Since we are now playing this game, once again, I thought I would publish some of the nonsense that comes from Kal Korff. This is written as an open letter to Korff, but I don’t believe I’ll get a logical and coherent response to it.
The following is based on Korff’s various writings including the four emails that he sent to me over a three day period in March 2007 (Not the two he later claimed). I will note here that in referring to these emails, I did not say he bombarded me with them and his continued insistence on that term is not only inaccurate, but in his demented world would be termed a LIE. I would like him to locate the place where I said bombarded. And I wondered if he planned to correct this erroneous statement now that it has been brought to his attention?
So, let the games begin.
Kal, let me remind you what you have said about making mistakes, "For the record, if I am indeed ‘wrong’ about anything, I have no’ problems, either admitting this or retracting anything which is incorrect. This offer of mine is timeless and universal, and it is available especially to my so-called self-described ‘kritics’ — which includes Major Kevin Randle."
To remind you of the facts, you sent a long email on March 8, 2007 which ran to five pages. Contrary to your claims, it did contain threats including death and lawsuits. Yes, you did say these were not threats, but calling an orange an apple doesn’t make it one and saying a threat isn’t one doesn’t change it.
(For those interested, on page 4 of the March 8 rant, Korff wrote, "Please don’t do anything stupid to get yourself in my show. EVERYONE ‘featured’ in it, either ends up dead or nailed in court, Kevin." He then adds, "This is NOT a ‘threat’ Kevin, just a fact.")
Contrary to your claims, I read each of the emails and I made copies of them. Yes, I did then delete them. But I know the contents and have hard copy of each of them because I always save emails that make charges and contain threats. Do you plan to correct your statements that I did not read them, which, in your world would be labeled a LIE.
Now, let me ask you a few questions for clarification.
1. You mentioned in your March 8, 2007 email that you had been in Iraq prior to the beginning of the war there. Would you care to elaborate and add any detail that would allow us to verify this claim? (I would think that a picture of you in front of an Iraqi landmark would do it. I can show you a couple of pictures of me standing under the crossed swords in downtown Baghdad for example.)
2. You say that you really were a captain (insert foot stomp here) in the Israeli based S3 (which you now call YS3) and that you would retire from these activities in five years. You said that you would not take a promotion even if offered one. Would you care to explain what happened to this statement and why you took the promotion?
3. You called me a coward for refusing to debate the merits of the Roswell case. Overlooking the fact that the last several years has seen me on active duty for various lengths of time and in various parts of the world, you wrote in your March 8, 2007 letter, "Remember Seattle?" This suggests that you remembered we had debated Roswell in the past so your claim that I was a coward for not debating was not only inaccurate, but could be considered a LIE and a SLANDER against a serving military officer. Do you plan to retract that statement? You did say that if you learned you had made an error you would quickly correct it. I’m waiting. (And this doesn’t even cover the two recent challenges to debate Roswell I accepted but you dodged.)
4. Your alter ego, Ms. Tycova (aka LT Tycova) said on "her" UFO Watchcat...
"On page 284 of Dr. Kevin D. Randle and Donald Schmitt's book, UFO Crash at Roswell, the following FALSE CLAIM is made:
"Sergeant Melvin E. Brown was at the second site, guarding the truck containing alien bodies. He also guarded the hangar at Roswell Army Air Field while crates from the site were held there."
She then notes, "FACT: THERE IS NO HARD EVIDENCE that Sgt. Melvin Brown was EVER a "witness" to the events at Roswell. Unfortunately, Sgt. Brown died YEARS BEFORE any UFO "researchers" such as Kevin Randle could ever interview him."
It is her opinion that this is a FALSE CLAIM, based, I’m sure on your opinion that there was no crash at Roswell and therefore anyone claiming to have seen anything unusual was telling a LIE. However, since this was based on an interview with Melvin Brown’s family, as noted in the book through footnotes, and since we were describing the relevance of each person in this little play at that point you, I mean she, quoted, the criticism is invalid. At no place do we suggest that we ever interviewed him and the astute reader knows that.
In the same vein, in your poorly researched book, you accuse us of "journalistic license" and suggest that a more honest way to convey Brown’s testimony would have been to have written, "According to Beverly Bean, Brown’s daughter, he said..." but this is another invalid criticism because the footnotes make it clear how the information was obtained. You are criticizing me for using a footnote, which is a proper thing to have done. And, on page 96, we explain exactly how the information was obtained. The astute reader knows that the information came from Brown through Bean... and they know who was present at the interview and that it was videotaped...
In fact, on page 82 of The Truth about the UFO Crash at Roswell, we again mention Brown and write, "Melvin E. Brown, a sergeant with the 509th , told family members that..." See that? Family members.
But we can say in your book you mislead the public by writing, "Finally as the pro-UFO Roswell researchers will admit when pressed, Beverly Bean is the only person in the Brown family who has made these claims about her father. Bean’s sister and her own mother have never confirmed the account."
This is, of course, not true and since you reference the 1991 interview conducted with the Brown family, you should have known that both her sister and her mother confirmed the account on video tape. So, you must have known the truth but rather than writing, "In 1991, both Bean’s sister and mother who had failed to corroborate the story earlier, are now on the record..." you chose to conceal this evidence from your readers.
So, I can write about your FALSE CLAIM, and provide information that suggests you should have KNOWN the truth at that time, and you therefore must be LYING.
5. Let’s talk about Edwin Easley since you now choose to bring him up. On page 91, of your misleading book, you wrote, "After initially refusing to confirm to Randle that he was even there at Roswell, Randle claims that Easley, on his deathbed, eventually confessed that not only had he "been there," but that he had also seen bodies."
Kal, this is a mishmash of testimony and statements. In my initial conversation with Easley, he not only confirmed he had been there, but that he was the provost marshal (please note the proper spelling). In the taped interview conducted on January 11, 1990, I said, "I’m doing some research into the 509th Bomb Group and I understand you were the Provost Marshal there at one time."
Easley said, "That’s right."
I said, "At the 509th?"
He said, "Yes."
And I said, "During July of 1947?"
And he said, "Yes."
So, that sort of blows your statement out of the water and proves it to be inaccurate and untrue. In your world, this would be a LIE and a SLANDER, and, of course, you’d want to repair this as you said you would if you learned that you had made a mistake. And, I suspect the comments about having been there and having seen it were comments made by Curry Holden and not Edwin Easley. And the initial refusal to acknowledge he was in Roswell was Sheridan Cavitt (who, BTW was not a COLONEL as you suggest but was, in fact, a lieutenant colonel so here is another mistake), the darling of the anti-Roswell crowd, who was knowingly LYING at that point, something you all fail to mention. I believe you got the three testimonies mixed up.
But wait, it gets worse for you. On page 92, you write, "According to Easley’s family, he was quite advanced in age when he spoke to Randle. His memory was failing him and Easley had a tendency to place himself in events at which he was not present." You attribute this to Dr. Harold Granich who you claim was Easley’s physician. Dr. Mark Rodeghier talked to Granich and got a story that is completely opposite of what you report. How is that?
To quote you, this might be considered "journalistic license" and that a more honest way to convey Easley’s testimony would have been to have written, "According to Dr. Harold Granich, Easley’s eye doctor..." (Please note that Dr. Granich was not an oncologist as you seem to believe, but an eye doctor...)
But wait... weren’t these statements really made by the family of Curry Holden who was 96 when I had the opportunity to talk to him... and isn’t the information that you attribute to Easley’s family and his doctor really the information we gathered from Holden’s family... I mean the wording is remarkably similar and it is not the first time you used the wrong quotes in the wrong place and attributed them to the wrong person.
Now you didn’t talk to Easley’s family at all, did you? You have no idea what they had to say, nor do you know of the correspondence I have had with the family, nor that I have had dinner with one of his daughters, nor that she appeared in a documentary about Roswell adding to what Easley told the family. Not to mention fellow officers at Roswell who corroborate Easley’s role in the recovery... something that you don’t bother to acknowledge or to mention.
In fact, I have a hand written statement by Edwin Easley that says, "This is information about the 1947 incident north of Roswell, New Mexico AFB... This case was presented on T.V. Unsolved Mysteries in September 1989."
Kal, I just don’t know how you can recover from so many errors in so short a space, but you did say if you had made a mistake you had no trouble admitting it. Should I put in that quote again?
So, now the question becomes, do you wish to continue this game, one that you are sure to lose, or will you stop now.
6. As just one final look into this there is your claim that we cannot prove that you ever said that you had an amazing IQ based on OMNI’s IQ test. Well, posted to Rob McConnell’s website, and I’m sure he’ll confirm it was there, he wrote, "01:00 am – 02:00 am EDT / 10:00 – 11:00 mp PDTKAL KORFF - Korff's Korner & SecretWar - Armed with an IQ of 219, according to the Omni Magazine’s World’s Hardest IQ Test; known worldwide for solving numerous mysteries, whether they are criminal, historical, scientific, or even "paranormal,"... So, let’s not pretend the proof isn’t out there.
BTW, Kal, a V-2, contrary to what you wrote in your book, was not a "buzz bomb." That was the nickname of the V-1. So, would this be another LIE, or would you catagorize it as just a simple mistake... and if you do, how come you can make simple mistakes and all the rest of us are guilty of LYING and SLANDERING?
And I resent your lectures on my belittling the military because some of the witnesses I have interviewed claimed that soldiers had threatened them. I have served in various components of the military for thirty years including in two war zones. I have earned the right to criticize them if I desire. You, on the other hand, have not worn the uniform of an American soldier in any war zone, let alone in the peacetime military, so keep your opinion to yourself. And, BTW, I am not drawing a pension so this becomes another LIE and SLANDER and you should retract it immediately, as you said you would.
Oh, and can you tell me why the Israeli-based YS3's web site is hosted in Prague? And do you really think that a one page web site that allows us to learn nothing about the organization proves anything at all? I mean, if you were making all this up (which of course you would never do), this isn’t a very clever way to say, "See, they do have a web presence." After all, how hard is it to design a one page site? For something similar please see the movie, Shattered Glass and you’ll understand what I’m saying here.
That’s it for now but please understand, I can do this all day, if I want... Look at the way we dismantled your Lydia Sleppy analysis, if you require yet another example.
And now back to our regularly scheduled blog...