Jump to content
The Education Forum
James DiEugenio

The KGB and the JFK case

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

Steve,

With all due respect, since I've been a member here (off and on -- lol) since 2005, I'm not surprised at all that that's what you believe.

--  Tommy  :sun

 

EDIT:  Oh, wait a second.  You mean bad guys on both sides, right? 

Thomas,

 

Yes.

 

Steve Thomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Steve Thomas said:

Thomas,

 

Yes.

 

Steve Thomas

James won't appreciate your saying that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

James won't appreciate your saying that.

Thomas,

 

I would not want to speak for Jim, or anyone else; but I think, and I hope, that Jim and I respect each other enough to know that we can disagree with something on an intellectual level, without making it personal.

 

What I think is that just as there is a reason to suspect that there were elements within the CIA (or the American government) that were working at cross-purposes with each other, there is no reason not to suspect that there were elements within the KGB (or the Russian government) who were doing the same thing.

Palace intrigue as it were.

 

I try to look at things from a geopolitical perspective.

(Larry Hancock would probably tell me to get my head out of my_ _ _, but then I probably shouldn't presume to speak for him either.  *grin*

 

Steve Thomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Steve Thomas said:

Thomas,

 

I would not want to speak for Jim, or anyone else; but I think, and I hope, that Jim and I respect each other enough to know that we can disagree with something on an intellectual level, without making it personal.

 

What I think is that just as there is a reason to suspect that there were elements within the CIA (or the American government) that were working at cross-purposes with each other, there is no reason not to suspect that there were elements within the KGB (or the Russian government) who were doing the same thing.

Palace intrigue as it were.

 

I try to look at things from a geopolitical perspective.

(Larry Hancock would probably tell me to get my head out of my_ _ _, but then I probably shouldn't presume to speak for him either.  *grin*

 

Steve Thomas

OK

--  :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/2/2018 at 3:30 PM, James DiEugenio said:

...

8. In Mexico City, I mean please. What is the evidence that he even visited the Russian Embassy?  ....  But even if you buy the whole Passport to Assassination book, which I do not, where is the tie in between the Russians and Oswald in Dallas?  

...

James,


Strange, isn't it, that Nechiporenko, Yatsev, and Kostikov claimed that Oswald visited them on Friday, September 26, and the next day, too, at which time he became quite emotional and brandished a revolver, whereas a fourth Soviet "diplomat," Nikolai Leonov, (who admittedly worked in a different part of the building, didn't say anything about those meetings, but did say that HE ALONE had met one-on-one with Oswald on Sunday, September 29, after Oswald showed up unexpectedly during an embassy volleyball match, and that, yep, you guessed it, Oswald became emotional and brandished a revolver!

What's going on, here?  Is it an example of four guys who can't synchronize their tall tales, or did the FSB tell Leonov to jump in with his story at a late date just to confuse us and / or make it sound as though they were all lying / all somehow telling the truth?  

Is it possible that Leonov jumped in there to confirm what the first three and Nosenko said -- that Oswald was a crazy-dangerous guy -- AND to obviate with smoke and mirrors the possibility that he, himself, had ... (gasp) ... impersonated Oswald on Friday, September 27?

As regards your question about an Oswald - KGB tie in in Dallas, let me remind you, James, that CIA CI officer Edward Clare Petty (who unfortunately thought that JJA was a mole) believed, based on some WWII VENONA decrypts, that George DeMohrenschildt was a long-term KGB "illegal".

--  Tommy  :sun
 

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a good example of the differences in how some people evaluate evidence and also their knowledge of and interest in history.

I named ten pretty much indisputable observations which show that the KGB was not involved in the JFK case, including the fact that they themselves suspected a high level plot within the US government.  I could have gone even further than that.  For example: I think most of us understand that what happened in Chicago three weeks previous was either a dry run for Dallas, or an actual attempt to kill JFK.  What was the KGB connection to Thomas Vallee?  Was there a KGB double agent in the Chicago office of the Secret Service who squelched the inquiry and allowed Dallas to occur?

TG answers none of those points.  He chooses to say well, the blonde guy Azcue and Duran describes resembles this Russian.  To me this is about as reliable and credible as is his "Morales in the film" in New Orleans.  Put them together and their probability exponentially weakens not strengthens.  Simply because they are both so tenuous. He then, when Sandy shows another big hole in his concept, throws in a slur at Harvey and Lee.  Again, where did I use any of that in my opening salvo?  

TG then goes on to make an even more wild and unfounded claim, something that I had to read twice to understand. And I still have a hard time believing he wrote it.

Somehow whatever happened in TG's  version of the JFK murder, this somehow, some way aided the rise of Trump and Putin to their places in government today?  I mean did I read that right?  If I did, I almost fear for this forum.

Putin's rise to power in Russia is directly related to what happened in Russia beginning in the early nineties, and can be explained by two things that anyone who is interested in history can easily learn.  The first was the coup attempt against Gorbachev by the hardline communists who wished to thwart his attempts at Glasnost and Perestroika. This grievously weakened his position and gave the opening to the drunken fool Yeltsin.  Yeltsin was an utter and complete disaster, and one reason he was so was his attempt at the so called Shock Doctrine economic plan which was implemented by the late Yegor Gaidar.  (Maybe he was the guy in Mexico City?)  Gaidar--and later Anatoly Chubais--did two things: 1.) He drove much of Russia into extreme poverty, and 2.) He and Yeltsin now gave rise to an immensely wealthy plutocratic class that, in reverse Robin Hood (or Milton Friedman style), began to rape the country of its national wealth.  It was that fire sale that opened up Russia to all kinds of foreign interests, including American. In 1999, when Yeltsin was ailing and realized that he had pretty much left the country a hopeless catastrophe, he invited Putin into the government as a Deputy Prime Minister. And from there, when Yeltsin resigned, Putin became Acting President.  How any of that has anything to do with the JFK case is something that only TG, or maybe Max Boot, knows.

To  ignore it all, or say that somehow its directly related to Dallas 1963, that to me is to me nothing but utter and complete nonsense.  It is anti-historical, anti-intellectual, and as judges say, "utterly without merit".  

 

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

 

I named ten pretty much indisputable observations which show that the KGB was not involved in the JFK case ...

TG answers none of those points.  

 

James,

With all due respect.


Really?

I didn't respond to two parts of your #8?

Do I have to write a book in reply to each of your questions, and do it right now gosh darn it? 

Do I have to have a complete Trejo-like theory?

I'm not permitted to throw out there for consideration some facts and observations that don't directly refute, with your (hypocritically, imho) required level of stone-cold proof, your (imho) cherry-picked demands?

Is this a manipulated-by-you "debate"?

 

Shall I start my own thread, "Tommy's 'Stone-Cold Proof' That The Ruskies and (witting or unwitting) Oswald and Rogue Mid-Level CIA Dudes Did It By Dem Widdle Selves, Or Hey! Maybe Pacepa Was Right, After All, ... Or Maybe .....?"

(Say, that;s not a bad idea ... At least then I could "control" the discussion.)

 

Are you going to make me prove that planet earth is flat, James?

The Harvey and Lee Theory? (LOL)

That Putin did not arrange the 1999 Russian Apartment Bombings which indirectly brought him to power?

That Marina Prusakova's uncle wasn't an officer in the MVD?  That Oswald didn't live near a KGB school in Minsk?

 

Is this a medieval trial by water -- "Don't worry, if you drown, it means you weren't a witch, after all!" ?

 

--  Tommy  :sun

 

PS  How many "JFK Assassination Facts" will I have to rebut?

Ten?  A million?  

How about a compromise?  Say ... 500,000?

 

Aren't you glad that Petty thought JJA a mole?

 


 

 

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

Jim,

 

I can't see the Russian government being behind JFK's assassination coming after Kenney's speech on June 10th at American University.

I can see the possibility however, that there were those who thought rapproachement was a bad idea.

I envision a scenario where there were people who did not want the Cold War to end; who wanted the arms race to continue. It was too lucrative.

Now maybe my "envsions" are the result of too much LSD, I don't know; but it's kind of like fighting the the war in Afghanistan, but not eradicating the poppy fields.

 

Steve Thomas

I like this post. It's possible to see Angleton working with a faction of KGB. JFK probably wouldn't have found this possibility too far fetched, nor would Kruschchev. How's that Tommy? The evil evil evil entity is supranational, and Angleton is the point man, the master planner who answers to this as yet unnamed higher authority whose foot soldiers are drawn from CIA, KGB, Mossad, and the remnants of the third Reich. I'll name it the Fourth Reich, the ones who have bought us Trump and the Oligarchs. 

Edited by Paul Brancato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paul Brancato said:

I like this post. It's possible to see Angleton working with a faction of KGB. JFK probably wouldn't have found this possibility too far fetched, nor would Kruschchev. How's that Tommy? The evil evil evil entity is supranational, and Angleton is the point man, the master planner who answers to this as yet unnamed higher authority whose foot soldiers are drawn from CIA, KGB, Mossad, and the remnants of the third Reich. I'll name it the Fourth Reich, the ones who have bought us Trump and the Oligarchs. 

Well, OK - but what did the Soviets get out of an LBJ presidency.  Unless they wanted a war on China's doorstep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

I like this post. It's possible to see Angleton working with a faction of KGB. JFK probably wouldn't have found this possibility too far fetched, nor would Kruschchev. How's that Tommy? The evil evil evil entity is supranational, and Angleton is the point man, the master planner who answers to this as yet unnamed higher authority whose foot soldiers are drawn from CIA, KGB, Mossad, and the remnants of the third Reich. I'll name it the Fourth Reich, the ones who have bought us Trump and the Oligarchs. 

 

Paul,

Do I think Angleton was a KGB-controlled mole?

With all due respect ....... LMFAO.

( This may not be logically appropriate, but since I am responding to YOU, I'll go ahead and say it -- "Why in the world would he want to play second fiddle?" )

Play another reel for us now will you, Paul?

--  Tommy  :sun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one knows yet what happened in MC for certain.

There are many schools of thought on this are there not?

Do I have to list them?

OK, Oswald was there, an Oswald impersonator was there, no one was there.

My point is this:  What is important is evaluating the evidence in relation to the JFK case .  Which means how did it impact the events at that time?

We know the answer to that question, thanks to the ARRB act.  We can read it in the Douglass book, and several others.  LBJ fell for what the CIA sent up to Washington and what Angleton and Phillips released. Namely it was Oswald trying to get to Russia through Cuba. And that started the specter of WW III.  And that is what was used to scare the crap out of Warren to the point he did not even want to call any witnesses.  And that is in the declassified WC executive session transcripts.  I mean you have read this stuff right TG?  Or you do know about it secondhand I hope?  

See, that is called material evidence since it directly relates to the reason for the cover up.  And we have it on tape.  Now maybe you think there was a KGB agent in the White House who altered the tape recording?   Please explain your sourcing if you do think that?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Thomas Graves said:

 

Paul,

Do I think Angleton was a KGB-controlled mole?

With all due respect ....... LMFAO.

( This may not be logically appropriate, but since I am responding to YOU, I'll go ahead and say it -- "Why in the world would he want to play second fiddle?" )

Play another reel for us now will you, Paul?

--  Tommy  :sun

My impression was that JJA was blindsided by KGB and did not realize how severely CIA had become destabilized by them.  JJA was unable to properly assess Nosenko when he came into the picture and tortured him, trying to get information Nosenko simply did not have.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Pamela Brown said:

My impression was that JJA was blindsided by KGB and did not realize how severely CIA had become destabilized by them.  JJA was unable to properly assess Nosenko when he came into the picture and tortured him, trying to get information Nosenko simply did not have.  

Pamela,

With all due respect, it's evident that you haven't read Tennent H. Bagley's 35-page (2015  PDF) "Ghosts of the Spy Wars," much less his 2007 book, "Spy Wars."

Both are free to read on the Internet.

Or maybe you have, and you think Bagley's a xxxx?

--  Tommy  :sun

PS  Are you aware that, according to Bagley, he and CIA psychologist John Gittinger both witnessed Nosenko, near the "breaking point" twice, mutter to himself, "I can't tell them the truth, I can't tell them the truth ..."? 

As though he'd been KGB "MKULTRAed" before he was sent here?

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pamela:

Some background of what TG just wrote and also a correction.

Angleton was quite ready for Nosenko;  he was getting ready for him months in advance.  In fact, he had already created a large file on the man before Bagley brought him over.

See, Angleton bushwacked both Nosenko and Bagley.  Bagley originally believed Nosenko.  Angleton knew that.  So when Bagley came back  from Europe, Angleton sat him down in a room, stacked his file in front of him and made his case that Nosenko was a false defector.  And it worked.  Bagley bought into it and reversed field.

Why is this important?  Because this is what caused the entire imprisonment of Nosenko at the hands of Angleton, aided by Helms. Virtually every person who kept Nosenko imprisoned, and then psychologically tortured him, had been handpicked by Angleton's team.  It went on for three years, because Dirty Dick (my name for Helms) approved it.

Now, if Angleton already had his mind made up, and his whole intent was to be judge, jury and executioner, then what was the whole purpose of the three year ordeal?  Well, it was essentially a POW camp for Nosenko.  

Finally, after this rather despicable trial by torture, a vote was taken and Helms allowed a neutral party to examine the process.  Which is how we got the Hart Report, which was the initial step in  setting the man free.  Now this was a key point in Angleton's career, since most commentators look at it at the beginning of the end for him.  And Anlgeton's backers have always stated that the Hart Report only analyzed the torture aspect not Nosenko's story.  This is not true. Hart mentioned some of the problems with Nosenko's statements and he said that it was common with defectors to try to oversell themselves so they can get a better deal.  Bill Colby had already had a look at what Angleton had done in his unfettered state as provided to him by Helms and Dulles. Colby did not buy Angleton's methods or his ideas about the Cold War, which to him had essentially paralyzed the CIA.  Along with ruining several lives--which the CIA later on had to pay money to some of these innocent people Angleton had persecuted.

Even Mike Holzman, who is rather kind to Angleton his his biography, has to admit that Nosenko turned out to be one of the most valuable defectors the CIA had, much better than Golitsyn., 

As per Angleton vs Nosenko on LHO, I mean look, anyone who studies Oswald from his time in the marines, and even before, that is with Ferrie in the CAP, understands he was being groomed as a false defector.  (See Destiny Betrayed, second edition, Chapter 7, "On Instructions from his Government.")  The Soviets understood this instantly. Mainly because the CIA had been doing it with increasing frequency through the years, especially 1957-59. Plus Oswald was not a really well rehearsed fake defector.

 This is why they sent him to Minsk and then put a ring of intel around him. Is that how you recruit someone? I doubt it.

Its stuff like this that made Colby promise himself  that if he was ever in a position to terminate Angleton, he would do so.  And, thank God for us all, he did.  But it was a bit late for JFK. And Oswald.

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Pamela:

Some background of what TG just wrote and also a correction.

Angleton was quite ready for Nosenko;  he was getting ready for him months in advance.  In fact, he had already created a large file on the man before Bagley brought him over.

See, Angleton bushwacked both Nosenko and Bagley.  Bagley originally believed Nosenko.  Angleton knew that.  So when Bagley came back  from Europe, Angleton sat him down in a room, stacked his file in front of him and made his case that Nosenko was a false defector.  And it worked.  Bagley bought into it and reversed field.

Why is this important?  Because this is what caused the entire imprisonment of Nosenko at the hands of Angleton, aided by Helms. Virtually every person who kept Nosenko imprisoned, and then psychologically tortured him, had been handpicked by Angleton's team.  It went on for three years, because Dirty Dick (my name for Helms) approved it.

Now, if Angleton already had his mind made up, and his whole intent was to be judge, jury and executioner, then what was the whole purpose of the three year ordeal?  Well, it was essentially a POW camp for Nosenko.  

Finally, after this rather despicable trial by torture, a vote was taken and Helms allowed a neutral party to examine the process.  Which is how we got the Hart Report, which was the initial step in  setting the man free.  Now this was a key point in Angleton's career, since most commentators look at it at the beginning of the end for him.  And Anlgeton's backers have always stated that the Hart Report only analyzed the torture aspect not Nosenko's story.  This is not true. Hart mentioned some of the problems with Nosenko's statements and he said that it was common with defectors to try to oversell themselves so they can get a better deal.  Bill Colby had already had a look at what Angleton had done in his unfettered state as provided to him by Helms and Dulles. Colby did not buy Angleton's methods or his ideas about the Cold War, which to him had essentially paralyzed the CIA.  Along with ruining several lives--which the CIA later on had to pay money to some of these innocent people Angleton had persecuted.

Even Mike Holzman, who is rather kind to Angleton his his biography, has to admit that Nosenko turned out to be one of the most valuable defectors the CIA had, much better than Golitsyn., 

As per Angleton vs Nosenko on LHO, I mean look, anyone who studies Oswald from his time in the marines, and even before, that is with Ferrie in the CAP, understands he was being groomed as a false defector.  (See Destiny Betrayed, second edition, Chapter 7, "On Instructions from his Government.")  The Soviets understood this instantly. Mainly because the CIA had been doing it with increasing frequency through the years, especially 1957-59. Plus Oswald was not a really well rehearsed fake defector.

 This is why they sent him to Minsk and then put a ring of intel around him. Is that how you recruit someone? I doubt it.

Its stuff like this that made Colby promise himself  that if he was ever in a position to terminate Angleton, he would do so.  And, thank God for us all, he did.  But it was a bit late for JFK. And Oswald.

James,

With all due respect, all Angleton did was get feedback from Bagley (who worked in the separate "Soviet Russia" aka "Soviet Block" division) by suggesting to him and permitting him to read Golitsyn's file ( before Golitsyn started going "over the top" with his "Sino-Soviet Split" and "Prague Spring" theories, etc, not to mention his later evil, evil, evil, HONTEL-inspiring clues and accusations as to who might be a mole in U.S. intelligence).

Please do try to get your facts straight.

(It's interesting that Bagley, with info from JJA, "connected the dots" and convinced JJA that the recent defector, Polyakov, was a very strange looking fish indeed.  And what's really, really, really interesting is that at some point (probably after he was posted to Burma) Polyakov really DID start cooperating with CIA, but was snitched on by a yet-undiscovered mole in U.S. intel, recalled to Moscow, and executed.)

--  Tommy  :sun

 

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×