27-01-2011, 04:18 AM
THat is a really interesting letter which I had not seen before. Don't know what to make of it if its real. Most people think Hubbard was a con artist who made millions off his phony religion. And that he did steal some CIA secret about MK/Ultra to brainwash some subjects.
Overall I generally give Prouty good grades. His book The Secret Team is a good one that has held up over time. His book on JFK is fairly good. I am just now reading his book with Ratcliffe Understanding Covert Operations.
Stone gives Prouty credit for the Vietnam angle in his film. Which was really important. There simply was no one in that high up a position who was talking about this stuff back then. And Prouty seemed to understand what had happened quite soon. He was probably up there with Gary Underhill in that regard. So his insights into policy making and the origins of the CIA outreach done by Dulles is valuable. And don't forget, Prouty did some very good essays in the seventies about the CIA secret programs, and then in Barnes Review also. I once had a collection of these. And most of them were good.
Prouty was also onto Watergate very soon. Since he understood who McCord really was--and exposed him as an operator in Secret Team, not just a technician. He also understood who Butterfield was, and exposed him to Dan Schorr.
Prouty was good on these things: the insider stuff and the Big Picture. He was not a detail guy. This is why Stone needed Newman to fill things in a bit more to be actually able to write those JCS scenes.
I agree with CD, no one should be held up on a pedestal. Especially in this field. I have disagreed with people I admire a lot, e g Melanson and Newman. That does not diminish their work to me. Same with Prouty. We should appreciate who he was and where he was good. But not be afraid of noting where he may have been wrong. That is not good research or criticism. Its elevating a man with human foibles that we all have into the status of a deity.
Overall I generally give Prouty good grades. His book The Secret Team is a good one that has held up over time. His book on JFK is fairly good. I am just now reading his book with Ratcliffe Understanding Covert Operations.
Stone gives Prouty credit for the Vietnam angle in his film. Which was really important. There simply was no one in that high up a position who was talking about this stuff back then. And Prouty seemed to understand what had happened quite soon. He was probably up there with Gary Underhill in that regard. So his insights into policy making and the origins of the CIA outreach done by Dulles is valuable. And don't forget, Prouty did some very good essays in the seventies about the CIA secret programs, and then in Barnes Review also. I once had a collection of these. And most of them were good.
Prouty was also onto Watergate very soon. Since he understood who McCord really was--and exposed him as an operator in Secret Team, not just a technician. He also understood who Butterfield was, and exposed him to Dan Schorr.
Prouty was good on these things: the insider stuff and the Big Picture. He was not a detail guy. This is why Stone needed Newman to fill things in a bit more to be actually able to write those JCS scenes.
I agree with CD, no one should be held up on a pedestal. Especially in this field. I have disagreed with people I admire a lot, e g Melanson and Newman. That does not diminish their work to me. Same with Prouty. We should appreciate who he was and where he was good. But not be afraid of noting where he may have been wrong. That is not good research or criticism. Its elevating a man with human foibles that we all have into the status of a deity.