Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!  (Read 47197 times)

Offline Michael Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 300
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #240 on: October 27, 2019, 11:36:59 PM »
Advertisement
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  ;)

Bagely is the only one who is spiteful, incompetent, and can’t face that he has been bamboozled. Hart, Heuer, Olson and McCoy all are looking after the agency and being as kind as possible to Bagely. Making clear, to the interested parties of the Agency, that Bagely screwed-up, big time, is not being spiteful, pernicious, disloyal or acting out of any personal animosity or jealousy; they are doing their job. Bagely is the one who is acting like the jilted teen-girl, commenting on the endowments of his colleagues as a defense.

But, Thomas, you just go on, and admire your man’s endowments.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #240 on: October 27, 2019, 11:36:59 PM »


Offline Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2693
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #241 on: October 28, 2019, 02:13:15 AM »
Bagely is the only one who is spiteful, incompetent, and can’t face that he has been bamboozled. Hart, Heuer, Olson and McCoy all are looking after the agency and being as kind as possible to Bagely. Making clear, to the interested parties of the Agency, that Bagely screwed-up, big time, is not being spiteful, pernicious, disloyal or acting out of any personal animosity or jealousy; they are doing their job. Bagely is the one who is acting like the jilted teen-girl, commenting on the endowments of his colleagues as a defense.

But, Thomas, you just go on, and admire your man’s endowments.

Michael,

A couple of questions for you:

Have you watched the part in John Newman's March 2018 "Spy Wars" presentation where Newman says that many people in CIA expected Bagley to become director of the agency?

Do you really think that, as you told Paul Baranco at the EF, Newman must have had some kind of prior "relationship" with Bagley which enabled Bagley to, in so many words, dupe Newman into believing Golitsyn was a true defector, and Nosenko a false one?

Do you think Newman might be part of "The Deep State"?

Are you going to send Newman and Peter Dale Scott a letter aprising them of how very, very wrong they are about your hero, Nosenko?

--  MWT   ;)
« Last Edit: October 28, 2019, 02:16:57 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 #242 on: October 28, 2019, 02:42:26 AM »
Michael,

A couple of questions for you:

Have you watched the part in John Newman's March 2018 "Spy Wars" presentation where Newman says that many people in CIA expected Bagley to become director of the agency?

Do you really think that, as you told Paul Baranco at the EF, Newman must have had some kind of prior "relationship" with Bagley which enabled Bagley to, in so many words, dupe Newman into believing Golitsyn was a true defector, and Nosenko a false one?

Do you think Newman might be part of "The Deep State"?

Are you going to send Newman and Peter Dale Scott a letter aprising them of how very, very wrong they are about your hero, Nosenko?

--  MWT   ;)

More stupid, inane, questions with false quotes and manipulative paraphrases.

Thomas, you know what people “make-of” people who repeat themselves over and over and over and over again, don’t you?

Now, excuse me whilst I distribute some Osborn memos, will you?
« Last Edit: October 28, 2019, 11:07:13 AM by Michael Clark »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #242 on: October 28, 2019, 02:42:26 AM »


Offline Michael Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 300
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #243 on: October 28, 2019, 02:52:00 AM »
And some more on Bagley,

More from CIA Director of Security, Howard Osborne:

« Last Edit: November 02, 2019, 01:58:23 PM by Michael Clark »

Offline Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2693
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #244 on: October 28, 2019, 05:03:37 AM »
And some more on Bagely,

Mqore from CIA Director of Security, Howard Osborne:



Michael,

Olson memos?  Did you mean Osborn memos?

If you were to honestly answer my questions, maybe I'd go a little easier on you.

But then again ... Nah, probably not.

Regardless, "false quotes"?  What false quotes?

That Newman said on videotape during his March 2018 "Spy Wars" presentation that many people in CIA believed Bagley was, in so many words, on the fast track to becoming Director of CIA?

You don't believe Bagley said that?

Or that Peter Dale Scott told Newman on videotape that Newman's March 2018 Bagley-based "Spy Wars" presentation had convinced him that Nosenko was a false defector who had been dispatched to the U.S. to discredit Golitsyn?

Or that you told Paul Baranco at the EF that Newman must have had some kind of prior "relationship" with Bagley which enabled Bagley to, in so many words, dupe Newman into believing Golitsyn was a true defector, and Nosenko a false one?

Please clarify, Mike.

If you can.

--  MWT  ;)

« Last Edit: October 28, 2019, 08:05:44 AM by Thomas Graves »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #244 on: October 28, 2019, 05:03:37 AM »


Offline Michael Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 300
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #245 on: November 02, 2019, 01:51:28 PM »
https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10111-10250.pdf

104-10111-10250

MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD.              Date: 18 Feb 1971
SUBJECT: Nosenko Case

1. On 18 Feb Mr. REDACTED chief/EUR/BNL told me that Mr. John Hart, C/EUR, had told him to tell only me the following.
When REDACTED was in Brussels, in late January, 1971, he was with Mr. Russell Hibbs, G5-14 case officer, for a long Wed. evening. REDACTED said that during their conversation, Hibbs spent a lot of time complaining about what Hibbs claimed was Mr. (Pete) Bagley’s, COS, reluctance to pursue and push investigations of AEDONOR leads. REDACTED said he would not attempt to relate what Hibbs said was the specific leads mentioned. The point he wanted to make sure I knew was Hibbs attitude towards Bagley as deliberately not following-up on AEDONOR leads. REDACTED said Hibbs was coming to Hq. in the Summer and he would let me know about the arrival in the event I wanted to talk to Hibbs.
2. My only contact was to thank REDACTED and tell him to let me know when Hibbs arrived.
(Copy to Solie)

                                                                                    SIGNATURE
                                                                                     Scott Miller

Note on p. 2: This information is not to be disseminated.
Any inquiry or interest in this memo should be brought
To the attention of DC/SRS, Bruce Solie
« Last Edit: November 02, 2019, 01:59:23 PM by Michael Clark »

Offline Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2693
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #246 on: November 02, 2019, 10:59:22 PM »
https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10111-10250.pdf

104-10111-10250

MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD.              Date: 18 Feb 1971
SUBJECT: Nosenko Case

1. On 18 Feb Mr. REDACTED chief/EUR/BNL told me that Mr. John Hart, C/EUR, had told him to tell only me the following.
When REDACTED was in Brussels, in late January, 1971, he was with Mr. Russell Hibbs, G5-14 case officer, for a long Wed. evening. REDACTED said that during their conversation, Hibbs spent a lot of time complaining about what Hibbs claimed was Mr. (Pete) Bagley’s, COS, reluctance to pursue and push investigations of AEDONOR leads. REDACTED said he would not attempt to relate what Hibbs said was the specific leads mentioned. The point he wanted to make sure I knew was Hibbs attitude towards Bagley as deliberately not following-up on AEDONOR leads. REDACTED said Hibbs was coming to Hq. in the Summer and he would let me know about the arrival in the event I wanted to talk to Hibbs.
2. My only contact was to thank REDACTED and tell him to let me know when Hibbs arrived.
(Copy to Solie)

                                                                                    SIGNATURE
                                                                                     Scott Miller

Note on p. 2: This information is not to be disseminated.
Any inquiry or interest in this memo should be brought
To the attention of DC/SRS, Bruce Solie

Michael,

John L. Hart, the guy who perjured himself in front of the HSCA?

What a piece of work he was.

This is what Tennent H. Bagley had to say, on page 215 of Spy Wars, about a 1976 incident between himself and Hart:

While paying lip service to the need for vigilance, Colby saw counterintelligence mainly as an impediment to intelligence collection. His impatience and disinterest came out in the form of simplification and sarcasm. “I spent several long sessions doing my best to follow [Counterintelligence Staff chief Angleton’s] tortuous theories about the long arm of a powerful and wily KGB at work, over decades, placing its agents in the heart of allied and neutral nations and sending its false defectors to influence and under- mine American policy. I confess that I couldn’t absorb it, possibly because I did not have the requisite grasp of this labyrinthine subject, possibly because Angleton's explanations were impossible to follow, or possibly because the evidence just didn’t add up to his conclusions. ... I did not suspect Angleton and his staff of engaging in improper activities. I just could not figure out what they were doing at all.” (fn 17)
.
Colby soon got to work reorganizing the (Angleton's) Counterintelligence Staff and divesting it of some of its components. Then in 1974 the New York Times exposed the fact that in apparent violation of the Agency’s charter, Angleton’s staff had been checking international mail to and from some left-wing Americans. This gave Colby the ammunition he needed to rid himself of this nuisance. At the end of that year he demanded Angleton’s resignation and was glad to see Angleton’s chief lieutenants Raymond Rocca, William Hood, and Newton Miler follow him into retirement.
.
To steer a less troubling course, Colby appointed to head the Counterintelligence Staff George Kalaris, a man without experience in either counterintelligence or Soviet bloc operations, and, as his deputy, Leonard McCoy, a handler of reports, not an operations officer, who had already distinguished himself as a fierce advocate for Nosenko. Now began an extraordinary cleanup inside the (Angleton's) Counterintelligence Staff— and the disappearance of evidence against Nosenko. Miler’s carefully accumulated notes on this and related cases were removed from the files and disappeared, along with a unique card file of discrepancies in Nosenko’s statements. (fn 18)
.
Shortly afterward Colby appointed an officer to review the files anew. John L. Hart was assisted by four officers. They worked for six months, from June to December 1976. I caught a glimpse of their aims and work methods when Hart came to Europe to interview me (in Belgium). He had not bothered to read what I had written (though he said nothing new had come to light on the question of Nosenko’s bona fides) and seemed interested only in why, eight years earlier, I had warned that bad consequences might flow from Nosenko’s release. I saw that his aim was not to get at the truth but to find a way to clear Nosenko, so I refused to talk further with him. As I later learned, Hart’s team did not even interview the Counterintelligence Staff officers who had analyzed the case and maintained files on it for nine years. Among them were two veteran analysts who, having come “cold” to the case, had concluded on their own that Nosenko was a plant— and had written their reasons. Hart then wrote a report that affirmed total trust in Nosenko. (fn 19)
.
Having decreed their faith and gotten rid of disbelievers, the CIA leadership banned further debate. One experienced officer in the Soviet Bloc Division— my old colleague Joe Westin, who knew so much about this case— took a late stand against Nosenko’s bona fides. He was told by higher-ups, “If you continue on this course, there will be no room for you in this Division”— and his future promotion was blocked. Peter Deriabin, who kept trying to warn Agency officials about Nosenko, was told to desist or his relations with CIA would be threatened (see Appendix A).
.
Nosenko’s rescuers then set out to discredit those who had distrusted him. They first labeled them as paranoid (a charge always difficult to refute) and then moved on to distort the record.

.....

Cheers!

--  MWT   ;)
« Last Edit: November 02, 2019, 11:00:36 PM by Thomas Graves »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #246 on: November 02, 2019, 10:59:22 PM »


Offline Michael Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 300
Re: The Monster Plot, by CIA's Very Own KGB Apologist John L. Hart!
« Reply #247 on: November 02, 2019, 11:11:14 PM »
https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10111-10250.pdf

104-10111-10250

MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD.              Date: 18 Feb 1971
SUBJECT: Nosenko Case

1. On 18 Feb Mr. REDACTED chief/EUR/BNL told me that Mr. John Hart, C/EUR, had told him to tell only me the following.
When REDACTED was in Brussels, in late January, 1971, he was with Mr. Russell Hibbs, G5-14 case officer, for a long Wed. evening. REDACTED said that during their conversation, Hibbs spent a lot of time complaining about what Hibbs claimed was Mr. (Pete) Bagley’s, COS, reluctance to pursue and push investigations of AEDONOR leads. REDACTED said he would not attempt to relate what Hibbs said was the specific leads mentioned. The point he wanted to make sure I knew was Hibbs attitude towards Bagley as deliberately not following-up on AEDONOR leads. REDACTED said Hibbs was coming to Hq. in the Summer and he would let me know about the arrival in the event I wanted to talk to Hibbs.
2. My only contact was to thank REDACTED and tell him to let me know when Hibbs arrived.
(Copy to Solie)

                                                                                    SIGNATURE
                                                                                     Scott Miller

Note on p. 2: This information is not to be disseminated.
Any inquiry or interest in this memo should be brought
To the attention of DC/SRS, Bruce Solie

Note: AEDONOR is the CIA cryptonym for Nosenko.