Sunday, June 29, 2014

Defending the indefensible? Lawyers on representing clients accused of nightmarish crimes

Rory Carroll and Simon Hattenstone talk to the lawyers who've taken on some of the toughest cases
Rory Carroll and Simon Hattenstone   
The Guardian, Friday 27 June 2014 10.00 EDT   

Irving Kanarek, 94, practiced law in California from 1957-1989. He represented Charles Manson, who was convicted in 1971 of conspiracy to murder actor Sharon Tate and six other people. He also defended Jimmy Lee Smith, convicted of abducting and murdering an LA police officer in 1963, a case immortalized in the book The Onion Field.

Irving Kanarek: ‘I don’t dream or even think much about Charlie.'
Photograph: Felix Clay for the Guardian
I would defend a client who I knew was guilty of horrific crimes. They have to be proved guilty. I've had cases where people were guilty as hell but they couldn't prove it. And if they can't prove it, he's not guilty. In that case, the person walks free. That's American justice.

I got a reversal of Jimmy Lee's death sentence, and he had been accused of killing a police officer. That made me the victim of police non-objectivity. They pulled me over, gave me tickets undeservedly.

It wasn't a difficult decision to take the Manson case. My purpose was to fight legally admissible evidence, and the amount of that was scant. His guilt was based on a few hearsay words, inadmissible in court, that he supposedly told this guy to do a number on the Tate residence. No question he was legally innocent. And, more than that, he was actually innocent. There was no evidence connecting him to those murders.

The newspapers, the magazines, the motion pictures got people all excited – Manson as the embodiment of human evil. Charlie wasn't a monster. When you look at the legally admissible evidence, you come to a very different conclusion. Just looking at him from objective considerations, he's a personable person.


I've thought a lot about the case in terms of the legalities. I haven't dwelt much on the human tragedy of it. There's a lot of myth, for example that the baby was taken out of Tate's body. Not so. The wounds were not in the abdomen. The wounds were primarily in the breast area.

I didn't spend much time [thinking about Tate and the other victims], because they were victims of disputes that Charlie had nothing to do with. I think his direct involvement has been woefully extrapolated.

By the time I visited the house, the bodies were gone. The scene was what I'd call mechanical. Nothing about it was gruesome, per se. They'd marked where they were in chalk. So it isn't as overwhelming as some people may feel. None of it stayed with me. The tools of the courtroom make such scenes less than human. I didn't think about it emotionally. The victims are part of the case, but are not that tangible. I lost sleep on other cases, but not on this one.

People ask me, have I ever felt in the presence of evil, I don't know how to respond to that. I don't dream or even think much about Charlie.

I have regrets about every case where someone is killed or injured. Murder is unappetizing. But I've never defended anyone who's been accused of horrible criminal acts on children.

Hat tip to Emily, a regular reader of the blog (or something like that).






Saturday, June 28, 2014

Goodbye Helter Skelter

George Stimson has a newly released book.

Goodbye Helter Skelter

A New Look at the Tate-LaBianca Murders

"There's an image and a person that the District Attorney created called 'Manson Helter Skelter.' And there's an image that's in the press that you've been reading and watching and looking at for years. And that's built up in your mind. That's an image that somebody else made up. It's got nothing, really, to do with me personally. I am not that guy. But yet that guy is built up in your mind and you think that that guy is me. You think that I'm that fire-breathing, seven-foot-tall, no good hippie cult leader bullshit bunkum punk shit that they put on me, you know. And then sometimes I think you guys get to believing that shit.

"That's not me.

"I might be worse than that, in some ways." -- Charles Manson

In August of 1969 the spectacular Tate-LaBianca murders rocked Los Angeles, the country, and the world. But even more shocking than those murders was the story behind them: the story of a homicidal maniac named Charles Manson, how he turned the sons and daughters of middle-class America into a "Family" of murderous slaves, and an insane plan to achieve world domination by sparking a race war called "Helter Skelter."

But what if it was just a story?

Here is the first realistic and reasonable examination of the Tate-LaBianca murders and the true reasons behind them. Based on years of research and exclusive information from Charles Manson and many of his former and present friends, Goodbye Helter Skelter presents the conclusions of a long-time Manson associate -- conclusions that will likely change everything you think you know about Charles Manson, his "Family," and some of the most infamous murders in the history of American crime.

Goodbye Helter Skelter includes material taken from hundreds of hours of tape-recorded conversations with Charles Manson. Never before has Manson's point of view been presented in such a complete and coherent format.

416 pages, including over thirty pages of color photographs
 

Goodbye Helter Skelter by George Stimson Available Now

Ordering Information

contact@goodbyehelterskelter.com  

Copyright © 2014 The Peasenhall Press





Wednesday, June 25, 2014

Who's that Girl?

Patty has seen this image before but she always assumed it was Photoshopped. Recently she noticed that Aes-Nihil has the original in his collection. Obviously it's Sandy and Lynn, but now Patty is wondering, "who's that girl?"
Anyone?





Monday, June 23, 2014

TRASH TALK

Okay, I will admit it, I have an affinity for these old trashy tabloids!  You know the stuff they write is totally blown out of proportion and sometimes outright made up but, damn, it is entertaining!

 
 
 
 
You rarely hear anything about Mike Armstrong and his wife Denise, I don't think they testified at the trial.  I have found a couple of articles about them though, here's one that Cielodrive has transcribed about a fire destroying their trailer at Spahn Ranch.






Saturday, June 21, 2014

Claire Vaye Watkins

This summer as part of a summer workshop Claire will do a special reading at The Cabin, a literary center in Boise Idaho on June 22nd. 

An article in the Boise Weekly reveals the news that Claire is expecting her first child in a couple of months.







Friday, June 20, 2014

Rare old photo







Wednesday, June 18, 2014

This Charming Man


What exactly was it that made people want to spill their guts out (no pun intended) to a man named Charles Manson? How did Charlie become so skilled at reading people? Was it just something he was born with, or was it something he learned in reform schools/prisons? Was he always charming? Back in the days of yonder, when he was a pimple-faced teen, did he have the ability to charm the girls out of their poodle skirts? Did he purposely pick certain people he knew he could dominate? Is he a man, monster, or both? What do you think he is? I don't think the answer is all that complicated. In my opinion, and I am sure I am going to get reamed for saying so, he is an extremely dangerous, unstable man who was nothing more than a clever pimp. His ability to get people to do stuff on his command is what makes him dangerous. That, and his opinion that human beings other than himself had no rights to their own lives & money. Their money was his money, according to the Gospel of Charlie. He always talked against being materialistic, but he was always the first one reaping the benefits of other people's goods. Manson loved the benefits of money more than he has ever let on, and that, right there makes him more human than ever! You didn't ever see him turning his nose up against all of the material possessions, luxuries & comforts that Dennis Wilson's money provided, did you? Hell no! He's no fool. The following excerpt from Paul Watkins book is an extremely good description of CM:

Later people would ask me how a man like Charlie Manson could ever be considered Christlike. How could he ever get that close to people, so close that they spoke his rap, and thought his thoughts. The answer is simple, really. He listened to them, each of them. He concentrated on what they said. He sympathized with their problems, knew their idiosyncrasies. He allowed them to express all their fears, hopes, aspirations. Seemingly, he did not judge, he merely listened, and focused all his attention on them. He became friend, brother, lover, and father. He gave himself in a way that, perhaps no one else ever had, particularly in the beginning. Ironically, few people ever really pay attention on that level. He taught the girls not only to love their minds, but their bodies, and to use them without inhibition. What he had started at Spahn's, he continued at Gresham Street. He was always changing the motion, remaining unpredictable. 

He went on to write:

The girls in the Family adored Charlie; he knew each of them-their hang-ups, their likes, dislikes, phobias, their tastes in food, sex, music, their backgrounds-everything. Whenever someone appeared who might cause a problem to our scene-a narc, redneck, probation officer, anyone from the straight world-Charlie knew immediately which girl would be best suited to neutralize that person. He was masterful at this; to do it, he had to know his women well.



In closing, I would like to add that while I am sure Manson is a fascinating character to know, and to correspond with, he is just too damned unstable to let out. He couldn't just go out into the desert to disappear into anonymity, because every moron in town would be chasing after him, following him around, and trying to recreate "The Family." Of course, I am sure old Charlie wouldn't mind an assortment of groupies following him out there to cater to his every need, but we all know that isn't ever going to happen. While I think Tex Watson is a helluva lot more dangerous than Manson ever will be, I still don't think he is innocent.





Monday, June 16, 2014

Linda Kasabian

Linda Kasabian 2014


Linda Kasabian 1970






Saturday, June 14, 2014

Manson-related art exhibit opens today in LA

Blog reader John Tottenham has an exhibit opening today at:

Maloney Fine Art
2680 South La Cienega Blvd.
(between Venice & Washington)
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 570-6420



On the subject of "The Undesirables" John writes:

"I encountered the Manson story as an impressionable 15-year-old who had recently been kicked out of one the least notable public schools in the south of England. I was sent to a school for difficult kids but spent most of my days walking the streets of London. I found a copy of  'The Family,' Ed Sanders' colorful account of the Manson murders, and I went round and round on the Circle Line in London, unable to put it down. The atmosphere it evoked, thick with sex and dread, was  intoxicating to a morbidly romantic youth whose voice still hadn't broken. In the evening, after a day of truancy, I returned to the family home in a quaint Kentish village - 35 miles from London but deep in the heart of the country, and very remote insofar as public transport was concerned - where I would read it while listening repeatedly to 'Forever Changes' by Love. Fortuitously enough, I discovered this record at precisely the same time, and it served as the perfect soundtrack, evoking an eerie, damaged, distinctively Los Angeles atmosphere. Arthur Lee's cryptic, riddling lyrics - 'Sitting on a hillside, watching all the people die,' etc, are not dissimilar to Manson's  "No sense makes sense" logic: "Look down at me and you see a fool, look up at me and you see a God, look straight at me and you see yourself," etc. The Manson case offered an exotic and extreme form of vicarious  teenage rebellion, being the complete antithesis of my staid rural colonial upbringing.

After gazing upon the grainy full page shot of Susan Atkins (AKA Sadie Mae Glutz)  in 'Helter Skelter' I became hopelessly besotted. I would stare at that photograph for minutes on end, completely losing myself in it. Her expression was very haunting, very penetrating. What most drew me to the Manson story was the  predicament of the girls. They seemed, in a way, like victims themselves, and they hadn't been much older than I was when they had fallen under Charlie's spell.

I projected most of my adolescent romantic longing onto them, though there was a lot to go around. I wrote a billet-doux to Susan Atkins and sent it to her care of the Frontera Women's Institute. A few weeks later my mother, understandably perplexed, handed over an envelope with a California prison stamp upon it and a complicated series of numbers denoting the sender. Susan had written back, informing me that she had seen the light and recommended I do likewise. After the epistolary letdown I began to feel guilty about my Manson-immersion. I built a ceremonial bonfire and burned the Atkins letter, along with other artifacts, including an original copy of the Manson 's 2019 record on ESP that I had found so affecting, especially 'Look at your Game Girl,' which perfectly evoked the eerie sun-dried lostness of those times.

When I started digging into the case again, I realized that the photograph of Sadie in 'Helter Skelter' was rather a flattering one. She certainly wasn't doing herself any favors when she started showing up in court with a shaved head and unshaven legs: that was a look I couldn't get behind. In hindsight, the Sadie infatuation probably had an unhealthy effect upon the kind of women I subsequently gravitated towards.

My interest in the case had faded by the time I made it out to LA. By then it had become off-puttingly trendy in transgressive circles. But it has turned out to be a constantly revisited fascination. And obviously I'm not alone in it. I frequently  meet people whose early impressions of Southern California were formed by the Manson case. Murder stories often serve as a portal to another time and place. In this case, it served as a window into the Los Angeles of the late 60s, obviously a very interesting time, especially as the idealism and hedonism began to sour. Here was a unique confluence of circumstances - a crucible of chaos in which a bizarrely charismatic ex-con with a messianic complex attracted just the right group of vulnerable and manipulable young men and women on just the right/wrong combination of potent drugs in a climate that facilitated a horrific and previously unthinkable chain of events.

My intention with the drawings was to capture as precisely as possible my most intimate impressions of nature. In this case, feminine nature. I was never interested in the murders as much as the shadows they cast and by the girls who dwelled in those shadows. And what became of them. The drawings are of all the girls in the Family, not just the killers; in fact, some of the killers are under-represented. I used almost every suitable image I could find. There has always been something haunting about a mugshot, especially old ones, and these mugshots are about 45-years-old now.

They started out, as everything seems to, as doodles on post-it notes, and they evolved on to slightly larger pieces of finer paper. Though tiny, some of them took a long time to complete. I wouldn't be satisfied until I felt that I'd captured something, if not an exact rendering of the photograph, then something that evoked.

The drawings are a personal exercise in nostalgia. When I think of the Manson saga I don't think so much of where it took place - and where I ended up - but rather of where I was when first exposed to it; the canyons and deserts of Southern California come sweeping back to me as I first imagined them, borne on the cold autumn wind through the English countryside, while I sat on the sofa in the living room of a modest country house with 'Forever Changes' repeatedly playing on the stereo. I know it's all played out now but it wasn't when I first came across it. It's my attempt to capture what I found so haunting when I first became obsessed with the case.






Friday, June 13, 2014

Marilyn Manson & The Spooky Kids posters

I don't think I have much to say about these posters, except they are from "Marilyn Manson & The Spooky Kids" circa 1991-1994. Just to add, I think it is sick of entertainers to use murder victims in their advertisements to sell tickets. Even more sick is the thought of Tex Watson "preaching" against Marilyn Manson music, because it is "evil!" What is worse? Don't know. Just don't know.......













Wednesday, June 11, 2014

Ballarat BEL Be-In, Easter Sunday '71

From the Nevada State Journal, April 8 1971:  "the gathering was called for by participants in the Laguna Beach Christmastime Happening as a religious experience. They denied later reports that the gathering would be a rock festival saying no live music was planned for the Easter sunrise observation."

*Special thanks to Michael Channels for permission to use the image at left.

Here are two more from the same event that DebS recently found in the LA Freep. One has a map showing festival attendees how to arrive at Ballarat from Laguna Beach:

"According to Superintendent Murphy of Death Valley National Monument, no arrangements have been made with his department for the festival...As we see it, this festival has all the makings of a very bad trip."


Promoters jumped on board and rumors floated that bands like Jethro Tull would be in attendance. BEL member Dion Wright who painted the Taxonomic Mandala made the following statement: "An Easter gathering will take place in Ballarat California, an eighty acre privately owned ghost town...(that) has been offered free of charge. We have represented to (Inyo County) a pilgrimage...including the placing of a Book of Life in the Panamint Valley." 

  Book of Life, not Book of Death (as in Leary's and the Manson's manifestos). Patty has heard the Goler Wash referred to as the "Holy Goler" and has always wondered why: perhaps this is part of the answer. Interesting, no?





Monday, June 9, 2014

The National Socialist Liberation Front, James Mason

Matt,

I am not sure if this will be of interest to you or the Mansonistas at the MansonBlog. Here it is anyway.

Below (and attached, as a Word Doc) are a number of articles. These were taken from SIEGE, a Neo-Nazi publication from the 1980s. SIEGE began as a newsletter associated with the National Socialist Liberation Front (an offshoot of the National Socialist White People's Party) and later was associated with Universal Order (a quasi-mystical, informal Hitler-worshipping group). In both instances it was edited and written by James Mason, who readers may remember from Schreck's original edition of The Manson File. He was a Neo-Nazi who established links with a number of Family members (Squeaky and Sandy mainly, I think) and (positively) associated Manson with figures like Hitler and George Lincoln Rockwell.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Liberation_Front
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Mason_%28National_Socialist%29

The articles below are the ones from SIEGE which deal directly with Manson. There are a number of others which mention him, but I didn't include him since they only do so indirectly. The articles that might be of most interest to MansonBlog readers are the last few, starting from 'Universal Order'. These ones, as far as I can tell, didn't appear in the NSLF-affiliated SIEGE but came later. They don't say anything particularly ground-breaking, but do provide an unorthodox view of Tate-LaBianca which I feel probably had some input from the Family members still grooving on Charlie's vibe. All collected editions of SIEGE can be accessed here:
https://archive.org/details/Siege_836

Vermouth
---------------------------------------

Introduction

James Mason is an ardent National Socialist who has achieved underground infamy. Mason's revolutionary rhetoric is deemed so subversive and violent that it has even alienated other Nazis. SIEGE shares this uncommon distinction with Céline's Les Beaux Draps (A Fine Mess), which was banned from print inside the Third Reich for being too hateful. This status of notoriety has served to propel SIEGE to new dimensions as a harangue bold enough to advocate sheer political terror. Indeed, Mason views the prevalent status quo Establishment as enemy number one, and has striven to foster its decollation by any means available.

Much of the criticism Mason has attracted stems from his praise of Charles Manson as a misunderstood ideological leader. Superficial minds immediately dismissed this claim as preposterous. But Manson did not carve a swastika on his forehead without reason. Manson does

consider himself a kind of neo-Nazi, and what is "neo" about his Nazism is at times quite fascinating. Thus Mason deserves credit for taking Manson seriously enough to glimpse the very coherent meaning behind his apparent façade of madness. Furthermore, both Mason and Manson have nothing but contempt for right wing shenanigans and escapist fantasies that purport to wage battle over pivotal issues that must not be lost, when in reality the greater WAR to even pre-emptively assert such causes has already been crushed. Suffice it to say, this open honesty has not endeared Mason with those of a lukewarm and illusive mentality.
....

Charles Manson

They'll say that you can't have anything to do with such a criminal, such a defective, such a pervert, such a monster. The lesson of history is clear and the method of the Jew is exposed for those with the understanding, the intelligence and the courage that it takes to put it to use. For the rest, they write themselves off right away, as easily as that. The Revolution is going to call for people who will think, "To hell with all that other! What has he to say?" For when they exclaim to hell with the other, they mean the whole System, everything it says and everything it stands for. They then stand at the beginning. (Adolf Hitler was unable to do this because at his time he was able to work within that system but, in so doing, may have engendered his own ultimate end.)

Those who cannot, under any circumstances, accept or even try to accept Manson are unconscious of the fact that, in reality, this means they cannot accept their own reflections. They are then severely crippled– just like the Jews say they are– and not only useless to themselves or anyone else but that same kind of liability to anything they may get into as I have attempted in many various ways to outline and illustrate in SIEGE over the years.

(Even in the hostile, Jewish-System accounts of the Manson Family, you'll find no dregs or cripples such as abound in the Right Wing. Only the best from among the best– racially and otherwise, profoundly alienated by a Jew System– just as it was with the NSDAP in Germany .)

There is the immediate rise of, "What about all those drugs?" Part of the legend and lore of the Kosher myth-building machine. First, speaking for myself only, I have never used drugs and never plan to. Not only do I not feel I require them for any reason, I feel they are detrimental to the faculties both mental and physical. Second, I have had explained to me by people who are "drug wise" that there is a differentiation between natural substances such as "grass" and certain hallucinogens, and the rest of the broad drug spectrum. It was that spectrum of addictive, manufactured drugs that Manson specifically forbade among his circle. But, just from a practical point ofview, you tell a young White kid he must get his hair cut and give up grass, etc., and you are going to lose him to the other side who will be thinking to themselves– rightfully– just what a jerk you are. We will interior decorate only AFTER we have extinguished the house fire. (Same goes for sex practices as long as it is kept WHITE, just as Manson insisted.)

Last of all, as could easily be deduced from my shotgun blast against any form of "religiosity" earlier in SIEGE, I go for nothing, indeed have no tolerance for anything remotely "spooky". All of this is real, it is solid, it is as "American as apple pie", and it only may seem strange on the surface because it is so new. Manson, like Hitler, is as human as you or I. He is just special by virtue of a one-in-a hundred-million shot of gene combinations which gives him his ideas, his personality and his physical presence.

Vol. XI, #11– Nov., 1982

The Meaning of Manson

He is a product of the American heartland and was subject to the worst conditions that prevailed. But racially, psychically, and culturally he is perhaps the MOST American. Personally gifted, selfless, fearless– both morally and physically– and absolutely dedicated to Life, to Earth and to Truth. What he did– in spite of a life full of the worst adversity– rather than drown in a sea of bitterness as most would have done, he established a racial-socialist colony in Death Valley, in California, in the midst of the push-shove of the 1960's, which was neither hippie nor Right Wing.

As far as those of us today who remain active in the struggle against Death, in favor of Life, Manson's meaning is of the highest importance. His ideas can be readily accepted by racially sound, intelligent, honest Leftists as they can be by Rightists. Without Manson's input, neither side will unravel the problem nor find an answer in time. His is to date the most supreme example of defiance, action and survival.

Little more can be added here except that the verse from Mein Kampf in which Hitler cautioned against turning one's back to the immortal hands which occasionally are outstretched to us in times of great stress, has its most potent meaning at this time– "...woe to the people that is ashamed to grasp them."

[Vol. XII, #3– March, 1983]

The Attack On Manson

Last month's issue of SIEGE had gone to press at about the same time the news of the prison attack against Charles Manson reached us here. Personally, I hadn't experienced such a shock since I received the word of the assassination of Commander Rockwell. Neither had the implications for the Movement been as great as that day in 1967. It was probably better that things worked out as they did, time-wise, as there was little or nothing more that could have been added in these pages to the news reports which, I'm certain, everyone saw at that time. I dislike trying to comment in an intelligent way on a grave topic about which few facts have come in.

Speculations now aside, Manson's injuries are not severe and will produce nothing of a lasting nature. One friend reported that,"It was all over with inside of four minutes." Those with any combat experience, or experience at being wounded, will be aware that four minutes can be an eternity. But there are at least as many friends of Manson inside as there are enemies and this plus their fast action made the difference. We thank these from the bottom of our heart.

I never recalled any questions or worries during the Sixties about what would happen should someone kill the Commander or even whether anyone might seriously try. He was eminently well qualified to take care of himself and, as he would say, his very audacity helped keep him alive. But with Manson it has been different. We have worried– deeply– about the very real risk of just such an attack. If the world outside is a jungle then the world of prison is an insane asylum. It turns out that it was a "nut" that finally got to Manson after all these years but it certainly didn't have to be. Among dangerous punks of all types– inmates and guards alike it is known and accepted that a hit against Charles Manson would place one at the top of the pecking order. And it's an odd coincidence that both Rockwell and Manson were forty-nine years of age at the time of their most deadly personal attacks.

People are dying and getting killed all the time. It'll happen to each one of us sooner or later. In prison, those with "names" have been targeted traditionally since these institutions first existed. Though maybe prison, with all its risks, is and has been Manson'sworld, we still view his life as something of extreme value, something to be preserved at all cost. We have been lucky this time. I'm a believerin luck. Maybe nothing like this will happen again, or at least not for a very long time. It was as though, with the elevation of years with no significant attack, the probability of one happening was becoming critical. Now, in more ways than one, the pressure is off, for awhile.

The press, as always, treated Manson as hot property, not as an individual. That he had been seriously attacked was sensational. That he's going to be all-right is not. And it is this view– that of the Jewish press– that the majority of those in the Movement seem content to be left with concerning Manson. Not too surprising really when you match this view and this attitude with the state the Movement finds itself in.

Though I expressed the sincere feeling that I do not identify with these times, I do take pride in the fact that and the realization that I am not, in spite, stricken by contemporary blindness. Jesus of Nazareth in robes and sandals in 1934 would be a sensation. But in the year 30 A.D., he was just another guy, a shit-disturber whom they allowed to be strung up in the manner of the most common criminals. Adolf Hitler with his flashy uniform, his para-military party and his histrionic oratory today seems most out of place. In 1933, he was little different than a dozen other European dictators. They say familiarity breeds contempt while the dreamer in all of us longs for the exotic. Maybe that's why the Christs among us in the present are so often overlooked or scorned. The Movement with its weird way of looking at things can't see in Manson anything more than what the Jewish press puts in its deliberately distorted, sensationalized coverages.

What did it in the end for Jesus, Hitler and Manson is found in what they SAID and in what they DID... and not in whatever way they might have tried to attract the attention of any potential fan club. If Manson is still with us in the living, you can thank a couple of nameless prison inmates. What do you now do about that which you nearly left until it was too late?

[Vol. XIII, #11– Nov., 1984]

Charles Manson

To Charles Manson it is necessary to devote his own segment. He is unique from the rest not because of any comparative degree ofgreatness, not on account of any variation from a certain, accepted norm but only because he is the only one which is still alive. And alive in this age generally means to be grossly misunderstood.

I have no way of knowing how many of you managed to watch the interview with Manson done by CBS on its "Nightwatch" program during March of this year. It is difficult for me to comment on what was said even though I videotaped the entire, sixty-minute show. For one, it was anything else but an interview. The "host" kept on interrupting, baiting and throwing barbs all throughout, not to mention tossing in his own little "interpolations" at every commercial break. Manson did his best to hold a tight line of thought despite all interference and provocation. What came across to me– and I have known Manson for about six years– was impressive. The heaviest concepts I have heard to date.Things so huge and all-encompassing that they were and are hard to grasp. I realize that the bulk of the Movement is in agreement with the System in that "Manson is insane". I have heard all that elsewhere before, applied to different personalities. It says nothing about Manson. It tells a lot about those who say it.

Without difficulty, I can well imagine and appreciate how Manson must strike the average mind. Incomprehensible. However, I always felt that the minds in the Movement– or at least some of the better ones– would and should be more perceptive and receptive. I have only been partially right. While 98% of what Manson says flies right over the heads of most, only about 30% leaves me behind in the dust. Tome– a realist and an objectivist– that doesn't mean Manson is screwy. To me it means that here is one source from which I can still draw understanding and knowledge– from which I can still LEARN. For these past five or six years, I have had a sure feeling that whenI could approach Manson's grasp and understanding, I'd have achieved something truly great. I've been gaining at it slowly but steadily and remain more convinced of it than ever before.

Contrast this with the information to be found in the Movement. First, how much of it is direct reprint, often dating back ten years and beyond? What does the most advanced of it consist of? Flowery curses upon the System and admonishments to get away and form our own colonies. What's missing is the state of mind, the weltanschauung, the ideology upon which to live, think, to base and to view and everything. I've come to know enough of it to realize that full comprehension of the rest would amount to the ultimate weapon, offensive anddefensive, in our poor, disinherited hands.

Manson is unique from the rest because he still lives. He is identical with the rest because he too was undone and betrayed by his own disciples. And for any who have the courage to see arid know that, with 1945, the world and everything in it was turned upside-down, it only follows logically that you look for the greatest of leaders, not at the top where they used to be found, but at the STONE BOTTOM the way this crazy, evil mess demands it must be! But bottom or no, not even the walls of San Quentin can confine his world-significant impact. (And I just wish all of you could have caught a glimpse of the half-dozen-strong escort of "Mr.T's” he had from the block to the roomwhere the interview was conducted.)

Everything else had become to me just like a broken record. I was more than just a little amazed and disgusted when some of the "better" people in the Movement would ask me in the beginning, "Is he a member of the party?" or "Does he plan to become a party member?"The problems always arise when small or average minds try to measure something great using their own inadequate standards. Such as if Jesus were to appear on the street and some asshole inquire, "Are you a member of our Church?" And, in any case, he'd be in violation of the hair and dress code, with no visible means of support, etc.

To the Right Wing aficionados, I would remind you that our Enemy, in the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, has long ago promised to invariably attach the status of "common criminal" to their own worst enemies so that their true nature would be effectively concealed from the eyes of the people. Even at that, they have found it altogether impossible to continue seriously pretending that Manson is no more than a common criminal.

I have done what I could to inject– subtlely and overtly– as many of Manson's ideas into Movement thought as possible. I have had limited success. But having accomplished this much, I can only hope that the seeds have been planted and the torch passed...

[Vol. XV, #5– May, 1986]

(This was the last commentary on the above subjects appearing in the original

SIEGE.)

Universal Order

"Do not handicap yourselves with the idea of revenge, because the trend of events will avenge the wrongs that you suffer, not only in the case of the individuals who initiated the persecutions, but also of the society that has permitted this lawlessness."–Vidkun Quisling, 1945


"To get yourself together you need not to even think there is anyone else in this world. I don't need to look down on, or get off on, or get over on. The hardest thing to overcome is our own lies, confusion and our jealousy!"
–Charles Manson


"Open up the dope valves and let the people take all the dope they want.

Let 'em dope themselves on out till there's nothing left of it.

Let the people do what they want to do.

Take the rules and regulations off of it and then what you have left is the people that want to live.

The people that want to die, let 'em go. The people that want to destroy themselves, let them go ahead and destroy themselves."
–Charles Manson, 1984
Night Of The Buck Knives

If any single historic similarity links Hitler to Manson in the eyes of friends and foe alike, surely it has to be what have become known as the Tate killings of 1969. One cannot bring up the name of Charles Manson for discussion without having these killings brought into the picture by the moralists and curiosity seekers just as one cannot bring up the name of Hitler without some conditioned brainwashees harping away on the "Six Million" I now undertake, to the best of my knowledge, for the first time the task of analyzing these killings strictly from the "pro" viewpoint and hope to come out with arguments superior to those of the "anti" camp. I do this with no firsthand knowledge of the events and certainly without the sanction of either Manson or any of his associates.

One thing I do however bring into the balance with my study of this most fascinating chapter in recent American history is abroad background as a National Socialist and the understanding of the modus operandi of the Jews and their controlled media. I bring with me also a background as a National Socialist revolutionary and all of the anti-Establishment modes of thought and action which that involves. Finally, I am supported by a better-than-average knowledge of and familiarity with some of the principals in the case. What follows then would have to be viewed as the appraisal of the Tate killings by a sympathetic, White revolutionary.

First of all it is necessary to dispel the prevailing mythology surrounding the case in precisely the same way as an entire universe of corresponding legend has to be done away with that was erected around the matter of European Jews during the Second World War. Manson, too, had his equivalents of Speer, Frank, Eichmann, etc., who– seeing that the jig was up– exulted in commanding huge fanfare for themselves yet were artists when it came to shifting the real blame. A very large proportion of the most bizarre, blood-and-gore and, I might add, perverse stories connected with the case were the inventions of Susan Atkins as she struggled to do her best to impress the grand jury after she had been indicted in the course of the investigation of another case. The opportunistic prosecuting attorney, Vincent Bugliosi, merely made capital of it in his subsequent book, Helter Skelter, and a legend was born. It mattered not that Susan Atkins later retracted her statements– enough evidence had been gleaned by the System to go on to crack the case and the media had the suitable grist for its myth mill.

It Couldn't Have Happened To a Sweeter Bunch

Let us now go on to get rid of another clumsy but commonly held misconception, that of the "poor, innocent victims". Those of you with backgrounds similar to mine in the American National Socialist Movement will be among the first to sadly admit that it was indeed a damnable shame that Hitler did not, in fact, kill at least six million Jews during the War. We are the minority who KNOW what the Jews were and are all about and we can shed no tears for any of them. The rest of the gullible public sees things otherwise. So we have before us the image of the beautiful actress, Sharon Tate, eight months pregnant, slaughtered in her home with a number of her equally beautiful friends by a bunch of crazed beasts out for bloodglut per se. Sound familiar in premise? Sort of like all those beautiful, talented and peace-loving Jews that a certain madman, bent on conquering the world, took an irrational dislike to.

How knowledgeable are most of you about the Tate case, even if that means judging it based upon the hostile and distorted versions available in bookstores? An intelligent, informed person can still learn much truth even from the worst liars if he knows what to look for. I found that the house on Cielo Drive in L.A., scene of the killings, had been occupied by one Terry Melcher, half-Jewish son of White renegade actress Doris Day, and that Melcher had made the acquaintance of Manson as a music promoter and had reneged on a series of promises he had made Manson over the previous year or more. In fact, it appears as though Manson and some associates had been at the house as guests on a few occasions. This much then rules out the false notion of "random" killings.

It may have been accident that the house on Cielo Drive had since been taken by Roman Polanski, Jewish film director and erstwhile child molester, at the time of the killings but it is irrelevant when one stops to consider that the strata of human type stayed steady throughout the transition of tenants. Given that then, it is helpful to take a look at what is known of the people who were in that house on the night of the killings. My sources are the very books that were written to, first of all, make money off the sensationalism, and, secondly, to defame Manson and his associates for having been anti-Establishment enough to have dared lay hands on the "Beautiful People". They are the following: Helter Skelter by Bugliosi and Gentry; The Family by Ed Sanders; Will You Die For Me? by Charles Watson; Child of Satan, Child of God by Susan Atkins; and The Manson Women by Clara Livsey.

Hollywood Rogues Gallery

Sharon Tate, whose most famous role was in "Valley of the Dolls" wherein she had typified the supreme harlot role for a nation full of impressionable, young White girls to emulate, had as her first business agent one Hal Gefsky. Her early producer as well as her lover had been one Martin Ransohoff. Still another lover of that period, Jay Sebring, a.k.a. Kummer, was to be among the dead at Cielo Drive a few years hence. Tate had come to meet Roman Polanski when her producer-lover, Ransohoff, had hired Polanski to direct one of his films. Through Polanski came Voityck Frykowski who had known Polanski from the old days in Poland and who was to become yet another Cielo Drive death.

Polanski and Tate began their affair and he wasted no time in exploiting her Aryan looks by getting her into a nude spread in "Playboy" magazine during 1967. They were married in 1968. The Polanskis were such close friends of the likes of Robert Kennedy that they were present the night of his killing. From the beginning it was known and accepted that the Polanskis were regular users of LSD.

A glance at the rest of those present at Cielo Drive that night reveals that Voityck Frykowski had been dealing in a substance known as methlenedioxyl-amphetamine which is used as a stimulant as well as an aphrodisiac. It was revealed that Frykowski was "on" this substance himself at the time of his death. He was also involved in a marijuana smuggling ring which brought that substance into the U.S. from Jamaica via Canada .

Through Frykowski came Abigail Folger, his lover and member-in-good-standing of the filthy rich set as Folger Coffee heiress. The nominally "White" Miss Folger had just campaigned for Negro Tom Bradley for mayor of L.A. and had been a volunteer social worker in Watts.

Jay Sebring was a successful men's hair stylist who took his business name from the famous race track. After his death it was revealed by the L.A.P.D. that Sebring had been heavy into sado-masochism after they had discovered whips, chains, studded cuffs, hoods, and even films of these activities on Sebring's premises.

The teenager, Steven Parent, it would appear, did have the dubious distinction of having been at the wrong place at entirely thewrong time.

Some of those who, as easily as not, might have been there that night at Cielo Drive included Terry Melcher himself, Roger Vadim (one-time husband of Jane Fonda) who had just celebrated a birthday at the house, Jerzy Kosinski (matchmaker for Frykowski and Folger) had actually been supposed to be there, and, finally, Roman Polanski himself who happened to be off tending to another film.

After the killings, the L.A.P.D. found at the house large quantities of cocaine and mescaline as well as videotapes depicting scenes of sadism, masochism and bestiality. The boy, Steven Parent, had not been at the house at all but was about to depart the grounds after visiting at the servant's quarters. This leaves only Tate, Sebring, Frykowski and Folger. Much speculation has been made concerning Sebring's presence there in Polanski's absence. The nature of the relationship between Folger and Frykowski is clear. With regard to the eight-month-old fetus Tate was carrying, it was, after all, a Jew.

Would You If You Could?

As a National Socialist, I am not interested in sensationalism. Instead of gruesome details, I want to know the why and wherefore of things. As with the facts disproving Nazi "gas chambers" plus information on why Jews were concentrated, similar circumstances surrounding the Tate killings are tacitly suppressed. We are satisfied the right people got it in both cases and, if there is fault to be found,it is that the Second World War was lost and that Manson and some of his best people were apprehended and jailed. Call it revolution, Helter Skelter, or whatever you want. It is WAR between Life and Death forces and war means killing.

The key, as Commander Rockwell said, is that it still remains a one-sided war with the only blows landing being those of the Enemy. You read of it each day. WE– the Whites– are fair game whether it be our minds, our souls, our spirits, our culture, our country or our very blood that is being attacked and destroyed. To the media that is only par for the course. But let OUR SIDE make an attack and you know the results! If you could mount a successful attack yourself would you do it? Would you condone it by others? Do you really KNOW who your enemies are? Do you KNOW what is happening and what is at stake? If there is ever to come a genuine Movement then it will only come about through people who have gotten their thinking straight, for, without the right thought, nothing of any value can hope to follow.

The killings of July and August, 1969 were prime examples of DIRECT ACTION and in cases of revolution, or national liberation, direct action alone merits the highest respect. Those out front, putting themselves on the line and taking the action, as Tomniasi wrote, are in fact the real LEADERS and are at the top level of the struggle. All else pales to insignificance as events over the past thirteen years would tend to prove. Everything combined that has been attempted on the part of this Movement since the death of Commander Rockwell in 1967stands at ZERO when compared to the magnitude of and vibrations from that one night in August, 1969, that have continued ever since.

Neither I nor anyone else has the right to question or judge what happened in 1969, least of all from a moralistic standpoint. It is only that we have misread it for so long. The historic march of events never stops at the death of a single individual.

However, poor mortals can and do often get out of step with or fail to recognize that same historic march when it reconstitutes itself into another form. We have been thirteen years in the wilderness.

I do know that with the death of Hitler and the loss of the Second World War the situation was transformed to the point where something very much like "Helter Skelter" most probably already is and shall more and more become the order of the day. I pose the merit of thenotion of a series of similar actions by members of the Movement directly on the heels of the arrest of Joseph Paul Franklin in order to have taken some heat away from Franklin and to, as Tommasi would say, "heighten the contradictions".

Nearer The Truth...

...or "How I Broke the Right Wing Habit And Started Living Life". The fact remains that the Truth is One and the conflict only enters because, due to racial differences in the world, the Truth smiles more on some than on others. The Right Wing is a history of deviations,off-channels and side-rails from the mainline of Truth, concocted mainly by those who didn't have it in them to stand in the harsh, naked glare of unadorned Truth. National Socialism has been the closest thing yet to approach successfully the task of putting the Truth to work in reality. But this was done very far away and nearly forty years ago.

The practice of mixing Truth with lies in an effort to formulate something that the sick masses might accept without much struggle has resulted in the Right having built for itself an insurmountable obstacle of self-imposed hang-ups and restrictions. 99% of everything in the Right goes toward maintaining the facade of this or that particular illusion, whether it be turning the clock back to 1876, 1933, or whatever.

The National Socialist Liberation Front, from the time I had reactivated it in 1980, and up to the present, has slowly and steadily been gaining acceptance among the members of the Movement having long ago grown sorely disappointed with the totally out-of-touch, cultist, hobbyist, fetishist Nazi organizations that had held the stage heretofore. In NSLF they at least found reality and honesty. But after two years of following this course, it had already become clear to me that the key element was still lacking and we were still a long way from starting the kind of Movement that will catch on, take hold and spread in the manner of all historically significant and successful Movements.

About one month after I had put out the first issue of the new SIEGE in the summer of 1980, I made my first contact with the Charles Manson people. In the two years that followed, that relationship grew to where now it has become too large to remain confined and camouflaged inside the idea of a fallen Comrade, Joseph Tommasi, whose work I had earlier set myself to keeping alive, as it was the best thing I had run across up to that time. No recorded comment of Tommasi's on Manson is known to exist even though Tommasi was in high-gear operation in the L.A. area at the time of the Tate killings. He, precisely as I at the time, probably missed the greater point to the thing entirely. I would venture to guess however that he would not take kindly to anyone trying to mix "apples and oranges" with regards to the NSLF and Manson. And, as far as Manson is concerned, I was advised over a year ago to forget what I was doing in NSLF and start over fresh. As I feel I must pursue this course unencumbered by considerations of the past, the decision was made to leave NSLF and start UNIVERSAL ORDER, a name suggested to me by the highest authority. (Manson himself.)

That is what I have now done.








Friday, June 6, 2014

Holy Cross

Hail Mary, full of grace. The Lord is with thee.
Blessed art thou amongst women,
and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.
Holy Mary, Mother of God,
pray for us sinners,
now and at the hour of our death. Amen.






Wednesday, June 4, 2014

Manson Tour 2014: A Day With Aes-Nihil

MansonBlog.com had the distinct pleasure of spending a day with John Aes-Nihil. John directed (among others) a film called "Manson Family Movies (1984)". If you haven't seen it, you should.

Aes-Nihil is an archivist, collector and broker of all things Manson (among many other subjects). His Manson archives alone covers 3 buildings, so we only scratched the surface of this magnificent  collection. Today we present you with a small taste of what we saw. If you are looking for a particular item you can contact him through his website.

One thing that caught our eye was a collection of paintings. If you peruse Facebook (for example) you can find some pretty good artists who use the Family as their subject matter. Back in the day, there was an artist by the name of Caesar Lindhersch who was pretty damned good. Here are a few examples:




Lindhersch Paintings








While we're on the subject of art,  DebS was delighted to see a print from a wood cutting that friend Robert Taylor did many years ago.  It is a self portrait.  Robert has a long history with the counter/alternative culture dating back to his involvement with The Process in Chicago in the mid '60's and then and his association with Robert DePugh's Minutemen in the late '60's, early '70's.  Robert, who is a writer and a musician has authored a thing or two that you may have read when researching things on the periphery of the Manson saga.  He writes under the name R N Taylor .  His folk noir genre band is named "Changes".



A branded case that formerly contained Jay Sebring products:



Here's something that caught our eye pretty quickly. An original 16mm reel of Robert Hendrickson footage from his time embedded with the Manson Family at Spahn Ranch:



If you'd like to own this photo of Bobby Beausoleil, John has it in mint condition in the original magazine:



Another thing that interested us was his collection of Manson music. As non-afficianados of Manson music, some of these we'd never heard of:







Aes-Nihil's personal Manson bookshelf (there are separate collections of books around the property, but these were within reach of his bed:


A signed hard-cover copy of Helter Skelter

A hard-copy edition of Stranger in a strange land:


This is an original copy of Mel Lyman's "Autobiography of a World Saviour". Below is a first edition copy which John explained is extremely rare. Mel Lyman headed The Lyman Family and the The Fort Hill Community. Manson reportedly corresponded with Lyman as he was "already doing what we're trying to do".

You may have heard this quote:
The only difference between us and the Manson Family is that we don't go around preaching peace and love and we haven't killed anyone, yet.
– Jim Kweskin (perhaps in jest)


Lyman addressed in The Freep:



Speaking of The Freep:



Ok, now here's a gem we just COULDN'T pass up. "The Psycho-Sexual History of the Manson Family". It's origins are not verifiable (yet). After perusing random sections of 850 pages, we were giddy enough to purchase a copy. Readers, you'll be hearing about this one over the coming months!


I randomly reached into that briefcase grabbing about 40% of the pages, cutting it like a deck of cards. The first thing I saw were these gems. All touring stopped as I gathered the group to look. How can anyone pass this up?




A prison sketch by Squeaky Fromme. John wasn't positive if it was original or a really good copy:



John showed us a photo of Steven Parent's corpse on the table at the coroner's office. This is a photo none of us had ever seen before. It gives a glimpse into the rarity of some of the items included in his collection. I'm no expert, but judging by the photographic paper I could be convinced that it' is original.

Out of respect to the victim's families we shy away from posting post-mortem photographs directly on this blog. However if you want to view it we have made it available to our readers HERE. If you do not like to see graphic content, DO NOT click the link.



Saying our good-byes. Thank you, John for your hospitality, patience and generosity with your knowledge!