Michael Clark
-
Posts
4,737 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Michael Clark
-
-
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.
-
8 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:
Kind of odd how I stumbled across it. Since Jim hadn't posted here in three weeks I googled K & K to see if there was anything new there as I'd done before, many times to see what was up at the site. Nope, nothing new in the last few weeks. I was wondering if he might have a health problem as he mentioned one on here a couple of months ago after a brief hiatus. So I googled his name and twitter since I don't do it myself. In addition to his twitter link one popped up for K& K, with the link for this article. It worked. Confused, I googled the site again, still no article. Weird. Could someone else try googling just the site to see if they find it? Or is it just me, my computer, provider or something else?
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”.
-
31 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:
Yet the record is clear that JFK opposed a nuclear middle east. Would he have approved the Iran deal? I think not. It is fair to make a comparison to Cuba in many ways. To say otherwise is naive.
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.
-
59 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:
How could so many of us know who Bolton is and yet the President doesn't?
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.
On 1/25/2017 at 1:27 PM, Larry Hancock said:Michael, you found the transcription on Lancer that I was just about to link in for you so you have that. Things have evolved a good bit from that particular presentation and probably your best and most current source dealing with the whole issue is Bill Simpich's book State Secret. I wrote a bit about the MC scenarios in NEXUS and then collaborated with Bill while he was working on his book; of course he has talked with and brainstormed at length with Newman as well.
There are a couple of schools of thought (OK, that was understated) but perhaps the simplest take is that links were planted (to a great extent via telephone impersonations) in Mexico City that would have connected Oswald to Cuban or Russian sponsors, exposing that connection would have meant war. That is a follow up to Peter Dale Scott's early research on Mexico City and give you the WWIII scenario leading to a Lone Nut alternative to prevent war. A different and even deeper take is that the telephone impersonation, the taping and the tapes themselves might have revealed that the impersonations were planted to frame Oswald and the Cubans/Russians, but in such a way as to have only been done by insiders - pointing not towards foreign conspiracy but a domestic one involving CIA officers or their agents working with the electronic surveillance in Mexico City. Rather than going that route, and perhaps destroying the CIA in the process, at the height of the Cold War, it would have been decided to go Lone Nut instead.
Of course you can mix and match both scenarios too. Hope that helps a bit, Larry
-
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......... -
25 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:
could you explain Newman’s WW 3 virus, or point to where Newman espouses it?
i too am bothered by the Nosenko mystery and Newman taking Bagley’s side. What’s worse for me is the irreparable harm caused by the man who would be a real defector, Golitsyn. I guess what I find most difficult is realizing that real defectors can lie and false ones can tell the truth. That’s another way of saying that discerning truth from falsehood matters far more than discerning KGB motives.
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
-
9 minutes ago, Douglas Caddy said:
Tom Graves wrote on Facebook today:
KGB Counterintelligence Lieutenant-Colonel Vladimir Putin is jumping for joy because, in America and The West in general, 98 years of KGB/FSB/SVR "active measures" counterintelligence operations, artfully interwoven with 60 years of KGB/FSB/SVR "strategic deception" counterintelligence operations, are really starting to pay off, now.
The 1962-to-1967 (false defector) Yuri Nosenko versus (true defector) Anatoliy Golitsyn "case" -- which involved KGB's sending several ot...her false defectors and triple-agents to the U.S. to secretly "vouch" for Nosenko's being a "true defector" -- and which the KGB won when some gullible and/or frustrated people at CIA declared Nosenko a true defector, financially rewarded him for his troubles, and actually employed him to lecture at CIA -- is a good example. It virtually destroyed CIA counterintelligence capabilities and morale at the time, and led to a "let's not be paranoid like that crazy James Jesus Angleton, now, folks" mindset at CIA that eventually enabled, for example, Aldrich Ames to be a KGB "mole" in the CIA from 1985 until 1994.
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.
-
7 minutes ago, David Josephs said:
They knew an awful lot about her on Nov 23rd. And Weisberg makes note that CIAHQ asks the Mexicans not beat her when arrested the 2nd time...
See attached... DJ
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
-
1 hour ago, David Josephs said:
With regards to most any item of incriminating evidence... look for its significance BEFORE Nov 22.... in the contemporaneous reporting.
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
-
1 hour ago, David Josephs said:
In the recent release of docs, we find out about LITAMIL-9, a very close friend of AZCUE who worked as a double agent for the USA within the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City
LITAMIL-9 is a recently updated entry to the Mary Ferrell Database. He gets us very close to Sylvia Duran...
-
A.J. Weberman posted this McCord rich post in the Bernard Festerwald thread.
-
44 minutes ago, David Andrews said:
Sherman Skolnick's lengthy and exhaustive research on the Hunt plane crash, and the minutiae of his court battles with the NTSB, seem to have disappeared from the internet. An appendix in St John Hunt's Dorothy digests these. The Amazon page "Look Inside" feature offers smple Skolnick pages at the end of the book:
https://www.amazon.com/Dorothy-Amoral-Dangerous-Woman-Watergates-ebook/dp/B015VN46XW
Anyone who can find me Skolnick's complete account online will be rewarded with a kiss from my withered lips, and the tears from my parchment cheeks.
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...
-
35 minutes ago, David Andrews said:
Sherman Skolnick's lengthy and exhaustive research on the Hunt plane crash, and the minutiae of his court battles with the NTSB, seem to have disappeared from the internet. An appendix in St John Hunt's Dorothy digests these. The Amazon page "Look Inside" feature offers smple Skolnick pages at the end of the book:
https://www.amazon.com/Dorothy-Amoral-Dangerous-Woman-Watergates-ebook/dp/B015VN46XW
Anyone who can find me Skolnick's complete account online will be rewarded with a kiss from my withered lips, and the tears from my parchment cheeks.
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.
-
Excellent contribution, Jim. I should not be, but always am, at the credible and very public suspicions that there was more to the unfolding, official story so soon after the assassination.
-
Debate Future
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
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.