07-07-2012, 08:53 PM
(This post was last modified: 07-07-2012, 09:16 PM by Albert Doyle.)
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:Covert footprint?
Albert, this is as bad as you using a letter from the LA Times by Cicely Angleton.
Janney and Damore can't find him, so that makes him a CIA agent?
You have to admit not being able to find that guy doesn't deter the accusation. This guy disappeared. I have to be honest with you that doesn't work against his being a spook and if it was a CIA hit his testimony doesn't work against their alleged purposes. Not everything the Times writes has to necessarily be false. There could be elements of truth to some of the information. For instance even if what the Times wrote is complete bullshit Angleton could have been worried about the diary because of what it potentially contained. You are kind of suggesting Angleton was there for a dinner date, but remember we are talking about the same guy who went and got the contents of Scott's safe in Mexico. It fits his MO.
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:And when Damore says that he wrote this so called CIA safehouse, and the hit man ANSWERED HIS LETTER! I mean please, Albert, please. That is so ridiculous as to be comedic.
But that's not enough for Janney. Damore then called the hit man. They stayed up talking most of the night according to the author. THe guy spilled his guts out. Happens all the time right? From a safehouse.
Perhaps Mitchell was so out in the open they decided giving the appearance of CIA openness worked in their interest. After all he did testify at a trial. Perhaps this phony image of CIA openness was used to their advantage, or used to avoid how they would appear if they didn't answer. Mitchell could have spilled a cover story used for disinformation purposes.
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:I don't know if you understand how these work. I do, since I do, or used to do, a lot of field investigation and reading about them. These places are monitored and surveilled, everything and everyone that comes in or goes out is only allowed entrance or exit with permission. So what Janney is talking about here is completely foreign to my experience.
I think Douglass did a good job showing how many loose lips CIA actually did possess. It could be CIA was unaware of exactly how much JFK did potentially tell Mary Meyer? Angleton's reaction shows that they may have been caught by surprise by Meyer's murder and rushed to cover their asses. It could be Mitchell was used to plant the seed for disinformation ops against Kennedy based on this diary. An admitted CIA hit could be used to plant a false history that worked to muddy both the waters and JFK's reputation. Leary, being compromised by threatened jail time, could have helped this history along. Then people like you come along, rightfully blow the whole thing out of the water on the basis of provable fact, and the doubt continues at full expected force. Don't underestimate the CIA or its room full of mirrors Mr Di.
.