I Was a Teenage JFK Conspiracy Freak (new book)

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Or, as Ion Pacepa says, maybe Oswald was programmed/trained to be an assassin in the USSR, and was sent back to the U.S. in June 1962 to kill JFK.


That would implicate the State Dept. as it was in their power to accept or reject Oswald's re-entry into the USA and that would implicate the Justice Dept. as it was in their power to have placed Oswald under arrest for threatening to divulge secrets to the USSR. I'm pretty sure the Ruskies wouldn't have wasted their time and treasure in turning Oswald into a zombie assassin when they couldn't be sure they could get rid of him.


Another unrelated but critical piece to solving this puzzle. How would you explain Oswald having obtained the job at the TSBD. Was it part of the conspiracy or just plain dumb luck?

That's a good point - i.e., that the Soviets couldn't be sure that the US would take him back. Although there were other defectors at or near that time that had returned/been accepted.

The US, as I understand it, was obligated to accept his request to return. He never formally renounced his citizenship so he was still an American citizen with all of the guaranteed rights extended to them. Would the Soviets understand this? That is the US would have to take him back? I think probably so, especially if they were training him for some sort of intelligence work.

Additionally, the Justice Department did look into whether he could be prosecuted for any crimes and determined that they had no evidence for it (see the HSCA report on this). Threatening to divulge secrets is, apparently, not a crime. Although it is interesting that Oswald asked the US Embassy official that he talked with whether he, Oswald, could receive any guarantees about not being prosecuted upon his return. He was certainly worried about it.

The Mailer book - "Oswald's Tale" - included numerous conversations/interviews he did with about 18 or so Belarus KGB agents assigned to monitor Oswald. He also quotes extensively from taps and other primary sources that were made available to him. If all of that is true then the KGB viewed Oswald with suspicion and didn't consider using him for any intelligence work, that he had no aptitude for anything. When he decided to return to the US - and the KGB learned about it almost immediately - their reaction was one of relief. They were glad to see this nuisance leave.

[Thomas Graves]

Tracy,

"With all due respect," if you believe it might have been excessive drinking and/or stress that made it impossible for Nosenko to remember details and caused him to change his story so often, then I think you need to re-read Bagley's book "Spy Wars" (and his pdf "Ghosts of the Spy Wars," if you've already read it, that is -- if not, then read it right here for the first time!).

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08850607.2014.962362 

---------------------------------------------------------------

Regardless, maybe THIS will impress all of the Nosenko apologists out there -- After reading Bagley's books "Spy Wars" and "Spymaster" (the latter with former senior KGB officer Sergey Kondrashev), Professor John M. Newman (author of "Oswald and the CIA" and true believer in the theory/religion that the "evil, evil, evil" CIA killed JFK) came to the realization about a year ago that Yuri Nosenko really was a false defector, and Anatoliy Golitsyn really was a true one.

Period.  Full stop.

Here's the first part of Newman's "Spy Wars" (based on Bagley's book by the same name) presentation in San Francisco last March.
(Note: That's incredulous Peter Dale Scott sitting next to him, and Bill Simpich sitting next to Scott.)

And here's the second part:

Enjoy,

--  Tommy

PS  Yeah, I like Z Z Top and The Rolling Stones and Led Zeppelin and ...

[Rob Caprio]

Hi Tommy, nice to hear from you. I always appreciated your work against the nonsensical H&L theory over at EF.

While I believe LHO acted alone for himself, I would definitely put your KGB theory above any CIA-did-it theories. I read Bagley's book and came away thinking that Nosenko could have been a false defector, a theory which puts me at odds with some LN advocates. He was either a false defector or alcohol had rendered him completely unable to remember simple details.

Why?

[Thomas Graves]

Rob,

Here's just one small clue: 

(Note:  The sentence in the article that starts, "But Moscow believed Oswald was a 'neurotic maniac' ..." would be much more accurate if it read, "But Moscow FALSELY CLAIMED IT believed Oswald was a 'neurotic maniac' ..." , or, on second thought, leave the sentence exactly as it is but emphasize the words "according to".  LOL

https://www.rferl.org/a/soviets-claimed-us-right-wing-lyndon-johnson-behind-kennedy-assassination-files-show/28820677.html

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And here's an eye-opening article about even earlier (like an hour or two after the assassination) Ruskie disinfo / active measures operation regarding the assassination of JFK:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2007/10/lucky-stars-ion-mihai-pacepa/


--  Tommy   

PS  Based on my recent "epiphany" (which Bill Simpich gave his stamp of approval to in a private Facebook Message) that James Angleton's (mis-spelled by the court reporter/stenographer during Angleton's June 1975 Church Committee testimony) TRIPLE AGENT "Byetkov*?" must have been Ivan Obyedkov (look him up), and the fact that Hoover's beloved (triple-agent) FEDORA had indirectly suggested that Kostikov was Department 13 (by fingering U.N. "diplomat" Oleg Brykin as same), I now believe that it wasn't James Angleton who contrived to plant the "WW III virus" in Oswald's file, after all, but ... gasp ... the Ruskies.

But, but, but ... WHY would they have done that, you ask?

Well, so that CIA and FBI, fearing nuclear war, would cover up evidence of Khrushchev's and/or Castro's involvement in the assassination, and so that, ironically, James Angleton could himself be semi-plausibly blamed years down the road for having "covered up CIA's involvement" -- blamed by the likes of Oliver Stone, John Newman, Peter Dale Scott, et al.

LOL

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Tracy,

"With all due respect," if you believe it might have been excessive drinking and/or stress that made it impossible for Nosenko to remember details and caused him to change his story so often, then I think you need to re-read Bagley's book "Spy Wars" (and his pdf "Ghosts of the Spy Wars," if you've already read it, that is -- if not, then read it right here for the first time!).

No, I agree that there is clearly something wrong with Nosenko.

[Oscar Navarro]

That's a good point - i.e., that the Soviets couldn't be sure that the US would take him back. Although there were other defectors at or near that time that had returned/been accepted.

The US, as I understand it, was obligated to accept his request to return. He never formally renounced his citizenship so he was still an American citizen with all of the guaranteed rights extended to them. Would the Soviets understand this? That is the US would have to take him back? I think probably so, especially if they were training him for some sort of intelligence work.

Additionally, the Justice Department did look into whether he could be prosecuted for any crimes and determined that they had no evidence for it (see the HSCA report on this). Threatening to divulge secrets is, apparently, not a crime. Although it is interesting that Oswald asked the US Embassy official that he talked with whether he, Oswald, could receive any guarantees about not being prosecuted upon his return. He was certainly worried about it.

The Mailer book - "Oswald's Tale" - included numerous conversations/interviews he did with about 18 or so Belarus KGB agents assigned to monitor Oswald. He also quotes extensively from taps and other primary sources that were made available to him. If all of that is true then the KGB viewed Oswald with suspicion and didn't consider using him for any intelligence work, that he had no aptitude for anything. When he decided to return to the US - and the KGB learned about it almost immediately - their reaction was one of relief. They were glad to see this nuisance leave.

 The US took it's time in evaluating Oswald before granting both him and his wife permission to return (in Oswald's case) to the US while the Soviets made it difficult for Marina to leave the workers paradise. Worked out both ways in the end.

[Rob Caprio]

Rob,

Here's just one small clue: 

(Note:  The sentence in the article that starts, "But Moscow believed Oswald was a 'neurotic maniac' ..." would be much more accurate if it read, "But Moscow FALSELY CLAIMED IT believed Oswald was a 'neurotic maniac' ..." , or, on second thought, leave the sentence exactly as it is but emphasize the words "according to".  LOL

https://www.rferl.org/a/soviets-claimed-us-right-wing-lyndon-johnson-behind-kennedy-assassination-files-show/28820677.html

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And here's an eye-opening article about even earlier (like an hour or two after the assassination) Ruskie disinfo / active measures operation regarding the assassination of JFK:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2007/10/lucky-stars-ion-mihai-pacepa/


--  Tommy   

PS  Based on my recent "epiphany" (which Bill Simpich gave his stamp of approval to in a private Facebook Message) that James Angleton's (mis-spelled by the court reporter/stenographer during Angleton's June 1975 Church Committee testimony) TRIPLE AGENT "Byetkov*?" must have been Ivan Obyedkov (look him up), and the fact that Hoover's beloved (triple-agent) FEDORA had indirectly suggested that Kostikov was Department 13 (by fingering U.N. "diplomat" Oleg Brykin as same), I now believe that it wasn't James Angleton who contrived to plant the "WW III virus" in Oswald's file, after all, but ... gasp ... the Ruskies.

But, but, but ... WHY would they have done that, you ask?

Well, so that CIA and FBI, fearing nuclear war, would cover up evidence of Khrushchev's and/or Castro's involvement in the assassination, and so that, ironically, James Angleton could himself be semi-plausibly blamed years down the road for having "covered up CIA's involvement" -- blamed by the likes of Oliver Stone, John Newman, Peter Dale Scott, et al.

LOL

But, JFK had a good relationship with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev so why would the KGB want him dead?

[Thomas Graves]

"But, JFK had a good relationship with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev so why would the KGB want him dead?"

Rob,

That's what I thought, too, until I read Bagley's "Spy Wars" and "Ghosts of the Spy Wars," got a handle (so-to-speak) on 90-plus years of KGB (and CHEKA, and OGPU, and NKVD, and FSB, and SVR, and ... etc, etc) ACTIVE MEASURES COUNTERINTELLIGENCE OPS (since 1959 artfully interwoven with Strategic/Operational Deception Counterintelligence Operations), and then read Chapter 10 ("Sinister Implications") of Mark Riebling's "Wedge: The Secret War Between The FBI and CIA", ... specifically from the last sentence on page 207 through the first sentence on page 209 in the 1994 book (pages 391 - 392 on my android).

The sentence that begins, "But what would the Soviets possibly gain from Kennedy's death ..."

https://archive.org/details/WedgeFromPearlHarborTo911HowTheSecretWarBetweenTheFBIAndCIAHasEndangeredNationalSecurity/page/n1

-- Tommy