What do you think?
Rate this book


330 pages, Hardcover
First published October 24, 2017
Petty’s methodology deserves the adjective Angletonian. Assuming the CIA had been penetrated at a high level, Petty considered the possibility that both Anatoly Golitsyn and Yuri Nosenko had been sent by the KGB under the guidance of the real mole: Angleton himself. Through this analytic lens, Petty saw new meaning in all the anomalies of Angleton’s career: his strange indulgence of Philby, his promotion of Golitsyn, his irrational insistence that the Sino-Soviet split was a ruse. Every decision he made seemed to impede U.S. intelligence operations, Petty noted. Perhaps it was intentional. This was speculation as counterintelligence. Petty took a semiplausible scenario based on a superficial fact pattern and used it to confirm a logical conclusion that flowed from untested assumptions.
Here is Morley’s full thought on page 265 of his book: "Was Angleton running Oswald as an agent as part of a plot to assassinate President Kennedy?" The problem with that sentence, so close to the end of his book, is that it offers no evidence of any kind that Angleton intended to kill the president or played a material role in organising or setting into motion the events that led to the killing of the president. Nobody else has such evidence either. What then gives Morley a right to suggest that Angleton was part of a plot to kill the president? The subject here is a murder. To charge a person with murder requires evidence of intent and of material acts to carry out the intent. By evidence is meant witnesses, documents, recorded conversations and the like. Morley has no such evidence and he knows he does not have it.