From: jac54@cas.org ()
Subject: Re: Teen Agent, Can you Hear Me? Teen Agent, Can You See Me? (was: Clay Shaw is Clay Bertrand, Oswald *was* a Teen Agent
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 11:34:29 GMT

In article <schuck.713688893@sfu.ca> Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca writes:
>Mitchell S Todd >
>Bruce Schuck >>
>Robert "Skeptical of one side only" Sheaffer >>>
>David Wright >>>>
>
>>>>Oswald was only 20 when he went to the USSR, supposedly as a "CIA
>>>>operative." That means that his alleged training must have taken
>>>>place while he was literally a teenager.
>
>>>So. They train teenagers to fly fighter planes.
>
>>      Since when? Last I checked, you have to be a college grad
>>      to fly one.
>
>Did you check 1959/1960?

	Did you?  Only officers are allowed to pilot aircraft, and
	you have to have a college degree to be an officer.  This
	may have been relaxed in WWII but it was tightened up again
	immediately after the war ended.

>
>>>They sent hundreds of thousands of teenagers to Vietnam.
>
>>      "They" did so more by necessity than choice. Conscription
>>      tends to keep the grunts young, especially when an unpopular
>>      war keeps a lot of poeple from enlisting on thier own for
>>      longer terms.
>
>>      Anyway, how did these tenneagers do in 'Nam?
>
>Not very well at all.

	Depends how you measure it.  Those kids fought well, a lot of them
	were killed because nobody could decide what they were being sent
	over there for.

>
>>>If you have any evidence that the CIA or other US agencies wait until
>>>people are over 21 to send them off to die please post it.

	Why don't you go and check the ARCO book on the CIA entrance
	exam?  If you're going to work for the CIA as an intelligence
	officer you will need a college degree and the sort of background
	that will get you a pretty high grade security clearance.  Immature
	teenagers don't stand much chance.  On the other hand, people
	from the other side are recruited on the basis of their weanesses.
>
>>      Yeah, but the idea is for the spy not to die. They're there
>>      to collect information. Generally specialized information.
>>      That requires a specialist with a good deal of knowledge in
>>      his specialty.
>
>Why specialized information? Spies come in all types. Some specialize,
>some don't. His mission may have been very simple. It's goal could
>have been to learn how the KGB/GRU handle military defectors. Such
>information would be of great value for future infiltrators.

	Interesting, the Soviets decided to have as little to do
	with him as possible.
>
>>>There is evidence that the Office of Naval Intelligence had a program
>>>designed to infiltrate the USSR by having young military personnel act
>>>disaffected and defect. The program may have infiltrated as many as 40
>>>military personnel , some for only a few weeks , into the USSR.
>
>>>Between 1945 and 1959, only 2 US military personnel defected to the USSR.
>
>>>In the 18 months leading up to 1960, 11 men with military backgrounds
>>>or backgrounds with access to sensitive data defected.

	Quite a few espionage cases were rolled up at the time too.  The
	Soviets will accept an agent as a defector if it looks like he
	is going to get caught.  The cases rolled up would definitely have
	made some people nervous.
>
>Finding out *how* the KGB and GRU operated would have been excellent
>intelligence, and worth the risk of losing an occasional motivated
>Marine. The military didn't have much problem with killing off lots of
>Marines a few years later in Vietnam for much less gain.

	What do you think the CIA have been doing for the past 40
	years?
>
>>       Anyway, how many of these men returned?
>
>A few. Oswald was one.

	Not surprising, most of them lost their illusions about the Soviet
	Union after a few weeks living there.  Having to learn to speak
>       Russian and not getting many of the privileges they thought they
	would get was a blow.

>>      How can you be a spy when the MVD/KGB, sure that you are a spy,
>>      is keeping close tabs on you?
>
>Gee you are dense! How did all those KGB men operate in the West when
>everyone knew who they were. The answer is pretty damn well!
>The same goes for intelligence officers operating out of embassies
>behind what was the Iron Curtain. Just because its hard doesn't mean
>you don't try!

	No you're the thick one.  The KGB/GRU agents start off with
	diplomatic immunity and a lot of technical and manpower support.
	When they arrive they don't tell the immigration authorities
	that they're going to administering Line N for the KGB.  They're
	the attache for specialized steel sales.  Identifying the agents
	is DIFFICULT.  When Stanislav Levchenko defected in Japan his CIA
	officer admitted that they hadn't identified this very hard
	working and succesful agent as a K.  On the other hand, Western
	intel agencies in WARPAC were playing with the deck stacked
	against them.  A classic example is the one-way traffic systems
	around Western embassies in Prague.  This made it very easy for
	their tails to pick the agents up.  Western agents were successful
	but not excessively so and a lot of their sources ended up with
	the copper-jacketed early retirement plan.
>
>>      Which leads to the big question: what was Oswald supposed to
>>      find out?
>
>I can think of 100's of things he could find out just by being in the
>USSR. Are the people dissatisfied? Who would be good to contact?
>Do they eat well? What would be a good bribe? What's the state of
>their electronics industry etc etc. He could even marry the daughter
>of someone high up in the party and listen to gossip!

	A lot of this can be done by agents with diplomatic cover wandering
	the streets.  The chances of a defector being allowed close to
>       anybody or anything important in a nation as paranoid as the USSR
	was extremely remote.


	Alec Chambers
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic