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

[Sandy Larsen]

20 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

Sandy, point of order, what is this business of you claiming "I haven't seen anybody here denying that Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic." Have you so short of memory that you yourself were saying that just that two days ago on this thread?

 

I've never denied that Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic, Greg. What I've said  is that it wasn't overtly anti-Semitic.

 

[W. Niederhut]

15 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Jeff: What you left out is the fact that "the critic" referred  has engaged a process of insults and name-calling from the start in the interest of reputational disparagement,

 

The other day, for example," the critic" offered a  list of twelve bullet points to bolster his argument,

 

Hmmm, "Process of insults and name calling." Wasn't the first title to this thread something to in effect to say, that only crackpots don't believe Fletcher Prouty? Do you think such an autocratic title may have set a tone? Did you ever consider, Jeff, that maybe you were entering a personal vendetta that one member was driven to post against another to settle some butthurt score?

 

 

 

Kirk,

     C'mon, man.  I'm surprised that my satirical intent sailed over your head.

     I used the term "crackpot" in the original thread title as a satire about the 30-year CIA propaganda campaign to smear and discredit CIA whistleblower, Fletcher Prouty, after his critically important revelations about CIA history were publicized in Oliver Stone's film, JFK.

    You and Greg Doudna have both missed the boat on this thread, while blathering about Michael Griffith's Liberty Lobby straw man.

     Did you bother to read and listen to Greg Burnham's commentaries about Prouty at the top of this thread-- before Michael Griffith hijacked the thread with his John McAdams/Liberty Lobby garbage?

[Kirk Gallaway]

On 4/13/2023 at 8:57 AM, W. Niederhut said:

Michael has deployed the same old CIA/John McAdams propaganda tricks that have been used for the past 30 years to discredit Prouty's rare insights into CIA history, Vietnam, and the JFK assassination.

      As Gerry Patrick Hemming told Greg Burnham, (see the definitive history posts at the top of this thread) Fletcher Prouty was the only Deep State insider who ever came forward to spill the beans about CIA black ops and their putative relationship to the JFK assassination and Vietnam.

     So, it's understandable that the CIA and U.S. military establishment has put a great deal of effort into trying to smear and discredit Prouty's revelations.

     I will also point out that Michael Griffith has repeatedly attacked James DiEugenio's historigraphy about JFK's decision to get out of Vietnam in 1963.  Griffith even claimed recently that DiEugenio is "out of his depth on Vietnam."

     Here is Michael Griffith's Education Forum bio, which includes a stint at the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, California.

Michael T. Griffith holds a Master’s degree in Theology from The Catholic Distance University, a Graduate Certificate in Ancient and Classical History from American Military University, a Bachelor’s degree in Liberal Arts from Excelsior College, and two Associate in Applied Science degrees from the Community College of the Air Force.  He also holds an Advanced Certificate of Civil War Studies and a Certificate of Civil War Studies from Carroll College.  He is a graduate in Arabic and Hebrew of the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, California, and of the U.S. Air Force Technical Training School in San Angelo, Texas.  In addition, he has completed Advanced Hebrew programs at Haifa University in Israel and at the Spiro Institute in London, England.  He is the author of five books on Mormonism and ancient texts, including How Firm A Foundation, A Ready Reply, and One Lord, One Faith.  He is also the author of a book on the JFK assassination titled Compelling Evidence (JFK Lancer, 1996), and of a book on the Pearl Harbor attack titled The Real Infamy of Pearl Harbor (2021).

This is your post W.  . This is what I mean when I say when people start losing the argument. They start trying to make the issue the person they're arguing against.

W: I used the term "crackpot" in the original thread title as a satire about the 30-year CIA propaganda campaign to smear and discredit CIA whistleblower, Fletcher Prouty, after his critically important revelations about CIA history were publicized in Oliver Stone's film, JFK.

W. you don't seem to realize, you were stripped of that title, so the mods also saw your title as demeaning  and you're the only one who saw it as "satire.' But if your  first diatribe agsainst Michael wasn't lame enough.

W. says Michael,      Instead of continuing to highjack this thread with your John McAdams-type, defamatory nonsense about Prouty, how about answering a few questions for us?

     Who paid for your stint at the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, California?  Was it part of your military service in the USAF?

     What do you do for a living in McLean, Virginia, when you're not posting lengthy diatribes on the Education Forum denying that JFK intended to get out of Vietnam in 1963, and falsely impugning Col. L. Fletcher Prouty's reputation?

     Also, I haven't visited the area for many years, but isn't McLean close to Langley?

Oops! So Michael's CIA now? W. This is outright wacko BS, and you should apologize, but Michael wasn't distracted, didn't go for tit for tat and continued his argument. Or is this just more "satire?"

But you're not answering the greater point W.. I've  seen your interaction previously  with Griffith over Prouty before. And I know you're not who can readily detach himself.  Come on, Weren't you just trying to goad Griffith?

Whereas Jeff has contributed substantively. W. you haven't contributed anything in rebuttal to Griffith's points except your expressed outrage over and over again that anybody couldn't think as you do about this.

I sense there's just so much invested in this by everybody, that no one is going to come out of this thinking any differently. But it's no deal breaker to me, as I've said.

You cite Burnham and Hemming?  I've listened to a few of their, I'd guess we'd  call it "freewheeling" "interviews". Ok, people are entitled to their viewpoints. A while back, Burnham came here briefly "blathering" (to use your phrase) right wing nonsense and quickly got discouraged and left. Though it sounded so trite, I can't remember specifically what it was about. JMO

 

[Jeff Carter]

12 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

Oh, sheesh. Go read the Wikipedia article on Prouty:

     Prouty also sold the reprint rights for The Secret Team to the Noontide Press, the publishing arm for the Institute for Historical Review, a holocaust denial organization.^[28][27]

The source is an article - “The Shooting of JFK” by Robert Sam Anson - which was published in the November 1991 edition of Esquire.

Note that this article was one of a series of essentially hatchet-jobs directed at the “JFK” film as published in the mainstream press on its release. For example, the article describes the Garrison-Shaw trial as a “paranoid charade”,“one of the most grotesque chapters in American legal history”, and ties Garrison with “psychotherapy”, “bribery”, “income tax evasion”, and “association with organized crime.” Assassination researchers are repeatedly referred as “buffs”.

The relevant section of the article, and where much of the information promoted by Griffith in his assertions first appears, is poorly sourced. A “tiny, left-wing New York weekly” is said to directly tie Prouty to Liberty Lobby, and supposedly later corroborated by “more information”. News of the alleged sale of the reprint rights of Secret Team is said to have been “discovered” by Stone’s staff.  Prouty is portrayed as having “pleaded ignorance” when questioned by unknown interlocutors in undescribed circumstances, a response said to have dismayed a Stone assistant “after listening to the rationalizations”. Prouty’s rebuttal, as interpreted, is circumscribed,  and it is unclear if the assistant reacting to "the rationalizations” was present when Prouty was “questioned”.

To reiterate, the sources for the assertions of Prouty’s ties to the extremist Lobby, beyond the paid speaking engagement and a handful of radio appearances, are:

- unidentified publication

- non-specified “information”

- non-specified “discovery”

 

Prouty:    “they just made up these things…they put all this in this Esquire magazine but did it all backwards, as though I was a member, writing with these people or joining them. “

 

(Interestingly, John Newman is introduced late in the article as a sort of anti-Prouty - “meticulous, low-key, methodical” - as opposed to the ”ever-voluble” Prouty whose “Vietnam expertise was not all that had been assumed.”  In the recent Malcolm Blount book, Newman describes advising Stone to do due diligence and allow for some basic research on Lansdale before including a sequence featuring General Y standing in Dealey Plaza in the “JFK” film. That is how Newman discovered the documentation locating Lansdale in Denton, Texas on November 21, 1963.)

 

Oliver Stone responded to Anson’s article in a letter published the following month by describing its “numerous errors, omissions, out-of-context quotes and misunderstandings” and avowed “I have not, or do I intend, to ‘distance’ myself in any way from Garrison’s or Colonel Prouty’s long efforts in this case. They may have made mistakes, but they fought battles that Anson could never dreamed of.”

[Michael Griffith]

15 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I've never denied that Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic, Greg. What I've said is that it wasn't overtly anti-Semitic.

And that's an inane and evasive argument, if not a shameful one. Just because Liberty Lobby did not admit they were anti-Semitic does not change the fact that they were obviously, clearly, self-evidently, and undeniably anti-Semitic. 

You could just as absurdly argue that N-azi Germany was not "overtly" engaged in genocide against the Jews. The N-azis denied this at every turn. During the war, the N-azis claimed that accounts of death camps and mass slaughter of Jews were Russian, British, and American propaganda. But who in their right mind would say, "Well, gee, the N-azis weren't 'overtly' genocidal"? 

To this day, there are neo-N-azi and anti-Semitic groups that adamantly deny the Holocaust, and Fletcher Prouty was in bed with two of them for many years.

When Prouty was asked about Willis Carto's denial of the Holocaust, he replied with the disgraceful doge of "I'm no authority in that area." He also blamed high oil prices on the Israelis. 

We both know that everyone in this thread would roundly condemn any WC apologist who gave such a sleazy answer when asked about Holocaust denial, had a book published by the IHR, appeared 10 times in a four-year period on Liberty Lobby's radio show (the same show that hosted numerous Holocaust deniers, neo-N-azis, and white supremacists), recommended that people read The Spotlight, defended the Scientology cult and its founder and crook Ron Hubbard, peddled the Iron Mountain Report hoax and even claimed he spoke with a member of the non-existent Iron Mountain Special Study Group, speculated that the "Secret Team" may have assassinated Princess Diana, and entertained the nutty theory that Churchill had FDR poisoned, etc., etc.

I am still astounded, just astonished, by the refusal of some here to face facts and deal honestly with the evidence about Prouty. It certainly doesn't help that a moderator is one of them.

I don't think Prouty was just a peddler of bogus claims. I don't think he was merely dishonest and disreputable. I think he actually had some screws loose. 

Edited April 16, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Jeff Carter]

4 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

And that's an inane and evasive argument, if not a shameful one. Just because Liberty Lobby did not admit they were anti-Semitic does not change the fact that they were obviously, clearly, self-evidently, and undeniably anti-Semitic. 

You could just as absurdly argue that N-azi Germany was not "overtly" engaged in genocide against the Jews. The N-azis denied this at every turn. During the war, the N-azis claimed that accounts of death camps and mass slaughter of Jews were Russian, British, and American propaganda. But who in their right mind would say, "Well, gee, the N-azis weren't 'overtly' genocidal"? 

To this day, there are neo-N-azi and anti-Semitic groups that adamantly deny the Holocaust, and Fletcher Prouty was in bed with two of them for many years.

When Prouty was asked about Willis Carto's denial of the Holocaust, he replied with the disgraceful doge of "I'm no authority in that area." He also blamed high oil prices on the Israelis. 

We both know that everyone in this thread would roundly condemn any WC apologist who gave such a sleazy answer when asked about Holocaust denial, had a book published by the IHR, appeared 10 times in a four-year period on Liberty Lobby's radio show (the same show that hosted numerous Holocaust deniers, neo-N-azis, and white supremacists), recommended that people read The Spotlight, defended the Scientology cult and its founder and crook Ron Hubbard, peddled the Iron Mountain Report hoax and even claimed he spoke with a member of the non-existent Iron Mountain Special Study Group, speculated that the "Secret Team" may have assassinated Princess Diana, and entertained the nutty theory that Churchill had FDR poisoned, etc., etc.

I am still astounded, just astonished, by the refusal of some here to face facts and deal honestly with the evidence about Prouty. It certainly doesn't help that a moderator is one of them.

I don't think Prouty was just a peddler of bogus claims. I don't think he was merely dishonest and disreputable. I think he actually had some screws loose. 

Your opinion has been forcefully articulated. It is clear where you stand on this matter. It is also the case however that sources and information you have presented to bolster your opinion have generally been of poor quality. This would include the Esquire article which is the primary source of a fair bit of your arguments over the past days -  including the alleged “I’m no authority in that area” quote which you have jumped on. Again, this article was denounced by Oliver Stone as “filled with numerous errors, omissions, out-of-context quotes, and misunderstandings.” Fletcher Prouty said that the contents of the article referring to him were “made up.”

[W. Niederhut]

13 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

This is your post W.  . This is what I mean when I say when people start losing the argument. They start trying to make the issue the person they're arguing against.

W: I used the term "crackpot" in the original thread title as a satire about the 30-year CIA propaganda campaign to smear and discredit CIA whistleblower, Fletcher Prouty, after his critically important revelations about CIA history were publicized in Oliver Stone's film, JFK.

W. you don't seem to realize, you were stripped of that title, so the mods also saw your title as demeaning  and you're the only one who saw it as "satire.' But if your  first diatribe agsainst Michael wasn't lame enough.

W. says Michael,      Instead of continuing to highjack this thread with your John McAdams-type, defamatory nonsense about Prouty, how about answering a few questions for us?

     Who paid for your stint at the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, California?  Was it part of your military service in the USAF?

     What do you do for a living in McLean, Virginia, when you're not posting lengthy diatribes on the Education Forum denying that JFK intended to get out of Vietnam in 1963, and falsely impugning Col. L. Fletcher Prouty's reputation?

     Also, I haven't visited the area for many years, but isn't McLean close to Langley?

Oops! So Michael's CIA now? W. This is outright wacko BS, and you should apologize, but Michael wasn't distracted, didn't go for tit for tat and continued his argument. Or is this just more "satire?"

But you're not answering the greater point W.. I've  seen your interaction previously  with Griffith over Prouty before. And I know you're not who can readily detach himself.  Come on, Weren't you just trying to goad Griffith?

Whereas Jeff has contributed substantively. W. you haven't contributed anything in rebuttal to Griffith's points except your expressed outrage over and over again that anybody couldn't think as you do about this.

I sense there's just so much invested in this by everybody, that no one is going to come out of this thinking any differently. But it's no deal breaker to me, as I've said.

You cite Burnham and Hemming?  I've listened to a few of their, I'd guess we'd  call it "freewheeling" "interviews". Ok, people are entitled to their viewpoints. A while back, Burnham came here briefly "blathering" (to use your phrase) right wing nonsense and quickly got discouraged and left. Though it sounded so trite, I can't remember specifically what it was about. JMO

 

Kirk,

    Geez...  You have often posted insightful, humorous comments on the Education Forum, since I first joined a few years ago, but you have always been weirdly off target in your attacks on Oliver Stone and James DiEugenio's critically important work on the JFKA and Vietnam-- some of which (in Oliver Stone's case) has been directly informed by Prouty's rare insights about CIA special ops, Saigon Station, and JFK's Vietnam policies.

    So, I'm not surprised that you have been suckered by Michael Griffith's scurrilous, deflective attacks on Fletcher Prouty on this thread.   Griffith has repeatedly highjacked this thread with the same old bogus CIA propaganda tropes that have been used for the past 30 years in an attempt to smear and discredit Prouty's whistleblowing on the CIA-- accusing Prouty of being anti-Semitic, a Holocaust denier, a Scientologist, etc.   It's all bunk.

     What has Prouty, himself, said about these bogus CIA allegations?

     Did you read my original post on that subject, on this thread?  Apparently not, since you mistakenly imagine that I "have contributed nothing" on that subject.  I posted the first reference here to Oliver Stone's Esquire commentary on the subject of the CIA's "character assassination" of Fletcher Prouty, and Prouty's history of speaking at the Holocaust Memorial.

     The basic question I would ask you, apropos of my original, censored thread title, is, "Who are the real crackpots-- CIA whistleblower Col. L. Fletcher Prouty, or the CIA propagandists who have used their mainstream media (and internet) assets for the past 30 years to falsely impugn Prouty's reputation?

     

[Joe Bauer]

The following is Fletcher Prouty's own response to accusations of extremist ties, from April 1996:

"Esquire magazine published an article, in which they just made up these things, I've never written for Liberty Lobby. I've spoken as a commercial speaker, they paid me to speak and then I left. They print a paragraph or two of my speech same as they would of anybody else, but I've never joined them. I don't subscribe to their newspaper, I never go to their own meetings, but they had a national convention at which asked me to speak and they paid me very, very well. I took my money and went home and that's it. I go to the meeting, I go home, I don't join.

That sole speech was years ago and was no different than the speech I gave at the Holocaust Memorial Conference. I spoke my own words and ideas. I do admit to having been a rather active public speaker for all types of audiences, on a commercial except for Rotary, They're gratuitous from my point of view.

"The funny thing was two months earlier I had spoken at the Holocaust Conference for the second annual meeting of the Holocaust Group which I learned later the Liberty Lobby is completely opposed to. Dr. Littel, of the Holocaust Memorial organization invited me to attend and make a few comments, as others were requested.

Well, they put all this in this Esquire magazine but did it all backwards, as though I was a member, writing with these people or joining them. The only club I've joined is the Rotary Club !

The attempt of character assassination is a sign you have become a small ..."

 

 

Obviously MG doesn't give Prouty's Liberty Lobby defense response above one ounce of credibility.

It seems fairly clear Prouty was really into making money with his post military career business endeavors. Speaking fees brought in a lot of income for him. His less than wise discernment in choosing his paying customers obviously came back to seriously hurt his reputation.

I remember when Hillary Clinton took enormous heat for her taking huge fees ( $350,000 or more ) for just a few hours of speaking to Wall Street giant Goldman Sachs. Progressive Democrats pilloried Hillary and saw this as a shameful sell out action on her part. When HC was confronted about her controversial acceptance of Wall Street monies...she weakly muttered...'Well, that's what they were willing to pay." ?

Her hubby has also made 10's of millions on the speaking fee tour.

The speaking fee tour has always been an absolute gold mine for politicians, former government and even retired military figures. For decades.

Reagan got 2 MILLION dollars just for flying to Japan and making two speaking stops there right after he got out of office. Come on...we all know these insanely huge speaking fee payments are usually laundered pay offs. 

GW Bush actually said just before he left office...something like he couldn't wait to hit the speaking tour golden trough.

"Everybody" jumps into that golden pond. Thousands of characters.

Even "Moose Momma" Sarah Palin joined the club! 100's of thousands for what? Performing cheer leader type jumps and Moose hunting calls!

Prouty obviously did a worst case scenario bad judgment job in choosing his speaking fee customers. His reputation and credibility has been hugely tainted as a result for doing so.

 

 

Edited April 16, 2023 by Joe Bauer

[Michael Griffith]

4 hours ago, Jeff Carter said:

It is also the case however that sources and information you have presented to bolster your opinion have generally been of poor quality. This would include the Esquire article which is the primary source of a fair bit of your arguments over the past days -  including the alleged “I’m no authority in that area” quote which you have jumped on. Again, this article was denounced by Oliver Stone as “filled with numerous errors, omissions, out-of-context quotes, and misunderstandings.” Fletcher Prouty said that the contents of the article referring to him were “made up.”

Your only sources are Prouty himself and Oliver Stone, yet Stone later repudiated Prouty's claims about Lansdale. Now, let's look at my sources:

One of my key sources is investigative journalist Chip Berlet. One would think that you and Niederhut would listen to Berlet because he is an ultra-liberal whose pro-civil rights and anti-surveillance-state credentials are beyond dispute. Here's what Wikipedia says about Berlet:

          He was a senior analyst at Political Research Associates (PRA), a non-profit group that tracks right-wing networks.

          Berlet, a paralegal, was a vice-president of the National Lawyers Guild. He has served on the advisory board of the Center for Millennial Studies at Boston University, and for over 20 years was on the board of the Defending Dissent Foundation. In 1982, he was a Mencken Awards finalist in the best news story category for "War on Drugs: The Strange Story of Lyndon LaRouche," which was published in High Times. He served on the advisory board of the Campaign to Defend the Constitution. . . .

          During the late 1970s, he became the Washington, D.C., bureau chief of High Times magazine, and in 1979, he helped to organize citizens' hearings on FBI surveillance practices. From then until 1982, he worked as a paralegal investigator at the Better Government Association in Chicago, conducting research for an American Civil Liberties Union case, involving police surveillance by the Chicago police (which became known as the "Chicago Red Squad" case).[8] He also worked on cases filed against the FBI or police on behalf of the Spanish Action Committee of Chicago (S.A.C.C.), the National Lawyers Guild, the American Indian Movement, Socialist Workers Party, the Christic Institute, and the American Friends Service Committee (a Quaker group).

But, alas, because Berlet has documented what a fraud and flake Prouty was, you're even turning against Berlet, rather than just admit the truth about Prouty.

One of my other sources is the Anti-Defamation League. Did you catch that? Yes, I said the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). So now you're going to dismiss the ADL rather than face the facts about Prouty? The ADL was the group that documented how many times Prouty appeared on Liberty Lobby's radio program (10 times in four years). The ADL also noted that Prouty was a "longtime Liberty Lobby associate." The ADL further listed all of the Holocaust deniers, white supremacists, and neo-N-azis who likewise appeared on Liberty Lobby's radio show (Willis-Carto-Extremism-in-America.pdf (adl.org).

The fact that Prouty peddled the Iron Mountain Report hoax and even claimed he spoke with a member of the non-existent study group is well documented (LINK, LINK, LINK, LINK). 

Another one of my sources is Prouty himself. In his interviews with Scientology's Freedom Magazine, Prouty declared that the Joint Chiefs of Staff and U.S. intelligence were behind the Jonestown massacre (LINK). Prouty peddled the Iron Mountain hoax during one of the appearances on Liberty Lobby's radio show. In his book JFK, Prouty said,

          All leaders of all nations know that, as stated in Report From Iron Mountain, "The organization of a society for the possibility of war is its principal political stabilizer. It is ironic that this primary function of warfare has been generally recognized by historians only where it has been expressly acknowledged—in the pirate societies of the great conquerors." (LINK)

Prouty's other bogus claims can be found in his writings and interviews, such as his claim that the "Secret Team" may have assassinated Princess Diana, that the F-16 was far inferior to the MiG-25, that Churchill may have had Stalin poisoned, that Lansdale hated JFK and wanted a huge escalation of the Vietnam War, that his trip to the South Pole on 11/22 was sinister and designed to ensure presidential protection was inadequate for the Dallas motorcade, that he had notes that he had taken during his alleged "stand down" phone call from the 112th MI Group, etc., etc., etc.

Edited April 16, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Jeff Carter]

I would just point out that a calm focussed discussion of Prouty, including faults and lapses of judgment, was always possible but hijacked by Griffith’s insistence that gratuitous insults and character assassination would define the topic.

Griffith:  allegations directed at Prouty “are abundantly documented…Let’s summarize some of what we now know beyond any doubt about him:

 

—The fact that Prouty peddled the Iron Mountain Report hoax and even claimed he spoke with a member of the non-existent study group is well documented

It’s not well-documented other than as an oft-repeated misreading. A correction to this appears on page 7 of this thread and does not need repeating. That you continue to persist in publicizing this misreading underlines the general quality of your scholarship on this issue.

 

-- He lied about his role in presidential protection.

           This is not correct. His statements were entirely consistent with his experience, and Secret Service expert Vince Palamara has confirmed Prouty’s opinions were by and large an accurate representation of presidential protection protocols in the early 1960s. The charge that Prouty “lied” is based in part on a fundamental misunderstanding or confusion, which attributes portions of the “JFK” script as literal statements made by Prouty. The ARRB panel, often referred as exposing this particular “lie”, merely concludes that Prouty was not in possession of specific “records relating to presidential protection”.

 

-- He lied about the sinister nature of his trip to the South Pole.

             Factually incorrect. As can be confirmed in his Letter to Garrison Oct 2, 1985, among other sources, Prouty on occasion speculated retrospectively on the nature of the trip, while maintaining that “it may be just a coincidence.” The charge that Prouty “lied” is, again, based in part on a fundamental misunderstanding or confusion, which attributes portions of the “JFK” script as literal statements made by Prouty. The ARRB panel, often referred as exposing this “lie”, sources the “sinister connotations” to the “JFK” script as well. (“Allegation #1” ARRB Interview with L. Fletcher Prouty September 24, 1996)

 

-- He made the slanderous claim that Lansdale was involved in the Lumumba and Trujillo murders.

-- He made the slanderous claim that Lansdale hated JFK and wanted him dead.

-- He made the bogus claim that Lansdale wanted to see a huge escalation in the American involvement in South Vietnam.

All three of these claims are factually incorrect, and nowhere in his voluminous writings and interviews does Prouty ever say such things. This represents, again, a fundamental misunderstanding or confusion, which attributes portions of the “JFK” script as literal statements made by Prouty.

 

-- Without a shred of supporting evidence, he claimed that Lansdale was involved in the assassination plot and was even in Dealey Plaza on the day it happened       

Prouty never made such claim as a definitive statement. He speculated on the possibility of Lansdale’s involvement based on his subjective identification of Lansdale in one of the Tramps photos. This ID was corroborated by General Krulak in a correspondence. Documentation which came to light since places Lansdale in Denton, Texas on November 21, 1963 (Dale, Blount  The Devil Is In The Details  p 86, 88, 262)

[Jeff Carter]

just a few more.

Griffith:  allegations directed at Prouty “are abundantly documented…Let’s summarize some of what we now know beyond any doubt about him:

 

-- When he was asked to produce the putatively historic notes that he had claimed in writing he had taken of his alleged 316th Det/112th MI Group "stand down" phone call, he lamely said they were "long gone" and offered no explanation for why he had failed to safeguard such supposedly historic notes (and, sadly, the ARRB interviewers were too polite to press him on this point). 

The notes actually do exist, and internal ARRB documentation reveal that “two independent sources confirmed that the information conveyed by Prouty was accurate in its outlines.”  DiEugenio “Fletcher Prouty vs the ARRB https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/fletcher-prouty-vs-the-arrb

 

--He said that Princess Diana may have been assassinated by "the secret team." He said he "would not be surprised" to learn that the secret team had killed Diana.

This is a cherry-picked speculation presented out-of-context. Its inclusion in the list presumably serves a prejudicial rather than informative function.

 

-- He approvingly quoted Stalin's nutty theory that Churchill poisoned FDR.

A distortion and misreading of Prouty’s original statement, which was an accurately transcribed quotation lifted from and properly attributed to an article written by Elliott Roosevelt, published in the Sunday Supplement magazine “Parade” (Feb 9, 1986).

 

— He associated with known anti-Semites and Holocaust deniers, and even appeared as a character witness for Willis Carto in the IHR trial.

Prouty acknowledged appearing at a Liberty Lobby event as a “paid commercial speaker”, but denied any “association” beyond that. There was no court appearance tied to Carto, and not much more than an unverified rumour to say Prouty “agreed” to such.

 

- He repeatedly defended the crook and quack Ron Hubbard. He stridently attacked Russell Miller's excellent expose of Hubbard and Scientology Bare-Faced Messiah.

- He publicly praised the cult of Scientology. 

Prouty was hired as an “expert witness” by Hubbard’s legal team in the 1980s.

Saying that Prouty “repeatedly defended” Hubbard, or “stridently attacked” a critic of Hubbard, or “publicly praised the cult” during service as an expert witness is a gross distortion of both the record and long established legal protocol.  An “expert witness” is legally defined as an “objective party to the lawsuit and never function as an advocate for one side or the other.”  It is revealing that Griffith disavows legal protocol so to attack Prouty for his expert witness work, yet insists on protocol when discussing Mark Lane’s work with Liberty Lobby.

 

[Paul Rigby]

2 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

Now, let's look at my sources:

One of my key sources is investigative journalist Chip Berlet. One would think that you and Niederhut would listen to Berlet because he is an ultra-liberal whose pro-civil rights and anti-surveillance-state credentials are beyond dispute. Here's what Wikipedia says about Berlet:

          He was a senior analyst at Political Research Associates (PRA), a non-profit group that tracks right-wing networks.

          Berlet, a paralegal, was a vice-president of the National Lawyers Guild. He has served on the advisory board of the Center for Millennial Studies at Boston University, and for over 20 years was on the board of the Defending Dissent Foundation. In 1982, he was a Mencken Awards finalist in the best news story category for "War on Drugs: The Strange Story of Lyndon LaRouche," which was published in High Times. He served on the advisory board of the Campaign to Defend the Constitution. . . .

          During the late 1970s, he became the Washington, D.C., bureau chief of High Times magazine, and in 1979, he helped to organize citizens' hearings on FBI surveillance practices. From then until 1982, he worked as a paralegal investigator at the Better Government Association in Chicago, conducting research for an American Civil Liberties Union case, involving police surveillance by the Chicago police (which became known as the "Chicago Red Squad" case).[8] He also worked on cases filed against the FBI or police on behalf of the Spanish Action Committee of Chicago (S.A.C.C.), the National Lawyers Guild, the American Indian Movement, Socialist Workers Party, the Christic Institute, and the American Friends Service Committee (a Quaker group).

Berlet for Beginners

Portland Free Press, July/August 1995

by Ace R. Hayes

https://www.geocities.ws/berletwatch/ace.htm

Reporting gets complicated when the subject becomes a personal antagonist of a reporter. John Foster "Chip" Berlet has been involved, over the past half decade, in attacking virtually every independent critic of the Imperial State that the reader can name. In his propaganda screed "Right Woos Left" (published by his employer, Political Research Associates -- PRA). which first came out in 1990, he attacked the Christic Institute, Ramsay Clark, Mark Lane, Fletcher Prouty, et al. His most recent attack via the Internet had this bizarre statement (24 April 1995): "Key individuals promoting scapegoaling conspiracism from both the left and the right include Mark Koernke, Sherman Skolnick, David Emory, John Judge, Ace Hayes and Dan Brandt."

The only person on his list I don't know to some degree is Mark Koernke -- who is the Imperial State "militia terrorist" poster boy -- tho' some people wonder if "Marrk of Michigan" might have some funny connections of his own with the Agencies who put him on the poster. The other people, whom I do know, are not a mutual- admiration society, with a couple who actively despise each other.

But, Berlet charges all of us equally with "scapegoating conspiracism." What, pray tell, does this mean? Whom have I "scapegoated"? And I defy anyone to provide a rational definition of "conspiracism" (see sidebar) -- it is not in any dictionary owned by this reporter. So, it must be a Berletian neologism which he invokes against those who actively challenge the Imperial State's power, ethics and legitimacy.

Given that John Foster Berlet has publicly slandered me and suggested that the Imperial State should target me once again, I am not an unbiased reporter in the following investigation.

The reason Berlet deserves investigation is that he turns up like a bad penny in every media venue you would care to know about. He has been on CBS News with Dan Rather, on Dateline NBC; he has been in the New York Times, the Progressive, and turns up as an "expert" from Covert Action Quarterly to The New Yorker. This is a person with such media presence that, since he is bogus, he is a serious threat to any understanding of Imperial State conspiracies against the people.

If John Foster "Chip" Berlet were denied the use of ad hominum attacks, he would be rendered mute. Just revoking his use of the phrase "paranoid conspiracy theory" would leave gaping holes in his screeds. His reliance on name-calling is an indicator of his level of intellectual competence, research credibility and ethical standards.

But, what is worse, he lies. His lies are not merely little self-promotional fibs and deceits. They are big, really big, misrepresentations of fact. One example is his story about his relationship with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). It changes to suit his immediate propaganda needs.

On the Internet, 23 May 1995, Berlet posts the brass-balled claim that "Neither PRA nor I have any relationship to ADL other than running into them at meetings, an occasional conversation on the phone and reading our respective publications." Berlet's contempt for truth is only exceeded by his faith in universal amnesia concerning his documented history.

In the 11 May 1993 issue of Israeli Foreign Affairs he was interviewed by Jane Hunter for an article titled, "Who Was The ADL Spying For?" He was quoted as saying, "I had had quite a cordial professional relationship with the ADL...." George Cothran and Peter Hegarty at San Francisco Weekly interviewed Berlet for their 28 April 1993 article, "Spies For Zion." They wrote that "[Chip Berlet and Russ Bellant] had been doing research in cooperation with ADL, on Lyndon LaRouche." Robert I. Friedman at Village Voice had an article, 11 May 1993, entitled "The Enemy Within." The article says that "[Bellant and Berlet] asked to meet fact-finding head [read Director, ADL Espionage] Irwin Suall to discuss their work on anti-Semite Lyndon LaRouche."

The New York City Jewish newspaper "Forward" published an article, "Letter from Boston," by Dale Miller on 22 January 1993 which blows Mr. Berlet's cover yet again.

Hollis Mosher goes back to the anti-Commie crusade of the '50s when he helped "indict 7 Communist Party functionaries" in Suffolk County. When he was not playing informant for the FBI, Mosher "has been useful as a conduit in passing information to watchdog organizations, such as PRA, of Cambridge, Mass." Further, Berlet admits to being the conduit for information from Mosher to ADL. Quoting again from the article, "Mr. Berlet said, '... he (Mosher) told us who he was and what he did. Little by little he began showing us things. As he began to see how we operate, he began to bring us publications.'"

This running of an ex-anti-Commie FBI informant by Berlet is confirmed in the same article where Leonard Zakim, ADL's New England Region Executive Director, is interviewed. "Although Mr. Zakim says the ADL has not dealt with Mr. Mosher, he expressed high regard for Mr. Berlet and PRA. 'I have found Chip Berlet to be reliable and knowledgeable on extremists and extremist groups in this area,' he said, 'and the information that PRA has shared with us has been very useful.'" So, Berlet was running agents for the ADL until at least 1993.

Further, the lead paragraph of Ms. Hunter's article in Israeli Foreign Affairs, 11 May 1993, is of special interest: "Chip Berlet..., who specializes in some of the same rightist organizations the ADL professes to combat, told IFA that several years ago 'a senior ADL official' warned him of 'people in the ADL who reported directly to [Irwin] Suall and it would be wise to assume that information would be made available to the FBI, CIA and Mossad.'"

Since Berlet knew for years that any reports he filed with ADL went to FBI, CIA and Mossad (Israel's counterpart to our CIA), how can he now put on the mask of innocence? He claimed in the same Internet post that "I even refused to cooperate with the FBI when it was investigating neo-fascist LaRouche." Does working through a known government espionage cut-out indicate anything other than witting collusion with same?

Spy v. spy is more than a cartoon strip in Mad Magazine. Pseudo-private spy operations being run by the various Imperial State Secret Services are quite as Byzantine as they have been in any other imperial epoch. In fact, Elite control of economic and political power requires spies and agents on all flanks. Any person, group or organization which could or would threaten that central Elite power is equally to be watched, controlled and -- if needed -- wrecked. Thus, it should not be a big surprise if the watchers, controllers and wreckers will hurl thunderbolts at one another in their professional roles and then get together for drinks and mutual plotting.

"The FBI And Right-Wing Spy Networks" by "Chip" Berlet revised 6 February 1991. This is "#5, Political Rights Information Series, distributed by the Movement Support Network of the Center for Constitutional Rights." It is a fire-breathing attack against John Rees, his legions of pseudo-private spooks and their corrupt involvement with FBI and other government agencies. What makes it of such interest is that it seems to be the case that Mr. Berlet (along with Messrs. Russ Bellant and Dennis King, who will come up later) were funded in cash by the self-same John Rees to attend a secret meeting in 1983. Mr. Berlet hurled his finest verbal thunder bolts at his benefactor in this screed. He also denounced virtually every crime of which the ADL was charged in 1993 and which seem to apply equally to himself.

Excerpts from Berlet's absolutely valid attack against Rees follow:

"Louise and John Rees have edited Information Digest for over twenty years, during which time they not only worked with far-right political groups such as the John Birch Society and Church League of America, but also provided information to the FBI, congressional committees, and local police intelligence units.

"The Hunt for Red Menace."

"The FBI has a long history of collaborating with right-wing groups to attack movements for peace and social justice, in much the same way as Oliver North relied on right-wing groups to both raise funds for the Contras, and serve as a public lightning rod to hide his own CIA-backed operation. In fact, some of the same players North orchestrated in the off-the-shelf private foreign policy drama were also involved in the off-the-shelf private domestic intelligence network -- a network which conducts surveillance of progressive groups, and then feeds the information to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and other public law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

"This loosely-knit cooperative network passes information both formally and informally as part of an obsessive anti-subversive witch hunt based on a paranoid conspiratorial world view. The network survives through different presidential administrations, working inside and outside of government agencies and Congressional committees, and pursues its goals in the public and private sectors with little regard for legislative or constitutional safeguards. It sees itself as composed of later-day knights on a patriotic crusade... and sees all dissenters as infidels.

"Right-wing Intelligence Networks"

"Within the right-wing conspiracy-mongering milieu are a handful of organizations which specialize in monitoring the activities of progressive activists. Whether they are sneaky spys [sic] or enterprising journalists generally depends on one's political perspective.

"The main right-wing intelligence-gathering networks are the John Rees Information Digest network, and the Council for Inter-American Security network of L. (Lynn) Francis Bouchey. The other two main domestic intelligence operations are the networks run by two cults, the neo-fascist Lyndon LaRouche, and the theocratic authoritarian Rev. Sun Myung Moon. Dozens of smaller groups also exist.

"The largest operation is run by Rees, a veritable right-wing spymaster who has published Information Digest, a gossipy newsletter, for over twenty years. John Rees and his wife Sheila Louise Rees spent several years in the late sixties and early seventies infiltrating progressive organizations and reporting their results to the John Birch Society and the FBI....

"John Rees spent the early years of the Reagan administration as the spymaster for the right-wing Western Goals Foundation. The Foundation was the brainchild of the late Rep. Larry McDonald, former leader of the John Birch Society. Western Goals published several small books warning of the growing domestic red menace, and solicited funds to create a computer database on American subversives. The Foundation was sued by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) when it was caught attempting to computerize references to 'subversive' files pilfered from the disbanded Los Angeles Police Department 'Red Squad.'" [This is the perfect analogue with ADL's being caught in San Francisco with SF and Portland Police Department files in 1993.]

There is no reason to disagree with the thesis Mr. Berlet advances in this piece. It is quite true that "right-wing intelligence networks" work for and with Imperial State spy agencies. However, the ADL does precisely the same thing. So does PRA and all sorts of regional spy operations being run by the ADL as cut-outs for Imperial State Secret Service. Thus, the hidden proposition that only right-wing spies are spies is simply absurd.

So, Berlet is a xxxx, a spook and a cog in the Imperial Secret Service, which is documented in Mr. Herbert Quinde's sworn affidavit in the LaRouche federal appeal. It closes the circle between the John Birch Society and the ADL -- it puts the CIA, FBI, NSC and the various spooks of left and right into the same room at the same time to plot together against a common "enemy."

The Baltimore Sun magazine, 5 June 1988, had a major article by Doug Birch on John Herbert Rees. In the article, John F. 'Chip' Berlet is quoted as saying that, "he was introduced to Richard Mellon Scaife, the conservative multi-millionaire from Pittsburgh, at a recent conference about extremist Lyndon LaRouche, staged by Information Digest." (This is John Rees' publication, denounced so often by Berlet.)

This is enough independent evidence to permit me to take the sworn affidavit by Quinde at face value.

Quoting from the Quinde affidavit (Sec. 13 through 16) is quite interesting:

"13. Mr. Berlet, an associate of Dennis King, stated to me on August 9, 1990, that individuals present at the meeting he attended at Train's residence [see documentation at end of article for information on Train] in 1983 had sworn never to discuss the meeting. He stated his trip to the meeting was financed, in cash, by John Rees and that Dennis King and Russ Bellant were also brought to the meeting by John Rees. The fact that Mr. Rees provided the financing for Mr. Berlet to attend the meeting was surprising to me. Mr. Berlet has investigated Mr. Rees for years, calling him America's 'premier right-wing spy,' and characterizing his activities against his targets as illegal action conducted 'privately' in conjunction with the Government in order to circumvent government restraints on such activities. I commented on this to Mr. Berlet. Mr. Berlet told me that Rees financed the participation of King, Bellant and himself in the Train meeting in order to allow for the presentation of their views on LaRouche to a conservative audience.

"14: Mr. Berlet further stated that Roy Godson, Michael Hudson, Rael Jean Isaac, Patricia Lynch, Richard Mellon Scaife, Virginia Armat, a woman from the ADL, Train, and Rees were also present at this meeting. Berlet also told me that he was introduced to many other individuals at the meeting who were simply identified as 'gentlemen with a government connection.'

"15. Berlet also told me that the funding for Dennis King's book, Lyndon LaRouche - The New American Fascism, New York: Doubleday, 1989, was arranged at this meeting. According to acknowledgments in the book, the financing came from the League for Industrial Democracy and the Smith-Richardson Foundation. John Train's name appears in the acknowledgments to that book.

"16. I interviewed John Rees on November 6, 1990. He stated that he attended anti-LaRouche meetings at John Train's home in the spring and fall of 1983 and in the spring of 1984. He described Train's purpose in holding the meetings as the next follow-up project to Train's work against the Institute for Policy Studies. He did not substantially disclose additional attendees at the meetings, citing Berlet, Lynch, Cleo Patrius, Rael Jean Isaac, Richard Mellon Scaife, Russ Bellant, Dennis King, John Train, Virginia Armat, and Michael Hudson. He stated that Virginia Armat prepared the chart utilized at the meetings."

This should be a wake-up call for every politically conscious citizen of the country, no matter what political flag you think you fly. Here is the Readers Digest; John Birch Society; National Security Council; Central Intelligence Agency; Federal Bureau of Investigation; Political Research Associates; Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith; National Endowment for Democracy; New Republic; National Broadcasting Corporation; Wall Street Journal; League for Industrial Democracy and Social Democrats, USA; among others, all together as one big happy family in John Train's living room. Think about this. Don't all the sheep dogs work for the farmer? 

Berlet is not alone in covert operations with the Imperial Secret Service for the Imperial State. Gloria Steinem worked for CIA in the '60s and has never renounced her past. ADL had one of Tom Metzger's top aids on its payroll. KKK units were founded by FBI agents. ADL ran an agent code named "Hot Spurs" inside the Aryan Nations who was "very close with its chief of security." A major Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) bomber in the 60s was working for the FBI. David Duke has family ties to CIA. ADL had skinheads on its payroll in Portland, Ore. Southern Poverty Law Center has funded white supremacists. PRA has been funded by the Beacon Fund whose only documentable existence was as a CIA funding conduit. The Imperial Secret Service is ubiquitous. (See documentation at end of article)

Money is the mother's milk of American politics. Money is funneled into organizations, publications and individuals who will protect the Imperial State from its people. The best protection it has is a condition of low-intensity conflict between and among various population segments. Thus, we get divisions based on race, sex, religion, etc., to keep people fighting each other.

The role and function of Berlet and all his clones is to protect the Imperial State through fabrication of fear and hatred among that portion of the population which they can influence. Since no one person, publication or organization can possibly create and maintain irrational popular conflicts over trivia, there must be many, many such covert operations. Most of the funded entities from left to right are corrupt, co-opted and compromised by the Imperial State.

Thus, no matter which Imperial Secret Service pied piper is chosen, the people who follow them are fools. Berlet, Rees, Dees, Weyrich, Gingrich and Clinton are functionally identical. They all fill their assigned roles in protecting and enhancing the Imperial State, while the Imperial Secret Service murders, bombs and spies as needed to ensure that there will be a credible basis for popular conflict.

Documentation:

John Train:

A Wall Street lawyer and broker who headed the CIA Afghanistan Relief Committee, is a member of Council on Foreign Relations and has been involved in a number of questionable activities over the years. Covert Action Information Bulletin #30, 1988, and CounterSpy, Spring 1980, are useful sources.

Gloria Steinem & CIA:

1. Black-listed News - Secret Histories from Chicago to 1984 / the New Yippie Book Collective, 1983 (ISBN 0-912873-00-0), Bleacker Pub. 2 articles: "Inside the CIA with Gloria Steinem, by Nancy Bowman -- Overthrow," July 1979, p. 117-122; "Did Rocky Buy Women's Movement?" YIPster Times, April 1976, p. 104-105

2. The Chairman: John J. McCloy, the Making of the American Establishment, by Kai Bird, 1992, (ISBN 0-671-454 15-3) Simon & Schuster, NY, p. 482-485

ADL running Metzger:

Inspector Ron Roth, San Francisco Police Dept. Documents - Exhibit "C". SFPD interview with Roy Bullock, 25/26 Jan. '93, p. 78, "... we financed 'scumbag,' who rose into the ranks of the WAR (White Aryan Resistance) Unit, until he became the voice of WAR over the telephone.... [scumbag] was able to supply us with the code, whereby you could get into the voice mail. And I wrote up a whole series of those called, I think 'Operation Eavesdrop.'"

p. 82 "... I would go over to the ATF office and sit down with [blocked out] and scumbag would then come up, join us and ... we'd get a report on what had happened."

FBI-KKK:

This information is from personal files of unredacted records from a Texas operation which were provided me by a personal friend whose family bad been a friend of the FBI agent and KKK organizer. I will provide more information on this in future editions of the PFP.

ADL - "Hot Spurs": SFPD interview, p. 23

SDS-FBI Bomber: This information was provided by private investigator Phil Stanford in a personal conversation.

David Duke and the CIA:

Covert Action Information Bulletin, #16, March 1982, "Behind the Klan's Karibbean Koup Attempt," part II, by Ken Lawrence, p. 21 and 44-45

ADL, Portland skinhead payroll:

Portland, Oregon Bureau of Police, Inter-office Memorandum, July 27, 1993,from Det. Frank Jolly, "Conclusion of ADL Investigation."

"Officer Siewert [Portland Police Department] has given the example that on occasion he and Bullock [ADL] would have different informants [spies] infiltrated into certain White Supremacy groups and they would cross check each other's informant's information to verify its accuracy." p. 2

Southern Poverty Law Center's (SPLC) funding white supremacists:

PDXS, Feb. 27-March 12, 1995, "Dave Mazzolla: Saint or Sinner?" by Jim Redden, in a feature entitled, "Snitching for a Living."

"... Mazzolla described the SPLC's witness protection program as a 'contract.' ... He said the Center wanted to keep him out of public view until the Metzgers had finished appealing the multi-million dollar judgment against them.... They [SPLC] kept me sheltered until the appeals were final, so that Metzger wouldn't have anything to get back in court with. Not that I lied or anything like that..."

Political Research Associates (PRA) -- Beacon Fund:

"PRA - Unmasking the Political Right" A Ten Year Report 1981-1991," p. 17

Future issues of PFP will include the letters which document the black hole of Imperial State stonewalling by PRA.

Sidebar: Where did this word "conspiracism" come from?

This word "conspiracism," turned up in a 19 June 1995 New Yorker article by Michael Kelly entitled "The Road To Paranoia." Kelly interviews Berlet, et al., for the piece, and goes one step beyond to "fusion paranoia by conspiracists." This article is recommended because it is a classic propaganda effort to prove that you should not see the reality which is well described in the article itself.

The same reality is presented honestly in the June 95 Harper's magazine by Michael Lind. His article is "To Have and Have Not: Notes on the Progress of the American Class War." If one reads both articles, they will have the truth and a textbook example of Imperial disinformation. Lind says, here is the Imperial system, this is how it works and it is screwing you. Kelly says, here is the Imperial system which is screwing you and if you believe any of this you are a paranoid conspiracist.

[Jeff Carter]

2 hours ago, Paul Rigby said:

Berlet for Beginners

Portland Free Press, July/August 1995

by Ace R. Hayes

https://www.geocities.ws/berletwatch/ace.htm

Reporting gets complicated when the subject becomes a personal antagonist of a reporter. John Foster "Chip" Berlet has been involved, over the past half decade, in attacking virtually every independent critic of the Imperial State that the reader can name. In his propaganda screed "Right Woos Left" (published by his employer, Political Research Associates -- PRA). which first came out in 1990, he attacked the Christic Institute, Ramsay Clark, Mark Lane, Fletcher Prouty, et al. His most recent attack via the Internet had this bizarre statement (24 April 1995): "Key individuals promoting scapegoaling conspiracism from both the left and the right include Mark Koernke, Sherman Skolnick, David Emory, John Judge, Ace Hayes and Dan Brandt."

The only person on his list I don't know to some degree is Mark Koernke -- who is the Imperial State "militia terrorist" poster boy -- tho' some people wonder if "Marrk of Michigan" might have some funny connections of his own with the Agencies who put him on the poster. The other people, whom I do know, are not a mutual- admiration society, with a couple who actively despise each other.

But, Berlet charges all of us equally with "scapegoating conspiracism." What, pray tell, does this mean? Whom have I "scapegoated"? And I defy anyone to provide a rational definition of "conspiracism" (see sidebar) -- it is not in any dictionary owned by this reporter. So, it must be a Berletian neologism which he invokes against those who actively challenge the Imperial State's power, ethics and legitimacy.

Given that John Foster Berlet has publicly slandered me and suggested that the Imperial State should target me once again, I am not an unbiased reporter in the following investigation.

The reason Berlet deserves investigation is that he turns up like a bad penny in every media venue you would care to know about. He has been on CBS News with Dan Rather, on Dateline NBC; he has been in the New York Times, the Progressive, and turns up as an "expert" from Covert Action Quarterly to The New Yorker. This is a person with such media presence that, since he is bogus, he is a serious threat to any understanding of Imperial State conspiracies against the people.

If John Foster "Chip" Berlet were denied the use of ad hominum attacks, he would be rendered mute. Just revoking his use of the phrase "paranoid conspiracy theory" would leave gaping holes in his screeds. His reliance on name-calling is an indicator of his level of intellectual competence, research credibility and ethical standards.

But, what is worse, he lies. His lies are not merely little self-promotional fibs and deceits. They are big, really big, misrepresentations of fact. One example is his story about his relationship with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). It changes to suit his immediate propaganda needs.

On the Internet, 23 May 1995, Berlet posts the brass-balled claim that "Neither PRA nor I have any relationship to ADL other than running into them at meetings, an occasional conversation on the phone and reading our respective publications." Berlet's contempt for truth is only exceeded by his faith in universal amnesia concerning his documented history.

In the 11 May 1993 issue of Israeli Foreign Affairs he was interviewed by Jane Hunter for an article titled, "Who Was The ADL Spying For?" He was quoted as saying, "I had had quite a cordial professional relationship with the ADL...." George Cothran and Peter Hegarty at San Francisco Weekly interviewed Berlet for their 28 April 1993 article, "Spies For Zion." They wrote that "[Chip Berlet and Russ Bellant] had been doing research in cooperation with ADL, on Lyndon LaRouche." Robert I. Friedman at Village Voice had an article, 11 May 1993, entitled "The Enemy Within." The article says that "[Bellant and Berlet] asked to meet fact-finding head [read Director, ADL Espionage] Irwin Suall to discuss their work on anti-Semite Lyndon LaRouche."

The New York City Jewish newspaper "Forward" published an article, "Letter from Boston," by Dale Miller on 22 January 1993 which blows Mr. Berlet's cover yet again.

Hollis Mosher goes back to the anti-Commie crusade of the '50s when he helped "indict 7 Communist Party functionaries" in Suffolk County. When he was not playing informant for the FBI, Mosher "has been useful as a conduit in passing information to watchdog organizations, such as PRA, of Cambridge, Mass." Further, Berlet admits to being the conduit for information from Mosher to ADL. Quoting again from the article, "Mr. Berlet said, '... he (Mosher) told us who he was and what he did. Little by little he began showing us things. As he began to see how we operate, he began to bring us publications.'"

This running of an ex-anti-Commie FBI informant by Berlet is confirmed in the same article where Leonard Zakim, ADL's New England Region Executive Director, is interviewed. "Although Mr. Zakim says the ADL has not dealt with Mr. Mosher, he expressed high regard for Mr. Berlet and PRA. 'I have found Chip Berlet to be reliable and knowledgeable on extremists and extremist groups in this area,' he said, 'and the information that PRA has shared with us has been very useful.'" So, Berlet was running agents for the ADL until at least 1993.

Further, the lead paragraph of Ms. Hunter's article in Israeli Foreign Affairs, 11 May 1993, is of special interest: "Chip Berlet..., who specializes in some of the same rightist organizations the ADL professes to combat, told IFA that several years ago 'a senior ADL official' warned him of 'people in the ADL who reported directly to [Irwin] Suall and it would be wise to assume that information would be made available to the FBI, CIA and Mossad.'"

Since Berlet knew for years that any reports he filed with ADL went to FBI, CIA and Mossad (Israel's counterpart to our CIA), how can he now put on the mask of innocence? He claimed in the same Internet post that "I even refused to cooperate with the FBI when it was investigating neo-fascist LaRouche." Does working through a known government espionage cut-out indicate anything other than witting collusion with same?

Spy v. spy is more than a cartoon strip in Mad Magazine. Pseudo-private spy operations being run by the various Imperial State Secret Services are quite as Byzantine as they have been in any other imperial epoch. In fact, Elite control of economic and political power requires spies and agents on all flanks. Any person, group or organization which could or would threaten that central Elite power is equally to be watched, controlled and -- if needed -- wrecked. Thus, it should not be a big surprise if the watchers, controllers and wreckers will hurl thunderbolts at one another in their professional roles and then get together for drinks and mutual plotting.

"The FBI And Right-Wing Spy Networks" by "Chip" Berlet revised 6 February 1991. This is "#5, Political Rights Information Series, distributed by the Movement Support Network of the Center for Constitutional Rights." It is a fire-breathing attack against John Rees, his legions of pseudo-private spooks and their corrupt involvement with FBI and other government agencies. What makes it of such interest is that it seems to be the case that Mr. Berlet (along with Messrs. Russ Bellant and Dennis King, who will come up later) were funded in cash by the self-same John Rees to attend a secret meeting in 1983. Mr. Berlet hurled his finest verbal thunder bolts at his benefactor in this screed. He also denounced virtually every crime of which the ADL was charged in 1993 and which seem to apply equally to himself.

Excerpts from Berlet's absolutely valid attack against Rees follow:

"Louise and John Rees have edited Information Digest for over twenty years, during which time they not only worked with far-right political groups such as the John Birch Society and Church League of America, but also provided information to the FBI, congressional committees, and local police intelligence units.

"The Hunt for Red Menace."

"The FBI has a long history of collaborating with right-wing groups to attack movements for peace and social justice, in much the same way as Oliver North relied on right-wing groups to both raise funds for the Contras, and serve as a public lightning rod to hide his own CIA-backed operation. In fact, some of the same players North orchestrated in the off-the-shelf private foreign policy drama were also involved in the off-the-shelf private domestic intelligence network -- a network which conducts surveillance of progressive groups, and then feeds the information to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and other public law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

"This loosely-knit cooperative network passes information both formally and informally as part of an obsessive anti-subversive witch hunt based on a paranoid conspiratorial world view. The network survives through different presidential administrations, working inside and outside of government agencies and Congressional committees, and pursues its goals in the public and private sectors with little regard for legislative or constitutional safeguards. It sees itself as composed of later-day knights on a patriotic crusade... and sees all dissenters as infidels.

"Right-wing Intelligence Networks"

"Within the right-wing conspiracy-mongering milieu are a handful of organizations which specialize in monitoring the activities of progressive activists. Whether they are sneaky spys [sic] or enterprising journalists generally depends on one's political perspective.

"The main right-wing intelligence-gathering networks are the John Rees Information Digest network, and the Council for Inter-American Security network of L. (Lynn) Francis Bouchey. The other two main domestic intelligence operations are the networks run by two cults, the neo-fascist Lyndon LaRouche, and the theocratic authoritarian Rev. Sun Myung Moon. Dozens of smaller groups also exist.

"The largest operation is run by Rees, a veritable right-wing spymaster who has published Information Digest, a gossipy newsletter, for over twenty years. John Rees and his wife Sheila Louise Rees spent several years in the late sixties and early seventies infiltrating progressive organizations and reporting their results to the John Birch Society and the FBI....

"John Rees spent the early years of the Reagan administration as the spymaster for the right-wing Western Goals Foundation. The Foundation was the brainchild of the late Rep. Larry McDonald, former leader of the John Birch Society. Western Goals published several small books warning of the growing domestic red menace, and solicited funds to create a computer database on American subversives. The Foundation was sued by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) when it was caught attempting to computerize references to 'subversive' files pilfered from the disbanded Los Angeles Police Department 'Red Squad.'" [This is the perfect analogue with ADL's being caught in San Francisco with SF and Portland Police Department files in 1993.]

There is no reason to disagree with the thesis Mr. Berlet advances in this piece. It is quite true that "right-wing intelligence networks" work for and with Imperial State spy agencies. However, the ADL does precisely the same thing. So does PRA and all sorts of regional spy operations being run by the ADL as cut-outs for Imperial State Secret Service. Thus, the hidden proposition that only right-wing spies are spies is simply absurd.

So, Berlet is a xxxx, a spook and a cog in the Imperial Secret Service, which is documented in Mr. Herbert Quinde's sworn affidavit in the LaRouche federal appeal. It closes the circle between the John Birch Society and the ADL -- it puts the CIA, FBI, NSC and the various spooks of left and right into the same room at the same time to plot together against a common "enemy."

The Baltimore Sun magazine, 5 June 1988, had a major article by Doug Birch on John Herbert Rees. In the article, John F. 'Chip' Berlet is quoted as saying that, "he was introduced to Richard Mellon Scaife, the conservative multi-millionaire from Pittsburgh, at a recent conference about extremist Lyndon LaRouche, staged by Information Digest." (This is John Rees' publication, denounced so often by Berlet.)

This is enough independent evidence to permit me to take the sworn affidavit by Quinde at face value.

Quoting from the Quinde affidavit (Sec. 13 through 16) is quite interesting:

"13. Mr. Berlet, an associate of Dennis King, stated to me on August 9, 1990, that individuals present at the meeting he attended at Train's residence [see documentation at end of article for information on Train] in 1983 had sworn never to discuss the meeting. He stated his trip to the meeting was financed, in cash, by John Rees and that Dennis King and Russ Bellant were also brought to the meeting by John Rees. The fact that Mr. Rees provided the financing for Mr. Berlet to attend the meeting was surprising to me. Mr. Berlet has investigated Mr. Rees for years, calling him America's 'premier right-wing spy,' and characterizing his activities against his targets as illegal action conducted 'privately' in conjunction with the Government in order to circumvent government restraints on such activities. I commented on this to Mr. Berlet. Mr. Berlet told me that Rees financed the participation of King, Bellant and himself in the Train meeting in order to allow for the presentation of their views on LaRouche to a conservative audience.

"14: Mr. Berlet further stated that Roy Godson, Michael Hudson, Rael Jean Isaac, Patricia Lynch, Richard Mellon Scaife, Virginia Armat, a woman from the ADL, Train, and Rees were also present at this meeting. Berlet also told me that he was introduced to many other individuals at the meeting who were simply identified as 'gentlemen with a government connection.'

"15. Berlet also told me that the funding for Dennis King's book, Lyndon LaRouche - The New American Fascism, New York: Doubleday, 1989, was arranged at this meeting. According to acknowledgments in the book, the financing came from the League for Industrial Democracy and the Smith-Richardson Foundation. John Train's name appears in the acknowledgments to that book.

"16. I interviewed John Rees on November 6, 1990. He stated that he attended anti-LaRouche meetings at John Train's home in the spring and fall of 1983 and in the spring of 1984. He described Train's purpose in holding the meetings as the next follow-up project to Train's work against the Institute for Policy Studies. He did not substantially disclose additional attendees at the meetings, citing Berlet, Lynch, Cleo Patrius, Rael Jean Isaac, Richard Mellon Scaife, Russ Bellant, Dennis King, John Train, Virginia Armat, and Michael Hudson. He stated that Virginia Armat prepared the chart utilized at the meetings."

This should be a wake-up call for every politically conscious citizen of the country, no matter what political flag you think you fly. Here is the Readers Digest; John Birch Society; National Security Council; Central Intelligence Agency; Federal Bureau of Investigation; Political Research Associates; Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith; National Endowment for Democracy; New Republic; National Broadcasting Corporation; Wall Street Journal; League for Industrial Democracy and Social Democrats, USA; among others, all together as one big happy family in John Train's living room. Think about this. Don't all the sheep dogs work for the farmer? 

Berlet is not alone in covert operations with the Imperial Secret Service for the Imperial State. Gloria Steinem worked for CIA in the '60s and has never renounced her past. ADL had one of Tom Metzger's top aids on its payroll. KKK units were founded by FBI agents. ADL ran an agent code named "Hot Spurs" inside the Aryan Nations who was "very close with its chief of security." A major Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) bomber in the 60s was working for the FBI. David Duke has family ties to CIA. ADL had skinheads on its payroll in Portland, Ore. Southern Poverty Law Center has funded white supremacists. PRA has been funded by the Beacon Fund whose only documentable existence was as a CIA funding conduit. The Imperial Secret Service is ubiquitous. (See documentation at end of article)

Money is the mother's milk of American politics. Money is funneled into organizations, publications and individuals who will protect the Imperial State from its people. The best protection it has is a condition of low-intensity conflict between and among various population segments. Thus, we get divisions based on race, sex, religion, etc., to keep people fighting each other.

The role and function of Berlet and all his clones is to protect the Imperial State through fabrication of fear and hatred among that portion of the population which they can influence. Since no one person, publication or organization can possibly create and maintain irrational popular conflicts over trivia, there must be many, many such covert operations. Most of the funded entities from left to right are corrupt, co-opted and compromised by the Imperial State.

Thus, no matter which Imperial Secret Service pied piper is chosen, the people who follow them are fools. Berlet, Rees, Dees, Weyrich, Gingrich and Clinton are functionally identical. They all fill their assigned roles in protecting and enhancing the Imperial State, while the Imperial Secret Service murders, bombs and spies as needed to ensure that there will be a credible basis for popular conflict.

Documentation:

John Train:

A Wall Street lawyer and broker who headed the CIA Afghanistan Relief Committee, is a member of Council on Foreign Relations and has been involved in a number of questionable activities over the years. Covert Action Information Bulletin #30, 1988, and CounterSpy, Spring 1980, are useful sources.

Gloria Steinem & CIA:

1. Black-listed News - Secret Histories from Chicago to 1984 / the New Yippie Book Collective, 1983 (ISBN 0-912873-00-0), Bleacker Pub. 2 articles: "Inside the CIA with Gloria Steinem, by Nancy Bowman -- Overthrow," July 1979, p. 117-122; "Did Rocky Buy Women's Movement?" YIPster Times, April 1976, p. 104-105

2. The Chairman: John J. McCloy, the Making of the American Establishment, by Kai Bird, 1992, (ISBN 0-671-454 15-3) Simon & Schuster, NY, p. 482-485

ADL running Metzger:

Inspector Ron Roth, San Francisco Police Dept. Documents - Exhibit "C". SFPD interview with Roy Bullock, 25/26 Jan. '93, p. 78, "... we financed 'scumbag,' who rose into the ranks of the WAR (White Aryan Resistance) Unit, until he became the voice of WAR over the telephone.... [scumbag] was able to supply us with the code, whereby you could get into the voice mail. And I wrote up a whole series of those called, I think 'Operation Eavesdrop.'"

p. 82 "... I would go over to the ATF office and sit down with [blocked out] and scumbag would then come up, join us and ... we'd get a report on what had happened."

FBI-KKK:

This information is from personal files of unredacted records from a Texas operation which were provided me by a personal friend whose family bad been a friend of the FBI agent and KKK organizer. I will provide more information on this in future editions of the PFP.

ADL - "Hot Spurs": SFPD interview, p. 23

SDS-FBI Bomber: This information was provided by private investigator Phil Stanford in a personal conversation.

David Duke and the CIA:

Covert Action Information Bulletin, #16, March 1982, "Behind the Klan's Karibbean Koup Attempt," part II, by Ken Lawrence, p. 21 and 44-45

ADL, Portland skinhead payroll:

Portland, Oregon Bureau of Police, Inter-office Memorandum, July 27, 1993,from Det. Frank Jolly, "Conclusion of ADL Investigation."

"Officer Siewert [Portland Police Department] has given the example that on occasion he and Bullock [ADL] would have different informants [spies] infiltrated into certain White Supremacy groups and they would cross check each other's informant's information to verify its accuracy." p. 2

Southern Poverty Law Center's (SPLC) funding white supremacists:

PDXS, Feb. 27-March 12, 1995, "Dave Mazzolla: Saint or Sinner?" by Jim Redden, in a feature entitled, "Snitching for a Living."

"... Mazzolla described the SPLC's witness protection program as a 'contract.' ... He said the Center wanted to keep him out of public view until the Metzgers had finished appealing the multi-million dollar judgment against them.... They [SPLC] kept me sheltered until the appeals were final, so that Metzger wouldn't have anything to get back in court with. Not that I lied or anything like that..."

Political Research Associates (PRA) -- Beacon Fund:

"PRA - Unmasking the Political Right" A Ten Year Report 1981-1991," p. 17

Future issues of PFP will include the letters which document the black hole of Imperial State stonewalling by PRA.

Sidebar: Where did this word "conspiracism" come from?

This word "conspiracism," turned up in a 19 June 1995 New Yorker article by Michael Kelly entitled "The Road To Paranoia." Kelly interviews Berlet, et al., for the piece, and goes one step beyond to "fusion paranoia by conspiracists." This article is recommended because it is a classic propaganda effort to prove that you should not see the reality which is well described in the article itself.

The same reality is presented honestly in the June 95 Harper's magazine by Michael Lind. His article is "To Have and Have Not: Notes on the Progress of the American Class War." If one reads both articles, they will have the truth and a textbook example of Imperial disinformation. Lind says, here is the Imperial system, this is how it works and it is screwing you. Kelly says, here is the Imperial system which is screwing you and if you believe any of this you are a paranoid conspiracist.

Thanks Paul. That’s very interesting. 

The Esquire article from 1991 is intriguing as it gradually becomes apparent that its real target is not Stone or Garrison but Prouty, and ultimately not due to Prouty’s politics or associations but due to his reading and timeline of NSAM 263/273.

It’s curious how Prouty sort of nonchalantly drifted into contact with extremist-linked entities just as the “JFK” film was developing. It’s curious how the Esquire writer seemed to happenstance be around at the same time unspecified “information” turned up at the “JFK” production office.  As I read through that section I did think of Berlet, and wondered if he was linked to the unidentified “tiny, left-wing New York weekly” in the story.

[Michael Griffith]

On 4/13/2023 at 4:07 PM, W. Niederhut said:

Michael,

      Instead of continuing to highjack this thread with your John McAdams-type, defamatory nonsense about Prouty, how about answering a few questions for us?

     Who paid for your stint at the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, California?  Was it part of your military service in the USAF?

     What do you do for a living in McLean, Virginia, when you're not posting lengthy diatribes on the Education Forum denying that JFK intended to get out of Vietnam in 1963, and falsely impugning Col. L. Fletcher Prouty's reputation?

     Also, I haven't visited the area for many years, but isn't McLean close to Langley?

Well, shoot, W., it looks like you've blown my deep cover. Who would have dreamed that my cover would be blown by someone who read my online "About the Author" page, which has been publicly available for about 20 years. 

Since you've blown my cover through cunning inference, I might as well admit that back in the 1990s, the Air Force Intelligence Agency (AIA) planted me in the research community because they suspected that the CIA had planted Prouty in the community to discredit the case for conspiracy and to tarnish all serious JFKA research. They wanted me to track Prouty's progress and effectiveness.

Fast forward to a few weeks ago. I might as well confess that a few weeks ago, my AIA (now AFISRA) handlers assigned me the task of seeing how many researchers in this forum I could get to come to Prouty's defense even after I documented his close and prolonged ties with anti-Semitic, Holocaust-denying groups and persons.

Based on your previous posts in defense of the deranged claims made by the 9/11 Truthers, my handlers told me, "This guy W. Niederhut looks like a prime candidate to come to Prouty's defense. We assess that he will discredit and disgrace the case for conspiracy even more than Prouty did. Plus, we assess that two or three others in the forum, including one of the moderators, will likewise defend Prouty, even to the point of arguing that Liberty Lobby was not 'overtly' anti-Semitic."

Frankly, I was skeptical. I told my handlers, "Surely no one in their right will come to Prouty's defense once I document his long-term relationship with Liberty Lobby and the IHR, especially since most of my material will come from Chip Berlet, a card-carrying ultra-liberal who has exposed right-wing groups for years and who has worked in support of the ACLU, the National Lawyers Guild, and even the Socialist Workers Party. When they read Berlet's research on Prouty, they will repudiate Prouty in a heartbeat."

My handlers replied, "Our analysis shows that some WC critics will in fact repudiate Prouty when they see the evidence about his Liberty Lobby and IHR ties, but we also assess that W. Niederhut and a few others will stand by Prouty, even it means attacking Berlet and dancing around Prouty's anti-Semitic ties." 

I must confess that my handlers were right. They're always right. I should have known better than to question them.  

Now that my cover has been blown, I feel obliged to further confess that my real name is Allen Dulles Jr., and that Curtis LeMay was my godfather. 

Edited April 17, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Sandy Larsen]

On 4/16/2023 at 5:06 AM, Michael Griffith said:

On 4/15/2023 at 1:39 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

I've never denied that Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic, ..... What I've said is that it wasn't overtly anti-Semitic.

On 4/16/2023 at 5:06 AM, Michael Griffith said:

And that's an inane and evasive argument, if not a shameful one. Just because Liberty Lobby did not admit they were anti-Semitic does not change the fact that they were obviously, clearly, self-evidently, and undeniably anti-Semitic.

 

What I said has been proven to be the case. Liberty Lobby was NOT obviously  anti-Semitic. and so it is entirely believable that Prouty was telling the truth when he said he didn't know it was anti-Semitic. 

Here are some arguments I earlier made for Paul Brancato which show that Liberty Lobby's anti-Semitism was unknown:

Had it been known that Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic, then why is it that Liberty Lobby bothered with suing those news publishers that claimed Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic?

Had it been known that Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic, then why is it that investigations were conducted to find evidence indicating that it indeed was?

Had it been known that Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic, then why is it they were invited to contribute to a Congressional report? ("The Role of Gold in the Domestic and International Monetary Systems" , search page for Liberty Lobby.)

Had it been known that Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic, then why is it that C-SPAN chose to broadcast a Liberty-Lobby hosted speech given by a former Mossad agent? ("Mossad Influence on U.S. Policy" .)

And on and on.