golitsin's claim that a senior figure in the Admiralty was a spy.
When Golitsin had been interviewed he had claimed the KGB would be so concerned about his defection, they would attempt to convince the CIA that the information he was giving them would be completely unreliable. He predicted that the KGB would send false defectors with information that contradicted what he was saying. The CIA were now uncertain whether to believe Golitsin or Nosenko.
In January 1964 Nosenko contacted the CIA and said he had changed his mind and was now willing to defect to the United States. He claimed that he had been recalled to Moscow to be interrogated. Nosenko feared that the KGB had discovered he was a double-agent and once back in the Soviet Union would be executed.
Nosenko arrived in the United States on 14th February, 1964. However, soon afterwards, Nosenko was undermined by the US National Security Agency who had been monitoring communications between Moscow and Geneva. It discovered that Nosenko had lied about being recalled to the Soviet Union. He was now taken to a CIA detention cell and after extensive interrogation he admitted the story about him being recalled was untrue.
Nosenko claimed that he had important information about the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. He told the CIA that he had been the KGB officially who had personally handled the case of Lee Harvey Oswald. After interviewing Oswald it was decided that he was not intelligent enough to work as a KGB agent. They were also concerned that he was "too mentally unstable" to be of any use to them. Nosenko added that the KGB had never questioned Oswald about information he had acquired while a member of the U.S. Marines. This surprised the CIA as Oswald had worked as a Aviation Electronics Operator at the Atsugi Air Base in Japan.
Members of the Warren Commission were pleased to hear this information as it helped to confirm the idea that Oswald had acted alone and was not part of a Soviet conspiracy to kill John F. Kennedy. CIA chief of intelligence, James Jesus Angleton, did not believe parts of Nosenko's story. He was supported by another KGB defector, Anatoli Golitsin. He had worked in some of the same departments as Nosenko but had never met him. After being interviewed for several days Nosenko admitted that some aspects of his story were not true. For example, Nosenko had previously said he was a lieutenant colonel in the KGB. He confessed that he had exaggerated his rank to make himself attractive to the CIA. However, initially he had provided KGB documents that said Nosenko was a lieutenant colonel.
The story was further complicated by the fact that another Soviet KGB defector under FBI control (code name Fedora) corroborated Nosenko's story. Therefore, if Nosenko was lying, it meant that Fedora was also a disinformation agent sent to the United States to confuse the security agencies. Nosenko was given two lie detector tests by the CIA. Both suggested he was lying about Lee Harvey Oswald.
The CIA now decided to put Nosenko under intense physical physical and psychological pressure. This involved him being kept in solitary confinement for 1,277 days. A light was left burning in his unheated cell for twenty-four hours a day and he was given nothing to read and his guards were ordered not to speak to him. However, Nosenko did not crack and insisted that Oswald was not a KGB agent.
James Jesus Angleton, chief of the CIA's counter-intelligence section, believed that Anatoli Golitsin was a genuine double-agent but argued that Nosenko was part of a disinformation campaign. However, Richard Helms (CIA) and J. Edgar Hoover (FBI) believed Nosenko and considered Golitsin was a fake.
Nosenko was eventually released and was given a false identity. He became an adviser to the CIA and the FBI on a salary of more than $35,000 a year. He was also given a lump sum of $150,000 as payment for his ordeal.
What was therefore going on? Nosenko told a great many lies and is now seen as a disinformation agent. If that was the case, Fedora was also a disinformation agent.
What were the KGB up to? There is two possible explanations. (1) The KGB was involved in the assassination of JFK. (2) The KGB was not involved in the assassination but feared that the American government would use this invented conspiracy as an excuse to invade Cuba. Therefore Nosenko was sent to America to convince the CIA that this was not the case.
I believe the second of these options. It clearly made no political sense at all for the Soviets to assassinate JFK. What is interesting is the desire of the CIA and FBI to believe Nosenko. This is especially true of the decision by the KGB not to interrogate Oswald about his knowledge of the U-2 plane. This is of course nonsense. So also is the claim that Oswald was not intelligent enough to work as a double-agent.
We therefore have to assume that Oswald was in fact a triple agent. That is to say, he was sent to the Soviet Union by the CIA as a disinformation agent. This involved him convincing the Soviets he was willing to return to the United States as a spy.
However, when he returned to the States he once again became a CIA/FBI agent. If he had been a Soviet spy he would never have associated himself with left-wing groups in America. However, when Oswald was arrested they became convinced that he had been set up by the FBI/CIA in order to instigate an invasion of Cuba. Sending Nosenko to the West was a desperate attempt to stop this happening. However, unknown to the Soviets, LBJ had already decided not to invade Cuba and instead was involved in covering up his connections with the KGB and CIA. That leaves us with the question why? I have attempted to answer that with my seminar on LBJ.
This analysis raises another important issue, If Nosenko was a disinformation agent, Anatoli Golitsin was a true KGB defector. Therefore it is interesting to see what other information he supplied. It included the claim that Kim Philby, Donald Maclean and Guy Burgess were members of a Ring of Five agents in MI5. We now know that was true. Golitsin also provided information about two spies in the Admiralty. Using the information supplied by Golitsin, MI5 came to the conclusion that one of these men could be John Vassall, a 37-year-old clerk working in the Admiralty. He was later convicted as a spy.
Golitsin also suggested that W. Averell Harriman had been a Soviet spy, while he was the U.S. Ambassador to the Soviet Union during the Second World War. Angleton was convinced by this story as he knew someone was involved in spying the negotiations that took place between Winston Churchill and Franklin D. Roosevelt. However, other CIA officers thought the story ridiculous and Harriman was appointed by LBJ as ambassador-at-large for Southeast Asian affairs.
Jim Marrs has a very good section in his book Crossfire on Nosenko. He quotes a passage from a book by Arkady Shevchenko (Breaking With Moscow). It is worth reading this passage very carefully.
In November 1963, President Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas. Everyone in the (Soviet) mission was stunned and confused, particularly when there were rumors that the murder had been Soviet-inspired... Our leaders would not have been so upset by the assassination if they had planned it and the KGB would not have taken upon itself to venture such a move without Politburo approval. More important, Khrushchev's view of Kennedy had changed. After Cuba, Moscow perceived Kennedy as the one who had accelerated improvement of relations between the two countries. Kennedy was seen as a man of strength and determination, the one thing that Kremlin truly understands and respects. In addition, Moscow firmly believed that Kennedy's assassination was a scheme by "reactionary forces" within the United States seeking to damage the new trend in relations. The Kremlin ridiculed the Warren Commission's conclusion that Oswald had acted on his own as the sole assassin. There was in fact widespread speculation among Soviet diplomats that Lyndon Johnson, along with the CIA and the Mafia, had masterminded the plot. Perhaps one of the most potent reasons why the U.S.S.R. wished Kennedy well was that Johnson was anathema to Khrushchev. Because he was a southerner, Moscow considered him a racist (the stereotype of any American politician from below the Mason Dixon line), an anti-Soviet and anti-Communist to the core. Further, since Johnson was from Texas, a center of the most reactionary forces in the United States, according to the Soviets, he was associated with the big-time capitalism of the oil industry, also known to be anti-Soviet.
It is worth considering the possibility of KGB involvement in the assassination. Joseph Trento, the journalist who reported the story that E Howard Hunt may have been in Dallas on 11-22-63, wrote a book, The Secret History of the CIA. In that book Trento claims that a faction in the KGB helped orchestrate or sponsor the Kennedy assassination was also behind the peaceful ouster of Khruschev a year later. His theory at least merits consideration.
I have always considered it anamalous to argue that: (1) LHO was an agent of US intelligence; (2) LHO was merely a patsy; and (3) the CIA was behind the assassination. If LHO was indeed a US intelligence asset, it would be foolhardy for the CIA to use him as a patsy. Would be more likely the planners were anti-CIA, eg KGB, who knew LHO was a CIA agent.
Or, the possibility that the assassination was planned by someone who wanted to blame it on Castro and who did not know that LHO was a CIA agent, e.g. for instance anti-Castro Cubans.
If Nosenko was a disinformation agent and Golitsin was genuine, it does not necessarily mean that LHO was a KGB agent, of course. Nosenko might have been a false defector on a KGB mission but intended by the KGB to convince the US of what was in fact true: the assassination was not a KGB operation. On the other hand, if Nosenko was a false defector, the possibility cannot be discounted that the information he was supplying was false.
John states that it made no sense for the KGB to assassinate JFK. Consider this chronology, however:
(1) Late March a Soviet ship is sunk in Havana harbor.
(2) Late April Castro and a large entourage travel to Moscow and spend four or five weeks there.
(3) On the same day that Cubela recontacts the CIA in Brazil, Castro goes to the Brazilian Embassasy in Havana to warn about American efforts to kill Cuban leaders.
(4) On October 29, 1963 Desmond Fitzgerald advises Cubela that he is a personal emissary of Robert Kennedy and that RFK support's Cubela's plans to overthrow Castro, plans that involve the assassination of Castro. Helms told Fitzgerald he could make this representation without clearing it with RFK.
(5) Obviously, Cubela's plan was a violation of JFK's agreement to keep US hands of Cuba if the Soviets withdrew the missiles.
(6) Within a month JFK is dead.
(7) According to Joseph Califano, who was working on anti-Castro operations for JFK, after the assassination LBJ ordered Califano to stop the anti-Castro operations.
(8) While in prison in 1959, Trafficante was visited by (among others, presumably) Jack Ruby and Rolando Cubela.
(9) Add to this the strange saga of Gilberto Lopez, who came to Key West from Cuba in 1961, but around the time that Castro and crew were in Moscow, moved to Tampa (home, of course, of Mr. Trafficante). Lopez obtained a visa to visit Mexico for fourteen days, and he entered Mexico from Texas on November 23. A few days later, he flew to Cuba, never to return to the U.S.
Who was the primary beneficiary of the JFK assassination? Well, it may have saved LBJ jail time but, arguably, the man who benefited the most was Fidel Castro, becaue it saved his LIFE. I mean, sooner or later one of the CIA-sponsored assassination efforts against Castro would have probably succeeded.
If this scenario (obviously a hypothetical but one consistent with many of the facts) is correct, how could the KGB be assured that LBJ would not retaliate if KGB or Cuban involvement was suspected? Well, if it looked like events were heading in that direction, did the KGB have evidence through Cubela that JFK's brother had personally endorsed plans to kill Castro?
Did Castro have motive to kill JFK? Yes. Was the motivation "retaliation" for past US efforts to kill him? Well, since the efforts were continuing, and did so despite Castro's Sept 7, 1963 warning, wouldn't the motive be more properly classified as "self defense"? Understand this motive works whether or not JFK and RFK were in fact apprised of the CIA assassination efforts. What matters is, if Cubela was indeed a double agent whose allegiance was to Castro, through Cubela Castro had reason to believe (whether correctly or not) that the Kennedy brothers had personally endorsed his assassination.
This is a scenario that fits some of the facts in the assassination. I would like to find out what basis Trento has for asserting that a faction within the KGB sponsored the JFK assassination (he even names names of KGB officials involved).
In any event, I submit it bears some consideration that Trento had information that supported the story he reports in his book.