Forums

Please or Register to create posts and topics.

transcript of interview for "Good Morning" on TV1, Moscow

Here are the questions and my answers. 

  • There are many theories regarding the Kennedy assassination, and none of them is official. Which version do you think is more possible and 

Any theory that has plotters with no connection to Lee Oswald should be thrown out. I don’t like to theorize too much, but the one person who connects very well is Fred Korth. Korth had a close association with Johnson. He was also the Secretary of the Navy until October 1963 when he was forced to resign because of conflicts of interest over military contracts, He was under investigation at the time of the assassination over those contracts, but the investigation ceased when Johnson took over.

Korth’s connection to Oswald goes back to the  1940s when he was a lawyer in Fort Worth and was the legal counsel for Oswald’s stepfather, Edwin Ekdahl.  Ekdahl himself had a role in Naval Intelligence during WWI.

  • Which documents do you think can be declassified?

They can all be declassified, but the ones I would like to see declassified are the remaining files on Mexico City and Oswald’s time in the Soviet Union. One good example is that the CIA parachuted a White Russian named Mikhail Platovsky into Minsk at the time Oswald lived there, for the purpose of forming what were called sleeper cells. These cells would reveal themselves in the event of an internal uprising against the communist rulers. The cells would provide leadership. But Platovsky was captured and executed, and it was only after he was captured that Oswald began making plans to return to the US.  The thing is that Platovsky’s name is mentioned nowhere in any of the available documentation.

  • The bullet that hit the president's head has already been shown at the exhibition and in 3D, but the second bullet has not yet been made public. Is there a chance these bullets were fired from different weapons?

That’s possible, but personally I think it was one shooter from the Dal-Tex building across the street from the book depository.

  • What could happen if it is revealed, for example, that in addition to Lee Harvey Oswald there was a second shooter?

That assumes that Oswald was one of the shooters, but recent discoveries show that he had a very good alibi. The interrogation notes of FBI agent James Hosty were recently discovered and show that Oswald said he had lunch on the first floor then went out to watch the parade. 

There is possible photographic proof of this. Two films sweep the front steps where some building employees stood to watch the motorcade. All of them have been identified except one – a young white male standing in the shadows of the back corner. He has a receding hairline and is dressed as a laborer.  The two films are held by NBC broadcasters and so far they have denied all requests by myself and others to study the original films so that clear scans can be obtained. Scams from the original films would be clear enough for proper identification of the figure.

  • How will events unfold in the world if the commission's conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone and without anyone's advice or help is refuted, and it turns out that he acted, for example, in the interests of another state?
Interesting question. Assuming a foreign state was involved – with or without help from Lee Oswald, I think it would be a very delicate diplomatic situation given the geopolitical troubles in parts of the world. We also need to consider that most of the plotters would be long dead and that this is a matter of history.
 
I think there would need to be the chance for acceptance of what happened and for reconciliation – a way to acknowledge the past and move forward with the idea that this can never happen again.

But the reality is, such a revelation would continue to be withheld. It was fear of a foreign state being involved that caused the Warren Commission to come into being to begin with. There was a real fear of WWIII and millions being killed. Not that WWIII would result now – but it is amazing what governments will cover up - even just to save embarrassment,

I think the real problem from such a revelation would be further internal ruptures in the US, politically and socially.

 

Additional info /clarifications (not part of the interview)

On Fred Korth

In addition to the above, the much maligned (in order to marginalize her and her statements) , Marguerite Oswald was certain of Korth's involvment, adding that Korth had a hand in Lee's life behind the scenes for some tome - including assisting with his early exit from the Marines. 

Korth was one of those in the Pentagon in favor of using a pre-emptive nuclear strike during the Missile Crisis. And apart from being a close ally of Johnson, he had connections with powerful  enemies of Kennedy in industry and intelligence.

Lastly, Korth's wife was  cousin to Roy Tryly. Truly, for those who may not know, was the Superintendant of the Texas School Book Depoitory.  He provably hired Oswald, gave him pernission to leae work after the assassination, and then reported him to police as missing - setting up Oswald's arrest and murder.

On Edward Ekdahl
In any future update of my book, I have some corections to make on him, as well as additional information connecting him to ONI. The corrections and additional info come courtesy of two friends who did the digging to help with this project. They will be fully acknowlwdged when and if I am able to get the updates done and published.

On Mikhail Platovsky
The Platovsky episode really underlines the almost unfathomable mindset of those playing  on the Cold War battle-field.

The fact is that Platovsky was only arrrested after a Soviet spy was arrested in New York. Tit for tat. Which means that the Soviets were well aware of Platovsky - yet did nothing about him until his arrest could send some type of message to US counterparts. 

Platovsky had not only been gathering military intel, but had been ordered to recruit "morally loose" elements of society for the aforementioned sleeper cells. This again, tells us something. The US must have conducted studies informing their choice of "morally loose" elements. Maybe because they could be blackmailed. Maybe because they are inherently more likely to take risks for certain rewards. It should not escape notice that according to a number of reports, Marina Oswald was "morally loose" and that after Platovsky's arrival in Minsk, she had a whirlwind courtship with Oswald and then after only 6 months of marriage, decided she needed a solo holiday in the Ukraine - a place where much of the training occured for Soviets about to depart for missions in the US.

It is criminal that Platovsky's files are not part of the JFK collection.

Final thoughts
The last question, it seems to me, was the main reason for the interview. The current governmeent in Russia it seems, is interested in pushing the "Soviets did it" line.  My answer, not being what they wanted, may have something to do with why they never provided me a copy of  what went to air They did say they were editing the interview, and I suspect that at minimum, they cut the last questio and answer. 

The facts of the who and the why and the how are not unanswerable. But thy are unacceptable for public consumption - both in the US and in the land of the former Cold War foe. 

It will only be through well-known and powerful voices WITHOUT A DOG IN THIS HUNT, including those in the media, Hollywood and yes, even in politics and academia... to ignore the politics, disregard the egos of those well-known and powerful people pushing nothing but theories and even disavow them in the same breath as they do the uber-conspiracists, and to rescue this case from the grasp of those doing so much damage to it and to history.

The assassination itself needs to be treated like any other cold case. But before that, the matter of Oswald needs to be addressed. His assumed guilt - alone or in company - needs the same treatment given to  living people by the Innocence Project.  He had an alibi. The alibi can be established as valid. It can also be disproven. There are two films in the hands of a corpoartion that hold the key.  It can certainly be proven right now that the alibi was hidden by the authorites - something there was no need for had it had no validity.

Cause
%d bloggers like this: