Jump to content
The Education Forum

Yuri Nosenko dead


Peter Fokes
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have never understood the Nosenko case. Maybe someone can enlighten me. If the CIA knew good and well that Oswald was not a Soviet agent, what was so wrong about Nosenko saying that Oswald was not a Soviet agent? The CIA never tried to claim that Oswald was a Soviet agent. It did apparently plan to portray Oswald as a Castro agent before it went the lone-nut route. I do not understand the purpose of the CIA's abuse of Nosenko. If the CIA genuinely suspected Nosenko of being a false defector, okay, but what did Oswald have to do with it? They knew that Nosenko was telling the truth, because I'm sure that the CIA knew who killed Kennedy and why and it wasn't some Soviet agent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron: I can only reply based on published accounts of what CIA thought at the time.

In late 1961, Anatoli Mikhailovich Golitsyn defected to the CIA in Helsinki. Initially, he provided info pointing to several agents, mostly in Europe. But he was a very difficult man. He demanded money to start his own anti-KGB organization, he demanded a personal audience with JFK and, by many accounts, when his genuine information dried up, he began "spinning," making all sorts of charges he couldn't prove. Many CIA and FBI people became very frustrated with him. He charged that CIA had a mole, and a massive mole hunt at CIA destroyed a number of careers.

Most important, he charged that other KGB/GRU officers who would come after him to work for the US (either agents in place or defectors) would be phonies, sent by the KGB to deflect HIS information. This brush tarnished Fedora, TopHat, Penkovskiy and others, and it was in this atmosphere that Nosenko, who had been an agent in place, defected in January 1964.

A few people like Angelton, Bagley and Dave Murphy immediately thought Nosenko's defection was a phony. Over the years, Bagely catalogued a long series of reasons why Nosenko must have been a phony. It was in THIS atmosphere that Nosenko made his Oswald statements. If Nosenko was phony, then his Oswald statements must be phony. People like Bagley then "mirror-read" them: If the statement that Oswald was not a Soviet agent is a phony, then maybe he really WAS a Soviet agent, and the Sovs sent Nosenko to deflect suspicion.

So, while most CIA and FBI people took the position that Oswald was neither a KGB or US agent, a small group held out the possibility that he may have been a KGB agent. And they tried to "break" Nosenko and get him to confess. I believe that Nosenko was a genuine KGB officer and that his defection was genuine, but that he lied about a number of things to puff up his importance, including his closeness to the Oswald case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, while most CIA and FBI people took the position that Oswald was neither a KGB or US agent, a small group held out the possibility that he may have been a KGB agent.

Perhaps, but I find it hard to believe that any "group" at the CIA or FBI was that naive, when those two organizations (or "rogue agents" therein) were suspects in the assassination for very good and obvious reasons. I believe it was Whitten (sp) who said that around the part of the CIA where he worked, it was taken for granted that Oswald was CIA. That makes sense to me; any CIA section thinking that Oswald could be KGB doesn't. But then I never worked at Langley or Hoover's domain so what do I know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter and Ron

The Nosenko case is of great interest to my research and I have written about it in several posts. To highlight (from memory) a few pieces of information may be useful for those who wish to look into this case further.

1) Nosenko first made contact with US Intelligence within days of LHO receiving his final papers to depart Russia. The timeline on this is interesting since we would later learn that Nosenko would be the KGB agent most familiar with the Oswald case. Coincidence?

2) While it is pointed out that Nosenko defected while in Geneva it is not mentioned who else was there. His defection occured while he was attending the Nuclear discussions taking place in Geneva. Present at those discussions (and missing a Warren Commission meeting to be there at the same time) was John J. McCloy. Coincidence?

3) Ron stated: "If the CIA knew good and well that Oswald was not a Soviet agent, what was so wrong about Nosenko saying that Oswald was not a Soviet agent?" If, on the other hand, the CIA (or certain people within the CIA) "knew good and well" that Oswald was a Soviet agent or had provided information to the Soviets that the CIA wanted the Soviets to have, then Nosenko's story did not hold water. Would Angleton have known about Oswald's connection to Soviet intelligence? Epstein's "The Orchid Man" tells a story, relayed to him by Angleton, of the unsuspecting insect that spreads the pollen necessary for the survival of the orchid plant species. Was Angelton talking about Oswald? Did Angleton know that Oswald had been used to spread the "pollen" to the Soviets about the vulnerabilities of the U-2? Remember that in November of 1959 John J. McCloy expressed a fear that the United States would be forced into signing a Limited Test Ban Treaty with the Soviets in May of 1960 that would not be benificial to the US. McCloy's fear was never realized because the U-2 incident occured. Was this the first time that McCloy was able to use Lee Harvey Oswald to accomplish his own goals and objectives? Or is it just a coincidence that McCloy did not want the Paris Summit to occur and that it did not occur?

4) It is the degree of importance that we COULD place on the Nosenko case while making an argument about the importance of Oswald in the strange world of espionage that I find intrigueing. Ron, I believe that you are exactly right! If Nosenko supported what the CIA believed to be true why were they not ready to give him his bonifides? If on the other side Nosenko supported what people in the top eschelon of the CIA (Angelton, Helms) knew to be false they would fight not to give him his bonifides but they would be fighting with both hands tied behind their backs. If Helms and Angelton knew that Oswald, the man accused of killing Kennedy, had in fact provided information to the Soviets that THEY had wanted Oswald to provide to the Soviets, then Oswald, the accused assassin of the President, was a US Intelligence asset. How do you explain that if you are Angelton and Helms?

5) IF Nosenko was a Soviet plant, the timming of his first contact with US Intelligence, which coincides with Oswald re-defecting to the US, followed by Nosenko's defection after the assassination (and willingness to provide information about Oswald), could suggest that Oswald was part of a very big intelligence operation for the Soviets. IF Oswald were part of a very big intelligence operation for the Soviets and Oswald was "The Orchid Man" suggested by Angelton, then Oswald was part of a very big (perhaps even bigger than the Soviets) US Intelligence operation. If the above senario were true we should expect to find a similar reaction by US Intelligence toward Oswald's return to the US. Upon examination of the time lines we find that Edwin Anderson Walker's fall from grace coincides with Oswald's initial attempts to return to the US from the Soviet Union. Coincidence?

6) IF Oswald were an asset of both US and Soviet Intelligence we can assume that Oswald's elimination after the assassination of John F. Kennedy was essential to both entities! A cover up of Oswald's association with both entities would be a must and would ensure the cooperation of both adversaries of the Cold War. In my opinion very few people would be in a position to understand the interplay of the forces that I have suggested and only those persons could have pulled off the assassination of the President of the United States and the cover up that would have followed this assassiantion senario!

7) Oswald's CIA files suggest that his file was manipulated from the beginning and has been covered up to this day. This fact, perhaps more than any other, suggests that Oswald was a very important "patsy" in the Cold War.

Jim Root

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, while most CIA and FBI people took the position that Oswald was neither a KGB or US agent, a small group held out the possibility that he may have been a KGB agent.

Perhaps, but I find it hard to believe that any "group" at the CIA or FBI was that naive, when those two organizations (or "rogue agents" therein) were suspects in the assassination for very good and obvious reasons. I believe it was Whitten (sp) who said that around the part of the CIA where he worked, it was taken for granted that Oswald was CIA. That makes sense to me; any CIA section thinking that Oswald could be KGB doesn't. But then I never worked at Langley or Hoover's domain so what do I know.

US intelligence is tightly compartmented, even within the agencies affected. If Oswald was a US agent, it is quite possible, even likely, that it was very tightly held. What's the point of a guy being a double agent if any Tom, Dick or Harry in the DDP can defect to the Soviets and blow it? Presumably, only a small group knew about it. It's impossible for us to speculate, as outsiders and many years after the fact, WHO ran Oswald, who knew and who didn't. CI seems likely, but maybe it was some part of the SB division. Or Staff D. Or some entity that we still don't know existed.

And it's reasonable to presume that, after the assassination, the people who knew didn't advertise that fact. They would have clamped the lid shut to prevent it from being widely known. So the universe of people who knew/know could be very small.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim Root Posted Yesterday, 08:35 PM

5) IF Nosenko was a Soviet plant, the timming of his first contact with US Intelligence, which coincides with Oswald re-defecting to the US, followed by Nosenko's defection after the assassination (and willingness to provide information about Oswald), could suggest that Oswald was part of a very big intelligence operation for the Soviets. IF Oswald were part of a very big intelligence operation for the Soviets and Oswald was "The Orchid Man" suggested by Angelton, then Oswald was part of a very big (perhaps even bigger than the Soviets) US Intelligence operation. If the above senario were true we should expect to find a similar reaction by US Intelligence toward Oswald's return to the US. Upon examination of the time lines we find that Edwin Anderson Walker's fall from grace coincides with Oswald's initial attempts to return to the US from the Soviet Union. Coincidence?

Jim,

We've been in touch regarding various angles of this case and other events occuring prior, the communication has been very interesting and very educational for me.

I read with great interest the connections you have made regarding numerous events and their timing. One question came to mind, it may be obvious, but it didn't click with me:

What is the significance of Gen. Edwin Anderson Walker's fall from grace coinciding with Oswald's initial attempts to return to the US?

Thanks.

Antti

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New York Times Obituary for Nosenko

But instead of being relieved to hear that the Soviets had not been involved in the assassination, James Jesus Angleton, the C.I.A.’s legendarily suspicious counterintelligence chief, and others in the spy trade thought Mr. Nosenko’s apparent defection was a trick. After all, the agency had suffered a series of setbacks, including the unmasking and execution of two Russian intelligence officials who had been spying for the C.I.A. inside the Soviet Union.

“In the spring of 1964, after years of crushing failures, Angleton sought redemption,” Tim Weiner, a reporter for The New York Times, recounted in his 2007 book, “Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA” (Anchor Books). Angleton “believed that if the C.I.A. could break Nosenko, the master plot might be revealed — and the Kennedy assassination solved.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/28/us/28nos...uARMkwqtnQH6fGg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim Root Posted Yesterday, 08:35 PM

5) IF Nosenko was a Soviet plant, the timming of his first contact with US Intelligence, which coincides with Oswald re-defecting to the US, followed by Nosenko's defection after the assassination (and willingness to provide information about Oswald), could suggest that Oswald was part of a very big intelligence operation for the Soviets. IF Oswald were part of a very big intelligence operation for the Soviets and Oswald was "The Orchid Man" suggested by Angelton, then Oswald was part of a very big (perhaps even bigger than the Soviets) US Intelligence operation. If the above senario were true we should expect to find a similar reaction by US Intelligence toward Oswald's return to the US. Upon examination of the time lines we find that Edwin Anderson Walker's fall from grace coincides with Oswald's initial attempts to return to the US from the Soviet Union. Coincidence?

Jim,

We've been in touch regarding various angles of this case and other events occuring prior, the communication has been very interesting and very educational for me.

I read with great interest the connections you have made regarding numerous events and their timing. One question came to mind, it may be obvious, but it didn't click with me:

What is the significance of Gen. Edwin Anderson Walker's fall from grace coinciding with Oswald's initial attempts to return to the US?

Thanks.

Antti

Hello Antti

Good to hear from you again.

Coincidences of timing are important to my/our research. Your help in discovering the origins of the two Finn Air flights, one of which Oswald must have arrived in Helsinki on, overlaps with Walker's journey to Europe at the same time. This research proved that the two, Walker and Oswald, could have been on the same flight out of London which, if true, provides a logical reason why the CIA never provided passenger lists or an answer to the Warren Commission about how Oswald traveled from London to Helsinki.

Gerry Hemming provided an e-mail to me which confirmed that (at least in his belief) Walker was part of the team that inserted Oswald into the Soviet Union. If true the Oswald "mission" would have been of a very high priotity on "someone's" list. Since the Paris Summit was an event that, among others, John J. McCloy did not want to see happen and the downing of Francis Gary Powers and the U-2 led to the failure of that Summit....well, I believe that there is enough motive surrounding these events to suggest that there was a possible intelligence mission to scuttle the Paris Summit which would have been very closely held. Powers himself always believed that Oswald played a part in the dowing of his plane. And Ambassador John Hickerson's note that provided the exact information needed to receive a Soviet visa via the Russian Embassy in Helsinki, information that Oswald would follow to the "T," was sent on the extra travel day that Oswald used on his journey to Helsinki. I believe that it is plausible that someone, someone with a very high level of security clearence (someone like Edwin Walker who had been repeatedly called upon by the Chief of Staff of the Army, General Maxwell Taylor), was used to pass that information to Oswald. I believe that if that person were Walker we can understand why the passenger lists for Oswald's travel from London to Helsinki have never surfaced.

If the above has merit then we can consider that one thing that went wrong within the whole senario. Oswald, who was never to return to the US and would forever after be lost in the Soviet Union, never gave up his US citizenship. When Oswald first decided to return to the US, depending upon who you believe (Oswald or the CIA, Oswald mentions a first letter to the State Department that has never appeared in any information provided by the US Government), the INVESTIGATION leading to the Overseas Weekly article begins just after Oswald's first letter was received at the State Department. I have spoken with one of the people who was involved in that investigation and he confirmed that both the tip and the push for the article came from above. The reporters had no problem finding information for the story because the Pro Blue Program was so openly a part of the 24th Infantrys regular educational indoctrination.

Two points: If Walker provided information to Oswald (the Hickerson information) which allowed Oswald easy entry into the Soviet Union via the Soviet Embassy in Helsinki, then Oswald could identify Walker upon his return to the US. This could be a huge problem if it were suggested that the US played a roll in the downing of its own spy plane!!!!! A right wing nut (Walker) would provide plausible deniability to the US Government.

This series of events would also explain a motive for Oswald to want to see Walker dead for using Oswald as a "patsy" for Walker's "right wing" organization. It would also provide those watching Oswald (George D. perhaps) knowledge that Owsald could be the killer that they would use to assassinate the President (Bellin note from the CIA). This senario also would explain Walker's actions after the assassination when he quickly made contact with a German publication and tied Oswald to the attempt on his own life at a time when Walker could have easily been tied to Oswald by Oswald himself. I imagine that Walker knew that there had been a plot at the highest levels of government to assassinate the President as soon as he saw Oswald's face on television and that he believed that he could easily be tied to that plot (especially if he had provided information to Oswald to enter Russia).

The timing of Walker's fall from grace does in fact fit and helps (at least me) to understand the dynamics of the plot to assassinate President Kennedy.

Jim Root

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Accordingly, from April 1964 Nosenko was detained at a safe house in Maryland for nearly 18 months, on the authority of the US attorney-general, before being transferred to a cell-block specially constructed at the CIA's training facility at Camp Peary, in Virginia. He remained there, under continuous and hostile interrogation, until October 1967.

A year later a report sponsored by the CIA's Office of Security concluded that Nosenko was a genuine defector, and he was given an apology for his treatment, $137,062 in compensation and a contract as a consultant.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries...ri-Nosenko.html

I see the UK Telegraph wants readers to believe that the incarceration of Nosenko was approved by Robert Kennedy, in clear violation of the law. I would be interested to know whose word they are relying on, and whether that person waited until RFK WAS DEAD BEFORE ACCUSING HIM OF participating in the conspiracy to KIDNAP Nosenko.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Accordingly, from April 1964 Nosenko was detained at a safe house in Maryland for nearly 18 months, on the authority of the US attorney-general, before being transferred to a cell-block specially constructed at the CIA's training facility at Camp Peary, in Virginia. He remained there, under continuous and hostile interrogation, until October 1967.

A year later a report sponsored by the CIA's Office of Security concluded that Nosenko was a genuine defector, and he was given an apology for his treatment, $137,062 in compensation and a contract as a consultant.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries...ri-Nosenko.html

I see the UK Telegraph wants readers to believe that the incarceration of Nosenko was approved by Robert Kennedy, in clear violation of the law. I would be interested to know whose word they are relying on, and whether that person waited until RFK WAS DEAD BEFORE ACCUSING HIM OF participating in the conspiracy to KIDNAP Nosenko.

In Bagley's book (p182), he states that Nosenko's incarceration (in some form) was approved by the then-AG, Nick Katzenbach on April 2, 1964

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few people like Angelton, Bagley and Dave Murphy immediately thought Nosenko's defection was a phony.

This is not actually true. Bagley's original CIA report said that he found Nosenko "totally convincing". It was James Angleton, who later convinced Bagley that Nosenko was a disinformation agent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few people like Angelton, Bagley and Dave Murphy immediately thought Nosenko's defection was a phony.

This is not actually true. Bagley's original CIA report said that he found Nosenko "totally convincing". It was James Angleton, who later convinced Bagley that Nosenko was a disinformation agent.

Yes, it is true. When Nosenko "walked-in" and became an AGENT IN PLACE in May 1962, Bagley thought he was genuine. A short time later, C/SB Jack Maury told Bagley to read up on Golitsyn and speak with Angleton. By mid-1963, he thought Nosenko was probably a phony. As I wrote, by January 1964, Bagley "immediately thought Nosenko's DEFECTION was a phony." (Emphasis added.) Bagley makes his thought process clear in "Spy Wars."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...