Watergate: The Hoax excerpt—"The Fielding Farce"

[Ashton Gray]

This is an excerpt from the book Watergate: The Hoax, by Ashton Gray.This is Chapter 27, “1971: The Fielding Farce”:

The files in my cabinet were in considerable disarray. My personal papers, including those pertaining to Dr. Ellsberg, appeared to have been thoroughly rummaged through.
CIA-Blessed Psychiatrist Lewis Fielding

We had gone to a lot of effort and taken a number of risks—for nothing. All we had established was that Ellsberg’s file was not in Fielding’s office. Where was it, then?
E. Howard Hunt

Arguably, the most deadly, mind-scrambling combination of CIA psyops in Watergate, the hoax, is embodied in the events of the night of 3 September 1971, going into the wee hours of 4 September, when E. Howard Hunt and G. Gordon Liddy supposedly masterminded and oversaw a “break-in” at the Beverly Hills office of Lewis Fielding— former psychiatrist to Daniel Ellsberg—utilizing three of the “Cuban Contingent” from Miami to do the dirty work: Bernard Barker, Eugenio Martinez, and Felipe de Diego. Martinez was actually still on the CIA’s payroll at the time, but the other two also were working for the CIA, just through some other “arrangement.”

There was, indeed, a “break-in” of sorts of Lewis Fielding’s office, and the Cubans took pains to make sure there was no mistaking the fact of a break-in, including breaking a window, using a crowbar on the office door and file cabinets, and scattering pills around the office to make it look like a search for drugs, but the entire “operation” was never anything other than a fraud and a farce. It never had anything at all to do with “finding” any psychiatric file on Ellsberg, as the perps claimed. It had two primary purposes:

1. Give Daniel Ellsberg a guaranteed “get out of jail free” card, and,
2. Create as much confusion as possible in relation to the later Watergate operations.

It was a masterpiece of psychological warfare, using no fewer than six CIA psyops. [see Appendix III: “The CIA Psyops of Watergate and Beyond.” —Ed.] It was so effective that up to the very moment when this manuscript is being prepared, not one single investigator, reporter, author, or trier of fact ever has exposed it for the abominable fiction it is—fiction almost certainly authored by E. Howard Hunt—even though the evidence of it being a fraud has been lying in plain sight for almost half a century, and is inarguable. The headings of some of the CIA psyops that were used help to analyze it for the farce it is.

CONTRADICTIONS TO CREATE CONFUSION, AND CONTRADICTION BY MULTIPLE SOURCES: THE COMMONALITIES

The “accounts” by different participants of the break-in at the Fielding office have certain scripted commonalities, but are irreconcilably contradictory on the single most important “fact” in this insane fiction: Did the perps find Ellsberg’s files in Fielding’s office or didn’t they? Here is how some of the perps and the “victims” told it—in different places, and at different times—to create the maximum possible mind-numbing confusion. First, here is the CIA psycho-establishment mouthpiece Lewis “Gollum” Fielding saying (under oath in both cases) that Ellsberg’s files were in his office during the break-in, and had been compromised:

Lewis Fielding in affidavit:
I drove down to the office . . . and found my papers and records strewn about. The files in my cabinet were in considerable disarray. My personal papers, including those pertaining to Dr. Ellsberg, appeared to have been thoroughly rummaged through.

Lewis Fielding in grand jury testimony:
Questioner: Now, would it be possible to look at the Ellsberg-1 envelope that you previously described in the drawer to determine whether it had been opened? . . . [Was there] no way to look at the papers themselves to see if there had been an actual intrusion and removal and then perhaps being put back?
Fielding: Oh, yes, there was, because these papers, as I found them, were outside the envelope. I know that I had left them inside the envelope. Beyond that, there was evidence that these papers— You know, again, if you have been with a file long enough and lived with it, you know what your papers look like. And this looked as if it had been fingered, had been fingered over, you know, people had done something with it, you know.

Then comes one of the “masterminds” of the break-in G. Gordon Liddy, to contradict the shrink:

G. Gordon Liddy in sworn testimony:
On the 3rd of September 1971, we—that is the group, using Cuban expatriates who had been trained and had been in the service of the Central Intelligence Agency—penetrated the office of Dr. Fielding, and they looked for those records. They were not there.

G. Gordon Liddy in autobiography Will:
Hunt arrived first [at the hotel room], and by the time I got there he was cooling a bottle of champagne. The Cubans arrived next. Barker spoke for them. . . . What did they find?

“Nothing, Eduardo

,” said Barker to Hunt. He held up a piece of paper on which I’d written the name “Daniel Ellsberg” . . . “There’s no file with this name on it.”

Hunt was unbelieving. “Are you sure?” he asked. They were.

Hunt had to ask if they were sure that they didn’t find anything. Sure he did. Oh, but the real “victim” has to weigh in himself, Saint Ellsberg, and the saint ain’t so sure:

Daniel Ellsberg:
The plumbers did find my file. . . . In it was a paper I had written for the American Political Science Association called “Quagmire Myth and the Stalemate Machine.” I alluded to classified information I’d seen, which obviously meant the Pentagon report.

Ellsberg told that to Smithsonian Magazine in 2012, and they were gullible enough to print it. Now comes Egil Krogh, who served time for having approved this “break-in”:

Egil Krogh:
Burglars broke into Dr. Fielding’s Beverly Hills office to photograph the files, but found nothing related to Mr. Ellsberg.

Oh, but Felipe de Diego, one of the Cubans who “had been in the service of the Central Intelligence Agency,” chooses to disagree, and after all, he was there:

Felipe de Diego, one of the burglars:
Mr. de Diego . . . did not remember who had found the file, but shortly afterward the search stopped and he helped to hold papers from what appeared to be Dr. Ellsberg’s file while Martinez photographed them.

That’s a little odd, because Eugenio Martinez doesn’t seem to remember photographing Ellsberg’s psychiatric files at all:

Eugenio Martinez, the burglar on CIA payroll at the time, who Diego says photographed Ellsberg’s file:
There was nothing of Ellsberg’s there. There was nothing about psychiatry, not one file of sick people, only bills. It looked like an import-export office more than a psychiatrist’s. The only thing with the name of Ellsberg in it was the doctor’s telephone book.

And now let’s hear from the CIA veteran xxxx himself, the spy-fiction writing hack who dreamed this miserable pack of lies up, E. Howard Hunt. Notice how similar his commonality “talking points” are to G. Gordon Liddy’s in their autobiographies:

E. Howard Hunt in autobiography Undercover:
I was the first one back to the hotel room, then Liddy came in a few minutes later. . . . The three men from Miami came in together. They were sweaty and disheveled, and one of them had cut himself on broken window glass. We gave each other abrazos [embraces], then Barker said, “Eduardo, there was nothing there.”

I stared at him. “Nothing?”

He shook his head. “We went through every goddamn file in that office, Eduardo, and there was nothing there. Nothing with the name Ellsberg on it.” From his pocket he pulled the scrap of paper on which Liddy had printed the name “Ellsberg” and given it to Barker.

. . . We had gone to a lot of effort and taken a number of risks—for nothing. All we had established was that Ellsberg’s file was not in Fielding’s office.

It’s spy fiction, and if your head isn’t spinning yet, you haven’t been paying attention. But it will spin. This CIA psyops carnival ride has hardly gotten set into motion.

THE PRINCIPLE OF DUPLICATES—“TWOSIES”

The Fielding Fraud is filled with terrible “twosies” that sow seeds producing thick briar-weeds of confusion. Here are the major ones:

• The Fielding Op was on a three-day summer holiday weekend, Labor Day weekend; the Watergate “first break-in” hoax was on a three-day summer holiday weekend, Memorial Day weekend. That alone can start to make you feel spinny and sick at your stomach. It was designed just that way.
• The Fielding Op was an actual break-in—even though Fielding was in on it —but the Watergate “first break-in” was a complete hoax. Then there was a later actual break-in at the Watergate [see Part VII, “The Break-In That Was and Aftermath.” —Ed.], during which the perps were arrested, creating even more confusion. The Fielding Op over a Labor Day weekend was to lend “credibility” to the Watergate phony break-in op over a Memorial Day weekend.
• Both ops used Cubans from Miami, and the three Cubans involved in the Fielding op will be used in the Washington ops—along with some others— creating further confusion.
• Both ops involve the Cubans having “camera equipment” and supposedly taking photographs of documents (except there were no documents to photograph—except there were documents to photograph, depending on which set of lies you listen to).
• All the ops involve the use of walkie-talkies.
• All the ops have Hunt and Liddy as the outside overseers, and in a hotel.
• The name “Fielding” is itself a “twosie,” because John Dean had hired Fred Fielding not long before this op—specifically for the “twosie” value. The psychiatrist Lewis Fielding is styled as a “victim” of E. Howard Hunt; the Dean-hired Fred Fielding later will be involved in the disposal of contents of E. Howard Hunt’s safe in the White House. This welds these “Fielding” names together in an incautious mind in relation to Hunt, creating extreme confusion, especially in texts where only the last name, “Fielding,” is used to refer to either man.
• The name of one of the Cuban perps is Martinez. Although the perps claim, in their versions, that they met and talked with a cleaning woman at Lewis Fielding’s office building early in the evening before the break-in, Lewis Fielding claimed in his affidavit that the cleaning person at his office building who interacted with the perps that evening was a male named—you guessed it: Martinez.

“HISTORY” BY MANUFACTURED CONFESSION

Exactly as with the later Watergate “first break-in” hoax, almost everything about this Fielding break-in covert op comes from manufactured “confessions” told by the perps, and, most importantly, by the CIA-connected psychiatrist Lewis Fielding himself. Although police were called in, and investigated the scene of a “break-in,” it had been staged by the Cubans with the specific intent to make unquestionable record of a “break- in.” When used in conjunction with the photos Liddy and Hunt had made of themselves in front of Lewis Fielding’s office using CIA-supplied “disguises,” camera, and film, that would be vital to spring Ellsberg later from the charges against him for releasing the Pentagon Papers.

PSYCHIATRIST LEWIS FIELDING WAS COMPLICIT IN A CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY

As with everything about Watergate, the hoax, this Fielding Farce is all talk, talk, talk, talk, talk. The one thing this exposé proves for the first time ever, and proves beyond even a faint shadow of reasonable doubt, is that at all relevant times the psycho-establishment’s psychiatrist Lewis J. Fielding was a willing and witting participant in this criminal CIA conspiracy against the United States and its people.

The Lewis Fielding “break-in” story was vicious fiction designed to make fools of the American people and the world. It’s fiction that was written by a hack spy-fiction writer named E. Howard Hunt, who was on the payroll of your tax dollars for decades. In fact, you or one of your family members probably paid, right out of pocket, every one of the professional liars involved in this hoax for the privilege of having them make a fool of you, and of the press, and of Congress, and of the entire world.

If you weren’t paying taxes then, don’t feel bad, you aren’t left out: there are just as many paid professional liars today as there were then, creating the exact same kinds of covert operations on your dime. The CIA is still a pack of professional liars using the money taken right out of your pocket to create elaborate fictions to make a fool of you. But you go right on paying them to do it, don’t you?

Don’t expect a receipt or an accounting of where your money went; fiction doesn’t leave a paper trail.

Edited September 19, 2016 by Ashton Gray

[Michael Clark]

On 9/18/2016 at 11:28 PM, Ashton Gray said:

This is an excerpt from the book Watergate: The Hoax, by Ashton Gray.This is Chapter 27, “1971: The Fielding Farce”:

The files in my cabinet were in considerable disarray. My personal papers, including those pertaining to Dr. Ellsberg, appeared to have been thoroughly rummaged through.
CIA-Blessed Psychiatrist Lewis Fielding

We had gone to a lot of effort and taken a number of risks—for nothing. All we had established was that Ellsberg’s file was not in Fielding’s office. Where was it, then?
E. Howard Hunt

 

Arguably, the most deadly, mind-scrambling combination of CIA psyops in Watergate, the hoax, is embodied in the events of the night of 3 September 1971, going into the wee hours of 4 September, when E. Howard Hunt and G. Gordon Liddy supposedly masterminded and oversaw a “break-in” at the Beverly Hills office of Lewis Fielding— former psychiatrist to Daniel Ellsberg—utilizing three of the “Cuban Contingent” from Miami to do the dirty work: Bernard Barker, Eugenio Martinez, and Felipe de Diego. Martinez was actually still on the CIA’s payroll at the time, but the other two also were working for the CIA, just through some other “arrangement.”

 

There was, indeed, a “break-in” of sorts of Lewis Fielding’s office, and the Cubans took pains to make sure there was no mistaking the fact of a break-in, including breaking a window, using a crowbar on the office door and file cabinets, and scattering pills around the office to make it look like a search for drugs, but the entire “operation” was never anything other than a fraud and a farce. It never had anything at all to do with “finding” any psychiatric file on Ellsberg, as the perps claimed. It had two primary purposes:

1. Give Daniel Ellsberg a guaranteed “get out of jail free” card, and,
2. Create as much confusion as possible in relation to the later Watergate operations.

It was a masterpiece of psychological warfare, using no fewer than six CIA psyops. [see Appendix III: “The CIA Psyops of Watergate and Beyond.” —Ed.] It was so effective that up to the very moment when this manuscript is being prepared, not one single investigator, reporter, author, or trier of fact ever has exposed it for the abominable fiction it is—fiction almost certainly authored by E. Howard Hunt—even though the evidence of it being a fraud has been lying in plain sight for almost half a century, and is inarguable. The headings of some of the CIA psyops that were used help to analyze it for the farce it is.

 

CONTRADICTIONS TO CREATE CONFUSION, AND CONTRADICTION BY MULTIPLE SOURCES: THE COMMONALITIES

The “accounts” by different participants of the break-in at the Fielding office have certain scripted commonalities, but are irreconcilably contradictory on the single most important “fact” in this insane fiction: Did the perps find Ellsberg’s files in Fielding’s office or didn’t they? Here is how some of the perps and the “victims” told it—in different places, and at different times—to create the maximum possible mind-numbing confusion. First, here is the CIA psycho-establishment mouthpiece Lewis “Gollum” Fielding saying (under oath in both cases) that Ellsberg’s files were in his office during the break-in, and had been compromised:

 

Lewis Fielding in affidavit:
I drove down to the office . . . and found my papers and records strewn about. The files in my cabinet were in considerable disarray. My personal papers, including those pertaining to Dr. Ellsberg, appeared to have been thoroughly rummaged through.

 

Lewis Fielding in grand jury testimony:
Questioner: Now, would it be possible to look at the Ellsberg-1 envelope that you previously described in the drawer to determine whether it had been opened? . . . [Was there] no way to look at the papers themselves to see if there had been an actual intrusion and removal and then perhaps being put back?
Fielding: Oh, yes, there was, because these papers, as I found them, were outside the envelope. I know that I had left them inside the envelope. Beyond that, there was evidence that these papers— You know, again, if you have been with a file long enough and lived with it, you know what your papers look like. And this looked as if it had been fingered, had been fingered over, you know, people had done something with it, you know.

 

Then comes one of the “masterminds” of the break-in G. Gordon Liddy, to contradict the shrink:

 

G. Gordon Liddy in sworn testimony:
On the 3rd of September 1971, we—that is the group, using Cuban expatriates who had been trained and had been in the service of the Central Intelligence Agency—penetrated the office of Dr. Fielding, and they looked for those records. They were not there.

 

G. Gordon Liddy in autobiography Will:
Hunt arrived first [at the hotel room], and by the time I got there he was cooling a bottle of champagne. The Cubans arrived next. Barker spoke for them. . . . What did they find?

 

“Nothing, Eduardo

,” said Barker to Hunt. He held up a piece of paper on which I’d written the name “Daniel Ellsberg” . . . “There’s no file with this name on it.”

 

Hunt was unbelieving. “Are you sure?” he asked. They were.

 

Hunt had to ask if they were sure that they didn’t find anything. Sure he did. Oh, but the real “victim” has to weigh in himself, Saint Ellsberg, and the saint ain’t so sure:

 

Daniel Ellsberg:
The plumbers did find my file. . . . In it was a paper I had written for the American Political Science Association called “Quagmire Myth and the Stalemate Machine.” I alluded to classified information I’d seen, which obviously meant the Pentagon report.

 

Ellsberg told that to Smithsonian Magazine in 2012, and they were gullible enough to print it. Now comes Egil Krogh, who served time for having approved this “break-in”:

 

Egil Krogh:
Burglars broke into Dr. Fielding’s Beverly Hills office to photograph the files, but found nothing related to Mr. Ellsberg.

 

Oh, but Felipe de Diego, one of the Cubans who “had been in the service of the Central Intelligence Agency,” chooses to disagree, and after all, he was there:

 

Felipe de Diego, one of the burglars:
Mr. de Diego . . . did not remember who had found the file, but shortly afterward the search stopped and he helped to hold papers from what appeared to be Dr. Ellsberg’s file while Martinez photographed them.

 

That’s a little odd, because Eugenio Martinez doesn’t seem to remember photographing Ellsberg’s psychiatric files at all:

 

Eugenio Martinez, the burglar on CIA payroll at the time, who Diego says photographed Ellsberg’s file:
There was nothing of Ellsberg’s there. There was nothing about psychiatry, not one file of sick people, only bills. It looked like an import-export office more than a psychiatrist’s. The only thing with the name of Ellsberg in it was the doctor’s telephone book.

 

And now let’s hear from the CIA veteran xxxx himself, the spy-fiction writing hack who dreamed this miserable pack of lies up, E. Howard Hunt. Notice how similar his commonality “talking points” are to G. Gordon Liddy’s in their autobiographies:

 

E. Howard Hunt in autobiography Undercover:
I was the first one back to the hotel room, then Liddy came in a few minutes later. . . . The three men from Miami came in together. They were sweaty and disheveled, and one of them had cut himself on broken window glass. We gave each other abrazos [embraces], then Barker said, “Eduardo, there was nothing there.”

 

I stared at him. “Nothing?”

 

He shook his head. “We went through every goddamn file in that office, Eduardo, and there was nothing there. Nothing with the name Ellsberg on it.” From his pocket he pulled the scrap of paper on which Liddy had printed the name “Ellsberg” and given it to Barker.

 

. . . We had gone to a lot of effort and taken a number of risks—for nothing. All we had established was that Ellsberg’s file was not in Fielding’s office.

 

It’s spy fiction, and if your head isn’t spinning yet, you haven’t been paying attention. But it will spin. This CIA psyops carnival ride has hardly gotten set into motion.

 

 

THE PRINCIPLE OF DUPLICATES—“TWOSIES”

The Fielding Fraud is filled with terrible “twosies” that sow seeds producing thick briar-weeds of confusion. Here are the major ones:

• The Fielding Op was on a three-day summer holiday weekend, Labor Day weekend; the Watergate “first break-in” hoax was on a three-day summer holiday weekend, Memorial Day weekend. That alone can start to make you feel spinny and sick at your stomach. It was designed just that way.
• The Fielding Op was an actual break-in—even though Fielding was in on it —but the Watergate “first break-in” was a complete hoax. Then there was a later actual break-in at the Watergate [see Part VII, “The Break-In That Was and Aftermath.” —Ed.], during which the perps were arrested, creating even more confusion. The Fielding Op over a Labor Day weekend was to lend “credibility” to the Watergate phony break-in op over a Memorial Day weekend.
• Both ops used Cubans from Miami, and the three Cubans involved in the Fielding op will be used in the Washington ops—along with some others— creating further confusion.
• Both ops involve the Cubans having “camera equipment” and supposedly taking photographs of documents (except there were no documents to photograph—except there were documents to photograph, depending on which set of lies you listen to).
• All the ops involve the use of walkie-talkies.
• All the ops have Hunt and Liddy as the outside overseers, and in a hotel.
• The name “Fielding” is itself a “twosie,” because John Dean had hired Fred Fielding not long before this op—specifically for the “twosie” value. The psychiatrist Lewis Fielding is styled as a “victim” of E. Howard Hunt; the Dean-hired Fred Fielding later will be involved in the disposal of contents of E. Howard Hunt’s safe in the White House. This welds these “Fielding” names together in an incautious mind in relation to Hunt, creating extreme confusion, especially in texts where only the last name, “Fielding,” is used to refer to either man.
• The name of one of the Cuban perps is Martinez. Although the perps claim, in their versions, that they met and talked with a cleaning woman at Lewis Fielding’s office building early in the evening before the break-in, Lewis Fielding claimed in his affidavit that the cleaning person at his office building who interacted with the perps that evening was a male named—you guessed it: Martinez.

 

 

“HISTORY” BY MANUFACTURED CONFESSION

Exactly as with the later Watergate “first break-in” hoax, almost everything about this Fielding break-in covert op comes from manufactured “confessions” told by the perps, and, most importantly, by the CIA-connected psychiatrist Lewis Fielding himself. Although police were called in, and investigated the scene of a “break-in,” it had been staged by the Cubans with the specific intent to make unquestionable record of a “break- in.” When used in conjunction with the photos Liddy and Hunt had made of themselves in front of Lewis Fielding’s office using CIA-supplied “disguises,” camera, and film, that would be vital to spring Ellsberg later from the charges against him for releasing the Pentagon Papers.

PSYCHIATRIST LEWIS FIELDING WAS COMPLICIT IN A CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY

As with everything about Watergate, the hoax, this Fielding Farce is all talk, talk, talk, talk, talk. The one thing this exposé proves for the first time ever, and proves beyond even a faint shadow of reasonable doubt, is that at all relevant times the psycho-establishment’s psychiatrist Lewis J. Fielding was a willing and witting participant in this criminal CIA conspiracy against the United States and its people.

 

The Lewis Fielding “break-in” story was vicious fiction designed to make fools of the American people and the world. It’s fiction that was written by a hack spy-fiction writer named E. Howard Hunt, who was on the payroll of your tax dollars for decades. In fact, you or one of your family members probably paid, right out of pocket, every one of the professional liars involved in this hoax for the privilege of having them make a fool of you, and of the press, and of Congress, and of the entire world.

 

If you weren’t paying taxes then, don’t feel bad, you aren’t left out: there are just as many paid professional liars today as there were then, creating the exact same kinds of covert operations on your dime. The CIA is still a pack of professional liars using the money taken right out of your pocket to create elaborate fictions to make a fool of you. But you go right on paying them to do it, don’t you?

 

Don’t expect a receipt or an accounting of where your money went; fiction doesn’t leave a paper trail.

I'm going to buy the book. But, since it is not supposed to hurt to ask, did you ever find an answer to where Hunt was on the weekend of 5-28-72?

Cheers,

Michael