The KGB "played" overly ambitious, scandal-plagued, and revengeful Jim Garrison

[Tom Graves]

TG-

The word "voluntary" is not mutually exclusive with "highly paid."

I assume JKM is accurate in his description of Shaw as "highly paid." The CIA has never retracted, corrected or clarified that description of Shaw by their own historian.

As a non-CIA officer, Shaw was likely not instructed or ordered anywhere, but was likely asked to perform certain tasks, and voluntarily did so, and then was highly paid.

Shaw may have contributed large amounts of information to the CIA, though verbally, or may have performed tasks for which there is no revealing paperwork, such as moving goods internationally through front companies.

Shaw may have been a source for documents written by others, including CIA officers.

My take is Shaw was among a group of US assets somewhat monitoring LHO, and other Cuban assets, in New Orleans, and for good reason. LHO was a declared Marxist, had been to Russia, and may have been seen in company of G2'ers or DGI'ers.

According to your tortured logic, J. Kenneth should have said Shaw was a highly paid contact source.

But he didn't.

He called him a highly paid contract source.

Whatever that is.

[Benjamin Cole]

TG--

OK, the accurate description of Shaw is that he was a "highly paid contract source."

If JKM and the CIA believe that to be true, then it was likely true.

So the CIA had Shaw "under contract" to provide information. So what? The contract may have been a formality of a sort.

Shaw was asked to perform certain tasks, and if he felt he could, then he did.

There is little doubt Shaw was a CIA asset, and evidently important in the 1950s, important enough to be "highly paid."

[Tom Graves]

TG--

OK, the accurate description of Shaw is that he was a "highly paid contract source."

If JKM and the CIA believe that to be true, then it was likely true.

So the CIA had Shaw "under contract" to provide information. So what? The contract may have been a formality of a sort.

Shaw was asked to perform certain tasks, and if he felt he could, then he did.

There is little doubt Shaw was a CIA asset, and evidently important in the 1950s, important enough to be "highly paid."

Besides Clay Shaw, who in the history of the CIA was a "contract source"?

Carter Page? If so, why has he been described as a "contact source"?

If "contract source" was an official designation, Shaw couldn't have been the only one, right?

Please tell us who, other than Shaw, was a "CIA contract source," and tell us if they were "highly paid," "moderately paid," or "low paid."

Or have the evil, evil, evil gunsel CIA'er perps in Project Mockingbird hidden that intel?

[Tom Scully]

Besides Clay Shaw, who in the history of the CIA was a "contract source"?

Carter Page? If so, why has he been described as a "contact source"?

If "contract source" was an official designation, Shaw couldn't have been the only one, right?

Please tell us who, other than Shaw, was a "CIA contract source," and tell us if they "highly paid," "moderately paid," or "low paid."

Or have the evil, evil, evil gunsel CIA'er perps in Project Mockingbird hidden that intel?

Voluminous support for the contention there was actually one side, description of two adversarial sides is found wanting, the Shaw criminal trial jury's three hours of deliberation
and the inaccurate naming of actual adversaries by Mellen, "On the Trail" editor and "JFK, the Movie", screenplay writer, Zachary Sklar, and of course, Jim DiEugenio, as well as
the two debates between Nicholas Lemann and Sklar, first in print, and secondly in a 1992 Charlie Rose TV segment, combine to influence a reasonable person to conclude that you, Tommy, are not helping yourself by creating this thread and posting in it what you have, so far.
 
Patience....following archive link loads slowly...

https://web.archive.org/web/20161229162654/https://jfkfacts.org/comment-of-the-week-17/Tom S. February 16, 2016

Ronnie Wayne – February 11 (2016)

…. I guess the other main theory of the thread is it means all of DiEugenio and Mellen’s work, as well as Garrison’s is junk?

It is inescapable, judging by researched details of familial relationships emerging during the past ten years, to argue as the only compatible with reality option, that
Garrison, Shaw, and Nicholas Lemann were all playing parts of the same script! There isn't any other plausible explanation for what we've become aware that they knew
vs. what they said, and did.

Mellen, Sklar, DiEugenio and this fellow, Perry Raymond Russo, obviously were not "read in".

The "both sides of the fence" stinking up Willard Robertson also is a tell.

Speaking of other "same side" activity,

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,3894.msg153982.html#msg153982
....
Garrison's mentor, Eberhard Deutsch, was United Fruit's outside counsel....inside counsel, Augusto Miceli, was the brother-in-law of CIA's Dorothy Brandao, (an
officer in the NOLA Domestic Contacts office.)
.....

Ms. Brandao attended college in Garrison's hometown, Des Moines

[Tom Graves]

Did a well-known New Orleans businessman, Clay Shaw, a highly valued contact source of the CIA's Domestic Contacts Division from 1948 to 1956, organize the assassination of JFK for the evil, evil Agency, or, as overly ambitious, scandal-plagued, and revengeful Jim Garrison originally thought (until he'd read an article in a Communist-owned Italian newspaper), did he mastermind a Leopold-and-Loeb-like homosexual "thrill-kill" of JFK?