11
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Is Niederhut just a run-of-the-mill "useful idiot," or something more?
« Last post by Tom Graves on Today at 11:07:04 AM »TG-
I doubt the CIA historian made any error in his definition of Clay Shaw, in preparing a classified report for the CIA director.
The CIA historian may have used non-standard nomenclature in describing Shaw. So what?
The CIA historian may have relied on documents that are not public record, or on off-the-record verbal discussions with CIA officers, in coming to his conclusions about Shaw. The historian may have not been allowed to discuss those OTR discussions, or classified records.
No one at the CIA has ever issued a statement that the CIA historian was in error in his description of Shaw. I find it hard to believe the CIA would never clear up the record, if the historian had bungled the truth.
Rather, I suspect someone at the CIA had Garrison's ear, and that someone wanted to plant the "CIA did it" narrative.
Who might that be?
Well, your buddy, J. Kenneth McDonald, wrote that so-called history in January 1992.
Probable KGB mole Bruce Leonard Solie -- James Angleton's Office of Security-based confidant, mentor, and mole-hunting superior -- had already retired from the Agency in 1979, but he didn't die until 23 December 1992, so who knows?
Recent Posts





