Why Col. L. Fletcher Prouty's Critics Are Wrong

[W. Niederhut]

22 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Mike, Fletcher's claims were not at all outlandish or baseless. That is pure myth.

Just read this and punch through to the links:

https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/fletcher-prouty-vs-the-arrb

I could not have written this article without the help of Doug Horne, who was there and described the perps to me.  Malcolm LBLunt who found the ARRB memos, and Len Osanic, who took the call from Prouty after the ambush. Len was also in contact with a relative of one of the men involved in the failed back up issue in Dallas.

Fletcher Prouty was correct on this.

The other issue Prouty gave advice on was the whole Vietnam angle.  Now, to give credit where it is due, people like Peter Scott, and O'Donnell and Powers, and the Mike Gravel edition of the Pentagon Papers did early work on this.  But in about 1986, Prouty wrote a long essay that, in my view at that time was the best, most complete accounting of what  really happened.  IIRC, he even had the intel deception about us winning in that article.  It was a remarkable piece of work.

Now its true that after Prouty did his consulting, John Newman came in and did some extensive help also.  But what is so striking about Prouty's article is that it presaged  JFK and Vietnam pretty well.

These are facts.  What you are doing is siding with the smear artists, which included the military guys on the ARRB.

 

Outstanding article, Jim, about the accuracy of Prouty's insights into the history of JFK's Vietnam policy, and the accuracy of his claims about the obstructed deployment of the 112th in Dallas.

The Prouty defamers, including Michael Griffith, keep striking out, while claiming that they are hitting home runs.

As for Ron Ecker's article, I have two questions.

JFK's Dallas trip was, apparently, scheduled in late September of 1963.

1)  When were the Tokyo and Honolulu conferences scheduled?

2)  Are there any examples, prior to November 22, 1963, of multiple Presidential cabinet members being simultaneously out of the country during a serious national crisis?

      If not, is it really accurate to describe Prouty as a "l-i-a-r" for saying that the absence of most of JFK's cabinet from the country on 11/22/63 was "unprecedented?"

 

[James DiEugenio]

You know when you think about that, it is really weird, to say the least.

So many people in the government flying all over the Pacific, and no one in Washington.

Edited April 26, 2023 by James DiEugenio

[Ron Ecker]

17 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

As for Ron Ecker's article, I have two questions.

JFK's Dallas trip was, apparently, scheduled in late September of 1963.

1)  When were the Tokyo and Honolulu conferences scheduled?

2)  Are there any examples, prior to November 22, 1963, of multiple Presidential cabinet members being simultaneously out of the country during a serious national crisis?

      If not, is it really accurate to describe Prouty as a "l-i-a-r" for saying that the absence of most of JFK's cabinet from the country on 11/22/63 was "unprecedented?"

 

 

The annual Tokyo conferences took place in November or December of each year (there were three). The first conference, which JFK called "a joint Cabinet group," was held in Tokyo in early November, 1961. The second was held in Washington on December 3-5, 1962. The third was to be held in Tokyo on November 25-27, 1963. I don't know when that date was set, I only know that there was nothing unusual about November or December dates for the conference.

The Honolulu conference was held on November 20-21 so that Secretary Rusk could go straight from Honolulu to Tokyo, the other Cabinet members arriving in Honolulu on the evening of November 21.

As for the question "Are there any examples, prior to November 22, 1963, of multiple Presidential cabinet members being simultaneously out of the country during a serious national crisis?" First off, there was no "serious national crisis" when the Cabinet plane took off for Tokyo. Secondly, no, most of the Cabinet members being simultaneously out of the country was not unprecedented if we assume, based on JFK's description of "a joint Cabinet group," that most of the Cabinet was out of the country simultaneously for the Tokyo conference in early November 1961.

 

 

[Ron Ecker]

10 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

You know when you think about that, it is really weird, to say the least.

So many people in the government flying all over the Pacific, and no one in Washington.

I suspect that it was not just coincidence. The purpose of my post was not to discount a conspiracy, it was just to point out Prouty being ignorant or dishonest in his statements about the flight and Honolulu conference, since Prouty is the subject of the thread.

[W. Niederhut]

51 minutes ago, Ron Ecker said:

I suspect that it was not just coincidence. The purpose of my post was not to discount a conspiracy, it was just to point out Prouty being ignorant or dishonest in his statements about the flight and Honolulu conference, since Prouty is the subject of the thread.

Ron,

     Do you know who was involved in scheduling the November 1963 Tokyo Conference, and when it was scheduled?

     Also, it seems like a stretch to accuse Prouty of "dishonesty" for his speculations about the absence of JFK's Cabinet during the pre-planned assassination of JFK (and his own November mission to Antarctica.)

     His theorizing may have been incorrect about some minor JFKA details, but that doesn't mean that he was "dishonest."  And, in any case, the essential aspect of his insights had to do with the drafting of the McNamara/Taylor Report, NSAM 263, and its subsequent reversal by NSAM 273, LBJ, and McGeorge Bundy.

     If I recall the details correctly, NSAM 273 had been drafted on November 21st, and delivered to LBJ by McGeorge Bundy on (?) November 25th.  Prouty smelled a rat, because he had worked on the preparation of JFK's NSAM 263 policy.

     Prouty also theorized in his book on JFK, the CIA, and Vietnam, that only someone in a very high government position could have arranged many of the suspicious aspects of the assassination op, including the security lapses in Dealey Plaza, the scrubbing of the limo, and the pre-arranged material in the international media about Oswald as a lone assassin, etc.

     

Edited April 26, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[Ron Ecker]

13 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Ron,

     Do you know who was involved in scheduling the November 1963 Tokyo Conference, and when it was scheduled?

     Also, it seems like a stretch to accuse Prouty of "dishonesty" for his speculations about the absence of JFK's Cabinet during the pre-planned assassination of JFK (and his own November mission to Antarctica.)

         

I don’t know who was involved in scheduling the Tokyo conference, I just know it was scheduled for November 25-27.

As for Prouty’s “dishonesty,” I was not referring to any legitimate Prouty “speculations” about the Tokyo flight, I was referring to either his expressed ignorance or dishonesty about it. He said that “no one had explained” why most of the Cabinet was simultaneously out of the country. All he had to do was inquire to find out why. I’m sure there was someone in government who could tell him about why (officially) those Cabinet members were going together to Tokyo for a third annual conference. But obviously, if he really didn't know, he didn’t bother to find out why.

[W. Niederhut]

1 minute ago, Ron Ecker said:

I don’t know who was involved in scheduling the Tokyo conference, I just know it was scheduled for November 25-27.

As for Prouty’s “dishonesty,” I was not referring to any legitimate Prouty “speculations” about the Tokyo flight, I was referring to either his expressed ignorance or dishonesty about it. He said that “no one had explained” why most of the Cabinet was simultaneously out of the country. All he had to do was inquire to find out why. I’m sure there was someone in government who could tell him about why (officially) those Cabinet members were going together to Tokyo for a third annual conference. But obviously, if he really didn't know, he didn’t bother to find out why.

Who would have been able to "explain" it to him, Ron?

In other words, who scheduled the conference that just happened to coincide with the JFK assassination op, and when was it scheduled?

Non-rhetorical question.

[Ron Ecker]

6 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Who would have been able to "explain" it to him, Ron?

In other words, who scheduled the conference that just happened to coincide with the JFK assassination op, and when was it scheduled?

Non-rhetorical question.

For some reason I'm not getting through here. I'll try one more time. In his book Prouty said, "No one has explained why the Kennedy cabinet was ordered to Japan at that time." Which is BS. How difficult would it have been for Prouty to find out that the cabinet was "ordered" to Japan for a third annual conference, which always took place in November or December? Now if he's saying that "No one has explained why the Kennedy cabinet ws ordered to Japan at that time," meaning when JFK was to be shot in Dallas, who in the world did he expect to "explain" such a government conspiracy to him? I don't think conspirators are in the habit of explaining their conspiracies to any curious inquirers. 

 

[W. Niederhut]

3 minutes ago, Ron Ecker said:

For some reason I'm not getting through here. I'll try one more time. In his book Prouty said, "No one has explained why the Kennedy cabinet was ordered to Japan at that time." Which is BS. How difficult would it have been for Prouty to find out that the cabinet was "ordered" to Japan for a third annual conference, which always took place in November or December? Now if he's saying that "No one has explained why the Kennedy cabinet ws ordered to Japan at that time," meaning when JFK was to be shot in Dallas, who in the world did he expect to "explain" such a government conspiracy to him? I don't think conspirators are in the habit of explaining their conspiracies to any curious inquirers. 

 

Fair enough, Ron.  Prouty was, apparently, mistaken about the history of these Japanese conferences.

But that doesn't mean that he was "dishonest," as you have stated.  A person can be mistaken without being "dishonest."

In fact, my studied opinion of Prouty-- speaking as a psychiatrist-- is that the man was far from "dishonest."

On the contrary, he was the only "Deep State" insider from the JFK administration who ever had the courage and integrity to come forward with important insights about JFK's Vietnam policy, and CIA and U.S. military motives for assassinating JFK.  And he was risking his life to do so.

In consequence, he has been falsely smeared by CIA propagandists for 30 years as a "crackpot," a mere "pilot," "anti-Semite," "Holocaust denier," wrong about Dealey Plaza security and the 112th, merely seeking to sell books, etc.

None of these defamatory tropes about Prouty are true.

At the same time, Prouty's musings about the Tokyo conference (and his misinterpretation of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle) are peripheral to his essential, accurate thesis about the CIA, Vietnam, and JFK's assassination.

To use a Biblical analogy, let's not strain a gnat while swallowing a camel.

[Ron Ecker]

3 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Fair enough, Ron.  Prouty was, apparently, mistaken about the history of these Japanese conferences.

But that doesn't mean that he was "dishonest," as you have stated.  A person can be mistaken without being "dishonest."

 

Certainly. He was dishonest only if he knew the history of the conferences but wrote as if he didn't, and as if no  one else did either. I don't know what he knew, I just know that what he wrote comes across as dishonest if he did know. If he didn't know, then the word "ignorant" applies in this case. He was being either ignorant or dishonest. You say he was just ignorant in this case. I've got no argument with that. I've just presented the options.

 

[W. Niederhut]

1 minute ago, Ron Ecker said:

Certainly. He was dishonest only if he knew the history of the conferences but wrote as if he didn't, and as if no  one else did either. I don't know what he knew, I just know that what he wrote comes across as dishonest if he did know. If he didn't know, then the word "ignorant" applies in this case. He was being either ignorant or dishonest. You say he was just ignorant in this case. I've got no argument with that. I've just presented the options.

 

Unaware?  Mistaken?  Ignorant?

Take your pick.

But don't choke on that NSAM 263 camel.

[Ron Ecker]

1 minute ago, W. Niederhut said:

Unaware?  Mistaken?  Ignorant?

Take your pick.

But don't choke on that NSAM 263 camel.

I'll just add that there was really no excuse for him being unaware, mistaken, or ignorant. He could have easily found out about the conferences but he apparently didn't. Which is a careless way to write a book.

 

 

[W. Niederhut]

3 minutes ago, Ron Ecker said:

I'll just add that there was really no excuse for him being unaware, mistaken, or ignorant. He could have easily found out about the conferences but he apparently didn't. Which is a careless way to write a book.

 

 

Ron,

     You're missing the big picture by straining your gnat.

     How critically important was Prouty's book on JFK, the CIA, and Vietnam, historically?  Can you think of anything comparable, written by "Deep State" insiders in the JFK administration?

     He had rare inside information about CIA special ops, and important clues about the JFK murder mystery.

     He also had a tendency to speculate about the subject, and occasionally get some minor details wrong. 

    

[Ron Ecker]

1 minute ago, W. Niederhut said:

Ron,

     You're missing the big picture by straining your gnat.

     How critically important was Prouty's book on JFK, the CIA, and Vietnam, historically?  Can you think of anything comparable, written by "Deep State" insiders in the JFK administration?

     He had rare inside information about CIA special ops, and important clues about the JFK murder mystery.

     He also had a tendency to speculate about the subject, and occasionally get some minor details wrong. 

    

I don't doubt the importance of Prouty's book. I contributed my "gnat" to the thread because it's something I came across in my research of the Tokyo flight, and I thought it was worth a mention in a thread about Prouty. That is all.

 

 

 

[W. Niederhut]

5 minutes ago, Ron Ecker said:

I don't doubt the importance of Prouty's book. I contributed my "gnat" to the thread because it's something I came across in my research of the Tokyo flight, and I thought it was worth a mention in a thread about Prouty. That is all.

 

 

 

Actually, Ron, I enjoyed reading your article.  I learned something new by reading it.

But I also think it's the kind of thing that Prouty defamers like Michael Griffith will blow out of proportion.