To be truly ‘Pentagon’ Papers, the majority of them, at least, ought to have been written there.”
Col Prouty sets out that the Pentagon Papers were disinformation to hide reality from those that were not already part of the Secret Team - the CIA nad its Allies which can be read at
I interviewed Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty in May 1989. Published in 1999, Understanding Special Operations is the transcript and account of that interview.
Concerning the release 50 years ago of The Pentagon Papers, the following provides Colonel Prouty’s first-hand experience and knowledge of this work including the actual sources of documents contained therein. As Prouty writes, “For example, despite their volume—nearly four thousand documents—there are remarkably few that actually bear the signature of military officers. In fact, many of those that carry the signature of a military officer, or that refer to military officers, make reference to such men as Edward G. Lansdale, who actually worked for the CIA while serving in a cover assignment with the military. When such papers are removed from the ‘military’ or ‘Pentagon’ categorization, what remains is a nonmilitary and non-Pentagon collection. For the serious and honest historian, this becomes an important distinction.
To be truly ‘Pentagon’ Papers, the majority of them, at least, ought to have been written there.”
Col Prouty sets out that the Pentagon Papers were disinformation to hide reality from those that were not already part of the Secret Team - the CIA nad its Allies which can be read at
https://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/ST/ST.html#TOC
https://hiddenhistorycenter.org/colonel-l-fletcher-prouty-on-the-pentagon-papers/
I interviewed Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty in May 1989. Published in 1999, Understanding Special Operations is the transcript and account of that interview.
Concerning the release 50 years ago of The Pentagon Papers, the following provides Colonel Prouty’s first-hand experience and knowledge of this work including the actual sources of documents contained therein. As Prouty writes, “For example, despite their volume—nearly four thousand documents—there are remarkably few that actually bear the signature of military officers. In fact, many of those that carry the signature of a military officer, or that refer to military officers, make reference to such men as Edward G. Lansdale, who actually worked for the CIA while serving in a cover assignment with the military. When such papers are removed from the ‘military’ or ‘Pentagon’ categorization, what remains is a nonmilitary and non-Pentagon collection. For the serious and honest historian, this becomes an important distinction.