Michael Clark

Hint #1 - Operation Mockingbird

I’ll use this opportunity to raise a question for a moderator if they see it.... Do you ever reconsider allowing past members back in who have been blocked or banned in the past? I imagine that some people have been blocked for minor transgressions and just forgotten about. Is it ok to even ask? I definitely don’t feel like it is ok to ask about the readmittance of a particular member, and it should not be that way. It should be ok to ask, keeping in mind that we may hove no idea what caused the member to lose privileges. And, generally, is there an eye, at all, towards reconciliation? Forever is a long time.

Stephanie, when I was new to the forum I did a lot of rummaging through and bumping of old treads, looking for gems. I think that was met with near universal approval, and I believe is fostered a lot of discourse. I dunt pick through the old threads as much as I used to but if you do, go ahead and dust-off old topics or share some of comments or quotes from them. Definitely raise your questions. There are very few crabs on this beach.

Not sure of your question, Ron. On the K&K homepage there is a link to “Articles”. Toward the bottom of that page the article you shared can be found under “General Interest”.

It’s more comparable to Cuba in 1898 when the Maine was blown up; another manufactured crisis meant to foment a war of aggression.

Tell people that Iran mined the ships (when they didn’t): some will believe it some will not. Tell people that Iran shot down the drone in international airspace (when it wasn’t): All will agree that Iran shot down the drone, but some will and some won’t believe that it was in international airspace. Rusult: The mass of the lies become greater than that of the truth. I was just musing on this. Is there some kind of previously conceived principle that I am not aware of, or not recognizing as applicable here?

Hello Harry. I can’t see your attachments on my iPad.

Just like Barr. But I’m not surprised at the cluelessness of the POTUS.

just a sneaky was to get a Trump discussion in the main forum. It doesn’t belong here.

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10167-10132.pdf QDCHAR QDALUM Not in MFF QDARBOR Not in MFF 16-7

McCord honored for development of anti bugging equipment https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10123-10407.pdf

McCord grated his Q clearance https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10124-10009.pdf and a better copy https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10123-10285.pdf

Paul, here is Larry’s response to an earlier inquiry I had made regarding the WW3 virus.

Paul, here is a link I posted before. P.4 gets you to a use of the “viirus” word. It’s worth reading, but it is difficult because it is a transcription of a presentation that had visual aids that are not in the transcript. Also, as noted in the notes at the end, Newman does not necessarily ascribe to everything he says here. It is a good read, however. The big lie that it exposes, however, is that, contrary to what the FBI and CIA have said, Oswald had been on their radar, for months, to say the least. P.4 “Okay, so this here is the Washington Field Office of the FBI. It happens to be a couple of days before the assassination and they just intercepted a letter that Oswald wrote to the Soviet embassy up in Washington, D.C. talking about his meeting with 'Comrade Kostin' [Kostin is a pseudonym for Kostikov] in Mexico City and so they are sending this to the FBI Director. So, here, you know we find the, again by the hand of LHO the virus is spreading again, only we are getting very close to the date (of the assassination)."Okay, that's all I have to show you prior to 11/22 and then we start in, then the shots ring out in Dealey Plaza, and it's quite interesting to see what happens.........

Paul, I should not try to explain it, although it is not complicated. I will try to find it for you. It really starts with this: https://www.history-matters.com/essays/frameup/WhatJaneRomanSaid/WhatJaneRomanSaid_1.htm I too have a problem with Newman’s apparent acceptance of Bagely. I get the feeling that John Newman knew Bagely, or through some other means became attached to him and his story; too attached. It can happen to anyone. Re: The WWIII virus. I will use the following 3 key words. In my search... diabolical, Angleton, WWWlll”

This is the crux of the whole argument by Tenant Pete Bagely: ” “Among the implications underlying the very real possibility that a Nosenko was planted on CIA by the KGB are these two: A. That Lee Harvey Oswald may have been a KGB agent B. That there was KGB penetration of sensitive elements of the United States government”. The argument continues, now, today, on Facebook, that if you don’t buy Tenant Pete Bagely’s Account, then you are unpatriotic, gullible, stupid, a commie and indeed complicit in the cover-up of the “KGB” sponsored assassination of JFK. It May very will be that that WWlll virus, which John Newman espoused, is still sitting there ticking away. Are ultra patriots, who don’t give a darn about JFK, still ready to pull that card and use it as an excuse to criminalize, to proscribe, those who believe, née know, that the conspiracy was formed from elements from inside American Government and power centers?

CIA director of Security had this to say about Pete Bagley, who handled Nosenko’s encarceration: https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32359254.pdf Italics are mine... TOP SECRET 13 October 1970 MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD Subject: BAGELY, Tennant, Harrington #386 38 1) On Wednesday, 7 October 1970 I briefed Colonel L. K. White, Executive Director-Controller on certain reservations I have concerning the proposed promotion of subject to a supergrade position.  2) I was very careful to explain to Colonel White at the outset that my reservations had nothing whatsoever to do with Bagely's security status. I explained that it was my conviction that Bagely was almost exclusively responsible for the manner in which the Nosenko case had been handled by our SR division. I said I considered that Bagely lacked objectivity and that he had displayed extremely poor judgment over a two year period in the handling of this case. Specifically as one example of Bagely's extreme prejudice I pointed out that the SR division had neglected to follow up several leads provided by Nosenko which subsequently had been followed up by this office (Bruce Solie) and that this lead us to individuals who have confessed their recruitment and use by the Soviets over an extensive period of time. 3) I explained further that Bagely displayed extremely poor judgment in the actions he took during that time that Nosenko was incarcerated at ISOLATION. On many occasions, as the individual responsible for Nosenko's care, I refuse to condone Bagely's instructions to my people who are guarding him. In one instance Bagely insisted that Nosenko's food ration be reduced to black bread and water three times daily. After I had briefed Colonel White, he indicated that he would refresh the Director's memory on Bagely's role in the Nosenko case at the time he reviews supergrade promotions.   Howard J. Osborn Director of Security

Douglas, This should have come with a warning that any persons engaging in debate that offers opinion contrary to the views stated above are likely to be met with a very ugly smiting via personal attacks on Facebook and elsewhere.

LITAMIL-9 considering recruiting Sylvia Duran in September of 1963 (thanks to MFF) P.45 https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10185-10266.pdf

Agreed, that’s why this is interesting, after 11-22 Sylivia Duran’s name is everywhere. With regard to these LITAMIL-9 docs, we have her documented prior to the assassination. I am not saying it is significant, just interesting.. https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10163-10009.pdf

LITAMIL-9 is a recently updated entry to the Mary Ferrell Database. He gets us very close to Sylvia Duran... https://www.maryferrell.org/php/cryptdb.php?id=LITAMIL-9

A.J. Weberman posted this McCord rich post in the Bernard Festerwald thread.

Found it.... http://www.apfn.org/skolnicksreport/shistory.html http://www.apfn.org/skolnicksreport/shistory2.html http://www.apfn.org/skolnicksreport/shistory3.html All from this page: http://www.apfn.org/skolnicksreport/index.html No kisses required...

I had the whole thing saved as text in my research storage thread. I deleted it after leaving unread for a long time. i am trying to remember the title of it.