“The true strength of rulers and empires lies not in armies or emotions, but in the belief of men that they are inflexibly open and truthful and legal. As soon as a government departs from that standard, it ceases to be anything more than ‘the gang in possession’, and its days are numbered.” – H.G. Wells
25 years of on-going coverup, lies, deceit, and treason. Balance this against 41 years of treachery, and you will begin to appreciate the nature and extent of the most important constitutional crisis confronting us since the civil war. There have been three major “scandals” in post-WWII Amercia: President Kennedy’s assassination, Watergate, and Iran-Contra. I argue they are all symptoms of the same problem: the ongoing growth and ever-expanding influence of the National Security State of America, which began in earnest when President Truman signed the National Security Act of 1947 which, among other things, formalized the structure of the U.S. intelligence community as we know it today. General Reinhard Gehlen, Hitler’s chief of intelligence for central and eastern Europe, “surrendered” himself to us in 1945. Allen Dulles, working for the O.S.S. in Berne, Switzerland since 1943, had been negotiating with high-ranking Nazis like SS General Karl Wolfe since 1943 for secret surrender plans that included enticing offers to the Western Allies like espionage information, as well as attempts to create alibis that downplayed the German officer’s participation in war crimes and genocide. Soon after the war was over, Dulles was instrumental in illegally sneaking Gehlen into the U.S. wearing an American General’s uniform, and then, along with industrialists like Herbert Hoover, Gehlen with his experience, “helped” us design and implement the structure of our own intelligence command organization. Such secret, illegal “appropriations” of high-level Nazis were by no means limited to Gehlen.
Among the most treacherous and nefarious others were: SS officer Otto A. Von Bolschwing, Adolf Eichmann’s teacher concerning Jewry and Zionism; Wernher Von Braun, and his military superior General Walter Dornberger, responsible for the deaths of more than 20,000 slave laborers who were worked to death at the Nordhausen concentration camp–the second rocket production facility; Klaus Barbie, the butcher of Lyons; German diplomat Gustav Hilger, who, among his other duties at the Nazi foreign office, coordinated the operations of the dreaded SS Einsatzgruppen murder squads that were responsible for the largest wholesale atrocities and genocide committed against people in Eastern Europe and Russia. These men and many others, had been our mortal enemies. But with the end of WWII, and the beginning of WWIII (some call this the Cold War), war became peace, enemies became valuable assets, and friends became faceless enemies bent on our annihilation.
This was accomplished in large part via our own budding invisible government of non-elected, behind-the-scenes manipulators, propagandists, spies, agent provocateurs assassins, “defense intellectual careerists”, powerful industrialists and financiers, and a host of good-meaning men like Truman who did not understand the long-term implications of what they were giving sanction and legality to. The three most famous scandals mentioned above are the overt surfacing from time to time of this government-by-covert-means. But the primary one is unquestionably the Kennedy assassination as this was the first time the National Security State declared itself openly and wrested control of America’s agenda away from a man who was attempting to move beyond the Cold War, stop nuclear proliferation, ease tensions with our primary adversary, find a way out of the morass of Vietnam, and redirect the industrial might of our country away from a permanent warfare economy and toward a more globally coexistent footing.
There has never been a trial for the President’s murder. The murder of Oswald made it easy to avoid having to prove in a court of law that he had in fact pulled the trigger of the rifle that killed the president. The “evidence” the Warren Commission used to indict, convict, and posthumously sentence Oswald, centering around the
fantastical and physically impossible scenario of the single bullet “theory”, would never have stood up under cross-examination in a court of law.
As long as we as a nation continue to attempt to live by the lies
of our collective past, we will continue to see the certain slide
into darkness that looms larger each year. The it-can’t-happen-here
school of thought is the most blinding of all diversions. If you
are concerned about our National Security State’s growing influence,
and would like more information about it, please contact the
Mae Brussell Research Center, P.O. Box 8431, Santa Cruz, CA, 95061.
Some people will complain that this lament is too long. Sadly, it
is much too short. The subject matter discussed is massive and this
is one of the main reasons people are still misinformed about the
events of 25 years ago.
What follows are exerpts from two different manuscripts. The
authors are L. Fletcher Prouty, and Roger Craig.
L. Fletcher Prouty worked closely with the CIA and other intelli-
gence services for more than 30 years. A pilot during WWII, he per-
sonally flew Roosevelt to the Cairo and Tehran conferences, as well
as flying dozens of high-level Nazis out of eastern europe at the
close of the war. After the war Mr Prouty rose through the Defense
Department chain of command to a point where all of the CIA’s mili-
tary activities were channeled through him.
Between 1955 and 1963, Mr Prouty served as chief of special opera-
tions for the Joint Chiefs of Staff and in a similar capacity with
the Office of Special Operations of the Office of the Secretary of
Defense. He also headed the Special Operations Office of the U.S.
Air Force. Each of these positions was charged with military support
of the clandestine operations of the CIA.
In 1973, Mr. Prouty’s book, “The Secret Team, The CIA and Its
Allies in Control of the United States and the World”, was published.
Book critics called it a “a blockbuster” and said that it “reveals
more of the CIA’s history, its clandestine operations and adroit
cover-up tactics than any previously published book on the subject.”
Not being a CIA man, Mr. Prouty was exempt from taking the
agency’s oath of secrecy. His privileged position gave him far more
knowledge of CIA activities than almost all members of that
Roger Craig was a police officer in the Dallas Police Department.
He was in Dealey plaza On November 22 and among other things, saw a
man he is certain was Oswald at about 12:41, running down the grass
from the Book Depository to a slow-moving Rambler station wagon com-
ing down Elm Street driven by a husky looking Latin. He describes
reporting this pick-up soon after to a man on the steps of the Book
Depository building identifying himself as a Secret Service agent.
There was at least one other police officer who describes confronting
a man up behind the stockade fence at the top of the grassy knoll
immediately after the assassination who also flashed credentials
identifying himself as a Secret Service man. Footprints of the con-
spiracy that murdered President Kennedy and then covered it up are
visible here when the facts show that there were no Secret Service
personnel of any kind who were stationed in Dealey Plaza that day.
The first exerpts are from Mr. Prouty. They come from a manu-
script yet to be published as a book. They were originally published
in the April/May 1987 issue of Freedom magazine.
The second exerpts of Mr Craig come from a manuscript written in
1971 titled, “When They Kill A President”.
…the swing through Texas by the president and the vice president
directly contradicted a long-standing Secret Service taboo on events
that brought both men together in public appearances.
[Once in Dallas,] we begin to notice that many things which ought
to have been done, as a matter of standard security procedure, were
not done. These omissions cannot do otherwise than to show the hand
of the plotters and the undeniable fact that they were operating
among the highest levels of government in order to be able to use the
channels necessary to arrange such things covertly.
By 1963, the Secret Service had many decades of experience in the
task of protecting presidents. There were many ironclad procedures
and policies which had been established ever since the Secret Service
was given protection of the president and his family as its main re-
sponsibility by Congress, following the assassination of President
William McKinley in 1901.
Because the Secret Service is a relatively small organization, it
has been customary for it to call upon local police, the local
sheriff’s office, state police, the National Guard and the regular
military establishment for assistance as necessary.
There is even a special course called “protection” for the
personnel of selected military units to familiarize them with this
responsibility. In this day of high technology it has become a pro-
fession of great precision and expertise.
In the bureaucracy, it is more difficult to arrange for some
office not to perform its duties than to let them do it. Such duties
are automatic and built into the system. Therefore, when some re-
sponsible unit does not perform its duties, it is a signal that some-
thing highly unusual has occurred. In the case of the killing of
President Kennedy, certain key people had been told they would not be
needed in Dallas. Some were told not to do certain things, while
others were simply left out.
Speaking generally, it is not always easy to obtain positive proof
of a conspiracy, even when many facts point to its existence. The
power of the conspirators may be such that they can squelch usual
legal procedures. Thus the public, if it is to know the truth, must
discover what happened from details and circumstantial material that
supports the case. Then, from whatever valid evidence becomes avail-
able, the public can eventually determine the nature of the conspir-
acy and the identity of the cabal.
More than 120 years ago, Special Judge Advocate John A. Bingham
observed that “A conspiracy is rarely, if ever, proved by positive
testimony…. Unless one of the original conspirators betrays his
companions and gives evidence against them, their guilt can be proved
only by circumstantial evidence. It is said by some writers on evi-
dence that such circumstances are stronger than positive proof. A
witness swearing positively may misrepresent the facts or swear
falsely, but the circumstances cannot lie.” (Special Judge Advocate
John A Bingham, “The Trial of the Conspirators”, Washington, D.C.,
1865, cited in “The Pope and the new Apocalypse, S.D. Mumford, 1986)
In something as routine as the providing of protection for the
president during a parade through a major U.S. city such as Dallas,
the fact of variations in the routine can reveal the presence and the
skill of the plotters. Let us review certain facts concerning the
events surrounding President Kennedy’s death.
The Warren Report contains testimony by Forest Sorrels of the
Secret Service. Sorrels says that he and a Mr. Lawson of the Dallas
Police Department selected “the best route … to take him [the
president] to the Trade Mart from Love Field.” This is a legitimate
task. But was the route Sorrels chose truly the “best route” from a
security standpoint? Why was that specific route chosen?
The route chosen by Sorrels and the Dallas police involved a
90-degree turn from Main Street to Houston Street, and an even
sharper [120-degree] turn from Houston to Elm Street.
These turns required that the president’s car be brought to a very
slow speed in a part of town where high buildings dominated the
route. That was an extremely dangerous area. Yet Sorrels told the
Warren Commission this “was the most direct route from there and the
most rapid route to the Trade Mart.” What Sorrels did not say was
that such sharp turns and high buildings made the route unsafe. Why
did he and the police accept that hazardous route?
President Kennedy was shot on Elm Street just after his car made
that slow turn from Houston. This has been considered by many to be
a crucial piece of evidence that there was a plot to murder the
president. It is considered crucial because the route was selected
by the Secret Service contrary to policy and because this obvious
discrepancy has been covered up by the Warren Report and all other
investigations since then. The conclusion that has been made is that
it was part of the plot devised by the murderers, that they had to
create an ideal ambush site. The Elm Street corner was it.
Furthermore, no matter what route was selected for the presiden-
tial motorcade, the Secret Service and its trained augmentation
should have provided airtight protection all the way. This they did
not even attempt to do, and this serious omission tends to provide
strong evidence of the work of the conspirators.
According to the Secret Service’s own guidelines, when a presiden-
tial motorcade can be kept moving at 40 miles an hour or faster (in
most locales), it is not necessary to provide additional protection
along the way. However, when the motorcade must travel at slow
speeds, it is essential that there be protection personnel on the
ground, in buildings, and on top of buildings. They provide essen-
tial surveillance. Protection personnel can order all the windows
sealed and can station men to ensure they stay closed.
None of these things were done in Dallas. Incredibly, there were
no Secret Service men or other protection personnel at all in the
area of the Elm Street slowdown zone.
How could this have happened? It is documented that the Secret
Service men in Fort Worth were told they would not be needed in
Dallas. The commander of an Army unit, specially trained in protec-
tion and based in nearby San Antonio, Texas, had been told he and his
men would not be needed in Dallas. “Another Army unit will cover
that city,” the commander was told. There were no Secret Service men
on the roofs of any buildings in the area. There had been no precau-
tions taken to see that all the windows overlooking the parade route
in this slowdown zone had been closed, and kept closed.
The man alleged to have killed the president is said to have fired
three shots from an open window on the sixth floor of the building
directly above the sharp corner of Houston Street and Elm Street.
The availability of that “gunman’s lair”, if it was occupied at
all, violated basic rules of protection. It overlooked the spot
where the car was going slow. It had open windows. No Secret
Service men were covering that big building, and no Secret Service
men were on the roofs of adjacent buildings to observe such lairs.
Why did the Secret Service do everything wrong, or omit doing
things that were normal and were required for protection? Had they
actually been told they were not needed? If so, who had the power to
tell the Secret Service such a thing? Obviously, that authority had
to have come from a very high level.
The commission never really considered the possibility that anyone
other than Oswald, by himself, had committed the crime.
The president was murdered in Dallas, Texas. By law, the crime of
murder must be tried in the state where it was committed. It remains
to be tried today. There is no statute of limitations on the crime
Why wasn’t this done? Oswald is dead, but that does not preclude
a trial. He is as innocent of that crime as anyone else until a
court of law has found him guilty. Given the available evidence, no
court could convict him.
These experienced men on the Warren Commission, particularly the
chief justice of the Supreme Court, had to know that.
Why did the Texas authorities permit the removal of Kennedy’s body
from Texas? Why did they not hold an official autopsy? Why did
Dr. James Humes, the man who did an autopsy at Parkland Memorial
Hospital in Dallas, burn his original notes?
For those in far-off Christchurch, New Zealand, …the Kennedy
Assassination took place at 7:30 on the morning of Saturday,
November 23, 1963.
As soon as possible, “The Christchurch Star” hit the streets with
an “Extra” edition. One quarter of the front page was devoted to a
picture of President Kennedy. The remainder of the page was, for the
most part, dedicated to the assassination story, from various sour-
ces. Who were those sources, and how could such intimate and detail-
ed information about Oswald have been obtained instantaneously? It
wasn’t. Like everything else, it had been pre-packaged by the secret
This “instant” news is important. Experienced on-the-spot report-
ers in Dallas said the president was hit with a “burst of gunfire”.
A few lines below, it said, “Three bursts of gunfire, apparently from
automatic weapons” were heard.
NBC-TV had reported that “the police had taken possession of a
British .303-inch rifle…with a telescopic sight.” That was not the
rifle of the Warren Report.
Another account stated that “the getaway car was seized in Fort
Worth.” Whose getaway car? Oswald never left Dallas.
This type of sudden, quite random reporting is most important, be-
cause one can usually find the truth of what occurred in these early
news reports. Later, the “news” will be doctored and coordinated,
and will bear no resemblance to the original, true accounts.
Experienced reporters travel in the presidential party. They know
gunfire when they hear it, and they reported “bursts” of gunfire.
They reported “automatic weapons”. They reported what they heard and
saw. They did not yet have propaganda handouts.
Neither the FBI nor the Secret Service reported such action.
Since automatic weapons were never found, it becomes apparent that
these reporters on the scene had heard simultaneous gunfire from
several skilled “mechanics” or professional killers, and that this
simultaneous gunfire sounded like “bursts” of “automatic weapons”.
Nowhere does the Warren Report mention the precision control of
several guns, yet it is hard to discount the first, eyewitness re-
ports from experienced men.
On the other hand, almost one-quarter of that front page in
Christchurch was taken up with detailed news items about Lee Harvey
Oswald. An excellent photograph of Oswald in a business suit and tie
was included on page 3.
At the time this early “Extra” of the Star had gone to press, the
police of Dallas had just taken a young man into custody and had
charged him with the death of a Dallas policeman named Tippit. They
had not accused Oswald of the murder of the president and did not
charge him with that crime until early the next morning. Yet a long
article put on the wires by the British United Press and America’s
Associated Press had been assembled out of nowhere, even before
Oswald had been charged with the crime. It was pure propaganda.
Where did those wire services get it?
Nowadays, Oswald is a household name throughout the world, but in
Dallas at 12:30 p.m. on November 22, 1963, he was a nondescript 24-
year-old ex-Marine who was unknown to almost everyone. There is no
way one can believe that these press agencies had all of the detailed
information that was so quickly poured out in their files, ready and
on call, in those first hours after the assassination.
In the long account in the “Christchurch Star” about Lee Harvey
Oswald, which included a fine studio portrait, these press services
said, and the “Star” published, some very interesting information.
According to the account, Lee Harvey Oswald:
a. “defected to the Soviet Union in 1959”
b. “returned to the United States in 1962”
c. “has a [Russian] wife and child”
d. “worked in Minsk in a factory”
e. “went to the U.S.S.R. following discharge from the Marine
f. “became disillusioned with life there [in the U.S.S.R.]”
g. “Soviet authorities had given him permission to return with
his wife and child”
h. “had been chairman of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee”
…and much more.
…By what process could the wire services have acquired, collat-
ed, evaluated, written and then transmitted all that material within
the first moments, even the first hours, following that tragic and
“unexpected” event–even before the police had charged him?
There can be but one answer: those in charge of the murder had
prepared the patsy and all of that intimate information beforehand.
Strangely, the FBI, the Secret Service, the Warren Commission, and
the Dallas police force instantly declared Oswald to be the killer.
They never considered any other possibilities. The evidence was
never examined. In newspapers around the world, even as far away as
Christchurch, New Zealand, the headlines blared that Oswald was the
Lt. Day inspected the rifle briefly, then handed it to Capt. Fritz who had a puzzled look on his face. Seymour Weitzman, a deputy con- stable, was standing beside me at the time. Weitzman was an expert on weapons. He had been in the sporting goods business for many years and was familiar with all domestic and foreign weapons. Capt. Fritz asked if anyone knew what what kind of rifle it was. Weitzman asked to see it. After a close examination (much longer than Fritz or Day’s examination) Weitzman declared that it was a 7.65 German Mauser. Fritz agreed with him.
[the Warren Commission claimed an Italian Mannlicher-Carcano 6.5 Caliber was the rifle owned by Oswald.]
…Later that afternoon I received word of the suspect’ arrest and
fact that he was suspected of being involved in the President’s
death. I immediately thought of the man running down the grassy
knoll. I made a telephone call to Capt. Will Fritz and gave him the
description of the man I had seen and Fritz said, “that sounds like
the suspect we have. Can you some up and take a look at him?”
I arrived at Capt. Fritz office shortly after 4:30 p.m. I was met
by Agent Bookhout from the F.B.I., who took my name and place of em-
ployment. The door to Capt. Fritz’ personal office was open and the
blinds on the windows were closed, so that one had to look through
the doorway in order to see into the room. I looked through the open
door at the request of Capt. Fritz and identified the man who I saw
running down the grassy knoll and enter the Rambler station wagon–
and it WAS Lee Harvey Oswald. Fritz and I entered his private office
together. He told Oswald, “This man (pointing to me) saw you leave.”
At which time the suspect replied, “I told you people I did.” Fritz,
apparently trying to console Oswald, said, “Take it easy, son–we’re
just trying to find out what happened.” Fritz then said, “What about
the CAR?” Oswald replied, leaning forward on Fritz’ desk, “That
STATION WAGON belongs to MRS. PAINE–don’t try to drag her into
this.” Sitting back in his chair, Oswald said very disgustedly and
very low, “Everybody will know who I am now.” At this time Capt.
Fritz ushered me from his office, thanking me…
I was convinced on November 22, 1963, and I am still sure, that
the man entering the Rambler station wagon was Lee Harvey Oswald.
After entering the Rambler, Oswald and his companion would only have
had to drive six blocks west on Elm Street and they would have been
on Beckley Avenue and a straight shot to Oswald’s rooming house.
The Warren Commission could not accept this this even though it
might have given Oswald time to kill Tippit for having two men
involved would have made it a CONSPIRACY!
…Combine the foregoing with the run-in I had with Dave Belin, junior counsel for the Warren Commission, who questioned me in April of 1964 and who changed my testimony fourteen times when he sent it to Washington, and you will have some idea of the pressure brought to bear.
David Belin told me who he was as I entered the interrogation
room (April 1964). He had me sit at the head of a long table. To
my left was a female with a pencil and pen. Belin sat to my right.
Between the girl and Belin was a tape recorder, which was turned
off. Belin instructed the girl not to take notes until he (Belin)
said to do so. He then told me that the investigation was being
conducted to determine the truth as the evidence indicates. Well, I
could take that several ways but I said nothing. Then Belin said,
“For instance, I will ask you where you were at a certain time.
This will establish your physical location.” It was at this point
that I began to feel that I was being led into something but still I
said nothing. Then Belin said, “I will ask you about what you
thought you heard or saw in regard.” Well, this was too much. I
interrupted him and said, “Counselor, just ask me the questions and
if I can answer them, I will.” This seemed to irritate Belin and he
told the girl to start taking notes with the next question. At this
point Belin turned the recorder on. The first questions were
typical. Where were you born? Where did you go to school? When
Belin would get to certain questions he would turn off the recorder
and stop the girl from writing. The he would ask me, for example,
“Did you see anything unusual when you were behind the picket
fence?” I said, “Yes” and he said, “Fine – just a minute.” He
would then tell the girl to start writing with the next question and
would again start the recorder. What was the next question? “Mr.
Craig, did you go into the Texas School Book Depository?” It was
clear to me that he wanted only to record part of the interrogation,
as this happened many times. I finally managed to get in at least
most of what I had seen and heard by ignoring his advanced questions
and giving a step by step picture, which further seemed to irritate
him. At the end of our session Belin dismissed me but when I start-
ed to leave the room, he called me back. At this time I identified
the clothing wore by the suspect (the 26 volumes refer to a box of
clothing – not boxes. There were two boxes.)…
I first saw my testimony in January of 1968 when I looked at the
26 volumes which belonged to Penn Jones. My alleged statement was
included. The following are some of the changes in my testimony:
Arnold Rowland told me that he saw two men on the sixth floor of the
Texas School Book Depository 15 minutes before the President arriv-
ed: one was a Negro, who was pacing back and forth by the southwest
window. The other was a white man in the southeast corner, with a
rifle equipped with a scope, and that a few minutes later he looked
back and only the white man was there. In the Warren Commission:
Both were white, both were pacing in front of the southwest corner
and when Rowland looked back, both were gone; I said the Rambler
station wagon was light green. The Warren Commission: Changed to a
white station wagon; I said the driver of the Station Wagon had on
a tan jacket. The Warren Commission: A white jacket; I said the
license plates on the Rambler were not the same color as Texas
plates. The Warren Commission: Omitted the not – omitted but one
word, an important one, so that it appeared that the license plates
were the same color as Texas plates; I said that I got a good look
at the driver of the Rambler. The Warren Commission: I did not get
a good look at the Rambler. (In Captain Fritz’s office) I had said
that Fritz had said to Oswald, “This man saw you leave” (indicating
me). Oswald said, “I told you people I did.” Fritz then said,
“Now take it easy, son, we’re just trying to find out what happen-
ed”, and then (to Oswald), “What about the car?” to which Oswald
replied, “That station wagon belongs to Mrs. Paine. Don’t try to
drag her into this.” Fritz said car (station wagon was not mention-
ed by anyone but Oswald) (I had told Fritz over the telephone
that I saw a man get into a station wagon, before I went to the
Dallas Police Department and I had also described the man. This is
when Fritz asked me to come there.) Oswald then said, “Everybody
will know who I am now;” the Warren Commission: Stated that the
last statement by Oswald was made in a dramatic tone. This was not
so. The Warren Commission also printed, “NOW everybody will know
who I am”, transposing the now. Oswald’s tone and attitude was one
of disappointment. (If someone were attempting to conceal his iden-
tity as Deputy and he was found out, exposed — his cover blown,
his reaction would be dismay and disappointment). This was Oswald’s
tone and attitude–disappointment at being exposed!
I told him I knew of twelve arrests, one in particular made by
R.E. Vaughn of the Dallas Police Department. The man Vaughn arrest-
ed was coming from the Dal-Tex Building across from the Texas School
Book Depository. The only thing which Vaughn knew about him was
that he was an independent oil operator from Houston,Texas. The
prisoner was taken from Vaughn by Dallas Police detectives and that
was the last that he saw or heard of the suspect. Incidentally,
there are no records of any arrests, either by the Dallas Police
Department or the Sheriff’s Office, in Dealey Plaza on November 22,
1963. Very strange! Any and all arrests made during my eight years
as an officer were recorded. It may not have been entered as a re-
cord with the Identification Bureau but a report was always typed
and a permanent record kept–if only in our case files. A report on
any questioning shows a reason for your action and protects you
against false arrest. I am saying that there is absolutely no
record in the case files or any place else.
yer friendly neighborhood ratman
Dan Quayle’s legislative aide was Rob Owen, who was intro- duced to John Hull in Quayle’s senate office in 1983.
“There are two governments. There is the National Security Governement which was put in place by the National Security Act of 1947. That is the real government of our country. Then there is the cosmetic govern- ment–the government for show. The ongoing presidential government and congress, which is totally meaningless now.” -Gore Vidal
yer friendly neighborhood ratman
ko.yan.nis.qatsi (from the Hopi Language) n. 1. crazy life. 2. life in turmoil. 3. life out of balance. 4. life disintegrating. 5. a state of life that calls for another way of living.