PJ 103
CHAPTER 3
REC #1 HATONN

MON., JUL. 18, 1994 9:58 A.M. YEAR 7, DAY 336

MON., JUL. 18, 1994

LET'S HAVE SOME INSIGHT AND SOME FUN

"DUGGAH" AND "HATONN"
Who in the world are Duggah and Hatonn? You, I hope, are asking. I don't know either but I shall point out a couple of things to watch for along the lines of the next writing--especially that which is between the lines for it will show up right up front that neither the person, nor the energy claimed, has studied very much of any of "our" information--good or bad. Remember, George Green told the world (everybody in earshot or on radio receiving waves, etc., that "Hatonn moved with him and De­sires to Nevada" and he, too, was receiving.

Now, comes this writing from "Duggah" as PROOF of Green's statements that the one in Tehachapi is some kind of nerdnick receiving from an unknown energy form. I am going to point out to YOU what it is you do when you hold such documents. Greens are now sending this message from someone called Ha­tonn to someone called Duggah. Truth and perception in truth are the SAME from any speaker or receiver--so, I want you to measure that which is offered against that which is documented and KNOWN. And, why would this unknown speaker reserve the information FOR THE ONES WHO ARE IN THE BAT­TLE?

How do I know that this "may" be true? Because the writing was sent to here from one in Florida who has been badgered constantly to join Green in the pull-down of the Institute--and who, by the way, would suffer great damage from such doings.

I ask that you study the questions assumed asked and the an­swers given. You do not need psychics telling you what is what--YOU ONLY NEED TO KNOW THE GUIDELINES OF TRUTH IN INQUIRY AND TRUTH IN INFORMATION OF­FERED--IN OTHER WORDS, FOR WHAT ARE YOU SEARCHING? ARE YOU LOOKING FOR PSYCHIC RE­CEIVERS TO HOLD YOUR HAND AND GODS AND HOSTS TO PAT YOUR PO-PO--OR DO YOU WANT TRUTH ABOUT YOUR CIRCUMSTANCE AND "KNOWING" ABOUT YOUR JOURNEY?

Is THIS "Duggah" good or bad, valid or invalid? Who cares?? IF TRUTH ABOUT THAT WHICH MAKES YOUR JOUR­NEY INSIGHTFUL COMES FROM SATAN HIMSELF, YOU HAVE A MASTER TEACHER--IT IS YOU WHO MUST DISCERN--NOT A "DUGGAH", "DORIS", J.Z. or Dinky Poo!

How can you tell if "Hatonn" is ME? Well, that is easy for "me"--but perhaps not for YOU. The reason? Because I am here and I have a style of writing and this does NOT match ei­ther my style OR THAT WHICH I KNOW. How can I tell "right off'? Because the "answer" is not in response to THE QUESTION and the answer given refers to ME when the "authors" in point--ARE NOT ME, never were and are part of the confrontation in the first place. THESE are the points you look for, glean the truth and discard that which is false. So, let us give the writing a go-over and see what is there. Why do I take time to do this? Because I am asked by S.Y. to do so and comment and she is dear to me.

As is typical of such types of writings and writers there is no in­formation as to date of writing, time of writing, author, receiver (other than Duggah), etc. This is fine for the ones who are fa­miliar with all this information but to comment on something which may have come yesterday or ten years ago is of impor­tance. So, we will have to do some "assuming" which is usually a bad idea. However, since it does serve George Green so nicely--it must be recently written for it refers to the problems present in encounter as well as is being used to foster support for Green's position as regards US&P. It does not, however, SEEM TO REFER TO THE GOLD GEORGE THIEVED OR OTHER SMALL INSTANCES SUCH AS THAT! Therefore, you can deduce up front that the response does not fit the ques­tion in point -nor bring in the whole of the information of FACTS relative to the represented response, if it be valid. In­deed I WILL nit-pick along the way because, until you can judge such writings and discern purpose of such receivers--you CANNOT realize that which is valid from that which is not.

[QUOTING]

I am Hatonn. I come to you in Light and in service to the One who is All. Thank you, Duggah, for allowing me this op­portunity to share with you. I am available to all who inquire of me for the sharing of information and awareness.

I am asked about the validity of the information coming from one who claims to receive from me in Tehachapi, California. Yes, the contact was initially a valid one. However, when the receiver first opened up to receive my energy, many psycho­logical issues arose that she needed to confront.

[H: Alright, the question is: "validity of the information". WHAT INFORMATION--there are well over 25,000 pages in journals and another 20,000 pages in CONTACT (separate) and thousands of pages written before journals--by hand, along with probably 3-4 thousand HOURS of taped material. WHAT INFORMATION IS REFERRED TO? ALL OF THIS HAS BEEN GIVEN BY "US" (NOT JUST ME) THROUGH THIS RESOURCE IN SOME SIX YEARS. WHAT INFORMATION DOES THIS ONE AT­TACK? HOLD ON, IT WILL BECOME QUITE EVI­DENT, VERY QUICKLY.
By the way, this receiver and that receiver and whichever receiver is VALID--EVERY TIME! So the point is never about the receiver--it is only about information and speaker. ALWAYS!]

First among these was the Ego. The Ego believed this expe­rience to be an exciting one, but also one of which she was not worthy. If she had been strong enough in her own being at that time, she would not have had to look to the outside for valida­tion and confirmation.

[H: Oh? Strong? Does this speaker and receiver question STRENGTH? SIX YEARS OF HELL AND THE TOTAL STRIPPING OF EVERYTHING AND STILL WE CON­TINUE THIS SPITTING IN THE WIND--AND WE SPEAK OF STRENGTH AND EGO? This foolish observation, without knowledge or wisdom, embarrasses me and might well embarrass the entities in point. It reminds me of one who came to visit this place some six years ago and said: "I, by God, and going to do God's work but, by God, I am go­ing to do it MY WAY!" Is "this" the kind of EGO "strength" to which this writing might refer?]

From her belief of unworthiness, a separation was created. My energy cannot be fully received on your level unless the re­ceiver feels worthy of it. [H: Well, I guess this one in point feels pretty "worthy"--but I guess I don't so she/he better stay with what is there because in the end he/she is going to be left flat abandoned! I shall not stoop to further games on semantics--"he" has been accepted in the English language to suit either gender in writing--therefore I shall refer to Dug­gah as "he" with no offense intended to that "ego" involved.]

In the gap formed by the separation [H: Separation? Sepa­ration from what? By the way, uneducated ones--no physi­cal expression can FULLY RECEIVE ON YOUR LEVEL any total energy form of etheric beings from Creator dimen­sions. If you THINK otherwise, that is part of your erro­neous understandings. That does not mean you are lesser--only not grown in understanding and insight in your con­sciousness. I would NEVER ask any "secretary" to bear re­sponsibility for FULLY RECEIVING MY ENERGY--what kind of stupidity would THAT represent? If I be the "teacher" would I do that to my "student"?] a psychological construct formed that normally could serve as an intermediary for contact between myself and others from your dimension pre­serving the integrity of each existence and serving further as an energy transformer. [H: Say what? Psychological construct? What in the world is that? Serve as an intermediary? Is it not your reliance on so-called intermediaries that has gotten you into this lack of responsibility in the first place? Why would Dharma need an intermediary? She is the first one to resign her job every day of her life-because it ain't so great, good friends! Now this "party" tells us that an intermediary between me and her "warped" lack of normalcy would serve as a transformer of some kind. Yes, I think so--transform­ers transform--from one thing TO ANOTHER and that is EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME--TRUTH IS OFFERED AND IT IS TRANSFORMED!!--TO SUIT THE NEEDS OF MY ADVERSARY!] If the receiver is clear within his or her being they would normally pull in my energy behind, so to speak, that of the intermediary. [H: Boy, this one "Duggah", "Hatonn", and Green would really like that wouldn't they?? I think it becomes obvious WHY GREEN didn't send this directly to ME or to Dharma! You see, you can always further JUDGE situations by how they are han­dled--don't take it to source but anonymously scatter the gossip. You have to understand that the information arrived to S.Y. without name but FROM BOZEMAN, MT--AND ALL OTHER SCRIBBLINGS AND DATA, INCLUDING THE ENVELOPE RETURNS, SHOWED IT TO BE FROM AMERICA WEST SOMETHING OR OTHER. THE AD­VERSARY ALWAYS WORKS WITHOUT IDENTIFICA­TION! OR IN THE LIE AND SECRECY OF HOPED-FOR SECURITY OF DARKNESS. The intended meaning in this statement above is that the true entity would have transfor­mation of information through that intermediary! I THINK NOT, READERS--YOU DON'T NEED AN INTERMEDI­ARY--YOU ONLY KEEP THEM AROUND TO ABSOLVE YOU OF YOUR OWN RESPONSIBILITY--i.e., "The Priest told me...!"] The intermediary is literally a combination of our energies and in this case has taken on a "life" of its own.

[H: Perhaps I misunderstand? Perhaps he is saying Dharma has created an intermediary? That couldn't be because he also states that there is "separation" and information is becoming somehow "transformed". But we will see later that the only subject in point as to information regards Mr. Green and WHY Dharma has a lawsuit from US&P. The fact that Mr. Green was FIRST listed, and still is, on the suit--seems to be overlooked by both this energy and re­ceiver. Should a "speaker" be so ill informed while throwing boulders at another?]
Unfortunately, the intermediary can grow and become "addicted" to physicality. It will tend to form a secondary per­sonality that becomes stronger and stronger until I am unable to be reached unless there is a window of some sort. [H: To you who know Dharma, this needs no comment!]

In essence, the intermediary is like a child and truly is the product of myself and the receiver. [H: This cannot be truth--for I am NOT a child--in singular energy OR combined! Dharma may be that which she chooses--in her off-duty time.] In this case, it appears to be me [H: Doesn't appear to me to be "me".]; in other cases, it can appear to be either and/or both myself and the receiver. [H: Does this mean there is also total stupid chaos on the higher-teacher levels of per­ception? Appear? Other cases? TRUTH IS CONSISTENT AND INFINITE--TRUTH STANDS AND THE FALSE WILL GIVE AWAY ITS FALSENESS--IT NEEDS NO AR­GUMENT NOR DEBATE. TO MAKE ACCUSATIONS AND ESPECIALLY PERCEPTIVE ACCUSATIONS IN ABSENCE OF ALL FACTS SHOWS THAT STUPIDITY QUITE CLEARLY--DO YOU WANT YOUR TEACHERS AND LEADERS TO BE STUPID, ERRATIC, CHANGING IN THE WIND AND MORALLY CORRUPT? Do you see that we are already a long way off the subject of the ques­tion in point--is INFORMATION GIVEN through Dharma VALID? NOW, let me present you with another thought--"If Dharma's information was invalid, which it is not, re­garding Green, US&P, etc., why would the proof in docu­mentation PROVE that Dharma is not the one who is in­valid? Further, will Dharma's opinion of one George Green, US&P or Hatonn--make any difference in the TRUTH OF INFORMATION WHICH FLOWS FROM HERE AS REGARDS THE MISSION TO YOUR PLACE AND SPECIES?
For instance, if I tell you that the circuits to one of the largest metals dealers in the world were locked on Friday and today--is that an opinion or a fact? Check it and see--that is exactly what happened on Friday and today. What might that indicate? Disaster, frozen prices, change in cur­rency evaluation, what, what, what? Well, there are lots of possibilities and if you are a regular reader--YOU WILL KNOW WHAT THEY ARE! THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH DHARMA, DORIS, DUGGAH, GREEN OR PUR­PLE PEOPLE EATERS!]
...This ultimately created a distortion in the reception and has limited the knowledge received to that obtained by the receiver from other sources or from the initial contact with myself. [H: Upon what basis of KNOWLEDGE does this energy or re­ceiver DARE to foundation such garbage? Reread the above. How would either the energy OR the receiver above have any notion as to what happened in the mind of one, Dharma/Doris and me--another energy? From what source of educated, scientific realization COULD such a party, who knows not either entity--base such authoritative information statements--not speculate or "may be"--but "ultimately cre­ated..."?]

That is why the Tehachapi receiver has been faced with a lawsuit from an entity known as the University of Science and Philosophy. [H: NO, and it is certainly beyond STUPID to infer such a thing--her energy intermediary or transformer or fat little pickle plucker are NOT responsible for the problems with US&P--very earthbound physically produced STUFF is the reason--and validity of information OR psychic anything has NOTHING TO DO WITH IT!] She was given the choice at the time to recognize that her contact was with the intermediary and not with me. Instead of facing that responsi­bility, she chose to blame the publisher of her material.

[H: If you readers don't see this one--then blindness is a hopeless handicap ye shall have to share. Firstly, the "authors" of the volumes of magazines in dispute WERE NOT "ME" (TRY "Russell" or "Germain" or...). Secondly, WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PUBLICATIONS AS A PUBLISHER? Thirdly, DHARMA, DORIS OR ANYONE AROUND HER HAS NEVER RECEIVED ANYTHING FOR THE PUBLICATIONS OF THAT PUBLISHER. Fourthly: The publisher got permits and information from OTHER authors of material--why suddenly did he fail to cover US&P? He claimed to be a good buddy of the Presi­dent of that entity and SAID IT WAS OK TO USE THE IN­FORMATION. This could go on and on--but still does not take up the theft of the gold by Greens nor the other crimi­nal activities worked out with such as Anderson, et al., OR address the real issues in point of his AGREEMENTS with US&P SEPARATE AND APART from the other "minor" named defendants in the original suit. It does not address how he made claims all about the globe that he had the books released TO HIM from the court and even got the poor attorney into trouble. It doesn't cover the other 95 volumes of writings--nor the ones through the first 50 some odd in which HE SHOWS AMERICA WEST COPY­RIGHTS!
Do these documentations abounding--REALLY indicate that Doris has no possible reason to suspect that perhaps Mr. and Mrs. Green might just have done something rather unsuit­able? Dharma WRITES and sometimes SPEAKS--FOR ME AND SOME OF MY COMPATRIOTS--so does Mrs. Green (or claims to do so) and so did Mr. Green indicate nationally that "Hatonn speaks to and through me and came with De­siree and me to Nevada!"
The writings here are turned into published form ONLY as magazine periodicals and newspaper--validly licensed and operating under the rules and regulations of news reporting--which means that no KNOWN LIES ARE PUBLISHED AS TRUTH! It is mandatory, further, to NOT use the hypo­thetical blitherings of some bodiless, vapor-trailed entity form--when truth of prior publication and fact is present! You want NEW REVELATION? THEN GO SOME­WHERE ELSE--THAT IS NOT MY JOB NOR INTENT! I personally hope that Mr. Green sends this writing of Dug­gah's off to everyone on every mailing list in the world mailing system--it can only HELP OUR CAUSE OF TRUTH!]
I have the utmost compassion for the receiver, but at this point, I can no longer allow her to state truly that the material she is receiving is from me. [H: Which receiver? No longer allow WHO to state truly that the material she is receiving is from me. Most of the information printed here with Dharma, is gathered right off your place--I just pick it out and comment! I guess "I" don't share the totally "unconditional compassion" of that other entity--for I will allow her and it, or him and it, to write anything they wish--for they ONLY MAKE MY POINT! I only suggest you get background on all information and THEN make decisions of YOUR OWN. This is obviously NOT worthy of further time wasted.]

I hope this answers your inquiry satisfactorily.

I am Hatonn. I take your leave in the Love and Light of Truth. [H: Well the old boy could have saved a bit of face by taking "his own leave" in love and light of truth---but "take your leave"? Ah it is always the little things that will spring the trap, readers!]
* * *
Yes, I could go on about this into volumes--but you are big kids now and must come into your own adult discernment. We have given you ways of measuring all things against that which God Creator offers as guidelines--but YOU have to shoulder your re­sponsibility of all background work and thorough investigation. Anyone basing anything on one page of written answer to such narrow and foolish inquiry which has no basis, no names, no dates--nothing--is foolish at best.

I am grateful for the opportunity to respond to your inquiries--you who have received the paper in discussion. I have no fur­ther comments if you will allow me to go back to our important work.

There are so many things taking place right now as to boggle the system and they must be attended, watched and more back­ground on players and the game, poured in.

Now what do you want in my comments about Green? His ac­tions, too, speak louder than ANYTHING I could possibly say. John Schroepfer and others who have "blown the whistle" on Green and "the Plan" to bury John--speak louder than any words could ever say on the matter of integrity and TRUTH! If people will do THIS ATROCIOUS AND BITTER ACTION against a literal brother--what think you they would do to retain gold and secrecy of their actions? Yes, it IS bad--but it has been agoniz­ing and HELL for John Schroepfer locked away in WORSE THAN A PRISON--to preserve George's and Eleanor's and as­sociates' assets and plans.

I think you can stop worrying about this speaker or that speaker or this entity or that entity--those in point will give you the an­swer in EVERY INSTANCE as TRUTH "OUTS"! AND, TRUTH SHALL ULTIMATELY ALWAYS "OUT"!

Can we please turn back to our work in progress? Thank you.
CHAPTER 4
REC #1 HATONN

TUE., JUL. 19, 1994 9:59 A.M. YEAR 7, DAY 337

TUE., JUL. 19, 1994
RACE RIOTS. ETC.,
(MISHPUCKA)
This is a valid term and you had better get accustomed to using it, seeing it and hearing it. It is exactly what you are being set up for having on a massive and national scale. The encompass­ing things will be such as Haiti, O.J. Simpson, the new "Jackson" (Rev.) upheavals and even the "Elders" matter with the son who was arrested for "drugs" and thus and so.

The Simpson matter is taking front seat in publicity but what is happening right now is atrocious. A police officer is being set up as a cause for racial clashes in that case. You can't help but follow the case because a necessary move on the part of the me­dia to precipitate desired results is to offer inflammatory infor­mation on cue to precipitate desired actions from otherwise un­caring citizens. At this point it will be basically a black v. white issue and black v. police issue. The fact that all of O.J.'s attor­neys at this time are JEWISH will prove to be another focus as the trial continues--it looks like the Jews are on the side of the blacks--but this will prove to be OTHERWISE and there will then become a three-way uprising. Out of this will be possible the passage of "hate-crime" laws because of the so-called "anti-Semitic" elements involved.

It is a BIG plan, readers, and behind the splashing and sloshing of pebbles on Jupiter--you have a major world series of events coming down. Don't blink both eyes at once or you will get "behind" and "blind-sided" before you realize it.

Let me assure you that O.J.'s lawyers have had this information on the officer, Furhman, since upstart so you can be sure there is positive reasoning behind the maneuver now under way.

These riots will not be sloppy half-baked flings as prior skir­mishes have been, my friends--this will be "big time", "world-cup" stuff of which WARS are made.

What will your "militia" do then? Indeed, you had better be considering these things--because the "Crips" and the "Bloods" are now WELL-TRAINED KILLERS--no more are they just children without a cause--THEY HAVE BEEN TRAINED INTO A "CAUSE"!

This little message is probably worthy of hot line as we want ev­eryone to PAY ATTENTION! Thank you.

WILLIAM DUDLEY PELLY
I am so often asked about such as the Pelly Papers and more often, the GOLDEN SCRIPTS. How valid is the information? I think I don't need to respond to THAT particular question other than by offering this presentment:

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
May Term, 1942
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

William Dudley Pelley,
Lawrence A. Brown, No. 7391 Cr.
Agnes Marian Henderson,
Fellowship Press, Inc.

* * *
I will not offer the case in point, here, at this time. Suffice it to say that there, was a Federal Grand Jury convened and an in­dictment for SEDITION brought against the above named par­ties and a publication called The Galilean Magazine.

To you who continue to prod and cause CONTACT to act more biased than an ordinary proper newspaper--are asking that the same be brought forth against the very resource of information.

If, in fact, the CONTACT ever digresses or, as some of you pre­fer, progresses, into seditious acts or insurrection printings, I will be considered withdrawn from any association with same. In that instance, I can promise you that there will be no "Contact" BEYOND THAT DATE.

A Newspaper and Current Information Magazines have respon­sibility to print what is brought forth, with credits to the authors of said information and if hear-say, is present in the information IT WILL BE SO STATED!

We have had ones who tout that the CONTACT backs THEM in their uprisings and urgings to do this or that. NO, we urge you to get informed, voice stance and ACT ONLY WITHIN REC­OGNIZED LAWS! To gather guns and go march on something is not acceptable to me OR TO YOUR VERY ENEMY AND YOU WILL BE STOPPED. An armed militia IS WITHIN THE LAWS OF YOUR CONSTITUTION AS A NATION. DO WITH THAT WHAT YOU WILL BUT DO NOT GO FORTH AND SAY THAT ANY AT CONTACT ADVOCATE WAR OR ARMED REBELLION.

If articles or writings are printed in the paper regarding such ac­tivities it is for information only and will be presented with dis­claimer EVERY TIME, PLEASE EDITORS. There ARE ALWAYS LEGAL ways to change a system if you act in rea­sonable timeliness. Locking the barn door and burning down the barn AFTER the horses have been taken--is of no value whatsoever and if it is, in fact, a confiscated barn--you will be charged and convicted of treason and unlawful behavior. If a barn-tender (guard) is injured or slain--YOU WILL BE CHARGED, CONVICTED AND PROBABLY EXECUTED FOR MURDER!

I do want to offer you the EXACT indictment as it happened be­cause you must see how dangerous it is to walk on the brink of such disaster. LaRouche is another prime example of unfair in­dictments and convictions--along with his people. Remember, one of LaRouche's secretaries, got something like 68 years in prison for simply being there. JUSTICE is not in point here--THERE IS NO JUSTICE so stop dwelling and time-wasting suggesting that this or that is not just--OF COURSE IT IS NOT JUST! YOU WILL WORK WITH "LAW" AND WITHIN "LAWS" OR YOU WILL BE INCARCERATED AND SHOT OR BOTH!

EXAMPLE
There is now afoot an attempt to "get the CONTACT" because of the letter of Ronn Jackson to Linda Thompson regarding "insurrection". No thank you, good friends. CONTACT, per­haps unwisely, printed Mr. Jackson's letter--along with an edito­rial disclaiming any association with anarchy or sedition. A lot of time and attention has been given by this paper and MYSELF to the freedom of Mr. Jackson. This is NOT for the purpose of shutting down the paper, arresting my writer or for gathering a glob of militiamen--armed or unarmed. It was printed because of FREEDOM OF THE PRESS in which all voices of the peo­ple can be heard and in result, wise counters and measures can be thought out and LAWS APPLIED AS RELATE TO FREE­DOM THROUGH CONSTITUTION! If you want a warrior leader--it will not be me. I am a different KIND OF WAR­RIOR--I NEED NO GUNS OR SWORDS--SAVE THE SWORD OF TRUTH THROUGH CREATOR/CREATION. Neither do YOU so the only difference is that I KNOW and YOU APPARENTLY DO NOT YET KNOW!

To save precious time and still be able to cover lots of information I ask that Dharma take up with the Usurpers and let us write on that subject a bit each day--these are representative of very important players in the game afoot even if their tenure was "past" in apparent power. These are the tools of the RULERS who often grow to become the RULERS in FACT.

Our last writing on this subject was regarding McNamara and there shall we take up again:

THE USURPERS. Part 9:
by Medford Evans, Ph.D.
Western Islands Publishers, Belmont, MA 02178.

THE OPERATORS,
THE TFX SCANDAL,
(TFX: Tactical Fighter, Experimental)
There is one important event in the disarmament activities of the former Secretary of Defense which can just as well stand for everything else, since in it are manifest all the personal charac­teristics of the man, especially his implacable refusal to counte­nance the least consideration for American victory on the field of battle.

The event to which I refer is known as the "TFX Scandal", which had been the subject of intensive Congressional investiga­tion, was cut off just as it was reaching a first crisis by the as­sassination of John F. Kennedy.

"The multibillion-dollar TFX warplane contract was the most coveted prize the Pentagon ever dangled before bidders," writes Liberal journalist Clark Mollenhoff in his book The Pentagon.

Government spending, it was estimated, would exceed $6.5 billion [it was to run much higher] the largest con­tract for military planes in the nation's history. The pro­gram was planned to include more than 1,700 planes for the Navy and the Air Force. Such a contract could mean prosperity for an entire state, and the competition was in­tense.

Nineteen-sixty-two was the year of decision. There were two main competitors--Seattle-based Boeing, which proposed to build the plane at its Wichita, Kansas plant, and General Dy­namics, which in cooperation with Grumman intended to pro­duce the Air Force version at its Convair plant in Fort Worth, and the Navy version at Bethpage, New York. The states of Washington, Kansas, Texas, and New York were politically in­terested. The first two are hardly a match in political influence for the last two, even waiving the fact that the Vice President was from Texas. But that was something no one was quite willing to waive, particularly in view of Johnson's well-earned reputation for arm-twisting in the clinches. Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson of Washington, in years gone by one of David Lilienthal's backers on the Congressional Atomic Committee, and more recently active with McNamara in the slandering of General Walker, now, awakening to alarm, raised a quite le­gitimate question with the Pentagon. Could it be that through Johnson and such, the state of Texas had the TFX contract sewed up and Boeing might as well forget it? He was assured that there was no bias anywhere, the contract would be awarded fairly.

On November 24, 1962 General Dynamics got the TFX con­tract. One wonders how this could have been, considering:

1) All four services--Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps--expressed a preference for the Boeing plane, technically.

2) The Boeing plane was $100 million cheaper than General Dynamics in the experimental phase, and was estimated at more than $400 million cheaper on the total contract.

3) The Pentagon Source Selection Board, a top-level group of generals and admirals, were unanimous in preferring Boeing, both for performance and economy.

In spite of the foregoing facts, Defense Secretary McNamara, supported by Deputy Defense Secretary Roswell Gilpatric, Air Force Secretary Eugene Zuckert, and Navy Secretary Fred Ko­rth ruled that General Dynamics should get the contract. Chal­lenged as to why, McNamara replied, essentially "Because"! The arrogance of this decision was incredible. Indeed, the sheer preposterousness of the thing through shock value, seemed to be a kind of protection. Nobody could quite believe that an al­legedly logical man like McNamara would not only make, but doggedly stick to, a decision of such importance without one shred of logic whatsoever to support him. That's what he did. Mollenhoff, in his 1965 book Despoilers of Democracy, tells of his own interview of McNamara, who received him in friendly fashion, leading off with flattering references to Mollenhoff s intellectual capacity. Mollenhoff does have intellectual capac­ity. He knows when he is getting the run-around. He poured pressure on the Secretary of Defense:

"How will you justify discarding the low bid on the ba­sis of a rough judgment and without cost studies?" I asked.

"I'm a $500,000 a year executive, " McNamara snapped back. "I was the second-highest-paid accountant in the United States. I was paid for my judgment on con­tracts involving millions of dollars. "

"But Mr. Secretary," I said, "assuming that you can make these judgments on multibillion-dollar contracts, do you feel it is good government operations when there are no documented cost studies to justify throwing out the low bids?"

"I know what I'm doing," he snapped, a little angry now. "I was the second-highest-paid accountant in the United States. " (pp. 190-191.)

That interview was a good day in the education of Clark Mollenhoff, and he has since done good work in contributing to the education of American voters and taxpayers. [H: Yes per­haps--but look who seems to keep on paying and paying.]

Somebody has done some reading--and thinking. World Bank promotion or no World Bank promotion, Robert McNa­mara cannot in 1968 say as he did in effect in 1962: "I am Sir Oracle, and when I open my lips let no dog bark!"

The year 1963 was a turning point in many lives, though in the case of Robert Strange McNamara the effect was not yet to be conspicuous. Close-up observers in Washington, such as re­porter Clark Mollenhoff, and a few Congressmen, began to learn with the McClellan Committee Hearings, initiated in February 1963, such indigestible facts as these:

(1) By all the ordinary rules of contractor-selection Boeing won the competition with General Dynamics hands down; the Boeing plane was better, it was cheaper, it was more suitable to defense needs.

(2) Secretary McNamara hardly bothered even to allege rea­sons for his arbitrary selection of General Dynamics, except (a) to cite his own reputation, and (b) to predict long-term savings resulting from "commonalty" of parts between the Air Force and Navy versions of the plane--a contention in part purely speculative and in part dependent on a degree of similarity be­tween the two versions which resulted, chiefly because of excess weight, in an inferior Navy plane. The Secretary also implied (c) that General Dynamics' higher bid was more realistic than Boeing's lower one! Thus, what might have been thought a Boeing advantage was turned into a liability. The reason Mc­Namara knew General Dynamics' higher bid was actually more economical than Boeing's lower bid was that he could "just tell".

(3) General Dynamics desperately needed a financial wind­fall; since 1957, when under the late John Jay Hopkins the firm had earned $56 million on sales of $1.7 billion; it had, under placid former Army Secretary Frank Pace, sustained the biggest loss on one project in American corporate history--a loss of $425 million, more than twice as much as Ford Motor Company lost on McNamara's Edsel.

(4) Involved in awarding the life-saving multibillion-dollar contract was McNamara's Deputy, Roswell L. Gilpatric, a New York lawyer friend of Frank Pace. Gilpatric had represented General Dynamics. His firm, Cravath, Swaine & Moore, still did. He had qiiit the firm he said, but the record showed that he was still carried by the firm's group insurance. When, eventu­ally (1964), Gilpatric resigned from the Defense Department he went right back to the law firm.

(5) Also involved in awarding the contract was Fred Korth, a Fort Worth banker whom John Kennedy had named as Secretary of the Navy when John Connally resigned to run for. Governor of Texas. Odd facts about Korth: He was, in 1952-1953, As­sistant Secretary of the Army under the ubiquitous Frank Pace. Though Korth was Kennedy's Secretary of the Navy for nearly two years, his name does not appear in the indexes of Arthur Schlesinger's, Ted Sorensen's, or Pierre Salinger's books on Kennedy. Korth, who plainly knew nothing about naval avia­tion, overruled his top admirals' analytically documented prefer­ence for the Boeing plane, so that he could sign, along with Air Force Secretary Zuckert and Robert McNamara, the award of the contract to General Dynamics. Korth's bank had made a loan of $400,000 to General Dynamics, which loan was out­standing while Korth was deliberating the TFX contract. [H: Doesn't all this smack of things TODAY?]

The foregoing is the merest suggestion of what came out during Senator McClellan's 1963 investigation of the TFX con­tract. It became crystal clear that Robert McNamara, supported by Gilpatric, Zuckert, and Korth, had arbitrarily, in defiance of every rational indication of the merits in the case, awarded the biggest contract in history to a firm threatened with bankruptcy, having business and financial ties to Gilpatric and Korth, and--of course--having its Convair plant in Fort Worth in the home state of the then Vice President of the United States.

President Kennedy had said that he saw nothing improper in the handling of the TFX contract award--but at the same time he made it plain enough that the White House had not been directly involved, that the whole deal was handled by the Department of Defense.

Hindsight is easier to acquire than presight. In the case of the TFX contract the hindsight available in 1968 confirms the foresight which began to dawn on Clark Mollenhoff, Senator McClellan, and a few others in 1963. For we know now that McNamara's decision was not only arbitrary and unreasonable. It was wrong.

From an abundance of documentation available, I take from Science News of October 21, 1967 an article entitled, "The Flying Edsel". [H: How many of you remembered the fiasco of the "Edsel" automobile? Did you remember that it was McNamara's fiasco? No? Well then, don't continue to ask me why WE ARE WRITING ALL THIS OLD 1NFORMA­TION--IT IS BECAUSE YOU ONES DO NOT REMEMBER AND, THROUGH FORGETTING--YOU LOSE THE PLAYERS!] Writes science reporter Jonathan Eberhart:

Five years ago, Defense Secretary Robert S. McNa­mara overruled his source selection board and picked General Dynamics over Boeing to build the TFX, a jet superfighter now famous--or notorious--as the F-111. The plane's big advantage was supposed to be that both the Air Force and the Navy could use it. This, said the Secretary, would save at least $1 billion. It hasn't worked out that way.

Eberhart reports how Grumman Aircraft, responsible as a General Dynamics co-contractor and subcontractor, objected to the very concept of "commonalty" of parts between the Air Force and Navy versions--though "commonalty" was the only understandable piece of rationalization which McNamara had of­fered in support of his otherwise patently bad judgment. The problem was that the Navy needed a lighter plane than the Air Force did--to operate from carriers. But if in the interests of "commonalty" the Navy was stuck with various features which the Air Force wanted, then there was no way to get the weight down to a usable level for the Navy. Eberhart quotes Grumman as writing:

The weight savings achievable... are directly propor­tional to the permissible reduction in airframe common­alty, [which Eberhart translates]: "This airplane is too heavy and it's going to stay that way as long as the Navy has to worry about the Air Force's design limitations."

Actually, the TFX (Tactical Fighter, Experimental) turned into three planes for production: the F-111A, for the Air Force, the F-111B, for the Navy; and the FB-111, a strategic bomber, to replace the B-52, for heaven's sake! Don't ask why a plane which is already a mess because of attempts to make it serve in­compatible purposes as (a) a land, and (b) a sea fighter, is now selected to fulfill also the radically different purpose of strategic bombing.

Meanwhile, all three versions are a continual headache to the military. The Air Force version is apparently least objection­able, but it too has "troubles of its own", according to Eberhart. Its loaded takeoff weight is six tons, or 17 per cent, more than what the contractor had guaranteed. There is a "speed brake" which "vibrates enough to cause buffeting of the aircraft," "improper location of... the center of gravity" has made landing hazardous, and finally--and inevitably--"production schedules have gone completely to pot." The Navy version is at present three years behind schedule--while the Navy's presence in Viet­namese waters is well ahead of schedule. Costs are astronomi­cal. Both Air Force and Navy style F-111's were originally to have come to $2.9 million apiece (an increase of 21 per cent), the Navy version at a cool $8 million each, or an increase in unit cost of 175 per cent! [H: Still can't top that of the little stealth fighter at well over half a BILLION last year.]

There is a law of diminishing returns in pursuing too far a fi­nancial and managerial fiasco like the McNamara-TFX-General Dynamics thing, but one more point must be made: Boeing wanted to equip the TFX with a "thrust reverser", for reducing speed for landings. But Robert McNamara said no--too advanced, too risky. We must have a solid, safe, approved con­ventional dive brake such as General Dynamics had come up with.

Now hear this, from Science News writer Eberhart concern­ing the Navy's aerial monstrosity

The aircraft's speed brake, a panel that lowers into the air stream from the fuselage, needs strengthening and re­design because it vibrates like a loose shutter, and a device called the adverse yaw compensator does such a poor job of controlling the plane's side-to-side motion that it adds to the already considerable hazards of night landings on an aircraft carrier, from which the F-111B's will operate.

It isn't just a matter of dollars and cents, though dollars and cents are important. We must think of McNamara sitting there insisting that young Navy fliers have got to trust their lives, and the life of every sailor on the carrier, to the unmanageable bulk of one of these General Dynamics creations.

General Dynamics could have been helped financially far more simply, and without great commotion, simply by (1) con­tinuing to produce B-58 "Hustler" bombers at the Convair plant in Fort Worth, (2) continuing to produce Atlas missiles at the Convair plant in San Diego, (3) going ahead with nuclear-pow­ered naval vessels, a program in which General Dynamics, builder of the Nautilus, the first nuclear-powered submarine, could logically have been included. Instead, the B-58 and the Atlas were discontinued, and McNamara made another of his arbitrary decisions to build a non-nuclear aircraft carrier rather than a nuclear-powered one--once more against all the best naval, military, and other technical advice. [H: Does anybody except me see TREASON here?]

Mollenhoff writes, "With all of the opinions and facts against him, Robert S. McNamara made the decision that the United States should not go ahead with a nuclear carrier." McNa­mara's "Flying Edsel" may have been ordered to please General Dynamics; his "Floating Edsel" could have pleased no one but the Disarmament Lobby.

The chilling significance of Robert McNamara is this: that a dedicated opponent of American national defense could for seven years be American Secretary of Defense.

Admiral Canaris was Hitler's chief of military Intelligence for nine years, and he was also head of an underground plot against Hitler. [H: How many of you remember the name and person of "Canaris"? Well, now, how many of you re­member the connection with Gunther Russbacher? So be it! Perhaps you simply can't hear these same things repeated often enough?] Most of us are not inclined to think that was morally so bad of Admiral Canaris. There are plenty of people who think it would be fine if a U.S. Secretary of Defense, sworn to defend our country, should actually think it his duty to help run the whole world in the interests of "peace," and to that end to use his position as a means of destroying armed might.

There are American intellectuals who consider that America is the threat to what they value in the world, and that they are doing their duty if they deliberately weaken America. Is this why McNamara sought more and more power? Should he be in a position of power--in the U.S. Gov­ernment, the World Bank, or anywhere else?

What McNamara did for seven years--three under Kennedy, four under Johnson--was to use the pretext of economy for disarming America.

Newsweek said December 11, 1967: "Few men have wor­shiped planning as obsessively as the eighth Secretary of De­fense--and few have been relieved of command [Italics added] in such a shambles of confusion." In such shambles of confusion totter and topple the towers of tyranny!

But to think that McNamara has now been "put out to pas­ture" is to fail to understand the nature of the fields into which he now has been turned. The World Bank is the pilot institution of the Government. Set up at Bretton Woods in July 1944, the World Bank, or "International Bank for Reconstruction and Development", along with the companion institution the "International Monetary Fund", was the first of the UN organi­zations to be established. The Bretton Woods conference was held two months before the Dumbarton Oaks conference at which was planned the more pretentious but hardly more influ­ential organization that we call the United Nations. The UN had been set in motion under the guidance of. Communist Alger Hiss at San Francisco in April of 1945. Hiss was an official U.S. delegate and secretary general of the conference! The UN was to maintain "peace"--which hardly anybody thinks can really be done. The World Bank was to manage the flow of money in the world--which lots of people think is being done very effectively, though not in the interest of the United States.

Regarding our current predicament, my conviction is that the whole buildup in Vietnam has as its purpose the distribution of wealth throughout the world in such a way as to make that wealth, whether greater or not, more manageable. And whether we have war, peace or negotiations, the buildup goes on.

Viewed functionally and from the offices of the threatened world Government, the Pentagon is subordinate to the World Bank. Our vast military operations are a means of the buildup, exist in order to make the buildup possible. But such a means, however vast, is not to be compared in ultimate importance with the management of that buildup once it is attained.
In the Pentagon, Robert Strange McNamara did the sinister work of so directing the American military effort that a maxi­mum of materiel buildup occurred in Vietnam, while a minimum of fighting which might really injure Communists or help the American national image was allowed to take place. Perhaps his job is virtually complete. The United States has unloaded in Vietnam enough military personnel and materiel to conquer a continent, without accomplishing any mil­itary purpose whatsoever. What could have more highly rec­ommended Robert McNamara to the ministers of the dreamed-of World Government!

To aspire to a job formerly held by Eugene Meyer, John J. McCloy, Eugene Black, and even George D. Woods is no mean ambition. Newsweek is quite correct, concerning McNamara, in concluding:

As head of the World Bank, he will technically be an international official, and likely will remain publicly aloof from the war and the Presidential campaign. But there is no reason to doubt that Bob McNamara will some day find himself back in the thick of American public life--perhaps with even more power than he wielded so well at the Pen­tagon.

There may be reason to think that the head of the World Bank is more powerful than a mere defense secretary of a na­tion--even "the most powerful nation in the world".

Left-leaning writer Emmett John Hughes shows signs of dis­tress when he writes: And as the din burbles ever higher, a brilliant and weary Robert McNamara prepares to depart from the Pentagon." "[yet] he cannot feel sheer anguish as he turns from Defense Department to World Bank." In fact, concludes Hughes with the wisdom of the heart, "It will be good for him to be back from the dark land beyond the looking glass," and adds semicryptically: "It will be even better when the nation can follow."

Does this mean when the nation can follow its erstwhile Sec­retary of Defense into becoming frankly and fully international?

McNamara's usurpations in the office of Secretary of De­fense are impressive. His opportunity for grander usurpations from this point on will be even more so.

* * *
When we again write on The Usurpers we will take up a person whose name is not so well recognized--perhaps as in "Brzezinski" the effort to learn pronunciation and spelling is too much for most people to handle. So, Katzenbach becomes the the dubbed version and the heinous actions are lost in the effort to pronounce or spell the name of the traitor later. Remember that as in the case of Henry Kissinger and Brzezinski--the names were not originally THESE. The facts are that you the people do not know to whom you owe your debt of gratitude for the loss of your nation, freedom--and ultimately--planet. You don't even know who is Shirley Maclaine (Really), so how are you ever going to reclaim your property? From whom? Mostly you will find that, at the original source, as with the Bolsheviks and beginners of the Communists in Russia--they were all Jewish in origin and simply changed their names to fool as many as they could--IT WORKED!! NEVER FORGET--IT WORKED!! AND, IT IS WORKING AGAIN!!!