K. Graham's Fatal "Fall"

Showing 1-128 of 128 messages
K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 8/26/01 9:29 AM
Did anyone witness Katharine Graham's fatal "fall"?  Did any news organ
anywhere report any details about the "accident"?    I hate being kept in
the dark like this, or have I just been reading the wrong publications?

---------
DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" TomS 8/26/01 9:34 AM
Does everything have to be a conspiracy? She was an old lady who never
learned to walk in heels.


"David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:9mb80r$ko8$1@bob.news.rcn.net...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 8/26/01 2:19 PM
On Sun, 26 Aug 2001 12:32:33 -0400, "TomS"
<Bhigheart@don'tspammehotmail.com> wrote:

>Does everything have to be a conspiracy? She was an old lady who never
>learned to walk in heels.
>
Besides, who gives a tinker's dam.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Lewis Knox 8/26/01 4:18 PM
MDs have a saying about diagnosing illnesses: "When you hear hoofbeats,
don't think of zebras." An 80-plus year old woman dies after a fall, and my
first thought is either a) it was really a fall and she died of
complications; b) she fell because she had a stroke, which is what really
killed her.


David Martin <dcd...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:9mb80r$ko8$1@bob.news.rcn.net...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 8/26/01 8:28 PM
Okay, let's try again.  I don't seem to be getting any answers to a very
simple question.  Did anyone witness Katharine Graham's fall?  Does anyone
know if anyone witnessed the fall of America's most powerful woman?  Did
anybody report on whether or not anyone witnessed the fall?  Is there a
human being alive who is willing and able to describe the fall?  If no one
witnessed it, how do they know that the putative head injury was caused by
the fall?

Yoohoo!  Any journalists out there?  Why the lack of curiosity?

Now if you were told that someone who appeared hale and hearty suddenly up
and died from something they called "unspecified complications related to
breast cancer" you'd want to know a bit more, wouldn't you, especially if we
were talking about a prominent person?

No, I guess not.

---------
DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird

Lewis Knox <lk...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:9mc04h$kk1$1@slb6.atl.mindspring.net...


> MDs have a saying about diagnosing illnesses: "When you hear hoofbeats,
> don't think of zebras." An 80-plus year old woman dies after a fall, and
my
> first thought is either a) it was really a fall and she died of
> complications; b) she fell because she had a stroke, which is what really
> killed her.

As one who has had his illnesses grossly misdiagnosed by MDs, I'm not all
that impressed by such sayings.  I'd prefer the scientific method, or maybe
even old wives tales.


>
>
> David Martin <dcd...@erols.com> wrote in message
> news:9mb80r$ko8$1@bob.news.rcn.net...
> > Did anyone witness Katharine Graham's fatal "fall"?  Did any news organ
> > anywhere report any details about the "accident"?    I hate being kept
in
> > the dark like this, or have I just been reading the wrong publications?
> >
> > ---------
> > DC Dave
> > Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
> > "America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
> > & "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
> > http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
> > news:alt.thebird
> >
> >
> >
>
>


K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" TomS 8/27/01 5:35 AM
Interesting that you would chastise "journalists" for something you could
well do for yourself. Get off your lazy duff and do some research into the
subject yourself if you are so damn curious. I am sure with a little digging
you could find out if Ms. Graham was accompanied during her fatal post
luncheon fall.

I happen to know there were stories that not only described the incident in
detail, but also named at least two people who were accompanying her at the
time of the fall. They also mention it was a stone walkway that she fell on.

Unfortunately for folks like you the mere fact that she was accompanied by
any other living human being probably would be fodder for a conspiracy
theory, which is what you are intimating in your own amateurish way.


"David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:9mceni$9kc$1@bob.news.rcn.net...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 8/27/01 5:44 AM
On Sun, 26 Aug 2001 19:25:47 -0400, "Lewis Knox"
<lk...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>MDs have a saying about diagnosing illnesses: "When you hear hoofbeats,
>don't think of zebras." An 80-plus year old woman dies after a fall, and my
>first thought is either a) it was really a fall and she died of
>complications; b) she fell because she had a stroke, which is what really
>killed her.

Actually the saying goes: `If you are following bear tracks don't
expect to find a rabbit'. c) she suffered a heart attack with
transient cerebral ischemia; d) she was pushed and lost her balance
(somebody guilty of reckless endangerment or Kennedy's crime at the
least); e) she had a spell of vertigo as the first symptom of a
serious brain abnormality (onset of epilepsy is rare at this age,
tumor is possible, or complication of prior head trauma - perhaps in
prior fall), etc... The appropriate sayings are: 1. You find what you
look for, and look for what you know. 2. Never stop looking after the
first abnormality is found, always search for the second, third, etc.
until your search is exhausted.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" jswe...@usaor.net 8/27/01 9:09 AM
Dave, I was there with her, i witnessed it all...i won't tell you until you pay
me handsomely...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 8/27/01 5:19 PM
TomS <Bhigheart@don'tspammehotmail.com> wrote in message
news:t2ri7.23552$zk4.1302454@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com...

> Interesting that you would chastise "journalists" for something you could
> well do for yourself. Get off your lazy duff and do some research into the
> subject yourself if you are so damn curious. I am sure with a little
digging
> you could find out if Ms. Graham was accompanied during her fatal post
> luncheon fall.

It is becoming obvious that the details of the "accident" have been
inadequately reported or it would require no digging at all.  In my initial
posting I suggested that perhaps I had just missed the story, but the first
few responses offered only attacks on me instead of worthwhile information.


>
> I happen to know there were stories that not only described the incident
in
> detail, but also named at least two people who were accompanying her at
the
> time of the fall. They also mention it was a stone walkway that she fell
on.

The walkway part I got, but I don't recall seeing any detailed description
of the incident.  So how, exactly did it happen?  Without slipping on ice or
something like a skateboard, how does one fall on ones head so violently as
to die from it?  I'm having real trouble picturing it.  Who were those 2+
people?  Did anyone interview them?  Where can I find the interview?

> Unfortunately for folks like you the mere fact that she was accompanied by
> any other living human being probably would be fodder for a conspiracy
> theory, which is what you are intimating in your own amateurish way.

I should hope that there were a few more folks around who expect facts from
our great free press.  I ask for facts and all I get is abuse, speculation,
and unsupported assertions.  Keep it up and I'm going to start getting
suspicious.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" TomS 8/27/01 7:10 PM
Again, do your own research. I'm beginning to wonder if you can chew your
food without somebody's help!


"David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:9meo0v$ej5$1@bob.news.rcn.net...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Michael Schneider 8/27/01 9:14 PM
In article <9meo0v$ej5$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>, "David Martin"
<dcd...@erols.com> wrote:

> TomS <Bhigheart@don'tspammehotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:t2ri7.23552$zk4.1302454@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com...
> > Interesting that you would chastise "journalists" for something you could
> > well do for yourself. Get off your lazy duff and do some research into the
> > subject yourself if you are so damn curious. I am sure with a little
> digging
> > you could find out if Ms. Graham was accompanied during her fatal post
> > luncheon fall.
>
> It is becoming obvious that the details of the "accident" have been
> inadequately reported or it would require no digging at all.  In my initial
> posting I suggested that perhaps I had just missed the story, but the first
> few responses offered only attacks on me instead of worthwhile information.
> >
> > I happen to know there were stories that not only described the incident
> in
> > detail, but also named at least two people who were accompanying her at
> the
> > time of the fall. They also mention it was a stone walkway that she fell
> on.
>
> The walkway part I got, but I don't recall seeing any detailed description
> of the incident.  So how, exactly did it happen?  Without slipping on ice or
> something like a skateboard, how does one fall on ones head so violently as
> to die from it?


You trip, and osteoperosus does the rest.

Graham was pretty up there, you know.

--
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/American_Liberty/files/al.htm

Reply to mike1@@@usfamily.net sans two @@, or your reply won't reach me.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" TomS 8/28/01 5:40 AM

"Michael Schneider" <su...@dotitan.com> wrote in message
news:super-2708012327010001@c5-207.xtlab.com...


She was a force to be reckoned with and probably did more to get cigarettes
and booze out of the newsroom than any other publisher in the nation.

I would also suggest she rode on the shoulders of giants and without their
help, and a certain amount of rubberstamping of their thoughts and ideas, I
doubt she would have amounted to much on her own. Still she was a force to
be reckond with according to associates of mine at the Post.

President Bush said in a statement yesterday. "Mrs. Graham became a legend
in her own lifetime because she was a true leader and a true lady, steely
yet shy, powerful yet humble, known for her integrity and always gracious
and generous to others."

And the more ironic quote from K herself-
"What I essentially did," she said, "was to put one foot in front of the
other, shut my eyes and step off the ledge. The surprise was that I landed
on my feet." Except for the last time.


K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 8/28/01 3:21 PM
On Tue, 28 Aug 2001 08:40:04 -0400, "TomS"
<Bhigheart@don'tspammehotmail.com> wrote:

>President Bush said in a statement yesterday. "Mrs. Graham became a legend
>in her own lifetime because she was a true leader and a true lady, steely
>yet shy, powerful yet humble, known for her integrity and always gracious
>and generous to others."
>
>And the more ironic quote from K herself-
>"What I essentially did," she said, "was to put one foot in front of the
>other, shut my eyes and step off the ledge. The surprise was that I landed
>on my feet." Except for the last time.

The usual posthumous blather. In my opinion, she was the first to
bring flagrant obvious bias to media and continued to lead with
propaganda until her death from what ever cause. How amusing if it
gets spun into a conspiracy myth. She was a disgrace to journalism.
Her paper is good for lining the bottom of bird cages and carrying out
the bundled garbage.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 8/28/01 4:46 PM
What on earth are we going to do about this critical faculty famine in the
country?  I ask a simple, straightforward question and no one seems to know
how to even begin to answer it.  I did not ask for speculation.  I did not
ask for opinions.  My question certainly had nothing to do with whether any
of us like Katharine Graham or whether any of you like me.  I asked if
anyone witnessed Katharine Graham's fall.

Still, no one seems to know.  Is there no enterprising reporter out there
who showed up on the scene in Sun Valley, Idaho, to ask if anyone saw the
fall?  If the fall was witnessed, how do they say she managed to fall so
forcefully as to cause fatal brain damage, if that's what it was that killed
her?  I'm having great difficulty picturing it in the one season of the year
when you are sure not to have ice on the walk in Sun Valley.  If no one
witnessed the fall, how do they know that the apparent brain injury was
caused by a fall?

Now one of the blow-hard respondents, behind a smoke screen of insults, said
that he had read that there were witnesses, but he seems to have been the
only one.  And he has not followed up with an actual news story.  At this
point I can only conclude that his memory is faulty or he was lying.  He was
also among those imploring me with epithets that I dig up the information
myself.  Well, I have looked on Net archives and they all say simply that
she fell on a concrete walkway and only imply that she hit her head.  That's
it.  Oh, there was this one from an offbeat story that, like so many
mainstream news stories these days, relied on an anonymous source:

N E W S   B L U E Z E T T E     Wednesday, July 18, 2001
A daily newsletter, produced by www.newsblues.com, for TV professionals.
Bluezette is sponsored by Silverscape Technologies. www.silverscape.net
======================================================
---Tipped Golf Cart Killed Graham
----Louisiana Company Scraps Indiana News
-----Quick, Get The Airbrush
------Your Station For Nudes
-------No-Show Surrender
--------Vote Early, Vote Often
---------News You Can Lose
----------Mrs. Bluezette's Grammar Corner

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Got News?  Let us know.  mailto:edi...@newsblues.com
Search the Bluezette archives at http://newsblues.com/Secure/Bluezette/
-------------------------------------------------------------------

TIPPED GOLF CART KILLED GRAHAM

Despite widespread reports in the Washington Post, New York Times and
Associated Press, an eyewitness to the accident that took the life of
Katharine Graham insists the 84-year-old former publisher was in a golf
cart that tipped over while making a sharp turn on an asphalt walkway.

His claim directly challenges the company's statement that Mrs. Graham
"suffered a head injury when she fell on a concrete walkway outside a
condominium in Sun Valley, Idaho."

According to the source, who works for a major news network, "The story
about falling during a walk is bullshit."

He says resort employees rushed her to a Sun Valley emergency care facility
where doctors determined her injuries were beyond the scope of anything
they could handle.

She was stabilized and airlifted in a new twin-engine Bell 222 helicopter
(known affectionately as "Deuce") on a difficult 100 mile flight along the
ridges of the Sawtooth National Forest.

Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical Center, in Boise, Idaho, which received
the critically injured woman late Saturday is touted as the "flagship
trauma center of Idaho," the state's only Level II trauma center.

Mrs. Graham underwent surgery Sunday for the head injury, which caused
massive bleeding in her brain. She remained in critical condition in the
hospital's intensive care unit for nearly two days and never regained
consciousness.

Graham's son, Donald Graham, chairman of the board of The Washington Post
Company, was at her bedside when she was pronounced dead at 11:56AM Tuesday.

The funeral service will be Monday at 11 a.m. at Washington National
Cathedral.
-----------

This strikes me as a false lead.  Why does the source want to remain
anonymous, and if she fell from a golf cart, why would they lie about it?
The fact that a bizarre story like this is being floated is the sort of
thing that begins to make me suspicious.

---------
DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird

Professor Vonroach <vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3b8c1750.3842723@NNTP.ix.netcom.com...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 8/28/01 5:09 PM
I did not ask for speculation; I asked for information.  Did anyone witness
Katharine Graham's fall on that walkway?  Yes or no?  Here's how the New
York Times reported it on July 16:

Katharine Graham, chairwoman of the executive committee of The Washington
Post Company, was in critical condition at a hospital in Idaho after surgery
that followed a fall, the paper reported today.

Mrs. Graham, 84, went to Sun Valley, Idaho, last week to attend a business
conference and fell on Saturday afternoon on a walkway outside a condominium
there, the paper said on its Web site, citing an unidentified spokesman for
the company.

Mrs. Graham was taken first to a hospital in the Sun Valley area, and then
by helicopter to the St. Alphonsus Regional Medical Center in Boise, where
she underwent surgery, said Amy Miller, a spokeswoman for St. Alphonsus..

Ms. Miller said that Mrs. Graham was listed in critical condition late
Saturday in an intensive care unit but that details of the surgery and Mrs.
Graham's injuries were withheld at her family's request.

The company spokesman said Mrs. Graham had left Washington and arrived in
Sun Valley on Tuesday. The meeting, held by a Wall Street investment banking
firm, began on Tuesday and ended Saturday.

Mrs. Graham's son, Donald E. Graham, chairman of The Washington Post
Company, also attended the meeting and was at the hospital with her, the
paper said.

Mrs. Graham took over the company in 1963 after the death of her husband and
turned over the reins entirely to her son in 1993.

In two decades, she built the paper her father had purchased at a bankruptcy
auction into a media empire that ranked on the Fortune 500 list by the time
she turned it over to her son.

The steadfastness with which she turned the newspaper into a powerhouse was
most visible during the turbulent 1970's, when The Post and The New York
Times joined in a confrontation with the federal government over publishing
the Pentagon Papers, a secret study of the Vietnam War, and in The Post's
dogged pursuit of the Watergate scandal that brought down President Richard
M. Nixon.

From a business standpoint, Mrs. Graham built The Washington Post Company
into a profitable conglomerate of newspaper, broadcast, cable and magazine
properties, including Newsweek.

In 1974, she was the first woman elected to The Associated Press board of
directors. She was also chairwoman and president of the American Newspaper
Publishers Association.

Her autobiography, ''Personal History,'' won the Pulitzer Prize in 1998.
(end)

Notice that they won't even identify the spokesperson for the Post company
and they intentionally withhold all information about the injuries.  We have
all assumed that it was a head injury, but they haven't even told us that
much.  Why the secrecy?  This is positively Soviet-like.

---------
DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird

Michael Schneider <su...@dotitan.com> wrote in message
news:super-2708012327010001@c5-207.xtlab.com...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 8/28/01 5:19 PM
Here's how the LA Times reported it on July 16.  Big improvement over the
New York Times.  The LA Times gave us the name of the Post spokesman:

Katharine Graham, chairman of the executive committee of the Washington Post
Co., was hospitalized in critical condition after surgery that followed a
fall.

Graham, 84, was in Sun Valley attending a business conference and fell on a
walkway outside a condominium, said Chip Knight, spokesman for the Post
company.

Graham was taken to St. Alphonsus Regional Medical Center in Boise, where
she was in intensive care, hospital spokeswoman Amy Miller said. Her
injuries and what type of surgery Graham underwent were not disclosed.(end)

How perfect, that the details of the fatal injury of America's leading
newspaper person should be veiled in secrecy!  What a fitting end for the
owner of the newspaper long known as Pravda on the Potomac!

---------
DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird

<jswe...@usaor.net> wrote in message news:3B8A6FE5.5066BBF3@usaor.net...


> Dave, I was there with her, i witnessed it all...i won't tell you until
you pay
> me handsomely...
>


K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" TomS 8/28/01 5:58 PM
blah,blah,blah,blah blah--time to plonk this ranting idiot.


"David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:9mhcda$69i$1@bob.news.rcn.net...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 8/28/01 7:19 PM
Now, do you think that means there were witnesses to the fall or there were
not witnesses to the fall?

Remember the old expression, "Uneasy lies the head that wears the crown."
In days of yore royalty died through plots and intrigue all the time because
royalty had the power.  Well, where does real power lie in our country?  The
consensus was that Katharine Graham was at the very least the most powerful
woman in the country, which means, at the very least, that she was the most
powerful woman in the world.  For some reason the people around Katharine
the Great have decided to be outrageously tight-lipped about the
circumstances of her demise, and when an honest citizen asks obvious
questions he gets evasions and abuse.  Who are these people working for?

---------
DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird

TomS <Bhigheart@don'tspammehotmail.com> wrote in message
news:IPWi7.29618$zk4.1564009@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Michael Schneider 8/28/01 9:36 PM
In article <ycMi7.27826$zk4.1...@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com>, "TomS"
<Bhigheart@don'tspammehotmail.com> wrote:

> "Michael Schneider" <su...@dotitan.com> wrote in message
> > You trip, and osteoperosus does the rest.
> > Graham was pretty up there, you know.
>
> She was a force to be reckoned with.....


   She was *the* force to be reckoned with.


> ....and probably did more to....


   ....run blocker on bubbling-over scandals such as Foster, Votescam and
etc all the way back to the Warren Commission farce (where her closed-door
lay-down-the-law meeting with other media heads is finally, if too slowly,
achieving the notoriety it deserves) than anyone else in the 4th branch.
   Sure certainly knew "too much", and if Martin can support an allegation
that she was about to spill the beans, I'll treat his skepticism a little
more kindly.


> I would also suggest she rode on the shoulders of giants and without their
> help, and a certain amount of rubberstamping of their thoughts and ideas


   "Rubberstamp" my butt: She was a conscious and willing propagandast.


> President Bush said in a statement yesterday. "Mrs. Graham became a legend
> in her own lifetime because she was a true leader and a true lady, steely
> yet shy, powerful yet humble,


   Everything Hillary wishes she could be, if only she could escape her
genetic limitations.


> known for her integrity and always gracious and generous to others."


   *Snort*  A eulogy to a skunk, from a weasel.

--
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/American_Liberty/files/al.htm

Reply to mike1@@@usfamily.net sans two @@, or your reply won't reach me.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Michael Schneider 8/28/01 9:41 PM
In article <9mhbqa$356$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>, "David Martin"
<dcd...@erols.com> wrote:

> I did not ask for speculation; I asked for information.  Did anyone witness
> Katharine Graham's fall on that walkway?  Yes or no?  Here's how the New
> York Times reported it on July 16:
>
> Katharine Graham, chairwoman of the executive committee of The Washington
> Post Company, was in critical condition at a hospital in Idaho after surgery
> that followed a fall, the paper reported today.


Ah. So the fall *didn't* kill her.

That being the case, why are you speculating -- yes, that's the word --
foul play, since even the least competent wet-work specialist, one
presumes, would have very little trouble offing an old lady.


> Mrs. Graham, 84, went to Sun Valley, Idaho, last week to attend a business
> conference and fell on Saturday afternoon on a walkway outside a condominium
> there, the paper said on its Web site, citing an unidentified spokesman for
> the company.


May I ask why you consider it unusual for old ladies to fall down?

--
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/American_Liberty/files/al.htm

Reply to mike1@@@usfamily.net sans two @@, or your reply won't reach me.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" jswe...@usaor.net 8/29/01 9:03 AM
dave...i think you need to write a book about it...at this point though, you
have no evidence of a conspiracy...why don't you call up her family and ask
what they think...i would bet if they felt there had been some plot to kill
her, and she was as you say " the most powerful woman in the world, " there
would me a widescale investigation by numerous authorities and privately paid
agents looking into this amazing mystery...but as of yet, there has been none
of this...if i were you, i would be petitioning the court to dig her up and
have world-renowned criminal pathologist cyril wecht do another in-depth
autopsy...then we could get to the bottom of this...don't you think her loving
family would want to know what really happened...if they don't, it would be
obvious evidence that they were in on the devious plot, or ...but much less
likely, it could mean that they realized that their mother fell and cracked her
head and died of natural causes from the accident.

jeff swensen

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Mann Kind 8/29/01 10:42 AM
On Tue, 28 Aug 2001 19:50:42 -0400, "David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote:

>TIPPED GOLF CART KILLED GRAHAM
>
>Despite widespread reports in the Washington Post, New York Times and
>Associated Press, an eyewitness to the accident that took the life of
>Katharine Graham insists the 84-year-old former publisher was in a golf
>cart that tipped over while making a sharp turn on an asphalt walkway.

Whoever made up this story needs to go back to spook-school.  As all American
teenagers know, no matter how drunk you get, you can not roll a golf cart.  The
low center of gravity and wide wheel base makes it physically impossible to flip.
If someone came into the pro-shop and said an 84 year-old woman tipped over a
golf cart, I would ask:  "What was she driving, a fork truck?"  

Usenet is a truth detector.  If you have a hunch about something, run it up the
flagpole and see if it catches a breeze.  If  no response, there was probably
nothing to it, however; if the spooks come out of the woodwork to slime you,
you've struck a nerve.  Continue to probe the issue and the spooks will swarm.

The spooks must forever play whack-a-mole with the truth.  Whenever the truth
pops up, it's their job to whack the messenger, which makes it obvious to me,
this lady was pushed.


p.s.
How Chris Ruddy could afford that new swimming pool:
http://members.nbci.com/yugo_archive/20000318mediaoverb.htm


K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Michael Schneider 8/29/01 2:31 PM
In article <3b8e2bd6...@news.shtc.net>, Tr...@abridge.net (Mann
Kind) wrote:

> On Tue, 28 Aug 2001 19:50:42 -0400, "David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote:
>
> >TIPPED GOLF CART KILLED GRAHAM
> >
> >Despite widespread reports in the Washington Post, New York Times and
> >Associated Press, an eyewitness to the accident that took the life of
> >Katharine Graham insists the 84-year-old former publisher was in a golf
> >cart that tipped over while making a sharp turn on an asphalt walkway.
>
> Whoever made up this story needs to go back to spook-school.  As all American
> teenagers know, no matter how drunk you get, you can not roll a golf cart.
> low center of gravity and wide wheel base makes it physically impossible to
> flip.


   Oh yeah?  The have a HIGH center of gravity the second a person sits on
them, and the 3-wheeled carts are notorious for tipping over if you take a
turn too sharply on any sort of incline.

--
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/American_Liberty/files/al.htm

Reply to mike1@@@usfamily.net sans two @@, or your reply won't reach me.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 8/29/01 3:09 PM
On Wed, 29 Aug 2001 11:59:32 -0400, jswe...@usaor.net wrote:

>do another in-depth
>autopsy...then we could get to the bottom of this...don't you think her loving
>family would want to know what really happened...if they don't, it would be
>obvious evidence that they were in on the devious plot, or ...but much less
>likely, it could mean that they realized that their mother fell and cracked her
>head and died of natural causes from the accident.
>
>jeff swensen
`another' when was the first? Where did you hear of a head injury?
This rich well-known publisher visiting in Montana tumbles and breaks
her hip. Not at all unusual at her age.
She elects to be treated with surgery locally without returning to her
home in Washington? Her `loving family' agrees? Hey, this is getting
very weird. Was her doctor traveling with her?
Who are the beneficiaries of her sudden demise? `Loving family' is a
bit secretive on that point? Children? A favorite charity? An old
trusted employee or servant? Have the shareholders been consulted on
her replacement on the BoD? Who is to be new CEO? There are other than
family issues involved here.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 8/29/01 6:51 PM
Professor Vonroach <vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3b926515.3184470@NNTP.ix.netcom.com...

Now we are beginning to make some progress.  You are quite right that I am
jumping to the conclusion that it was a head injury that did Her Powerness
in.  It just seemed to me that that was the only kind of injury that would
have resulted in death so quickly.  But I have not read that it was a head
injury.  They haven't even told us that much.  They won't even say what kind
of injury it was.

So to my original question of who witnessed the fall, we may now add the
question of what part of Her Powerness was injured.  We may also add the
overriding question, "Why the super secrecy?"  What are they hiding?  And
why doesn't anyone seem to care that all the news stories on the fall come
from the single source of a Washington Post company spokesman?  Where are
all those enterprising reporters.  John Swinton is being proved more right
than ever about them, I fear.

As I go back and read that spokesman's statement, I see that I am also
jumping to the conclusion that Ms. Graham was walking on the walkway when
she fell.  They only said that she fell on a concrete walkway.  That leaves
open the possibility that she fell on it in the same way that rain
occasionally falls on it.  Maybe her starting point was a sixth floor
balcony.  Now that would explain why the fall was fatal.

---------
DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird


K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Awater Melon 8/30/01 7:57 AM
On Wed, 29 Aug 2001 16:22:48 -0500, su...@dotitan.com (Michael Schneider) wrote:

>   Oh yeah?  The have a HIGH center of gravity the second a person sits on
>them, and the 3-wheeled carts are notorious for tipping over if you take a
>turn too sharply on any sort of incline.

It's a moot point because 87 year-old women don't play golf
because if they did they might fall and bust their head open.

Why don't you spooks just say she fell in the shower.  That
would explain why nobody was around to see who did it.

Here's a picture of the agent who thought up: "Suicide by golf cart."

  http://users.lycaeum.org/~sunny/whats-up.jpg

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" TomS 8/30/01 6:18 PM
Journalism is considered the first rough draft of history. Why don't you two
enterprising conspiracy theorists put your noggins together and write the
second. I am sure there will be a huge demand for finding out whoo 'offed'
the dowager princess.

"David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:9mk65e$9tr$1@bob.news.rcn.net...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 8/30/01 8:43 PM
TomS <Bhigheart@don'tspammehotmail.com> wrote in message
news:YABj7.73964$V7.1578413@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...

> Journalism is considered the first rough draft of history. Why don't you
two
> enterprising conspiracy theorists put your noggins together and write the
> second. I am sure there will be a huge demand for finding out whoo 'offed'
> the dowager princess.

Well, there's journalism and there's journalism.  Had they depended
exclusively on the national media, very few people out there would have
learned about the former White House intern, Mary Caitrin Mahoney, who was
shot to death along with two other young employees at the Wisconsin Avenue
Starbucks here in Washington on July 4th weekend in 1997.  The local papers
had to cover it because people were talking about it.  (Search Starbucks on
my web site for more information.) Similarly, a local Long Island newspaper,
Suffolk County Life, has reported far more about TWA 800 than ever hit the
national press.  (Search Suffolk County Life on http://www.newsmax.com ) I
have sent the following e-mail to the weekly Mountain Express of Ketchum,
Idaho, that covers Sun Valley.  Maybe they will tell us something:

Dear Mountain Express,

I have been very frustrated by the paucity of details in the national news
concerning Katharine Graham's fatal fall.  The New York Times, for example,
uses only the web page of The Washington Post for its source, which, in
turn, uses a spokesman for the Washington Post Company.  All he tells us is
that she fell on a concrete walk and that she underwent surgery of an
unspecified nature.  Then she died.

I'm sure you will agree with me that were this Jane Q. Tourist who died from
a fall at Sun Valley this reporting simply would not do.  In the case of the
death of the world's most powerful woman it is unforgivable.

As the newspaper on the spot, perhaps you can tell me:

1.  Were there any witnesses to the fall?
2.  If not, how was it determined that her injuries were caused by the fall?
3.  If so, who were they and what did they have to say about the fall?  What
caused it?  How did she land?  Did she hit her head?  If so, on what?  If
not, what part of her did appear to land on the walk most heavily?
4.  I should think that the law would require a police report.  What does
the police report say about the accident?
5.  Did the Mountain Express report the details of the accident?  If so,
could you please e-mail me what you reported.  If not, could you explain why
not?
6.  If you did not report the details at the request of the Graham family,
could you tell me if you would withhold such details at the request of the
family of Jane Q. Tourist, even though the police tell us that in unnatural
death cases, immediate family members are generally high among the suspects
as to the cause of the death?

I would very much appreciate answers to these questions.

Sincerely,
David Martin

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 8/31/01 4:17 AM
On Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:14:09 -0400, "TomS"
<Bhigheart@don'tspammehotmail.com> wrote:

>ournalism is considered the first rough draft of history. Why don't you two
>enterprising conspiracy theorists put your noggins together and write the
>second. I am sure there will be a huge demand for finding out whoo 'offed'
>the dowager princess.

Really, I'd say most couldn't care less.  Most do not even know that
it happened. She was a bad person and now she is gone.

On your first absurd statement, I must look up some of Goebbels's `hot
journalism' and refresh my mind on the great triumphs of the Third
Reich.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" TomS 8/31/01 4:53 AM

"Professor Vonroach" <vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3b92709a.984221@NNTP.ix.netcom.com...

that last graph is an absurd non-sequitor if I ever read one.


K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" TomS 8/31/01 4:57 AM

"David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:9mn137$8sj$1@bob.news.rcn.net...

What's your point. If in doubt you apparently choose to obfuscate. What does
a local homicide case have to do with a wobbly old lady falling down and
going boom?

Nothing, absolutely nothing.

There are plenty of press critics but unfortunately the critics never share
the reality of modern day journalism, not the least of which is the great
possibility of litigation.  $600 and hour lawyers don't grow on tree's and
the bottom line certainly is a strong consideration these days in any
publishing board room.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 8/31/01 12:24 PM
On Fri, 31 Aug 2001 07:52:01 -0400, "TomS"
<Bhigheart@don'tspammehotmail.com> wrote:

>n your first absurd statement, I must look up some of Goebbels's `hot
>> journalism' and refresh my mind on the great triumphs of the Third
>> Reich.
>
>that last graph is an absurd non-sequitor if I ever read one.
>
He professed to be a journalist, but I suppose you have been anointed
to decide. Most of the `journalists' these days seem to be following
in his steps - certainly those who worked for K. Graham.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 8/31/01 12:28 PM
On Fri, 31 Aug 2001 07:56:26 -0400, "TomS"
<Bhigheart@don'tspammehotmail.com> wrote:

>What's your point. If in doubt you apparently choose to obfuscate. What does
>a local homicide case have to do with a wobbly old lady falling down and
>going boom?

Both are excellent examples of obfuscation by hired copy writers
serving as journalists these days.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" TomS 8/31/01 2:06 PM
BAck when Geraldo Rivera claimed to be a "journalist" I came up with what I
feel distinguishes a reporter from a so called journalist and I believe says
it all- "A reporter tells the story, and a journalist is the story."

"Professor Vonroach" <vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3b90e493.596938@NNTP.ix.netcom.com...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 8/31/01 8:41 PM
While this wrestling match was going on a correspondent has furnished me
with some excellent articles from Boise's Idaho Statesman.  From it I have
learned that Ms. Graham underwent surgery to repair "extensive intracranial
injuries" and that she died from internal bleeding.  That's a lot more than
I ever saw in America's major newspapers or news magazines.  They even name
the three doctors who worked on her.  They also say that she was walking on
the walkway at the time of her fall, ruling out a fall from a higher
altitude.

Meanwhile, the Mountain Express of Ketchum has failed to respond to my
questions concerning witnesses, and the Idaho Statesman says nothing about
witnesses.  I shall now direct my questions to them.  I am all the more
curious about what sort of spectacular fall it was that resulted in such
"extensive intracranial injuries."

Maybe after this puzzle is solved we can find out what those "unspecified
complications related to breast cancer" were that killed Bill's talkative
mom.

---------
DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird

Professor Vonroach <vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3b8fe33f.256193@NNTP.ix.netcom.com...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/1/01 5:03 AM
On Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:52:30 -0400, "TomS"
<Bhigheart@don'tspammehotmail.com> wrote:

>BAck when Geraldo Rivera claimed to be a "journalist" I came up with what I
>feel distinguishes a reporter from a so called journalist and I believe says
>it all- "A reporter tells the story, and a journalist is the story."
Close but: A reporter tells _a_ story, a journalist is _a_ story, an
imaginary concept.
If Geraldo is a `journalist', then Heidi Fleiss is a movie star.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Andy Walton 9/1/01 10:47 PM
In article <9mplb6$e7l$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>,
 "David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote:

 :Maybe after this puzzle is solved we can find out what those "unspecified


 :complications related to breast cancer" were that killed Bill's talkative
 :mom.

And then you can try to find out who murdered George Burns, because
people don't *just die* suddenly at the age of 102.
--
      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
       hesitating, non-committal language."
                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Andy Walton 9/1/01 10:59 PM
In article <9meo0v$ej5$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>,
 "David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote:

 :Keep it up and I'm going to start getting suspicious.

Heaven forfend.


--
      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
       hesitating, non-committal language."
                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Dennis Tetreault 9/2/01 2:37 AM
On Sun, 02 Sep 2001 01:46:55 -0400, Andy Walton
<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>In article <9mplb6$e7l$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>,
> "David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote:
>
> :Maybe after this puzzle is solved we can find out what those "unspecified
> :complications related to breast cancer" were that killed Bill's talkative
> :mom.
>
>And then you can try to find out who murdered George Burns, because
>people don't *just die* suddenly at the age of 102.


And following that, he can begin to investigate who's got it in for
Bob Hope !  
Must be the damn Trilateralists behind it all!!

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/2/01 4:20 AM
On Sun, 02 Sep 2001 01:46:55 -0400, Andy Walton
<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
>       hesitating, non-committal language."
>                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
Just to think, Andy, if he had only said `Make definite assertions _OF
FACT_', perhaps a lot of the lying and propaganda called `journalism'
and backed by those of Graham's ilk, could have been avoided.
Unfortunately the advice was flawed from the start.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 9/2/01 6:11 AM
Would you look what we have here, a real, live award-winning journalist,
snidely offering commentary and advice, but, as one might expect, no
information.  So tell me, Andrew, did anyone witness Katharine Graham's
fatal fall or didn't they?  Do you believe the account of the anonymous
witness that she actually fell out of a golf cart?  Why or why not?

While we're at it, do you have any thoughts on why your entire profession is
suppressing the news of the existence of the addendum to Starr's report of
Deputy White House Counsel Vincent W. Foster's death? (See
http://fbicover-up.com/starr/starrreport.htm , especially John Clarke's
exhibits with his letter.)

And another:

If CNN, The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal,
and The Washington Times were official organs of the government, how would
they have reported any differently than they have done on Graham's death,
Foster's death, TWA 800, the Oklahoma City bombing, Waco, our Balkan
adventures, the Kennedy and King assassinations, or virtually anything else
that is really important?

And finally:

How do you live with yourself?

If I am not as credulous as you and your partners in cover-up would have me
be, it is from experience and education.


---------
DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird

Andy Walton <att...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:atticus-024A8E.01465502092001@basic.bs.webusenet.com...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Hugh Turley 9/2/01 9:27 AM
den...@ma.ultranet.com (Dennis Tetreault) wrote in message news:<3b91fd41...@news.ma.ultranet.com>...

I still haven't seen anyone post an answer to the most basi question,
"Who saw Katharine Graham fall?"  Why should that be so difficult to
answer?

Throwing up words like "Trilateralists" is making silly of a serious
question.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Awater Melon 9/2/01 1:42 PM

>      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
>       hesitating, non-committal language."
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

                                              _
                                            /'_/)
                                         ,/_   /
                                         /    /
                                    /'_'/'  '/'__'7,
                                /'/    /    /    /"/_\
                               ('(    '    '  _~/'   ')
                                \              '     /
                                '\'   \           _.7'
                                  \              (
                                   \              \

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" TomS 9/2/01 3:47 PM
If you are so interested in who witnessed the fall perhaps you should
request the police report or write directly to the Washington Post and ask
them the question.

As for me I really don't give a rats ass one way or the other, and as far as
that condemning me as being a "bad journalist" I was never assigned to the
story nor would I care to be assigned to it.

I have other local fish to fry like the slumlord who murdered his wife and
got away with it.


"Hugh Turley" <Tur...@acninc.net> wrote in message
news:cf3c27d2.0109020827.2b26b3c3@posting.google.com...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Dennis Tetreault 9/2/01 8:04 PM

Because we, here in the real world, are not privvy to the police
reports, coronors inquest, etc.  And who really cares if it was a
butler,  a friend from across town, or if it were not witnessed at all
and the her being found 10 minutes later, muttering "I slipped thanks
to the Trilateralists pouring tea at the 3rd step from the top."

>Throwing up words like "Trilateralists" is making silly of a serious
>question.

Seeking a grand conspiracy because an old woman slipped and fell is
even more silly.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Hugh Turley 9/2/01 8:35 PM
If TomS doesn't "give a rats ass one way or another" why does he
bother to read this thread and respond with comments?

Perhaps like me he does not care about how Mrs. Graham actually died
but he does care the really important issue of this thread that the
American press is an unreliable source for important information.
Some of us no longer trust the American press others here are
defenders of the spokesmen of our authorities.


"TomS" <Bhigheart@don'tspammehotmail.com> wrote in message news:<PEyk7.3$ZJ...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com>...


> If you are so interested in who witnessed the fall perhaps you should
> request the police report or write directly to the Washington Post and ask
> them the question.
>
> As for me I really don't give a rats ass one way or the other, and as far as
> that condemning me as being a "bad journalist" I was never assigned to the
> story nor would I care to be assigned to it.
>
> I have other local fish to fry like the slumlord who murdered his wife and
> got away with it.
>

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" TomS 9/2/01 8:42 PM
No.

"Hugh Turley" <Tur...@acninc.net> wrote in message
news:cf3c27d2.0109021935.26a460@posting.google.com...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Andy Walton 9/3/01 3:41 AM
In article <9mtb44$mk6$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>,
 "David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote:

 :Would you look what we have here, a real, live award-winning journalist,


 :snidely offering commentary and advice, but, as one might expect, no
 :information.  So tell me, Andrew, did anyone witness Katharine Graham's
 :fatal fall or didn't they?

Dunno. You're the one who's devoted so much time to writing about it.
Would a little research be out of the question? Assuming that "DC Dave"
is a geographical reference, the Post is a local call. Or do you prefer
to make vague intimations of a conspiracy based on an unanswered
question you haven't tried very hard to answer? I understand the appeal
of the latter approach, because any information you don't have spoon-fed
you can label "suppressed," even if you haven't looked very hard for it.

 :Do you believe the account of the anonymous


 :witness that she actually fell out of a golf cart?  Why or why not?

An account given to whom, under what circumstances? I'm generally leery
of anonymous sources.

 :While we're at it, do you have any thoughts on why your entire profession is


 :suppressing the news of the existence of the addendum to Starr's report of
 :Deputy White House Counsel Vincent W. Foster's death? (See
 :http://fbicover-up.com/starr/starrreport.htm , especially John Clarke's
 :exhibits with his letter.)

If they're "suppressing" it, they're not doing much of a job. It's on a
hundred or so Web sites, despite the claims on the site you cited. The
report, with addendum, is available on demand from the GPO. You don't
even need to file a FOIA request. Why did they not report on it? Because
they didn't find it credible. If you disagree with that judgment, feel
free to offer your own view (not that you needed the invitation).

 :And another:


 :
 :If CNN, The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal,
 :and The Washington Times were official organs of the government, how would
 :they have reported any differently than they have done on Graham's death,
 :Foster's death, TWA 800, the Oklahoma City bombing, Waco, our Balkan
 :adventures, the Kennedy and King assassinations, or virtually anything else
 :that is really important?

That question is only relevant if you assume that the "official" account
of events is always a lie, and any press accounts that agree with the
government investigators are ipso facto involved in a coverup. It's
obvious to the most casual observer that you hold that view. I prefer to
evaluate conflicting claims in the light of available facts, and to
evaluate claims on the evidence supporting them rather than how well
they tell me what I want to hear.

 :And finally:


 :
 :How do you live with yourself?

I sleep like a baby. And you?

 :If I am not as credulous as you and your partners in cover-up would have me


 :be, it is from experience and education.

"Not as credulous" is an interesting spin, given that you draw broad
conclusions based on a lack of evidence, rather than on the evidence
available. You're every bit as credulous as the people you decry; you
just evaluate the evidence according to different prejudices. You
intimate that there was a plot to kill a retired newspaper publisher,
without any evidence that was the case, without even a suggestion of who
was involved or what their motives were, and you somehow find this more
believable than an octagenarian woman simply dying after falling down,
which happens hundreds of times a day. You cite your own ignorance as
proof of, erm, something or other. If that's not "credulous," I'll eat
my hat.


--
      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
       hesitating, non-committal language."
                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Andy Walton 9/3/01 3:59 AM
In article <cf3c27d2.01090...@posting.google.com>,
 Tur...@acninc.net (Hugh Turley) wrote:

 :I still haven't seen anyone post an answer to the most basi question,


 :"Who saw Katharine Graham fall?"  Why should that be so difficult to
 :answer?

Why, indeed? Why have the people who've bandied about the question for
the last month and a half not bothered to look for the answer? Someone,
presumably, called 911 before Graham was evac'ed via helicopter to
Boise. The transcripts and, in most jurisdictions, the audio recordings
of 911 calls are public records. The police report and death certificate
are public records. One has to wonder why the "reporters" who are so
interested in the answers are posing them to alt. newsgroups rather than
asking the people who have the answers. If you're that curious, do your
goddamned homework.

Here's a head start: Graham suffered her injuries in Sky Valley, Idaho.
That's a ski resort in Blaine County; the closest large town is Ketchum.
She died in Boise, so she was transported there at some point, probably
by helicopter. So the officers who responded to the accident were from
Sun Valley, Ketchum, Blaine County, or some combination thereof. You
know whom to contact. Have at it.

 :Throwing up words like "Trilateralists" is making silly of a serious
 :question.

No, it's making silly of a silly question. If you want to make the case
that something is amiss in the official version of events, you'll need
something more than your own ignorance as evidence. DC Dave's customary
rhetoric raises the rebuttable presumption that he's a conspiracy kook.
Feel free to rebut it.


--
      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
       hesitating, non-committal language."
                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/3/01 4:11 AM
On 2 Sep 2001 20:35:24 -0700, Tur...@acninc.net (Hugh Turley) wrote:

>f TomS doesn't "give a rats ass one way or another" why does he
>bother to read this thread and respond with comments?
>
>Perhaps like me he does not care about how Mrs. Graham actually died
>but he does care the really important issue of this thread that the
>American press is an unreliable source for important information.
>Some of us no longer trust the American press others here are
>defenders of the spokesmen of our authorities.
>
`our authorities'? It is unclear whether you mean `the press' or the
law enforcement group in what ever local county or township the event
happened. In this ambiguous statement both interpretations are
probably false. None but the mentally and morally deranged look for
any `authoritative accounting' of events in the American press which
has been totally converted to the style of Goebbels by people like
Graham. If the local group charged with local investigations of
medico-legal occurrences is to be interpreted, then I'd say the
Ramsey, OJ Simpson, and Ted Kennedy cases are recent examples that
give the lie to that assertion.  Why should the thought even present
itself that the press account or police report  was slipshod or
fraudulent? It is a symptom of the cancer of lost integrity which has
become obvious to all who can read if they are capable of any
independent thought.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/3/01 4:36 AM
On Mon, 03 Sep 2001 06:41:23 -0400, Andy Walton
<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:

> Why did they not report on it? Because
>they didn't find it credible. If you disagree with that judgment, feel
>free to offer your own view (not that you needed the invitation).
>

> :If I am not as credulous as you and your partners in cover-up would have me


> :be, it is from experience and education.
>
>"Not as credulous" is an interesting spin, given that you draw broad
>conclusions based on a lack of evidence, rather than on the evidence
>available. You're every bit as credulous as the people you decry; you
>just evaluate the evidence according to different prejudices. You
>intimate that there was a plot to kill a retired newspaper publisher,
>without any evidence that was the case, without even a suggestion of who
>was involved or what their motives were, and you somehow find this more
>believable than an octagenarian woman simply dying after falling down,
>which happens hundreds of times a day. You cite your own ignorance as
>proof of, erm, something or other. If that's not "credulous," I'll eat
>my hat.

A very free use of the terms `credible' and `credulous'. What is
credible to a reporter often seems to be what they are told is
credible by their employers, otherwise they don't give a `rat's ass'
what the facts are.  News reporters once attempted to gather facts and
report those facts to the public so that their readers could judge the
credibility of those facts. The `new' reporters of the baby boom
generation (now `Yuppies') have an entirely new spin on their job.
They are generally spoon-fed their `facts', and expound on what their
employer finds `credible'. Little idols on their pillars
_instructing_, not informing the public who bothers to read them
anymore. In olden day, a person when to school to obtain instruction,
and bought a newspaper for _information_, now in the words of Mr.
Porter: `Anything goes'. Reporters are judged by their employers on
their ability to spin out the company line with speed regardless of
the facts; on radio and TV, they are generally judged by their
employers on their voice, face, and reading ability, as well as the
vacuousness of their skulls and the ability to quickly absorb the
company line.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 9/3/01 7:01 AM
Andy Walton <att...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:atticus-673620.06412303092001@basic.bs.webusenet.com...

> In article <9mtb44$mk6$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>,
>  "David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote:
>
>  :Would you look what we have here, a real, live award-winning journalist,
>  :snidely offering commentary and advice, but, as one might expect, no
>  :information.  So tell me, Andrew, did anyone witness Katharine Graham's
>  :fatal fall or didn't they?
>
> Dunno. You're the one who's devoted so much time to writing about it.
> Would a little research be out of the question? Assuming that "DC Dave"
> is a geographical reference, the Post is a local call. Or do you prefer
> to make vague intimations of a conspiracy based on an unanswered
> question you haven't tried very hard to answer? I understand the appeal
> of the latter approach, because any information you don't have spoon-fed
> you can label "suppressed," even if you haven't looked very hard for it.

First, as anyone following this thread can see, I am apparently virtually
the only one who has bothered to do any research on the question.  Where are
all the journalists?  Do they all, like young Andrew, prefer to pop off at
those who resist being insulted with passed-on press releases (talk about
spoon-fed!)?  I did, in fact, begin with a few simple questions which I
hoped someone would answer, saving me the trouble of doing the sort of
digging that one can see that I have done with such questions as the death
of Vincent Foster, the Oklahoma City bombing, the Starbucks murders, Federal
Prison Industries, and quite a few other things with which our kept press
cannot be bothered.

The suggestion that The Post would be the best place to start for answers
must be meant as a joke.  Here, on another issue, is an example of how
helpful The Post is in imparting essential information:

The National Reconnaissance Office certainly is a very secret agency, with a
great deal of help from The Washington Post.  At a gathering to discuss a
book on government secrecy a couple of years ago (a panel discussion of the
book,
"Secrets, the CIA's War at Home," by Angus MacKenzie) I asked panelist Bob
Woodward why The Post had reported nothing about the murder of the security
guard at the NRO building there a short time before the building became
operational, during the time when everyone was being told that it was the
North American Rockwell building.  Woodward professed ignorance and asked
for information.  I sent him the full article from which excerpts are taken
at the end of this posting.  Still, The Post has written nothing about the
NRO murder mystery/outrage (It looks for all the world like an inside job.
A rather imposing security fence was already up around the building
complex.).

The room was just jammed with journalists and spooks (at this level usually
one and the same), and only one person sought me out for details after my
question.  That was James Bamford, author of now two books on that other
powerful and secret organization, the National Security Agency (NSA).  I
don't know if he ever wrote anything about the NRO murder either.

For its part, the Post only writes government press releases like the
following, while the little Centreview scoops it on the real news like the
article that follows the one by The Post.

Satellite Agency Has Tradition of Secrecy
Joint Defense-CIA Enterprise Uses Many Contract Employees Such as Alleged
Spy
 _____

 By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, August 25, 2001; Page A10

The once super-secret National Reconnaissance Office where alleged spy Brian
P. Regan worked manages the design, construction and operation of the
nation's intelligence and early warning satellites on an annual budget of
about $6 billion.

The very existence of the NRO, which was established in 1961, was classified
until 1992. Today it has a Web site, although its exact budget remains
secret. The designs of its satellites and some of the intelligence they
gather are classified as special compartmented intelligence, or SCI, a
category beyond top secret.

Though formally part of the Defense Department, the NRO is run jointly by
the director of the CIA, and its $300 million headquarters is in a complex
of high-rise office buildings in suburban Chantilly.

A recent internal study described it as "simultaneously an intelligence
organization, a defense organization, and a space organization."

Both the Pentagon and the CIA contribute people, funds and other support to
NRO. In turn, the agency supplies intelligence both for national
policymakers and for frontline military forces.

Because NRO works closely with private contractors, many of its headquarters
employees are contract personnel working for companies such as TRW, which
hired Regan after he retired from the Air Force.

The satellites that NRO manages provide many types of intelligence,
including photographs taken from space that can show objects on the ground
only inches in length. They also produce infra-red images, showing sources
of heat; radar images, showing movement; signals intelligence, meaning
intercepted radio and microwave communications; and measurement and
signature intelligence, a new technology that can help determine the
chemical composition of an object from far away.

The biggest intelligence satellites cost more than $1 billion apiece, but in
recent years the NRO has been moving toward smaller ones. Some of the NRO's
early photographs helped determine that there was no real "missile gap" with
Russia. In the 1980s, its satellites were used to verify arms control
agreements, and in the 1990s, the NRO provided key assistance in the Persian
Gulf War. Today, many of its assets are used to support U.S. and allied
troops abroad.

Recently, however, there has been concern that countries have learned to
keep track of U.S. satellites and deceive their sensors. Many within the
U.S. intelligence community believe that the Indian government, for example,
was able to hide its preparations for nuclear tests because it knew when
U.S. satellites would be overhead and what their capabilities were.

The most famous previous spy case involving satellites took place in the
late 1970s, when Christopher Boyce and a partner, Andrew Daulton Lee, were
arrested for selling the Soviet Union thousands of secret documents. The
pair also worked for TRW, which was involved in designing satellites.

In 1978, William Kampiles, a CIA watch officer, sold Moscow the operations
manual for the KH-11, at the time the most sophisticated U.S. photo
satellite.

The latest U.S. imagery satellites provide a continuous flow of so much data
that processing it, rather than collecting it, has become the key
intelligence problem.

© 2001 The Washington Post Company

The Tina Ricca Murder
Excerpted from the Centre View (Centreville, Va.) 8/11/94

Right from the start, said John Ricca, the investigation into his daughter's
Nov. 6 murder at the construction site of the Rockwell International
building in Westfields was "shrouded in secrecy."

He received little information about how she died and nine months after her
murder the police have still not found her killer.

Now, says Ricca, it all makes sense.

It was revealed this week that the Rockwell site where his daughter Tina
worked as a security guard was actually a front for the headquarters of the
super-secret National Reconnaissance Office (NRO). The CIA and the Defense
Department jointly oversee the NRO-which manages America's spy
satellites-and its existence was kept top secret until two years ago.

On Monday, President Clinton declassified the NRO headquarters' existence,
after many senators complained no one had told them of the project' s
magnitude and cost. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence was upset to
discover the building was estimated to cost $350 million-nearly twice what
they'd been told it would.

Ricca has little sympathy for them, saying they "only lost money-I lost a
daughter."

Fairfax County Police Lt. Dennis Wilson with the homicide squad said Ricca's
body was found in a temporary construction trailer not part of the NRO
complex. He said police didn't know then that the complex was anything but a
Rockwell facility, but said that fact has no bearing on the investigation.

But to Ricca, of Falls Church, it does have bearing, and "makes it even more
believable why things have gone the way they have. It's making more sense by
the minute why I haven't gotten any information."

Tina Ricca, 27, was employed as a security guard by Vance International of
Oakton and had worked at the Rockwell site on Chantilly's Lee Road almost
two years. She'd just been offered a job by Rockwell in Australia and was
looking for ward to beginning it.

She'd already finished her own eight-hour shift and was filling in for a
co-worker away on National Guard duty when her life was ended by a bullet to
the upper part of her body.

Police decline to reveal the type or caliber of weapon used or specify
exactly where she was shot. But she wasn't wearing the bullet proof vest she
usually wore, and both her gun and radio were missing.

Police have not ascribed a motive for her murder, but the ClA's involvement
in the building, Ricca said, brings possible scenarios to mind. Perhaps, he
said, his daughter saw something she shouldn't have. It also might explain,
he said, why there was an approximately 2 1/2-hour gap between the time she
was shot and the time Vance reported it.

"It gave the CIA plenty of time to destroy whatever evidence there was
before the police got on the scene," said Ricca.

CIA spokeswoman Suzanne Wheeler Klein said Wednesday, "We don't have any
information and don't have any comment on it."

There's also a question whether the FBI was involved in the murder
investigation. Although FBI officials have denied they're a part of it,
Ricca said he understands the FBI was on the scene before the police and
later questioned some possible suspects. After the murder, he said, both the
police and Vance had difficulty getting into the site.

I f you've got the CIA and a real top-secret thing like the NRO," he said,
"why in the world did they have one guard out there? There was only one
guard on duty besides her, and there was supposed to be four. They should
have had more." He also plans to contact the Senate, Congress and President
Clinton, but doubts if, ultimately it'll get him anywhere.

Ricca said"If [the CIA] doesn't want Congress and the Ways and Means
Committee to know what happened," he said, "they're surely not going to tell
me-especially if they're involved in it."

Although police are saying the slain guard' s body was found in a
construction trailer, Ricca said they told him she was actually found in a
blue, modular building. If she was in the trailer, he said, the other guard
would have been with her.

He also said the room she was in had working computers in it, and he
believes, "at the very minimum, those computers contained the drawings of
the building, and that was top secret." Yet, he said, police told him when
the FBI let them in, there was nothing on the computers.

To get through each day, he focuses on his job (ironically, he's a general
manager for a construction company that's a prime contractor to the federal
government), his wife and his children. (end)

From http://www.thepacc.org/Tina.html

The Post, by the way, has never reported a word about the death--ruled
suicide with the assistance of Vince Foster autopsy doctor, James C.
Beyer--of DEA informant, the college student, Tommy Burkett whose parents
keep up the web site above.

>
>  :Do you believe the account of the anonymous
>  :witness that she actually fell out of a golf cart?  Why or why not?
>
> An account given to whom, under what circumstances? I'm generally leery
> of anonymous sources.

Some sharp reporter!  No wonder he's now "free lancing."  I put this on this
thread back on August 28.  Wonder what sources he relied on to tell him that
America sent unmanned rockets to the moon in the 1950s? (See his web site.)
I'm leery of anonymous sources, too, but as I detail in "America's Dreyfus
Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster," the early impression
created by the press that Foster was depressed relied heavily on those
anonymous sources.

N E W S   B L U E Z E T T E     Wednesday, July 18, 2001
A daily newsletter, produced by www.newsblues.com, for TV professionals.
Bluezette is sponsored by Silverscape Technologies. www.silverscape.net
======================================================
---Tipped Golf Cart Killed Graham
----Louisiana Company Scraps Indiana News
-----Quick, Get The Airbrush
------Your Station For Nudes
-------No-Show Surrender
--------Vote Early, Vote Often
---------News You Can Lose
----------Mrs. Bluezette's Grammar Corner

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Got News?  Let us know.  mailto:edi...@newsblues.com
Search the Bluezette archives at http://newsblues.com/Secure/Bluezette/
-------------------------------------------------------------------

TIPPED GOLF CART KILLED GRAHAM

Despite widespread reports in the Washington Post, New York Times and
Associated Press, an eyewitness to the accident that took the life of
Katharine Graham insists the 84-year-old former publisher was in a golf
cart that tipped over while making a sharp turn on an asphalt walkway.

His claim directly challenges the company's statement that Mrs. Graham
"suffered a head injury when she fell on a concrete walkway outside a
condominium in Sun Valley, Idaho."

According to the source, who works for a major news network, "The story
about falling during a walk is bullshit."

He says resort employees rushed her to a Sun Valley emergency care facility
where doctors determined her injuries were beyond the scope of anything
they could handle.

She was stabilized and airlifted in a new twin-engine Bell 222 helicopter
(known affectionately as "Deuce") on a difficult 100 mile flight along the
ridges of the Sawtooth National Forest.

Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical Center, in Boise, Idaho, which received
the critically injured woman late Saturday is touted as the "flagship
trauma center of Idaho," the state's only Level II trauma center.

Mrs. Graham underwent surgery Sunday for the head injury, which caused
massive bleeding in her brain. She remained in critical condition in the
hospital's intensive care unit for nearly two days and never regained
consciousness.

Graham's son, Donald Graham, chairman of the board of The Washington Post
Company, was at her bedside when she was pronounced dead at 11:56AM Tuesday.

The funeral service will be Monday at 11 a.m. at Washington National
Cathedral.


>
>  :While we're at it, do you have any thoughts on why your entire
profession is
>  :suppressing the news of the existence of the addendum to Starr's report
of
>  :Deputy White House Counsel Vincent W. Foster's death? (See
>  :http://fbicover-up.com/starr/starrreport.htm , especially John Clarke's
>  :exhibits with his letter.)
>
> If they're "suppressing" it, they're not doing much of a job. It's on a
> hundred or so Web sites, despite the claims on the site you cited. The
> report, with addendum, is available on demand from the GPO. You don't
> even need to file a FOIA request. Why did they not report on it? Because
> they didn't find it credible. If you disagree with that judgment, feel
> free to offer your own view (not that you needed the invitation).

So the press is only suppressing the news of its existence to the best of
their ability?  Why am I not appeased?  Imagine where we would be without
the Internet, depending almost completely upon the press to tell us what's
in government documents.  Yes, I picked up my $12 copy of Starr's report on
Foster's death from the GPO and saw for myself that the Clarke/Knowlton
addendum was shrink-wrapped with it, but one would never know of the
addendum's existence if he were to depend completely on our press.  What a
revolting state of affairs!

Now the blanket conclusion that the addendum is not credible covers a lot of
ground.  It means, for instance, that the witness Patrick Knowlton is doing
a lot of lying about what he saw at Fort Marcy Park that day (as are several
corroborating witnesses), about his harassment on the streets of Washington,
and about the FBI changing his testimony, for starters.  It also means that
a number of government documents don't say what they clearly do say, and
quite a bit else.  And where do you and your press partners in cover-up get
off with such wave of the hand pronouncements?  Why can't you just give us
the news, which includes Patrick Knowlton's efforts to be heard, and let us
decide for ourselves whether it is credible?

News suppression by whatever name you want to call it is still news
suppression.  It reminds me of how the mainstream press will only pass along
to us outlandish conclusions from the government on TWA 800 and won't give
us, unfiltered, what scores of witnesses saw.  The one tiny local newspaper
exception you can read at
 http://www.newsmax.com/articles/print.shtml?a=1998/12/13/204744 proves the
rule.


>
>  :And another:
>  :
>  :If CNN, The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Wall Street
Journal,
>  :and The Washington Times were official organs of the government, how
would
>  :they have reported any differently than they have done on Graham's
death,
>  :Foster's death, TWA 800, the Oklahoma City bombing, Waco, our Balkan
>  :adventures, the Kennedy and King assassinations, or virtually anything
else
>  :that is really important?
>
> That question is only relevant if you assume that the "official" account
> of events is always a lie, and any press accounts that agree with the
> government investigators are ipso facto involved in a coverup. It's
> obvious to the most casual observer that you hold that view. I prefer to
> evaluate conflicting claims in the light of available facts, and to
> evaluate claims on the evidence supporting them rather than how well
> they tell me what I want to hear.

My "views" are not what is at issue here.  It's not that official accounts
are always a lie, but that they often are.  I have certainly found that to
be the case in questions I have examined closely, the Foster death, the
Burkett death, the death of Kenneth Trentadue (do search), the Okahoma City
bombing, the Waco siege, the assassinations mentioned above, and quite a few
more.  When they have a track record like that, one should treat their
pronouncements with great skepticism.  Our press, instead, acts as though
they were dealing with the pronouncements of God.  What do we need them for?
We might as well cut out the middle man and take the government press
releases straight (or in the case at hand, the press releases of The
Washington Post Company).


>
>  :And finally:
>  :
>  :How do you live with yourself?
>
> I sleep like a baby. And you?

And think much like one, too, it seems.  Unfortunately, I snore like a
middle-aged man.


>
>  :If I am not as credulous as you and your partners in cover-up would have
me
>  :be, it is from experience and education.
>
> "Not as credulous" is an interesting spin, given that you draw broad
> conclusions based on a lack of evidence, rather than on the evidence
> available. You're every bit as credulous as the people you decry; you
> just evaluate the evidence according to different prejudices. You
> intimate that there was a plot to kill a retired newspaper publisher,
> without any evidence that was the case, without even a suggestion of who
> was involved or what their motives were, and you somehow find this more
> believable than an octagenarian woman simply dying after falling down,
> which happens hundreds of times a day. You cite your own ignorance as
> proof of, erm, something or other. If that's not "credulous," I'll eat
> my hat.

From day one, our press called Vince Foster's death an "apparent suicide"
when there was nothing apparent about it.  They did no reporting of vital
details.  It made me curious.  Now I don't believe anyone can read
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster" with
anything approaching an open mind and not conclude that there has been a
cover-up.  Similarly, the press bought into the "bothched robbery"
explanation for the Starbucks murders from the beginning and all through the
various police flip-flops when the evidence on its face screamed
"professional hit," and that made me curious.  Search "Starbucks" on my site
and see for yourself now if you think justice was done in that case.

The reporting on Katharine Graham's death nationally has been curiously
extremely sketchy.  Who can possible deny that fact?  Now, it is altogether
possible that when an older man signs the name "John Smith" on the motel
register, with a chippy on his arm, that his name really is John Smith, but
I have learned not to take everything I am told--especially by The
Washington Post et al.--at face value.


> --
>       "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
>        hesitating, non-committal language."
>                            -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

--

---------
DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird
>


K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Hugh Turley 9/3/01 9:07 AM
Andy Walton has argued that the entire journalism profession concealed
the existence of a 23-page document ordered made public by the Special
Division of the United States Court of Appeals is because journalists
"didn't find it credible".  Walton would have us believe that three
senior judges on the second highest court in the United States
attached false information to the Report of an Independent Counsel and
because it was false it is not news.

The document deemed "not credible" contained exhibits of Senate
depositions, Park Police Reports, an autopsy Report, FBI Interview
Reports, Paramedic's Incident Report, and Special Counsel Robert
Fiske's Report.  If these exhibits of official documents concerning
the violent death of the highest government official since John F.
Kennedy are "not credible" that per se should be front page news.

Would Mr. Walton kindly explain what specifically in the court ordered
23-page addendum to Starr's Report is "not credible" and why "not
credible" official documents are not news?

I am confident that Mr. Walton, like his fellow "truth seeking"
journalists, will proclaim he does not know and does not want to know
anything about it, proving that journalists are the least credible
people on earth.

I also predict with complete confidence that Mr. Walton will retreat
from the free and open dialog of this discussion.  No journalist will
defend the behavior of their corrupt profession in face of the facts
and the evidence.  Anyone that would profess to be an American
journalist ought to be ashamed.  Covering-up murder is wrong Andy.

Kind Regards,
Hugh Turley
FBIcover-up.com


Andy Walton <att...@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:<atticus-673620.06412303092001@basic.bs.webusenet.com>...
> In article <9mtb44$mk6$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>,
>  "David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote:
>
>  :While we're at it, do you have any thoughts on why your entire profession is
>  :suppressing the news of the existence of the addendum to Starr's report of
>  :Deputy White House Counsel Vincent W. Foster's death? (See
>  :http://fbicover-up.com/starr/starrreport.htm , especially John Clarke's
>  :exhibits with his letter.)
>
> If they're "suppressing" it, they're not doing much of a job. It's on a
> hundred or so Web sites, despite the claims on the site you cited. The
> report, with addendum, is available on demand from the GPO. You don't
> even need to file a FOIA request. Why did they not report on it? Because
> they didn't find it credible. If you disagree with that judgment, feel
> free to offer your own view (not that you needed the invitation).
>

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/3/01 3:01 PM
On Mon, 03 Sep 2001 06:58:52 -0400, Andy Walton
<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>     "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
>       hesitating, non-committal language."
>                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"

Odd, I always imagined it was a reporters job to make a tame colorless
report of facts, leaving the wild colorful `assertions' to folks like
Pulitzer and Hearst and publishers of flamboyant supermarket scandal
sheets. Broadsheets once had a more credible reputation even after the
success of the screamers in San Francisco and St. Louis. Then along
came the NYTimes, Wash. Post, LATimes, et al and following the
leadership of Kathryn Graham turned their papers into propaganda
organs with `definite biased assertions of prejudiced opinions'. The
lapdog Bradley fit neatly on Kathryn's lap and barked the boss's
commands to the hired writers.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/3/01 3:04 PM
On 3 Sep 2001 09:07:03 -0700, Tur...@acninc.net (Hugh Turley) wrote:

>Andy Walton has argued that the entire journalism profession concealed
>the existence of a 23-page document ordered made public by the Special
>Division of the United States Court of Appeals is because journalists
>"didn't find it credible".  Walton would have us believe that three
>senior judges on the second highest court in the United States
>attached false information to the Report of an Independent Counsel and
>because it was false it is not news.
>
>The document deemed "not credible" contained exhibits of Senate
>depositions, Park Police Reports, an autopsy Report, FBI Interview
>Reports, Paramedic's Incident Report, and Special Counsel Robert
>Fiske's Report.  If these exhibits of official documents concerning
>the violent death of the highest government official since John F.
>Kennedy are "not credible" that per se should be front page news.
>
>Would Mr. Walton kindly explain what specifically in the court ordered
>23-page addendum to Starr's Report is "not credible" and why "not
>credible" official documents are not news?

I imagine this was a decision arrived at by his boss and quickly
adopted to preserve employability.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 9/3/01 7:16 PM
Andy Walton <att...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:atticus-FBC501.06585203092001@basic.bs.webusenet.com...

> In article <cf3c27d2.01090...@posting.google.com>,
>  Tur...@acninc.net (Hugh Turley) wrote:
>
>  :I still haven't seen anyone post an answer to the most basi question,
>  :"Who saw Katharine Graham fall?"  Why should that be so difficult to
>  :answer?
>
> Why, indeed? Why have the people who've bandied about the question for
> the last month and a half not bothered to look for the answer?

Typical journalistic accuracy from young Andrew.  I first raised the
question eight days ago, not some 45 days as he suggests.  Since asking the
question I have discovered that it was reported that a witness has claimed
to have seen Katharine Graham fall out of a golf cart.  I have also learned
from an article by Rocky Barker in the Idaho Statesman of Boise that Ms.
Graham underwent surgery to repair "extensive intracranial injuries."  It is
interesting that the national media kept this detailed information away from
us, and I salute Mr. Barker and his newspaper for not depending exclusively
upon a Post company spokesman, as all the others seemed to do.  I have
written Mr. Barker to see if he might have learned exactly how Ms. Graham
might have sustained such injuries from a fall on a walk.

Someone,
> presumably, called 911 before Graham was evac'ed via helicopter to
> Boise. The transcripts and, in most jurisdictions, the audio recordings
> of 911 calls are public records. The police report and death certificate
> are public records. One has to wonder why the "reporters" who are so
> interested in the answers are posing them to alt. newsgroups rather than
> asking the people who have the answers. If you're that curious, do your
> goddamned homework.
>
> Here's a head start: Graham suffered her injuries in Sky Valley, Idaho.
> That's a ski resort in Blaine County; the closest large town is Ketchum.
> She died in Boise, so she was transported there at some point, probably
> by helicopter. So the officers who responded to the accident were from
> Sun Valley, Ketchum, Blaine County, or some combination thereof. You
> know whom to contact. Have at it.

I have begun to grow weary of doing journalists' jobs for them.  My web site
is already chockablock full of information one would have hoped to get from
our news organizations with all their vast resources and their power.  I am
not a professional journalist, and my power to elicit cooperation from
individuals involved in some of these things is distinctly limited.  I once
called the pharmacy that Robert Fiske said filled the prescription for Vince
Foster's "anti-depressant" medication and asked to speak with the pharmacist
who filled it.  The person fielding the question sounded highly agitated at
the question and hung up on me.  Now why should I have to be checking up on
Fiske's allegations?  I have noted that neither the actual prescription nor
the actual pills have ever been entered into the record nor have records of
purported telephone calls from Foster to Dr. Watkins in Little Rock or from
Dr. Watkins to the Georgetown pharmacy.  But, again, why do I have to point
these things out while all of young Andrew's colleagues are busy playing
megaphone for the government?

I also called Park Police spokesman, Robert Hines, after reading a Post
report that Foster family lawyers had turned police away from the Foster
home on the night Foster's body was found.  I asked Hines how that was
possible.  He told me that the Post was not correct, that the police had
spoken briefly to the widow Lisa and determined that she was too broken up
to be helpful, and they returned the next morning.  If subsequent reports
are accurate, Hines was no more truthful than was the Post, but I wonder if
he would have been so loose with the truth if he had been talking to a
reporter from a major news organization.  One may find a great deal of
evidence as to why Michael Isikoff and Ann Devroy of the Post, David Gergen
of the White House, and Major Hines lied about this matter in Part 6 of my
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster."


>
>  :Throwing up words like "Trilateralists" is making silly of a serious
>  :question.
>
> No, it's making silly of a silly question. If you want to make the case
> that something is amiss in the official version of events, you'll need
> something more than your own ignorance as evidence. DC Dave's customary
> rhetoric raises the rebuttable presumption that he's a conspiracy kook.
> Feel free to rebut it.

Now he's throwing up expressions like "conspiracy kook," attempting to
elevate his childish epithet-hurling to something he calls a rebuttable
presumption.  How does one rebut something no better defined than a
school-yard insult, and what role does "presumption" play here except to
further reveal the writer's inability or, more likely, his unwillingness to
express himself clearly?  How's this for a rebuttal:

Unprincipled sell-outs and hacks,
With long yellow streaks down their backs,
Love to play games
Like the calling of names,
Let's agree just to stick to the facts.

One can also see that young Andrew has sought refuge here in #5 of the
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression.

---------
DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird


> --
>       "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
>        hesitating, non-committal language."
>                            -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/
>


K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Hugh Turley 9/3/01 8:09 PM
I think the Professor is correct about the desire to preserve
employability.
Too often in our society career and monetary success are considered
more valuable than integrity.  Selling one's integrity is a
prerequisite for a successful career in the journalism.  I am
surprised that anyone would be proud to admit they were a member of
the profession that covers up murder.  Mr. Walton displays his resume
displayed online.

Perhaps Mr. Walton just doesn't know his soul is required from him to
rise to the top of the journalism ladder.

vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com (Professor Vonroach) wrote in message news:<3b94fd8c...@NNTP.ix.netcom.com>...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Dennis Tetreault 9/4/01 3:19 AM
On Mon, 03 Sep 2001 11:34:04 GMT, vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com
(Professor Vonroach) wrote:

(deletia)

>A very free use of the terms `credible' and `credulous'. What is
>credible to a reporter often seems to be what they are told is
>credible by their employers, otherwise they don't give a `rat's ass'
>what the facts are.  News reporters once attempted to gather facts and
>report those facts to the public so that their readers could judge the
>credibility of those facts. The `new' reporters of the baby boom
>generation (now `Yuppies') have an entirely new spin on their job.
>They are generally spoon-fed their `facts', and expound on what their
>employer finds `credible'. Little idols on their pillars
>_instructing_, not informing the public who bothers to read them
>anymore. .....

Very True. Though there are many examples previous, the most blatent
one is the Watergate Breakin and the IR by Woodward and Bernstein.
Gathering facts, inserting opinion as to motives, and pursuing
personal goals is now the norm. No one calls themselves "Reporters',
anymore.  They're "Journalists" now, which means that opining on a
news event is required. It's part of the "Calling".


>...........In olden day, a person when to school to obtain instruction,


>and bought a newspaper for _information_, now in the words of Mr.
>Porter: `Anything goes'. Reporters are judged by their employers on
>their ability to spin out the company line with speed regardless of
>the facts; on radio and TV, they are generally judged by their
>employers on their voice, face, and reading ability, as well as the
>vacuousness of their skulls and the ability to quickly absorb the
>company line.

And they cringe and jeer when suddenly the spotlight is turned on
their own personal lives.

Here in Boston some years back, a TV Anchor named Liz Walker suddenly
found herself a news story because she was unmarried and pregnant.
Almost as quickly, it was dropped becuse other anchors realized (or
were told) that their personal lives could also end up on the front
page.

Didn't Rush Limbaugh once say he was going to hire Private
Investigators to look into the lives of some reporters/journalists who
were looking into his background?

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/4/01 4:20 AM
On 3 Sep 2001 20:09:04 -0700, Tur...@acninc.net (Hugh Turley) wrote:

> I am
>surprised that anyone would be proud to admit they were a member of
>the profession that covers up murder.

That is a bit harsh. The Edgartown Police, the State of Massachusetts,
and the U.S.Senate all played a part in covering up negligent
homicide, perhaps even murder on Chappaquidick by Sen. Ted Kennedy. An
incompetent DA office in LA that allowed the selection of an
incompetent prejudiced jury covered up the murders committed by O.J.
Simpson (violence by professional athletes is often covered up by
local police cooperating with team management).  There were multiple
murders committed in Arkansas which were not fully investigated by
police or the press. There are periodic murders in Washington, D.C.
which are swiftly swept under the rug by the police, FBI, and press.
There were murders in Texas during the `reign' of LBJ that were not
fully investigated beyond the well-known example in Dallas. The Ramsay
child's murder was covered up by a flawed investigation by incompetent
authorities... The list is long.

As to referring to reporters and editors as professionals, I've
reservations. If we apply the loosest standard: _they get paid for
what they do_, then I suppose `journalists', politicians, whores,
abortion `doctors', et. al. qualify.  But as soon as we begin to apply
standards of ethics and morality, the list quickly diminishes. All a
`journalist' really has to do is pick up a pencil, write, and take
orders. All K. Graham had to do was inherit a paper, become drunk with
power and publicity, hire lackeys to do the lifting, and she was off
and walking towards her `fatal fall'.  Advertising supports the paper
not `journalists' and it is often as phony as they as a group are.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/4/01 4:47 AM
On Tue, 04 Sep 2001 10:16:57 GMT, den...@ma.ultranet.com (Dennis
Tetreault) wrote:

>On Mon, 03 Sep 2001 11:34:04 GMT, vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com
>(Professor Vonroach) wrote:
>
>(deletia)
>
>>A very free use of the terms `credible' and `credulous'. What is
>>credible to a reporter often seems to be what they are told is
>>credible by their employers, otherwise they don't give a `rat's ass'
>>what the facts are.  News reporters once attempted to gather facts and
>>report those facts to the public so that their readers could judge the
>>credibility of those facts. The `new' reporters of the baby boom
>>generation (now `Yuppies') have an entirely new spin on their job.
>>They are generally spoon-fed their `facts', and expound on what their
>>employer finds `credible'. Little idols on their pillars
>>_instructing_, not informing the public who bothers to read them
>>anymore. .....
>
>Very True. Though there are many examples previous, the most blatent
>one is the Watergate Breakin and the IR by Woodward and Bernstein.

An excellent example of a political assassination and coup
orchestrated by K. Graham. Woodward and Bernstein did nothing before
that and have done nothing since, other than try to exploit the
notoriety of what they obviously view as a `crowning achievement'.
Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, another `publisher' who inherited a paper also
preaches to the public with his gaggle of hired clowns, as in the case
of the much ballyhooed Pentagon Papers.  Encouragement can be taken
from the fact that more and more of the public is catching on and
circulation is plummeting. The major networks and their hired readers
are all seeing their rating fall off a precipice.

>Gathering facts, inserting opinion as to motives, and pursuing
>personal goals is now the norm. No one calls themselves "Reporters',
>anymore.  They're "Journalists" now, which means that opining on a
>news event is required. It's part of the "Calling".
>
>
>>...........In olden day, a person when to school to obtain instruction,
>>and bought a newspaper for _information_, now in the words of Mr.
>>Porter: `Anything goes'. Reporters are judged by their employers on
>>their ability to spin out the company line with speed regardless of
>>the facts; on radio and TV, they are generally judged by their
>>employers on their voice, face, and reading ability, as well as the
>>vacuousness of their skulls and the ability to quickly absorb the
>>company line.
>
>And they cringe and jeer when suddenly the spotlight is turned on
>their own personal lives.
>
>Here in Boston some years back, a TV Anchor named Liz Walker suddenly
>found herself a news story because she was unmarried and pregnant.
>Almost as quickly, it was dropped becuse other anchors realized (or
>were told) that their personal lives could also end up on the front
>page.

Yes, I recall like the black girl at the Times, you had a Mr. Barnacle
who was caught manufacturing a story out of thin air - he had to pay a
price, but the number that never get caught (except by the good sense
of many of the public) is mind boggling.

>Didn't Rush Limbaugh once say he was going to hire Private
>Investigators to look into the lives of some reporters/journalists who
>were looking into his background?

Didn't know that. I have heard it said that he is an entertainer, not
a `journalist'. Will Rogers once claimed the same immunity.
I fear if we started looking into the private lives of entertainers,
reporters, and professional athletes, it would be akin to rolling over
a log and counting the snakes, grubs, and insects concealed in the
rotting wood. I imagine (note no `journalist' claim to infallibility)
that both Ms. Graham and Mr. Sulzberger would be uncomfortable with a
through review of their backgrounds and private lives - even a `fall'
seems to be shrouded.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" TomS 9/4/01 6:14 AM
Apparently if the good professor is so "aware" of all these so called
"cover-ups" I would like to know how he obtained that information. Could it
possibly be that some enterprising reporter or "journalist" made those facts
public?

Your point seems moot in light of the fact your shopping list of misdeeds is
"public knowledge." In fact I have seen rather lengthy in depth TV
documentaries on everything you list. Apparently you are confusing the fact
that the guilty parties (in your rather jaundiced eye) were never brought to
justice because of official and governmental misconduct, with the role of
the media in the judicial system.

In  the good old USA I don't ever recall the Constitution of this nation
giving the media having any voice or power within the judiciary. Perhaps you
have read a different Constitution that does.

I think you are confusing your perceived role of the press with reporting
the story and being the story.


"Professor Vonroach" <vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3b95b8b9.4573479@NNTP.ix.netcom.com...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Bethan 9/4/01 10:26 AM
In message <cf3c27d2.0109...@posting.google.com>
          Tur...@acninc.net (Hugh Turley) wrote:

> Path: foweraker.ntlworld.com!news.ntlworld.com!NewsHound!fakexover
> From: Tur...@acninc.net (Hugh Turley)
> Newsgroups: alt.journalism.newspapers,alt.thebird,alt.journalism.print,alt.news-media,alt.journalism,alt.journalism.students
> Subject: Re: K. Graham's Fatal "Fall"
> Date: 3 Sep 2001 09:07:03 -0700
> Message-ID: <cf3c27d2.0109...@posting.google.com>
> References: <9mc04h$kk1$1...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net> <3b926515...@NNTP.ix.netcom.com> <9mk65e$9tr$1...@bob.news.rcn.net> <YABj7.73964$V7.15...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com> <3b92709...@NNTP.ix.netcom.com>
>  <FTKj7.76775$V7.16...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com> <3b8fe33...@NNTP.ix.netcom.com> <9mplb6$e7l$1...@bob.news.rcn.net> <atticus-024A8E.01465502092001@basic.bs.webusenet.com> <9mtb44$mk6$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>
>  <atticus-673620.06412303092001@basic.bs.webusenet.com>
> Lines: 54
> Xref: foweraker.ntlworld.com alt.journalism.students:180
> Bytes: 4280
stop sending this junk please! It is anoying me!

--
Bethan

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Hugh Turley 9/4/01 3:33 PM
I disagree with the Professor that "Advertising supports the paper"
and the implication that advertisers pull the journalists strings.

That is the popular myth our dishonest press would have us believe.
We all know that he who pays the piper calls the tune, so why would
all of the soap salesman, car dealers, and department stores together
want our press to cover-up the murder of JFK, MLK, and Vincent Foster?

We do not need to know exactly WHO pays the prostitutes/journalists,
it is enough to know that they are bought and the myth that journlists
have integrity is a joke on the public.

The authorities would not get away with MURDER if we had honest
journalists.
Does the truth seem too harsh?

vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com (Professor Vonroach) wrote in message news:<3b94b248...@NNTP.ix.netcom.com>...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Hugh Turley 9/4/01 3:36 PM
Hooray for free speech!

Thank you for sharing your comments.  ;-)


Bethan <bet...@foweraker.com> wrote in message news:<8313d2b4...@foweraker.ntlworld.com>...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/4/01 3:44 PM
On Tue, 4 Sep 2001 09:14:23 -0400, "TomS"
<Bhigheart@don'tspammehotmail.com> wrote:

>Apparently if the good professor is so "aware" of all these so called
>"cover-ups" I would like to know how he obtained that information. Could it
>possibly be that some enterprising reporter or "journalist" made those facts
>public?
>
>Your point seems moot in light of the fact your shopping list of misdeeds is
>"public knowledge."
Perhaps you have failed to read carefully. None of these `cover-ups'
by officials were reported as such in the press (which I am surprised
you are unaware has been called the 4th estate since about the time of
the French Revolution). They became obvious to the point that the
press was forced to report them as exposes hoping to claim some
undeserved credit. They have become a part of the cover-up problem
with the emergence of opinionated publishers of K. Graham's ilk who
hired lackeys to proclaim her prejudices. This is one of the reasons
that special prosecutors became necessary. The Clinton scandals were
`buried' as long as the conventional media could hold the lid on. The
conventional press and media considers Drudge and Limbaugh who
revealed these latest misdeeds to the public as `gossip columnist' and
hate mongers (in an odd reversal of that term).

As to there being no mention or suggestion of the `duty' and
`importance' of the press, I am truly astounded by your apparent
ignorance on that point. I would hasten to point out that the freedom
of the press is one of the explicit rights protected under the great
first amendment in the Bill of Rights, a part of the U. S.
Constitution demanded by Virginians and others to buy their support
for the adoption of the rest of the document. It thus was explicitly
placed beyond any constraints that Congress might wish to apply. It is
a private enterprise in the U.S. and therefore like free speech and
other rights can not be protected from those of Graham's ilk who seek
to exploit the protection to pontificate rather than inform - at least
it has only a casual connection with politics rather than being the
official voice of government as their mentor Goebbels was.

The `press' is not one of the noble professions, it is a business
dedicated to the sale of advertising space and newspapers. Beyond the
advertising, the content is the prerogative of the publisher and hired
writers; and, the publisher is free to advance their own agenda under
the false title of `news'. This has engendered a lack of credibility
to the extent that hard times have descended on these false messengers
and their circulation plummets.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/4/01 3:49 PM
On Tue, 04 Sep 2001 18:14:23 +0100, Bethan <bet...@foweraker.com>
wrote:

>In message <cf3c27d2.0109...@posting.google.com>
>          Tur...@acninc.net (Hugh Turley) wrote:
>blah, blah, blah...

>stop sending this junk please! It is anoying me!

Me being Bethan? Considering the newsgroups in which it was posted -
are you a `journalism student'?  What a typical response from one
seeking employment as a `news' gatherer. Bethan old clod, it is your
attitude that bothers me.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 9/4/01 5:55 PM
Professor Vonroach <vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3b9658c9.4313747@NNTP.ix.netcom.com...

The entire American journalistic profession seems to be annoyed at my
efforts to learn details about Katharine Graham's fatal "fall."  Rocky
Barker of the Idaho Statesman, to my knowledge, is the only one to report
that "Doctors at Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical Center (Boise) performed a
series of surgeries to repair extensive intracranial injuries," but a few
days have passed now and he has not responded to queries about the
circumstances surrounding the fall.  Even before I was supplied with his
article, which contained his e-mail address, I wrote the Mountain Express of
Ketchum, Idaho, asking who witnessed the fall and a few other questions, and
they have also remained silent.  Meanwhile, after pretty much confiming his
profession's utter uselessness, except to those who would perniciously
manipulate public opinion, award-winning journalist, Andrew Walton, seems to
have slunk (or slithered) off into the tall grass.

I am now more curious than ever as to what sort of fall could have resulted
in "extensive intracranial injuries" and why our vaunted free press is
treating it as something like a state secret.

---------
DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird


K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" TomS 9/4/01 6:57 PM
Yes and your point?
The "Fourth Estate" is a label.
The last time I checked there were only three legitimate branches of
government.
You ramblings as usual bear little substance or basis in fact, and are
tedious rantings of a what appears to be a person who is a true legend in
their own mind.

Your responses remind me of the sound of one hand clapping.


"Professor Vonroach" <vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3b95515e.2415208@NNTP.ix.netcom.com...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Andy Walton 9/5/01 12:08 AM
In article <9n3t42$cvr$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>,
 "David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote:

 :The entire American journalistic profession seems to be annoyed at my


 :efforts to learn details about Katharine Graham's fatal "fall."

Have you contacted the Ketchum County authorities? You know, the people
who produce police reports, and whose job it is to provide them to the
public? They're more likely to respond than reporters who've no doubt
moved on to other stories in the last couple of months.

 :Rocky Barker of the Idaho Statesman, to my knowledge, is the only one to


 :report that "Doctors at Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical Center (Boise)
 :performed a series of surgeries to repair extensive intracranial injuries,"
 :but a few days have passed now and he has not responded to queries about
 :the circumstances surrounding the fall.  Even before I was supplied with his
 :article, which contained his e-mail address, I wrote the Mountain Express of
 :Ketchum, Idaho, asking who witnessed the fall and a few other questions, and
 :they have also remained silent.

Their job is to publish the newspaper, not to seek out medical records
and police reports at the behest of anyone with an e-mail address.

 :Meanwhile, after pretty much confiming his


 :profession's utter uselessness, except to those who would perniciously
 :manipulate public opinion, award-winning journalist, Andrew Walton, seems to
 :have slunk (or slithered) off into the tall grass.

I have other things to do than post to Usenet, and the dozen-and-a-half
posts -- including a 435-liner of yours -- take a little more time to go
through than I've been willing to devote. This seems to betray part of
your problem with mainstream journalists: you assume that they're at
your service, and any information they don't drop everything to provide
is being "suppressed."

You know where the records of Graham's accident are kept -- at the
Blaine County Courthouse (or some other nearby government building). I'm
at a loss to explain why you haven't contacted them. I don't know what
their policy is on releaseing such documents to the pubic, as they vary
by jurisdiction, but it's worth a try. The Sherriff's Department phone
number is (208) 778-5555, fax (208) 788-5559.

 :I am now more curious than ever as to what sort of fall could have resulted
 :in "extensive intracranial injuries"

She fell and hit her head. Nothing -- not even the anonymous witness you
cite -- indicates otherwise.

From the Merck Manual of Medical Information
<http://www.merck.com/pubs/mmanual_home/sec6/75.htm>:
  Sometimes severe brain damage can occur with what appears to
  be a minor head injury. The elderly are particularly susceptible
  to bleeding around the brain (subdural hematoma) after a head injury.

From the journal Clinical Geriatrics
<http://www.mmhc.com/cg/articles/CG0103/linder.html>:
  Falling is the most common mechanism of injury in the elderly.3
  The three most prevalent causes of falls in the elderly are
  generalized weakness, environmental hazards, and orthostatic  
  hypotension.

[...]

  Brain aging results in cerebral atrophy and increased vascular
  fragility. Subdural hematoma should be considered in an elderly
  patient presenting with changes in mental status, headache,
  disturbances in ambulation, or nonfocal neurological findings.
  Spontaneous intracranial bleeding, strokes, or other cerebrovascular
  event may have caused the fall. Other findings in the patient over 65
  years with acute changes in mental status may include cardiac
  dysrhythmia, acute myocardial infarction, or metabolic disorders.

From <http://www.intelihealth.com/IH/ihtIH/WSIHW000/9339/28074.html>:
  Acute subdural hematoma ‹ When an impact or a sudden deceleration
  causes a blood vessel to tear, blood collects between the dura and the
  surface of the brain. Acute subdural hematoma develops rapidly, most
  commonly after serious head trauma caused by an assault, car accident
  or fall. It is a very severe brain injury that typically causes
  unconsciousness, and it is fatal in about 50 percent of cases. Acute
  subdural hematomas occur in 20 percent to 40 percent of people whose
  head injuries are described as severe. However, subdural hematoma can
  occur without direct head trauma. For example, the force of whiplash
  alone can be severe enough to cause this injury, especially in elderly
  people and in people taking blood-thinning medications.

Apparently, your extensive research didn't include a well-constructed
Google search.

 :and why our vaunted free press is


 :treating it as something like a state secret.

Something like 6,500 other people died in the United States the same day
as Katherine Graham. How many details of their deaths were "suppressed"?
Were their medical records treated like "state secrets"?


--
      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
       hesitating, non-committal language."
                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Andy Walton 9/5/01 12:13 AM
In article <cf3c27d2.01090...@posting.google.com>,
 Tur...@acninc.net (Hugh Turley) wrote:

 :The authorities would not get away with MURDER if we had honest
 :journalists.

So, according to you, why don't we? Doesn't it seem a bit odd to you
that no one can make a living telling the "truth," as you see it? What
invisible hand is at work?


--
      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
       hesitating, non-committal language."
                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Andy Walton 9/5/01 1:58 AM
In article <9n02eq$7ak$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>,
 "David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote:

 :Andy Walton <att...@mindspring.com> wrote in message


 :news:atticus-673620.06412303092001@basic.bs.webusenet.com...
 :> In article <9mtb44$mk6$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>,
 :>  "David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote:
 :>
 :>  :Would you look what we have here, a real, live award-winning journalist,
 :>  :snidely offering commentary and advice, but, as one might expect, no
 :>  :information.  So tell me, Andrew, did anyone witness Katharine Graham's
 :>  :fatal fall or didn't they?
 :>
 :> Dunno. You're the one who's devoted so much time to writing about it.
 :> Would a little research be out of the question? Assuming that "DC Dave"
 :> is a geographical reference, the Post is a local call. Or do you prefer
 :> to make vague intimations of a conspiracy based on an unanswered
 :> question you haven't tried very hard to answer? I understand the appeal
 :> of the latter approach, because any information you don't have spoon-fed
 :> you can label "suppressed," even if you haven't looked very hard for it.
 :
 :First, as anyone following this thread can see, I am apparently virtually
 :the only one who has bothered to do any research on the question.

If your definition of "research" is "asked a question in a low-volume
alt. newsgroup," I suppose so.

 :Where are all the journalists?  Do they all, like young Andrew, prefer to


 :pop off at those who resist being insulted with passed-on press releases
 :(talk about spoon-fed!)?

About 6,500 people die a day in the United States. Police, medical
examiners, and hospital personnel log the cause of death. If the press
looked into all of those, they'd need ten times the manpower, have no
time left for anything else, and produce a product no one would buy.
Investigative obituaries aren't a growing industry.

The story that came out of Idaho was that an elderly woman fell and hit
her head. Nothing has contradicted that. If you want to stand around the
race track expecting each new round of hoofbeats to be a herd of zebras,
it's your time. Just don't expect us to believe that someone's painted
the zebras brown and bought off the media to hide the truth.

 :I did, in fact, begin with a few simple questions which I


 :hoped someone would answer, saving me the trouble of doing the sort of
 :digging that one can see that I have done with such questions as the death
 :of Vincent Foster, the Oklahoma City bombing, the Starbucks murders, Federal
 :Prison Industries, and quite a few other things with which our kept press
 :cannot be bothered.

 :The suggestion that The Post would be the best place to start for answers
 :must be meant as a joke.

But posting to an alt. newsgroup is the pinnacle of investigative
journalism? Even if you don't expect any accurate information from the
Post, it's worth a local phone call.

 :For its part, the Post only writes government press releases like the


 :following, while the little Centreview scoops it on the real news like the
 :article that follows the one by The Post.

I'm not sure what this exercise is supposed to prove. You've got a
report from last week about an arrested spy, and an article from seven
years ago about a murder at the same building. The stories are quite
different, because they're entirely different stories. I will note,
however, that the Post story has a lot of facts, but few conclusions;
the Centre View story is built around the best guesses of a distraught
father.

 :>  :Do you believe the account of the anonymous


 :>  :witness that she actually fell out of a golf cart?  Why or why not?
 :>
 :> An account given to whom, under what circumstances? I'm generally leery
 :> of anonymous sources.
 :
 :Some sharp reporter!  No wonder he's now "free lancing."  I put this on this
 :thread back on August 28.

Sorry. I haven't kept up with or archived every thread in every
newsgroup I read.

 :Wonder what sources he relied on to tell him that


 :America sent unmanned rockets to the moon in the 1950s? (See his web site.)

I can't divulge my sources, but I did have to take a circuitous route
and change cars to make sure we weren't being followed.

 :I'm leery of anonymous sources, too, but as I detail in "America's Dreyfus


 :Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster," the early impression
 :created by the press that Foster was depressed relied heavily on those
 :anonymous sources.

And that has what, exactly, to do with the price of chicken in China?

 :Despite widespread reports in the Washington Post, New York Times and


 :Associated Press, an eyewitness to the accident that took the life of
 :Katharine Graham insists the 84-year-old former publisher was in a golf
 :cart that tipped over while making a sharp turn on an asphalt walkway.
 :
 :His claim directly challenges the company's statement that Mrs. Graham
 :"suffered a head injury when she fell on a concrete walkway outside a
 :condominium in Sun Valley, Idaho."

It only "challenges the company's statement" in the sense that concrete
isn't asphalt. Other than that, it's just adding details. The question
is how many details you feel entitled to; the "nut" of the story is that
an elderly woman hit her head in an accident and died later of
complications.

 :According to the source, who works for a major news network, "The story


 :about falling during a walk is bullshit."

I haven't seen any media source say that Graham fell "during a walk";
The Post's release says she "fell on a walkway," which certainly leaves
that as the most likely inference. I fail to see how the exact
circumstances of her accidental death are a matter of grave public
concern; if you think they are, I've posted the phone numbers of the
local Sherriff's department in another message in this thread.

 :> If they're "suppressing" it, they're not doing much of a job. It's on a


 :> hundred or so Web sites, despite the claims on the site you cited. The
 :> report, with addendum, is available on demand from the GPO. You don't
 :> even need to file a FOIA request. Why did they not report on it? Because
 :> they didn't find it credible. If you disagree with that judgment, feel
 :> free to offer your own view (not that you needed the invitation).
 :
 :So the press is only suppressing the news of its existence to the best of
 :their ability?

"Not covering" is not the same thing as "suppressing." When my
grandfather died, the Orlando Sentinel ran nothing but a notice provided
by the family. Were they "suppressing" the news of his death?

A basic lesson on the word "suppress" -- it applies to one person or
entity telling another what he may not say. If I make a blanket policy
not to discuss, say, abortion on Usenet, I'm not suppressing pro-life or
pro-choice posters.

 :Why am I not appeased?

I missed the part where appeasing you became part of my job description.
I need to look over my contract.

 :Now the blanket conclusion that the addendum is not credible covers a lot of
 :ground.

It's not my conclusion. I didn't work on that story. It's my best
explanation for why the addendum didn't get any play in the mainstream
press, and very little in the alternative press.

 :And where do you and your press partners in cover-up get


 :off with such wave of the hand pronouncements?  Why can't you just give us
 :the news, which includes Patrick Knowlton's efforts to be heard, and let us
 :decide for ourselves whether it is credible?

News reports, by definition, are summaries. Editors have to decide what
is most important and what is most credible, and readers find editors
whose judgment they trust.

 :News suppression by whatever name you want to call it is still news


 :suppression.  It reminds me of how the mainstream press will only pass along
 :to us outlandish conclusions from the government on TWA 800 and won't give
 :us, unfiltered, what scores of witnesses saw.

The FAA report, with appendices, runs 416 printed pages. And that only
includes summaries of 734 witness accounts taken by the FBI. Just what
do you mean by "unfiltered?" Are you saying that it is the press's duty
to publish the contents of every document compiled by every government
agency (local, state, federal and international)? Or to provide an
unlimited platform to absolutely anyone (if the witness statements are
truly "unfiltered," every Howard Stern fan will chime in with a long
diatribe)?

 :The one tiny local newspaper


 :exception you can read at
 : http://www.newsmax.com/articles/print.shtml?a=1998/12/13/204744 proves the
 :rule.

It's hardly "one tiny local newspaper exception." William S. Donaldson's
suit was covered by the Washington Times, Paris Match, and the Village
Voice in some depth. Most other outlets used wire stories (which can't
be retained on line because of contractual issues). Every media outlet I
saw followed Pierre Salinger's claims.

 :> That question is only relevant if you assume that the "official" account


 :> of events is always a lie, and any press accounts that agree with the
 :> government investigators are ipso facto involved in a coverup. It's
 :> obvious to the most casual observer that you hold that view. I prefer to
 :> evaluate conflicting claims in the light of available facts, and to
 :> evaluate claims on the evidence supporting them rather than how well
 :> they tell me what I want to hear.
 :
 :My "views" are not what is at issue here.  It's not that official accounts
 :are always a lie, but that they often are.  I have certainly found that to
 :be the case in questions I have examined closely, the Foster death, the
 :Burkett death, the death of Kenneth Trentadue (do search), the Okahoma City
 :bombing, the Waco siege, the assassinations mentioned above, and quite a few
 :more.  When they have a track record like that, one should treat their
 :pronouncements with great skepticism.  Our press, instead, acts as though
 :they were dealing with the pronouncements of God.

Nonsense. We've had reams of coverage that questions, challenges or
outright debunks government accounts in the Pentagon Papers, My Lai,
Watergate, Iran-Contra, Wedtech, Abscam, Ruby Ridge, Waco, the Persian
Gulf War, Somalia, and dozens of others I've missed. There's a
rebuttable presumption -- I know how you hate that term -- that the
official accounts are credible. A "rebutable presumption" is best
described as a hypothesis that can be reevaluated if evidence to the
contrary comes to light.

That's a practical necessity, because the press, though you think it's a
mighty monolithic entity, doesn't have the manpower or budget to assign
someone to shadow every beat cop, local detective, medical examiner,
FBI/DEA/ATF/Secret Service/Interpol agent, Congressman, Congressional
staffer, White House official, UN bureaucrat, and gunnery sergeant on
the planet.

 :From day one, our press called Vince Foster's death an "apparent suicide"


 :when there was nothing apparent about it.  They did no reporting of vital
 :details.  It made me curious.  Now I don't believe anyone can read
 :"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster" with
 :anything approaching an open mind and not conclude that there has been a
 :cover-up.  Similarly, the press bought into the "bothched robbery"
 :explanation for the Starbucks murders from the beginning and all through the
 :various police flip-flops when the evidence on its face screamed
 :"professional hit," and that made me curious.  Search "Starbucks" on my site
 :and see for yourself now if you think justice was done in that case.

This is where you win the war of attrition. I started out discussing the
death of Katherine Graham. I don't have the time or inclination to
revisit every news story of the last ten years in detail. You will, no
doubt, call that a dereliction of duty by the "kept press," but there's
nothing I can do about that.

 :The reporting on Katharine Graham's death nationally has been curiously
 :extremely sketchy.

Uh-huh. And? How much detail do you want? Is it the duty of the press to
provide, on request, a suitable-for-framing 8x10 copy of any CAT scan
that you find interesting?

 :Now, it is altogether


 :possible that when an older man signs the name "John Smith" on the motel
 :register, with a chippy on his arm, that his name really is John Smith,

It's possible. If you want to turn your doubts into facts, it takes more
than your vague suspicions. The easiest way to prove he isn't John Smith
is to find out who he is. And you might want to ask someone other than
the desk clerk, because keeping you amused is not his job.

 :but I have learned not to take everything I am told--especially by The


 :Washington Post et al.--at face value.

And that's a damned healthy impulse. Even if you don't assume that the
press is populated by liars, dupes, communists, scalawags, pederasts,
puppy-rapers, or other unscrupulous characters, they're working with
limited resources on tight deadlines. Skepticism is healthy. Dogma isn't.

Doctors lose patients, Engineers build Ford Pintos, singers crack notes
at Carnegie Hall, cops shoot innocent people with wallets in their hands
and shove plungers up Hatian immigrants' asses, meteorologists tell you
it's okay to leave the convertible top down, and journalists botch
stories. People fuck up, whether by malice or error or both, every hour
of every day. Fact of life.


--
      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
       hesitating, non-committal language."
                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Andy Walton 9/5/01 2:08 AM
In article <cf3c27d2.0109...@posting.google.com>,
 Tur...@acninc.net (Hugh Turley) wrote:

 :Andy Walton has argued that the entire journalism profession concealed


 :the existence of a 23-page document ordered made public by the Special
 :Division of the United States Court of Appeals

I argued nothing of the kind.

[...]

 :I also predict with complete confidence that Mr. Walton will retreat


 :from the free and open dialog of this discussion.  No journalist will
 :defend the behavior of their corrupt profession in face of the facts
 :and the evidence.  Anyone that would profess to be an American
 :journalist ought to be ashamed.  Covering-up murder is wrong Andy.

That's a pretty safe prediction. In about a day and a half since I
posted, about 90% of the posts in this newsgroup have been devoted to
attacking me as a government stooge, propagandist, liar, whore -- and
those have been the nicer epithets. I didn't even identify myself as a
journalist. All I did was post a glib one-liner, with the implied joke
that since the Internet became popular there has not been a single
unsuspicious death. Dave Martin went to my Web site, read my resume, and
posted that I was an "award-winning journalist." The floodgates opened.
So, no, don't expect to see a lot of journalists volunteering to run
that gauntlet.


--
      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
       hesitating, non-committal language."
                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/5/01 4:51 AM
On 4 Sep 2001 15:33:48 -0700, Tur...@acninc.net (Hugh Turley) wrote:

> disagree with the Professor that "Advertising supports the paper"
>and the implication that advertisers pull the journalists strings.

I take it that is the implication you draw from the comment that
papers are a business and that business is selling advertising and
newspapers? No, I don't think `advertisers control the paper', but I
do think that their business (dependent to some extent on circulation)
is very import to most papers. But in my opinion the PUBLISHER
controls the paper - in the specific case of the Washington Post,
until recently K. Graham and her hired lackeys such as former editor
Bradley who recognize which side their bread is buttered on. They act
on orders, and who is to say what actually motivates the boss. I do
not think that the contents of the paper reflects reality as was the
original motive. The Publisher is aware of circulation and the
financial circumstances of the business. They seem always have deep
biases and prejudices. Like most business persons they act on what
they perceive is in the best interests of their business, not
necessarily what is truthful and proper. Finally, they are not immune
to pride and narcissism surrounded by yes-men and politicians coveting
for their favors. I would say that the Washington Post and Pravda are
very comparable in the way they were run. Hearst and Pulitzer paved
the road in the modern newspaper era, and their stock in trade was
sensationalism and _FORMING_ public opinion without letting truth and
reality get in the way. Their circulation dependent on the gullibility
and foolishness of their customers (just as in a circus side show)
attracted advertisers who generally can care less how they get the
publics attention. It is a misnomer to continue calling such nonsense,
a `newspaper'. Call it an appropriate name, such as Graham's Opinion
Journal or Magazine.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/5/01 5:00 AM
On 4 Sep 2001 15:36:26 -0700, Tur...@acninc.net (Hugh Turley) wrote:

>Hooray for free speech!
>
>Thank you for sharing your comments.  ;-)

And freedom of the press; in addition to protecting our basic liberty,
the great 1st Amendment also protects a horde of liars, exploiters,
and con men (of both sexes) that the free citizen is theoretically
suppose to be able to see through. I would place K. Graham, Wm. R.
Hearst, and Josef Pulitzer in that latter group of liars, exploiters,
and con men post-humously.


>
>Bethan <bet...@foweraker.com> wrote in message news:<8313d2b4...@foweraker.ntlworld.com>...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/5/01 5:06 AM
On Tue, 4 Sep 2001 21:56:00 -0400, "TomS"
<Bhigheart@don'tspammehotmail.com> wrote:

>Yes and your point?
>The "Fourth Estate" is a label.
>The last time I checked there were only three legitimate branches of
>government.
>You ramblings as usual bear little substance or basis in fact, and are
>tedious rantings of a what appears to be a person who is a true legend in
>their own mind.

Your shallow understanding of politics and government does not merit
another iteration of factual reality. Go wander among your shadows,
illusions, and fantasies.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/5/01 5:23 AM
On Wed, 05 Sep 2001 03:07:33 -0400, Andy Walton
<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>In article <9n3t42$cvr$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>,
> "David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote:
>
> :The entire American journalistic profession seems to be annoyed at my
> :efforts to learn details about Katharine Graham's fatal "fall."
>
Actually, some would prefer details of her life as a publisher.

>Have you contacted the Ketchum County authorities? You know, the people
>who produce police reports, and whose job it is to provide them to the
>public? They're more likely to respond than reporters who've no doubt
>moved on to other stories in the last couple of months.

The Ketchum county boys? Like the LAPD and DA's office, the Boulder
County `authorities', the Washington D.C. Park Police, the Washington
D.C. PD, etc...? Yeah, really, that's where I'd go to get the `full
story'. I'd never depend on biased publishers to print the facts.

>Their job is to publish the newspaper, not to seek out medical records
>and police reports at the behest of anyone with an e-mail address.

Pray tell what is their job? To await marching orders and then grind
out copy reflecting the company line? It used to be just what you say
it is not anymore.


>
> :Meanwhile, after pretty much confiming his
> :profession's utter uselessness, except to those who would perniciously
> :manipulate public opinion, award-winning journalist, Andrew Walton, seems to
> :have slunk (or slithered) off into the tall grass.
>
>I have other things to do than post to Usenet, and the dozen-and-a-half
>posts -- including a 435-liner of yours -- take a little more time to go
>through than I've been willing to devote. This seems to betray part of
>your problem with mainstream journalists: you assume that they're at
>your service, and any information they don't drop everything to provide
>is being "suppressed."

Yes that would appear to be a valid assumption. Doing one's job is not
looked on by many as a matter of `dropping everything' that they are
amusing themselves with at that moment.


K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/5/01 5:27 AM
On Wed, 05 Sep 2001 03:13:12 -0400, Andy Walton
<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>o, according to you, why don't we? Doesn't it seem a bit odd to you
>that no one can make a living telling the "truth," as you see it? What
>invisible hand is at work?

That is a deception. Those who tell the truth usually make many times
the salary of those who lie or suppress on orders. They are usually
branded as gossip and hate mongers by the jealous employees. Invisible
hand at work? K. Graham would have been an excellent example.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/5/01 5:40 AM
On Wed, 05 Sep 2001 04:58:24 -0400, Andy Walton
<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>About 6,500 people die a day in the United States. Police, medical
>examiners, and hospital personnel log the cause of death. If the press
>looked into all of those, they'd need ten times the manpower, have no
>time left for anything else, and produce a product no one would buy.
>Investigative obituaries aren't a growing industry.

By and large, that's true - but the conclusion is false. In this age
of news suppression and deception, investigative obituaries are very
much a `growing industry'. Some might even say exploding (no reference
to Waco or OKC).  Let's see for starters: Jack Kennedy, Mary Jo
Kopeckne, the little girl allegedly slain by a Kennedy cousin, Marilyn
Monroe, a dozen or so yet unsolved deaths around Little Rock, Vince
Foster, the Ramsey child, Ms. O. J. Simpson, Ronald Goldman, perhaps a
bit premature to add Ms. Levy to the group. Apologies for only a
fragmentary list. Didn't include K. Graham because as was said by
someone earlier in the thread I don't think anybody really gives a
rat's ass in her case.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/5/01 5:47 AM
On Wed, 05 Sep 2001 05:08:13 -0400, Andy Walton
<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>That's a pretty safe prediction. In about a day and a half since I
>posted, about 90% of the posts in this newsgroup have been devoted to
>attacking me as a government stooge, propagandist, liar, whore -- and
>those have been the nicer epithets. I didn't even identify myself as a
>journalist.

Exception taken `Andy', I've not posted one sentence attacking you. It
shows a bit of hubris to absorb all the criticism leveled at
`newspapers' and their publishers such as the late Ms. Graham, on to
yourself. You do correctly identify several terms which have been used
to describe newspapers and publishers generally, and rather
accurately.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall"- the VonRoach solution TomS 9/5/01 6:27 AM
Apparently this "VonRoach" character is some kind of unemployed pseudo
intellectual who has chosen to infest this newsgroup with his blathering
babble, and in fact floods it with volumes of text without any substance.

First thing you need to do is get out of your mothers basement and get a
real job. the second thing is we need to stop responding to this obvious
idiot and the other one just like him.

Like your namesake it doesn't take much to exterminate you and your ilk from
my server. Goodbye --PLONK!


"Professor Vonroach" <vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3b9c1cec.4884698@NNTP.ix.netcom.com...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Andy Walton 9/5/01 10:48 AM
In article <3b991575...@NNTP.ix.netcom.com>,
 vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com (Professor Vonroach) wrote:

 :On Wed, 05 Sep 2001 03:07:33 -0400, Andy Walton
 :<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:
 :
 :>Have you contacted the Ketchum County authorities? You know, the people

 :>who produce police reports, and whose job it is to provide them to the
 :>public? They're more likely to respond than reporters who've no doubt
 :>moved on to other stories in the last couple of months.
 :
 :The Ketchum county boys?

Blaine County, actually. Ketchum is the nearest town. I corrected that
later in the post, but missed it in this paragraph.

 :Like the LAPD and DA's office, the Boulder


 :County `authorities', the Washington D.C. Park Police, the Washington
 :D.C. PD, etc...? Yeah, really, that's where I'd go to get the `full
 :story'. I'd never depend on biased publishers to print the facts.

Okay. You don't trust the press or the authorities for even the most
basic information. Tell us, Professor, whom would you turn to? Would you
prefer to ask people who have no idea, than complain that the
information is "suppressed" because no one has an answer?

 :>Their job is to publish the newspaper, not to seek out medical records

 :>and police reports at the behest of anyone with an e-mail address.
 :
 :Pray tell what is their job?

As I said above, to publish a newspaper.

 :To await marching orders and then grind


 :out copy reflecting the company line? It used to be just what you say
 :it is not anymore.

Really? Reporters used to do research for anyone who asked? I wonder why
I wasted all that time in the library during my school years when I
could have just called a reporter. Silly me.

 :>I have other things to do than post to Usenet, and the dozen-and-a-half

 :>posts -- including a 435-liner of yours -- take a little more time to go
 :>through than I've been willing to devote. This seems to betray part of
 :>your problem with mainstream journalists: you assume that they're at
 :>your service, and any information they don't drop everything to provide
 :>is being "suppressed."
 :
 :Yes that would appear to be a valid assumption. Doing one's job is not
 :looked on by many as a matter of `dropping everything' that they are
 :amusing themselves with at that moment.

Answering questions on Usenet and via e-mail is a journalist's job?
Please contact me via private e-mail with a rate schedule, and I'll let
you know where to send the check.

I have no doubt that reporters used to answer more (as a percentage of
the total) questions from the public than they do now; but the ease of
bulk snail-mail, e-mail and fax has made that a practical impossibility.
The feedback mail at CNN.com contains hundreds of "do my homework for
me" messages a day, and I have little doubt that any national news
organization has a similar number. Smaller papers have fewer messages,
but also smaller staffs to deal with them.


--
      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
       hesitating, non-committal language."
                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Hugh Turley 9/5/01 10:50 AM
Andy Walton <att...@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:<atticus-184802.05081305092001@basic.bs.webusenet.com>...

> In article <cf3c27d2.0109...@posting.google.com>,
>  Tur...@acninc.net (Hugh Turley) wrote:
>
>  :Andy Walton has argued that the entire journalism profession concealed
>  :the existence of a 23-page document ordered made public by the Special
>  :Division of the United States Court of Appeals
>
> I argued nothing of the kind.
>

Well what do you call it, if not "concealed", when the entire press
fails to report official evidence of a murder of a White House
official attached to an Independent Counsel's Report.  When offical
evidence of a murder of a White House official is not reported it is
not shown to the public, I call it concealed, what do you call it
Andy?   I think you said it was "not credible"?  and if official
documents are "not credible" about the murder of a White House
official is that not news in itself?

What is your point?

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/5/01 3:22 PM
On Wed, 05 Sep 2001 13:48:16 -0400, Andy Walton
<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>Okay. You don't trust the press or the authorities for even the most
>basic information. Tell us, Professor, whom would you turn to? Would you
>prefer to ask people who have no idea, than complain that the
>information is "suppressed" because no one has an answer?

No, Andy, since I do not profess to be a reporter and make my
contribution to the economy in other ways - I would prefer if those
who do call reporting their profession would ferret out information
from a number of sources (such as witnesses, official documents,
authorities who are usually a weak source, those with some expertise
in similar occurrences, etc...) and pass such data along to those who
purchase their broad sheets without any publisher/editor filter or
personal bias filter. I immodestly believe that I am learned and
mature enough to judge the meaning of data. An identified page can be
designated for the reporter, editor, or publisher to give their own
opinion on the meaning, but it should not be on the front page under
screaming headlines to further their agenda. In my opinion elected
public officials should have the privilege of having their remarks
presented without comment except on the page reserved for such
comment. It is a curious practice know as reporting the news without
the baggage of the bias of the publisher and their hired hand the
editor or the sensationalism introduced by some to sell papers in
supermarkets such as perhaps one of your idols J. Pulitzer.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/5/01 3:44 PM
On 5 Sep 2001 10:50:54 -0700, tur...@acninc.net (Hugh Turley) wrote:

> I think you said it was "not credible"?  and if official
>documents are "not credible" about the murder of a White House
>official is that not news in itself?

The death of Mr. Foster was widely reported. Authorities decided
despite a flawed investigation and many contradictory facts that it
was death by suicide. The press accepted this hand-out because it
would have required effort on their part to continue the
investigation, plus suicide meshed with the publisher/editor filter
set to protect President Bill Clinton and his family from any
criticism of what was at that point becoming a very obvious
dysfunctional family life. Had it not been for `gossip reporters' and
`hate mongers' we would not to this day know of the existence of
Monica Lewinsky or Paula Jones or the others. Genifer Flowers and
other Clinton womanizing and official misconduct had been thoroughly
filtered and suppressed by biased reporting attacking her character
and that of anyone who accused Clinton of misconduct. They were all
set to shield Clinton from public scrutiny just as they had shielded
J. F. Kennedy and his brothers, 3 decades before. Not one of the
dozens of Clinton scandals was _first_ reported in the mainstream
American newspapers. The London Times had the story before that
slothful crew. Magazines such as Newsweek actively attempted to gag
their reporters and suppress their findings.  An these charlatans
wonder why they have lost the publics confidence.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall"- the VonRoach solution Professor Vonroach 9/5/01 4:27 PM
On Wed, 5 Sep 2001 09:27:35 -0400, "TomS"
<Bhigheart@don'tspammehotmail.com> wrote:

>Apparently this "VonRoach" character is some kind of unemployed pseudo
>intellectual who has chosen to infest this newsgroup with his blathering
>babble, and in fact floods it with volumes of text without any substance.
>
>First thing you need to do is get out of your mothers basement and get a
>real job. the second thing is we need to stop responding to this obvious
>idiot and the other one just like him.
>
>Like your namesake it doesn't take much to exterminate you and your ilk from
>my server. Goodbye --PLONK!
>
Good old TomS has become irritated by observations for which he has no
ready answer. Tommy, ad hominem is the final stage in a failed
argument, particularly ad hominem without substance and based on
personal pique.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 9/5/01 6:44 PM
Andy Walton <att...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:atticus-38754E.03073305092001@basic.bs.webusenet.com...

> In article <9n3t42$cvr$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>,
>  "David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote:
>
>  :The entire American journalistic profession seems to be annoyed at my
>  :efforts to learn details about Katharine Graham's fatal "fall."
>
> Have you contacted the Ketchum County authorities? You know, the people
> who produce police reports, and whose job it is to provide them to the
> public? They're more likely to respond than reporters who've no doubt
> moved on to other stories in the last couple of months.

Once again, I tell you that I am tired of doing the work of the
amply-endowed news media for them.  The last time I called local authorities
about a suspicious death was after the "suicide" of Britt Hume's inquiring
reporter son, Sandy.  Public details were sadly lacking in that case as
well.  The Arlington (VA) sheriff's office told me that they give out no
information on violent deaths that they have ruled suicide.  He suggested
that I call the office of the doctor who had performed the autopsy, James C.
Beyer.  Alert readers will recognize the name from his stellar performance
for our controlling criminal elite in the Foster and Burkett cases. (Search
Beyer at http://www.thepacc.org/ and at my web site.)

For another extremely suspicious case in which the local authorities have
apparently behaved in a less than dependable manner and the press has been
in full cover-up mode, check out
http://www.thebird.org/host/dcdave/article3/000628.html .  See how many
times the journalist, Gertz, uses anonymous sources and see if you can spot
the one that I overlooked.


>
>  :Rocky Barker of the Idaho Statesman, to my knowledge, is the only one to
>  :report that "Doctors at Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical Center (Boise)
>  :performed a series of surgeries to repair extensive intracranial
injuries,"
>  :but a few days have passed now and he has not responded to queries about
>  :the circumstances surrounding the fall.  Even before I was supplied with
his
>  :article, which contained his e-mail address, I wrote the Mountain
Express of
>  :Ketchum, Idaho, asking who witnessed the fall and a few other questions,
and
>  :they have also remained silent.
>
> Their job is to publish the newspaper, not to seek out medical records
> and police reports at the behest of anyone with an e-mail address.

But their job was to have sought them out for us all at the time of the
accident.  They should already have the information at their fingertips.
Why do they bother to announce their e-mail addresses if they are unwilling
to pass on such important information upon request?

Actually, Barker, in his initial Idaho Statesman article July 16 did
apparently ask the right questions of the right people, a lot more so than
is evident from the reporting by the major national media.  Here are the
last three paragraphs of his article:

Graham left for the secretive Allen and Co. retreat from Washington, D.C.,
and arrived in Sun Valley on Tuesday, according to The Washington Post.

The retreat, which included Mexico President Vicente Fox and Microsoft
founder Bill Gates Jr., began Tuesday and ended Saturday night.

Sun Valley officials would not comment Sunday night on any details
surrounding the retreat, including Graham's fall. Neither would officials
with the private security force hired by Allen and Co. (end)

Extraordinary!  They all stiffed him.  Secretive, indeed!  Sun Valley
perhaps should be renamed Black Hole for all the light that escapes it.  I
get the impression from reading his reporting compared to that of the others
that Barker has already written a good deal more than he should have, and he
has probably already been reminded of how easy it would be to get someone
else to do what he does.  He could very easily find himself "free-lancing"
and losing Internet debates, himself, if he doesn't stay in line.


>
>  :Meanwhile, after pretty much confiming his
>  :profession's utter uselessness, except to those who would perniciously
>  :manipulate public opinion, award-winning journalist, Andrew Walton,
seems to
>  :have slunk (or slithered) off into the tall grass.
>
> I have other things to do than post to Usenet, and the dozen-and-a-half
> posts -- including a 435-liner of yours -- take a little more time to go
> through than I've been willing to devote. This seems to betray part of
> your problem with mainstream journalists: you assume that they're at
> your service, and any information they don't drop everything to provide
> is being "suppressed."

Might I remind you that it was you who put yourself into the line of fire by
gratuitously sniping at my very simple public question, "Did anyone witness
Katharine Graham's fall?"  You apparently have the time to count lines, to
dream up insults, and to rationalize on behalf of your wretched profession,
but not to deal with any substantive questions.


>
> You know where the records of Graham's accident are kept -- at the
> Blaine County Courthouse (or some other nearby government building). I'm
> at a loss to explain why you haven't contacted them. I don't know what
> their policy is on releaseing such documents to the pubic, as they vary
> by jurisdiction, but it's worth a try. The Sherriff's Department phone
> number is (208) 778-5555, fax (208) 788-5559.

Hey, wake up, Andrew!  You're the professional free-lance journalist.
You're already to first base.  There's a big scoop here for you, I tell you.
There must be dozens of people who know all about the Graham swan dive onto
the concrete walk that left her with "extensive intracranial injuries."  The
reading public, as you surely must know, can never get enough information
about big-time celebrities, and Katharine Graham, the world's most powerful
woman, was about as big a celebrity as they come.  Go for it.


>
>  :I am now more curious than ever as to what sort of fall could have
resulted
>  :in "extensive intracranial injuries"
>
> She fell and hit her head. Nothing -- not even the anonymous witness you
> cite -- indicates otherwise.

Gee, Andrew, you may not have much of a nose for news, but I have to give it
to you, you surely are demonstrating that you know how to keep it clean from
a career-protecting standpoint.  Far be it from you to get out ahead of the
pack.

Whiplash onto the concrete?


>
> Apparently, your extensive research didn't include a well-constructed
> Google search.
>
>  :and why our vaunted free press is
>  :treating it as something like a state secret.
>
> Something like 6,500 other people died in the United States the same day
> as Katherine Graham. How many details of their deaths were "suppressed"?
> Were their medical records treated like "state secrets"?

What a reach!  None of them were the head of a media conglomerate that might
well be the world's most powerful and influential.  None of them were the
subjects of two published biographies and one autobiography.  None of them
were "Katharine the Great." (subtitled, "Katharine Graham and Her Washington
Post Empire" by Deborah Davis.  See also "Power, Privilege, and the Post,
the Katharine Graham Story" by Carol Felsenthal.)


> --
>       "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
>        hesitating, non-committal language."
>                            -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/
---------
DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird
>


K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 9/5/01 6:59 PM
Professor Vonroach <vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3b97a533.2859275@NNTP.ix.netcom.com...

And might I add:

After having been shown the tons of evidence showing that Vince Foster was
murdered and his murder was covered up, the inevitable response I get is,
"But what was the motive?"

My best guess is that he was murdered for the same reason that Jerry Parks
was murdered, and everyone, even the authorities, agree that Parks did not
commit suicide.  "Jerry who?" you ask.  See what I mean about the
suppression of news by Andrew's boys?  But you can be sure Andrew knows
about Jerry Parks.  He knows all about "well-constructed Google searches,"
after all.

---------
DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird


K. Graham's Fatal "Fall"- the VonRoach solution TomS 9/5/01 7:25 PM
Actually you just aren't worth the effort-because i would surmise regardless
of the answer-including one from the dead person themselves-would not be
sufficient for you.

There is one like you in every newsgroup and eventually you get to have the
whole thing to yourself because people tire of idiots like you.

now a final PLONK-


"Professor Vonroach" <vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3b9db346.6462327@NNTP.ix.netcom.com...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Andy Walton 9/5/01 9:57 PM
In article <9n6kbh$mkh$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>,
 "David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote:

 :Andy Walton <att...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
 :news:atticus-38754E.03073305092001@basic.bs.webusenet.com...
 :>
 :> Have you contacted the Ketchum County authorities? You know, the people


 :> who produce police reports, and whose job it is to provide them to the
 :> public? They're more likely to respond than reporters who've no doubt
 :> moved on to other stories in the last couple of months.
 :
 :Once again, I tell you that I am tired of doing the work of the
 :amply-endowed news media for them.

If you can't be bothered to ask the people who know, quit bitching that
you haven't gotten answers.

 :> Their job is to publish the newspaper, not to seek out medical records


 :> and police reports at the behest of anyone with an e-mail address.
 :
 :But their job was to have sought them out for us all at the time of the
 :accident.  They should already have the information at their fingertips.

Why should they? The questions you asked are well beyond the scope of
what they'd normally gather in a dog-bites-man story.

 :Why do they bother to announce their e-mail addresses if they are unwilling


 :to pass on such important information upon request?

Presumably, so that you can contact the reporters with tips or
corrections. I've never been a big fan of linking e-mail addresses to
bylines, myself, because it fosters the belief that the reporter is at
the beck and call of anyone who happens upon the Web site.

 :Actually, Barker, in his initial Idaho Statesman article July 16 did


 :apparently ask the right questions of the right people, a lot more so than
 :is evident from the reporting by the major national media.  Here are the
 :last three paragraphs of his article:
 :
 :Graham left for the secretive Allen and Co. retreat from Washington, D.C.,
 :and arrived in Sun Valley on Tuesday, according to The Washington Post.
 :
 :The retreat, which included Mexico President Vicente Fox and Microsoft
 :founder Bill Gates Jr., began Tuesday and ended Saturday night.
 :
 :Sun Valley officials would not comment Sunday night on any details
 :surrounding the retreat, including Graham's fall. Neither would officials
 :with the private security force hired by Allen and Co. (end)
 :
 :Extraordinary!  They all stiffed him.  Secretive, indeed!  Sun Valley
 :perhaps should be renamed Black Hole for all the light that escapes it.

Nothing unusual there. Try asking Walt Disney World if anyone has ever
died at the park (people have). Tourist attractions don't like to be
associated with death, and private entities are under no obligation to
share information with the public.

 :I


 :get the impression from reading his reporting compared to that of the others
 :that Barker has already written a good deal more than he should have, and he
 :has probably already been reminded of how easy it would be to get someone
 :else to do what he does.  He could very easily find himself "free-lancing"
 :and losing Internet debates, himself, if he doesn't stay in line.

By all means, when you have no facts, feel free to fill in with blind
speculation.

 :> I have other things to do than post to Usenet, and the dozen-and-a-half


 :> posts -- including a 435-liner of yours -- take a little more time to go
 :> through than I've been willing to devote. This seems to betray part of
 :> your problem with mainstream journalists: you assume that they're at
 :> your service, and any information they don't drop everything to provide
 :> is being "suppressed."
 :
 :Might I remind you that it was you who put yourself into the line of fire by
 :gratuitously sniping at my very simple public question, "Did anyone witness
 :Katharine Graham's fall?"

If you're going to post your suspicions that every single celebrity
death is the subject of a coverup and you get in high dander over a
wiseass one-liner, Usenet may not be the best medium for you.

 :You apparently have the time to count lines,

Get a real newsreader, and you'll see just how much effort that takes.

 :to dream up insults,

That's probably the quickest and easiest activity that can be carried
out at a keyboard.

 :and to rationalize on behalf of your wretched profession,


 :but not to deal with any substantive questions.
 :>
 :> You know where the records of Graham's accident are kept -- at the
 :> Blaine County Courthouse (or some other nearby government building). I'm
 :> at a loss to explain why you haven't contacted them. I don't know what
 :> their policy is on releaseing such documents to the pubic, as they vary
 :> by jurisdiction, but it's worth a try. The Sherriff's Department phone
 :> number is (208) 778-5555, fax (208) 788-5559.
 :
 :Hey, wake up, Andrew!  You're the professional free-lance journalist.
 :You're already to first base.  There's a big scoop here for you, I tell you.

Uh-huh. You're the one who's convinced that there's a story there.
You've now spent more time rationalizing why you won't make a simple
phone call than you would have spent on the phone. If you want me to
check it out for you, my rates for freelance research start at $50/hour.

 :There must be dozens of people who know all about the Graham swan dive onto


 :the concrete walk that left her with "extensive intracranial injuries."  The
 :reading public, as you surely must know, can never get enough information
 :about big-time celebrities, and Katharine Graham, the world's most powerful
 :woman, was about as big a celebrity as they come.  Go for it.

Frankly, I'm surprised someone hasn't already gotten the documents.
Since she died while in a doctor's care, there probably aren't any
grizly autopsy photos that some corners of the Web find appealing, so
that diminishes the motive.

 :>  :I am now more curious than ever as to what sort of fall could have


 :resulted
 :>  :in "extensive intracranial injuries"
 :>
 :> She fell and hit her head. Nothing -- not even the anonymous witness you
 :> cite -- indicates otherwise.
 :
 :Gee, Andrew, you may not have much of a nose for news, but I have to give it
 :to you, you surely are demonstrating that you know how to keep it clean from
 :a career-protecting standpoint.  Far be it from you to get out ahead of the
 :pack.

If "out ahead of the pack" means "standing at the horse track looking
for zebras," I'll pass. If I wanted o spend my time looking for a story
where I don't think there is one, I'd be looking for the Sasquatch or
the Loch Ness Monster. They're in more scenic places, and I could get
some fishing in. Although Sun Valley's not bad, I hear. If I could get
someone to fund a junket...

 :>   head injuries are described as severe. However, subdural hematoma can


 :>   occur without direct head trauma. For example, the force of whiplash
 :>   alone can be severe enough to cause this injury, especially in elderly
 :>   people and in people taking blood-thinning medications.
 :
 :Whiplash onto the concrete?

That's all you could find to say? You asked "what sort of fall could have
resulted in 'extensive intracranial injuries'". Answered. Two journals
and the American Academy of Emergency Medicine said that falls often
cause subdural hematoma in the elderly. The excerpt you criticized above
pointed out that the elderly can suffer cranial bleeding with *no* head
trauma. So whatever grounds you still harbor for suspicions of a
coverup, scratch the "medical implausibility" bit.

 :> Apparently, your extensive research didn't include a well-constructed


 :> Google search.
 :>
 :>  :and why our vaunted free press is
 :>  :treating it as something like a state secret.
 :>
 :> Something like 6,500 other people died in the United States the same day
 :> as Katherine Graham. How many details of their deaths were "suppressed"?
 :> Were their medical records treated like "state secrets"?
 :
 :What a reach!  None of them were the head of a media conglomerate that might
 :well be the world's most powerful and influential.

And none of them got front page stories. Let me break it down another
way -- do you recall any celebrity obituary that you felt *did* have
enough detailed medical information? Care to post a URL to it?


--
      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
       hesitating, non-committal language."
                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Andy Walton 9/5/01 11:54 PM
In article <3b96a14e...@NNTP.ix.netcom.com>,
 vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com (Professor Vonroach) wrote:

 :On Wed, 05 Sep 2001 13:48:16 -0400, Andy Walton


 :<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:
 :
 :>Okay. You don't trust the press or the authorities for even the most
 :>basic information. Tell us, Professor, whom would you turn to? Would you
 :>prefer to ask people who have no idea, than complain that the
 :>information is "suppressed" because no one has an answer?
 :
 :No, Andy, since I do not profess to be a reporter and make my
 :contribution to the economy in other ways - I would prefer if those
 :who do call reporting their profession would ferret out information
 :from a number of sources (such as witnesses, official documents,
 :authorities who are usually a weak source, those with some expertise
 :in similar occurrences, etc...) and pass such data along to those who
 :purchase their broad sheets without any publisher/editor filter or
 :personal bias filter. I immodestly believe that I am learned and
 :mature enough to judge the meaning of data.

The "personal bias" filter is something every reporter and editor has to
fight against every day -- they're as human as anyone. In fact, I think
that a partly conscious, partly unconscious effort to avoid both the
appearance and reality of "liberal bias" explains the kid-glove
treatment Dubya has gotten so far. How successful any given writer or
set of editors is is an exercise left to the reader, and part of why
readers pick one outlet over another.

Without the "publisher/editor filter," a newspaper would be nothing more
than a collection of raw data. That's not what people buy newspapers
for. A reporter and editor, like Edmund Burke said of legislators, "owes
his constitutents not only his industry, but his judgment." If you think
there's enough of a market to sustain a publication based on raw data
without any exercise of editorial judgment, start contacting investors.
The Internet feeds part of that need, but bringing government agencies
and the information they produce online is a slow process.

 :In my opinion elected public officials should have the privilege of


 :having their remarks presented without comment except on the page
 :reserved for such comment.

They have that privilege. Every elected official has a Web page where he
can post transcripts, audio or video of his remarks at will. If every
elected official had unlimited use of the airwaves, without anyone
exercising editorial judgment over which parts are most important, you'd
need at least ten more channels of C-SPAN (and even those two channels
exercise editorial judgment in deciding what to carry when or even at
all, as they've only got 48 hours [2 channels] in the day). If you want
to know what members of Congress want to say with no filters -- even
libel and slander laws don't apply to members of Congress while they're
in session -- the Congressional Record is found in most large libraries
and at <http://thomas.loc.gov/>.

 :It is a curious practice know as reporting the news without


 :the baggage of the bias of the publisher and their hired hand the
 :editor or the sensationalism introduced by some to sell papers in
 :supermarkets such as perhaps one of your idols J. Pulitzer.

I'm not a fan of Pulitzer. He made a couple of useful innovations, like
printing a newspaper that wasn't an avowed ally of any particular
political party, but he was left with an equally powerful and,
ultimately, more insidious agenda -- what sells. The famous "you provide
the pictures, I'll provide the war" incident occurred, I believe, not
because of any political conviction of Pulitzer's, but because he knew
that a "nice little war" would boost circulation.

Which leads me into a few more general observations. I don't worry about
any political influence -- whether partisan, or by the more amorphous
"Establishment" -- as much as I worry about commercial influence. We're
now getting all Condit, all the time, because it's better for ratings
and circulation (and, as night follows day, ad revenues) than coverage
of Taliban abuses, mind-numbing economic analysis, in-depth review of
the balance between environmental and economic concerns, and other
issues that have more meaning to people's lives. While Serbs, Croats and
Moslems were busily slaughtering each other in a replay of the strife
that led to World War I, and Hutus and Tutsis were shattering all
records for machete-based brutality, we heard less about Slobadan
Milosevic and Ratko Mladic than we did about Kato Kaelin, the nonentity
of the decade. Kato was cuter. So was that hunky, square-jawed Mark
Fuhrman, until the other shoe dropped.

I expect those pressures to become more acute now that most news
organizations aren't led by "news people." Of course, whether they ever
were is subject to debate. But with much of the news media run by one or
the other of AOL, the oddly-named News Corp, Disney, and a few other
diversified "media" companies, the commercial pressures become more
acute. I don't believe that the corporate bigwigs apply direct editorial
pressure, or particularly care to -- they enforce profit, circulation
and ratings targets that affect the product in more subtle ways.

It's a tough balance to strike. What good does it do to publish a paper
that is perfect in its balance (by someone's judgment, of course), puts
important stories ahead of popular and titillating ones, and doesn't get
read by anyone? Is the latest study on whether spanking is harmful to
children more important than the war in Macedonia, which could spill
over into the rest of the Balkans? The spanking study has more immediacy
for more readers, and will sell more papers. So spanking gets A-1,
column 5, and Macedonia winds up below the fold (or in the B-block, or
in the third tier of Web page bullets -- I use the newspaper metaphor
because it's still the most natural to me).

I don't buy into the dim view of the media that's prevalent on this
newsgroup, but I can't claim that it's beyond reproach. There are
pressures that have nothing to so with the pure pursuit of facts (I say
"facts" instead of "truth" intentionally), and while I'd love to see the
Platonic ideal of journalism, I don't see how it could persist in the
real world. As I see it, there are four rough types of media outlets:

1) Market-funded. Pro: there's a lot of opportunity for niche
publications, as there is for any niche product in a free market. No
explicit coercion, and bad PR for any government agency that attempts
more subtle coercion. Con: pressure to "perform" financially skews the
balance. There's a tendency to publish what people want to read rather
than what they need to read, to lean toward the salacious.

2) Government-funded. Pro: No need to suck up to corporate sponsors.
Con: Vital need to suck up to government sponsors. Even if the
government takes elaborate means on paper to take itself out of the
editorial loop, every reporter and editor knows that offending Jesse
Helms (e.g.) will eventually bring down a shitstorm.

3) Non-profit. Pro: No market pressures. Con: donors have more influence
than in 1) or 2). Advertisers feel they're getting something for their
money, and government sponsors face public pressures. Non-profit
publishers are entirely dependent on the goodwill of their donors.
Whether implicit or explicit, that lurks in the back of the mind of
every writer and editor.

4) Unfunded. Pro: no pressures of any kind from anyone else. Sheer drive
and will, without a thought toward being accepted or profitable. Con:
Limited resources, limited circulation, a certain Cassandra factor. One
person's view, with no other input, and no writer is so good he doesn't
need an editor; viz. the recent books of Stephen King compared to his
earlier works.

Like any rough categories, there's a lot of overlap. NPR and PBS are a
hybrid of 2) and 3). Plenty of small "alternative" sites are some
combination of 1) and 4), as Matt Drudge was in the early days. But if
there's a perfectly fair and virtuous balance, our imperfect world has
thus far failed to produce it.


--
      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
       hesitating, non-committal language."
                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/6/01 2:33 AM
On Thu, 06 Sep 2001 00:56:47 -0400, Andy Walton
<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>:Actually, Barker, in his initial Idaho Statesman article July 16 did
> :apparently ask the right questions of the right people, a lot more so than
> :is evident from the reporting by the major national media.  Here are the
> :last three paragraphs of his article:
> :
> :Graham left for the secretive Allen and Co. retreat from Washington, D.C.,
> :and arrived in Sun Valley on Tuesday, according to The Washington Post.
> :
> :The retreat, which included Mexico President Vicente Fox and Microsoft
> :founder Bill Gates Jr., began Tuesday and ended Saturday night.

Barker then actually had news to most people under his nose - what was
the opinionated publisher of a newspaper doing at a secretive retreat
in Sun Valley? Who is Allen & Co.? What was the objective of the
`retreat'? What were the odd couple, Fox and Gates doing at this
secret `retreat'. What are the names of the other `guests'. Sounds
reminiscent of the Hudson River cruises that the NJ politicians
regularly held to do their deal-making out of site (also pointedly
neglected by the local press). I repeat who is Allen & Co.? I suppose
the press, acting on instructions decided that this was privileged
information, not the sort of thing their peasant readers should be
exposed to. DC Dave has uncovered a nugget of news among all the slop.

Andrew be mama's good boy now and get out your broom. There is news
that you must sweep under the rug.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/6/01 3:48 AM
On Thu, 06 Sep 2001 02:53:28 -0400, Andy Walton
<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:


> :


> :No, Andy, since I do not profess to be a reporter and make my
> :contribution to the economy in other ways - I would prefer if those
> :who do call reporting their profession would ferret out information
> :from a number of sources (such as witnesses, official documents,
> :authorities who are usually a weak source, those with some expertise
> :in similar occurrences, etc...) and pass such data along to those who
> :purchase their broad sheets without any publisher/editor filter or
> :personal bias filter. I immodestly believe that I am learned and
> :mature enough to judge the meaning of data.
>
>The "personal bias" filter is something every reporter and editor has to
>fight against every day -- they're as human as anyone. In fact, I think
>that a partly conscious, partly unconscious effort to avoid both the
>appearance and reality of "liberal bias" explains the kid-glove
>treatment Dubya has gotten so far. How successful any given writer or
>set of editors is is an exercise left to the reader, and part of why
>readers pick one outlet over another.

The `kid-glove' treatment is a myth, kid. I suppose you mean being
accused of being a weed head, an election thief, an alcoholic, a moron
with a low IQ, and a little rich kid dependent on daddy is
`kid-gloves' - and compared to some of the political butchery that K.
Graham's WP is famous for, it might appear that way to a biased kid
like yourself whose prejudice fairly drips from your terms like
`Dubya'.

>
>Without the "publisher/editor filter," a newspaper would be nothing more
>than a collection of raw data. That's not what people buy newspapers
>for. A reporter and editor, like Edmund Burke said of legislators, "owes
>his constitutents not only his industry, but his judgment." If you think
>there's enough of a market to sustain a publication based on raw data
>without any exercise of editorial judgment, start contacting investors.
>The Internet feeds part of that need, but bringing government agencies
>and the information they produce online is a slow process.

More arrogance from the hired hands of a publisher.

> :In my opinion elected public officials should have the privilege of
> :having their remarks presented without comment except on the page
> :reserved for such comment.
>
>They have that privilege. Every elected official has a Web page where he
>can post transcripts, audio or video of his remarks at will. If every
>elected official had unlimited use of the airwaves, without anyone
>exercising editorial judgment over which parts are most important, you'd
>need at least ten more channels of C-SPAN (and even those two channels
>exercise editorial judgment in deciding what to carry when or even at
>all, as they've only got 48 hours [2 channels] in the day). If you want
>to know what members of Congress want to say with no filters -- even
>libel and slander laws don't apply to members of Congress while they're
>in session -- the Congressional Record is found in most large libraries

I hope this is an attempt to be humorous. `Exercising editorial
judgement', actually you mean reinventing a statement and spinning it
to the publishers wishes. C-Span a big biased joke, as big a joke as
public television and NPR - all retirement homes for burned out new
deal reporters.  The Congressional Record - you can't be serious. To
read about Byrd's little dog Billy and his random senile thoughts on
the Roman Senate.  You must have a fascination with phony blather. So
you think the President should put his remarks on some web site and
leave it at that - and that Graham, Sulzberger, et al should
rightfully publish their biased account on the front page under
screaming headlines. My, you lack prejudices don't you.

Are you ducking the questions? Who is Allen & Co. What was this `odd
mob', Graham, Fox, Gates, and other `un-named guests' doing at this
secret retreat in Sun Valley? Seems to have been a media-inspired
eclipse. Were you as silent when the Mafia gathered at their
`Appalachian Retreat'? Probably wouldn't be politic for an aspiring
hired hand to become too curious about the Sun Valley get-together, I
suppose, if they ever planned to progress up the lackey ladder.

> :It is a curious practice know as reporting the news without
> :the baggage of the bias of the publisher and their hired hand the
> :editor or the sensationalism introduced by some to sell papers in
> :supermarkets such as perhaps one of your idols J. Pulitzer.
>
>I'm not a fan of Pulitzer. He made a couple of useful innovations, like
>printing a newspaper that wasn't an avowed ally of any particular
>political party, but he was left with an equally powerful and,
>ultimately, more insidious agenda -- what sells. The famous "you provide
>the pictures, I'll provide the war" incident occurred, I believe, not
>because of any political conviction of Pulitzer's, but because he knew
>that a "nice little war" would boost circulation.

Is this politically correct journalistic history? I believe you will
find the war-monger to have been Wm. Randolph Hearst and his San
Francisco tabloid empire. Pulitzer combined a couple of St. Louis
tabloids, the Post and the Dispatch to found the solidly left wing
Post Dispatch - probably in later days a solid backer of Council
Gebhardt in his leap from undistinguished member of the St. Louis city
council to minority leader of the US House.


>
>Which leads me into a few more general observations. I don't worry about
>any political influence -- whether partisan, or by the more amorphous
>"Establishment" -- as much as I worry about commercial influence. We're
>now getting all Condit, all the time, because it's better for ratings
>and circulation (and, as night follows day, ad revenues) than coverage
>of Taliban abuses, mind-numbing economic analysis, in-depth review of
>the balance between environmental and economic concerns, and other
>issues that have more meaning to people's lives. While Serbs, Croats and
>Moslems were busily slaughtering each other in a replay of the strife
>that led to World War I, and Hutus and Tutsis were shattering all
>records for machete-based brutality, we heard less about Slobadan
>Milosevic and Ratko Mladic than we did about Kato Kaelin, the nonentity
>of the decade. Kato was cuter. So was that hunky, square-jawed Mark
>Fuhrman, until the other shoe dropped.

You whine because the public has lost interest in your manufactured
left wing crises. Maybe they no longer want your garbage left on their
door step. Perhaps after 8 years of female abuse Clinton-style, they
are concerned for the fate of a missing intern formerly `protege' of a
wimp womanizing congressman from California. Those from California
seem to have bizarre fates in Washington DC. Perhaps they wonder if
Panetta had anything to do with procuring Ms Levy as in the case of
Ms. Lewinsky? It is certainly more interesting than the phony power
shortage. Maybe the press found Kato cuter (few readers did), but some
of us noted despite the hysterical clamor of the press that Mark
Fuhrman was the only wide awake detective in LA and even more than the
LADA got it right at the start and nailed O.J.s hide to the wall.
Bailey the blustering Boston has-been and his red herrings amused only
the press, he looked like a confused blow hard to many. The press is
now again following the Fuhrman lead and belatedly revealing another
Kennedy cousin involved in a murder that would have been forbidden
press during `their honeymoon in `Camelot'. You are a pathetic
specimen Andrew.


>
>I expect those pressures to become more acute now that most news
>organizations aren't led by "news people." Of course, whether they ever
>were is subject to debate. But with much of the news media run by one or
>the other of AOL, the oddly-named News Corp, Disney, and a few other
>diversified "media" companies, the commercial pressures become more
>acute. I don't believe that the corporate bigwigs apply direct editorial
>pressure, or particularly care to -- they enforce profit, circulation
>and ratings targets that affect the product in more subtle ways.

I take this to mean that moderate private business men, who may
require you to get out of a chair and earn a living do not agree with
your left wing leanings.

>It's a tough balance to strike. What good does it do to publish a paper
>that is perfect in its balance (by someone's judgment, of course), puts
>important stories ahead of popular and titillating ones, and doesn't get
>read by anyone? Is the latest study on whether spanking is harmful to
>children more important than the war in Macedonia, which could spill
>over into the rest of the Balkans? The spanking study has more immediacy
>for more readers, and will sell more papers. So spanking gets A-1,
>column 5, and Macedonia winds up below the fold (or in the B-block, or
>in the third tier of Web page bullets -- I use the newspaper metaphor
>because it's still the most natural to me).

Wars are a dime a dozen, Andy. Perhaps if more attention was given to
raising and educating kids this would not be the case. The press draws
cold feet every time the subject of the rotten entertainment and music
scene of the present that preaches Clintonesque values.

>I don't buy into the dim view of the media that's prevalent on this
>newsgroup, but I can't claim that it's beyond reproach. There are
>pressures that have nothing to so with the pure pursuit of facts (I say
>"facts" instead of "truth" intentionally), and while I'd love to see the
>Platonic ideal of journalism, I don't see how it could persist in the
>real world. As I see it, there are four rough types of media outlets:

I also have tried to confine my remarks to facts, data, news rather
than the amorphous phony biased truth proclaimed by publishers.

>
>1) Market-funded. Pro: there's a lot of opportunity for niche
>publications, as there is for any niche product in a free market. No
>explicit coercion, and bad PR for any government agency that attempts
>more subtle coercion. Con: pressure to "perform" financially skews the
>balance. There's a tendency to publish what people want to read rather
>than what they need to read, to lean toward the salacious.
Market-funded media speaks for that market. Pure propaganda.

>2) Government-funded. Pro: No need to suck up to corporate sponsors.
>Con: Vital need to suck up to government sponsors. Even if the
>government takes elaborate means on paper to take itself out of the
>editorial loop, every reporter and editor knows that offending Jesse
>Helms (e.g.) will eventually bring down a shitstorm.
Government-funded media speaks for that government. Pure propaganda,
to balance your remark a bit, it would also shrug from discussing Ted
Kennedy's sins and cirrhosis.

>3) Non-profit. Pro: No market pressures. Con: donors have more influence
>than in 1) or 2). Advertisers feel they're getting something for their
>money, and government sponsors face public pressures. Non-profit
>publishers are entirely dependent on the goodwill of their donors.
>Whether implicit or explicit, that lurks in the back of the mind of
>every writer and editor.
The goodwill of donors, sponsorship of large business (have you seen
PBS lately), and pleasing government regulators. The influence of
government on PBS and NPR is direct and obvious - their sponsors are
the left wing extremists in government. C-spam is a little more subtle
in sucking up to their left wing government supporters at the behest
of the TV industry seeking approval, support, and favors for their
efforts.

>4) Unfunded. Pro: no pressures of any kind from anyone else. Sheer drive
>and will, without a thought toward being accepted or profitable. Con:
>Limited resources, limited circulation, a certain Cassandra factor. One
>person's view, with no other input, and no writer is so good he doesn't
>need an editor; viz. the recent books of Stephen King compared to his
>earlier works.
Clearly expresses the biases and prejudices of the unfunded owner
without any filter pure propaganda.

>Like any rough categories, there's a lot of overlap. NPR and PBS are a
>hybrid of 2) and 3). Plenty of small "alternative" sites are some
>combination of 1) and 4), as Matt Drudge was in the early days. But if
>there's a perfectly fair and virtuous balance, our imperfect world has
>thus far failed to produce it.
True, but we were once a lot closer when publishers had ethics,
integrity, and morality - and in a few cases perhaps even the best
interests of their readers at heart.
For all the weeping, gnashing of teeth, renting of their garments, and
application of ashes - journalism and the press will not miss K.
Graham, she brought nothing to the mix.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Andy Walton 9/6/01 10:17 AM
In article <3b9842ba...@NNTP.ix.netcom.com>,
 vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com (Professor Vonroach) wrote:

 :>Without the "publisher/editor filter," a newspaper would be nothing more

 :>than a collection of raw data. That's not what people buy newspapers
 :>for. A reporter and editor, like Edmund Burke said of legislators, "owes
 :>his constitutents not only his industry, but his judgment." If you think
 :>there's enough of a market to sustain a publication based on raw data
 :>without any exercise of editorial judgment, start contacting investors.
 :>The Internet feeds part of that need, but bringing government agencies
 :>and the information they produce online is a slow process.
 :
 :More arrogance from the hired hands of a publisher.

If I'm a "hired hand of a publisher," I wish they'd be more prompt with
the checks. If there's something substantive you want to dispute in the
above paragraph, I'd love to hear it.

 :> :In my opinion elected public officials should have the privilege of


 :> :having their remarks presented without comment except on the page
 :> :reserved for such comment.

[...]

 :>If you want

 :>to know what members of Congress want to say with no filters -- even
 :>libel and slander laws don't apply to members of Congress while they're
 :>in session -- the Congressional Record is found in most large libraries

[...]

 :The Congressional Record - you can't be serious. To


 :read about Byrd's little dog Billy and his random senile thoughts on
 :the Roman Senate.  You must have a fascination with phony blather.

Could you at least make some token effort to be consistent? You wanted
to see elected officials' comments presented without filters. I told you
where to find precisely that, and you claimed that *I* am the one
"fascinated with phony blather." In effect, you said you wanted to make
every newspaper a carbon copy of the Congressional Record but, I assume,
with space for state and local official records as well. But you hate
the CR. You're like a spoiled child on Christmas morning -- give you
precisely what you demand, and you'll hate it. You're only happy when
you have something to condemn.

 :So you think the President should put his remarks on some web site and
 :leave it at that

I do? Funny, I don't recall saying or even thinking that. You wanted
elected officials' every utterance, untouched by other editors, and I
told you where to find it. I'd settle for a "thank you."

 :- and that Graham, Sulzberger, et al should


 :rightfully publish their biased account on the front page under
 :screaming headlines.

Are you saying that George W. Bush should edit the front page of the New
York Times and Washington Post? Freedom of the press belongs to those
who own one. If you don't like it, buy a press -- in the Internet age,
the price of a metaphorical press is trivial.

 :My, you lack prejudices don't you.

I'll let the irony of that statement in the middle of your screed speak
for itself.

 :Are you ducking the questions?

Um, what questions?

 :Who is Allen & Co. What was this `odd mob', Graham, Fox, Gates, and
 :other `un-named guests' doing at this secret retreat in Sun Valley?

Ah, those questions. Beats me. Where did you get the impression that I
had anything to do with it, or knew anything about it?

 :Seems to have been a media-inspired


 :eclipse. Were you as silent when the Mafia gathered at their
 :`Appalachian Retreat'?

It's Appalachin. Pronounced with a hard 'k', not like the mountain
range. And I was completely silent, as my father was eight years old at
the time.

 :Probably wouldn't be politic for an aspiring


 :hired hand to become too curious about the Sun Valley get-together, I
 :suppose, if they ever planned to progress up the lackey ladder.

You, on the other hand, as the Last Honest Man, are free to be as
curious as you like about any gathering of the Rich And Powerful. I
suspect the whole Sun Valley gathering was a ploy to distract you from
the next Renaissance Weekend or Bilderberg meeting.

 :>I'm not a fan of Pulitzer. He made a couple of useful innovations, like

 :>printing a newspaper that wasn't an avowed ally of any particular
 :>political party, but he was left with an equally powerful and,
 :>ultimately, more insidious agenda -- what sells. The famous "you provide
 :>the pictures, I'll provide the war" incident occurred, I believe, not
 :>because of any political conviction of Pulitzer's, but because he knew
 :>that a "nice little war" would boost circulation.
 :
 :Is this politically correct journalistic history? I believe you will
 :find the war-monger to have been Wm. Randolph Hearst and his San
 :Francisco tabloid empire.

I stand corrected. How a Citizen Kane fan can munge Hearst and Pulitzer,
I don't know. I'll blame the lateness of the hour.

 :Pulitzer combined a couple of St. Louis


 :tabloids, the Post and the Dispatch to found the solidly left wing
 :Post Dispatch - probably in later days a solid backer of Council
 :Gebhardt in his leap from undistinguished member of the St. Louis city
 :council to minority leader of the US House.

It's spelled "Gephardt." I, personally, have never seen an 18-year
"leap."

 :>Which leads me into a few more general observations. I don't worry about

 :>any political influence -- whether partisan, or by the more amorphous
 :>"Establishment" -- as much as I worry about commercial influence. We're
 :>now getting all Condit, all the time, because it's better for ratings
 :>and circulation (and, as night follows day, ad revenues) than coverage
 :>of Taliban abuses, mind-numbing economic analysis, in-depth review of
 :>the balance between environmental and economic concerns, and other
 :>issues that have more meaning to people's lives. While Serbs, Croats and
 :>Moslems were busily slaughtering each other in a replay of the strife
 :>that led to World War I, and Hutus and Tutsis were shattering all
 :>records for machete-based brutality, we heard less about Slobadan
 :>Milosevic and Ratko Mladic than we did about Kato Kaelin, the nonentity
 :>of the decade. Kato was cuter. So was that hunky, square-jawed Mark
 :>Fuhrman, until the other shoe dropped.
 :
 :You whine because the public has lost interest in your manufactured
 :left wing crises.

Which of Yugoslavia, Rwanda, the Taliban, and the economy are "my
manufactured left-wing crises"?

 :Maybe they no longer want your garbage left on their


 :door step. Perhaps after 8 years of female abuse Clinton-style, they
 :are concerned for the fate of a missing intern formerly `protege' of a
 :wimp womanizing congressman from California.

If news consumers are concerned about Chandra Levy, they have an odd way
of showing it. There's more talk, by a wide margin, about whether Gary
Condit schtupped her than where the hell she is and what happened to
her.

 :Maybe the press found Kato cuter (few readers did),

I'll take circulation and ratings numbers over your best guess, but
thanks anyway.

 :Bailey the blustering Boston has-been and his red herrings amused only


 :the press, he looked like a confused blow hard to many.

He seems to have amused the jury, as well. And you miss the point yet
again, with all your pronouncements that "only the press" cared about OJ
and other salacious stories. CNN didn't cover the living hell out of the
story for its own jollies -- they ran with it because PEOPLE WERE
WATCHING. TV news people watch the ratings like you watch your
children's grades.

Repeat this as many times as it takes to get it: in a market economy,
people get the products they demand. If you're not happy with what's
available for sale, your gripe isn't with the thousands who sell it, but
with the millions who buy it.

 :>I expect those pressures to become more acute now that most news

 :>organizations aren't led by "news people." Of course, whether they ever
 :>were is subject to debate. But with much of the news media run by one or
 :>the other of AOL, the oddly-named News Corp, Disney, and a few other
 :>diversified "media" companies, the commercial pressures become more
 :>acute. I don't believe that the corporate bigwigs apply direct editorial
 :>pressure, or particularly care to -- they enforce profit, circulation
 :>and ratings targets that affect the product in more subtle ways.
 :
 :I take this to mean that moderate private business men, who may
 :require you to get out of a chair and earn a living do not agree with
 :your left wing leanings.

Take it how you will. I've come to accept that what I write doesn't
necessarily correlate to what you read.

[snip -- the Professor explains that every form of media, not only
existent but imaginable, is "pure propaganda"]

 :True, but we were once a lot closer when publishers had ethics,


 :integrity, and morality - and in a few cases perhaps even the best
 :interests of their readers at heart.

When was that? When was the press run by these perfect, noble people?


--
      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
       hesitating, non-committal language."
                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/6/01 1:04 PM
On Thu, 06 Sep 2001 13:10:22 -0400, Andy Walton
<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>. CNN didn't cover the living hell out of the
>story for its own jollies -- they ran with it because PEOPLE WERE
>WATCHING.

Many for the last time judging by their ratings.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Andy Walton 9/6/01 3:01 PM
In article <3b973ecf...@NNTP.ix.netcom.com>,
 vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com (Professor Vonroach) wrote:

 :I repeat who is Allen & Co.? I suppose


 :the press, acting on instructions decided that this was privileged
 :information, not the sort of thing their peasant readers should be
 :exposed to. DC Dave has uncovered a nugget of news among all the slop.

Would it kill you to even make a vague effort to find answers before
screaming "coverup"? Your ignorance isn't proof of anything. But it is
curable. Here are a few of the most prominent publications who've
covered the story, found in a few minutes of Googling:

The NY Post described the conference -- apparently an annual event --
beforehand. <http://www.nypost.com/technology/34637.htm>

Britannica magazine has more depth (no surprise) at
<http://www.britannica.com/magazine/article?content_id=190708&query=idaho
>.

Bloomberg moved a story, carried by the Seattle Times and, no doubt,
other papers.
<http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/134314653_sunva
lley06.html
>.

Time:
<http://www.time.com/time/magazine/1998/dom/980720/business.power_camps.9
.html
>

Fast Company: <http://www.fastcompany.com/online/28/hrubin.html>

Forbes: <http://www.forbes.com/1999/03/23/feat.html>

Time again:
<http://www.time.com/time/magazine/1997/int/971117/business.a_new_world_a
.html
>

USA Today: <http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/ctf569.htm>

Business Day (a magazine in THAILAND, f'rcrissake):
<http://www.bday.net/jul16/p06-161.htm>

The Idaho Mountain Express describes the crush of reporters surrounding
the 1999 retreat: <http://www.mtexpress.com/1999/07-14-99/l14murph.htm>

There's a detailed profile of Allen & Co. at
<http://www.iwon.com/home/careers/company_profile/0,15623,754,00.html>.

 :Andrew be mama's good boy now and get out your broom. There is news


 :that you must sweep under the rug.

It can't be that important. I haven't gotten a call from Moscow about
it.


--
      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
       hesitating, non-committal language."
                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/6/01 4:04 PM
On Thu, 06 Sep 2001 18:00:42 -0400, Andy Walton
<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>In article <3b973ecf...@NNTP.ix.netcom.com>,
> vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com (Professor Vonroach) wrote:
>
> :I repeat who is Allen & Co.? I suppose
> :the press, acting on instructions decided that this was privileged
> :information, not the sort of thing their peasant readers should be
> :exposed to. DC Dave has uncovered a nugget of news among all the slop.
>
>Would it kill you to even make a vague effort to find answers before
>screaming "coverup"? Your ignorance isn't proof of anything. But it is
>curable. Here are a few of the most prominent publications who've
>covered the story, found in a few minutes of Googling:
>
Hush, Andy, it's good training. I haven't the time that students have.
Thanks for the information on `Allen & Co.'. I've never paid any
attention to conspiracy theorists or the renaissance retreat.  But
perhaps I've been naive. A company whose employees say they feel like
they are working for a secret society. Humm... Secret media clients,
secret roles in deals, secret meetings (retreats) hosting well-known
people who strive to keep their attendance secret. I must say this is
an eye opener. Buzzard's luck - a prominent guest falls and scrambles
her cranial contents, and the cozy meeting receives publicity.

Virtually all jurisdictions require a medico-legal autopsy to
establish a `cause of death' - you perhaps recall the ancient coroner
in Virginia where they carted V. Foster for a flawed looksee - I
assume Idaho has similar laws. Is anyone aware of the results?

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 9/6/01 8:06 PM
So, according to award-winning journalist, Andrew Walton, how it happens to
be known that Katharine Graham's fatal injuries were caused by a fall on a
concrete walk is of no more news value than any old dog-bites-man story.  It
is something that we humble masses simply don't need to be told.  A
corollary has to be that we should take it on faith that we are not being
lied to about the whole thing, because, after all, it does sound like a
reasonably plausible story.  It's all the more plausible if you believe that
The Washington Post is primarily in the news business where getting
information to the public is paramount, as opposed to the power-wielding
business, where it's essentially public-be-damned.

Now one might be inclined to respect Andy's news judgment had he not
previously defended the complete suppression of the news of the existence of
a devastating addendum to Kenneth Starr's report on the death of Deputy
White House Counsel, Vincent Foster.  His basis for the defense was that the
news media, in their collective wisdom, must not have found the addendum
credible, ignoring the fact that its entire content is made up of government
documents and the testimony of a witness who would have no apparent reason
to lie.  It would have to be a real piece of garbage, indeed, to lack news
value considering the fact that its conclusions utterly contradict the
conclusion of the Independent Counsel that the highest ranking official
since Kennedy to die by gunshot killed himself.

There are only two possibilites here (1)  Mr. Walton believes that addendum
was so lacking in news value that the entire American news establishment was
right to black out the news of its existence in spite of the fact that a
3-judge panely ordered it appended over Starr's strenuous opposition.  In
that case he must be pitifully stupid.  (2) He doesn't really believe it
lacked news value.  That means he's a liar and might, after all, have a
bright future in the American news business.  (See Part 6 of my "America's
Dreyfus Affair" on my web site, which is subtitled, "The Reign of the Lie.")

His fitness to take his place among American journalists is also revealed by
some of the subtle tricks he pulled in his rejoinder to my last posting.  He
gives the appearance of simply responding to my points, one by one.  Were he
engaged in honest debate that is what he would have done.  But careful
examination reveals that he has also gone to the trouble to snip as much
valuable information out of his posting as he possibly could without making
it too obvious.  Not content to deprive the public of information in the
first instance when it was their job to impart it, our press hacks bend over
backwards to attempt to prevent others from imparting it.

In my posting I made mention of the questionable "suicide" of reporter Sandy
Hume and my futile attempts to gain information about it from the Arlington
County Sheriff.  I spoke of the corrupt autopsy doctor, James C. Beyer, and
gave a web site http://www.thepacc.org where you could read about it, as
well as in my "America's Dreyfus Affair."  I also mentioned the case of
Tommy Burkett, also described at that web site, and that of the "suicide" of
the staff director of the House Intelligence Committee, John Millis, and
gave a web site in which I discuss it further at
http://www.thebird.org/host/dcdave/article3/000628.html .  These all give
the reader a better feel for the milieu of corruption that surrounds us, and
incipient propagandist Walton carefully snipped them all.  Better not to
keep them out in front of the public too much.  Previously he had snipped my
reference to the Tina Ricca murder at the NRO building and my account of my
call to a Park Police spokesman in which I sought clarification of a major
whopper in the Washington Post.

Concerning what he leaves in and attempts to rebut, as opposed to what he
snips, one of his main points involves a sleight of hand.  He pretends that
only the Sun Valley resort people stiffed the reporter, Barker, when he
asked for details of the fall, but Barker says very clearly that "Sun Valley
officials would not comment Sunday night," and apparently they have still
not commented because, to my knowledge, nothing has turned up in the press
and Barker has not answered my questions.  The Brain Injury Association put
out a press release after Katharine's death warning everyone of the dangers,
but they tell me they don't have any idea what specificdanger K. G_m
succumbed to.  Back in Sun Valley, Police Chief Cameron Daggett seems to be
the key person, but as they say in the newspapers, he was not available for
comment.  I am not holding my breath waiting for his availability,
considering how cooperative he has been with the Idaho Statesman.

Now here are some articles nailing down my assertion that The Post is in the
corrupt power rather than in the news business,
http://www.thebird.org/host/dcdave/article2/082798.html
http://www.thebird.org/host/dcdave/article3/990808a.html
http://www.thebird.org/host/dcdave/article1/072298.html
http://www.thebird.org/host/dcdave/article1/072198.html
http://www.thebird.org/host/dcdave/article1/030998.html ,
future victims of the Walton snipper, no doubt.

---------
DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird

Andy Walton <att...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:atticus-AFF862.00564706092001@basic.bs.webusenet.com...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Andy Walton 9/6/01 10:34 PM
In article <9n9dh5$455$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>,
 "David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote:

 :So, according to award-winning journalist, Andrew Walton, how it happens to


 :be known that Katharine Graham's fatal injuries were caused by a fall on a
 :concrete walk is of no more news value than any old dog-bites-man story.

It obviously holds little real interest for you, because you haven't
spent a fraction of the time looking for the answer that you've spent
condemning me.

 :Now one might be inclined to respect Andy's news judgment had he not


 :previously defended the complete suppression of the news of the existence of
 :a devastating addendum to Kenneth Starr's report on the death of Deputy
 :White House Counsel, Vincent Foster.

I've already told you that you'll win the war of attrition if you're
going to dig up every famous death that you find suspicious. It's
time-consuming enough to argue about Katherine Graham without getting
into Vince Foster, Sandy Hume, Bill Clinton's mom, the interns at
Starbucks, Kennedy, MLK, Tommy Burkett, John Millis, Tina Ricca and
whomever you're going to introduce next.

 :His fitness to take his place among American journalists is also revealed by


 :some of the subtle tricks he pulled in his rejoinder to my last posting.  He
 :gives the appearance of simply responding to my points, one by one.  Were he
 :engaged in honest debate that is what he would have done.  But careful
 :examination reveals that he has also gone to the trouble to snip as much
 :valuable information out of his posting as he possibly could without making
 :it too obvious.

There's nothing subtle or devious about it. I leave in the points to
which I'm responding, leaving the least possible quoted text to put my
comments in context. It's called netiquette. Look it up.

 :Not content to deprive the public of information in the


 :first instance when it was their job to impart it, our press hacks bend over
 :backwards to attempt to prevent others from imparting it.

I haven't prevented you from imparting anything. I have neither the
power nor the inclination to interfere with your posts. Your post is
right where you left it. I'm not repressing you by failing to repeat it
for you in its entirety.

 :future victims of the Walton snipper, no doubt.

No doubt. You've posted the URL. It's not my job to post it again for
you.


--
      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
       hesitating, non-committal language."
                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Andy Walton 9/6/01 10:56 PM
In article <3b97fd32...@NNTP.ix.netcom.com>,
 vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com (Professor Vonroach) wrote:

 :On Thu, 06 Sep 2001 18:00:42 -0400, Andy Walton


 :<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:
 :
 :>In article <3b973ecf...@NNTP.ix.netcom.com>,
 :> vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com (Professor Vonroach) wrote:
 :>
 :> :I repeat who is Allen & Co.? I suppose
 :> :the press, acting on instructions decided that this was privileged
 :> :information, not the sort of thing their peasant readers should be
 :> :exposed to. DC Dave has uncovered a nugget of news among all the slop.
 :>
 :>Would it kill you to even make a vague effort to find answers before
 :>screaming "coverup"? Your ignorance isn't proof of anything. But it is
 :>curable. Here are a few of the most prominent publications who've
 :>covered the story, found in a few minutes of Googling:
 :>
 :Hush, Andy, it's good training. I haven't the time that students have.

I'd wager it took me less time to find the answer -- at least the first
couple of articles out of the list I posted -- than it took you to
compose the post to which I was responding.

And I'm not a student, though I do have time on my hands at the moment.

 :Humm... Secret media clients,


 :secret roles in deals, secret meetings (retreats) hosting well-known
 :people who strive to keep their attendance secret.I must say this is

 :an eye opener. Buzzard's luck - a prominent guest falls and scrambles
 :her cranial contents, and the cozy meeting receives publicity.

At least a partial list of the attendees has been published before the
meeting every year for the last few (and maybe before -- news stories on
the Web before about 1996-97 are pretty scarce). Some of the more
marginal figures brag about going, because it's a sure sign they've
"made it." Sun Valley is mobbed by reporters during the conference,
though the actual sessions are closed to the media.

 :Virtually all jurisdictions require a medico-legal autopsy to


 :establish a `cause of death' - you perhaps recall the ancient coroner
 :in Virginia where they carted V. Foster for a flawed looksee - I
 :assume Idaho has similar laws.

In most jurisdictions, an autopsy isn't always required if the deceased
was attended by a doctor at the time of death. In that case, a death
certificate would be filed by the doctor who was there. The death
certificate is usually a matter of public record. The medical records
usually aren't.


--
      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
       hesitating, non-committal language."
                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/7/01 3:24 AM
On Fri, 07 Sep 2001 01:34:24 -0400, Andy Walton
<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>
> :So, according to award-winning journalist, Andrew Walton, how it happens to
> :be known that Katharine Graham's fatal injuries were caused by a fall on a
> :concrete walk is of no more news value than any old dog-bites-man story.

The assessment of K. Graham on a par with a man biting dog makes sense
to me.

>It obviously holds little real interest for you, because you haven't
>spent a fraction of the time looking for the answer that you've spent
>condemning me.

A touch of pique, hubris, and paranoia - why do you alone shoulder the
guilt of the entire American media? Reporters are supposed to have the
time to look into things that other folks are too busy to look into?
Where were you schooled in this phony `journalistic' pride? And,
here's one you won't have to look for - what exactly is this `award'
alleged to have been won? What was it awarded for?

>
> :Now one might be inclined to respect Andy's news judgment had he not
> :previously defended the complete suppression of the news of the existence of
> :a devastating addendum to Kenneth Starr's report on the death of Deputy
> :White House Counsel, Vincent Foster.
>
>I've already told you that you'll win the war of attrition if you're
>going to dig up every famous death that you find suspicious. It's
>time-consuming enough to argue about Katherine Graham without getting
>into Vince Foster, Sandy Hume, Bill Clinton's mom, the interns at
>Starbucks, Kennedy, MLK, Tommy Burkett, John Millis, Tina Ricca and
>whomever you're going to introduce next.

Regaining the subject of K. Graham, it appears to many observers, even
casual ones, that she suppressed important public news for 8 solid
years during the scandalous Clinton administration. How many
fund-raising `coffees' for Asian business leaders and government
operatives were first disclosed in the Washington Post? When national
secrets were sold, was the Washington Post to discover and print that
information? How many government bungled jobs were first reported in
the Washington Post? Was the criminal mischief at Waco and Ruby Ridge
first revealed on the pages of the Washington Post? Where they on top
of the real estate and banking frauds and misdeeds of federal agencies
in Little Rock, before it was glaringly evident from other sources?
The Washington Post is a propaganda rag from sheet one on, suppressing
important news every day. The incidents cited were trivial beside the
bigger picture of a totally corrupt paper. What they can not suppress,
they spin to the bosses wishes.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/7/01 3:43 AM
On Fri, 07 Sep 2001 01:55:39 -0400, Andy Walton
<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>In article <3b97fd32...@NNTP.ix.netcom.com>,
> vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com (Professor Vonroach) wrote:
>
> :On Thu, 06 Sep 2001 18:00:42 -0400, Andy Walton
> :<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> :
> :>In article <3b973ecf...@NNTP.ix.netcom.com>,
> :> vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com (Professor Vonroach) wrote:
> :>
> :> :I repeat who is Allen & Co.? I suppose
> :> :the press, acting on instructions decided that this was privileged
> :> :information, not the sort of thing their peasant readers should be
> :> :exposed to. DC Dave has uncovered a nugget of news among all the slop.
> :>
> :>Would it kill you to even make a vague effort to find answers before
> :>screaming "coverup"? Your ignorance isn't proof of anything. But it is
> :>curable. Here are a few of the most prominent publications who've
> :>covered the story, found in a few minutes of Googling:
> :>
> :Hush, Andy, it's good training. I haven't the time that students have.
>
>I'd wager it took me less time to find the answer -- at least the first
>couple of articles out of the list I posted -- than it took you to
>compose the post to which I was responding.

Tut tut Andy, You did not provide any `answer'. You furnished a few
paltry leads with no follow up, kid. That is not answering anything.

>And I'm not a student, though I do have time on my hands at the moment.
>
> :Humm... Secret media clients,
> :secret roles in deals, secret meetings (retreats) hosting well-known
> :people who strive to keep their attendance secret.I must say this is
> :an eye opener. Buzzard's luck - a prominent guest falls and scrambles
> :her cranial contents, and the cozy meeting receives publicity.
>
>At least a partial list of the attendees has been published before the
>meeting every year for the last few (and maybe before -- news stories on
>the Web before about 1996-97 are pretty scarce). Some of the more
>marginal figures brag about going, because it's a sure sign they've
>"made it." Sun Valley is mobbed by reporters during the conference,
>though the actual sessions are closed to the media.

Reporters as usual enjoying a vacation, since no reports of the
retreat (what ever that is) reach their reading public. If reporters
were `mobbing' the scene, then it is odd that a fatal injury to K.
Graham was so little noted.

> :Virtually all jurisdictions require a medico-legal autopsy to
> :establish a `cause of death' - you perhaps recall the ancient coroner
> :in Virginia where they carted V. Foster for a flawed looksee - I
> :assume Idaho has similar laws.
>
>In most jurisdictions, an autopsy isn't always required if the deceased
>was attended by a doctor at the time of death. In that case, a death
>certificate would be filed by the doctor who was there. The death
>certificate is usually a matter of public record. The medical records
>usually aren't.

Then K. Graham was on a stroll with her doctor?  And Vince Foster was
chatting with his doctor when the trigger was pulled? That is the
evasive answer of all evasive answers. The illnesses of notable public
figures is usually disclosed if they have nothing to conceal. Often as
in the case of Ted Kennedy, they are obvious even though an attempt is
made to conceal them. Incidentally, what did `the doctor' list as the
cause of death in the case of K. Graham, if you haven't decided for
some reason or other that the reading public should not know?

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall"-STOP THE INSANITY TomS 9/7/01 4:43 AM
This whole thing has become nothing more than a poor imitation of an
intellectual pissing match.
It does not seem to have caught the interest of the majority of folks who
probably read the postings in this NG, so why don't the three of you take it
to a chat channel somewhere or e-mail each other with your individual rants
and save the bandwidth here for something of general interest.

Personally I think it has reduced the credibility of all three of you to
zero and all it takes is for one of you to stop replying to the others to
stop these rambling idiotic posts.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall"-STOP THE INSANITY Professor Vonroach 9/7/01 1:47 PM

It's simple Tom, tune out. You know how to do that, don't you?

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Andy Walton 9/7/01 3:12 PM
Followups redirected.

In article <3b99a014...@NNTP.ix.netcom.com>,
 vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com (Professor Vonroach) wrote:

 :On Fri, 07 Sep 2001 01:55:39 -0400, Andy Walton
 :<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:
 :
 :>I'd wager it took me less time to find the answer -- at least the first

 :>couple of articles out of the list I posted -- than it took you to
 :>compose the post to which I was responding.
 :
 :Tut tut Andy, You did not provide any `answer'. You furnished a few
 :paltry leads with no follow up, kid. That is not answering anything.

You asked who Allen & Co. is, and I told you. You asked why the media
didn't cover the retreat, and I demonstrated that it does.

 :>At least a partial list of the attendees has been published before the

 :>meeting every year for the last few (and maybe before -- news stories on
 :>the Web before about 1996-97 are pretty scarce). Some of the more
 :>marginal figures brag about going, because it's a sure sign they've
 :>"made it." Sun Valley is mobbed by reporters during the conference,
 :>though the actual sessions are closed to the media.
 :
 :Reporters as usual enjoying a vacation, since no reports of the
 :retreat (what ever that is) reach their reading public.

Again, just because you didn't read it, it doesn't follow that it
doesn't exist. The sessions are closed to the press, but reporters can
and do get interviews. A google search for [allen "sun valley" retreat]
turns up 481 hits, most including comments from conference attendees. A
separate search of the New York Times online database turns up 81
articles, most of them apparently on-topic (you have to pay for the full
text).

 :If reporters


 :were `mobbing' the scene, then it is odd that a fatal injury to K.
 :Graham was so little noted.

"So little noted?" You want someone to hire the town crier to stand on
your doorstep? It was on page A5 of the Washington Post the next day,
and in the national section of the New York Times (the online archive
doesn't say what page).

 :>In most jurisdictions, an autopsy isn't always required if the deceased

 :>was attended by a doctor at the time of death. In that case, a death
 :>certificate would be filed by the doctor who was there. The death
 :>certificate is usually a matter of public record. The medical records
 :>usually aren't.
 :
 :Then K. Graham was on a stroll with her doctor?

She didn't die on the sidewalk. She died in a hospital.

 :Incidentally, what did `the doctor' list as the


 :cause of death in the case of K. Graham, if you haven't decided for
 :some reason or other that the reading public should not know?

I don't know. I haven't seen the death certificate. Presumably, cerebral
hemorrhage, because that's the cause of death hospital representatives
gave.


--
      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
       hesitating, non-committal language."
                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Andy Walton 9/7/01 3:18 PM
In article <3b989afb...@NNTP.ix.netcom.com>,
 vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com (Professor Vonroach) wrote:

 :>It obviously holds little real interest for you, because you haven't

 :>spent a fraction of the time looking for the answer that you've spent
 :>condemning me.
 :
 :A touch of pique, hubris, and paranoia - why do you alone shoulder the
 :guilt of the entire American media?

I don't. You might want to pass that on to Dave.

 :Reporters are supposed to have the


 :time to look into things that other folks are too busy to look into?

And to decide which things to look into, another exercise most people
are too busy for.

 :Where were you schooled in this phony `journalistic' pride?

I'm not sure what you're talking about.

 :And,


 :here's one you won't have to look for - what exactly is this `award'
 :alleged to have been won? What was it awarded for?

Several awards, most notably a Peabody, for my work on
<http://cnn.com/coldwar>.


--
      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
       hesitating, non-committal language."
                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall"-STOP THE INSANITY TomS 9/7/01 3:30 PM
I tuned out after one of your first posts on this topic. Thank god for
evelyn wood.
Lessee first graph, last graph and like your head not much in between.

Good bye Mr. Bug

"Professor Vonroach" <vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3b9c3167.3317849@NNTP.ix.netcom.com...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall"-STOP THE INSANITY Fruitcake 9/8/01 12:15 AM
Fancy finding you here. (I usually see you in austin.general.) Are you a
journalist?


Professor Vonroach wrote:

<snip>

------
A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of
being right.
      -- Thomas Paine


K. Graham's Fatal "Fall"-STOP THE INSANITY Professor Vonroach 9/8/01 3:39 AM
On Fri, 7 Sep 2001 18:30:30 -0400, "TomS"
<Bhigheart@don'tspammehotmail.com> wrote:

>I tuned out after one of your first posts on this topic. Thank god for
>evelyn wood.
>Lessee first graph, last graph and like your head not much in between.
>
That is the nature of the Usenet - no concrete knowledge where the
Walton or TomS stuff comes from. It is as likely to be a pack of lies
as fact. I find it `not credible' in Andy's words, that any student of
journalism would confuse the careers of Wm. Randolph Hearst and Josef
Pulitzer, particularly in the light of the foggy nature of the other
answers. Walton and TomS could easily be two monikers of a troll, and
a clumsy one at that. Cheers.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/8/01 3:54 AM
On Fri, 07 Sep 2001 18:12:13 -0400, Andy Walton
<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>You asked who Allen & Co. is, and I told you. You asked why the media
>didn't cover the retreat, and I demonstrated that it does.

Yes, acknowledging that a secret `retreat' with closed sessions was
held in Sun Valley sponsored by a firm whose own employees acknowledge
that they feel as though they worked for a secret society.  Period
over and out. No curiosity? No investigative drive? No interest in
what the subject of such a conference might be? No curiosity if any
conflict of interest was at play?
And the `reports' limited to small items on back pages or the
unreliable, undependable internet.  If you liked Sun Valley, you
probably loved Hilliary's un elected , unsupervised work on medicare.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/8/01 3:59 AM
On Fri, 07 Sep 2001 18:17:51 -0400, Andy Walton
<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>:Reporters are supposed to have the
> :time to look into things that other folks are too busy to look into?
>
>And to decide which things to look into, another exercise most people
>are too busy for.

No one asks you for decisions, those are left up to courts. Your job
is to gather information and make it available to your busy readers
without much comment (except on a designated page) for their
interpretation. The information should be full and complete with
nothing suppressed or twisted to your bosses fancy.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall"-STOP THE INSANITY Professor Vonroach 9/8/01 9:02 AM
On Sat, 08 Sep 2001 02:07:29 -0700, Fruitcake <smart@l.eck> wrote:

>Fancy finding you here. (I usually see you in austin.general.) Are you a
>journalist?
>
And the first words you send are an insult.
>Professor Vonroach wrote:
>
><snip>
>

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Andy Walton 9/8/01 9:24 AM
In article <3ba2f6a2...@NNTP.ix.netcom.com>,
 vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com (Professor Vonroach) wrote:

 :On Fri, 07 Sep 2001 18:12:13 -0400, Andy Walton


 :<att...@mindspring.com> wrote:
 :
 :>You asked who Allen & Co. is, and I told you. You asked why the media
 :>didn't cover the retreat, and I demonstrated that it does.
 :
 :Yes, acknowledging that a secret `retreat' with closed sessions was
 :held in Sun Valley sponsored by a firm whose own employees acknowledge
 :that they feel as though they worked for a secret society.  Period
 :over and out. No curiosity? No investigative drive? No interest in
 :what the subject of such a conference might be?

Before you criticize the articles I cited, try reading them.

 :No curiosity if any conflict of interest was at play?

Such as?

 :And the `reports' limited to small items on back pages or the
 :unreliable, undependable internet.

Says you. This "they're hiding it from me because I don't read" nonsense
of yours is tiresome.


--
      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
       hesitating, non-committal language."
                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Andy Walton 9/8/01 9:32 AM
In article <3ba3f88a...@NNTP.ix.netcom.com>,
 vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com (Professor Vonroach) wrote:

 :No one asks you for decisions, those are left up to courts.

I have to wonder what your job is, if you never have to make decisions,
prioritize, or allocate scarce resources.


--
      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
       hesitating, non-committal language."
                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall"-STOP THE INSANITY Fruitcake 9/8/01 1:35 PM
What??

Ugh. Forget it.


Professor Vonroach wrote:

> And the first words you send are an insult.

--


A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance
of being right.
      -- Thomas Paine


K. Graham's Fatal "Fall"-STOP THE INSANITY Professor Vonroach 9/8/01 3:38 PM
On Sat, 08 Sep 2001 15:28:20 -0700, Fruitcake <smart@l.eck> wrote:

>What??
>
>Ugh. Forget it.
>
>
>Professor Vonroach wrote:
>> And the first words you send are an insult.

>A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance


>of being right.
>      -- Thomas Paine
A long habit of not thinking is evident in the threads of most
newsgroups.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 9/9/01 2:07 PM
Journalistic paragon Andy Walton's defense would carry more weight if our
entire purpose--a  daunting one without subpoena and law-enforcement
power--were finding out if we are being told the truth about the cause of
Katharine Graham's fatal injury.  When I asked my initial question, "Did
anyone witness Katharine Graham's fatal fall," I was motivated by my
perception from what I had read of the national accounts that there was a
peculiar imbalance in the news coverage.  On the one hand, there was a huge
outpouring of tribute and news about her career, befitting one many called
"the world's most powerful woman."  On the other hand, so sketchy was the
coverage of the circumstances of her fatal accident that the death might
well have been that of a friendless, homeless bag lady.  It would seem that
at the moment of her accident that she hadn't a friend, or even an
acquaintance (or a servant) in the world.

Now I have demonstrated on a number of occasions that I am fully capable of
digging up and reporting important news that one would hope our massive news
operations would do.  I purposely did not do that in this case when I first
asked my question.  I was shaking the tree of all these journalism news
groups to see what would fall out.  Since I went on vacation and was a bit
out of touch immediately after the "accident," I thought that possibly I had
just missed some of the coverage and someone would quickly supply an answer
to my question.  Interestingly, though, no one even attempted to answer.
Rather, they shrank from the question and responded merely with jibes and
accusations.

At that point, I noticed a similarity to the coverage of the death of Bill
Clinton's mother, Virginia Kelly.  At that point, young Mr. Walton appeared
on the scene, apparently sensing weakness.  But let him defend the apparent
satisfaction of America's entire journalism profession with the fact that we
have never been told the actual cause of the voluble Ms. Kelly's death.

At this point I would like to explain why the other facts I have brought in
are not extraneous things, worthy to be ignored and snipped by our champion
of American journalism.  They provide important context.  Without them we
are left with the spare, fairy tale context provided by our "mainstream"
media.  If Bill Clinton were just any old governor of any old state who
became just another president, one would be more inclined to take at face
value whatever we are told about the circumstances of the death of people
around him.  But the number of suspicious deaths around this product of mob
penetrated illegal gambling mecca of Hot Springs, Arkansas, now runs into
the high double figures.  While I don't think that even Bill Clinton is so
low as to have his own mother disposed of, I do think that the Faustian
bargain of this son of Dixie riffraff was so complete that he would have
been powerless to do anything about it should someone else have pulled off
the deed.

Similarly, when I raise questions about Katharine Graham's death, the
context is important.  The Post, as Deborah Davis has pointed out in
"Katharine the Great," is as heavily connected to the CIA as Roger Morris
suggests Bill Clinton is in "Partners in Power."  One of Kay's favorite
lunch partners was Polly Fritchey, the widow of CIA dirty tricks impresario
Frank Wisner.  Wisner, they tell us, like Kay's husband, Phil Graham, became
deranged and shot himself to death.  A frequent companion of the two at
lunch was another CIA wheelhorse, Dickie Bissell.  The sister-in-law, if
memory serves, of Kay's right-hand man, Ben Bradlee, Mary Pinchot Meyer, was
mysteriously murdered and her diary made off with by another CIA man, James
Jesus Angleton.
Meyer was said to have been one of JFK's mistresses.

Here's some more context on the Post that is not from my web site:
http://members.aol.com/orwell1950/aep2.htm  and
http://www.booknotes.org/transcripts/10042.htm .

So similar is Walton's defense of the indefensible performance of our news
media to what I have seen before, I think it is time to recycle some
previous observations:

                        Dan Moldea's America

 The United States of America in which I was born and raised was the America
of the civics textbooks. We were "the land of the free and the home of the
brave." We were safely protected against tyranny through the ingenious
system of checks and balances that our founding fathers had built into our
government. Our freedom was safeguarded further by the Bill of Rights, in
particular the First Amendment which guaranteed a free and uncontrolled
press. We were truly Lincoln's "last best hope of earth."
Then, not too long after the Kennedy assassination it began to dawn on me
that something was amiss. A lot of things seemed to be going on behind the
scenes that we weren't being told about. In 1992 I voted for Bill Clinton as
a protest vote against what I perceived as this pervasive corruption of our
system. Imagine that, a vote for Clinton as a vote against corruption!

It didn't take me long to recognize my error. I had been like the Russian
who backed the Bolsheviks out of protest over the oppression of the Czars.
The Waco massacre was the first obvious sign that things were quickly
getting a lot worse. The covered-up, hushed-up murder of scandal researcher
Paul Wilcher in his D.C. townhouse in June of 1993 was another sign. Then
came the discovery in Fort Marcy Park of the body of Deputy White House
Counsel Vincent Foster. The death immediately aroused my curiosity because
the press seemed curiously incurious about such a curious choice of a site
and the lack of anything approaching a convincing explanation for why it was
being called an "apparent suicide" by the authorities. It also attracted my
interest because I remembered Vince as an intramural basketball opponent
back at Davidson College in the years surrounding the Kennedy assassination.

My interest has manifested itself in a number of poems and the long essay,
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster," now in
five parts on my web site. What comes through very clearly in that body of
work is my realization that I am no longer living in the country in which I
thought I grew up. As my fellow Tar Heel, Thomas Wolfe, said, "You can't go
home again."

But wait. I recently read a book entitled "A Washington Tragedy, How the
Death of Vincent Foster Ignited a Political Firestorm," and I find there a
mythical re-creation that very closely resembles the America of my youthful
fancy. It's not quite Mr. Rogers' neighborhood, but it comes close. It's:

Dan Moldea's America

In Dan Moldea's America, deputy White House counsels don't come to the job
fresh from having handled the legal work for the person reportedly
responsible for bringing to America the largest criminal enterprise in
history, a person heavily involved in financing both Republican and
Democratic political campaigns, most recently the campaign of America's
president, the counsel's boss.

In Dan Moldea's America, the deputy White House counsel does not engage in
two days of meetings two days before his mysterious violent death with the
Deputy U.S. Attorney General and another person heavily involved in
political finance who also has invested in casinos jointly with members of
the Gambino family and the Meyer Lansky organization.

In Dan Moldea's America, there have never been strong, attributed
allegations that the deputy White House counsel had contracted a detective
to spy on the future president at the behest of the future first lady, that
the detective and the future deputy White House counsel had themselves been
involved in the illegal drug business, and that the detective correctly
predicted his own subsequent murder upon hearing of the death of the deputy
White House counsel.

In Dan Moldea's America, presidents don't have close friends, family
members, and political backers who are or have been heavily involved in the
illegal drug business.

In Dan Moldea's America, presidents have never had subordinates who have
covered up murders related to the illegal drug business or people apparently
 working on their behalf who have either threatened or actually inflicted
bodily harm upon inconvenient witnesses.

In Dan Moldea's America, autopsy doctors might make occasional mistakes, but
they never are simply flat-out corrupt, fabricating cause of death at the
behest of corrupt higher-ups who are protecting powerful people engaged in
the illegal drug business.

In Dan Moldea's America, heaven forbid that government clandestine and
police organizations themselves might be involved in the illegal drug
business, and, of course, no serious allegations have ever been made that
they are.

In Dan Moldea's America, if there were any truth at all to numbers 1-7,
America's major news organizations would have duly reported them, with
appropriate emphasis.

In Dan Moldea's America, the word of a public official is always worth more
than that of a private citizen unless, perhaps, that private citizen is
employed by a major news organization.

In Dan Moldea's America, major news organizations are interested only in
pursuit of the truth. They never knowingly withhold important information
from the public and they would never, ever knowingly assist public officials
in covering up a crime.

In Dan Moldea's America, if a capital-area college student doing undercover
work for the Drug Enforcement Administration were to have been ruled dead of
a gunshot suicide by the authorities and a second autopsy paid for by the
parents showed convincingly that the young man was beaten to death, the news
would not be blacked out by The Washington Post.

In Dan Moldea's America, the major news organs do not get ahead of the
official "investigators" in uncovering and revealing anonymously sourced
"evidence" that reinforces the official line.

In Dan Moldea's America, when witnesses, suspects, or investigators change
their story, the last story told is always to be believed implicitly when it
supports the official line.

In Dan Moldea's America, government agents would not harass and intimidate a
witness in an important case and if it were to happen, it would not be
ignored by the major news organs.

In Dan Moldea's America, official reports on important investigations are
always critically examined and duly reported upon by major news
organizations.

In Dan Moldea's America, major news organs do not falsely report that
investigating police did not talk to immediate family members on the night
of the mysterious violent death of a high level government official and
leave the record uncorrected for a year.

In Dan Moldea's America, major news organs do not black out the news that a
suicide note in a high-profile case has been determined to be a forgery by
reputable handwriting examiners.

In Dan Moldea's America, there is an adversarial relationship between the
government and the press.

In Dan Moldea's America, challenges to the official verdict in high level
cases come only from nebulously-defined "conspiracy theorists" or
well-financed political fanatics.

In Dan Moldea's America, certain reporters are granted selective access to
official "investigators" not because the reporters are stooges who will
parrot the obvious official line--or the less obvious disinformation line--
but because they possess exceptional charm.

Finally, might I add that from the beginning of this thread, I have been the
only one to come up with substantive new information:

1.  A story was floated that a witness saw Graham fall out of a golf cart.
2  She was operated on several times for "extensive intracranial injuries."
3. Sun Valley officials would give out no information to a reporter from the
Idaho Statesman on the circumstances of Katharine Graham's accident as of
the day of the first report, and no subsequent report has been forthcoming.
4. Now I am telling you that there was no police report by the Sun Valley
Police Department.  The chief says that she "tripped on a walk on private
property" and his department was not involved in the aftermath in any way.
He does not say if there were any witnesses.

---------
DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird

Andy Walton <att...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:atticus-20159B.01342407092001@basic.bs.webusenet.com...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" TomS 9/9/01 6:52 PM
I honestly don't give a rat's ass...

"Hugh Turley" <Tur...@acninc.net> wrote in message
news:cf3c27d2.0109021935.26a460@posting.google.com...
> If TomS doesn't "give a rats ass one way or another" why does he
> bother to read this thread and respond with comments?
>
> Perhaps like me he does not care about how Mrs. Graham actually died
> but he does care the really important issue of this thread that the
> American press is an unreliable source for important information.
> Some of us no longer trust the American press others here are
> defenders of the spokesmen of our authorities.
>
>
> "TomS" <Bhigheart@don'tspammehotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<PEyk7.3$ZJ...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com>...
> > If you are so interested in who witnessed the fall perhaps you should
> > request the police report or write directly to the Washington Post and
ask
> > them the question.
> >
> > As for me I really don't give a rats ass one way or the other, and as
far as
> > that condemning me as being a "bad journalist" I was never assigned to
the
> > story nor would I care to be assigned to it.
> >
> > I have other local fish to fry like the slumlord who murdered his wife
and
> > got away with it.
> >

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Professor Vonroach 9/10/01 1:57 AM
On Sun, 9 Sep 2001 21:51:52 -0400, "TomS"
<Bhigheart@don'tspammehotmail.com> wrote:

>I honestly don't give a rat's ass...
>
>"Hugh Turley" <Tur...@acninc.net> wrote in message
>news:cf3c27d2.0109021935.26a460@posting.google.com...
>> If TomS doesn't "give a rats ass one way or another" why does he
>> bother to read this thread and respond with comments?
>>
>> Perhaps like me he does not care about how Mrs. Graham actually died
>> but he does care the really important issue of this thread that the
>> American press is an unreliable source for important information.
>> Some of us no longer trust the American press others here are
>> defenders of the spokesmen of our authorities.
>>
No, I suspect t is his way of attempting to withdraw `gracefully' from
a thread that he hasn't spun to his liking.

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall"- the VonRoach solution Awater Melon 9/10/01 6:06 AM

On Fri, 7 Sep 2001 07:43:22 -0400, "TomS"
<Bhigheart@don'tspammehotmail.com> wrote:

>This whole thing has become nothing more than a poor imitation of an
>intellectual pissing match.

To me it's an excellent discussion, exactly what I pay $19.99/mth. for.

>It does not seem to have caught the interest of the majority of folks who
>probably read the postings in this NG,

I find this thread *very* interesting and I'm sure the other lurkers are taking notes.

>so why don't the three of you take it
>to a chat channel somewhere or e-mail each other with your individual rants
>and save the bandwidth here for something of general interest.

Katharine Graham's life was full of intrigue and she has a place in media history,
but more importantly, the mainstream media are showing they will not tolerate
criticism.  This is of more than just general interest to people seeking the truth.

Interview with Deborah Davis, author of "Katharine The Great."
http://www.disinfo.com/pages/article/id1415/pg1/

>Personally I think it has reduced the credibility of all three of you to
>zero and all it takes is for one of you to stop replying to the others to
>stop these rambling idiotic posts.

The discussion should continue and no one should interfere.


K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 9/10/01 4:49 PM
           RIP KMG

A powerful publisher had a great fall.
Did anyone see it?  No one can recall.
Maybe those who exposed all the president's men
Will tell us in time, but no one can say when.

                                         DC Dave

---------
DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird

Professor Vonroach <vonr...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3b9c7f50.2711881@NNTP.ix.netcom.com...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall"- the VonRoach solution David Martin 9/10/01 5:01 PM
That's a very gratifying posting, Mr. Melon, and informative, too, with the
interview of Deborah Davis.  Here's my latest summing up of the situation:

            RIP KMG

A powerful publisher had a great fall.
Did anyone see it?  No one can recall.
Maybe those who exposed all the president's men
Will tell us in time, but no one can say when.

                                            DC Dave

---------
DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird

Awater Melon <Tr...@abridge.net> wrote in message
news:3b9cbd9e.5802709@news.shtc.net...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Salvador Astucia 9/10/01 9:11 PM
Given the complete lack of candor by the news media, the family, the
police, and virtually everyone associated Ms. Graham's "accident," it
appears that something smells to high heaven.

Why should we care what happened to Katharine Graham? After all, the
Washington Post has lied for years about countless murders including
but not limited to the assassinations of President Kennedy, his
brother Bobby, and Martin Luther King, Jr., just to name a few. Here
is why we should care about the death of this world class shrew.

The citizens of the United States are oppressed under Talmudic rule,
and Katharine Graham was the high queen of that tyranny. Through her
manipulation of news, Ms. Graham played a major role in ensuring that
the governments of the United States and Israel would forever be
joined at the hip.

The Washington Post and most major news outlets are controlled by
AIPAC whose primary objective is to pick the pockets of every U.S. tax
payer to the tune of billions of dollars per year to subsidize the
racist, terrorist regime of Israel. Any politician who objects will be
publicly tarred and feathered or worse.*

If Israel wants to oppress and murder Palestinian's in the perverted
belief that Israelis have a birth right to Palestine, then go ahead
Israel. Continue the bloodshed. Continue the bigotry. But don't expect
U.S. citizens to pay for your terrorism any longer !

Katharine Graham was the victim of her own lifestyle. When you live by
the sword, you die by the sword, possibly at the hands of your own
children growing tired of waiting for their inheritance. Katharines
children and colleagues were apt pupils, a brood of vipers.

Salvador Astucia


* What kind of rapport does Gary Condit enjoy with AIPAC these days?
Did he stand up to Israel, or merely fornicate with an Israeli
prostitute? You will recall that when Condit told Connie Chung that
Levy wanted to join the CIA or FBI, Chung did not raise a word of
objection. In other words, Chung accepted the fact that Levy wanted to
be a spy. Who knows, maybe Levy is already an Israeli spy.)


"David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote in message news:<9nglk1$sen$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" Andy Walton 9/11/01 5:20 AM
In article <9nglk1$sen$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>,
 "David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote:

 :Journalistic paragon Andy Walton's defense would carry more weight if our


 :entire purpose--a  daunting one without subpoena and law-enforcement
 :power--were finding out if we are being told the truth about the cause of
 :Katharine Graham's fatal injury.

Wasn't that the point? If not, I have to confess that I have no idea
what the hell you're getting at. If you're not contesting the popular
view of Katherine Graham's death, I can only conclude that you're
deliberately pissing against the wind because you enjoy the spray.

 :It would seem that


 :at the moment of her accident that she hadn't a friend, or even an
 :acquaintance (or a servant) in the world.

So the genesis of this apparently interminable thread was that you were
worried that Mrs. Graham was lonely in her last days? Your concern is
touching.

 :At that point, I noticed a similarity to the coverage of the death of Bill


 :Clinton's mother, Virginia Kelly.  At that point, young Mr. Walton appeared
 :on the scene, apparently sensing weakness.

"Apparently sensing weakness" is your own creation. For someone who
insists on Nth-degree detail and documentation from the "mainstream
press", you're quite willing to engage in your own flights of fancy and
treat them as proven fact.

In my eight or nine years on Usenet, I've noted a trend: when any famous
person dies, someone, somewhere will post that (s)he was murdered, and
the murder was covered up. I made a one-line comment to that effect. And
then you decided that I was your latest whipping boy for all that you
perceive to be wrong with the American media.

 :At this point I would like to explain why the other facts I have brought in


 :are not extraneous things, worthy to be ignored and snipped by our champion
 :of American journalism.  They provide important context.  Without them we
 :are left with the spare, fairy tale context provided by our "mainstream"
 :media.

So anyone who expresses an opinion on any issue is held to account for
any position you object to on any issue? If you held yourself to one
tenth of the standards of evidence you demand of others, this thread
would have fallen into silence weeks ago.

 :If Bill Clinton were just any old governor of any old state who


 :became just another president, one would be more inclined to take at face
 :value whatever we are told about the circumstances of the death of people
 :around him.  But the number of suspicious deaths around this product of mob
 :penetrated illegal gambling mecca of Hot Springs, Arkansas, now runs into
 :the high double figures.

Uh huh. If you define "people around him" in the sloppiest possible
terms. See <http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/clinton.htm> for one
guy's shot at a comprehensive debunking.

 :While I don't think that even Bill Clinton is so


 :low as to have his own mother disposed of, I do think that the Faustian
 :bargain of this son of Dixie riffraff was so complete that he would have
 :been powerless to do anything about it should someone else have pulled off
 :the deed.

"While I don't think" ... "I do think" ... Why should I five a babboon's
bright-blue ass what you think? You bend over backwards to imply that I
am a tool of the Conspiracy if I take anything at second hand, but then
present your own best guesses as if they prove your point. Your
definition of "evidence" depends on how well it fits what you want to
believe.

 :So similar is Walton's defense of the indefensible performance of our news


 :media to what I have seen before, I think it is time to recycle some
 :previous observations:

So you post a couple hundred lines of text that have nothing to do with
me, revolve around someone I've never heard of, and that's aparrently
supposed to be a rebuttal.

 :4. Now I am telling you that there was no police report by the Sun Valley


 :Police Department.  The chief says that she "tripped on a walk on private
 :property" and his department was not involved in the aftermath in any way.
 :He does not say if there were any witnesses.

Okay, Dave. Let's take it from the top.

The fundamental model for news writing is the "inverted pyramid," with
the most important details at the top and the least important at the
bottom. That way, if someone trims the story down the line, the most
important points are still in.

You buried the lead. I plodded through three hundred lines of your
screed before I found your point.

Let's take it down to brass tacks: what questions do you feel are
unanswered? What would satisfy you? What do you want to know, and how do
you want it proven? Be succinct.


--
      "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
       hesitating, non-committal language."
                           -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 9/11/01 7:19 AM
. Me: If Bill Clinton were just any old governor of any old state who

 :became just another president, one would be more inclined to take at face
 :value whatever we are told about the circumstances of the death of people
 :around him.  But the number of suspicious deaths around this product of
mob
 :penetrated illegal gambling mecca of Hot Springs, Arkansas, now runs into
 :the high double figures.

Andrew:  Uh huh. If you define "people around him" in the sloppiest possible


terms. See <http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/clinton.htm> for one
guy's shot at a comprehensive debunking.

Anyone promoting this "comprehensive debunking" is simply not interested in
the truth.  First, let me say that this "Clinton body count" list that has
been circulated far and wide together with the debunking are prime examples
of number 4 in the "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression."  The list
has a number of names that should not be there, and it contains exaggerated
charges and plain incorrect facts with respect to a number of the names that
are there.  Then along comes the "debunker" to slap down all of them.  Both
the list and the debunking are clearly part of the same operation.

The reader, when encountering the list for the first time, should ask
himself who compiled it and who wrote the narrative accompanying each name.
Who stands behind it, in other words?  Then he might contrast it with what I
have written about the first two names on the "debunking" list, Mary Caitrin
Mahoney and Vincent W. Foster, Jr.  On Mahoney I particularly recommend
http://www.thebird.org/host/dcdave/article3/990831.html which appeared on
8/31/99.  The reader might also read articles posted on my site on 2/24/99,
1/16/00, 2/9/00, and 2/14/00.  On Foster I have a number of articles, but
the main one is the 6 part series, "America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of
the Death of Vincent Foster."  I stand behind all of it.

Have a look, too, at what the "debunker" has to say about Jerry Parks.  The
writer smugly says that Parks' son has not produced the comprehensive file
that Jerry allegedly had collected on Clinton.  What he does not say is that
son Gary and Parks' widow Jane say government agents descended upon the
house and rifled it, taking all Jerry's files with them right after the
murder.  Most unforgivable, and telling,  is the almost total American news
blackout about the Parks murder and the allegations of the survivors.  Do
the google search and see what I mean.

Having said that about the list, I must add that most of the names on it are
of people connected in one way or another to Clinton, and it is truly
amazing how many of them have died mysteriously and prematurely.  We also
have examples of threats of bodily harm like the ones made to Sally Miller
Perdue and Kathleen Willey where their silence would be beneficial to
Clinton.  When people threaten violence against others one should not be
surprised when they carry it out.

As for the rest of Walton's vitriolic though weak rejoinder, any reader
hungry for information would be best advised to go back and read carefully
the posting it attempts to rebut and make up his own mind about it.  I
should think that real people spending 20 or so bucks a month to read their
news on the Internet would be pretty tired by now of being told what to
think by the likes of this shallow young media flunky.

            RIP KMG

A powerful publisher had a great fall.
Did anyone see it?  No one can recall.
Maybe those who exposed all the president's men
Will tell us in time, but no one can say when.

                                           DC Dave

---------


DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird

Andy Walton <att...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:atticus-9BA87B.08194511092001@basic.bs.webusenet.com...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" casa donald 9/14/01 8:48 AM

"TomS" <Bhigheart@don'tspammehotmail.com> wrote in message
news:g0Vm7.103471$ZJ.1191673@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...Who cares

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 9/15/01 11:55 AM
casa donald <gis...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9nq2g1$noq$1@phys-ma.sol.co.uk...

RIP KMG

A powerful publisher had a great fall.
Did anyone see it?  No one can recall.
Maybe those who exposed all the president's men
Will tell us in time, but no one can say when.

                                         DC Dave
---------
DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird
>
>


K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" TomS 9/15/01 3:21 PM
If you wait for a few more seconds someone will no doubt blame it on
mid-east terrorists.

"David Martin" <dcd...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:9o085r$rb$1@bob.news.rcn.net...

K. Graham's Fatal "Fall" David Martin 9/21/01 6:54 PM
Now I'm beginning to wonder if Kay Graham opposed the 9-11 operation.

---------
DC Dave
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh,"
"America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster,"
& "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave
news:alt.thebird

David Martin <dcd...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:9nl6gi$2qg$1@bob.news.rcn.net...

More topics »