JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
Some Info about Malcom Blunt and Bruce Solie
Tom Graves:
--- Quote from: Benjamin Cole on January 30, 2026, 12:20:14 AM ---TG-
Sorry if this info is not useful to you.
--- End quote ---
Have you found it useful?
Maybe I'm missing something.
Benjamin Cole:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JrjkAJh0eUTDFgl8LbU7y6OAhKnnPi54/view?usp=sharing
This doc shows Solie was sticking his nose into the Garrison investigation, although Solie was in counter-intel.
I don't know know if there are other docs, or many undocumented actions by Solie.
If Solie is hunting spies and moles, he seems a little far astray. Maybe he had valid reasons, but I can't see that story line.
Perhaps Solie feared G2 assets would be exposed, which could lead to his exposure as well.
Lance Payette:
--- Quote from: Benjamin Cole on January 30, 2026, 04:43:00 AM ---https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JrjkAJh0eUTDFgl8LbU7y6OAhKnnPi54/view?usp=sharing
This doc shows Solie was sticking his nose into the Garrison investigation, although Solie was in counter-intel.
I don't know know if there are other docs, or many undocumented actions by Solie.
If Solie is hunting spies and moles, he seems a little far astray. Maybe he had valid reasons, but I can't see that story line.
Perhaps Solie feared G2 assets would be exposed, which could lead to his exposure as well.
--- End quote ---
He was in the Office of Security, heading the Research staff. Read his HSCA testimony as to the scope of his duties. Moreover, Shaw's attorneys were posing questions as to Shaw's possible CIA connections (and even whether the CIA had files on THEM!). We have no idea what the "inquiry" may have related to in the context of Solie's position.
In fact, the All-Seeing Eye of AI tells me this is exactly what Solie was doing - assisting in the inquiry as to whether Shaw in fact had any CIA connections as alleged. Moreover, there are many materials with Solie's name in reference to WC critics like Weisberg and Epstein and characters like Nagell. Why? Because these were potential SECURITY issues and he headed the RESEARCH staff. Indeed, pesky Mr. AI interrupted my breakfast to add, "Bruce Solie, a high-ranking official in the CIA’s Office of Security (OS) and its Security Research Staff (SRS), was interested in Jim Garrison’s investigation because it threatened to expose sensitive CIA operations and personnel."
On pages 11-17 of this PDF are organizational charts for the Office of Security. It wasn't exactly "Howard Osborn and Bruce Solie sharing a desk in the corner."
https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32404556.pdf
This is my problem with characters like Blunt, whom I put in the same category as Newman. They absolutely BURY themselves (and you, their eager readers) in documents and acronyms and fill in the vast gaps with dark speculation driven by what they want to see. "Read Newman's Jesus book," advises the sage Mr. Payette. You will realize that Newman and Blunt, your heroes, are, in their own little way ... absolutely nutty.
Memo to Solie referencing Garrison's investigation = Solie is outside his assigned area = Solie is monitoring the Garrison investigation = Solie is a KGB mole.
Tom Graves:
--- Quote from: Lance Payette on January 30, 2026, 01:02:08 PM ---He was in the Office of Security, heading the Research staff. Read his HSCA testimony as to the scope of his duties. Moreover, Shaw's attorneys were posing questions as to Shaw's possible CIA connections (and even whether the CIA had files on THEM!). We have no idea what the "inquiry" may have related to in the context of Solie's position.
In fact, the All-Seeing Eye of AI tells me this is exactly what Solie was doing - assisting in the inquiry as to whether Shaw in fact had any CIA connections as alleged. Moreover, there are many materials with Solie's name in reference to WC critics like Weisberg and Epstein and characters like Nagell. Why? Because these were potential SECURITY issues and he headed the RESEARCH staff. Indeed, pesky Mr. AI interrupted my breakfast to add, "Bruce Solie, a high-ranking official in the CIA’s Office of Security (OS) and its Security Research Staff (SRS), was interested in Jim Garrison’s investigation because it threatened to expose sensitive CIA operations and personnel."
On pages 11-17 of this PDF are organizational charts for the Office of Security. It wasn't exactly "Howard Osborn and Bruce Solie sharing a desk in the corner."
https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32404556.pdf
This is my problem with characters like Blunt, whom I put in the same category as Newman. They absolutely BURY themselves (and you, their eager readers) in documents and acronyms and fill in the vast gaps with dark speculation driven by what they want to see. "Read Newman's Jesus book," advises the sage Mr. Payette. You will realize that Newman and Blunt, your heroes, are, in their own little way ... absolutely nutty.
Memo to Solie referencing Garrison's investigation = Solie is outside his assigned area = Solie is monitoring the Garrison investigation = Solie is a KGB mole.
--- End quote ---
Dear Fancy Pants Rants,
Was it "nutty" of Blunt to show to Bagley an April 1964 memo to Warren Commission attorney W. David Slawson in the margins of which Slawson had written that Solie had tried to convince him in a (now missing) letter or memo to let Nosenko testify to the Warren Commission, even though harsh (but not tortuous) interrogations of Nosenko had just begun, and even though many officers in the Soviet Russia Division and the Counterintelligence Staff doubted that Nosenko was bona fide?
Was it "nutty" of Blunt to show Bagley some CIA documents that Bagley hadn't been privy to in 1959-1960 which indicated that someone in Solie's office had arranged in advance with the Records Integration Division and the Office of Mail Logistics to have all of the incoming non-CIA cables on Oswald's upcoming defection be sent to Solie's office instead of where they would normally go -- the Soviet Russia Division?
-- Tom
Benjamin Cole:
LP--
Fair points.
But Solie's actions regarding the WC, and then testimony to the HSCA, sure look like he was eager to absolve Nosenko of wrongdoing in the eyes of investigating bodies. That seems to extend beyond his professional ken.
Bagley thought Nosenko was a rat. By all accounts, Bagley was smart and experienced, had done good service for the CIA. Even if Bagley was "wrong on Nosenko," one would expect Bagley to be shuffled sideways, or even "kicked upstairs." Instead the professional noose was brought out.
This lines up with Ambassador Mann and State Dept'er Charles Thomas having their careers ended merely for being interested in LHO-Cuba ties.
Victor Marchetti said decades ago that the CIA was so laced with KGB he was not sure who was working for who.
It may be G2 assets egged LHO on, or maybe helped on 11/22.
Solie? Fishier than the Starkist tuna factory.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version