>>5779074 (pb)

From the Horse’s Mouth - Letter dated August 13, 1994, from Fletcher Prouty to Dave Ratcliffe exposing the deceits, fabrications and limited-hangouts of spoopy and sleazy Gerald Posner’s Book “Case Closed”, the “Christchurch” incident included:

PART 1

….“A glowing example of a member of this sleazy profession is Gerald Posner with his book Case Closed. As a simple example, that I am in a position to support, I'll pick his slanderous attack on me. Actually he fails to mention me and my work in the entire 607 pages of his work; but he does drag me into the fray with a footnote on page 468. In so doing, he erroneously cites my book, JFK, the CIA, Vietnam and the Plot to Assassinate John F. Kennedy, by simply referring to it as JFK. (This little device confuses his readers who discover there is no book by that name.)

However he proves that he has read it by citing "p.306. The implication [by Prouty] is that some intelligence agency, probably the CIA, released an early, prepackaged set of details about the assassin to the media." These are his words, and – as a mark of his profession – they are false. No where on those pages, 306-309, or elsewhere in my book, did I make such a comment whatsoever. He fabricated that lie in an attempt to categorize my work as biased and incorrect.

Further Posner used a typical lawyer's game to characterize me incorrectly; so that anyone who wished to seek information about me from the U.S. Army or the Intelligence community could not find it, because there would be none. He cites me as "a mysterious intelligence officer" and as "an ex-Army colonel." I never served as either and have claimed neither.”…..

(continued)

>>5780013

PART 2

“Then he continues his lies with, "the chief Pentagon liaison officer to the CIA." I never had such a job.

Proof of the fact that he created these lies on purpose is the fact that he has my book with my biographical data correctly available to include photographs, bits of my biography and all.

Next he plays a game with the Christchurch New Zealand Star newspaper that was shown being read by Sutherland (Man X) in the film JFK. He says "Prouty claimed that the local newspaper published an extra." That was no casual "claim." It is a positive fact. I bought the paper in New Zealand, and I still possess that same copy. It's a fact, not simply a claim as he embellishes his story.

Then he fabricates the timing sequence of the press time of the newspaper. To be accurate, he confuses "press time", i.e. that time when the paper was ready for the press, and the time I gave when I had purchased it on the street, i.e. "around noon time." That difference itself could be one to two hours, and the arrest of Oswald is not when reporters learned he was suspected of killing the President. At that time he was arrested on the suspicion of Tippet's murder. There was a big time difference.

Here again he creates a purposeful lie to obfuscate my main point concerning the content of that paper. It published a section about Oswald with his biographical material that had been written by the conspirators before the Dallas Court had charged him with the crime. This is the time when the reporters on the scene first knew that Oswald was a suspect.

You may recall that there had been a printed news report that "a suspect" had been picked up in Fort Worth. The reporters would not have begun to go after that story until then and that was after the news was already on the streets in New Zealand. That is important.

There was a long gap between the time the police arrested Oswald on the suspicion of murder of Tippet, and his arraignment as the suspected murderer of JFK. Yet the paper in New Zealand received a copy of the conspirators' cover story that had been collated and written before he was charged with the crime. This is important, and Posner is attempting to bury it with contrived, misleading data.

With this important fact in mind, there could not have been any substantive attempt to delve into the skimpy records of Oswald. It was only after his arraignment that they began that search in earnest. Therefore, the very fact that the Star carried a complete, well researched account of Oswald's life before he had been arraigned is most significant. It should be noted that the Star also carried a fine, studio photo of Oswald that was rarely seen anywhere else. How did the Star and other papers around the world get such information by newswire unless it had been collated, written and transmitted before Oswald had been charged, perhaps even before Nov 22?

Then Posner continues to embellish his lies by closing with "the Star managed to get a thin extra on the street within three hours." It's a small, but significant point. Posner says he quotes me for that statement. I never said it was a thin extra. In other words it was not some casually whipped up supplement to the day's news. I have the paper today. It is the normal 36 pages including all the routine locals news, sports news, etc. of a regular, well constructed daily paper.

I go into this detail because of the significance of the Posner slander. He is a lawyer. He is accustomed to tearing apart his opposite's story. In this case, as sole writer of the book, he plays both sides. He characterizes me untruthfully, he attacks the film, he quotes my book wrong. He is dishonest – as are so many others who work to maintain the "dead dog" cover story.”….

https://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/USO/appF.html