Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!  (Read 8212 times)

Offline Michael Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 310
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #20 on: August 15, 2019, 06:55:47 PM »

In the meantime, while 24 of us are still waiting, is it okay if we read Tennent H. Bagley's excellent 35-page PDF, Ghosts of the Spy Wars, in which he mentions your boy Hart's brother-in-arms, Leonard MCCoy, twenty-five times?
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08850607.2014.962362


It is interesting that in the page you linked there is no mention made of the “Master Plot” or, obviously, “Monster Plot”.

Offline Michael Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 310
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #21 on: August 15, 2019, 06:56:34 PM »




Newman does not think that the KGB or Cuba had anything to do with the JFK Assassination

Newman is not fully convinced of Golitsyn’s Bona Fide’s, neither is Peter Dale Scott.

Newman never mentions Heuer

Newman never mentions Hart

Newman never mentions the Monster or Master Plot
« Last Edit: August 15, 2019, 09:34:13 PM by Michael Clark »

Online Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2509
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #22 on: August 15, 2019, 08:35:33 PM »
Newman does not think that the KGB or Cuba had anything to do with the JFK Assassination

Newman is not fully convinced of Golitsyn’s Bona Fide’s, neither is Peter Dale Scott.

Newman never mentions Heuer

Newman never mentions Hart

Newman never mentions the Monster or Master Plot

Michael,

Excellent observations on your part!  (Well, some of them, anyway.)  But please bear in mind -- Newman didn't say the Cubbies was gonna win the World Series this year, neither.

.....

Front-and-center "stage edge" aside to the payin' audience:

What does it really matter that, in the context of our little "debate" about "The Monster Plot," that Newman (probably mistakenly) believes that the evil, evil, evil CIA was solely responsible for the assassination of our beloved president -- whom I was lucky enough to see give a commencement address on "education" at San Diego State College [sic] in June of 1963?

.....

I guess you finally got around to watching both parts (or ... ?).

Regardless, none of the "issues" you raise address the overall point, i.e., that Nosenko was a false defector, sent here to detract from and to contradict what Golitsyn was imperfectly trying, due to his having incomplete information, to tell CIA about a couple of moles -- Edward Ellis Smith, and/or someone in SR Division -- George Kisevalter? Richard Kovich? -- whom HE'D helped KGB to recruit), the never-uncovered cipher clerk "Jack" (recruited in 1949 by Sergei Kondrashev), and oodles and gobs of false defectors/triple agents in U.S. Intelligence, not to mention oodles of gobs of moles, false-defectors and triple-agents in the intelligence services of our allies (France's especially).

In other words, in retrospect there really was something to Golitsyn's "Master Plot," which plot was devised by KGB in 1959, put into effect with the dispatching of GRU colonel Dimitri Polyakov to NYC (the UN) that same year, and "activated" with Polyakov's "volunteering" (after Pekovsky had been brought back to Moscow and "cornered like a bear in its den") to secretly work for the FBI and CIA (but never contributing a dang actionable thang while stationed in the U.S.).

Hey, it may make you feel better vis-a-vis The Assassination that Nosenko's lying about KGB's "not having even interviewed LHO in the USSR" -- i.e., telling CIA what it desperately wanted to hear 7 weeks after the assassination -- was JUST a great "ice breaker" for Nosenko, whether or not the Ruskies were behind the assassination, don't you agree?

Hmm.  Okay.

Just to focus on your boy Heuer for a moment --

A (if not "The") major theme in Heuer's Five Paths to Judgement is that Nosenko was a true defector, gosh darn it, and that he was unjustly accused of being a false one by Bagley and Angleton due to their foolishly and inexpertly applying five analytical "approaches" to his case, and that, concomitantly, all of the "alleged" triple-agents and false defectors (like Kulak, Cherepanov, Loginov and Kochnov, for example) who had effectively vouched for Nosenko's being a true defector were not triple-agents or false defectors at all, but actually pro-CIA good guys, pure-as-the-driven-snow and eminently trustworthy sources for CIA and the FBI!

LOL

Maybe you should watch it again (both parts), and take notes this time.

-- MWT  ;)

PS  You got Newman's "take" on Golitsyn all wrong, Michael.

Newman has no problems with Golitsyn' bona fides per se.

Maybe you should look up the definition of "bona fides" and watch that bit near the end of Part Two, again.

Ask yourself this question: 

How could Newman question Golitsyn's bona fides on the one hand, but so totally accept what Bagley had told him (in Spy Wars and Spy Master) regarding the implications of Golitsyn's insider revelations on the other -- as to cause CTer Newman to ... gasp ... actually agree with Bagley that ... gasp ... Nosenko was a false defector, after all?

LOL

Did you intentionally mis-characterize Newman's opinions of Golitsyn, Michael?

If so, why?

Isn't that sort of thing against Forum rules?
« Last Edit: August 16, 2019, 12:27:28 AM by Thomas Graves »

Offline Michael Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 310
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #23 on: August 16, 2019, 12:49:29 AM »
Note: The title of this thread, right now, is “The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!”

Michael,..............

Excellent observations on your part! 

..............

How could Newman ...... so totally accept what Bagley had told him (in Spy Wars and Spy Master) ....?

John Hart’s “Monster Wars” was not released to the public until November of 2017. Newman’s presentation came on March 3 of 2018. Perhaps he didn’t know about it, hadn’t read it, and perhaps he never read Heuer’s “Nosenko: Five paths to judgement”. He never mentioned either. Unlike you, a credible person would want to maintain credibility with his or her peers by acknowledging the most relevant counter treatments on your subject and address the counterarguments.

You simply refer to anyone who does not agree with you as tinfoil hat wearers, traitors, liars, KGB lovers, buddies of Putin or Stalin or some other-such nonsense.

Newman is not fully convinced of Golitsyn’s Bona Fide’s, neither is Peter Dale Scott.

Newman never mentions Heuer

Newman never mentions Hart

Newman never mentions the Monster or Master Plot
« Last Edit: August 16, 2019, 12:52:13 AM by Michael Clark »

Online Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2509
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #24 on: August 16, 2019, 01:17:23 AM »

Newman is not fully convinced of Golitsyn’s Bona Fides ...


Michael,

Sorry, but that's a patently untruthful statement on your part, and you're doing yourself and the research community a disservice by saying it.

All the way through the videos, Newman relies on what Golitsyn revealed to Bagley, and agrees with Bagley's meticulous analysis of said information.

As far as the veracity and verifiability of Golitsyn's information is concerned, Bagley himself says in Spy Wars that "early Golitsyn" (i.e., from December 1961 until mid-1964, or so) was "golden," and that after that, he became a little less so, as Newman politely explained to Peter Dale Scott, Bill Simpich, and James "Nosepicker" DiEugenio (who didn't even have the grace to clap with the others after Newman had finished his presentation), et al., near the end of Part Two.

Do you even know what "bona fides" means in spy parlance, Michael?

LOL

How ironic that you accuse me of calling members who disagree with me "liars".

When have I ever called another member a "liar," Michael?

In fact, have I ever used that word, that you know of?  Are you sure you aren't confusing me with John "You Made That Up!" Iacoletti, or Brian Doyle, perhaps?

Hint: Kim Philby, James "Jumbo Duh" DiEugenio, Tommy Mangold, and Jefferson "Intelectually Dishonest" Morley don't count.

PS  Do you have any idea how many moles, false defectors and triple agents in the U.S., Canada, and our European allies' countries Golitsyn gave CIA and our allies solid, actionable leads to?

Which leads me back to a question I've asked you several times on this forum, but which you, alas, are yet to answer:

Can you name just one traitor, false defector or triple-agent that Nosenko helped FBI or CIA to uncover who:

1) wasn't already suspected,

2) still had access to confidential information, or

3) was still actively working for the KGB or the GRU?

The answer:  Zilch, Nada, Didley Squat, Zero

LOL
« Last Edit: August 20, 2019, 01:12:05 PM by Thomas Graves »

Offline Michael Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 310
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #25 on: August 16, 2019, 02:26:37 AM »
Michael,

Sorry, but that's a patently untruthful statement on your part, and you're doing yourself and the research community a disservice by saying it.

All the way through the videos, Newman relies on what Golitsyn revealed to Bagley, and agrees with Bagley's meticulous analysis of said information.

As far as the veracity and verifiability of Golitsyn's information is concerned, Bagley himself says in Spy Wars that "early Golitsyn" (i.e., from December 1961 until mid-1964, or so) was "golden," and that after that, he became a little less so, as Newman politely explained to Peter Dale Scott, Bill Simpich, and ########  (who didn't even have the grace to clap with the others after Newman had finished his presentation), et al., near the end of Part Two.

Do you even know what "bona fides" means in spy parlance, Michael?

LOL

How ironic that you accuse me of calling members who disagree with me "liars".

When have I ever called another member a "liar," Michael?

In fact, have I ever used that word, that you know of?  Are you sure you aren't confusing me with John "You Made That Up!" Iacoletti, or Brian Doyle, perhaps?

Hint: Kim Philby, James "Jumbo Duh" DiEugenio, Tommy Mangold, and Jefferson "Intelectually Dishonest" Morley don't count.

PS  Do you have any idea how many moles, false defectors and triple agents in the U.S., Canada, and our European allies' countries Golitsyn gave CIA and our allies solid, actionable leads to?

Which leads me back to a question I've asked you several times on this forum, but which you, alas, are yet to answer:

Can you name just one traitor, false defector or triple-agent that Nosenko helped FBI or CIA to uncover who:

1) wasn't already suspected,

2) still had access to confidential information, or

3) [It'll come to me ...]  Oh yeah! -- was still actively working for the KGB or the GRU?

The answer:  Zilch, Nada, Didley Squat, Zero

LOL


“Q. Are you convinced of Golytsin’s bona fides?

Newman: Yeah I think he probably is bona fide. But I think Peter’s point is that once you’re here so many years and and he’s getting all this special treatment from Angleton. He’s looking out for his own interest. I believe in his initial debriefing. Don’t you agree with that?

Peter Dale Scott: I don’t know.”
« Last Edit: August 16, 2019, 04:04:54 AM by Michael Clark »

Online Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2509
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #26 on: August 16, 2019, 03:13:06 AM »

“Q. Are you convinced of Golytsin’s bona fides?

Newman: Yeah I think he probably is bona fide. But I think Peter’s point is that once you’re here so many years and and he’s getting all this special treatment from Angleton. He’s looking out for his own interest. I believe in his initial debriefing. Don’t you agree with that?

Peter Dale Scott: I don’t know.”

Michael,

Exactly.

Thanks for posting that.

"Probably is bona fide" meaning, "Yes, probably even after mid-1964, and certainly good enough before that for Bagley, Angleton, Miler, and me (John Newman) to trust and believe regarding the shenanigans of 'The Three Musketeers,' et al., to help us come to the correct conclusion that Nosenko was a false defector, and to help us see that the only way to judge the actions of Cherepanov, Ivanov, Polyakov, Kulak, and Kochnov (who fooled the pants off of Bruce Solie) et al., as they tried to decieve us into believing he was a true defector, is to realize that they were part-and-parcel of a 1959-on intertwining of KGB traditional "active measures" counterintelligence operations with brand new SCD (FSB) Department 14 "strategic deception" counterintelligence operations, waged primarily against the U.S., aka the Kremlin's "Main Adversary" as of 1959, ... so ...gasp ... yeah ... a true 'Monster Plot,' if that's what anyone wants to call it, if that'swhat turns you on, bucko."

-- MWT  ;)
« Last Edit: August 16, 2019, 04:05:54 AM by Thomas Graves »

Offline Michael Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 310
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #27 on: August 16, 2019, 04:08:04 AM »
Michael,

Exactly.

Thanks for posting that.

"Probably is bona fide" meaning "yes, probably even after mid-1964, and certainly good enough earlier for Bagley, Angleton, Miler, and me (John Newman) to trust and believe regarding the shenanigans of 'The Three Musketeers,' et al., to help us come to the correct conclusion that Nosenko was a false defector, and to help us see that the only way to judge the actions of Cherepanov, Ivanov, Polyakov, Kulak, and Kochnov (who fooled the pants off of Bruce Solie) et al., as they tried to decieve us into believing he was a true defector, is to realize that they were part-and-parcel of a 1959-on intertwining of KGB traditional "active measures" counterintelligence operations with brand new SCD (FSB) Department 14 "strategic deception" counterintelligence operations, waged primarily against the U.S., aka the Kremlin's "Main Adversary" as of 1959, ... so ...gasp ... yeah ... a true 'Monster Plot,' if that's what anyone wants to call it, if that'swhat turns you on, bucko."

-- MWT  ;)

I just wanted to capture one of Thomas’ ever-morphing, nonsensical, impossible sentenceoids in one of it’s bizarre morphological states.

Online Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2509
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #28 on: August 16, 2019, 04:22:50 AM »
I just wanted to capture one of Thomas’ ever-morphing, nonsensical, impossible sentenceoids in one of it’s bizarre morphological states.

Michael,

It it too complicated for you to understand? Too Russian Doll-like, too convoluted, too many Russian names?

Or is it too much like Gonzo Journalism?

(I hope so.)

If so, maybe I can edit it or rephrase it for you and make it simple enough for you to get a "handle" on, but if I do that, seein' as how you've already covered it with a short nonsensical post, I'd probably get banned again for "bumping," and you'd be the bigger loser because you'd probably ... gasp ... never "get it".

(Not that you ever could "get it," mind you, capable though you almost certainly are.)

-- MWT  ;)

PS  Is this how you "capture" things? 

Kinda like a "screen capture" that you might forward to James "The Poser" Gordon at the EF, or just save in The Cloud or on your own Hard Drive for any future extrajudicial "case" you might bring some day?

Or did you "capture" it and post it here to impress something upon the 51 guests who were still reading this thread when I started typing this (and still are, btw) ?

PPS  It's kinda funny (in a sad way) how you resort to "hijinks" like this whenever you realize that you're losing yet another "debate" with me.

Hmm.

Edit: I see you're currently composing something to post here. I guess I'll hold off until you've actually posted it before I post my next rather short (and probably nonresponsive) one to "cover" it ...

"Turnabout is fair play," eh?

« Last Edit: August 16, 2019, 05:04:54 AM by Thomas Graves »

Offline Michael Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 310
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #29 on: August 16, 2019, 05:07:29 AM »
Michael,
......

... you realize that you're losing yet another "debate" with me.


I’m not losing. I’m not even debating you. I’m just throwing water on your Bagely / Spy Wars parade by pointing out that Bagely was castrated for his Nosenko failure, his folly was condemned by two CIA studies that remained classified for years, and the paranoid culture that he and Angleton propagated was lampooned. Yet, you continue to believe in the Monsters under the bed myth, that the KGB got LHO to Kill JFK and now Putin is trying to slip under YOUR bed at the first chance he gets.

I don’t have to debate you. All I have to do is present the refutations and renunciations of Bagley’s former CIA colleagues. Your theory isn’t suitable for the recycle bin, everyone is tired of hearing it, and I am simply exploring the proof that it has long been proven to be a joke. The CIA documents speak for themselves, Bagely speaks for Bagely; what would you expect.



https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32359254.pdf


TOP SECRET

13 October 1970

MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD

Subject: BAGELY, Tennant, Harrington

#386 38

1) On Wednesday, 7 October 1970 I briefed Colonel L. K. White, Executive  Director-Controller on certain reservations I have concerning the proposed promotion of subject to a supergrade position.

2)  I was very careful to explain to Colonel White at the outset that my reservations had nothing whatsoever to do with Bagely's security status. I explained that it was my conviction that Bagely was almost exclusively responsible for the manner in which the Nosenko case had been handled by our SR division. I said I considered that Bagely lacked objectivity and that he had displayed extremely poor judgment over a two year period in the handling of this case. Specifically as one example of Bagely's extreme prejudice I pointed out that the SR division had neglected to follow up several leads provided by Nosenko which subsequently had been followed up by this office (Bruce Solie) and that this lead us to individuals who have confessed their recruitment and use by the Soviets over an extensive period of time.

3)  I explained further that Bagely displayed extremely poor judgment in the actions he took during that time that  Nosenko was incarcerated at ISOLATION. On many occasions, as the individual responsible for Nosenko's care, I refuse to condone Bagely's  instructions to my people who are guarding him. In one instance Bagely insisted that  Nosenko's food ration be reduced to black bread and water three times daily. After I had briefed Colonel White, he indicated that he would refresh the Director's memory on Bagely's role in the Nosenko case at the time he reviews supergrade promotions. 

 

Howard J. Osborn

Director of Security
———————————————————————-

The Monster Plot by John Hart

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10534-10205.pdf
————————————————————————

Richards Heuer: Nosenko, Five Paths to Judgement

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/25943-richards-heuer-nosenko-five-paths-to-judgement/




« Last Edit: August 16, 2019, 12:40:32 PM by Michael Clark »

 

Mobile View