Important Disclosure about William King Harvey in Recently Released Document

[Tom Graves]

I wish Litwin would give up and just admit the CIA historian [Kenneth J. McDonald] referred to Clay Shaw, in a heavily vetted document, as a "highly paid contract source" and that the description was not a mistake, and the CIA historian meant to say a "highly rated" contact source.

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10337-10006.pdf

What, pray tell, is a "CIA contract source"?

Why not say contract agent, instead?

Shouldn't J. Kenneth McDonald have said, "Clay Shaw was a highly valued CIA contact source?"

Wouldn't that make more sense?

Regardless, what years did the 1992 report (which was cobbled together by McDonald's staff) say Shaw was a "highly paid CIA contract source"?

1948 to 1956, wasn't it?

Did you think evil, evil Shaw started planning the homosexual thrill-kill the CIA's assassination of JFK in 1956?

"McDonald's report was heavily vetted," you say?

LOL!

"Heavily vetted" by whom?

Answer: By incompetent J. Kenneth McDonald's incompetent staff.

[Benjamin Cole]

Evidently, Shaw was highly paid, and was not a CIA officer, but a source. That is what the CIA historian said, and in writing, and not in a memo, but an official report. This seems like a hard one to dodge.

I had the misfortune of working in a government office in the late 1979s, and anything in writing is scrutinized carefully, and I assume more so at the CIA.  One reason is that government offices are very political, and also do not have budget constraints and tight deadlines like the private sector.

The government agencies can and do copy-edit through layers and layers of officialdom.

In the private sector, there is a budget for a thin line of copy-editors, and the product has to get to press (old days).

If you look at the "masthead" of the CIA report, you see a lot of names.

I cannot prove the CIA historian was accurate in his description of Shaw. I would put high odds he was. That's kind of sensitive matter to get wrong.

But, as I say, caveat emptor,, and draw your own conclusions.

[Tom Graves]

Evidently, Shaw was highly paid, and was not a CIA officer, but a source. That is what the CIA historian said, and in writing, and not in a memo, but an official report. This seems like a hard one to dodge.

I had the misfortune of working in a government office in the late 1979s, and anything in writing is scrutinized carefully, and I assume more so at the CIA.  One reason is that government offices are very political, and also do not have budget constraints and tight deadlines like the private sector.

The government agencies can and do copy-edit through layers and layers of officialdom.

In the private sector, there is a budget for a thin line of copy-editors, and the product has to get to press (old days).

If you look at the "masthead" of the CIA report, you see a lot of names.

I cannot prove the CIA historian was accurate in his description of Shaw. I would put high odds he was. That's kind of sensitive matter to get wrong.

But, as I say, caveat emptor,, and draw your own conclusions.

"Evidently" my you-know-what.

Question:

Why is it that when one googles the words "CIA" and "Contract Source" simultaneously, all one gets is evil, evil, evil Clay Shaw?

Thank you in advance for your collegial reply.

[Benjamin Cole]

TG-

To answer your collegial question, my take is that the CIA is not in the practice of publishing names of their paid contract sources. So, very few such names have entered open-source literature.

So Clay Shaw gets a lot of hits and goes high in the algos.

Clay Shaw worked in an organization (the trade mart) that shipped goods and documents, and traveled, internationally.

It makes sense Shaw was some sort of paid CIA contract source, and perhaps even helped on some operational matters, as in shipping goods.

I cannot prove that. I doubt Shaw had much to do with the JFKA.

But as I always say, caveat emptor, and draw your own conclusions.

[Tom Graves]

TG-

To answer your collegial question, my take is that the CIA is not in the practice of publishing names of their paid contract sources. So, very few such names have entered open-source literature.

So Clay Shaw gets a lot of hits and goes high in the algos.

Clay Shaw worked in an organization (the trade mart) that shipped goods and documents, and traveled, internationally.

It makes sense Shaw was some sort of paid CIA contract source, and perhaps even helped on some operational matters, as in shipping goods.

I cannot prove that. I doubt Shaw had much to do with the JFKA.

But as I always say, caveat emptor, and draw your own conclusions.

I think it's because the evil, evil CIA never uses the nonsensical expression "contract source" except when its incompetent historical staff cobbles together some old memos in a "Chinese Whispers" kinda way.

Unless, of course, Mole Solie (whom, you will remember, JFKA CT and researcher Malcolm Blunt told Bart "The Xxxx" Kamp in September of 2021 was "All over the Kennedy Investigation and all over Clay Shaw for Jim Garrison") "got to" said historical staff and/or its incompetent chief, J. Kenneth McDonald.

When you go to 100:29 for this revelation, bear in mind that Blunt says "Jim DiEugenio . . . Jim DiEugenio" when he means to say "Jim Garrison . . . Jim Garrison."

https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=%22malcolm+blunt%22+nosenko+youtube&mid=7DBB503AA54F7BE317ED7DBB503AA54F7BE317ED&FORM=VIRE

[Lance Payette]

My God, these CT loons just never give up ...

Larry Schnapf - a/k/a I'm Increasingly Thinking He's Nuts - just posted on the Other Forum:

What JFK Facts has reported is that Charles Niles was an aviator who died in  1916 so his name was being used as an alias.  Here is link to Niles wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Franklin_Niles

JFK Facts "has reported"? Reported? It's just about all you encounter when you try to research Charles F. Niles. Yes, Charles Franklin Niles was indeed a well-known aviator who crashed, which makes researching the name rather difficult. There was also a Charles F. Niles, Jr. and a Charles F. Niles III, not to mention a surprising number of other Charles F. Niles.

HOW BATSH*T CRAZY would you have to be to think that "Charles F. Niles" was being used as an alias for some FAA grunt whose name appears in federal employee directories (from as early as 1959 and as late as 1968, just by what Fred found)? The CIA assigned Buford H. Philbin the alias Charles F. Niles because ____________? Please, try to fill in the blank with something that doesn't make you sound insane.

Is the theory that this was some inside joke? Yeah, let's disguise old Buford with an alias that matches the name of a renowned aviator. Hello?

[Tom Graves]

My God, these CT loons just never give up ...

Larry Schnapf - a/k/a I'm Increasingly Thinking He's Nuts - just posted on the Other Forum:

What JFK Facts has reported is that Charles Niles was an aviator who died in  1916 so his name was being used as an alias.  Here is link to Niles wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Franklin_Niles

JFK Facts "has reported"? Reported? It's just about all you encounter when you try to research Charles F. Niles. Yes, Charles Franklin Niles was indeed a well-known aviator who crashed, which makes researching the name rather difficult. There was also a Charles Franklin Niles, Jr. and a Charles Franklin Niles III, not to mention a surprising number of other Charles F. Niles.

HOW BATSH*T CRAZY would you have to be to think that "Charles F. Niles" was being used as an alias for some FAA grunt whose name appears in federal employee directories? The CIA assigned Buford H. Philbin the alias Charles F. Niles because ____________? Please, try to fill in the blank with something that doesn't make you sound insane.

Dear Fancy Prancer Rants,

Don't you understand?

"Former" KGB counterintelligence officer Vladimir Putin cherishes what Larry Schnapf, Jefferson Morley, and Chester "Chad" Nagle, Jr., et al., have been doing for so many years.

-- Tom