Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team
Thomas Graves

Was KGB Officer Nikolai Leonov Cuban Consul Azcue's "Blond, Very Thin-Faced" Oswald"?

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:
12 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:


Can you briefly explain the need for bumping?

Are you afraid that there are some members who would like to join your topic, but won't because they look only at page-1 topics? (FWIW, I generally look at pages 1 and 2, and sometimes 3. There are plenty of page 1 threads I have little interest in.)

 

Slightly paranoiac?

Uhhhh ..... maybe because I'm almost constantly editing and / or augmenting?

Just a wild guess.

LOL


I just figured that if I understood your reason for bumping, maybe I could help out by bumping posts for you. (I never bump, so I can afford to do some bumping.)

You know, don't you, that you can do massive editing without bumping? Just do all your editing on an existing post. Then when you're done, bump it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:


That's not true. Your interjected remark changed the meaning of what I'd written.

 

Dear Sandy,

Do you really think that it was my intent to change the meaning of what you'd said?

Really?

Even though I just might have been clarifying for others (and maybe even "highly-experienced" you) that the date in late September that Duran and Azcue were referring to when they collectively described the "Oswald" with which they'd dealt face-to-face was "blond, blond or dark blond," "short", "35-ish," "thin-bodied," and "very thin-faced" was (oops!)  Friday the 27th, and not Saturday, September 28th, or any other day. (Date "boo-boo" voluntarily and sheepishly corrected by Tommy Graves)

LOL

Don't get all paranoid on me, now.

(Thanks for kinda de-railing my thread, btw.)

--  Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:
16 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:


That's not true. Your interjected remark changed the meaning of what I'd written.

 

Dear Sandy,

Do you really think that it was my intent to change the meaning of what you'd said?


At the time I did. I thought that you were qualifying or clarifying what I'd written. I figured you must know something I didn't know. And I wanted to know what that was.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
56 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:


At the time I did. I thought that you were qualifying or clarifying what I'd written. I figured you must know something I didn't know. And I wanted to know what that was.

 

Fantastic.

So, where WERE we an hour or so ago on this thread?

You could bump a pertinent reply of yours IF YOU WANTED TO, I suppose, or if you prefer, we could go on quibbling about my irritating bumping habits and my recent, audaciously devious ....... "insertion" ..... ad nauseum.

Or shall I bump us back on track in another 23 hours, or so?

-- Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 4/29/2017 at 2:17 PM, Paul Brancato said:

Thomas - Is this all fun and games to you, or do you honestly believe that the USSR was behind the assassination of JFK? I've read all the material you posted here. I'm not sure if either or both Golitsyn and Nosenko were real defectors or double agents. I am sure that using a very late Angleton interview, or a National Enquirer article, offers little credibility. The HSCA testimony of Azcue e is interesting and thought provoking. What is your knowledge of Leonov's fluency in English? Azcue strikes me as a more reliable witness than Duran, if only because Duran was subject to pressure and torture by the DFS. The fact that Leonov was photographed 11 minutes prior to Oswald's appearance at the Cuban Embassy is in itself meaningless. 

At least we have you out if the closet now. No wonder you won't articulate your theory. It's absurd, unless of course you want to go deep and claim that in the deep state KGB and CIA were allies. Is that your opinion?

Paul,

If you read some of the books and articles about their respective "careers" as defectors, you'd realize that Golitsyn helped to uncover many more important Soviet spies than Nosenko ever did, and that the KGB briefly shut down its operations in something like 54 of its stations right after Golitsyn defected due to KGB's leaders realizing he knew so darn much about different KGB operatives and operations, and that he was willing to "spill the beans" to the CIA and FBI.

Wikipedia is a good place to start your research on them, IMHO.

--  Tommy :sun

 

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/17/2017 at 3:52 PM, Thomas Graves said:

If Mexico City Soviet Embassy-based KGB officer Nikolai Leonov was, as I firmly believe, the blond guy photographically "captured" in the October 2, 1963, LILYRIC and LILIMITED photos, above, then the CIA most certainly knew who and what he was at the time (as is indicated by their writing his abbreviated name "Leon" below photo #6 of the October 2 film strip -- and by typing it on the October 2 LILYRIC index), so the most intriguing question for me is why the CIA didn't "out" him to the HSCA, and the only non-conspiratorial reason I can think of is that the CIA didn't want the Ruskies to know that they knew who and what the little, thin-faced, blond dude was -- a KGB officer based in the Mexico City Soviet embassy.

All of which makes me wonder:  Could Leonov's photos have been the ones Head of Station Winn Scott was writing about in a 11/23/63 letter to CIA's Head of Western Hemisphere, J.C. King when he said "they are of a certain person who is known to you", or words to that effect?  Could he have been referring to the October 2 photos of KGB officer Nikolai Leonov rather than one of the same-day photos of big, burly, balding "Mexico City Mystery Man"?

bumped

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/20/2017 at 7:12 PM, Thomas Graves said:

 

Why did "Blond Oswald" KGB officer Nikolai Leonov say years after the assassination, in his Russian-language memoirs and in a National Enquirer article, that the real Oswald (revolver packin' 'n cryin') showed up unannounced at the Soviet Embassy on Sunday, September 29, and met with him, "and the guard was the only other person in the building (because it was a Sunday)"

He was lying, of course, but to what end?

OR WAS HE?

bumped

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/14/2017 at 8:31 PM, Thomas Graves said:

Why did "Blond Oswald" KGB officer Nikolai Leonov say years after the assassination, in his Russian-language memoirs and in a National Enquirer article, that the real Oswald (revolver packin' 'n cryin') showed up unannounced at the Soviet Embassy on Sunday, September 29, and met with him, "and the guard was the only other person in the building (because it was a Sunday)"

He was lying, of course, but to what end?

OR WAS HE?

IMHO, that's one of the sixty-four thousand dollar questions, folks.

That, and why Duran's description of the "Blond Oswald" she'd dealt with (or not dealt with) on 9/27/63 appeared to vary so much over the years,

and why the combined description of the guy who had (or not)  visited them on 9/27/63 so closely matched the description of KGB officer "Third Secretary" Nikolai Leonov?

Man, that's like $192,000 altogether if my "maths" is correct.

--  Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×