Interview of CIA Black Ops Operative Chip Tatum

[Daniel Burnet]

.

Edited August 28, 2015 by Daniel Burnet

[Daniel Burnet]

.

Edited August 28, 2015 by Daniel Burnet

[Len Colby]

Among various lesser problems with his story he claims to have reported to CIA Director “William J. Colby” 1985 – 1992, 9 – 16 years after William E. Colby was forced out by Ford, thus he is stupid, ignorant and a xxxx, thus his claims are worthless except as poorly written fiction.

[Daniel Burnet]

.

Edited August 28, 2015 by Daniel Burnet

[Len Colby]

Among various lesser problems with his story he claims to have reported to CIA Director “William J. Colby” 1985 – 1992, 9 – 16 years after William E. Colby was forced out by Ford, thus he is stupid, ignorant and a xxxx, thus his claims are worthless except as poorly written fiction.

Please allow me to play Devil's Advocate for a moment.

Of course, William Colby was not with the CIA at this juncture. He was, however, still highly connected and active in CIA related programs. For instance, he remained in contact with such Wackenhut associated individuals as Mitchell Rogovin and Admiral Stansfield Turner, as well as with Ray Cline, who was believed to be part of Danny Casolaro's 'Octopus' - which was itself extremely connected to Wackenhut and the CIA. See here.

Except that he clearly IDed Colby as the Director in the period and said he succeeded Bush when the opposite was the case. He even claimed that he gave Colby his resignation in 1992.

So in your book participating in “panel discussions” with “Mitchell Rogovin and Admiral Stansfield Turner, as well as with Ray Cline” qualified as continuing contact with them? By that same ‘logic’ Frank Church and Claiborne Pell were tied to the CIA and the Octopus because they participated in the discussions as well.

[Daniel Burnet]

.

Edited August 28, 2015 by Daniel Burnet

[Len Colby]

I had already acknowledged I had not watched the video in quite some time and had forgotten most of the details, and that if he had fingered Colby as the then CIA Director that we should discard Tatum's claims.

Was the CIA Director title used as a general reference, or was he specifically referred to as the current CIA Director? If the latter, then yes, we should leave behind everything that Tatum says.

And guess what? That's exactly what I'm doing right now.

Since we are in basic agreement I won't nitpick !