James Hosty and KGB Agent Kostikov

[Paul Brancato]

Paul T - that is certainly not proof, especially as Hosty wrote that book after Newman's groundbreaking research. We all know that you know that, no wriggling out if it. You choose to believe Hosty, pure and simple. Why don't you just say that?

[Pamela Brown]

On 11/27/2016 at 7:23 AM, Paul Trejo said:

Pamela,

It's very interesting that you've interviewed James Hosty.  Yet if I may be so bold, I think we have been too cautious about James Hosty for over a half century.

Your interview suggests that James Hosty stuck to his story.  That's what I would expect.  Yet it's precisely Hosty's own story in his book, Assignment Oswald (1996) that reveals this gap in his story: how could Hosty have been aware of a Kostilov-Oswald connection in 1963?

This is not my original claim -- this is Hosty's own claim inside his own book.  I'm surprised nobody has noticed this before (to the best of my knowledge).

Hosty's 1996 book is 99% historical fact and chronology -- there is only this 1% addition which is a thread that runs from the beginning to the end of his book.  It can be clearly seen by simply going to the Index in the back of the book, and finding the name, "Kostikov," and reading just those pages.

The Kostikov Myth, the reader will see, forms the very theme of his book.  Hosty "proves" his innocence of any wrongdoing in the JFK assassination by means of blaming "Kostikov" and by linking Oswald to Kostikov.  That's Hosty's own theme.  Hosty himself said he knew about this back in 1963.

So, the reason Bill Simpich (2014) is so important is because Simpich shows carefully, by using new FOIA releases of CIA documents, that the Kostikov Myth was part of a Top-Secret CIA Mole-Hunt -- unknown even to CIA agents -- except to the actual Moles that the CIA was trying to catch!

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

You seem to be injecting your own opinion into Hosty's book, but not providing support other than "Simpich says so." I am not persuaded at this point that your position is anything other than a case of the fallacy of false alternatives...

[Paul Trejo]

10 hours ago, Pamela Brown said:

You seem to be injecting your own opinion into Hosty's book, but not providing support other than "Simpich says so." I am not persuaded at this point that your position is anything other than a case of the fallacy of false alternatives...

Pamela,

Have you read Bill Simpich's free eBook, State Secret: Wiretapping in Mexico City (2014)?  Do you have an opinion about this book?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[Pamela Brown]

2 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Pamela,

Have you read Bill Simpich's free eBook, State Secret: Wiretapping in Mexico City (2014)?  Do you have an opinion about this book?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

I am reading it.  It has some interesting insights.  I am an historian, so I don't just 'believe' or 'disbelieve' anything.  I do my best to weigh and evaluate what I am reading.  The same is true of Hosty's book as well as his statements to me.  

Edited November 30, 2016 by Pamela Brown

[Paul Trejo]

42 minutes ago, Pamela Brown said:

I am reading it.  It has some interesting insights.  I am an historian, so I don't just 'believe' or 'disbelieve' anything.  I do my best to weigh and evaluate what I am reading.  The same is true of Hosty's book as well as his statements to me.  

Pamela,

I'm delighted that you're reading it.  I read it in 2014, as soon as it came out, and I was blown away.  It challenges the 20th century CIA-did-it CT's head-on.

I hope that you will consider comparing Bill SImpich's well-researched State Secret, with James Hosty's 1996 biography, here on the internet with this thread.  I am a student of history (UT Austin).  Like you, I'm only interested in objective history.  Yet the contradictions between these two authors are intense.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited November 30, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Pamela Brown]

18 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Pamela,

I'm delighted that you're reading it.  I read it in 2014, as soon as it came out, and I was blown away.  It challenges the 20th century CIA-did-it CT's head-on.

I hope that you will consider comparing Bill SImpich's well-researched State Secret, with James Hosty's 1996 biography, here on the internet with this thread.  I am a student of history (UT Austin).  Like you, I'm only interested in objective history.  Yet the contradictions between these two authors are intense.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

I may.  To me, the question to be answered is not whether or not Hosty's statements fit in with Simpich's theory, but what Hosty knew about Kostikov and when. Might we agree upon that? 

[Paul Trejo]

11 minutes ago, Pamela Brown said:

I may.  To me, the question to be answered is not whether or not Hosty's statements fit in with Simpich's theory, but what Hosty knew about Kostikov and when. Might we agree upon that? 

Pamela,

We do agree upon that.   I would add another element -- what Hosty claimed that his superiors knew about Kostikov, and when -- and whether his superiors agreed. 

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[Pamela Brown]

17 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Pamela,

We do agree upon that.   I would add another element -- what Hosty claimed that his superiors knew about Kostikov, and when -- and whether his superiors agreed. 

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

I see that as more speculative and involving many sources, so my preference would be to table that discussion for now...

Edited December 1, 2016 by Pamela Brown

[Paul Trejo]

8 hours ago, Pamela Brown said:

I see that as more speculative and involving many sources, so my preference would be to table that discussion for now...

Pamela,

OK, agreed.  We seem to agree that we will focus first and foremost on James Hosty's own words, and his claims about what he knew about KGB agent Valerie Kostikov in 1963, as it allegedly related to Lee Harvey Oswald -- and when he knew it.   That's actually a lot.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo 

[Pamela Brown]

4 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Pamela,

OK, agreed.  We seem to agree that we will focus first and foremost on James Hosty's own words, and his claims about what he knew about KGB agent Valerie Kostikov in 1963, as it allegedly related to Lee Harvey Oswald -- and when he knew it.   That's actually a lot.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo 

Fair enough.  Where would you like to start?

[Paul Trejo]

16 hours ago, Pamela Brown said:

Fair enough.  Where would you like to start?

Pamela,

I have James Hosty's 1996 book, Assignment Oswald.  I'd like to start with his very first mention of Kostikov in that book, namely, page 48.

On that page, he claims that he saw an FBI Airtel in October 1963 - he does not give the exact date -- and that Airtel referenced a CIA document dated October 18, 1963, which connected Lee Harvey Oswald with Vladimir Kostikov. 

What is your opinion of that claim?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[Chris Newton]

The 10/10/63 CIA cable that was disseminated to FBI was DIR 74673. It was released by the ARRB in 1995.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1546#relPageId=3&tab=page

The cable doesn't mention Kostikov.

 

[Pamela Brown]

5 hours ago, Chris Newton said:

The 10/10/63 CIA cable that was disseminated to FBI was DIR 74673. It was released by the ARRB in 1995.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1546#relPageId=3&tab=page

The cable doesn't mention Kostikov.

 

True, but it does mention the Soviets.  The description does not sound like LHO though...

[Pamela Brown]

6 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Pamela,

I have James Hosty's 1996 book, Assignment Oswald.  I'd like to start with his very first mention of Kostikov in that book, namely, page 48.

On that page, he claims that he saw an FBI Airtel in October 1963 - he does not give the exact date -- and that Airtel referenced a CIA document dated October 18, 1963, which connected Lee Harvey Oswald with Vladimir Kostikov. 

What is your opinion of that claim?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

It seems a bit convoluted but not impossible that this was how Hosty first heard of Kostikov as an employee at the Embassy...what do you think?

[Pamela Brown]

On 11/27/2016 at 6:23 PM, Paul Trejo said:

James,

It's no distortion.  The material on Kostikov was disseminated in 1995 by John Newman, and James Hosty came out with his biography in 1996 -- but it would be a mistake to imagine that Hosty invented some "Kostikov-did-it" CT merely by reading John Newman's book in 1995. 

James Hosty tells us himself in his 1996 book that he had heard about Valerie Kostikov in October, 1963.  Here are his exact words:

---------- BEGIN EXTRACT FROM JAMES HOSTY, "ASSIGNMENT OSWALD" (1996), pages 47-48 --------

In October 1963, the New Orleans office sent me a communication reporting that the Oswalds had again disappeared...

Later that month, shortly after I received the New Orleans memo, I returned to the INS office to check on another case. Jeff Woolsey, the chief clerk at the INS office said, "Hey, Jim, what do you think of Lee Oswald in Mexico City making contact with the Russians a little while ago?"

"I didn't know that," I replied.  "Can I see that communication?"

"I can't.  Sorry, Jim," Woolsey said, somewhat embarrassed...

Back at the office, I sent an urgent overnight...Airtel, to FBI headquarters and the New Orleans office to respond.  By return mail, I received information...

When I received this information in late October from New Orleans, I saw the communication was dated October 18, 1963.  The CIA report said that Lee Oswald had been in Mexico City and had made contact with V. Kostikov, a vice consul at the Soviet Embassy there...

---------- END EXTRACT FROM JAMES HOSTY, "ASSIGNMENT OSWALD" (1996), pages 47-48 --------

By the way, Hosty will later admit that this crucial FBI Airtel October 18, 1963, later "disappeared."   Afterwards, on the Monday after the JFK assassination,James Hosty claims that he first became suspicious of Kostikov.   Here are Hosty's own words.  The date is Monday 25 November 1963, at about 11am.  Hosty decided to speak to the Dallas FBI Assistant SAC, Kyle Clark.  Hosty says:

---------- BEGIN EXTRACT FROM JAMES HOSTY, "ASSIGNMENT OSWALD" (1996), page 70 --------

I decided to go talk with Clark.  I saw Ken Howe was in Clark's office.  I tapped on the door and moseyed in.

"Kostikov was going to --"  Clark was saying when I walked in, but when he saw me he stopped talking abruptly.  Howe and Clark turned and looked at me.  After a moment of awkward silence, Clark asked, "What do you want?"

"I wanted to talk to you.  But it can wait."

"I'll come and get you later," Clark replied.

Kostikov again!  Who was he, and what was going on?  I was being kept from the full facts.

---------- END EXTRACT FROM JAMES HOSTY, "ASSIGNMENT OSWALD" (1996), page 70 --------

James Hosty would not allow the US Government to block him, but would aggressively investigate Kostikov in the days and weeks to come.  This is detailed in his 1996 book.

The Kostikov CT is significantly different from the "Communists-did-it" CT that emerged out of Dallas and Mexico City in the first few hours and days of the JFK assassination.  Everybody on the Right said it was a "Communist plot," just as everybody on the Left said it was a "Fascist" plot.  In the Cold War, the US Government was duty bound to investigate charges that the USSR had killed JFK.  So that was indeed investigated.

But Kostikov was a special case.  He was known only to the CIA high-command -- and the alleged Oswald-Kostikov connection was known only to the creators of the Simpich Mole Hunt in September 1963.   It was a super-secret project.  Only the Moles in that impersonation knew anything about it.

Hosty knew about it, by his own admission -- but he claims that his superiors also knew, but were keeping it from him.  His evidence is non-existent.  That's my argument.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Now I think I see what you are getting at here.  It was my impression in talking with Hosty that he did not either take into account or give any credence to LHO being impersonated in MC.  I don't think I asked him about that either.  But he did say that when he confronted LHO about MC that Lee blew up at him and refused to talk with him any more.  That says to me that Hosty may have thought that since he got a reaction from Lee, that it was an admission of guilt, when that may not have been the case.