CIA's McCone: "Oswald subject was trained by this agency"
|
CIA's McCone: "Oswald subject was trained by this agency"
|
06-01-2014, 12:38 AM
If it is legit, document below is stunning! I've sent a copy to John Armstrong to get his opinion. It doesn't have the usual declassification stamps, so it must be either leaked or a hoax, or, at best, released through unusual channels. Anyone have any thoughts?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]5631[/ATTACH]
06-01-2014, 01:26 AM
Pretty sure its a hoax document.
The number at the top is for the wrong agency (but it could be plausible deniability, but still, not likely) and i'm pretty sure there is a website where a guy claims he wrote it (again, ?i mean, umbrella man 'came forward') but i personally regard it as a hoax. i think most others do too. (but i'm open to opinions, always) ? ps. meant to include that i believe it has been submitted to NARA and they came back having "physically searched" with no matching document.
06-01-2014, 01:59 AM
Nick Rose Wrote:Pretty sure its a hoax document. CO-2-34,030 seems to refer to the Secret Service, at least as it appears in CE3119, but I'm not of the syntax rules (whether "to:" or "from:" etc.) Thanks for the quick reply.
06-01-2014, 02:09 AM
It's a hoax that's been floating around the internet for some time now.
06-01-2014, 06:01 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-01-2014, 06:40 AM by Peter Lemkin.)
A document of that 'nature' would have been secret or top secret and would also contain the usual routing codes [which offices and/or persons in them/ number of copies, etc.] - that it doesn't have them makes me quite sure it is not the real deal. It also lacks the usual marginalia often found on real documents.
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn "If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
06-01-2014, 07:31 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-01-2014, 09:16 PM by Albert Doyle.)
I'm pretty sure not only would the sentence "Oswald subject..." ever be written for an agent in Oswald's position but the wording used in that sentence would never be used in any real inter-agency CIA document. "Under cover of ONI" is too colloquial and offhand to be used in any inter-agency document describing Oswald's agency background and visibly grinds against CIA nomenclature.
06-01-2014, 03:51 PM
Jim Hargrove Wrote:If it is legit, document below is stunning! I've sent a copy to John Armstrong to get his opinion. It doesn't have the usual declassification stamps, so it must be either leaked or a hoax, or, at best, released through unusual channels. Anyone have any thoughts?Gotta be a fake, too much truth here. If this was real there would be entire parts blacked out. Remember Dan-I'd Rather not and his W document? That's a drawback of the internet age, so much can be easily faked and made to look real. Dawn'
06-01-2014, 07:52 PM
The reviews seem pretty universal!
There is a blog apparently devoted to this very "document" at http://mccone-rowley.blogspot.com/. Sheesh! John A. just forwarded me a note from Jim Di pretty much concurring with the blog, that this was a forgery by a guy named Gregory Douglas, called by the blog a "notorious document hoaxer." Probably too good to be true, anyway, but I'm going to hold out a long-shot hope for a miracle leak by a disgruntled analyst at Langley, No doubt a L O O N G shot indeed. Thank you for all your replies. Jim
06-01-2014, 09:48 PM
The faker didn't know enough about government classifications to realize that CONFIDENTIAL is what they stamp on the least important documents. This would be at least a TOP SECRET document, and McCone would have been too smart to commit anything like that to writing anyway.
06-01-2014, 10:27 PM
Tracy Riddle Wrote:The faker didn't know enough about government classifications to realize that CONFIDENTIAL is what they stamp on the least important documents. This would be at least a TOP SECRET document, and McCone would have been too smart to commit anything like that to writing anyway. Thanks, Tracy. Walt Brown has a less totally dismissive analysis of this document, also discussing the CONFIDENTIAL stamp, here: http://www.manuscriptservice.com/DPQ/mccone.html You're right about this thing floating around the net for at least a decade. I hadn't seen it before. Jim |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
