Jump to content
The Education Forum

Watergate: What was it all about?


John Simkin
 Share

Recommended Posts

Regarding W. Clement Stone: Approximately 12-15 years ago, a JFK researcher based in New England contacted me to share a story starring the Chicago wheeler-dealer -- one that I quickly judged to be a movie/novel pitch in the form of "investigatory lead."

Without going into details, I can report that the researcher claimed to have been contacted by two psychologists who were treating a woman with repressed memory syndrome. Her story: She had been sexually abused by Stone and other participants during Satanic rituals -- at least one of which was attended by Richard Nixon (who took the role of passive observer).

The patient had given written permission for her doctors to share the story, which included an unbelievable (literarlly) JFK assassination element.

I listened politely, then informed the researcher that, in my opinion, what he was spouting was nothing other than the outline for a piece of cinematic and/or literary fiction. At the time, cases of RMS in general, and ritual-related cases in particular, frequently were in the news. And the story's outline was too neatly drawn. Thanks, but no thanks.

I haven't heard from him since.

I am intrigued, however, by Mr. Gray's description of Stone's alleged "connection to the American Society for Psychical Research (ASPR) and the Spiritual Frontiers Fellowship (SFF)". And I wonder if he can expand upon the outline I've provided above.

Charles

Edited by Charles Drago
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I am intrigued, however, by Mr. Gray's description of Stone's alleged "connection to the American Society for Psychical Research (ASPR) and the Spiritual Frontiers Fellowship (SFF)". And I wonder if he can expand upon the outline I've provided above.

To quote a very wise person in regard to the outline you've provided above: "Thanks, but no thanks."

Ashton

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Email from someone who was close to Richard Nixon during the Watergate crisis:

First of all, I've never found a reason to believe there was a connection between Michele Clark and the $10,000 that Dorothy Hunt was carrying because I don't believe the obsequious executives at CBS at that time would have provided Ms. Clark with money to acquire Watergate information in view of the fact that the White House intimidated all the major networks in the fall of 1971 to discourage the news groups from exposing Richard Nixon's criminal activities. You may recall that the Washington Post was the only news organization that showed any interest in the June 17, 1972 arrests of the Watergate burglars. The intimidation of the networks began shortly after I told the two FBI agents I met with on September 21, 1971 that I was going to contact the media to report their failure to uphold the law. Mr. Nixon, who had orchestrated the obstruction of justice on September 17th, was obviously worried about my threat because the White House quickly put pressure on the networks. Subsequently, White House special counsel Charles Colson provided Nixon with an update and the following memo was sent to chief of staff H R. Haldeman:

EYES ONLY

October 21, 1971 TO: H. R. Haldeman

FROM: Charles Colson

RE: CBS

We have been putting some very intense pressure on CBS through their affiliate board. I just obtained a copy of a memo from Salant [CBS News President Richard Salant] to one of his assistants which would indicate that perhaps the pressures are doing some good. As you will see Salantis really putting the heat on Marvin Kalb [a CBS news reporter]. I don't know whether this proves anything but it's clear that continuous pressure does at least penetrate the news organizations to some extent.

Also, I do believe Nixon would have brought down an airplane to kill Mrs. Hunt because that crime was only one of the major offenses associated with Watergate. The criminality was so unconscionable that I came to strongly suspect Mr. Nixon and his wealthy supporters were behind the assassinations that started the year after Nixon lost the 1962 gubernatorial race in California. By murdering Medgar Evers, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, and the Kennedy brothers in the short 5-year span, the greedy plutocrats put an end to the men's efforts to establish some economic justice and enabled the then former vice-president Nixon to win the presidency in 1968.

Finally, the question regarding the numerous FBI agents at the Chicago plane crash scene. When it became apparent to me that the Washington Democrats were going to cover up all the crimes that led to the spying activities at the Democratic National Committee headquarters, I inadvertently started the chain of events that led to Nixon's decision to select acting FBI director L. Patrick Gray to be the permanent director. The sequence started on January 13, 1973, when I sent a letter to FBI special agent-in-charge Robert Kunkel, whom Gray had transferred from the Washington D. C. field office to St. Louis, Missouri in November 1972. My letter, which contained no indication that I had already given the Watergate motive information to George McGovern's presidential campaign officials, provided Kunkel with a full explanation of the Watergate break-in. In his very prompt letter of response on January 16th, Kunkel didn't address the major facts I disclosed and he flatly rejected my logical assertion that my former employer was involved in the $25,000 cashiers check that was deposited in the bank account of Bernard Barker, one of the arrested Watergate burglars.

Following my letter exchange with Kunkel, the FBI arrested Les Whitten on January 31, 1973, and subpoenaed his and Jack Anderson's long-distance phone records for the previous six-month period. Whitten and Anderson were investigative reporters who worked at the Washington Merry-Go-Round. I had met with Whitten in Washington on March 27, 1972 to see if he would help me expose the FBI's misconduct. In a letter dated March 30th - which the FBI obviously observed before it was placed in my mail box - Whitten advised me that the Washington Merry-Go-Round would not be able to help me due to its limited staff. Nixon, who was obviously told about my meeting with Whitten, must have wanted the phone records examined to see if Whitten or Anderson had made contact with me after the Washington Post, on July 31, 1972 began reporting on the aforementioned cashiers check and four Mexican bank drafts totaling $89,000 that were also deposited in Barker's account. I had personal knowledge that one of my former employer's several businesses in Mexico City had a checking account with the same Mexico City bank that issued those drafts and I made that fact known in a letter I sent to one of McGovern's campaign officials.

After the FBI examined the phone records and confirmed that neither reporter had contacted me, the White House made a February 17, 1973 announcement of Nixon's fateful decision to select Gray as the permanent FBI director. As you might recall, the Gray confirmation hearings established the fact that Gray destroyed documents that were found in Howard Hunt's White House safe and that he kept John Dean informed on the status of the Watergate investigation. Since Gray was actively involved in the Watergate cover-up, I believe he must have known about Nixon's dastardly plan to eliminate Mrs. Hunt. And by dispatching the many agents to the vicinity of Chicago's Midway Airport prior to the plane crash he was able to take immediate control of the investigation and initiate the cover-up that followed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Email from someone who was close to Richard Nixon during the Watergate crisis:

First of all, I've never found a reason to believe there was a connection between Michele Clark and the $10,000 that Dorothy Hunt was carrying because I don't believe the obsequious executives at CBS at that time would have provided Ms. Clark with money to acquire Watergate information in view of the fact that the White House intimidated all the major networks in the fall of 1971 to discourage the news groups from exposing Richard Nixon's criminal activities. You may recall that the Washington Post was the only news organization that showed any interest in the June 17, 1972 arrests of the Watergate burglars. The intimidation of the networks began shortly after I told the two FBI agents I met with on September 21, 1971 that I was going to contact the media to report their failure to uphold the law. Mr. Nixon, who had orchestrated the obstruction of justice on September 17th, was obviously worried about my threat because the White House quickly put pressure on the networks. Subsequently, White House special counsel Charles Colson provided Nixon with an update and the following memo was sent to chief of staff H R. Haldeman:

EYES ONLY

October 21, 1971 TO: H. R. Haldeman

FROM: Charles Colson

RE: CBS

We have been putting some very intense pressure on CBS through their affiliate board. I just obtained a copy of a memo from Salant [CBS News President Richard Salant] to one of his assistants which would indicate that perhaps the pressures are doing some good. As you will see Salantis really putting the heat on Marvin Kalb [a CBS news reporter]. I don't know whether this proves anything but it's clear that continuous pressure does at least penetrate the news organizations to some extent.

Also, I do believe Nixon would have brought down an airplane to kill Mrs. Hunt because that crime was only one of the major offenses associated with Watergate. The criminality was so unconscionable that I came to strongly suspect Mr. Nixon and his wealthy supporters were behind the assassinations that started the year after Nixon lost the 1962 gubernatorial race in California. By murdering Medgar Evers, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, and the Kennedy brothers in the short 5-year span, the greedy plutocrats put an end to the men's efforts to establish some economic justice and enabled the then former vice-president Nixon to win the presidency in 1968.

Finally, the question regarding the numerous FBI agents at the Chicago plane crash scene. When it became apparent to me that the Washington Democrats were going to cover up all the crimes that led to the spying activities at the Democratic National Committee headquarters, I inadvertently started the chain of events that led to Nixon's decision to select acting FBI director L. Patrick Gray to be the permanent director. The sequence started on January 13, 1973, when I sent a letter to FBI special agent-in-charge Robert Kunkel, whom Gray had transferred from the Washington D. C. field office to St. Louis, Missouri in November 1972. My letter, which contained no indication that I had already given the Watergate motive information to George McGovern's presidential campaign officials, provided Kunkel with a full explanation of the Watergate break-in. In his very prompt letter of response on January 16th, Kunkel didn't address the major facts I disclosed and he flatly rejected my logical assertion that my former employer was involved in the $25,000 cashiers check that was deposited in the bank account of Bernard Barker, one of the arrested Watergate burglars.

Following my letter exchange with Kunkel, the FBI arrested Les Whitten on January 31, 1973, and subpoenaed his and Jack Anderson's long-distance phone records for the previous six-month period. Whitten and Anderson were investigative reporters who worked at the Washington Merry-Go-Round. I had met with Whitten in Washington on March 27, 1972 to see if he would help me expose the FBI's misconduct. In a letter dated March 30th - which the FBI obviously observed before it was placed in my mail box - Whitten advised me that the Washington Merry-Go-Round would not be able to help me due to its limited staff. Nixon, who was obviously told about my meeting with Whitten, must have wanted the phone records examined to see if Whitten or Anderson had made contact with me after the Washington Post, on July 31, 1972 began reporting on the aforementioned cashiers check and four Mexican bank drafts totaling $89,000 that were also deposited in Barker's account. I had personal knowledge that one of my former employer's several businesses in Mexico City had a checking account with the same Mexico City bank that issued those drafts and I made that fact known in a letter I sent to one of McGovern's campaign officials.

After the FBI examined the phone records and confirmed that neither reporter had contacted me, the White House made a February 17, 1973 announcement of Nixon's fateful decision to select Gray as the permanent FBI director. As you might recall, the Gray confirmation hearings established the fact that Gray destroyed documents that were found in Howard Hunt's White House safe and that he kept John Dean informed on the status of the Watergate investigation. Since Gray was actively involved in the Watergate cover-up, I believe he must have known about Nixon's dastardly plan to eliminate Mrs. Hunt. And by dispatching the many agents to the vicinity of Chicago's Midway Airport prior to the plane crash he was able to take immediate control of the investigation and initiate the cover-up that followed.

These are very serious charges your emailer is making. I wonder what he believes regarding Richard Nixon and the death of J Edgar. Or the shooting of Wallace.

How much does he think John Dean knew/knows?

I look forward to future emails from this person. (There has never been any doubt in my mind that Nixon had Dorothy Hunt killed)

Dawn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Email from someone who was close to Richard Nixon during the Watergate crisis:

Well, John, this is quite a development: you have gone from studying and reporting history to making it by introducing yet another "Deep Throat" into the annals of Watergate.

It is of abiding interest to me that your new "Deep Throat" has found his/her/its voice here in this thread where "The Official Story" of Watergate has been being shred to confetti, and has arrived to shore up...well, "The Official Story."

I have a few specific questions. Your source said:

...I told the two FBI agents I met with on September 21, 1971 that I was going to contact the media to report their failure to uphold the law. Mr. Nixon, who had orchestrated the obstruction of justice on September 17th, was obviously worried about my threat because the White House quickly put pressure on the networks.

1. What "two FBI agents"? What were their names?

2. What "failure to uphold the law" by these purported FBI agents?

3. What "obstruction of justice on September 17th 1971" had Nixon purportedly orchestrated?

...my former employer was involved in the $25,000 cashiers check that was deposited in the bank account of Bernard Barker, one of the arrested Watergate burglars. ...the Washington Post, on July 31, 1972 began reporting on the aforementioned cashiers check and four Mexican bank drafts totaling $89,000 that were also deposited in Barker's account. I had personal knowledge that one of my former employer's several businesses in Mexico City had a checking account with the same Mexico City bank that issued those drafts..

First, the cashier's check for $25,000 was issued on Monday, 10 April 1972 by the First Bank and Trust Company of Boca Raton, Florida, to Kenneth Dahlberg, who was traveling to Washington, D.C. the following day. The check was purchased with cash that allegedly had been left as a donation to the Nixon campaign by Dahlberg's business partner, Dwayne Andreas, who was traveling abroad at the time.

On Tuesday, 11 April 1972, Dahlberg was at a meeting of Republican fundraisers in Washington, D.C., and gave the $25,000 cashier's check he'd gotten in Florida the previous day to Maurice Stan, who passed it on to Hugh Sloan.

On or about Thursday, 13 April 1972, G. Gordon Liddy—who secretly was working at the time under special orders and clearances with CIA—showed CIA dirtbag E. Howard Hunt the $25,000 cashier's check, plus the four checks drawn on the Mexico City bank totalling $89,000, and asked Hunt if their fellow CIA dirtbag Bernard Barker could launder the checks through Barker's Miami business and return cash. Dirtbag Hunt called dirtbag Barker and set it up, then Hunt and Liddy flew to Miami on or about Friday, 14 April 1972 and delivered the checks to dirtbag Barker, who subsequently deposited the checks into the Republic National Bank of Miami to the account of his real estate firm on Thursday, 20 April 1972.

The vaunted Washington Post stories by Woodward and Bernstein that your source waxes so warmly about have conflicting information about the checks that would totally screw up anyone trying to trace the truth through their distortions. And of course Woodward and Bernstein never revealed Liddy's secret arrangements with CIA.

Now, your source has just claimed to have had a "former employer" who was "involved in the $25,000 cashiers check," and nobody was "involved" in that check except Dahlberg and Dwayne Andreas—other than the CIA dirtbags.

So my next question is: Was your source's "former employer" Dahlberg, Andreas (or both, since they were partners at the relevant time), or CIA? (Guess where my money's going.)

Your source also claims: "one of my former employer's several businesses in Mexico City had a checking account with the same Mexico City bank that issued those drafts... ." The bank at issue for the four checks totalling $89,000 was Banco Internacional of Mexico City, all four made out to Manuel Ogarrio Daguerre from Gulf Resources and Chemical Corporation in Houston, Texas (and we won't even get into that story.)

If this is the same "former employer," is it Dahlberg, Andreas (or both, since they were partners at the relevant time), or CIA? (Guess where my money's going.)

And if it isn't the same "former employer," who is it?

I wonder if this new Watergate gladiator will be more forthcoming than Mssrs. Caddy and Baldwin. Guess where my money's going.

Ashton

Edited by Ashton Gray
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...
Email from someone who was close to Richard Nixon during the Watergate crisis:

Well, John, this is quite a development: you have gone from studying and reporting history to making it by introducing yet another "Deep Throat" into the annals of Watergate.

It is of abiding interest to me that your new "Deep Throat" has found his/her/its voice here in this thread where "The Official Story" of Watergate has been being shred to confetti, and has arrived to shore up...well, "The Official Story."

I have a few specific questions. Your source said:

...I told the two FBI agents I met with on September 21, 1971 that I was going to contact the media to report their failure to uphold the law. Mr. Nixon, who had orchestrated the obstruction of justice on September 17th, was obviously worried about my threat because the White House quickly put pressure on the networks.

1. What "two FBI agents"? What were their names?

2. What "failure to uphold the law" by these purported FBI agents?

3. What "obstruction of justice on September 17th 1971" had Nixon purportedly orchestrated?

...my former employer was involved in the $25,000 cashiers check that was deposited in the bank account of Bernard Barker, one of the arrested Watergate burglars. ...the Washington Post, on July 31, 1972 began reporting on the aforementioned cashiers check and four Mexican bank drafts totaling $89,000 that were also deposited in Barker's account. I had personal knowledge that one of my former employer's several businesses in Mexico City had a checking account with the same Mexico City bank that issued those drafts..

First, the cashier's check for $25,000 was issued on Monday, 10 April 1972 by the First Bank and Trust Company of Boca Raton, Florida, to Kenneth Dahlberg, who was traveling to Washington, D.C. the following day. The check was purchased with cash that allegedly had been left as a donation to the Nixon campaign by Dahlberg's business partner, Dwayne Andreas, who was traveling abroad at the time.

On Tuesday, 11 April 1972, Dahlberg was at a meeting of Republican fundraisers in Washington, D.C., and gave the $25,000 cashier's check he'd gotten in Florida the previous day to Maurice Stan, who passed it on to Hugh Sloan.

On or about Thursday, 13 April 1972, G. Gordon Liddy—who secretly was working at the time under special orders and clearances with CIA—showed CIA dirtbag E. Howard Hunt the $25,000 cashier's check, plus the four checks drawn on the Mexico City bank totalling $89,000, and asked Hunt if their fellow CIA dirtbag Bernard Barker could launder the checks through Barker's Miami business and return cash. Dirtbag Hunt called dirtbag Barker and set it up, then Hunt and Liddy flew to Miami on or about Friday, 14 April 1972 and delivered the checks to dirtbag Barker, who subsequently deposited the checks into the Republic National Bank of Miami to the account of his real estate firm on Thursday, 20 April 1972.

The vaunted Washington Post stories by Woodward and Bernstein that your source waxes so warmly about have conflicting information about the checks that would totally screw up anyone trying to trace the truth through their distortions. And of course Woodward and Bernstein never revealed Liddy's secret arrangements with CIA.

Now, your source has just claimed to have had a "former employer" who was "involved in the $25,000 cashiers check," and nobody was "involved" in that check except Dahlberg and Dwayne Andreas—other than the CIA dirtbags.

So my next question is: Was your source's "former employer" Dahlberg, Andreas (or both, since they were partners at the relevant time), or CIA? (Guess where my money's going.)

Your source also claims: "one of my former employer's several businesses in Mexico City had a checking account with the same Mexico City bank that issued those drafts... ." The bank at issue for the four checks totalling $89,000 was Banco Internacional of Mexico City, all four made out to Manuel Ogarrio Daguerre from Gulf Resources and Chemical Corporation in Houston, Texas (and we won't even get into that story.)

If this is the same "former employer," is it Dahlberg, Andreas (or both, since they were partners at the relevant time), or CIA? (Guess where my money's going.)

And if it isn't the same "former employer," who is it?

I wonder if this new Watergate gladiator will be more forthcoming than Mssrs. Caddy and Baldwin. Guess where my money's going.

Ashton

Ashton, my source has replied to your questions:

The names of the two FBI agents that my wife and I met with on September 21, 1971 are unknown, but they were assigned to the southern Illinois FBI field office which was located in East St. Louis at that time. The agents were four hours late for their scheduled appointment. When they finally arrived, I told them I was the target of an ongoing conspiracy and that I believed my primary care physician had been murdered. Instead of asking some questions, one of the agents ignored me and began to encourage my wife to demand money from the coconspirators, implying that he would contact somebody and disclose the amount she wanted. The other one didn't seem interested in what I was telling him and when I finished he said the FBI couldn't investigate my allegations.

At that point, I told the agents that somebody had apparently told them how to conduct themselves and that I intended to contact the media and report their refusal to look into my doctor's death. After hearing my threat, the agent with whom I had been conversing said the investigation I was seeking would require the assistance of the Internal Revenue Service. And then, in an emphatic manner, he said that President Nixon would have to personally order such an investigation.

I had initially reported the apparent homicide on September 16th to a local police detective whose supervisor had previously worked for one of the coconspirators I identified. The supervisor - who was obviously told by the detective that he had suggested to me that the FBI might be interested in the matters I had disclosed - must have quickly warned the coconspirator who, in turn, immediately contacted the executive who masterminded the intrigue in late 1967 or early 1968.

During that time, the executive and I worked for a multinational corporation before he resigned in 1969 or 1970 (but remained on the board of directors of the corporation) and joined a major defense contracting company that had a valuable contact in the White House. According to a book entitled "The Haldeman Diaries" by H. R. Haldeman, President Nixon made a decision on September 17, 1971, to seek the resignation of J. Edgar Hoover, the longtime FBI director. The diary entry strongly suggests that Nixon became aware of the executive's dilemma and decided to protect him without Mr. Hoover's knowledge. It also explains the aberrant behavior of the FBI agents I met with four days later.

I hope this brief description of the seminal events that led to Watergate will help Ashton and other researchers who are trying to acquire a better understanding of the Watergate era.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Dear John, the black informant in the Glass House Tapes said that at one point Hunt said there would be an assassination of Nixon and he (informant) could be part of this op. XXXX Now around 1977 I talked to Daniel Ellsberg in a call in Radio show (I think it was KMET here in PASADENA/LA area) . I asked about oil in Vietnam...he replyed NO OIL IN VIETNAM (????) only BORAX. XXXXX Now a book published by (dont know title but Im sure it could easily be found) DeGloyer and McNaughton in late 1950s talked about potential great oil in Vietnam/Cambodia......(and now proven true). Wouldnt CIA have this BOOK ??? XXXXX Crazy anti-nuke protests headed by Ellsberg in isolated cold high desert (one KID died of cold) on railway tracks. SO- SO far away from areas of major MEDIA coverage (use to be closer). XXXX In 80s saw Ellsberg on right-wing TV show with so called inventor neutron bomb. Neutron Bomb inventor ranting against "" liberal"" Ellsberg . Ellsberg replyed ,"Im more conservative than you think. I didnt release all the Pentagon Papers."XXXX When we see how the CIA reclassifed papers and then some were re-released (and rewritten) showing NOW = NOW they predicted KOREAN invasion ...and that overall the PENTAGON PAPERS showed how they (re-written ???) predicted this and that and that ...that.. others didnt follow their (CIA) sound advice.....XXXXX NOW Watergate,gets rid of NIXON politically (with Mockingbird help). CIA wanted NIXON. FAR right of JCS/NAVY wanted NIXON (for CHINA opening) (they were added latter by CIA) . Elites wanted NIXON -NIXON supported negative income tax - this far from the elite Chicago School of economics= taking USA towards a few at top = many at bottom economy-which is happening as we speak. THANKS I hope this adds to your DATUM on Watergate sg

DOUGLASS VALANTINE ALSO AGREES THERE IS MORE TO ELLSBERG than meets the eye. SEE

http://www.counterpunch.org/valentine03082003.html thanks sg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
They have some other books. He is their 'political author', for sure. I was briefly on their Forum [invited by Ashton] but now banned for not following [if I remember] Rule #14 [one must state a full answer to the question and withold nothing..or some such...made me think they were either very naive or a vacuumcleaner [Hoover] operation. I would doubt Ashton will return, but don't know. I'm sure he'll discuss it on their Forum where he is Grand Poohbah...but be careful...I was banned on my fourth post! If you want a good laugh, read their rules for posting. While I can't see if it is still there, I once had a thread there, but I know they erased by last reply. Petty stuff and very naive Forum overseer. Ashton has asked me a very specific question on Plumlee's flight. I declined to answer in detail and gave my reasons why. I was booted out due to rule 14 [or 11].

It is clearly an Ashton Gray operation. Have you got a link to the forum? I would be interested in taking a look at the way Ashton runs his forum. As someone who always demanded the right of freedom of expression, he seems to have some strange rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Thanks, Peter, for posting a link to Ashton's site.

1. There are only a few authors on the site. One of them is a writer of pulp mysteries named Jon D'Arme. The lead character in D'Arme's book, featured on the cover of his book, is "the Colonel". In his photos, Ashton Gray is dressed up to look like "The Colonel". There is no bio given for Jon D'Arme. Ashton Gray is therefore probably Jon D'Arme. Since Jon D'Arme is most probably a nom de plume for someone with a less dramatic name than Ashton Gray, Ashton Gray is probably another nom de plume for this same gentleman. Take a look and see if this makes sense.

http://www.omenbooks.com/Murder_at_Wisteria_Pines.html

2. Ashton has three books all set to come out. One of them is an assault on the pharmaceutical industry. When Ashton began pushing his "timeline" on the Forum, he claimed he hadn't written it, but had only discovered it online and wanted to share it with us. He told us that it was just a coincidence that the timeline was written to push scientology, and imply that the CIA's fear of L. Ron Hubbard's discoveries re remote viewing was the core cause for Watergate. (or something like that). Now, not only does he have the timeline on his website, but it appears he is pushing the scientology agenda that pharmaceuticals are evil, and that the only way to get "clear" of your problems is to get "audited" by a trained scientologist. (Of course, this isn't free.) Ashton Gray is therefore the nom de plume of a fanatic scientologist, quite possibly working with other scientologists, in order to spread the gospel according to L. Ron.

While I suspected as much from the get-go, I was sorta hoping I was wrong. If such a joker can dupe so many on this site--where people are prone to be skeptical--what hope is there really that less skeptical people will be able to see through jokers like Bugliosi and Myers, when Reclaimng History is broadcast on HBO?

Edited by Pat Speer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Peter, for posting a link to Ashton's site.

1. There are only a few authors on the site. One of them is a writer of pulp mysteries named Jon D'Arme. The lead character in D'Arme's book, featured on the cover of his book, is "the Colonel". In his photos, Ashton Gray is dressed up to look like "The Colonel". There is no bio given for Jon D'Arme. Ashton Gray is therefore probably Jon D'Arme. Since Jon D'Arme is most probably a nom de plume for someone with a less dramatic name than Ashton Gray, Ashton Gray is probably another nom de plume for this same gentleman. Take a look and see if this makes sense.

http://www.omenbooks.com/Murder_at_Wisteria_Pines.html

2. Ashton has three books all set to come out. One of them is an assault on the pharmaceutical industry. When Ashton began pushing his "timeline" on the Forum, he claimed he hadn't written it, but had only discovered it online and wanted to share it with us. He told us that it was just a coincidence that the timeline was written to push scientology, and imply that the CIA's fear of L. Ron Hubbard's discoveries re remote viewing was the core cause for Watergate. (or something like that). Now, not only does he have the timeline on his website, but it appears he is pushing the scientology agenda that pharmaceuticals are evil, and that the only way to get "clear" of your problems is to get "audited" by a trained scientologist. (Of course, this isn't free.) Ashton Gray is therefore the nom de plume of a fanatic scientologist, quite possibly working with other scientologists, in order to spread the gospel according to L. Ron.

While I suspected as much from the get-go, I was sorta hoping I was wrong. If such a joker can dupe so many on this site--where people are prone to be skeptical--what hope is there really that less skeptical people will be able to see through jokers like Bugliosi and Myers, when Reclaimng History is broadcast on HBO?

I think, Pat, that you have solved the puzzle of who was or is the person known in the forum as Ashton Gray. Within days of his joining the forum he implemented a plan, likely previously conceived by him with other scientologists, to sow dissention and confusion among our members and succeeded brilliantly in doing so for quite a length of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest David Guyatt

No disrespect intended to you Peter, but I felt Aston was a flawed character and I am personally convinced he has engaged in Remote Viewing and that this may have had a deleterious effect on him.

Obviously, my view is biased because I fell out with Ashton, so this bias needs to be taken into consideration when weighing my view. Having provided this caveat, I stand by what I have said above. I can't recall what thread it was, but there was a suggestion that Ashton was the author of a document that had been posted anonymously on a usenet/usegroup (or similar) that he then had posted on this forum in support of (as I recall) some of his views. The emotional tone of some of the views expressed in this document rang loud and clear to my ears as being Ashton all over. Assuming this interpretation of events is accurate it demonstrates a certain dishonesty and deviousness.

I have no doubts that Remote Viewing can be effective. Remote Influencing in it scope and intention is even more sinister. A quick buff up on the history Haitain Voudon - as one example amongst a great many - demonstrates that it can have considerable potency under the right psychological circumstances.

As I usually do in these subjects, I recommend a careful reading of Jung to acquire a fuller understanding of the scientific base to these matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...