Jump to content
The Education Forum

CIA Psy-Ops of Watergate and Beyond

Ashton Gray

Recommended Posts

The following article began as a necessary set of caveats to the article, "The CIA Watergate Bait-and-Switch—19 June 1972," Part II of a series of related articles on how John Dean and L. Patrick Gray helped the CIA frame the White House.

I started out attempting in the articles themselves to explain the CIA black psy-ops techniques integral to the fraud they perpetrated, but it became so unwieldy that the only solution was to break these caveats out into this separate article.

This has no pretensions to being any exhaustive study of such black mental techniques. It merely outlines major ones used in the packaging and selling of a CIA fraud of remarkable scope known as "Watergate." That said, these same techniques will be found, when looked for, in other purported but manufactured black op "histories," or wherever there is an attempt to hide the truth of past events with malign fictions.


What is commonly known as "Watergate" is largely a false "universe" of purported history made up of some truth and a great many lies. It is an infinitely elastic universe, because it can't possibly exist except in each individual perceiver's mind. Once the volunteered "confessions" and accounts and testimony are closely compared, so many contradictions emerge that in order for much of "Watergate" to have happened at all, a universe with multiple time streams is required.

These contradictions (and, importantly, omissions of truth) aren't the result of mere "misperceptions" by different eyewitnesses: these are cooked, manufactured fictions by people supposedly "confessing" their roles, and their accounts—and even staged "events"—contain specific known elements of psy-ops that are planted for no other purpose than to confuse, and, by confusing, to deflect close inspection and comparison that would reveal the lies.


A time-honored and favorite technique for creating confusion is to have two separate and completely contradictory accounts of what purportedly is the same event. The mind locks. It cannot be resolved. No certain truth can be reached at that point in "time" because both contradictory accounts cannot be true. The mind is forced to make a choice between two accounts that might both be false, or to leave it entirely unresolved and still attempt to link that enduring mystery to other claimed or actual events that depend on it or take place around it. "Watergate" is a mine field of such mental traps.


One frequently used technique to spread a tremendous amount of confusion is to supply seemingly "plausible" accounts of the "same" events through different sources, with the varying accounts originating at different times and places. Each of the divergent accounts has certain major commonly agreed-upon or sometimes true components. These are crucial to the fraud. The perceiver's mind latches onto these common components they've heard about from "multiple sources," and attempts to synthesize those together into a cohesive whole, no matter how many details are at variance and odds with each other. The hopelessly contradictory details most often are overlooked entirely. That factor alone is the key to the success of the fraud.

That's the way "Watergate" was packaged. To hear one participant's testimony, it makes "sense." To read another's book, it makes "sense." The mind constructs a mental "universe" in which all these things are able to take place, and in which time not only is completely elastic, but even can be, and often must be, subconsciously subdivided into entirely separate parallel, but unsynchronized, time streams.


What the human imagination can do with time is infinite. When presented, as in "Watergate," with multiple seemingly consistent but actually contradictory accounts and stories from multiple sources—each of which purports to be "fact"—the perceiver's mind can, and will, subconsciously create parallel time streams—like a railroad track suddenly splitting off into four or six different tracks, each regulated with a different clock, those then merging again somehow at the commonalities, then splitting again, and so on.

This gets so absurd in "Watergate" that when exposed it can't help but be funny, even with the realization that the CIA operation was an act Treason.

Only a very careful and detailed comparison of all the accounts side-by-side, on one and only one time stream—the one governed by the motion of heavenly bodies and measured by clocks—reveals that no such set of events possibly could have taken place in the universe we all agree upon and know of as "objective reality." Law enforcement now uses this investigative tool of creating a timeline regularly, though inexactly.

If there is any one tool most effective in deconstructing such false and willfully fraudulent "histories" as Watergate it is a meticulously detailed timeline into which all accounts by the actors are recorded. False "facts" then become starkly apparent. Its importance can't be overstated, and it is the single most neglected and misused tool of investigative research.


Two major building blocks of entirely false "histories" are falsehoods and omissions.

Through the use of a very exacting timeline, the most blatant falsehoods can be located with relative ease. Once that's done, more subtle falsehoods inevitably emerge, since they are necessary to the greater ones. By that stripping away of layers of falsity, omissions begin to emerge, the most obvious ones being the omission of whatever truth the lies were invented to conceal.

Omissions are their own subject. Inevitably, where a false "reality" is being created to supplant or cover up the truth, many small omissions will be scattered throughout. They are very difficult to perceive, because they are not there. This sounds obvious, but it is almost always missed. (This is the irony of describing "nothing.") People fail to look for what should be there—but isn't. They merely accept what is supplied (even when what is supplied is false), and create their own "explanations" to fill in the gaps. Life abhors a vacuum. It is very difficult for life to perceive a vacuum, an absence, a "not there," so life tends to fill the gap, often subconsciously. It takes practice to look for omissions. Some people find it next to impossible, so automatic and instant is their construction of "reasonable explanations" for entirely unreasonable circumstances, whether those be falsehoods or, commonly, omissions.

Thus researchers and analysts and writers playing the popular indoor sport of "connect the dots" with Watergate (and many other such "events" in history) often have been only connecting a considerable amount of fiction with very little verifiable fact, building mental "bridges" to span the gaps. Often they have attempted to do this over considerable yawning chasms, and hence a flood of "theories" attempting to bridge the gaps and resolve the contradictions. Results and conclusions of such methods inevitably are false in varying degrees, and, however "interesting," are ultimately unsatisfactory, since people by and large have a sense on some level of when they have been denied the truth.


A subset of falsehoods, this is a black ops technique used like repeated blows of a blunt instrument to the head all throughout "Watergate" and its "testimony." It is used over and over and over to confound and confuse, but is so subtle as almost to escape notice entirely.

The basic technique is to keep changing the singular/plural reference to "things" that play a role, often "things" that never had any existence at all.

It is used in the number of "bugs" supposedly planted in the Watergate, when there were none at all. It is used by Hunt and Douglas Caddy in the number of partners of Caddy's law firm supposedly contacted by Caddy. It is used by Baldwin in referring to the number of receiving "units" in the Howard Johnson's rooms. It is used in the number of Howard Johnson's rooms. It is used by Alfred Baldwin in the number of "logs" he purportedly hand-delivered to CREP headquarters (the real number is zero). And it is used by John Dean, L. Patrick Gray, Charles Colson, and E. Howard Hunt in their "Diem cables" fraud.

It is sheer hell on the mind. It keeps it in a constant state of uncertainty at a very low level of awareness, and it is almost never noticed by anybody unless this black psy-ops technique is known as a well-trained black operation to help keep things in a state of constant confusion. That is its purpose.


This is a caveat regarding a very deadly psy-op technique that was warned about in the articles on the entirely fictional "fabricated Diem cables": the psy-op principle of planting near-duplicates as a method of creating enormous confusion.

Certainly, life can and does produce "coincidences" of seeming similarity. But there is a knowing malefic use of this phenomenon that is done solely to confuse. It has been called a "burdensome fog" by John Gillespie.

One vicious example in "Watergate" is the purported "logs" of wiretaps. The stories of the co-conspirators allude to two complete (but entirely fictional) sets of these "logs": one set supposedly made by Alfred Baldwin, another by G. Gordon Liddy that purportedly was created to "fix" Baldwin's set—which never existed in the first place. (Notice the constant need to "fix" something.) None were ever made by Alfred Baldwin at all. The "logs" created by Liddy were actually just scripts supplied to him via CIA that he dictated himself and handed to his secretary to type. Then even those were destroyed by Liddy after they had been used briefly as nothing more than stage props to make people believe that wiretaps had existed. Fiction leaves no paper trail.

Something almost never even noticed is that the phony Ellsberg psychatrist "break-in" and the later purported but entirely fictional "first break-in" at the Watergate are written to be extremely similar: both over holiday weekends, both using many of the same personnel, both having "walkie-talkie problems," both failing to accomplish their purported (entirely false) "objectives," and many more close similarities that one can count once the black psy-op technique to generate confusion is known.

Another critical example is John Dean's assistant, Fred Fielding, whose last-name counterpart, Dr. Louis Fielding, is so important in the "Pentagon Papers" fraud, itself merely the opening act in the greater CIA fraud. It is no accident at all that Dean was supplied with an "assistant" whose last name was Fielding. Both "Fieldings" are linked to the activities of E. Howard Hunt in crucial ways. In some of the testimony, particularly Dean's, only the last name is used repeatedly. This is a trained technique used repeatedly for maximum destruction. It is tantamount to a stun grenade every place it is used. It scatters attention off on two different "tracks" widely separated in time: in this case the "Dr. Fielding" CIA op of early September 1971, and the "Fred Fielding" involvement in the other CIA op, the fraud of the "Diem cables." The complexity of this black "Fielding" operation alone, and how time was maliciously manipulated with it, is going to be the subject of a separate article.

For now, suffice it to say that John Dean is the person whose role it was to make the "revelations" of both of these devastating CIA fraudulent operations, both involving "Fieldings" and E. Howard Hunt in some crucial way, and Dean did it when he had maximum world exposure: in the Senate Watergate hearings. Both of these "revelations" and "confessions" by Dean had world-shaking consequences, and if you think for a moment that the seeding of "Fieldings" into both of these catastrophic "confessions" is an accident, do us both a favor and don't ever read another syllable of anything I've written.

I'll end this section by saying that someone in these forums might want to ask Douglas Caddy just what he knows about the circumstances of Fred Fielding's "hiring" as John Dean's assistant. I won't be asking him. I don't need to.


A psy-op technique heavily relied upon in "Watergate" to create the conflicts and fictions described generally above is alleged private, secret talks and meetings and activities between two (or a few) of the principal actors, with nothing more than their own assertions of what the subject and substance of such an interaction was. An almost inconceivable amount of what we know as "Watergate" is built on no more foundation, and it is no foundation at all. It often is pure fiction.

In most instances where we literally are forced to rely on the accounts of a small number of the co-conspirators interacting, one of more of the persons involved has known CIA background, connections, clearances, employment, or all four. The Watergate literature is so strewn with one-on-one encounters that the exceptions are easier to count than the instances.

All of the people involved in these countless clandestine interactions have been solidly documented as having told knowing, willful lies, even under oath, about these same events. Therefore, it is of an importance that cannot be overstated to recognize, in each instance where a private meeting or phone call purportedly takes place between two criminal co-conspirators, that the only thing that can be known with any relative certainty is that such an interchange took place.

Worse than that, there are very important places in the record where close inspection and comparison leads to the only reasonable conclusion that even the claim of such two-party (or more) interaction is itself a completely manufactured fiction, never mind any claimed "substance" or subject.

One startlingly elaborate example is the entirely manufactured and fictional Watergate "first break-in" and its two-week aftermath. It involves seven people over three days of whole-cloth fiction. Layered on that is even more fiction consisting of a set of "events" that never happened at all, but is superimposed over the real events of two weeks in June 1972.


The entire Intelligence Cult relies almost exclusively on hidden communications. This article has dealt with only a small facet of this, one used to manufacture fictions in complete secret for public performance and dissemination. A far more deadly facet is that wherever these filthy, lying vermin are at work in the walls, the real-universe truth of what is being done (and has been done) lies only hidden inside heavily fortified communication systems exclusive to the Intelligence Cult.

For decades their carte noir wall of secrecy has been "national security." The National Security Act of 1947 and its allied counterparts created the largest and most powerful organization of unprincipled criminals the world has ever known and gave them an almost unlimited budget and almost unlimited control over world affairs. It arguably was the culmination of mankind's cumulative stupidity. The Act almost unquestionably was an act of social suicide for the civilizations of man, and the slow-acting but very deadly poison still races unseen today through the most vital organs of civilization. It has almost done its job.

If no antidote is administered soon, the world as we know it is likely to die by its own hand.


As stated in the introductory matter, this article is merely an outline of some of the more deadly techniques used by CIA and its murderous sisters in its black ops against mankind. My hope is that this article will be amended and expanded by others so mankind can begin to catalog the arsenal of deadly weapons being used against it by these criminals on a daily basis.

It is an act of self-preservation for mankind, and probably the only hope it has left, for these techniques are not relegated to historical frauds like the "Pentagon Papers" and "Watergate": the daily news you're getting right this instant is filled with these same black ops.

These are the techniques used right now, today, to keep the world in the exact state of turmoil and war and conflict that justifies the existence of this gang of amoral murdering, lying thugs and their obscene budgets. They create, continually, the "need" for their "services" in a self-feeding frenzy of self-serving world annihilation.

This is the snake consuming itself, and it has no conscience or compunctions about consuming every last one of us in the process.

Ashton Gray

Edited by Ashton Gray
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
  • Create New...