Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!  (Read 47062 times)

Offline Michael Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 300
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #232 on: September 10, 2019, 01:47:31 AM »
Advertisement

https://jfkfacts.org/was-yuri-nosenko-a-kgb-mole/#more-29709


Was Yuri Nosenko a KGB mole?
jeffmorley
A readeader asks:

Do you still believe Nosenko was a true defector, Jeff?

Have you read Tennent H. Bagley’s “Spy Wars,” or even his 35-page PDF “Ghosts of the Spy Wars”?

Yes, I did read Bagley’s Spy Wars. I also interviewed him. And yes, I do believe Nosenko was a true defector.

I think Bagley was wrong, for two reasons: lack of a plausible suspect and lack of damage to CIA operations.

Remember Angleton’s theory that Nosenko was a dispatched defector is inextricably bound up in the theory that Nosenko was dispatched to protect a mole already working inside the CIA as of January 1964.  So the  reader’s question is really two, was Nosenko a mole? And, if so, who was he protecting?

As I asked in THE GHOST

if there was a mole burrowed into the CIA in the 1950s and 1960s, as the Angletonians claimed, who the devil was it? And what damage did he do?

James Angleton
James Angleton oversaw the surveillance of Oswald
Those who argue that Nosenko was a controlled defector need to answer these two questions. I was especially convinced by George Kisevalter, the most experienced CIA officer handling Russian defector. Kisevalter always vouched for Nosenko’s bonafides.

From THE GHOST

“Kisevalter’s opinion was not idiosyncratic. In 1997, he received the agency’s Trailblazer Award recognizing him as one of fifty top CIA officers in its first fifty years, an honor Angleton did not receive. There was never any doubt in Kisevalter’s mind about the bona fides of Yuri Nosenko. Three subsequent reviews by senior CIA officers reached the same conclusion. So did Cleveland Cram, the former London station chief who wrote the definitive study of Angleton’s operations.. So did Benjamin Fischer, a career officer who became the agency’s chief historian.

“The Great Mole Hunt or Great Mole Scare of the late 1960s turned the CIA inside out ruining careers and reputations in search for Soviet penetrations that may or may not have existed,” Fischer wrote.

The dissenters from the institutional consensus about the Mole Hunt were mostly officers who had served Angleton on the Counterintelligence Staff. The Angletonians, as they called themselves, were a dogged bunch. Bill Hood and Pete Bagley asserted that the clandestine service was never penetrated during Angleton’s watch–which is true. They also claimed that the CIA’s operations against the Soviet Union were not unduly harmed by the Mole Hunt–which is not.

Yuri Nosenko and wife
Exonerated mole suspect Yuri Nosenko and wife.
Angleton and his acolytes would speak many words in his defense and write more than a few books. They cited scores of statements by Yuri Nosenko that they said were not credible or misleading, and indeed, Nosenko had exaggerated and embellished as defectors often do.  But if there was a mole burrowed into the CIA in the 1950s and 1960s, as the Angletonians claimed, who the devil was it? And what damage did he do?

The CIA has learned from hard experience what happened when the Soviets succeeded their operations: agents were arrested and executed. But even after the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the opening of significant portions of KGB archives, the Angletonians could not identify any operations compromised by the putative mole [allegedly protected by Nosenko]. They could not even offer up the name of a single plausible candidate. After the passage of five decades, the likeliest explanation is that there wasn’t a mole.”

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #232 on: September 10, 2019, 01:47:31 AM »


Offline Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2693
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #233 on: September 10, 2019, 02:27:24 AM »
https://jfkfacts.org/was-yuri-nosenko-a-kgb-mole/#more-29709


Was Yuri Nosenko a KGB mole?
jeffmorley
A readeader asks:

Do you still believe Nosenko was a true defector, Jeff?

Have you read Tennent H. Bagley’s “Spy Wars,” or even his 35-page PDF “Ghosts of the Spy Wars”?

Yes, I did read Bagley’s Spy Wars. I also interviewed him. And yes, I do believe Nosenko was a true defector.

I think Bagley was wrong, for two reasons: lack of a plausible suspect and lack of damage to CIA operations.

Remember Angleton’s theory that Nosenko was a dispatched defector is inextricably bound up in the theory that Nosenko was dispatched to protect a mole already working inside the CIA as of January 1964.  So the  reader’s question is really two, was Nosenko a mole? And, if so, who was he protecting?

As I asked in THE GHOST

if there was a mole burrowed into the CIA in the 1950s and 1960s, as the Angletonians claimed, who the devil was it? And what damage did he do?

James Angleton
James Angleton oversaw the surveillance of Oswald
Those who argue that Nosenko was a controlled defector need to answer these two questions. I was especially convinced by George Kisevalter, the most experienced CIA officer handling Russian defector. Kisevalter always vouched for Nosenko’s bonafides.

From THE GHOST

“Kisevalter’s opinion was not idiosyncratic. In 1997, he received the agency’s Trailblazer Award recognizing him as one of fifty top CIA officers in its first fifty years, an honor Angleton did not receive. There was never any doubt in Kisevalter’s mind about the bona fides of Yuri Nosenko. Three subsequent reviews by senior CIA officers reached the same conclusion. So did Cleveland Cram, the former London station chief who wrote the definitive study of Angleton’s operations.. So did Benjamin Fischer, a career officer who became the agency’s chief historian.

“The Great Mole Hunt or Great Mole Scare of the late 1960s turned the CIA inside out ruining careers and reputations in search for Soviet penetrations that may or may not have existed,” Fischer wrote.

The dissenters from the institutional consensus about the Mole Hunt were mostly officers who had served Angleton on the Counterintelligence Staff. The Angletonians, as they called themselves, were a dogged bunch. Bill Hood and Pete Bagley asserted that the clandestine service was never penetrated during Angleton’s watch–which is true. They also claimed that the CIA’s operations against the Soviet Union were not unduly harmed by the Mole Hunt–which is not.

Yuri Nosenko and wife
Exonerated mole suspect Yuri Nosenko and wife.
Angleton and his acolytes would speak many words in his defense and write more than a few books. They cited scores of statements by Yuri Nosenko that they said were not credible or misleading, and indeed, Nosenko had exaggerated and embellished as defectors often do.  But if there was a mole burrowed into the CIA in the 1950s and 1960s, as the Angletonians claimed, who the devil was it? And what damage did he do?

The CIA has learned from hard experience what happened when the Soviets succeeded their operations: agents were arrested and executed. But even after the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the opening of significant portions of KGB archives, the Angletonians could not identify any operations compromised by the putative mole [allegedly protected by Nosenko]. They could not even offer up the name of a single plausible candidate. After the passage of five decades, the likeliest explanation is that there wasn’t a mole.”

Michael

Have you seen my reply to this on my new "Sinister Implications" thread, yet?

Do you think your "saturation dumping" technique impresses our open-minded and inquisitive guests?

Cheers!

--  ;)
« Last Edit: September 13, 2019, 08:17:47 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 #234 on: September 16, 2019, 05:09:41 AM »
Michael,

Do you realize how pathetic you look to our open-minded and inquisitive guests?

--  MWT   ;)


PS  How's that letter to professors Newman and Scott coming along?

You're gonna set 'em straight about your hero, Nosenko, right?

LOL




OMG

I just now realized that Michael Clark probably hasn't been banned after all -- he's just working on that letter he's gonna send to professors Newman and Scott, notifying them that HSCA perjurer John L. Hart's hush-hush 187-page The Monster Plot Report was finally released by the National Archives two years ago!

(They must not have known it, seein' as how they were so badly fooled by that evil, evil, evil-and-incompetent Tennent H. Bagley!)

--  MWT  ;)
« Last Edit: September 16, 2019, 05:20:18 AM by Thomas Graves »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #234 on: September 16, 2019, 05:09:41 AM »


Offline Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2693
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #235 on: September 20, 2019, 01:20:58 AM »
OMG

I just now realized that Michael Clark probably hasn't been banned after all -- he's just working on that letter he's gonna send to professors Newman and Scott, notifying them that HSCA perjurer John L. Hart's hush-hush 187-page The Monster Plot Report was finally released by the National Archives two years ago!

(They must not have known it, seein' as how they were so badly fooled by that evil, evil, evil-and-incompetent Tennent H. Bagley!)

--  MWT  ;)

I miss Michael Clark.

Where has he gone?

Gasp -- Is he on a two-week suspension, or is he just worn out?

It's so dead around here without him!

--  MWT   :'(

Offline Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2693
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #236 on: September 22, 2019, 11:46:10 PM »
Michael,

Do you realize how pathetic you look to our open-minded and inquisitive guests?

--  MWT   ;)


PS  How's that letter to professors Newman and Scott coming along?

You're gonna set 'em straight about your boy, Nosenko, right?

LOL




I do wish Michael Clark would come back so we could talk about these things.

Except Michael doesn't exactly talk about them, he just posts discredited essays and debunked FBI and CIA documents about them, instead.

Over and over and over again.

-- MWT  ;)



JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #236 on: September 22, 2019, 11:46:10 PM »


Offline Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2693
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #237 on: October 23, 2019, 01:22:02 AM »
I do wish Michael Clark would come back so we could talk about these things.

Except Michael doesn't exactly talk about them, he just posts discredited essays and debunked FBI and CIA documents about them, instead.

Over and over and over again.

-- MWT  ;)

Michael,

Have you watched John Newman's two-part March 2018 youtube video presentation about Bagley's book Spy Wars yet?

-- MWT ;)


« Last Edit: October 23, 2019, 01:23:00 AM by Thomas Graves »

Offline Michael Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 300
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #238 on: October 23, 2019, 02:09:57 AM »
Michael,

Have you watched John Newman's two-part March 2018 youtube video presentation about Bagley's book Spy Wars yet?

-- MWT ;)


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
« Last Edit: October 24, 2019, 02:45:39 AM by Michael Clark »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #238 on: October 23, 2019, 02:09:57 AM »


Offline Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2693
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #239 on: October 23, 2019, 02:20:58 AM »

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

Resentful Howard J. Osborn, who was Chief of the Soviet Russia Division for only a very short time, and who worked in CIA's Office of Security with Bruce "I Got  Duped By "Kitty Hawk," "Fedora" and "Top Hat," Et Al" Solie?

LOL

From an earlier post:

Michael,

In Spy Wars, Bagley says that some "spiteful, under-endowed" CIA officers caused wishful-thinking/"let's move beyond this mess" CIA leadership to conclude, erroneously, that Nosenko was a true defector.

Your Howard J. Osborn had been chief of the Soviet Russia Division for a only a short time when he was replaced by David Murphy, and Osborn's boy, Bruce "Gumshoe" Solie, was not only totally snookered by triple-agent Kochnov into losing a true defector (Artamanov) in the Kittyhawk Affair, but bamboozled by triple-agent Loginov (who, btw, was still alive and doing business in Moscow in 2004, according to Bagley) into believing that Nosenko was ... gasp ... a true defector.

Now, nobody wants to know that they are incompetent or that they've been fooled, and when confronted with facts that tend to indicate that they are incompetent or gullible, many, like Osborn and Solie, become ... well ... spiteful.

It's an unfortunate but natural human reaction.

-- MWT  ;)
« Last Edit: October 23, 2019, 02:38:31 AM by Thomas Graves »