David Josephs Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 (edited) On 2/20/2018 at 12:17 PM, Pamela Brown said: Agent Hosty said to me that when he asked LHO about going to MC he became enraged. That at least tells me there was something of significance going on there. Indeed there was Pamela.... And until anyone can refute the ID from both ODIO sisters... our little spy getting caught in the midst of spying would get me pretty hot too... All he had to do was buy a 3 or 4 part ticket in New Orleans to and from Mexico City to Dallas... even if he didn't go, at least there would have been a record... there is literally no information on Oswald leaving New Orleans - which would dovetail nicely into his being driven off by 2 Cubans. Edited May 24, 2018 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said: Yeah, that Jim, he's a real live wire! Sandy said: What I can't understand is why the Soviets would want to assassination Kennedy. I mean, if he was such a pain in the xxx, why not just wait for his term(s) to end? I can't believe that Khrushchev and his comrades at the Kremlin would be so stupid as to kill an American president. Talk about a death wish. Why do you think the Soviets would want to kill Kennedy? Sandy's right. It ignores what was really happening. The retreat from the brink in the Missile Crisis, the correspondences between Kennedy and Khrushev, the Nuclear Test ban Treaty, the American University speech. And the historic accounts of insider Kremlin response to it. There are things that are mind boggling about the Kennedy Assassination. So maybe there's no wonder that there's always "this 1+1 has be 3" thinking that's always lurking behind the scenes. Tommy, I understand you implore everyone to read these books. Just like Jim D. But I probably never will. And just because some theory is cleverly put together in some book is not going to change my life about it. So I look at the bottom line, and your theory posits that the Soviet Union killed JFK, and with all due respect Tommy, I'd be more inclined to believe Paul T's theory. At least there, is legitimate motive. But there is no shortage of other people here who are curious, and want to put in the time to really understand as well as argue with your theory, and share their theories. And for that, I'd imagine you gotta feel good. Kirk, With all due respect, the "books" I'm imploring everybody to read, Bagley's "Spy Wars" and his 35-page follow-up PDF "Ghosts of the Spy Wars," do not speculate or theorize about the JFK assassination. They simply show, in great (and sometimes necessarily convoluted) detail how we've been penetrated many times over the years by incredibly sophisticated and long-term Soviet and Russian counterintelligence operations, and that at the time of Bagley's writing (2014 for the PDF, iirc) there was still at least one highly-placed "mole" in U.S. Intel. The book in particular proves that Yuri Nosenko was a false defector, sent here to discredit Golitsyn's early leads, *AND*, apparently, to nullify any U.S. suspicion that KGB might have had something to do with the assassination. Problem is, Nosenko was so "over the top" in his denials of possible JFK assassination involvement as to cast said denials in a rather strange light. Question: Why are so many JFK Assassination Debate forum members so staunchly pro-Nosenko (and, concomitantly, so staunchly anti pre-1964-or-so Golitsyn)? Because to believe that Nosenko was a true defector is to "confirm" that that evil, evil, torturing James Angleton was a very sick man at best and an evil, evil JKF Assassination Mastermind/Traitor at worst? And that to disbelieve in Nosenko is tantamount to admitting NOT ONLY that James Jesus Angleton and Tennent H. Bagley, working in two independent-from-each-other CIA counterintelligence divisions or departments, might actually have been "on to something" regarding the extent of KGB - GRU penetrations and recruitments (and how darned good the Ruskies were at interweaving "active measures counterintelligence" ops with "strategic deception" ops (since 1958)), but also somehow tantamount to conceding that the Ruskies MUST have killed JFK through their evil, evil agent, Lee Harvey Oswald? (lol) Question: Why do so many Forum readers refuse to read "Spy Wars" and "Ghosts of the Spy Wars"? It think I know the answer: Because they fear that the book and/or the PDF would upset their worldview "applecart," and they just don't want to find out how wrong and misguided Hart, McCoy, Helms, Colby, Turner, Solie, Cramm, et al., *might* have been in their analyzing and interpreting and selectively choosing and spinning "the facts" in coming to their "incubus"-killing conclusion that (hooray!) ... Yuri Nosenko WAS a true defector, after all! (sigh) -- Tommy Edited February 20, 2018 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirk Gallaway Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 38 minutes ago, David Josephs said: Indeed there was Pamela.... And until anyone can refute the ID from both ODIO sisters... our little spy getting caught in the midst of spying would get me pretty hot too... All he had to do was buy a 3 or 4 part ticket in New Orleans to and from Mexico City to Dallas... even if he didn't go, at least there would have been a record... there is literally no information on Oswald leaving New Orleans - which would dovetail nicely into his being driven off by 2 Cubans. David, I remembered this quote of Hoover , to LBJ. and the first sentence is: " "Ok, but I hope you are not being taken in." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 (edited) 27 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said: Why do so many Forum readers refuse to read "Spy Wars" and "Ghosts of the Spy Wars"? Because you're mixing the history of Soviet/Russian penetration with a notion none of us can swallow, that the Russkies whacked Jack. Just because the Kremlin wanted to dissuade the Yanks from thinking they'd overthrown our government doesn't mean they did it. The first word that Oswald was a lone gunman came from McGeorge Bundy, from the Situation Room at the White House. The autopsy had a bunch of top military men observing. Did the Soviets control Skull and Bones Bundy and the generals? Edited February 20, 2018 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 (edited) 30 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said: David, I remembered this quote of Hoover , to LBJ. and the first sentence is: " "Ok, but I hope you are not being taken in." I'm sorry Kirk... you've confused me... the text was written on the memo above, not said to LBJ... The memo is discussing CIA domestic operations... you think this went from Hoover to LBJ? or are the comments for the TO: and FROM: ?? Edited February 20, 2018 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirk Gallaway Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 No you're right David, it was to a "subordinate". It is: "Ok, but I hope you are not being taken in. I can't forget the CIA withholding the French espionage activities in USA nor the false story re Oswald's trip to Mexico City, only to mention ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said: Because you're mixing the history of Soviet/Russian penetration with a notion none of us can swallow, that the Russkies whacked Jack. Just because the Kremlin wanted to dissuade the Yanks from thinking they'd overthrown our government doesn't mean they did it. ..... Cliff, Exactly one of the points I (rather obliquely) made in my post (which I edited several times before I'd read your very perceptive remark). Perhaps you could read my post again and see if you can "catch" it? Thanks, -- Tommy Edited February 20, 2018 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted February 20, 2018 Author Share Posted February 20, 2018 (edited) How about this instead: Why does TG rigorously ignore things like Angleton and the Hunt Memorandum? Why does he also ignore one of the most incriminating statements anyone in this case ever made: "A mansion has many rooms, I was not privy to who struck John." ? Why does he also ignore the routing of Oswald's files, the delay of the 201 file opening, and Betsy Wolf's work on that subject for the HSCA, which was recently declassified? In fact, why does he ignore the new files and instead wants us to read something by Bagley? Which TG actually thinks explains the 2016 election. I mean talk about Buck Turgidson. As Sandy Larsen has just shown, Angleton was very likely making up BS stories ten years later to somehow substantiate this Leonov or Leontov or whatever tale you have been trying to sell here as assiduously as PT has been trying to sell his Walker theory. Does it bother you at all, that on top of the three points above that you ignore, that JJA was selling snake oil to congress to further the very wacky idea you are trying to market here? Or that he worked with Epstein to turn the Baron into a Russian agent to further that nutty concept? When in fact, it was J Walton Moore who asked DeM to introduce himself to Oswald? And I don't have to tell you about the timing of that death do I? Or Mark Lane's interview with the US attorney Mr. Bloodworth? As for JFK being a hawk, I was not being a live wire at all. In all of those instances I described, Kennedy resisted what the real hawks wanted him to do. And Varnell is wrong about Cabell and the Bay of Pigs. When I interviewed Marchetti in his office in Virginia he told me that Cabell wanted him to create a false report about MIGS strafing the beach .(This is mild?) Nixon also advised JFK to call it a beachhead and then invade. My argument stands. In all of these situations--and in addition to that in Congo, and the Dominican Republic, and Indonesia--JFK was pretty much the one guy who tried to stand up for the Third World nationalist cause against anti communist hysteria. And in almost each and every instance, that policy was altered by LBJ and then torn asunder by Nixon and Kissinger. So on it most fundamental level, the Bagley concept has simply no credibility or sustainability in either its theoretical construct or in evidentiary fact. Especially since Sandy has now shown that the Leonov/Leontov angle appears to be another fabrication by your buddy Angleton. Or are you also going to say the reactions by both Castro and Krushchev were carefully staged? As were the findings of their intel agencies. Edited February 20, 2018 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 Jim... I do believe this tactic is simply to get a rise out of people.... especially you since you're educated and knowledgeable about the subject and tommy it appears, has very little else to do. I find it a bit hard to believe this is the result of short term memory loss, a side-effect of a medication, abject ignorance, or RCPS - Repeated Clueless Post Syndrome... It takes a real effort to ignore everything and parrot the same tired and incorrect information, even when it is your own brain child... Why say in 2 words what you can post in 50? Why learn ANYTHING when you can post and annoy half dozen people... FUN! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 (edited) On 2/20/2018 at 3:02 PM, James DiEugenio said: How about this instead: Why does TG rigorously ignore things like Angleton and the Hunt Memorandum? Why does he also ignore one of the most incriminating statements anyone in this case ever made: "A mansion has many rooms, I was not privy to who struck John." ? Why does he also ignore the routing of Oswald's files, the delay of the 201 file opening, and Betsy Wolf's work on that subject for the HSCA, which was recently declassified? In fact, why does he ignore the new files and instead wants us to read something by Bagley? Which TG actually thinks explains the 2016 election. I mean talk about Buck Turgidson. As Sandy Larsen has just shown, Angleton was very likely making up BS stories ten years later to somehow substantiate this Leonov or Leontov or whatever tale you have been trying to sell here as assiduously as PT has been trying to sell his Walker theory. Does it bother you at all, that on top of the three points above that you ignore, that JJA was selling snake oil to congress to further the very wacky idea you are trying to market here? Or that he worked with Epstein to turn the Baron into a Russian agent to further that nutty concept? When in fact, it was J Walton Moore who asked DeM to introduce himself to Oswald? And I don't have to tell you about the timing of that death do I? Or Mark Lane's interview with the US attorney Mr. Bloodworth? As for JFK being a hawk, I was not being a live wire at all. In all of those instances I described, Kennedy resisted what the real hawks wanted him to do. And Varnell is wrong about Cabell and the Bay of Pigs. When I interviewed Marchetti in his office in Virginia he told me that Cabell wanted him to create a false report about MIGS strafing the beach .(This is mild?) Nixon also advised JFK to call it a beachhead and then invade. My argument stands. In all of these situations--and in addition to that in Congo, and the Dominican Republic, and Indonesia--JFK was pretty much the one guy who tried to stand up for the Third World nationalist cause against anti communist hysteria. And in almost each and every instance, that policy was altered by LBJ and then torn asunder by Nixon and Kissinger. So on it most fundamental level, the Bagley concept has simply no credibility or sustainability in either its theoretical construct or in evidentiary fact. Especially since Sandy has now shown that the Leonov/Leontov angle appears to be another fabrication by your buddy Angleton. Or are you also going to say the reactions by both Castro and Krushchev were carefully staged? As were the findings of their intel agencies. James, With all due respect, wasn't it Angleton's underling in CI, Edward Clare Petty, who not only thought that Angleton himself was a Ruskie mole, but said (according to Dick Russell) that George DeMohrenschildt was probably a very long term KGB "illegal," and that he (Petty) had arrived at this view of GdM based on some decrypted WWII VENONA intercepts? -- Tommy PS Which of the new releases would you like for me to take a look at, James? Any in particular? Like that one that's a transcript of one of the (twelve in total) interviews of Nosenko by ... (gasp) ... true defector Ptyor Deriabin? Or must I read all of the new releases, as you undoubtedly have? No help? I'm all on my own? Edited February 26, 2018 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 (edited) 6 hours ago, David Josephs said: ....Until anyone can refute the ID from both ODIO sisters... ... there is literally no information on Oswald leaving New Orleans - which would dovetail nicely into his being driven off by 2 Cubans. I also find Silvia and Annie ODIO to be credible. I would like to point out Harry Dean's claim that the "2 Cubans" were in reality the Cuban-American Loran Hall, and the Mexican-American Larry Howard. Both Silvia and Annie said that the second Cuban "looked like a Mexican." Harry Dean said that Loran and Larry were his good friends, and they all had a fourth friend and fearless leader, Gabby Gabaldon, who gave Loran and Larry a big wad of money to drive Lee Harvey Oswald to Mexico City and back again. It is interesting that Mexico Immigration Records records that LHO entered and exited Mexico as a passenger in a car. Most of the "bus trip" witnesses are easily shown to be victims of "mistaken identity." A few were in direct complicity with the FBI "Lone Nut" paradigm. Regards, --Paul Trejo Edited February 21, 2018 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 18 hours ago, Thomas Graves said: Question: Why do so many Forum readers refuse to read "Spy Wars" and "Ghosts of the Spy Wars"? Tommy, The reason I won't read those books is because there are thousands of books I could read. So why read those particular two? Because apparently they support your theory. But why would I want to read a book that supports a theory that makes no sense? You DID read the books, and even you can't make sense out of your theory. Why would the Russians want to kill Kennedy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 (edited) 13 hours ago, Paul Trejo said: It is interesting that Mexico Immigration Records records that LHO entered and exited Mexico as a passenger in a car. I would be most appreciative if somebody body can confirm this, and especially if somebody can provide a reference. Edited February 21, 2018 by Sandy Larsen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 (edited) On 2/21/2018 at 7:56 AM, Sandy Larsen said: I would be most appreciative if somebody body can confirm this, and especially if somebody can provide a reference. Sandy, We need to understand that by claiming Oswald was in a car - by definition he had to be with others... legend says he couldn't drive. And it acts as a double edeged sword since is correct, the FBI's thousands of pagers showing he took a bus is ever that much more junk... yet as we both know, the existence of Oswald other than on those calls or at those embassies... cannot be proven. By the night of the 23rd, the amount of Disinformation in this little paragraph is amazing. Amb MANN of STATE was trying so hard to help the CIA... This is from 104-10004-10256... attached. It keeps Oswald in Mexico until Oct 3rd... Except he was at the TEC on Oct 3rd... 1127 miles away... I'd suggest working thru some of the Mexico articles on K&K that I posted.... All the info is in there... There were a number of stories related to Oswald in a AUTO-mobile. One of them has the border inspector claiming he remembered an american in a car with a man and a woman, another with a man a 2 women.. Here is a piece of the OCT FM-11 for the 2nd half of Sept... Shows "AUTO." for transportation On the 23rd of Nov US Consul HARVEY CASH has Tijerina type up cards he's gotten from Immigration at Gobernacion... and then lies about it to William KLINE... Lester Johnson, PUGH and KLINE are covered in my work... interesting back-peddling and excuse making going on here... 63-11-24 WHAT THE CIA CLAIMS TO HAVE KNOWN THE MORNING OF THE 24TH - QUITE A LOT104-10004-10256.pdf Edited October 19, 2018 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 (edited) 10 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said: Tommy, The reason I won't read those books is because there are thousands of books I could read. So why read those particular two? Because apparently they support your theory. But why would I want to read a book that supports a theory that makes no sense? You DID read the books, and even you can't make sense out of your theory. Why would the Russians want to kill Kennedy? Sandy, With all due respect, you don't seem to "get" it. First of all, only one of them is a book. The other one is a 35-page PDF, the first four or five pages of which would be the most important ones for you to read. You know, just to "rock your boat" a little, "whet your appetite," and "peke your curiosity"? Secondly, Bagley (who was not "Angleton's guy," BTW) had intimate knowledge of the Nosenko case (that KGB "defector" who told CIA about a month after the assassination that KGB hadn't even interviewed or monitored-very-closely Marine Corps radar operator LHO during the 2.5 years he lived in the USSR), having been involved with said case from "day one" (in May, 1962 in Geneva, Switzerland), and having later become privy to the file on (the six-months-earlier-and-true) defector, Anatoly Golitsyn, which privy-ness shed considerable light on the intelligence leads on Soviet spies and U.S. moles, etc, that Nosenko was sent to Geneva in 1962, and to the U.S. in January, 1964, to try to obfuscate and deflect attention away from. But Sandy "Genius" Larsen would rather read "Harvey and Lee," and books about forensic dentistry? Anything but four or five pages of "Ghosts of the Spy Wars" or ... gasp ... Simpich's entire "State Secret"? LOL! http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08850607.2014.962362?scroll=top&needAccess=true -- Tommy Edited February 22, 2018 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now