Jump to content
The Education Forum
Thomas Graves

Why Does the "Mitrokhin Archive" Claim KGB Paid Mark Lane $6000 in Today's Money to Debunk The Warren Report?

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Robert Charles-Dunne said:

  .....

 

"Did Tommy really not consider so obvious an hypothesis before creating that thread?

Apparently not.  Which tells us something about Tommy’s intellectual rigor.  As in, there’s little evidence for it.  

Which makes it all the more puzzling why so many Forum members take the bait and keep engaging this barnacle in discussions he will only warp through subsequent editing anyway."   

 

Robert,

 

(deleted)

 

Regardless, this thread is about the so-called Mitrokhin Archive, and how it states, probably incorrectly, that the KGB paid Mark Lane $6000 in todays' dollars to debunk the Warren Commission Report.

I assume that you and most of the other members of this forum believe, based on the Mitrokhin Archives' saying such a nasty, nasty thing about Mark Lane, that the Archive must be a clever disinformation operation by the evil, evil CIA.

I, on the other hand, would argue that it is much more likely an active measures / strategic deception op by the KGB/FSB, intended, among other things, to create confusion and dissension in the JFK Assassination Research Community, and to cast aspersions on The Community as a whole.

If I remember correctly, the Mitrokhin Archive, in addition to spreading that (probably) untrue allegation against Lane, also stated as fact the bald-faced l-i-e that Yuri Nosenko was a true defector.  But, having already returned the copy of the book I was reading to the library, I am admittedly going from memory here.  So, I'll have to "check it out," and if it turns out that I was wrong about that, I'll just have to return to this post at some point in the future and ... gasp ... edit it.

 

--  TG

 

 

EDIT

 

Ah yes, looks as though I was right about Mitrokhin Archives' "take" on Nosenko.

 

From Andrew's and Mitrokhin's book The Sword and the Shield:

 

"In November 1963 Aleksandr Nikolayevich Cherepanov of the KGB Second Chief Directorate
(internal security and counter-intelligence), sent the American embassy in Moscow a packet
of highly classified papers dealing with the surveillance and entrapment of diplomats and
other foreigners in Russia, together with a note offering his services to the CIA. In the
ambassador’s absence, the deputy head of mission feared that the documents were part of a KGB
provocation. Though the head of the CIA station was allowed to photograph the documents,
the originals, despite his protests, were returned to the Russians. Cherepanov fled from Moscow
but was arrested by KGB border guards on the frontier with Turkestan on December 17, 1963. He
admitted during interrogation that the operational secrets he had revealed to the Americans included

the use of “spy dust” (metka), special chemicals applied to suspects’ shoes to facilitate
tracking. Cherepanov was sentenced to death at a secret trial in April 1964. The Centre’s damage
assessment of the case concluded: It is not possible to determine why the Americans betrayed
Cherepanov. Either they suspected that his action was a KGB provocation or they wanted to burden

the KGB with a lengthy search for the person who had sent the package to the embassy.
Though the CIA was not responsible for Cherepanov’s betrayal, it was shortly to make another, even
more serious error. In February 1964 Yuri Ivanovich Nosenko, a KGB officer serving on the Soviet
disarmament delegation in Geneva, who had begun working for the Agency in June 1962, defected to
the United States. Nosenko's CIA debriefers, however, wrongly concluded that he was a KGB plant.

Unaware of the CIA’s horrendous misjudgement, the Centre regarded Nosenko’s defection as a serious
setback. Its damage assessment began with the usual character assassination, claiming that Nosenko
(henceforth codenamed IDOL), had been infected — like Golitsyn — with the “virus of careerism.”

Nosenko, who lusted for power, did not hide his ambitions and obtained a high position. The leadership
of Department 1 at Headquarters will not forget Nosenko’s hysterical reaction when he was informed of
their plans to promote him from deputy chief to chief of section [otdeleniye]. “The chief of the
directorate has promised that I will replace the head of the department [otdeiy he shouted shamelessly.
The characteristics of careerism were evident in many curious facets of his life. When he became the deputy
chief of another department, Nosenko was ashamed of his rank [KGB captain], which was below that normally
associated with his position. He would return unsigned any documents with “Captain” on them, and would only
sign documents on which his perceptive subordinates had not indicated his rank.'"

 

etc.

 

https://archive.org/stream/TheSwordAndTheShield-TheMitrokhinArchiveAndTheSecretHistoryOfTheKGB/The+Sword+and+the+Shield+-+The+Mitrokhin+Archive+and+the+Secret+History+of+the+KGB_djvu.txt

 

 

 

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/8/2018 at 10:34 AM, Paz Marverde said:

I'm frankly thinking to leave the Forum ...

 

Paz,

 

Seriously, please don't go.

 

EDIT ALERT: [Believe it or not, ] I actually enjoy having you around!

 

--  TG

 

EDIT ALERT:  Gerunds are tricky.  Correct would be: "I'm thinking OF LEAVING," or "I'm thinking ABOUT LEAVING."

(Funny how that Russian-speaking Hungarian lad / young man would probably have got / gotten that right.)

Sorry, I couldn't help it.  You know, *my being* a Grammar Nazi and all / everything ...

 

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/8/2018 at 11:38 AM, Thomas Graves said:

 

"Did Tommy really not consider so obvious an hypothesis before creating that thread?

Apparently not.  Which tells us something about Tommy’s intellectual rigor.  As in, there’s little evidence for it.  

Which makes it all the more puzzling why so many Forum members take the bait and keep engaging this barnacle in discussions he will only warp through subsequent editing anyway."   

 

Robert,

 

(deleted)

 

Regardless, this thread is about the so-called Mitrokhin Archives, and how it states, probably incorrectly, that the KGB paid Mark Lane $6000 in todays' dollars to debunk the Warren Commission Report.

I assume that you and most of the other members of this forum believe, based on the Mitrokhin Archives' saying such a nasty, nasty thing about Mark Lane, that the Archive must be a clever disinformation operation by the evil, evil CIA.

I, on the other hand, would argue that it is much more likely an active measures / strategic deception op by the KGB/FSB, intended, among other things, to create confusion and dissension in the JFK Assassination Research Community, and to cast aspersions on The Community as a whole.

If I remember correctly, the Mitrokhin Archive, in addition to spreading that (probably) untrue allegation against Lane, also stated as fact the bald-faced l-i-e that Yuri Nosenko was a true defector.  But, having already returned the copy of the book I was reading to the library, I am admittedly going from memory here.  So, I'll have to "check it out," and if it turns out that I was wrong about that, I'll just have to return to this post at some point in the future and ... gasp ... edit it.

 

--  TG

 

 

EDIT

 

Ah yes, looks as though I was right about Mitrokhin Archives' "take" on Nosenko.

 

From Andrew's and Mitrokhin's book The Sword and the Shield:

 

"In November 1963 Aleksandr Nikolayevich Cherepanov of the KGB Second Chief Directorate
(internal security and counter-intelligence), sent the American embassy in Moscow a packet
of highly classified papers dealing with the surveillance and entrapment of diplomats and
other foreigners in Russia, together with a note offering his services to the CIA. In the
ambassador’s absence, the deputy head of mission feared that the documents were part of a KGB
provocation. Though the head of the CIA station was allowed to photograph the documents,
the originals, despite his protests, were returned to the Russians. Cherepanov fled from Moscow
but was arrested by KGB border guards on the frontier with Turkestan on December 17, 1963. He
admitted during interrogation that the operational secrets he had revealed to the Americans included

the use of “spy dust” (metka), special chemicals applied to suspects’ shoes to facilitate
tracking. Cherepanov was sentenced to death at a secret trial in April 1964. The Centre’s damage
assessment of the case concluded: It is not possible to determine why the Americans betrayed
Cherepanov. Either they suspected that his action was a KGB provocation or they wanted to burden

the KGB with a lengthy search for the person who had sent the package to the embassy.
Though the CIA was not responsible for Cherepanov’s betrayal, it was shortly to make another, even
more serious error. In February 1964 Yuri Ivanovich Nosenko, a KGB officer serving on the Soviet
disarmament delegation in Geneva, who had begun working for the Agency in June 1962, defected to
the United States. Nosenko's CIA debriefers, however, wrongly concluded that he was a KGB plant.

Unaware of the CIA’s horrendous misjudgement, the Centre regarded Nosenko’s defection as a serious
setback. Its damage assessment began with the usual character assassination, claiming that Nosenko
(henceforth codenamed IDOL), had been infected — like Golitsyn — with the “virus of careerism.”

Nosenko, who lusted for power, did not hide his ambitions and obtained a high position. The leadership
of Department 1 at Headquarters will not forget Nosenko’s hysterical reaction when he was informed of
their plans to promote him from deputy chief to chief of section [otdeleniye]. “The chief of the
directorate has promised that I will replace the head of the department [otdeiy he shouted shamelessly.
The characteristics of careerism were evident in many curious facets of his life. When he became the deputy
chief of another department, Nosenko was ashamed of his rank [KGB captain], which was below that normally
associated with his position. He would return unsigned any documents with “Captain” on them, and would only
sign documents on which his perceptive subordinates had not indicated his rank.'"

 

etc.

 

https://archive.org/stream/TheSwordAndTheShield-TheMitrokhinArchiveAndTheSecretHistoryOfTheKGB/The+Sword+and+the+Shield+-+The+Mitrokhin+Archive+and+the+Secret+History+of+the+KGB_djvu.txt

 

 

 

 

I am bumping this now [EDIT: has it been at least 24 hours yet, Michael?] with a polite "heads up" warning:  I WILL be editing it later (and will mark said edits with appropriate indicators), and [EDIT: will be doing so] specifically in order to shed some Tennent H. Bagley-esque light on something I included [EDIT: from Andrew's and Mitrokhin's book The Sword and the Shield],above, but only for context [EDIT: on the Nosenko Situation]: The Cherepanov Deal and the ramifications thereof.

Meanwhile, while y'all are waiting on pins and needles for that to go down (I've got some things to do today [EDIT: in beautiful La Jolla; have you googled it yet?]), hopefully my on-again off-again debating partner, James DiEugenio, will reappear and attempt to support his claim, made earlier on this very thread, that Alger Hiss was NOT spying for the Soviets (the GRU, iirc), inspite of my having (gerund there) recently informed James that our very own patron, John Simkin, apparently begs to differ with him.

 

--  TG

 

 

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎3‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 1:14 AM, James DiEugenio said:

The typewriter was not in existence when the FBI said it was first used by Priscilla Hiss's father.  

Therefore, it could not have been the one given to her and then used to type the documents in question.  And the FBI knew that and concealed it from the defense. 

Further, Elizabeth McCarthy, one of the finest document examiners in America, stated that in her opinion it was possible to create a typewriter to duplicate certain typing on pages.  Which coincides with what Nixon told John Dean, that they had created a typewriter in the Hiss case.  (This is the woman who said that Shaw was Bertrand, based on two pairs of handwriting.  She was right about that also.)

Therefore, I don't have much respect for Bagley's take on the Hiss case.  My graduate field of concentration was postwar American History. I was interested in how the Cold War started, and how it was used politically for domestic purposes.  That is why I was interested in both the Rosenberg and Hiss cases. And the careers of Joe McCarthy and Dick Nixon.

As per Bagley on Nosenko, he may be right, he may be wrong.  I will agree that there is  a case for both sides.  Something I would not have written awhile back.

But the other thing Bagley is credible on is the routing of Oswald's files when they first came in.  Which you still have not commented on.

Wow, I was not aware that Nixon made this incredible admission.  From where did you obtain this tidbit Jim?  Remember that film I told you about- "The Trials of Alger Hiss" ? I still am not able to find a copy to view or buy. It's been written out of existence,  due to its sympathetic portrayal of Hiss.  As for professional misconduct by the FBI- seems par for the course, sadly.

I just ordered Joan Brady's book. 

Dawn 

ps Tommy why does Jim D need a profile pic on facebook? He has one here. Anyone who has attended a JFK assassination  conference  knows him. It's not like he is incognito.

Edited by Dawn Meredith

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

×
×
  • Create New...