Thomas Graves

Paul, I see your point. Hmmm Well, I guess it must have been a different 35-year-old, short, thin-bodied, blond-haired, blue-eyed, very thin-faced guy that Duran and Azcue dealt face-to-face with, huh? Oh well, .... (sigh) ..... back to the drawing board, gosh darn it. -- Tommy

Paul, With all due respect, do you actually believe that the CIA forced the Mexican Police to force Sylvia Duran to describe, in late 1963 and early 1964, "Oswald" in such a way as to point a guilty finger at short (especially by Duran's own 5' 3.5" standards!), blond-haired, blue-eyed KGB-officer Nikolai Leonov, or did she tell them that bit more or less voluntarily between her brutal, brutal beatings in an attempt to get her to admit that she had sex with Lee Harvey Oswald and/or paid him money to kill JFK? Why did both Sylvia Duran (in '63 and '78) and Eusebio Azcue (in '78) collectively describe the Oswald Impersonator (with whom they probably hadn't even dealt!) in such a way as to perfectly resemble KGB officer Nikolai Leonov? -- Tommy

Tracy, "You mean, you mean, you mean -- we can't eat our cake and have it, too???? ....... sniff ...................sniff ......................... Waaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!" -- Tommy

So, so, so, so, so, what are we to make of "thirty-five year old, short, thin-bodied, blond-haired, very thin-faced" Nikolai Leonov's assertion in his book and in National Enquirer magazine that the meeting with crying, revolver-packin' Oswald took place not on Saturday, 9/28, but on Sunday, 9/29, and that said highly-dramatic meeting with Oswald took place with only himself (Leonov) in attendance? Just implausible, wrong-dated "overkilll regarding the alleged emotional instability of Oswald, ..... or a rather so-so clumsy attempt by Leonov to disassociate himself from his 9/27 role as Duran's and Azcue's short, blond-haired, very thin-faced "Oswald"? -- Tommy

edited for grammar and a human-interest tidbit

Taking into consideration my last two posts on this thread, it seems to me that "former" KGB officer Nikolai Leonov's (fairly) recent pronouncements are an attempt to dissuade us from believing Golitsyn's contention that Oswald, having been a "defecting" U. S. military man, would automatically have been interviewed by the KGB's Department 13 in while Oswald was in the Soviet Union. In the immortal paraphrased words of "defector" Yuri Nosenko: "Because ..... you know ......uh ...... Oswald was ...... uh ... uh .... unstable ..... you know ....... and uh ..... therefore, the ... uh ... KGB had absolutely no ....... uh ..........interest ..... uh ....... in him, what ...... uh ..... so ..... uh ..... ever!" Yeah right, Yuri Baby. But wait! Hasn't Oswald's "emotional instability" already been sufficiently "established" by, you know, Neporoshenko's (unfortunately, highly-regarded) recounting of the revolver-on-the-table meeting that had (allegedly) taken place on Saturday 9/28/63 with that "highly unstable" crybaby, Oswald? I mean, I mean, I mean ... Does this seem like to y'all to be confusing, implausible, "overkill" by Leonov, or could it be an attempt by him to do three things in one fell swoop -- 1 ) emphasize Oswald's emotional "instability" / propensity for violence (e.g., his alleged threatening to kill the people who were watching him and following him in Mexico City) , 2 ) like Sandy Larsen pointed out today on another thread, an attempt by Leonov to obviate the possibility that he, short, thin, blond, very thin-faced, 35 year-old Nikolai Leonov, had himself been the "Blond Oswald" that Duran and Azcue had dealt with on Friday, September 27, and 3 ) perhaps most importantly -- further confuse and confound JFK assassination researchers and students? Hmm? -- Tommy

edited and bumped for Sandy Larsen and maybe even DSL

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

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

But in this case, Sandy, I'm gonna do it just to help you "confirm" your slightly-paranoiac theory about why I bump so much. -- Tommy

Slightly paranoiac? Uhhhh ..... maybe because I'm almost constantly editing and / or augmenting? Just a wild guess. LOL

Dear Sandy, I don't imply anything but you, as usual, infer one heck of a lot. Typical. -- Tommy

This is being bumped by Hargrove's only active critic at-the-moment. -- Tommy

LOL Good one, Jim! BTW, how many critics do you figure you have here, Jim? Three? Four? I mean, I mean, I mean ...... from time-to-time? -- Tommy

Never mind. Too bad you didn't tack this onto your most recent post, seein' as how I'm prohibited by Forum rules from bumping my second-most-recent post for another 23.75 hours or so ...

Yes it is, isn't it. -- Tommy

To be continued

Sandy, It can be logically inferred, from what you're saying, that Oswald intentionally posed unnaturally and uncomfortably like that so he could later claim the photo had been faked. -- Tommy

bumped with my questions and comments in blue -- Tommy

Obviously

bumped with questions and observations -- Tommy

Huh? Gee, I dunno. Maybe (just maybe) this? -- "If the Oswald character was indeed Leonov, maybe he [who?] used the fabricated [by whom?] story you quoted in an attempt to remove himself [who was that, again?] from consideration as the blond Oswald." He, whom, who? Oh My God. Are you actually agreeing with me that KGB officer Nikolai Leonov impersonated Oswald on Saturday, September 27, 1963? -- Tommy Also, which David Lifton post on which thread were you talking about before that confusing sentence? PS Do you only tend to believe things that "point toward" an evil, evil CIA conspiracy, and dismiss everything else?

Huh?

Sandy, Looks like my "sense of humor" is rubbing off on you. Perhaps you should get some professional help before it's too late. -- Tommy.

Sandy, Excellent post. -- Tommy