[104-10211-10001.pdf — page 68]
669was the end of 1960 or the very beginning of 1961. whereas infact MAHONEY's visit was in January 1961. Despite the errorsrelating to loadings and unloadings of deaddrops at the PushkinStreet location locate after the second (ABIDIN) Visit there, thisstory from establishes KG3 knowledge of it's casingof Pushkin Street.Greville ANNE's testimony co.cerning his interrogations bythe KGB else introduced elements contradicting the versions ofNOSEIKO,As indicated in discussion of NUSENKO'S story of the con-versation with DULACKI (Pages 536-538), the FOB was con arcedthat PINKOVSKIY's question about his girlfriend "ZEP" was an im-portant allusion and they demanded that we explain it. MYNEeither had forgotten the name or had never known it, and he wasurable to tell the KGB who "ZEP" was. The fact that the KGB hada recording of this 27 May 1961 conversation shows also that theKGB was at least suspicious of the relationship before that con-versation took place and must have then become aware of the con-spiratorial aspect of the PENKOVSKIY-E relationship by virtueof the cryptic nature of that conversation. The additional factthat the KGB surveilled WYNNE to the apartment of an unidentifiedofficer of British Intelligence on the same day the "ZEP" conver-sation between WYNNE and PFIKOVSKIY was monitored is evidencethat both ANNE and PENKOVSKIY were under strong suspicion ofespionage as of that day, if not earlier. Nor could those sus-picions have been explained away by the fact that PEIKOVSKIY andWYNNE hed legitimate cover reasons for contact, in view of thecontent of their conversation--there was nothing in their overtrelationship which required secrecy or even caution in conversa-tion.The indication fron that the KC3 was awareof MAHONEY's visit to the inside vestibure of the Pushkin Streetsite in January 1961 is not only missing from all other versions,but conspicuously so from NOSENKO's story: he claimed to knoweverything the KGB knew about this American dead drop site, be-cause of ABIDIAN's visit there. NOSENKO on one occasion saidthat he thought an American tourist (not a U.3. Embassy officer)might have visited the site a year or two earlier than ABIDIAN.(iii) RemarksNOSENKO did not know or did not report to CIA that theonly other American who had visited the Pushkin Street dead droparea was MAHONEY. This fact suggests that either NOSEIKO wasdeliberately withholding from CIA information of vital import-ance in the PENKOVSKIY compromise, or he was unaware of theKGB's possession of this information, despite his claimed posi-tion in the U.S. Embassy Section and responsibility for cover-age of ABIDIAN. The fact that his story on the PESKOVSKIYcompromise, like the "official report" of the KGB, does rotshow the seriousness of the evidence in the KGB's possessionas of 27 May 1961 additionally points to his withholding of in-formation on the subject of the timing of PEIKOVSKIY's compro-mise, which was definitely no later than this date. IF NOSENKOwas deliberately withholding information on this subject andlying about the PENKOVSKIY compromise, then he is not a bonafide defector. If he is unaware of the information which theKGB has in its possession, then he was not in the U.S. ErbassySection in 1960 or 1961 as claimed, and hence his bona fideswould be disproven.TOP SECRET