Q. You say you want those with prior knowledge of the Indochina war tried for war crimes. You also express opposition to organized retribution. Which is it?
A. Both. I think it wise, always, to forgive past offenses. Ongoing oppression requires more flexibility. The war criminals are evidently still at it.
Revenge is nothing but an effective outlet for anger. As a general all-purpose deterrent it doesn’t work. When they publicly hanged pick-pockets in England, pick-pockets worked the crowd. When and where capital punishment prevails, the murder rate tends to be slightly higher. The more prisons they build, the more crime there is — because prisons undoubtedly breed criminal professionalism.
Paul Goodman asks, in Growing Up Absurd, why — when such facts have been brought to light in study after study — there is never significant prison abolition or reform. Maybe because vengeance is so emotionally satisfying that most people would rather ignore the logic of ripping down prisons in order to fight crime.
Q. And what about the war criminals who escalated the Viet Nam war?
A. They, and all other genocidal depopulationists in the Caucasian race, should be tried, before a tribunal — first, so as to determine exactly who they are and aren’t. Second, in order to break up their conspiracy.
When the magnitude of the crimes they have committed and intend to commit in the near future is revealed, the majority of the world’s population will think hanging is much too good for them. I don’t think there is going to be time to convince them otherwise just because retribution happens in my opinion to be barbaric and useless. And to the extent that I, for one, stive to enlighten the world as to the futility of organized, legally sanctified revenge, it is for the sake of society’s victims, not its manipulators.
Chairman Mao could only have been referring to imperialist war criminals and their accomplices when he predicted that someday they would hang before the eyes of the whole world. I believe I am in a unique position to help make that prophecy come true. And if need be I am willing to hang with them, because I also had prior knowledge of the war, although I failed to recognize it for what it was.
Q. Your attitude toward E. Howard Hunt also seems contradictory. You say you think he was obliquely giving you a chance to blow the theories that aborted the mission. Why, then, do you say he is a war criminal who should be tried, as well sa questioned on tape with his response subjected to Psychological Stress Evaluation, etc.?
A. I think he was assigned by someone to supply that information about the war conspiracy, and deliberately botched it — a practice known as “running” an assignment. He also got me to promise, in effect, not to support any war crimes trials in the future. It was that premeditated! And, yes, I am breaking that promise. According to UFO’s: the Nazi Secret Weapon, members of Nazi secret societies are pledged to preserve and protect the white race. Both the Secret Order of Thule and the Luminous Lodge (Vril Society) must have been quite involved. I find it hard to believe the man I call Brother-in-law (and suspect was Hunt) was among the uninitiated. Castro was white; the Vietnamese weren’t — that was enough for the Nazis. Class war is only half the picture. Race wars are alive and well.
–Kerry Wendell Thornley
