Jump to content
The Education Forum

Max Holland Says Enough!


Recommended Posts

I'd like to give Mr. Graves a pat on the back for contributing to this discussion without resorting to his bag of tricks. It's refreshing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Bagley was Angleton's man on Nosenko.

And he would stay that way during the entire three year ordeal.

From Mangold, page 193, " By April 1967. . . . The Fundamentalists led by Jim Angleton and Pete Bagley, had refused to loosen their grip..."

Helms was now advised to take the case away from Bagley and Angleton.  It was eventually turned over to Bruce Solie.(p. 194)

Everyone and their mother knows that the imprisonment and torture of Nosenko was started and run by Angleton; and Bagley was his man on the case during the three years Nosenko was locked  up.  Just look at the number of references in Mangold's book to Bagley. 

Your other statement about the SR division makes Bagley's statement about Oswald's false defection even stronger.  Because as Newman originally wrote in Oswald and the CIA, that is where the files on LHO should have gone when he arrived in Russia.(Newman, p. 27)  

This, of course, makes it even odder why you should remain silent on that point.

Bagley: Oswald was a false defector and his defection was preplanned and routed within the CIA.

Graves:  Sound of crickets in the night.

 

Ten minutes later: Even though Oswald was a false defector, hey the KGB killed Oswald.  I got it from Bagley. And those active measures he talks about is how we got Putin in collusion with Trump to get him elected.

Thus ignoring the fact that the whole Trump and Putin collusion story is now falling apart.  And also ignoring that by the end of his book, Newman had concluded that the whole CIA WW 3 scenario that did so much to stop a real inquiry was stage managed by Angleton who had the most control of all of Oswald's files at CIA. (pgs. 636-37)

But all of that is OK.  Why? Nosenko was not a real defector.

Whew.  What a detective.

 

 

James,

Bagley, who originally believed Nosenko to be a true double agent, eventually changed his mind and became "Angleton's man on Nosenko" because Angleton had wisely suggested in 1962 (soon after Nosenko had been interviewed in Geneva several times by Bagley and George Kisevalter) that he (Bagley) read the file on Golitsyn, a true defector who had come to the U.S. six months earlier, and who eventually helped the CIA and the intelligence services of some allied countries to uncover some important, previously unsuspected, and still active moles and spies.

This sharing of the Golitsyn file was the seminal act that helped Bagley and Miler, et al., in the Soviet Russia Division's Counterintelligence section (SR/CI) to start to connect the dots on Nosenko.

More to come ...

But for now, suffice it say that you would see what I mean if you were to read "Spy Wars."

--  Tommy  :sun

 

https://archive.org/details/SpyWarsMolesMysteriesAndDeadlyGames

 

 

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We know what the more to come is.

Short blond guy is the KGB agent and this was cooperated on with Duran.

Presto.  KGB- G2 plot.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, James DiEugenio said:

We know what the more to come is.

Short blond guy is the KGB agent and this was cooperated on with Duran.

Presto.  KGB- G2 plot.

 

 

James,

Nope, that's not what I'm going to post here as soon as I feel like it in the next day or so. 

So please "hold your horses."

Thanks.

--  Tommy  :sun

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Paz Marverde said:

Yes, Jim, but always "with all due respect" :D

 

Paz,

How would you like it if I started "covering" your longer posts, or even short but meaningful ones (if there are any; I don't know because I don't read your Permindex and Angleton-oriented threads) with one word, or one emoticon, or one sentence (two at the most) "posts" that add nothing to issue you're trying to get other members to read about or comment upon?

--  Tommy  :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Paz Marverde said:

Yes, Jim, but always "with all due respect" :D

Forgot.

But I give Mr. Graves credit, he is in good humor today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Forgot.

But I give Mr. Graves credit, he is in good humor today.

James,

Give me five minutes.

(Laughing Out Loud)

 

Believe it or not, I do hope you have a fantastic day.

(Hey, life is short.)

--  TG  :sun

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
On 3/18/2018 at 3:14 PM, James DiEugenio said:

Bagley was Angleton's man on Nosenko.

And he would stay that way during the entire three year ordeal.

From Mangold, page 193, " By April 1967. . . . The Fundamentalists led by Jim Angleton and Pete Bagley, had refused to loosen their grip..."

Helms was now advised to take the case away from Bagley and Angleton.  It was eventually turned over to Bruce Solie.(p. 194)

Everyone and their mother knows that the imprisonment and torture of Nosenko was started and run by Angleton; and Bagley was his man on the case during the three years Nosenko was locked  up.  Just look at the number of references in Mangold's book to Bagley. 

Your other statement about the SR division makes Bagley's statement about Oswald's false defection even stronger.  Because as Newman originally wrote in Oswald and the CIA, that is where the files on LHO should have gone when he arrived in Russia.(Newman, p. 27)  

This, of course, makes it even odder why you should remain silent on that point.

Bagley: Oswald was a false defector and his defection was preplanned and routed within the CIA.

Graves:  Sound of crickets in the night.

 

Ten minutes later: Even though Oswald was a false defector, hey the KGB killed Oswald.  I got it from Bagley. And those active measures he talks about is how we got Putin in collusion with Trump to get him elected.

Thus ignoring the fact that the whole Trump and Putin collusion story is now falling apart.  And also ignoring that by the end of his book, Newman had concluded that the whole CIA WW 3 scenario that did so much to stop a real inquiry was stage managed by Angleton who had the most control of all of Oswald's files at CIA. (pgs. 636-37)

But all of that is OK.  Why? Nosenko was not a real defector.

Whew.  What a detective (EDIT ALERT:  TG is.).

 


James,

 

After attending John Newman's presentation in San Francisco a few weeks ago, do you still believe Yuri Nosenko was a true defector?

 

 

 

 

Well, at least John convinced Peter Dale Scott that Nosenko was a false defector.

 

--  TG

 

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...