GLORIA BARON: This is Dialogue: Assassination with research
specialist Mae Brussell. For KLRB I'm Gloria Baron.
Well Mae, we promised them last week that you would be doing
the Manson trial this week. And I guess from the looks of things
you're ready.
MAE BRUSSELL: Yes. I'm ready and I'm not ready. I would like
lots of hours on this, but it's really big and we'll get right
into it. I had ten other subjects I wanted to talk about today,
but it would delay the Manson story, so we'll go into it, Gloria,
right away.
Because in this world, in this strange world of covert overthrow
of the governments and clandestine armies and secret operations,
the problem we're facing is that you're working with two realities:
you're working with what we assume is the real way to function
and move. And then we're working with a system of what we call
power: exchange of power, economic power, power over people;
controlling their lives. And in order to do that you disguise
certain persons and send them into roles to influence; they
become actors on a stage and they influence our minds in a way
that is not real but effect a reality that will touch us later.
A propos of the Manson thing: the Oda trial; the murder of
the Oda family–with accused murderer, Fazier–goes to trial Monday.
It's in the paper today. That was not a hippie murder–I've said
it before. They took the trial out of Santa Cruz up to Redwood
City.
We'll do a show on the Oda trial, but because the Manson trial
effects this particular geographic area–it's close to us; it's
close to home. California was where the flower children were.
Big Sur was the home of the people like Joan Baez, Henry Miller,
free souls, artists. California was an important state in terms
of conspiracies to kill candidates and presidents, and to effect
national policy. And it's part of the military-industrial-complex.
And I'm going to explain why the Manson trial–why the murder
of Sharon Tate and the other persons in her home was a political
massacre. Other researchers have done work on John Kennedy,
Robert Kennedy, and Martin Luther King. I was the first researcher
in the United States to turn the other peoples' minds to the
fact that the same lawyers, the same planners, the same teams
originated this particular massacre, and what effect it would
have on our society.
It had to be planned well in advanced of when it happened.
And I'll go in–I'm going to give you my conclusions on the Manson–I
call it the Manson trial because nobody talks about it being
Charles Watson's massacre. That's the boy who killed seven people.
But the news media associates the name Charles Manson. He made
the picture on the cover of Life. He is the man that you associate
with killing Sharon Tate. Many people don't even know the name
Charles Watson, because you're not supposed to know it. Right
now there's a hung jury in Los Angeles on the decision of whether
Charles Watson is guilty of murdering seven people. He was in
the home. He did the stabbing forty times. He wrote "death
to the pigs" on the door. The jury can't decide if he was
guilty.
Now, my conclusions are, number one: that all of these persons
involved: the major people, are agent provocateurs. They come
at a time to increase violence. To come down on a segment of
our society prior to an election year. And to make law and order
necessary to protect us from the people at large in our society.
Number two: Charles Manson was a patsy. He is identical, historically,
to Lee Harvey Oswald, Sirhan Sirhan, and James Ray. Charles
Manson killed nobody in the Sharon Tate home, or in the La Bianca
home. He was being charged with these murders, he didn't kill
any one of those seven people. He was used. He was a person
who had been in jail twenty-two of his thirty-two years of life.
He was the product of our penal system. He was not a hippie
or a part of the youth culture. They bought him a guitar, let
his hair grow, and put a leather jacket on him, gave him money,
gave him a bus and credit cards, and told him to do his thing.
It was like James Ray was a part of our penal system. He was
in Missouri in jail, and he was met with certain persons. And
the next day he was out and there was twenty, thirty-thousand
dollars of money spent. And he traveled continents and everywhere,
and he was to be used at a certain time and place.
Charles Manson was identical to James Ray as a product of our
penal system. He was used by the news media to slam down on
the hippies. We could do one hour on the news control of how
your brain is shaped to believe that Charles Manson made a robot
out of a nice white Christian boy from Texas–isn't this terrible–kind
of a criminal mind. He was used.
And now I'm going into my background of these opinions because
they may be startling: People who think they're knowledgeable
on our economy, or on the other assassinations, who never believed
the Warren Report, throw up their hands. I spoke to somebody
just this morning before I came in the studio, and said I was
doing a story on Manson. And this particular person: educated,
informed, said, "That is something I never–I'm not interested
in Manson. I'd never think about that particular human being."
And people turn off on Manson.
But this is the way my mind was going in 1963. I told you how
I was studying the death of John Kennedy, starting November
22nd. I was studying the use and the misuse of power, after
the president of the United states had been killed. I was wanting
to know who killed him, what kind of people they were, what
was their interest? What was their philosophy? What was their
politics? How many of them believed Adolph Hitler should have
won World War Two? How many of the people involved in that assassination
worked in our state department, defense industry, or had important
government positions, like in Cabinet now? Or in the Republican
National Committee? This country that is current today, I've
been studying since '63. I studied the Cold War, the military-industrial-complex
of the United States. What we formally call capitalism verses
communism, which now is a disguised fascism–with the electoral
process over–verses communism. And I studied the economic and
philosophical policies of both systems and the religious revolution
that was going on simultaneously.
In April, 1967 the Greek government was overthrown by a military
Junta. There is a book–I tell you, have your pencil ready for
the program. I want you to write down this book. It's pertinent
to the Manson-Sharon Tate massacres. It's called Death of a
Democracy: Greece and the American Conscience. It's written
by Stephen Rousseas. And when Greece was overthrown, the excuse
for the Junta to take power and end the electoral process was
that there was tension and chaos. And they had to prevent that.
They had to prevent the May election.
The man who was running to be the president of Greece was Papandreou
who captured the imagination of the young people. Now I'm reading
a quote from the book Death of a Democracy:
"...Papandreou captured the imagination of young people
and many members of the professional and intellectual classes....He
was popular in Greece..." and he was linked psychologically
"...with the late President Kennedy." He was "...a
man of style and intellect."
And they thought that for the first time in thirty years they
would get a program growing where they'd have a democratic government
for the first time. And the people in power felt that no one
should tamper with their existing institutional structure. And
they kept the power and canceled the elections.
Now the edicts in Greece, when Greece was overthrown, were
the following: If it was an economic problem, or political problem,
like We don't want communists. We got to save you from communists,
that's one thing, but the edicts that I noticed in 1967, in
April, when Greece was overthrown, and I copied in my newspaper
right away–I was reading the daily papers because I was studying
power and the exchange of power; the United States had exchanged
power. I was studying Greece–I study every country. And these
were the edicts:
* No gathering in the open country of more than five persons.
* And no gathering in any close space at all.
* No anti-national propaganda, such as anti-war or anything
against a public official.
* No marches or dissensions.
And we will now have what Rousseau describes as a puritan orgy:
there would be no beards or long hair on the men. No mini-skirts
on the girls. Everyone in Greece had to attend a Sunday church,
[including tourists]; Sunday church mandatory. They called it
a Christian coup, because the Jews traditionally do not go to
church on Sunday. But if you did not go to church on Sunday
you could be exiled to an island and arrested. It was similar
to the inquisition in Spain. The students were to turn in every
old history book they had, and it would be replaced with a new
one. Racial purity was proclaimed. And the theories of Darwin
and de Vries were thrown out. They were ordered to protect their
Christianity, on a public order that was passed in 1942 by the
Nazis. It was revived again.
All legitimate theaters were to submit their scripts. Does
this sound–I'll end the quote for one minute–does it sound like
our own theater where they're asking Powerplay recently in the
theater in town here in Carmel, where the director was removed
because they wanted to examine the scripts?
Now let's get back to the other book; back to the quotation:
They wanted the right to delete scripts or rewrite scripts anywhere
from the Greek tragedies to the modern. Every play from antiquity
to the present was to be censored. Music would be selected.
Bob Dylan, the Beatles wouldn't be allowed at all. No music
from Tchaikovsky, Prokofiev, any Russian composer, even prior
to the Russian Revolution.
And Greek was quickly transformed into the first fascist dictatorship
on European soil since Mussolini and Hitler.
Now I looked at those edicts and I knew that the one problem
in the United States was going to be a revolution that was coming
along in our country. Because, just as I analyzed in 1963, on
November 22nd, I said to myself, "Is Jack Ruby in that
jail to kill Oswald to silence him?" My brain began to
work with what I was reading about the edicts in Greece, because
these were not communist edicts, this was a sociological thing.
And I knew in the summer of '67–this was the spring when it
was happening–that something very big in the United States was
coming to ahead. Because I live in the Peninsula here; I'm close
to a movement that was growing: going back and forth from San
Francisco to Big Sur, spending my summers at Sur, I could see
something really good in a true Judeo-Christian tradition of
people making it on, sharing their housing, sharing their food,
rapping. And I realized that in this country we had a revolution.
There was a revolution of hair-style, clothing, cosmetics, transportation,
housing, value system, churches–there was an economic revolution.
It effected the cosmetic industry, canned foods, grocery revolution,
dietary habits, dwelling, the use of land. No longer needing
dwelling; meeting outdoors, no high rent for each separate family;
sharing one place. People were delivering their own babies,
[instead of] spending $250 for the obstetrician. They were recycling
old clothes; going to the Good Will, making their own things,
wearing burlap, sharing, doing without, withdrawing from spectator
sports or amusements; sitting and watching people throw a pigskin
ball back and forth.
These are revolutions. They're revolutions: economic, sociological.
They were breaking the boundaries where white and black could
rap. They lived together. They slept together. You didn't know
somebody's background: if they were rich or poor. You didn't
know if they were Jew or Gentile. Those boundaries were thrown
out the window in '67. Greece was putting them back, but America
was throwing them out the window. And the country club thing
was going by the wayside. And zoning laws were ignored; if you
have a zoning place in a fancy residential, the children are
leaving those homes. They're living where there is no zoning.
They are up on the land in the communes. They've left their
parents in their big homes and they leave the zoning laws behind;
they just split. And real estate values are effected because
the kids aren't going to buy the house with the picket fence
any longer and live two people in that dwelling.
Now this was an economic, sociological necessity in our system
as it existed in terms of capitalists, and whether to survive.
That the Rand Corporation and other think tanks in America decide
what to do for the United States of America.
And this was the year of the Beatles; it was the summer of
Sgt. Pepper, the Monterey Pop, Haight Ashbury, the Renaissance,
make your own candle, turn off your electricity, sit–turn on
with your friends and rap it over What is life about? The generation
was born with an atomic bomb over their head. They weren't going
to live long anyway, so there wasn't that much time for hate.
And they were really making it. And my car was filled with kids;
hitch-hikers everywhere; I picked strangers off the streets.
They slept in our home, slept in the yards, too. Monterey Pop
came that weekend. We were there everyday and I picked people
off the road and our house was filled. It was the most beautiful
thing. I still have yard furniture; they all painted chairs
and tables and everyone pitched in. It was just–it was human
beauty and they were making it together.
But it isn't the way it was meant to be made by U.S. Steel
and General Motors and Kaiser Aluminum. They want to sell you
your own car, and your own house, and your own washing machine
and dryer.
So in my cross-filing system–because you see this is the summer
of '67 and I've been on the assassinations for four years–I
started a file called Greece, because I didn't watch Greece
at all until the coup. But the edicts were–and as I said, Is
this a test case of what the United States could do to its people
if it had to? Because those edicts were set up very strangely
if it were a communist verses a right-wing coup. And I did all
of the research right up to the present day; anything that comes
about Greece. Marilyn (?) McCurry was on a national television
show this morning. I watched her talking about Greece. It's
current.
So I watched who overthrew Greece. I watched the Pompus (?)
Foundation. We've talked about them on the air. They're the
men that siphoned the money–Standard Oil of New Jersey, linked
with Richard Nixon, Donald Nixon, Spiro Agnew. Agnew's in Greece
today as we talk. And I have a file that started in '67, and
every article from all the magazines or books that I could get
follows up who overthrew Greece: the Litton Industry, the fascists
in this country put those edicts in there. Now if they put them
in there and it worked they could put them down on us.
So I have another file, in '67, that I started along with my
John Kennedy–because I told you before I have 1600 subject categories
of current news–and I started a file called Hippies. Because
articles in '67–it was sociological phenomenon–were coming out.
And in the envelopes that I have, I began articles like Who
recognizes something good in this movement? Who was putting
it down? What is their philosophy? Hippies that were interviewed
in magazines like Ramparts or New York Times. What are they
saying about themselves? What are people saying about them?
And I realized that it was going to be stopped some way. Because
it was taking hold; It captured the basic good that is in people.
And I don't believe in the doctrine of original sin, I believe
in original goodness. And these children had it. They have it.
Somebody was going to have to get them.
Yesterday's paper had an article that the head of the whole
Navy of South Vietnam said You were going to have to rule out
sex. They have a Navy of 40,000 men. And he said, You were going
to have to rule out sex. It's decadent. If you want to fight
the communists you've got to stop that. You're a bunch of filthy
worms, he said. The head of the Navy, of Vietnam, said in order
to really fight the communists you've got to stop you're sexual
activity, the Navy [in Vietnam] was told yesterday.
Now these are the same people: Mr. Key(?) and the fascists,
and the same people in Greece, and the people in South Vietnam,
who are coming down on the kids. Their sexual fantasies, their
fears that their kids could do what they never could do. I'd
like to do a whole show on sexual repressions and fascism and
coming down.
So in the summer of '67, '68, I know that the hippies were
being handed out–I had a friend I met who worked at the Diggers,
and they were being handed bad acid by disguised agent provocateurs,
to begin to burn their bellies out and rob their minds. [And
that's the way] the Diggers were [being treated] up there. This
can be documented. And I know that the federal government were
throwing things out at pop festivals. And they allowed people
like Melvin Belli–that worked with Jack Ruby–was the man in
on the Altamont thing. That brings the pressure. And we'll go
on to that some other day; on pop festivals and music, and what
happened to the music scene, and the musicians at the Monterey
Pop.
So I was watching how the hippie scene would be put down and
what evidence there was that they had to crack it. And in my
neighborhood–I've mentioned on two different programs–a man
moved in from Texas. I think he gets tired of my talking about
this, this is the last time I'll mention him. He was dressed
as a hippie. He wasn't a hippie. He brought his children into
this community. He lived a block from my house. He wrote a book
for Henry Kaiser called Children of Change. I'm repeating for
somebody who hasn't heard the show. A non-hippie from Texas,
he lived here for about one or two years, walking down the coast,
going the music scene. And wrote, just prior to the Sharon Tate
murders, that "the hippies would have made it..."
–this is what Henry Kaiser published– "...would have made
it if, number one: they had a sense of humor. And number two:
they weren't so violent.
Now, if anybody had a sense of humor that generation did. Because
there wasn't much to be funny about–the way the Cold War was
going after Korea and everything like that. And I have a button
collection. People who've been to my home see it. I started
this around those years, and I have a whole wall with thousands
of buttons. And it's funny. And they did have a sense of humor.
The kids were beautiful. And they laughed. And there were very
funny things. If you read the button it says sociological things.
I [have] the sense of humor of that generation. And I collected
the car bumpers for a while–the stickers–but it got too expensive,
so I save the buttons.
They did have a sense of humor and there was no violence. There
was no violence at all. And this same particular man referred
to his wife and hippie-women as witches. And she wasn't a witch.
She was a very establishment Texas girl who is the wife of a
man, this man that was dressed as a hippie–I said before. He
is now at the Navy post-graduate school. He's Navy, he had to
be Navy intelligence. How did he get into the Navy post-graduate
school if his undergraduate school was a hippie on Big Sur road,
back and forth on the highway?
So this particular man: he had his gun and his scopes and his
knives and things. And I watched, and there was no massacre.
And I was watching the phenomena. How was our government going
to handle it?
Now in the summer of 1969 there was a murder in Hollywood,
California in which Sharon Tate, Jay Sebring, Mr. Frokowski,
Abigail Folger, Steve Parent, Mr. and Mrs. La Bianca were stabbed
forty-four times. The newspaper did not know who did the murders,
but it read in my mind like a military ambush. It could be no
other way. And it was described by people later as a military
ambush. And for the reasons as this: these many people were
slaughtered. Nobody heard a sound. There were dogs on the grounds
that didn't say boo. There was a caretaker in a guest cottage
who didn't hear one gun go off, and guns went off. They didn't
hear any screaming. Nobody saw a getaway car. the place was
completely destroyed. There was time to put hoods over the people,
ropes on their neck, leave signs and symbols that would come
down on a particular group of our society–two groups–and split.
And no, not a dog was killed or barked. And the fellow that
lives on the grounds said he slept through it. And the telephone
poles–they shimmied up the poles, cut the wires, left all this
obvious evidence, and split. And the way the wires and the lines
were cut I felt that it had to be a military type ambush.
Now the total effect was to appear, or want to appear that
if they didn't catch the murderers of these people they would
come down on the blacks–that was their hope.
Now it's very interesting in my research on the assassinations
that the very first man to publish an article on the Sharon
Tate murder in my collection of the murders, before they had
a suspect–the murders were in August, and they found the suspects
in December–was a man named Ed Butler. In October '69 he wrote
an article. The man who publishes the newspaper that he writes
for is Patrick Frawley of Schick Razor and Technicolor, who
is one of the third largest supporters of Richard Nixon–a far
right-wing person. And he hires Ed Butler to write articles
for him. And Ed is an agent provocateur who worked with Lee
Harvey Oswald in New Orleans. And when Oswald had the cover
story that he was a communist because he didn't want to get
into Cuba if he could, Ed Butler made a record for him when
Oswald said he was a member of the Fair Play for Cuba [Committee].
And he was the only member of the New Orleans area, and Ed Butler
knew it. Ed Butler worked with Lee Harvey Oswald, so it's interesting
that in 1969 the first person who has an opinion on who murdered
these seven people would be Ed Butler; In my collection of articles
we have Ed Butler. Now, what is this article called? It says
Did Hate Kill Tate? And he goes into the fact that the Black
Panthers are tied into the communists, and the evidence is that
the Panthers killed these people to come into the middle class
America and spread terror.
Now this is what we call provocateurs, agent provocateurs,
clandestine governments: where somebody is the first one in,
and he's tied with all these other people and links. And he
is taking your brain now and your gray matter. In the event
they don't have a suspect, he is saying here are the clues:
Number one, the hood over the draped bodies–was it a turn
about for the Ku Klux Klan?
Number two, the rope found around their bodies, strung body
to body is ironic reminder to lynchings.
Number three, the words "death to pigs" that were
scrawled with the human blood over the front door–was that a
challenge to Blue Meanies?
Remember the Beatles made a movie about Blue Meanies. He's
throwing the whole thing in.
And number four, Time magazine quoted an article that Jay
Sebring was supposed to be anti-black.
So you see that Ed Butler has you in the palm of his hand.
If they don't have a suspect, you're going to think that the
blacks come into fancy residential homes and massacre these
lovely white people.
To make that even worse, when the people were arrested they
admitted on their own volition that they took the credit cards
from Mr. and Mrs. La Bianca after they cut their bellies open
and stuck–they went to the ice box to eat, and then took their
forks and stuck their forks in their stomachs. They took out
their credit cards and left them in the black part of town in
Los Angeles so the people would think the blacks killed the
Biancas.
To back up my own feelings they–every word from what these
people said afterward confirms what I knew they were doing.
They were coming down on–they could come down on two groups,
one for sure. And if they're caught they'll come down on the
second. So the first group was to press fear that the blacks
are now in our part of town, that they're communists, they hate
the rich.
And Ed Butler goes into their motives, and he says, well, one
of the things is that Mr. Polanski is an ex-patriot from communist
Poland, and we know the Panthers are communists. And he said
the hate and propaganda they have will make other people want
to continue these murders. He said that the Panthers were doing
this kind of murdering to test the stomach of America for future
violence. Ed Butler: the authority on riots. He comes out all
the time in the news. And he said that they are–what he wants
to see is how many of these massacres people will take. He's
convinced that the blacks did this murder. But he is covered
because when the actual facts came out it turns out that it
wasn't the blacks at all. So what are you left with now? You're
left with a hippie group. You're left with this great hippie
clan. And this is where the real problem comes in, because,
as I said before, and I'll say it over and over today, Charles
Manson was not a hippie.
Now, when they arrested Charles Manson, Sue Atkins was in jail
for stealing some parts to an automobile, and the chicks squealed.
The police department didn't even have any clue in this murder
at all. They didn't even want it. I know the Los Angeles Police
Department didn't want to find them. But the particular girl
broke down in jail and told another woman–and that's how they
were found. The police department did not find them. Just like
the FBI did not find James Earl Ray. Scotland Yard did it. When
he just had one foot on the plane and one foot to Rhodesia where
he would never be extradited, Scotland Yard did it. The FBI
didn't do it.
So, what happened was that the police had to go to where the
Manson Family lived. And what did they find there? They found
what the newspaper described as a ritualistic killing done by
self-confessed hippies, in what they called a military-style
commune.
Now, how–first the news media should define hippie; the word
hippie. Because the hippies that I knew from '67 to '69 didn't
mean a military operation in any sense of the word, nor in anybody
else's mind in the world. Nor did it to the Rand Corporation,
or the President of the United States, or John Mitchell. Hippie
did not mean military; it was anti-military. It was anti-war.
It was let's get it together generation.
So when they found the real killer and he has this beard and
guitar, we just can't call him an ex-convict. They have to call
it a military-style commune. We must have military-style communes
in Vietnam if a commune is where people all live together and
you're military; it's a military commune. But it certainly isn't
a hippie commune. But they have to make it a hippie thing.
Now what did they have in the commune? They had shacks with
the lookout points. They had telescopes. They had walkie-talkies.
They had military field telephones. They had collections of
knives and shotguns. They had four-wheel drive [dune buggies].
The neighbors turned them in for threatening them. They drove
all night and made so much noise and the neighbors said, You
know you're–you keep us awake. And they said, Oh, we'll kill
you if you don't shut up. They threatened their lives.
And then the news media picked up right away that evidently
the crime had all the marks of premeditation. And they mentioned
then that the telephone wires were cut at the Tate home. I remember
that in August, but in December when they were discovered, they
went into the shears and the problem of the weapons.
Now Sheriff Tom Montgomery of Colin County in Texas was taking
care of his cousin at that time that the police came into this
little commune where Sue Atkins was talking [about]. Cousin
Charles 'Tex' Watson was safe in Texas. He was watched by this
first cousin of his. He was described as clean cut, short hair.
He was living a happy life. His girlfriend testified they were
having pleasant sexual relationships. He was normal in every
sense of the word. Those seven massacres that he did didn't
seem to bother him at all. He didn't even mention them to her.
He was not mentally sick. He was not depressed. He had a good
job. And when Charles Manson and the others were arrested in
Los Angeles they put this young boy, Charles Watson, in the
jail with his cousin to take care of him.
Now we're going into Who was Charles Manson?
GLORIA: All right, well do that in just a moment. You're listening
to Dialogue: Assassination, with Mae Brussell. This is KLRB,
stereo FM, Carmel by the Sea.
(End of first half)
MAE: Now, we're going to talk briefly about Charles Manson
and Charles Watson, and the implications in this particular
case, and how I follow it and why it's of interest to me. Because
every case beyond what the news media tells you, you're looking
for facts. You're looking–like in the Oswald case, they tell
you that Oswald was a communist, or he was a misfit in society.
But then when I see my documents, that he had cameras and walkie-talkies,
and electronic devices, security clearances–then I want to know
more about Lee Harvey Oswald. And I want to know more about
Charles Manson because he was thirty-two and did spend twenty-two
years of his life in jail.
Now a prominent attorney by the name of George Shibley who
works with groups in the Middle East–in Beverly Hills, has powerful
connections–met with Charles Manson just before he got out of
jail in Treasure Island. And no one will know what conversation
transpired between Mr. Shibley, or why he was up there. Or why
Charles Manson is unknown, this illegitimate child of a sixteen
year-old girl, no family or kin. No one would know how Charles
Manson would get such a famous Beverly Hills attorney to visit
him before he's paroled. No one will ever know the conversation
that transpired between those men. But what we do know is that
when Charles Manson got out of Treasure Island in 1967, at the
height of the Haight Ashbury scene, he got a bus, a large bus–and
he did not buy it. He did not have a job, and he had credit
cards for gasoline. Now in the trial some subject was made up
that one of the girls stole a credit card from her family to
buy Charley gasoline. I am sure the parents would have had him
arrested before long; you can't go for two years on a stolen
credit card. Charley was never arrested. And one of the questions
in one of the articles I have is, it simply said: He had a credit
card. And in order to do a study of a covert operation, or a
murder, or a simple murder: who paid the gasoline for Charley
Manson?
Now I know being locked up for twenty-two years and with a
strong sexual drive you may have–it may be fun to have twenty
or thirty chicks around you, but they still have to eat, they
still have to have housing. Who was buying the machine guns,
the walkie-talkies, the dune buggies? He was on the edge of
the Mohave Desert. They didn't steal all of it; none of them
were hardly ever arrested for anything. They have parts of expensive
cars. They had material things that are warfare things, and
they didn't ever get arrested. And the gasoline–once in a while
as punishment the girls would have to go out and take food out
of garbage cans–that was their punishment for maybe not sleeping
with Charlie or a guest or something like that. But for the
most part none of them suffered any malnutrition; they had healthy
babies; they seemed to be doing very well; they had guests at
the ranch.
Where was this money coming from, from the day he left that
jail until the Sharon Tate murders? Just like I follow the money
from the James Ray case: from the day he left the Missouri jail
he went right to a trailer the first night that was open. There
was wine there. There was everything but the welcome sign, and
maybe that was there. And within a day he had a car. Pretty
soon he was on his way up to Canada or a resort motel and fancy
place.
Where did the money come from the time Charley Manson was in
jail until the Sharon Tate murder?
Now we go to Charles Watson: This was a clean cut boy who did
these murders. He came from Texas. And the question was Where
was he approached? How did he get into this case? Was it of
his own volition?
Last week on the Monterey Peninsula there was an article in
the paper that a boy was picked up as a hitch-hiker in Santa
Cruz. And he was thrown out of the car near the highlands, and
we talked about that a littler bit on this show. And he was
almost killed. And the subject of the conversation was that
one of the four men who just about killed him was–he said, "I'm
from the Manson Family in Texas." And that caught my interest
because something very big in the planning stage of this particular
massacre took place in the state of Texas.
So I went to Community Hospital to discuss with this boy–this
boy attended five years of College and the American system of
education. He was about to go into the Peace Corp and go to
the Philippines the next week. He was almost dead out at Community
Hospital after just going down our beautiful coast and being
picked up and roughed up by somebody who claimed to be from
the Manson Family in Texas.
Now we don't know much–because it's never brought out at these
trials–about the background of Charles Watson, except that he
did appear with a beard and became part of the Manson Family.
But when Charles Manson was arrested, a law firm sent two lawyers
who went to Texas to see this particular boy, Charles Watson.
And Judge Brown, Judge David Brown, said to the lawyers from
Beverly Hills, California, "You take the next plane back
to California. That I will put you in jail for seventy-two hours
or fine you if you don't get back to California." And the
lawyers said, "Well, wait a minute, that's our client.
We want to see him." The lawyer that wanted to see Charles
Watson was named Mr. DeLoach. And he called a press conference
at a Dallas Hotel. And DeLoach said this at the press conference,
he said, "I came to see my client." That Charles Watson
had been in his office in Los Angeles, California thirty or
forty times prior to the killing of Sharon Tate and the other
six people in Los Angeles. DeLoach said he was–his own background
was that he was a Republican candidate for the State Assembly
in 1964, and he was chairman for the Young Republicans, and
he belonged to a law firm on Santa Monica Boulevard in Los Angeles.
At the jail to keep Mr. DeLoach from seeing Charles Watson were
twenty Texas highway patrolmen and sheriff's deputies guarding
him. And they fought the extradition for eight months.
Now when you're talking about conspiracies, or going into every
avenue that has to be developed in the course for his defense
that Charley Manson masterminded him; programmed them; that
the hippie-youth magic, a Satan kind of thing to control him;
to use his knife to kill these people. That prior to that time,
prior to meeting Manson, he was not involved in any kind of
violence or altercation.
Now, I have seen no record, publicly, that Mr. Watson had a
traffic violation or any kind of problem. That this twenty year-old
boy needed an attorney from the Young Republican Committee forty
times. I know what the expenses are to meet with any attorney,
even for one hour. And people use attorneys or public defenders
if they have small altercations. But to go to a prominent law
office of a man named Mr. DeLoach thirty to forty times prior
to the time that you're going to kill seven people is worth
investigating. And it's particularly worth investigating because
the boy isn't even really considered a criminal or a murderer.
When the trial for Charley Manson took place this boy was in
Texas and he didn't even–they fought the extradition so he–and
later wouldn't be associated as part of that clan but as the
robot or the product of that society.
Now the psychiatrist claims that when the decision was made
to remove Charles Watson to California, that he became a catatonic,
schizophrenic vegetable in a fetal position. Eight months in
Texas he was doing just fine; he didn't lose a pound, he didn't
lose a night's sleep, he was just having a good time. And when
the decision came to bring him to California he became very
sick. And now they have said–the prosecution claims that he
was faking this; that when the psychiatrist looked the other
way he would take a different posture, and he would talk to
people. And the jury has been out for two days trying to decide
if Charles Watson was guilty of those murders. They have to
deliberate two days when it is common knowledge that he was
in the homes; he did the murders. And Manson was never in the
homes where seven people were killed.
Now if that isn't a topsy-turvy, crazy world I don't know what
it is.
Now how did you–how does your mind get effected to only associate
the murder with one man, and let the other man get off the hook
like this? I'm going to read headlines from this particular
case, just for a few days in December, the way they were reading,
coming off the press.
The first article I told you [about] was in October '69: Did
Hate Kill Tate? That was the first opinion about who did it
by Ed Butler.
In November there was a very objective article saying The Grand
Jury is to End the Probe of these 7 Deaths. That they don't
know what to do.
Now, in December they began to describe Watson as a, in quotes
"man". They called him a man. And that Manson was
the hippie, that guru Satan that influenced the man. the man
did the killings, and that hippie guru Satan influenced him.
They have on December 2nd that Nomadic hippies in the Tate
murders.
December the 3rd: 3 Suspects in Tate Case Tied to Guru.
December the 4th: Accused Killers Live Nomad Life with Magnetic
Guru.
December the 4th another paper said: Hypnotic Killers - Hippie
Bands, They're Controlled by an Evil Genius.
Another headline: Father Became a Hippie, Looking for Sharon
Tate Clues. Sharon Tate's father, dressed as a hippie looked
around with drug addicts and vagabonds for four months. He was
in Army Intelligence. And he was looking for hippies who killed
his daughter.
Another headline–These are headlines, not sentences from the
articles: A Move to Indict God.
Another headline: The D.A. Asks Hippie-cult Indictment.
Another one: Inside the Desert-cult Hideout - Family Members
Talk of Black Magic, Sex, Murder.
You see, the headline is putting all of these things in your
heads, but it's not telling you, like the early articles, about
the military type of killing that it was.
Another headline: Charles Manson - Nomadic Guru, Flirted with
Crime.
Another one: Hippie Family Member Describes the Murder.
Another describes the murders as bizarre, twisted.
Cult Leader Plotted the War Between the Races – The cult leader.
Mystic Hippie... in quotes ...Used Dune Buggies Mounted with
Machine Guns to Trigger a Negro vs. White War.
Another headline: Hippie Satan Clan is Indicted.
Talk of Cult Leader Arraigned in Slayings.
Another headline: Leader of a Hippie Cult Held in Isolated
Cell.
Hippie Leader in Tate Case in Maximum Security. If they want
to say the alleged murderer is in maximum security, he's the
hippie leader in security. He's the hippie leader in an isolated
cell.
Another article: The Hippie Mystique
Another one: The Love and Terror Cult, The Dark Edge of Hippie
Life
Life magazine published a cover of Lee Harvey Oswald holding
a gun. The shadows–the discrepancies of the murder are horrendous.
They implant in your mind, this in the boy: This is the gun.
None of it was true. Life magazine had a cover of James Earl
Ray. This poverty-ridden, depressed prisoner who killed Martin
Luther King. They said he was an orphan. None of that was true.
Remember, his family was–his father was living. I mean all of
that was untrue.
Life magazine December the 19th: Large cover of Charley Manson's
eyes all blown up. Not in Texas. Not wanting to understand the
American phenomena of hostility behind a blue suit and a white
shirt and a neck tie and short hair–the killer. Not wanting
to know how the Whitman boy is killed; how the college people
kill. The brain children, one of the brightest children in this
town–Charles Watson. Nobody's doing psychological, sociological
studies on the actual killers. No. Life magazine has a cover
of Manson. Nobody would sleep at night or give a kid on the
road a ride if and when you saw Manson's eyes. Not a chance.
They call it Love and Terror Cult.
Then Richard Nixon comes into the act: headline: Here a man
is guilty or indirectly of 8 months without reason. They hadn't
even come to a verdict in the trial. Richard Nixon was in on
the act. John Mitchell got into the act.
Then–headline: Manson's Race Theory Rested on the Beatles.
Then began a long attack on the Beatles.
Now those are the headlines of one month in December. That
went on for one year. And the consequence is in Carmel Valley
or in down to Big Sur. How many people would you pick up today?
How many people do you put in your car? Or give a lift to? Or
take into your home? Who would you trust? Who is disguised as
a hippie with a knife that is going to come down on you?
I was in my neighbor's home across the street from me one day
and we were talking about something, and a man from the police
force in Seaside–a black man–had come there, and he didn't know
who I was. And we were rapping. And he had been down at Lime
Kiln Creek and he had lived with hippies for two weeks, and
smoked their grass, and probably enjoyed the sex and the relationships
and the vibe. And he was going home; he was on his way home
to Seaside to clean and shave, and go down and make a bust on
those people, dressed as a hippie. Beard–he was going to take
his beard off. I have seen it. I've lived with it. You can't
give a lift, because the agent provocateurs, the covert government
is working. It's working in our city. And I can say it works
on a national scale.
You read in the paper yesterday, maybe, how much of the Pentagon
Papers is not being published and why it's being withheld. And
the large part of it is the covert relationship to Vietnam,
the agents in disguise in Laos, or in Vietnam; our hidden war.
The Manson thing is a hidden war. It's a hidden war against
the youth, and it worked. If you take enough agents and give
[kids] blades, or give them money, or give them the assurance
that if they're arrested they'll get off, they will mess up–these
kids.
Somebody came to my home a few weeks ago who had hitch-hiked
across the country, and it was really scary. And he went to
some town in Idaho. And this sheriff says, "Oh, did we
have fun last night: we took this nigger-hippie and tied him
up and dumped him in the river and got rid of him forever."
And this is what I am hearing because I am talking about these
things, and when I talk I get a feedback. And people come to
me and say, "Right on. This is what's happening."
So, I'm just showing you: if you multiply one month of headlines
and you sat with my collection, or somebody that just published
how the news media comes down on you.
Now, who were the lawyers involved in these cases? How do they
overlap? Joseph Ball, from the Warren Commission, was in with
Sue Atkins: the girl who's to turn state evidence. A man named
Lawrence Schiller made a record with Jack Ruby on January the
2nd,1967, in which Ruby said there was no conspiracy to kill
Oswald; that he was not a part of a conspiracy. And it was made
for Capital Records. Capital Records. And this man, I knew that
Ruby then would be dead within days because it was now recorded
for history there was no conspiracy. No one could see Jack Ruby
except Capital Records. The only person who could see–Lawrence
Schiller was with him.
January the 4th, two days later, Ruby was dead. The morning
I read that in my paper that Capital Records got into that hospital
room and got this recording of Ruby's voice, I knew then that
now Ruby could leave this earth. You see, it's all down for
posterity.
Now this same Lawrence Schiller is the man who gave Sue Atkins
a $150,000 to turn the state's evidence to say that Manson masterminded
the murders. She made $150,000. It was described as an unusual
legal trick. Joseph Ball, who worked with the Warren Commission,
was with parties involved in the Sharon Tate massacre. George
Shibley, who worked with Sirhan–and McKissick was in his office–they
worked with the Sirhan case. They were in on the Sharon Tate
case. The lawyers overlap.
Now, Lawrence Schiller wrote a book about the Sharon Tate massacres.
And this is the way his book starts. He paid this huge amount
to Sue Atkins to turn state's evidence, and I'm going to read
you what he had to say. I read you what Ed Butler said, who
worked with Oswald. Here is Schiller, he said:
"Where did it all start? We can see them going to San
Francisco with flowers in their hair. They're flower children.
The Haight Ashbury hippie, linked together in the history of
the Americas of 1960."
I'm going to stop the quote now to say this is where we started
this hour. That I began in '67 with those flower children and
started a file in my filing system on the flower children, knowing
that within two to three years everything would break down on
their heads. Now, it's interesting that Lawrence Schiller begins
his book:
Where did it all start? We see them on the road. Those flower...
He said:
...a movement which sprang from multiple revolutions of the
sixties. The new morality. The revolt of youth. The middle-class
watched them. Relieved, happy to be spectators. When the Sharon
Tate murders happened, because it was two out-groups that fell
on each other.
The people that were making it with their loose sex, he implies,
and the drugs. It was two out-groups hitting at each other.
Now he goes into:
"...the youth of today swallowed the precepts of their
forbearers until this time. But mass communication changed everything,
and changed our youth. They traveled, they had experiences,
information, money. And how could you bring people inundated
with facts of life to believe the puritan ethic."
I'm going to digress again; stop the quote. We talked about
Greece. I was watching Greece for two years. I was watching
the hippies. Here is Lawrence Schiller in on the thick of everything,
telling you, just where I was two years earlier watching how
it was going to come down. Now we're getting back to his quotations:
"...Young people having rejected the ethics, rejected
the laws which were based upon them. And they were ripe for
new liberation."
And then he perverts the whole thing and says:
"...When Charley Manson came along, our chemical messiah.
And the essence of their lives were anti-establishment. They
had thrown down the puritan ethics, the laws."
He implies they could become lawless and amoral and throw around
their sex and their bodies, and they latched on to what he called
the chemical messiah. Now who bought the LSD and the chemicals?
Did our government pay Charley's way? His bus? His gas? Was
he a chemical messiah, or is he designed out of Texas? Or Mussel
Sholes, Alabama, where everything else is assigned, and the
lawyers are sent? Who designed Charley Manson? Lawrence Schiller
is telling you he's a chemical messiah. I'm saying somebody
bought his chemistry. He didn't–it wasn't all handed to him.
And the government brought it to him and put on his costume;
his leather coat and his guitar, and said, "Charley, get
on the road."
Now Schiller says Manson drifted into the hippie scene. And
he admits he's another ex-con seeking protective coloration
from the hippies. I claim he was an ex-con who went into the
hippie scene to pick up the jargon, to do a job like the mafia
does a job; like we do in Vietnam: like a soldier goes out to
kill. We send boys out to Fort Ord for a six weeks training,
chanting "Kill the commies". They pick up the jargon
of the jungle because they're gonna be in the jungle. They didn't
arrive that way, we teach them the jargon. And Charley Manson
was taught because he was gonna pretend to be a hippie. He hated
being called a hippie–the book mentions it. He disliked being
called a hippie.
So they put him in a beat up school bus and they called it
the Manson Family and they headed south. And Manson learned
to play the guitar, and to sing, and write music. And that was
his last occupation. This is what he was trained for in the
federal prison. Lawrence Schiller tells you in a federal prison
they rehabilitate you to go out on the street. And they bought
Charley a guitar. And he had an inkling for music, and he was
a natural. He's probably horny as hell and wanting to get on
the road anyway, he had all this hostility. He said, "I
did it because I wanted to make it look like the blacks were
doing it. I want to speed [up] a race war." He's violently
anti-black. And he could sing a song and carry a tune. He had
the natural hatred. And he loved the chicks. And he was just
perfect for the role; he was just ripe for it.
Now, Schiller went on that his livelihood, when they let him
out of prison, was that he was going to be a musician. Now,
"...Within a year..." Lawrence Schiller says, "...Charley
Manson was out of prison mingling with the Hollywood stars in
1968. And the Manson Family somehow was making it with the establishment.
And they were going to be part of Hollywood's plushest parties."
Now Lawrence Schiller is telling you that a year later Charley
is right in there with the biggest people of all. Now that's
pretty interesting considering the lawyer that he saw before
he got out of Treasure Island, and the lawyer that Tex Watson
is seeing before these crimes are committed. That these boys
were wined and dined in the music scene, in the art scene by
certain people before the massacres took place. Now, Lawrence
Schiller said, "...In a true sense the Manson Family weren't
hippies at all. Manson didn't like being called a hippie, either."
Well I guarantee Lawrence Schiller that the hippies didn't like
it either. He knows they didn't, he said the hippies didn't
like it. I know they didn't. It ended everything that was really
good that was coming down. And then he concludes the introduction
to his book on Sharon Tate saying, "It was a strange Satanic
whim that sent those people into Benedict Canyon." And
I claim it was more than a Satanic whim, but that the book that
Mr. Kaiser puts out in Oakland, and advertises in Esquire magazine,
and the use of this word Satan and witchcraft is a conceived
program disguises covert government to come down on this generation.
And it has succeeded. And nobody really feels safe in the area
or around the country. And the effect that they wanted has happened,
you see.
Now, I just gave a sentence from an article, a few, last week.
And I'm going back to conclude with a few remarks of Marshal
Singer. It was an article that was printed in April, 1970:
Observations on the Sharon Tate massacre and Charley Manson,
and he says ...Charley Manson is certainly an enigmatic. Is
he a victim or a monster? He's equal parts of Charley Chaplan
and Jack the Ripper. He had been arrested thirty-seven times
in his thirty-five years.
And Manson said:
I'll tell you I'm not from your society. I've spent most of
my life in a world of bars and solitary confinement. And my
philosophy comes from underneath the boots and the sticks and
the clubs that they beat people with, who come from the wrong
side of tracks. And people like me are society's scapegoats.
And this is James Ray, the same thing: society's scapegoats.
Jack Ruby is society's scapegoat. He can be used. He's Jewish.
He's poor. He's kicked around by the anti-Semitics, the rich
oil people. He's used when they want. He's stepped on when he
wants. He is just a pushed-around kid who wanted to make it
in this world and be recognized as just what he is. And always
carrying this heavy load of anti-Semitism, an underdog, playing
a game with the military and the mafia and the oil people for
approval and affection: "If I do your work will you love
me now?" The minute he shot Oswald, Jack Ruby said, "I
wanted to prove to them that I had guts." And he took the
challenge.
And Manson is saying, "People like me are society's scapegoats."
Now the article by Marshall Singer goes on to say that Lawrence
Schiller got the confession of this Atkins girl. She was twenty-one
and pretty and she would say that she was victimized by Manson.
And how she had to hold Sharon Tate in her arms so 'Tex' Charles
Watson could stab this particular female who was pregnant and
all the other people.
Now, Manson had a lot of hostility. He tells you he was kicked
around. His plans were to assemble these dune buggies and have
an armada against the pigs, against the black people, against
the cops; he would kill cops. He'd been arrested all these times.
He'd been in isolation. He would kill them, but he would make
it look like blacks did it. And he would be getting even with
blacks and cops at the same time. And he hoped to wipe out both
groups that he hated so much.
The article does say that in the early sixties we had our own
magical potions, and we had a handsome young president who held
out promises. And when he was killed a lot of the dreams went
away. And when people like Manson break in with us it is a reality
too complex and to banal to understand.
Now, in one hour it's hard for me to really rap up the complexity
of this because each week we talk about the covert government,
the overthrow, change in the economic system. This is what the
Sharon Tate massacre is about. And I hope that in this one brief
hour you can understand how minds all over the world can be
effected by killing just seven people, and perverting the news
media everyday and every hour to keep this image going; where
the truth of the murders is different than what the news is
saying.
GLORIA: Thank you, Mae. I don't see how you got it in one hour,
but you seem to do it. Thank you.
MAE: Okay.
