Thomas Graves

Very well spoken, Michael. I, too, plan to make a financial contribution. Just one question, though. When you say that Paul Trejo is "purveying falsehoods," aren't you in effect accusing him of l-y-i-n-g? -- TG PS I learned to write grammatically correct long sentences in my "Legal Analysis" class in law school. Not that my 100 word-long sentences here would necessarily reflect that. (Laughing Out Loud)

Have you read it yet, Michael? -- TG

Interesting post, Michael. My little anecdote: George Whitman (R.I.P.) who owned Shakespeare and Company bookstore in Paris, and who let me stay there for 3.5 weeks in late 1993, claimed to be a / the grandson of Walt Whitman. -- TG

David, Playing Devil's Advocate again: "Either that, or to sell it to Gerry Patrick Hemming." -- TG

David, Hmm. Good point. (Please don't let anyone know that I'm your CIA-appointed "straight man.") Laughing Out Loud -- TG

David, Couldn't it have been "planted" after the fact? -- TG

Eddy, Thanks for the feedback! Will do it today! -- TG

Steve, Couldn't agree more, seeing as how there are a couple of members whose future responses to my posts, or "snide" references to me in other posts, might tempt me to become "uncivil," once again. Thanks, -- TG

Dawn, Maybe with a little witting or unwitting help from some "rogue" CIA types? (I'm still trying to figure out what "Neck Scratcher" was up to, if anything, while watching Oswald on Canal Street on 8/09/63.) Regardless, thank you for expressing your opinion in a civil manner. I can only hope that you, too, believe that I have the right as a member of this forum to express my opinions (in a from-now-on polite and civil manner, of course) without having to fear being subjected to impolite and/or sarcastic responses thereto. Thanks, -- TG

Lance, Excellent post (in my humble opinion). Thanks, -- TG

Paul, Thanks. One would certainly hope so. -- TG

Ron, I agree with you, totally. "Very well-spoken, sir" if I do say so, myself. One could only hope that a member whose political and JFK assassination views are radically contrary to the vast majority's here would be able to "call out" the rudeness and/or incivilities which other members, even "highly respected, perhaps published" members may direct at him or her either on a continuous basis or as a one time "hit and run" attack, without incurring the communicated wrath of like-minded members. -- TG

Kathy, Well, in an attempt to get some clarification from Mark Knight (whose e-mail or PM James quoted in an earlier post), I sent a PM to Mark, but I've yet to hear back from him. Regardless, I hope that you've noticed that I've been a bit less cynical, sarcastic, t-r-o-l-l -like, etc. during the past 24 hours or so, and that Paul B. has actually complemented me on that. Thank you, -- TG EDIT: OOPS, I JUST NOW CHECKED AND FOUND OUT THAT MY "IN BOX" IS FULL. WILL DELETE SOME OLDER PMs PRONTO!

Kathy, Thank you. I realize that yours and James' responsibilities (and those of the other persons with official roles at The Forum) must be very stressful and time-consuming. Regardless, this is the part of James' post that I was referring to: "I cannot accept remaining with the status quo and all the issues that has provoked and also be expected to fund this forum - as I have done for a number of years. I will stop payments to Invision after April 4th. That means this forum is funded until May 11th - approximately 7 weeks. What happens now to the EF is for the membership to decide." -- TG

David, You're right. My bad. I'm 6' 3" (used to be 6' 5" but I've shrunk 2 inches at my 68.5 years of age), so that must have been what I was thinking about. The one-and-only Oswald was 5' 9.5" tall, so you're absolutely correct. -- TG

David, At the risk of being accused of ... gasp ... colluding with you, I would like to point out that Frazier also stated that Oswald was nestling the package between his cupped hand and his armpit, iirc, suggesting that the package was somewhat longer than 24 inches. -- TG

Ron, I like the image you invoke, convoke, or conjure up. A falcon hitting a pigeon at eighty miles an hour. Snatchin' chunks out of thin air. (Great stuff; Laughing Out Loud) -- TG

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

James, Thanks for the heads up. How much will it cost to keep it going? Thanks, -- Tommy PS Honest question: If I make a sizable donation, would you promise to keep it a secret?

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

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

Thanks, Paul. Welcome back, man. -- Tommy

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 https://archive.org/details/SpyWarsMolesMysteriesAndDeadlyGames

Paz, Thanks for weighing in on the subject! (laughing out loud) -- Tommy

Kathy, Okay. Sorry. (At least I did delete it from its birth thread, iirc) -- Tommy Would anyone other than James and Steve care to comment on the substance of my post? What I actually said to Michael, in other words?