Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!  (Read 47180 times)

Offline Michael Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 300
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #32 on: August 17, 2019, 01:00:55 AM »
Advertisement
.Bagely, in a 15 June 1965 memorandum to Helms (Who was by then DDCI, But still writing herd on the case),  described the interviews as unrewarding in terms of producing new information or insights ... It was obvious that subject had given some thought ... To improving and smoothing over some of the rough spots in his story.”
By the end of 1965, there were others in the SR division who doubted the thesis, and one of them was willing to risk his career by putting his thoughts on paper in a 31 page memorandum to Bagely, commenting on the sterile version of the SR/CI’s notebook documenting the case against Nosenko. It began:
Introduction: At your request, I have read the basic Nosenko notebook and I hope you will honor my right to dissent. I find the evidence that Nosenko is a bona fide defector far more convincing than the evidence used in the notebook to condemn him as a KGB agent.
It is because I am concerned about the serious ramifications of a wrong verdict that I wish to set forth my dissenting views in considerable detail. If the present verdict of guilty is right I believe there must be satisfactory answers to the questions raised herein; if it is wrong, as I believe it is, it should be rectified as soon as possible.
Intelligence Production: There are several references to the Nosenko notebook to the extent and quality of the intelligence he provided. In the 25 March 1964 memo to DDP, it is asserted that “a comparison of his positive intelligence with that of other Soviet bloc intelligence officers with whom we have had an operational relationship shows that all of them were consistently better able to provide useful positive intelligence then has been Nosenko.”    
Tab D the same memo states “his positive intelligence production is practically nil,” and later: “viewed overall, however, Nosenko’s positive intelligence production has been so meager for a man of his background, training and position as to cast doubts on his bona fides, without reference to other criteria.” All of these statements are incorrect.
The three persons in the clandestine services with the background and experience to make such a judgment regarding Nosenko’s production and access agree that they are incorrect. No KGB officer has been able to provide more useful intelligence than the Nosenko has; Experience has shown that intelligence usefulness of KGB officers in general is “practically nil”. Golytsin’s was Nil. Viewed in the proper context, therefore, Nosenko’s intelligence production cannot be used in his defense, but neither can it be said honestly to cast any doubt whatsoever on his bona fides. In the realm of substance, judgment regarding his bona fides must therefore be made on the basis of his counter intelligence information.



JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #32 on: August 17, 2019, 01:00:55 AM »


Offline Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2693
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #33 on: August 17, 2019, 02:54:35 AM »

"Bagley, in a 15 June 1965 memo- randum to Helms (Who was by then DDCI, But still writing herd on the case),  described the interviews as unrewarding in terms of producing new information or insights ... It was obvious that subject had given some thought ... To improving and smoothing over some of the rough spots in his story.”

By the end of 1965, there were others in the SR division who doubted the thesis, and one of them was willing to risk his career by putting his thoughts on paper in a 31 page memorandum to Bagely, commenting on the sterile version of the SR/CI’s notebook documenting the case against Nosenko.

It began:

"Introduction: At your request, I have read the basic Nosenko notebook and I hope you will honor my right to dissent. I find the evidence that Nosenko is a bona fide defector far more convincing than the evidence used in the notebook to condemn him as a KGB agent. It is because I am concerned about the serious ramifications of a wrong verdict that I wish to set forth my dissenting views in considerable detail. If the present verdict of guilty is right I believe there must be satisfactory answers to the questions raised herein; if it is wrong, as I believe it is, it should be rectified as soon as possible.

Intelligence Production: There are several references to the Nosenko notebook to the extent and quality of the intelligence he provided. In the 25 March 1964 memo to DDP, it is asserted that “a comparison of his positive intelligence with that of other Soviet bloc intelligence officers with whom we have had an operational relationship shows that all of them were consistently better able to provide useful positive intelligence then has been Nosenko.”    

Tab D the same memo states “his positive intelligence production is practically nil,” and later: “viewed overall, however, Nosenko’s positive intelligence production has been so meager for a man of his background, training and position as to cast doubts on his bona fides, without reference to other criteria.”

All of these statements are incorrect. [emphasis added by mwt]

The three persons in the clandestine services with the background and experience to make such a judgment regarding Nosenko’s production and access agree that they are incorrect. No KGB officer has been able to provide more useful intelligence than the Nosenko has; Experience has shown that intelligence usefulness of KGB officers in general is “practically nil”. Golytsin’s was Nil. Viewed in the proper context, therefore, Nosenko’s intelligence production cannot be used in his defense, but neither can it be said honestly to cast any doubt whatsoever on his bona fides. In the realm of substance, judgment regarding his bona fides must therefore be made on the basis of his counter intelligence information."


Michael,

The three persons in the clandestine services who were qualified to render a judgement regarding Nosenko's production and access, or Three persons in the clandestine services who were qualified to render a judgment regarding Nosenko's production and access?

Regardless, which three persons?
Got names?
....

A 31-page memo to Bagley?
Where is it?
.....

Regarding Golitsyn's true production, please read pages 57 and 58 of Spy Wars).
https://archive.org/details/SpyWarsMolesMysteriesAndDeadlyGames
Bottom line: A lot
.....

Regarding Nosenko's so-called "production," please read in Spy Wars pages 97, 178-79, 208, 219, 245, 260-61; on "Zepp", 15-16, 152-53, 206. See also "Andrey"; Belitsky, B.; Dejean, M.; Johnson, R. L.; Saar Demichel, F.; Vassall, W.; Watkins, J.
https://archive.org/details/SpyWarsMolesMysteriesAndDeadlyGamesottom
Bottom line: Diddley Squat. For the simple reason that no one Nosenko helped to "uncover": 1) was still actively working for the KGB/GRU, or 2) still had access to secret information, or 3) was not already suspected by CIA or the FBI.

--  MWT  ;)

PS  Your turn



« Last Edit: August 17, 2019, 05:31:30 AM by Thomas Graves »

Offline Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2693
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #34 on: August 17, 2019, 06:02:36 AM »
Michael,

Never mind.

I'll go again.

Here are some of Tennent H. Bagley's thoughts about your boy, John L. Hart, as presented in Bagley's 71-page HSCA testimony.

Cheers!

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol12/html/HSCA_Vol12_0288a.htm

-- MWT   ;)

PS  The "X" Bagley refers to is true defector Anatoly Golitsyn.

PPS  On page 593 of the document, Bagley really starts laying into Hart, saying he counted 30 errors in Hart's HSCA testimony, etc., etc, etc.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2019, 07:39:02 AM by Thomas Graves »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #34 on: August 17, 2019, 06:02:36 AM »


Offline Michael Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 300
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #35 on: August 17, 2019, 02:00:13 PM »
While notionally correct, my past statements about Bagely being a sadistic torturer have been slightly hyperbolic based on the source material upon which I was commenting.

However, I now see that hint of that sadistic tendency, which came through in that document, was clearly meant to be conveyed, if muted. As I read “The Monster Plot”, that tendency, as manifested in Bagely, was clearly meant to be documented and highlighted in an alarming manner. Furthermore, it seems apparent, in my slow, deliberate read (transcription process) that the author, via his witnesses, is documenting a CIA culture affected by fear of the unknown, false fears, fear from each other, mind games and duplicitousness. “ The Monster Plot” May explain or be a model explanation for the 1960’s and beyond.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2019, 05:19:38 PM by Michael Clark »

Offline Michael Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 300
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #36 on: August 17, 2019, 03:20:10 PM »
Howard Osborne; Director of Security wrote:

« Last Edit: August 17, 2019, 03:31:23 PM by Michael Clark »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #36 on: August 17, 2019, 03:20:10 PM »


Offline Michael Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 300
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #37 on: August 17, 2019, 03:36:13 PM »
Michael,
....

A 31-page memo to Bagley?
Where is it?
.....

--  MWT  ;)

It’s probably sitting on a shelf where John Hart’s “The Monster Plot” sat for 40 years until it was pried-out of the US Archives in 2017.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2019, 03:37:17 PM by Michael Clark »

Offline Michael Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 300
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #38 on: August 17, 2019, 03:52:17 PM »

More from CIA Director of Security, Howard Osborne:


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #38 on: August 17, 2019, 03:52:17 PM »


Offline Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2693
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #39 on: August 17, 2019, 04:45:38 PM »
While notionally correct, my past statements about Bagely being a sadistic torturer have been slightly hyperbolic based on the source material upon which I was commenting.

However, I now see that hint of that sadistic tendency, which came through in that document was clearly meant to be conveyed, if muted. As I read “The Monster Plot”, that tendency, as manifested in Bagely, was clearly meant to be documented and highlighted in an alarming manner. Furthermore it seems apparent, in my slow, deleiberate read (transcription process) that the author, via his witnesses, is documenting a CIA culture affected by fear of the unknown, false fears, fear from each other, mind games and duplicitousness. “ The Monster Plot” May explain or be a model explanation for the 1960’s and beyond.

Michael,

Are you trying to impress us with incomprehensible verbosity?

Plain English, please, and spellcheck, too.

Trying to understand your post was sheer torture (probably worse than what your boy, Nosenko, got), even for someone like me who scored at the 98 percentile in "Verbal Intelligence".

Back in the day in 1966.

Or was it 1965?

(Not when they denied him a toothbrush, but when I took the SAT.)

--  MWT  ;)

PS  How is it that a former Army Intelligence analyst like John Newman could let himself be fooled by (sadistic and incompetent) Bagley into believing Yuri Nosenko was a false defector, Michael?

And ... gasp ... to believe it so strongly and so thoroughly that he, in turn, unwittingly fooled Peter Dale Scott?

« Last Edit: August 17, 2019, 05:02:09 PM by Thomas Graves »