Thomas Graves

Didn't you read the National Enquirer article you posted the link to, here? Regardless, you do know that Leonov wrote a book -- his memoirs (in Russian, of course) -- a few years ago, don't you, and that if you do a little googling around you can find an analysis of his recounting of his (alleged) one-on-one sit down with revolver packin' n' cryin' LHO on Sunday ... in English? Edit: It's on jfkfacts.org. Google * leonov oswald sunday * to find it.

Chris, IDK. I asked Bill some follow-up questions late last nigh (early this AM, actually) and he hasn't replied yet. Let's bear in mind, though, that Nechiporenko didn't mention Leonov as one of the colleagues who met with Oswald on Saturday, September 28. Nechi said Yatskov and Kostikov were the only others there with him. And Leonov in his Russian-language book and in that National Enquirer "interview" (?) said that he met with Oswald on Sunday, September 29. Stupid question, but did those Ruskies at the Sov Emb play volleyball on Saturdays and Sundays? IIRC, Tennent H. Bagley points out that the KGB was never able to provide documentary proof to CIA "after the Cold War had ended" (LOL- that's a good one) that Nechi and the boys really had sent a cable about Oswald to Moscow Center on Saturday, 9/28. ... -- Tommy Edit: Here's an interesting-looking MFF page I just now stumbled upon while innocently checking the correct spelling of Yatskov's name. https://www.maryferrell.org/php/cryptdb.php?id=LIOVAL-1

Simpich said Leonov may have seen an upset person or someone upset, but didn't say where.

Chris, That's what's so intriguing about Duran's and Azcue's collectively describing the guy who was-or-was-not there on 9/27 in such a way that so closely described Leonov. Why? Why? Why? Maybe he wasn't there and their description was a kind of message or warning to one of the Intel agencies involved? Just thinking out loud here ... -- Tommy

Chris, In a PM to me last night, Bill Simpich said rather cryptically that Leonov was the KGB's David Atlee Phillips, that Leonov was the victim of (evil, evil) CIA "dirty tricks", and that he had been a (3-time) target of TARBRUSH. Edit: Is Simpich implying that Duran's and Azcue's collectively describing the guy who was-or-was-not there the way they did (i.e., like Leonov) was somehow related to the (evil, evil) CIA's TARBRUSH project? Or am I only inferring that that's kinda what Bill Simpich is geting at? MFF has some stuff on Leonov and TARBRUSH. -- Tommy Edit: Here's the follow-up, explanatory PM Bill sent me. I hope he won't mind my (possessive pronoun) making (gerund) it "public". "If you go to MFF you will see he was the target in several TARBRUSH actions designed to make [Leonov] look bad. I think he helped direct covert actions like Phillips that is why he was targeted. I believe he saw someone upset - not sure it was Oswald. Few people care about Leonov in the 10/1 [sic; 10/02, actually] photo because it doesn't solve the case - you and I find it fascinating to actually resolve another puzzle piece and be able to move on."

Dear Paul, I read only your first sentence and I automatically thought of the perfect response -- "You're the cop. You figure it out." Have you started reading your Kindle edition of Tennent H. Bagley's Spy Wars yet, Paul? Let me know if you need any help understanding it. LOL ( Still unable to use Google Search ? Tsk, Tsk ... ) -- Tommy

bumped

bumped

Nothing to worry about, though. Vladimir Putin's a very nice man and he'll take care of it. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/putins-way/ -- Tommy

edited and bumped

Yooou weeen wit weally waaas Wuuuby? Weal-weee?

Dear Paul, ....... ok -- Tommy

Proof positive: The electing of "Useful Idiot" Donald Trump to the Presidency. -- Tommy

Yes, Paul. I have. Why? Would you like for me to explain it to you? LOL -- Tommy

The reason the microphone isn't there is very simple. The evil CIA took it and used it as a moon landing prop.

Whaaat? It wuzzant Wuuby? My goodness whaaat an impotent tweaad.

Dear Michael, Are you, in a weasly kind-of-way, accusing Walton of being a saboteur? Sure seems that way. I might be mistaken, but I believe that's against Forum rules. Are you trying to goad Walton into saying something rude so that he will get himself banned from "your" Forum? If so, wouldn't that make you a ... PRO.VO.CA.TEUR ? Just sayin' -- Tommy

Dear Paul, I haven't "come up with any answers" other than the fact that something's rotten in the state of Denmark and it probably has something to do with the KGB. Like I said, you're on you're on your own now, Paul. I got Bagley's Spy Wars at a library, and you probably can, too. BTW, what answers have YOU come up with? Let me guess -- "Well, after years and years of study, I've narrowed it down quite a bit and I've concluded with a high degree of probability that JFK was killed by the Military Industrial Intelligence Complex." (lol) -- Tommy

Dear Paul, If Bagley's 37-page PDF is too difficult for you to understand, you might want to read his "Spy Wars" book, instead. -- Tommy BTW, ... You're welcome.

Dear Paul, What it has to do with the Assassination: By sending false defector Nosenko to the U.S. one month after the assassination, the Russians had him not only discredit what genuine defector Golitsyn was telling the CIA about KGB operations, but also had him try to hide the fact that the KGB had, at the very least *and as a matter of policy*, interviewed Oswald in Russia (ironically by Kostikov's Department 13) to find out what Oswald knew about Marine Corps weapons and weapons systems, etc. As students of the assassination, I think we've got to ask ourselves why in the world were the Russians trying to hide that fact? -- Tommy PS I highly suggest that you read the Sparticus page on Tennent Bagley, and that you also read his easy-to-understand book *Spy Wars*. You're on your own now.

Sandy, It does appear that way, doesn't it. Seems rather short sighted to me. It's hard to get people to collaborate with you when you deny them of their fair share of the glory. -- Tommy

Sandy, I wonder if Bart's willing to compromise with us and say there were two Billy Lovelady's there that day? I mean I mean I mean ... if there were two Oswalds for 15 years, why couldn't there have been two Lovelady's for one day? -- Tommy PS How many Gloria Calverys would that require?

Dear Bart, It's reasonable to assume Lovelady's not noticing Baker was due to Lovelady's being engrossed in what Calvery was telling him on the steps. -- Tommy

Paul, You don't seem to understand. Did I refer you to any wikipedia articles on this thread? (No, I didn't.) Did I say anything about Leonov on this thread? (No, I didn't) Did you click on the Bagley link I provided, above? You know, the 37-page PDF I told you about? Better yet, have you read Bagley's Spy Wars or Spymaster yet? -- Tommy

Paul, Do yourself a favor and click on the link to the Bagley PDF I provided, above, and read the 35-page essay, or whatever you want to call it. I sent it to Chris a couple of nights ago and he told me he found it so interesting that he stayed up until 3 am reading it. -- Tommy