+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/Forum-Deep-Politics-Forum)
+--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/Forum-JFK-Assassination)
+--- Thread: Deep-Throat Dave (/Thread-Deep-Throat-Dave)
Deep-Throat Dave - Allan Eaglesham - 06-05-2010
The parallel experiences of Dennis David and Doug Horne:
http://www.manuscriptservice.com/DeepThroat/
Allan
Deep-Throat Dave - Phil Dragoo - 07-05-2010
Allan
Fascinating tale. I have Horne V and see the cautionary tale pp. 1777-1796. On page 1794 Horne writes:
If Deep Throat was not who he said he was--a former ONI investigator who had kept current his ties within his former service--then he could only have such knowledge if he was a current member of the intelligence community, perhaps even an employee of ONI itself.
On page 1795 Horne writes:
Why It Was Done
The U.S. government's most effective technique in discrediting news stories and books that it finds unfavorable, or undesirable, has always been the use of ridicule.
Horne posits the government intended to ridicule him should he have accepted Deep Throat by having a stooge out DT as a fraud, or in the alternative, rattle Horne with the realization that he was the target of an op. He states such intent was based on misreading him as he neither accepted DT nor was put off his game by the op.
Allan, you offer a parallax view, a stereopticon of the government's game. I see much more than the usual marketing ploy of greedy publisher here. Rather, the hubris of the Navy spooks.
Which is enormous. Witness their complete ineptness in the incident contained in Moscow Station. More recently in their stomping on the midshipmen in overzealous pursuit of a handle on the electrical engineering scandal at the Naval Academy.
http://www.nytimes.com/1994/01/13/us/an-inquiry-finds-125-cheated-on-a-naval-academy-exam.html?pagewanted=all
They began the JFK chapter with the defector program, selecting Marine Oswald as candidate. They now botch the extant op with too many Deep Throats. They protest too much: so eager, so desperate to get the story out, but in no rush to answer any questions. Which of course gives away their game.
Deep-Throat Dave - Allan Eaglesham - 07-05-2010
Phil Dragoo Wrote:Allan
Fascinating tale. I have Horne V and see the cautionary tale pp. 1777-1796. On page 1794 Horne writes:
If Deep Throat was not who he said he was--a former ONI investigator who had kept current his ties within his former service--then he could only have such knowledge if he was a current member of the intelligence community, perhaps even an employee of ONI itself.
On page 1795 Horne writes:
Why It Was Done
The U.S. government's most effective technique in discrediting news stories and books that it finds unfavorable, or undesirable, has always been the use of ridicule.
Horne posits the government intended to ridicule him should he have accepted Deep Throat by having a stooge out DT as a fraud, or in the alternative, rattle Horne with the realization that he was the target of an op. He states such intent was based on misreading him as he neither accepted DT nor was put off his game by the op.
Allan, you offer a parallax view, a stereopticon of the government's game. I see much more than the usual marketing ploy of greedy publisher here. Rather, the hubris of the Navy spooks.
Which is enormous. Witness their complete ineptness in the incident contained in Moscow Station. More recently in their stomping on the midshipmen in overzealous pursuit of a handle on the electrical engineering scandal at the Naval Academy.
http://www.nytimes.com/1994/01/13/us/an-inquiry-finds-125-cheated-on-a-naval-academy-exam.html?pagewanted=all
They began the JFK chapter with the defector program, selecting Marine Oswald as candidate. They now botch the extant op with too many Deep Throats. They protest too much: so eager, so desperate to get the story out, but in no rush to answer any questions. Which of course gives away their game.
Phil:
What do you mean by "too many Deep Throats?"
Deep-Throat Dave - Charles Drago - 07-05-2010
"All intelligence operations have at least two objectives."
-- Bernard Fensterwald
Did the DT operation fail or succeed?
Yes.
-- after George Michael Evica
Deep-Throat Dave - Jan Klimkowski - 07-05-2010
Charles Drago Wrote:"All intelligence operations have at least two objectives."
-- Bernard Fensterwald
Did the DT operation fail or succeed?
Yes.
-- after George Michael Evica
This is true.
However, it is also true that when an abominable crime has been committed during an intelligence operation, and a researcher gets close to being able to substantiate elements which - if proven - would be highly damaging to the dominant power structures, then the appearance of a high calibre Deep Throat is standard operating procedure.
Allan - your tale is salutary. Thank you for sharing it here.
Other researchers have told me of similar phantasmagoric appearances when they were closing to lifting one of the veils.
When I was seriously investigating Jonestown, I shared some research with a source who had an operational intelligence background and who had been incarcerated in a deep black prison for several years following a mission which had been exposed.
Suddenly, my source provided a military witness who claimed to have been present at Jonestown, and personally involved in the turkey shoot in the jungle and subsequent clean up. This witness offered a number of intriguing and potentially significant details.
He was the type of witness that one dreams of finding. However, as I probed deeper, I could not corroborate his military record, and the timing of certain events - as he described them - seemed out. Not by much. But by enough to make the entire story crumble.
Ultimately, then, this was a "witness" that I could not use.
More, I suspect this "witness" was an unexploded grenade. I had hoped he would blow up in the faces of the criminals responsible for Jonestown. In truth, I suspect he was sent to take off my head, if I got closer to what had really happened.
Deep-Throat Dave - Jack White - 07-05-2010
Beware of witnesses who suddenly COME FORWARD with tales.
When they SEEK YOU OUT, they have something to sell you. Let the
buyer beware. (Chauncey Holt, James Files, Judyth Baker)
It is more reliable to trust witnesses you find who DID NOT SEEK YOU
OUT. (Gordon Arnold, Beverly Oliver, Madeleine Brown, Jean Hill, Mary
Moorman, Bill Newman, Dennis David, Aubrey Rike, etc.)
Jack
Deep-Throat Dave - Phil Dragoo - 07-05-2010
Allan
Phil:
What do you mean by "too many Deep Throats?"
I mean that the same fictional character appeared TWICE, to Horne, and to Groden/David.
Deep-Throat Dave - Charles Drago - 08-05-2010
A false witness is sent to an honest researcher.
The false witness, while presenting a story as relatively sophisticated as it is enticing, intentionally if quietly makes a miscalculation that gives away his game to the honest researcher.
The honest researcher exposes the false witness to an engrossed research community.
The honest researcher makes his bones and subsequently achieves prominence in the research community.
The honest researcher's judgement is celebrated and trusted.
Sometime later, another false witness -- this time with an ultra-sophisticated story -- is sent to the honest researcher, who cannot find fault with the bill of goods he's been handed.
The honest researcher, with the best of intentions, endorses the false story and lends his prestige to it. It's a classic argument from false authority, and it wins the day.
The damage is done.
This game plays out at its own pace. No need to rush the time, as they say at the Village Vanguard.
Time is on their side.
Deep-Throat Dave - Dawn Meredith - 10-05-2010
Charles Drago Wrote:A false witness is sent to an honest researcher.
The false witness, while presenting a story as relatively sophisticated as it is enticing, intentionally if quietly makes a miscalculation that gives away his game to the honest researcher.
The honest researcher exposes the false witness to an engrossed research community.
The honest researcher makes his bones and subsequently achieves prominence in the research community.
The honest researcher's judgement is celebrated and trusted.
Sometime later, another false witness -- this time with an ultra-sophisticated story -- is sent to the honest researcher, who cannot find fault with the bill of goods he's been handed.
The honest researcher, with the best of intentions, endorses the false story and lends his prestige to it. It's a classic argument from false authority, and it wins the day.
The damage is done.
This game plays out at its own pace. No need to rush the time, as they say at the Village Vanguard.
Time is on their side.
To this I can only add: beware of the false researcher. There have been many in this case. I had good instincts from the start for certain ones such as Dan Moldea, (sp), Epstein, many more, gotta be at court early this am...watch especially for the ones who write one good book then...TRUN....or a book with a few really good pieces of info but then goes into a rabbits's hole...The enemy has many tricks, but those well versed in this kind of investigation can spot the fakes.
I was recently warned yesterday by an old friend about someone...someone who already burned me once 12 years ago....
Of to court
Dawn