Undercovering Popov's Mole: The Assassination of President Kennedy by John M. Newman

[Paul Brancato]

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

I hope you're right Paul. Because with my limited knowledge, I agree with Angleton as well. It's good to know that I'm on the same side of the fence as the expert, John Newman.

 

For years I’ve felt otherwise. In your view, why was Nosenko sent to the US as a false defector? 

[Matt Allison]

It seems others suspected John Paisley of misdeeds, as he was found floating in Chesapeake Bay in October 1978 with a gunshot wound to the head and weights tied around his torso.

Dick Russell got a face-to-face interview with Angleton in the 70s, and the first edition of TMWKTM has an in-depth section on Angleton, the mole, and John Paisley.

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Paul Brancato said:

For years I’ve felt otherwise. In your view, why was Nosenko sent to the US as a false defector? 

 

I believe that Nosenko was sent to undue damage caused by Golitsyn, and to confirm that Oswald wasn't in cahoots with the Soviet Union.

But I'm not well read on this topic. So my opinion isn't a strong one.

 

[Matt Allison]

12 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I believe that Nosenko was sent to undue damage caused by Golitsyn, and to confirm that Oswald wasn't in cahoots with the Soviet Union.

 

Yes, the irony is interesting. Standard method of operation for the KGB/FSB is to lie about everything; it is a requirement.

So when they actually needed to tell the truth, no one believed them lol

[Anthony Thorne]

Another CIA murder occurred just a couple of week's after Paisley's - largely overlooked, during the HSCA hearings, and of a Latin American specialist. I keep meaning to write it up here. Will try over the coming week or so.

[Paul Brancato]

16 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

I believe that Nosenko was sent to undue damage caused by Golitsyn, and to confirm that Oswald wasn't in cahoots with the Soviet Union.

But I'm not well read on this topic. So my opinion isn't a strong one.

 

Well, Oswald wasn’t IMO in cahoots with USSR, so if they sent him to prove that point it seems unnecessary. Golitsyn certainly went off the deep end later, with insane info about supposed Soviet agents, such as Harold Wilson. Angleton’s obsession with Nosenko, and belief in Golitsyn, was by nearly all accounts destructive to the CIA. He may have been a real defector, but a nut anyway. It’s hard to see how Nosenko could compare on that level. I’m troubled by Newman’s adherence to Pete Bagley. 
I sat in a room of researchers, invited by Jim D, in SF, where many were presenting their views and latest books. Newman sat in his chair and acted the leader, even though he wasn’t. It bothered me. I’ve been following his occasional hints as to what’s coming, and for sure I’m interested, having admired his earlier book on Oswald. As you say, I’m no expert. But my antenna are up. 

[Matt Allison]

If one assumes that at least one person in the CIA knew more about Oswald in Russia than Nosenko did, then there's quite a bit that can be deduced by how each particular CIA official treated Nosenko...

[Sandy Larsen]

19 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

On 10/13/2022 at 8:42 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

I believe that Nosenko was sent to undue damage caused by Golitsyn, and to confirm that Oswald wasn't in cahoots with the Soviet Union.

But I'm not well read on this topic. So my opinion isn't a strong one.

Well, Oswald wasn’t IMO in cahoots with USSR, so if they sent him to prove that point it seems unnecessary.

 

Ah, but the CIA had conducted a false flag operation -- as revealed by the faked Mexico City episode -- to paint Oswald as conspiring with Cuba and Russia to kill Kennedy. The Russians knew this and wanted to make sure that the Johnson Administration hadn't fallen for the ruse.

 

19 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Golitsyn certainly went off the deep end later, with insane info about supposed Soviet agents, such as Harold Wilson. Angleton’s obsession with Nosenko, and belief in Golitsyn, was by nearly all accounts destructive to the CIA. He may have been a real defector, but a nut anyway. It’s hard to see how Nosenko could compare on that level.

 

You may be right. But there are those who disagree with you, including Angleton himself. Who... was there.

 

19 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

I’m troubled by Newman’s adherence to Pete Bagley. 
I sat in a room of researchers, invited by Jim D, in SF, where many were presenting their views and latest books. Newman sat in his chair and acted the leader, even though he wasn’t. It bothered me. I’ve been following his occasional hints as to what’s coming, and for sure I’m interested, having admired his earlier book on Oswald. As you say, I’m no expert. But my antenna are up.

 

Newman is the expert. But that doesn't mean he is or will be right.

While my thoughts regarding Nosenko aren't strong, my thoughts regarding the Mexico City incident being a CIA-sponsored false-flag operation against Cuba and Russia (and Oswald as a patsy) ARE strong. So if what Newman concludes goes counter to that, I certainly won't necessarily accept it.

 

[David Boylan]

Dr. Newman talks to Doug Campbell and reveals quite a bit of new information on Popov's mole and how this new book is currently being suppressed!

 

https://www.spreaker.com/user/7338953/197-october-16-2022-with-intent-to-suppr?

Edited October 16, 2022 by David Boylan

[Leslie Sharp]

On 10/2/2022 at 4:50 AM, Benjamin Cole said:

For example, the 15 June 1978 HSCA interview of Mr. Angleton which, thanks to Alan Dale and Jeff Morley, was found at the National Archives, listened to, transcribed and made available to us. It's an absolute master class in gaining some small understanding of the mind of James Angleton. 

https://jfkfacts.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Angleton-HSCA-interview.pdf 

here

Benjamin,

I transcribed one of the three tapes for Jeff.  I did so out of gratitude for his providing a quality forum, jfkfacts.org.  Listening to a clearly inebriated Angleton ramble on and knowing that every word must be transcribed correctly was  a challenge. And yes, I wanted to wash my brain when I finished. The man was an evil genius.

[Benjamin Cole]

5 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

Benjamin,

I transcribed one of the three tapes for Jeff.  I did so out of gratitude for his providing a quality forum, jfkfacts.org.  Listening to a clearly inebriated Angleton ramble on and knowing that every word must be transcribed correctly was  a challenge. And yes, I wanted to wash my brain when I finished. The man was an evil genius.

Then, a special thanks to you, Leslie Sharp. 

I often feel that many, many people (especially professionals) need to "take a long vacation." It is easy to get engulfed in one's work, and especially those in the intel services, and especially during or around Cold Wars.  

I never met Angleton, but it would not surprise me if he "got in too deep." 

[Tony Rose]

On 10/1/2022 at 10:35 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

Why is the mole referred to as "Popov's mole?"

I know that Pyotr Popov was a KGB double agent. But what has he to do with Angleton's hypothetical mole?

 

No one seems to have answered you directly.

Popov, who defected in place, told his CIA contact (George Kisevalter) that the highest echelons of the CIA had been infiltrated.  He had heard the information from KGB agents who was bragging.  Hence, "Popov's mole."

[Tony Rose]

On 10/1/2022 at 10:50 AM, Chris Barnard said:

What’s in it for JJA? You’re screwed if you get caught. I feel like JJA justified his actions as patriotism or the greater good. He seems an unlikely double agent. He could see first hand the Soviets losing. There was all of the money in the world for JJA to make with the foreknowledge of CIA ops and how they change things abroad. He wouldn’t be better off. I guess the Soviets could have blackmail materials compromising him, its a possibility. 

I don't think he was. 

No, JJA wasn't Popov's mole, but I suspected him for years if for no other reason than he never seemed to be able to find the mole and because of his close association with Philby.

[Tony Rose]

On 10/1/2022 at 10:50 AM, Chris Barnard said:

What’s in it for JJA? You’re screwed if you get caught. I feel like JJA justified his actions as patriotism or the greater good. He seems an unlikely double agent. He could see first hand the Soviets losing. There was all of the money in the world for JJA to make with the foreknowledge of CIA ops and how they change things abroad. He wouldn’t be better off. I guess the Soviets could have blackmail materials compromising him, its a possibility. 

I don't think he was. 

No, JJA wasn't Popov's mole, but I suspected him for years if for no other reason than he never seemed to be able to find the mole and because of his close association with Philby.

[Tony Rose]

On 10/1/2022 at 10:50 AM, Chris Barnard said:

What’s in it for JJA? You’re screwed if you get caught. I feel like JJA justified his actions as patriotism or the greater good. He seems an unlikely double agent. He could see first hand the Soviets losing. There was all of the money in the world for JJA to make with the foreknowledge of CIA ops and how they change things abroad. He wouldn’t be better off. I guess the Soviets could have blackmail materials compromising him, its a possibility. 

I don't think he was. 

No, JJA wasn't Popov's mole, but I suspected him for years if for no other reason than he never seemed to be able to find the mole and because of his close association with Philby.