07-07-2012, 07:10 PM
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?
No it does no such thing sir. Not in the least. Not if we have any standards in this field. If research is to have any validity, it has to be deductive. That is, the conclusions derive from the evidence, not from a pre conceived agenda.
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.
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.
The other problem is, if this conversation did happen, where is the tape? Damore said it was taped in March of 1993. If you read the book, it does not exist. Even though Damore lived for two more years. And Janney had 17 years to find the tape. Now further, Janney implies that Damore said he actually met with Mitchell. (Some covert footprint. Damore had lunchwith a CIA assassin.) Where is the file on this? If he met with him and talked to him at length, where is all the information he should have then?
Let me tell you Albert: it is nowhere.
I will talk about this strange negative template at length in my review.
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?
No it does no such thing sir. Not in the least. Not if we have any standards in this field. If research is to have any validity, it has to be deductive. That is, the conclusions derive from the evidence, not from a pre conceived agenda.
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.
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.
The other problem is, if this conversation did happen, where is the tape? Damore said it was taped in March of 1993. If you read the book, it does not exist. Even though Damore lived for two more years. And Janney had 17 years to find the tape. Now further, Janney implies that Damore said he actually met with Mitchell. (Some covert footprint. Damore had lunchwith a CIA assassin.) Where is the file on this? If he met with him and talked to him at length, where is all the information he should have then?
Let me tell you Albert: it is nowhere.
I will talk about this strange negative template at length in my review.