Soviet File Given to Luna Proves a KGB Operation

[Tommy Shanks]

I think the true nature of the "Oswald letter" is getting lost here. This is a hugely important discovery and validates Hunt's own belief that the KGB were trying to set him up as part of the assassination team. The reason that the letter appeared to be in Oswald's handwriting is BECAUSE it was actually his handwriting - just cleverly combined into a "new" fake letter.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

I think the true nature of the "Oswald letter" is getting lost here. This is a hugely important discovery and validates Hunt's own belief that the KGB were trying to set him up as part of the assassination team. The reason that the letter appeared to be in Oswald's handwriting is BECAUSE it was actually his handwriting - just cleverly combined into a "new" fake letter.

Yes, we (led by me) got side-tracked to the Belarus/KGB files and whether Oswald was used as a KGB asset. I thought that the Hunt letter was shown to be a forgery about 20-30 years ago? Or dismissed as not reliable? Seems the conspiracy crowd ignored it and they have very low standards when it comes to evidence. At least evidence they like. In any case, this should close the question. That Paese Sera disinformation about Shaw can be the next nonsense to be tossed into the garbage.

One last (hah) post about Oswald and the KGB: We've had numerous sources - defections and reports - supporting the conclusion that the KGB didn't use Oswald, that they viewed him as too risky and unreliable (Q: Has Marina been lying all of these decades? She was a KGB "swallow"?). And that Nosenko for all of his problems *was* truthful when he said this. He may or may not have been a legitimate defector (I think the evidence at this point is he was); but he was truthful when he said the KGB didn't use Oswald.

Oleg Nechiporenko, one of the KGB officers who Oswald talked to in Mexico City, said he reviewed Oswald's file in Moscow and it showed that the KGB had no interest in using Oswald. Too unreliable. He also quoted in his book "Passport to Assassination" from a report that the then head of the KGB, Vladimir Semichastny, sent to the Politburo after the assassination saying the same thing: the KGB didn't recruit Oswald. Oleg Kalugin, the head of KGB counterintelligence, said Nosenko was legitimate (he was seen as a drunken, womanizing buffoon but he was indeed an agent) and the KGB didn't use Oswald. Vitaly Yurchenko, the agent who defected and then changed his mind, said the same thing. Et cetera, et cetera.

Quotes from Semichastny's memo are here: https://www.drivehq.com/file/DFPublishFile.aspx/FileID12897371455/Key2b656lhgowhe/nechiporenko%20and%20semichastny.JPG

If you want to believe they all lied - Semichastny lied to Khrushchev? - and that all of the files were whitewashed and everything was faked by the "inner" KGB as part of a "Monster Plot" then, well, there's nowhere to go. Whatever evidence that is produced that shows the KGB didn't use Oswald will be viewed as evidence that they did use him. This is the "CIA killed JFK" view where everything showing they didn't kill JFK is evidence they did. Since it's all faked.

Up is down and down is up and we'll just go in circles.

[Tommy Shanks]

If you want to believe they all lied - Semichastny lied to Khrushchev? - and that all of the files were whitewashed and everything was faked by the "inner" KGB as part of a "Monster Plot" then, well, there's nowhere to go. Whatever evidence that is produced that shows the KGB didn't use Oswald will be viewed as evidence that they did use him. This is the "CIA killed JFK" view where everything showing they didn't kill JFK is evidence they did. Since it's all faked.

Up is down and down is up and we'll just go in circles.

Excellent point, Steve. I have rarely, if ever, met a JFK conspiracy theorist who is willing to admit when they're wrong and that the evidence does not support their claims. This is another example of how an entire line of thinking could easily be tossed in the trash forever, but the nutjobs at the JFK Education Forum will spin it backwards in a way they think proves their nutty beliefs.

[Tom Graves]

Yes, we (led by me) got side-tracked to the Belarus/KGB files and whether Oswald was used as a KGB asset. I thought that the Hunt letter was shown to be a forgery about 20-30 years ago? Or dismissed as not reliable? Seems the conspiracy crowd ignored it and they have very low standards when it comes to evidence. At least evidence they like. In any case, this should close the question. That Paese Sera disinformation about Shaw can be the next nonsense to be tossed into the garbage.

One last (hah) post about Oswald and the KGB: We've had numerous sources - defections and reports - supporting the conclusion that the KGB didn't use Oswald, that they viewed him as too risky and unreliable (Q: Has Marina been lying all of these decades? She was a KGB "swallow"?). And that Nosenko for all of his problems *was* truthful when he said this. He may or may not have been a legitimate defector (I think the evidence at this point is he was); but he was truthful when he said the KGB didn't use Oswald.

Oleg Nechiporenko, one of the KGB officers who Oswald talked to in Mexico City, said he reviewed Oswald's file in Moscow and it showed that the KGB had no interest in using Oswald. Too unreliable. He also quoted in his book "Passport to Assassination" from a report that the then head of the KGB, Vladimir Semichastny, sent to the Politburo after the assassination saying the same thing: the KGB didn't recruit Oswald. Oleg Kalugin, the head of KGB counterintelligence, said Nosenko was legitimate (he was seen as a drunken, womanizing buffoon but he was indeed an agent) and the KGB didn't use Oswald. Vitaly Yurchenko, the agent who defected and then changed his mind, said the same thing. Et cetera, et cetera.

Quotes from Semichastny's memo are here: https://www.drivehq.com/file/DFPublishFile.aspx/FileID12897371455/Key2b656lhgowhe/nechiporenko%20and%20semichastny.JPG

If you want to believe they all lied - Semichastny lied to Khrushchev? - and that all of the files were whitewashed and everything was faked by the "inner" KGB as part of a "Monster Plot" then, well, there's nowhere to go. Whatever evidence that is produced that shows the KGB didn't use Oswald will be viewed as evidence that they did use him. This is the "CIA killed JFK" view where everything showing they didn't kill JFK is evidence they did. Since it's all faked.

Up is down and down is up and we'll just go in circles.

Dear Steve M.,

You're naive if you believe Yuri Nosenko was a true defector-in-place in Geneva in June 1962 and a true physical defector to the U.S. in February 1964 (News Flash: He was either STILL a false defector or had "gone rogue" and got himself to The Land of Milk and Honey (the U.S.) with the "The KGB Had Absolutely Nothing To Do With Former Sharpshooting U-2 Radar Operator LHO In The USSR" disinfo Gribanov had sent him back to Geneva to "lay on" Bagley and (probable mole) Kisevalter), that Aleksei Kulak (FEDORA) really did spy for the FBI -- LOL!, that Igor Kochnov really did collude with the CIA and the FBI, and that Vitaliy Yurchenko was a true "but very, very homesick" defector in 1985, etc., etc., etc.

LOL!

When are you going to get around to reading Bagley's book, "Spy Wars," his 35-page follow-up article, "Ghosts of the Spy Wars," and the parts about Nosenko in John M. Newman's book, "Uncovering Popov's Mole" (which he dedicated to Bagley)?

Here's my Wikipedia article on Bagley.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennent_H._Bagley


-- Tom

[Michael T. Griffith]

https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/soviet-file-given-to-luna-proves-a-kgb-operation

Soviet File Given to Luna Proves a KGB Operation 

A letter written by Lee Harvey Oswald, contained in the Soviet file given to Congresswoman Luna, proves the KGB conducted an operation to influence American public opinion that the CIA was involved in the JFK assassination.

To put it another way, the KGB was aware that rogue CIA elements played a role in JFK's death and sought to bring this fact to the attention of the American people in response to right-wing efforts to blame the Soviet Union for JFK's murder.

This Soviet file provides substantial indirect confirmation of Richard Case Nagell's claims. We know that Nagell was deeply involved in the U.S. intelligence long after he left the Army because he had the real names of several counter-intel CIA officers in his notebook. As I have told you before, Fred, go ask anyone with a TS/SCI clearance how abjectly impossible it would be for a non-intel person to know the real names of several counter-intel CIA personnel. Only someone who had the required clearance and access could know such information.

[Tom Graves]

To put it another way, the KGB was aware that rogue CIA elements played a role in JFK's death and sought to bring this fact to the attention of the American people in response to right-wing efforts to blame the Soviet Union for JFK's murder.

This Soviet file provides substantial indirect confirmation of Richard Case Nagell's claims. We know that Nagell was deeply involved in the U.S. intelligence long after he left the Army because he had the real names of several counter-intel CIA officers in his notebook. As I have told you before, Fred, go ask anyone with a TS/SCI clearance how abjectly impossible it would be for a non-intel person to know the real names of several counter-intel CIA personnel. Only someone who had the required clearance and access could know such information.

Dear Comrade Griffith,

"Rogue elements," or KGB "moles"?

Regardless, please tell me, again, how many bad guys and bad gals were involved altogether in the planning, the "patsy-ing," the planting of evidence, the shooting, the getting-away, the altering of photos, films and x-rays, and creating other aspects of the all-important (and evidently ongoing!!!) cover-up?

Just twenty to thirty?

LOL!

-- Tom

PS Your buddy, Putin, says "Keep up the good work!"

[Michael T. Griffith]

Yes, we (led by me) got side-tracked to the Belarus/KGB files and whether Oswald was used as a KGB asset. I thought that the Hunt letter was shown to be a forgery about 20-30 years ago? Or dismissed as not reliable? Seems the conspiracy crowd ignored it and they have very low standards when it comes to evidence. At least evidence they like. In any case, this should close the question. That Paese Sera disinformation about Shaw can be the next nonsense to be tossed into the garbage.

One last (hah) post about Oswald and the KGB: We've had numerous sources - defections and reports - supporting the conclusion that the KGB didn't use Oswald, that they viewed him as too risky and unreliable (Q: Has Marina been lying all of these decades? She was a KGB "swallow"?). And that Nosenko for all of his problems *was* truthful when he said this. He may or may not have been a legitimate defector (I think the evidence at this point is he was); but he was truthful when he said the KGB didn't use Oswald.

Oleg Nechiporenko, one of the KGB officers who Oswald talked to in Mexico City, said he reviewed Oswald's file in Moscow and it showed that the KGB had no interest in using Oswald. Too unreliable. He also quoted in his book "Passport to Assassination" from a report that the then head of the KGB, Vladimir Semichastny, sent to the Politburo after the assassination saying the same thing: the KGB didn't recruit Oswald. Oleg Kalugin, the head of KGB counterintelligence, said Nosenko was legitimate (he was seen as a drunken, womanizing buffoon but he was indeed an agent) and the KGB didn't use Oswald. Vitaly Yurchenko, the agent who defected and then changed his mind, said the same thing. Et cetera, et cetera.

Quotes from Semichastny's memo are here: https://www.drivehq.com/file/DFPublishFile.aspx/FileID12897371455/Key2b656lhgowhe/nechiporenko%20and%20semichastny.JPG

If you want to believe they all lied - Semichastny lied to Khrushchev? - and that all of the files were whitewashed and everything was faked by the "inner" KGB as part of a "Monster Plot" then, well, there's nowhere to go. Whatever evidence that is produced that shows the KGB didn't use Oswald will be viewed as evidence that they did use him. This is the "CIA killed JFK" view where everything showing they didn't kill JFK is evidence they did. Since it's all faked.

Up is down and down is up and we'll just go in circles.

Right, because intel agencies would never, ever cover up illegal and/or controversial operations by destroying files, creating fake paper trails, planting false leads, etc., etc. Oh, no! Never!

The degree of gullibility and naivete in the lone-gunman camp is a sight to behold.

And, no, the "Dear Mr. Hunt" note has not been proven to be a forgery. In 1977, the Dallas Morning News had the note analyzed by three handwriting experts, and all three concluded the handwriting was Oswald's (Henry Hurt, Reasonable Doubt, pp. 235-236; Dallas Morning News, February 6, 1977, April 2, 6, 1977, September 26, 1978).

The HSCA handwriting experts were "unable to come to any firm conclusion regarding this particular document," were not able "to accurately determine that it is specifically a forgery and at the same time not able to accurately determine whether or not it corresponds to all of the other writings that we have identified" (4 HSCA 359).

However, speaking for the handwriting panel, Joseph McNally acknowledged that "the writing pattern or the overall letter designs are consistent with those as written" on the other Oswald documents" but that the handwriting in the note "is much more precisely and much more carefully written" than most of Oswald's other writings (4 HSCA 358).

McNally admitted that this precision was not markedly out of the ordinary from other Oswald documents but only "a little bit out of the ordinary," and that the note showed "no great deviation" from Oswald's handwriting in letter design forms:

There is no great deviation from the writing of Oswald insofar as individual letter design forms are concerned. However, it is the method of writing that is so precise and so careful, it is a little bit out of the ordinary from most of the writing that I have seen. (4 HSCA 358)

Let's remember that in that note, Oswald asks a "Mr. Hunt" for information on his next "assignment," and that Jack Ruby visited one of the offices owned by oil billionaire and ardent right-winger H. L. Hunt the day before the assassination. The Hunts were known virulent Kennedy haters. H. L. and his sons Lamar and Nelson paid for a large anti-Kennedy ad in the Dallas Morning News on the day of the assassination that accused JFK of aiding the Communist cause and of being dangerously soft on the Soviet Union and Cuba. I can hear you folks now: "This is all just an incredible, cosmic coincidence! Such wildly unlikely and seemingly mind-boggling coincidences happen all the time! Nothing to see here!"

Finally, it bears repeating that you guys are the ones who are in the decided minority on the JFK case, and that those who reject your lone-gunman fantasy in this forum are among those in the 2/3 to 3/4 majority of the Western world who believe JFK was killed by a conspiracy--not to mention the fact that the percentage of people who agree with you is not very much larger than the percentage of people who believe 9/11 was an inside job.

You guys talk like you're in the mainstream majority, when in fact you're in the decided minority. When a political candidate loses an election and gets only 1/4 to 1/3 of the votes, he is viewed as having lost in a "landslide." If he had any sense, he wouldn't go around talking like he had barely lost, much less like he had won.

[Tom Graves]

Right, because intel agencies would never, ever cover up illegal and/or controversial operations by destroying files, creating fake paper trails, planting false leads, etc., etc. Oh, no! Never!

Dear Comrade Griffith,

I'm sure your beloved KGB* would never do that sort of thing.

*Today's SVR and FSB

-- Tom