Subject: Letter from Fletcher Prouty - June 1995 - repost
Date: 31 Mar 2000 19:57:00 -0800
From: Arnie Lerma <www.lermanet.com> <Arnie_member@newsguy.com>
June 1 1995
Patrick Jost (deleted street adress)
Falls Church, Virginia 22042-1830
First, about your letter of May 26, 1995, I have not included my telephone number, because my severe deafness precludes comfortable and meaningfull conversations.
I have not been aware of the "controversy about the war record of LRH." I am not and never have been a member of the Internet or Scientology. Once in a while folks mention some subject that included my name, and it always comes as a surprise. I am surprised by the existence of what you term the "Prouty Declaration." Is it purported to be a single document, or is it a file of records, and how did my name get on it?
It is a fact that I wrote, when I was employed by the legal representatives of the Church, or by their own researchers who were working for their legal staff, a considerable amount of LRH material that I located in various military files.
My contact with the church, its people, and its legal teams was always on the basis of an outside "expert witness" or research analyst, etc. In other words I was retained, contractually, to do certain projects as directed by them.
I am well aware of the fact that there are all kinds of arguments about the military carreer of LRH. I thought I had straightened that out... up to a point. He had a much more important career than they knew at Church headquarters, and from the files available to those who could find them and interpret them properly.
Furthermore there is great obfuscation among his purported "military" records. Despite all that, he had a most unusual and important career...by military standards. I know the intelligence business well, and some of its important peripheral areas and can tell what is real and what is not.
At the conclusion of my last work for them I was on the brink of finding and interpreting a true golden lode of records. I has always believed that because I had pointed the way to their own in house experts that they would finish the job.
The 1993 work that you quote gives a totally inadequate summary of his record, and may have been written that way on purpose. I am quite surprised, as a result of your current interest to learn that you are "unaware of any Navy records to support the claim that Mr Hubbard, etc." I know very well he served in Australia and in fighting off the western coast of Australia, and that he was involved in many other actions. However much of his service was heavily cloaked in security coverage. Have you ever noted that he worked under FDR's chief of Intelligence Vanderbilt?
The next paragraph of your letter gives some of the facts. I can not account for the fact that the Church chooses to provide its own "cover" for his intelligence career; but that is none of my business. I provided them with what they asked me to do. I found much more than they expected.
Next you ask for further information. Many years ago I was asked to write the biography of LRH by the Bridge people. I worked on the project for years and even was invited to American Booksellers Ass'n meetings where I was featured as the "LRH Biographer' to be. It was during this active and deep project that I discovered the material you have heard about.
Then LRH died, and things cooled off for a bit. I was busy and without their continued support, or retainer from Bridge, I had no recourse but to stop my work and to get on with other things, such as my work for for Oliver Stone with the film "JFK" and my book about all that.
I can not account for the Church's choice to conceal my findings. At the end you bring up an interesting point. You must realize I worked closely with everyone in the upper echelons of the Church and even was sent to that fine "Campus" in England, i.e. "St.----" name escapes me.
At the same time I realized that there was quite a bit of infighting at the upper echelons. It had nothing to do with me; but I could not help but notice it. Some of my closest associates were so up-set that they left the Church. That period marked the end of my work there. I have sent "tons" of records to an old friend in the L.A. area who is still active.
I'm sure I could answer a lot of your questions..if they were specific. I am totally neutral. I have no interest either way; but I am personally convinced that LRH was a most extraordinary man and that his true "biography" if ever printed will be a blockbuster supreme. His "role" in the government was enourmous. Internet is just being "had" by including me in anything today.
Your last note about "your statement What is Scientology?" does not ring a bell. It may be something erroneously attributed to me. It is not anything I recall...but then there could be much I have forgotten...since I was never associated with the Church...except as an employee. I find your note interesting, and full of more questions than it asks.
L. Fletcher Prouty
Ocr'd & uploaded by Arnie Lerma
I have in front of me a clean xerox
copy of this letter with the clearly
readable handwritten signature 'Fletch'