Mysterious deaths of OKC bombing witnesses
Mike>Schnieder
Looking for verification on the following:
newsgroups: misc.activism.militia
subject: Worker who rescued children from OKC bombing-found DEAD afterward
USCM...@aol.com wrote:
--part0_901171824_boundary
Content-ID: <0_901171824@inet_out.mail.aol.com.1>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Dear Citizens:
Norio Hayakawa <Groom...@aol.com> has important information that has
been uncovered showing that a GSA worker was suspicious well before theOKC
bombing because he saw the BATF loading explosives into the building. He
mentioned it to higherups who rebuked him. Other workers filed a grievance
with GSA and complained to the Fire Marshal who subsequently was refused
inspection of the building.
The GSA worker told many parents to take their children OUT of the Murrah
Building before the bombing (which saved many lives) and AFTER he rescued many
children immediately after the bombing, he was found DEAD at his desk FROM the
bombing.
Plus there are MANY MANY more instances of similar ASSASSINATIONS of
witnesses who could testify that the federal government planned and carried
out the OKC bombing just to scare the public into giving up even more of their
rights and accepting "anti-terrorist" legislation that makes us nearly slaves
in preparation for the New World Order.
Please read Norio's post.
USCMike1
--part0_901171824_boundary
Content-ID: <0_901171824@inet_out.mail.aol.com.2>
Content-type: message/rfc822
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-disposition: inline
From: Groom...@aol.com
Return-path: <Groom...@aol.com>
To: USCM...@aol.com
Subject: from Norio: UPDATE: Unresolved Deaths in Oklahoma !!
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 22:53:28 EDT
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Hello, Mike
Here is an exclusive report I received today directly from Michael A. O'Camb.
I would certainly appreciate if you could post this far and wide.
Thank you so much.
-from Norio:
UNRESOLVED DEATHS IN OKLAHOMA
by Michael A. O'Camb
In the first minutes and hours following the blasts that devastated the
Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City, the morning of
April 19, 1995, a number of selfless individuals risked life and limb to
rescue many of the victims. Among them were Oklahoma City police officers,
Terrance Yeakey, Gordon Martin and Ken Griffin, a number of Oklahoma City
firefighters, Dr. H. Don Chumley, G.S.A. employee Mike Loudenslager and
others.
In the aftermath of the "bombing" the name Mike Loudenslager holds
particular significance in the hearts of many families in and around Oklahoma
City. And this is so, because of the forewarning he gave to a number of those
who had children in the Murrah Building's day-care center. In the weeks
preceding the bombing, G.S.A. employee, Michael Loudenslager, 48, became
increasingly aware that large amounts of ordnance and explosives were in the
building and strongly urged (along with the operator of the day-care center) a
number of parents to take their children out of the Murrah Building.
This situation arose after other employees became concerned with an
increased amount of ordnance (missiles) being brought into the building by the
B.A.T.F. and D.E.A. As a result of this concern, a grievance was filed with
G.S.A. by the building's security director. The result was, the man who'd
complained lost his job there. Then, after the operator of the day-care
center (the security director's wife) notified the fire marshals after some
remodeling had been done (as her license required her to do), the fire
marshals were denied access to do their inspection by federal agents and told
to leave! And the day-care operator lost her contract.
As a result of this (fearing the worst with all the talk around town of a
possible bombing), Mike Loudenslager and the day-care center operator then
told many of the parents to get their children out. And, because of their
warnings, far fewer children were in the day-care center on that horrible
Wednesday morning than there otherwise would have been. A number of families,
in and around Oklahoma City, have these two people to thank for their
children's lives today.
Shortly after the bombing, Michael Loudenslager was actively helping in
the rescue and recovery effort. A large number of those at the bomb-site
either saw or talked with him. During the course of the early rescue efforts,
however, Mike Loudenslager was seen and heard in a very "heated" confrontation
with someone (there). Much of his anger stemmed from the fact he felt the
B.A.T.F. was in large part responsible not only for the bombing, but for the
death and inury to those inside, including all the children.
To the absolute astonishment of a large number of police officers and
rescue workers, it was later reported that G.S.A. employee Mike Loudenslager's
body had been found inside the Murrah Building the following Sunday, still at
his desk, a victim of the 9:02 A.M. bombing! This, mind you, after he'd
already been seen alive and well by numerous rescue workers at the bomb-site
AFTER the bombing! He is also officially listed as one of the 168 bombing
fatalities.
The question now becomes: Was he murdered and placed at his desk by
federal agents? Or was he just simply murdered by them and SAID to have been
found at his desk? Access to the inside of the building, from shortly after
the bombing onward was extremely limited to nearly all but federal employees
by the F.B.I.
His death is UNQUESTIONABLY the most important sidelight of the Oklahoma
City bombing.
Mike Loudenslager's murder, most assuredly was one of the major factors
leading to the demise of both Dr. H. Don Chumley and later Terry Yeakey!
For whatever reason, the Oklahoma City Police Dept. has always down-
played Officer Terry Yeakey's presence at the Murrah Building the morning of
April 19, 1995, even though a large number of Oklahoma City police officers,
firefighters, emergency personnel and survivors KNOW he played a much larger
role in the early rescue-effort than he's given credit for.
In an effort to cover up Mike Loudenslager's murder and to intimidate
others who were there early-on that morning, someone has taken out a number of
internal witnesses. Dr. Don Chumley AND Terry Yeakey, both, besides being at
the Murrah Building that morning, shared one other commonality. Each at the
time of his "death" was attempting to deliver EVIDENCE concerning the fact
Mike Loudenslager was alive and well AFTER the bombing, and also to get
certain other facts out about the "bombing" as well.
In Terry Yeakey's case he thought he was delivering evidence and
information to a multi-county task force who would help get the truth out.
That's how he was set-up. In Dr. Chumley's case, he was killed, some months
earlier, when his personal jet aircraft "crashed" while attempting to do the
same thing.
Were the deaths of Jack Colvert, Jackie Majors and Buddy Youngblood also
directly related to the cover-up of Mike Loudenslager's murder? Each of them
had been at the Murrah Building that morning and each had also seen Mike
Loudenslager ALIVE and well after the bombing.
Others who were there that morning have also felt threatened. Officer
Gordon Martin, for one, feels at least two attempts on his life have been
made. Other police officers and emergency services personnel fear for their
personal safety as well. And while all this goes on, the moguls of the major-
media remain silent! The so-called "fourth pillar of democracy" - the press
- once again falls flat on its face, foresaking its sacred duty to REPORT THE
NEWS. Remember, Hell is just as hot for those who go there for sins of
OMISSION as those who go for sins of COMMISSION!.
Another interesting case of "suicide" in Oklahoma, since the bombing, is
that of Kenneth Trentadue, who as the result of violating conditions of his
parole in California, was re-incarcerated and sent to a federal (transfer)
facility in Oklahoma. Mr. Trentadue, the brother of a prominent Salt Lake
City, Utah attorney, supposedly committed suicide by hanging himself. But in
actuality managed to commit a "suicide" very similar to Terry Yeakey's (minus
the gunshot-wound-to-the-head). Only Kenneth Trentadue's was committed with
knotted or "braided" bedsheet, barely long enough to fit around his neck in a
"suicide-proof" prison cell.
THE SALT LAKE TRIBUNE later reported the trustees who cleaned Mr.
Trentadue's cell after his "suicide" found copious amounts of blood inside.
This included bloody fingerprints up a wall, to within a few inches of a
"panic button" on or near the ceiling.
This certainly is not consistent with hanging.
When his family was contacted by prison officials and informed of his
"suicide", they were asked if they wanted his remains cremated. They
indicated they did not, and after a very difficult time and much red-tape, the
body was finally shipped back to them.
Being very skeptical as to a suicide, family members removed the mortuary
make-up and were shocked to find part of his skull crushed, his knuckles
damaged, bruises, puncture-and-slash-wounds over a good portion of his body
(including the soles of his feet) and his throat slashed. Boot heel marks
were apparent around the right eye and on his chest. All evidence points to
the fact Kenneth Trentadue was subdued after a fight - brutally beaten,
tortured and murdered!
(Update: THE SALT LAKE TRIBUNE, Sat. July 11, 1998 - states M.E. says
Trentadue death "suicide"!).
This case is "supposedly" being looked into by U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch.
Former 7-term U.S. Rep. George Hansen of Idaho and his organization, The
United States Citizens Human Rights Commission, IS, however, actively pursuing
it. Former Rep. Hansen was himself unjustly convicted and imprisoned and
spent a number of years literally as a political prisoner in the federal penal
system until his case was finally decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Many Americans who are familiar with the Trentadue case see a chilling
similarity between Officer Terry Yeakey's "suicide" and Kenneth Trentadue's.
Especially when each occurred in such close proximity to the other, in and
around El Reno and Oklahoma City, AFTER the bombing.
Like Terry Yeakey, Kenneth Trentadue, (although smaller) was also a
powerfully-built man. He lifted weights regularly, had a 19-inch neck and was
a street-fighter with street savvy. In short, he knew how to take care of
himself.
Many now wonder if Kenneth Trentadue might have had information regarding
the Oklahoma City bombing, or its aftermath, that certain agents wanted him
taken-out for. And many also wonder why a man re-incarcerated for violating
his parole would REQUEST solitary confinement. What was Kenneth Trentadue
afraid of?
Could the murder of Murrah Building G.S.A. employee Michael Loudenslager
and the subsequent cover-up be the reason for (many of) the unresolved deaths
in Oklahoma since the bombing? A growing number of Americans certainly think
so.
For those who'd like to get the definitive pictorial book on the Oklahoma City
bombing and the rescue and recovery efforts, ANGELS OVER OKLAHOMA CITY, send
$35.90 ($29.95 + $5.95 S & H) to: Globe Color Press, Inc., 414 NW 4th St.,
Oklahoma City, OK 73102 (Make check* or money order payable to Globe Color
Press, Inc.) Allow 2-4 weeks for delivery. (*$25 fee on all returned
checks). If you have Visa, MasterCard or American Express and would like to
expedite your order, call, (405) 235-3489. This book is the product of
Heroes of the Heart, Inc., a non-profit group of survivors, rescue and
recovery personnel. A MUST SEE!!
Norio Hayakawa
http://www.eagle-net.org/groomwatch
--part0_901171824_boundary--
--
We are, and long have been, at a point where the entire concept of
"thinking" as a human activity practical for the purpose of addressing the
issues we're sorting through, must be re-built from the ground up, like some
ancient edifice lost. Unless and until that happens, there is virtually no
hope of avoiding *war* with the socialists, because that is the only
alternative to reason. -- Billy Beck
=======================================================================
Email: Replace everything before the @ with "mike1" and delete any CAPS
Claire Wolfe: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1797/essay.htm
A con's advice to Hillary: http://www.sonic.net/maledicta/penpal_pr.html
All burundanguiado test peons report to: http://www.mk.net/~mcf/barr.htm
Lynn Wallace
> Looking for verification on the following:
>
Why? It's never stopped you from believing something before.
E. Faubion
> Looking for verification on the following:
Try the inside of a Pepsi bottle cap. You'll have better luck there
than in ok.general.
Billy Beck
Lynn Wallace <law...@xmission.com> wrote:
>Mike>Schnieder wrote:
>
>> Looking for verification on the following:
>Why? It's never stopped you from believing something before.
It's pretty clear that *you're* no help, but it's nothing new.
Billy
VRWC fronteer - sigdiv
http://www.mindspring.com/~wjb3/free/essays.html
Rob Robertson
>
> mig...@winZZZterBBBnet.com (Mike\>Schnieder) wrote:
>
> > Looking for verification on the following:
>
> than in ok.general.
<unsnip>
Mike>Schnedier
<lcar...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Just out of curiosity, if it's true, why is some reporter not on
>it like a duck on a junebug? It would seem to be a story which could
>generate a lot of public interest.
Ask a reporter fired for being too nosy over the Foster killing, and
see if he can enlighten you.
>And yes, it's a naeive question.
"You are so *knave*!"
-- Archie Bunker
Kurt Lochner
>
> Lynn Wallace wrote:
>
Never heard of these folks Beckwheat, never saw mentions
of them in the local papers. Go do your own search,
instead of swallowing the hook, line and stink-bait...
It never seems to dawn on you that these stories that you like
to believe in might be factually incorrect..
--You're completely beyond help, in my opinion...
Kurt Lochner
>
> E. Faubion wrote:
> >
> > Mike Schnieder <mi...@winternet.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Looking for verification on the following:
> >
> > Try the inside of a Pepsi bottle cap. You'll have better luck there
> > than in ok.general.
>
> <unsnip>
>
> Looking for verification on the following:
>
Never heard of these folks...
--Follow-ups to ok.general trimmed...
Mike>Schnedier
(Jerry Morgan) wrote:
>On Fri, 24 Jul 1998 01:43:13 -0500, mig...@winXXXterBBBnet.com
>(Mike\>Schnedier) wrote:
>
>>In article <6p8k1u$9...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>, Les Cargill
>><lcar...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Just out of curiosity, if it's true, why is some reporter not on
>>>it like a duck on a junebug? It would seem to be a story which could
>>>generate a lot of public interest.
>>
>>
>> Ask a reporter fired for being too nosy over the Foster killing, and
>>see if he can enlighten you.
>>
>
>Ask "Woodward and Bernstein" of "Watergate" fame and I'm sure they
>could enlighten you regarding the fame and fortune that motivates
>reporters to search out "the big story" (tm).
Nixon, if you forget, was wanted *out* by the establishment press.
Clinton is wanted *in*.
Now if you're done playing misdirection, do you have anything to
contribute toward the subject matter of the thread?
Les Cargill
>
> In article <6p8k1u$9...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>, Les Cargill
> <lcar...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> >Just out of curiosity, if it's true, why is some reporter not on
> >it like a duck on a junebug? It would seem to be a story which could
> >generate a lot of public interest.
>
> Ask a reporter fired for being too nosy over the Foster killing, and
> see if he can enlighten you.
Huh? What reporter was fired for being too nosy in the Foster suicide?
Names, employers and other documentation, please.
Damn, I gotta get out from under the rock now and again.
Y'all, if there was physical evidence that
Foster was murdered, how come the only place it surfaces is
Usenet? Gee, Usenet is *SUCH* a reliable source.
And yes, I've heard the arguments. I don't buy it.
>
> >And yes, it's a naeive question.
>
> "You are so *knave*!"
> -- Archie Bunker
An I kant spel neethur. Sheesh.
>
> --
> We are, and long have been, at a point where the entire concept of
> "thinking" as a human activity practical for the purpose of addressing the
> issues we're sorting through, must be re-built from the ground up, like some
> ancient edifice lost. Unless and until that happens, there is virtually no
> hope of avoiding *war* with the socialists, because that is the only
> alternative to reason. -- Billy Beck
> =======================================================================
> Email: Replace everything before the @ with "mike1" and delete any CAPS
> Claire Wolfe: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1797/essay.htm
> A con's advice to Hillary: http://www.sonic.net/maledicta/penpal_pr.html
> All burundanguiado test peons report to: http://www.mk.net/~mcf/barr.htm
--
Les Cargill - lcar...@worldnet.att.net
Les Cargill
>
> On Thu, 23 Jul 1998 19:24:41 -0500, Les Cargill <lcar...@worldnet.att.net>
> expressed the following:
>
> >Just out of curiosity, if it's true, why is some reporter not on
> >it like a duck on a junebug? It would seem to be a story which could
> >generate a lot of public interest.
>
> JFK are still alive... How do you explain that, Mr. Smarty Pants? ;-)
>
> Michael OKC
Elvis IS alive. I seen him at the tracter pull.
Look, governments DO that sort of thing. Really. Truly. But how on
Earth would someone keep *THAT* a secret in this day and age.
Not to offend anybody ( as if it was possible not to), but....
ShadowMan
> Ask a reporter fired for being too nosy over the Foster killing,
> see if he can enlighten you.
The things is those of us in Oklahoma know how laughably obsurd that
email gets towards the end. I think the Trenadue (sp?) case does need
to be looked into, but not because of any grand conspiracy, more so
because it was likely a case of local "good 'ole boys" breaking the law.
Geesh, next they'll be trying to find a way to tie the Jasper, Texas
civil rights violation case to all of this.
MSLU123
>From: Lynn Wallace <law...@xmission.com>
>Date: Thu, Jul 23, 1998 16:11 EDT
>Message-id: <35B798F3...@xmission.com>
>
>Mike>Schnieder wrote:
>
>> Looking for verification on the following:
>>
>
>
>
What worker? There were hundreds. One is bound to have died by now from old
age if he was an old worker.
jmo...@bubbaworld.com
>In article <35b968c4....@news.supernews.com>, jmo...@bubbaworld.com
>(Jerry Morgan) wrote:
[snip]
>>Ask "Woodward and Bernstein" of "Watergate" fame and I'm sure they
>>could enlighten you regarding the fame and fortune that motivates
>>reporters to search out "the big story" (tm).
> Nixon, if you forget, was wanted *out* by the establishment press.
> Clinton is wanted *in*.
Yeah sure, that's why they simply refuse to "let go" of the "Bill and
Monica Story" (tm), and this in spite of the fact that a large portion
of the population considers it a "non-story".
> Now if you're done playing misdirection, do you have anything to
>contribute toward the subject matter of the thread?
Now if you are done making stupid statements such as you made above,
do you have anything intelligent, ANYTHING, to say or are you simply
going to continue spewing mindless conspiracy theories?
--------------------------- Whack A Loon, Inc. ------------------------------------------
The next "conspiracy theory" will probably be that a chunk of the
Murrah building was blasted into space and eventually re-entered
the atmosphere and knocked TWA Flight 800 out of the sky!
-- Loons whacked - Charlatans Exposed - Liars Confronted -----------
jmo...@bubbaworld.com
>E. Faubion wrote:
>>
>> mig...@winZZZterBBBnet.com (Mike\>Schnieder) wrote:
>>
>> > Looking for verification on the following:
>>
>> Try the inside of a Pepsi bottle cap. You'll have better luck there
>> than in ok.general.
><unsnip>
[snip]
No, it looks a lot better and far more intelligent with all the
bullshit shipped.
But thanks for playing, anyhow.
"Johnny, what's the consolation prize we have for this luser, Rob
Robertson?"
"Well we have 20 whacks with a clue stick, and one thumping with the
Golden Mallet"!!!
WHACK!!!
Alright, next contestant please.
Mike>Schnedier
I wrote:
>>> Now if you're done playing misdirection, do you have anything to
>>>contribute toward the subject matter of the thread?
jmo...@bubbaworld.com wrote:
>Now if you ar--
[No.]
Reprise:
Dear Citizens:
USCMike1
--
Democracy: Three wolves and a sheep voting on dinner.
Republic: The flock gets to vote for which wolves vote on dinner.
Constitutional Republic: A sheep's "Bill of Rights" is appended to the
document codifying the desire of wolves to vote on dinner.
Federal Government: The resturant employing and catering to the wolves.
jmo...@bubbaworld.com
>I wrote:
>>>> Now if you're done playing misdirection, do you have anything to
>>>>contribute toward the subject matter of the thread?
>jmo...@bubbaworld.com wrote:
>>Now if you ar--
> [No.]
>Reprise:
['fraid not]
Mike, whether you repost the same bullshit once, twice or ten thousand
times it DOES NOT make it any more credible, factual or real.
No more believable than someone claiming that the Murrah Building was
leveled by a laser blast from Elvis, in a flying saucer. Such a
foolish claim would be just about as factual a claim as you have been
posting here.
Have you ever wondered *WHY* damn near every "Konspiracy Kook"
originating these foolish theories is *SELLING A BOOK*??? It's
because the "Konspiracy Kooks" that lap up this type of crap are *so
gullible*.
Pardon the rest of us, if we aren't.
TarlaStar
>mig...@winXXXterBBBnet.com (Mike\>Schnedier) wrote:
>>In article <35b968c4....@news.supernews.com>, jmo...@bubbaworld.com
>>(Jerry Morgan) wrote:
>[snip]
>>>Ask "Woodward and Bernstein" of "Watergate" fame and I'm sure they
>>>could enlighten you regarding the fame and fortune that motivates
>>>reporters to search out "the big story" (tm).
>> Nixon, if you forget, was wanted *out* by the establishment press.
>> Clinton is wanted *in*.
>Yeah sure, that's why they simply refuse to "let go" of the "Bill and
>Monica Story" (tm), and this in spite of the fact that a large portion
>of the population considers it a "non-story".
Guess you haven't heard the latest rumors, Jerry. It seems as though
the President and Monica weren't necessarily playing "hide the salami"
but in fact, Monica was acting as Clinton's mule. She had a complete
access pass to the White House, and the current dirt that I've read
says that Starr is actually trying to uncover cocaine use by the
President. THAT is why he's been so insistent about having the Secret
Service testify. And that's why it's taken so long to come to an
agreement between Lewinsky's lawyers and Starr.
Mike>Schnedier
>whether you repost the same bullshit once, twice or ten thousand
>times it DOES NOT make it any more credible, factual or real.
Your rote dismissals are totally worthless, as you will discuss none of
the *facts*. I was looking for *verification*. Did you *miss* that part in
your heady rush to bitch about conspiracy mongering? Either you are able
to provide verification or you are not - in which case your opinion is
completely useless to me.
1. I want to know more about Michael Loudenslager. Was he in fact declared
a victim of the bombing after having been seen rescuing others?
2. Who is the day-care operator?
3. Why was Kenneth Trentadue murdered (obviously), yet his family told he
had committed suicide? Who was the medical examiner who ruled suicide, and
has he a history of ruling suicide in other suspicious cases (as had
Beyer, who examined Foster)?
Gary McManus
Cut it out, Deming.
Gary McManus
Mike>Schnedier
>>
>>>Yeah sure, that's why they simply refuse to "let go" of the "Bill and
>>>Monica Story" (tm), and this in spite of the fact that a large portion
>>>of the population considers it a "non-story".
CORRUPTION AND COVERUP
You Can't Have One Without The Other
By Edward Zehr
Two anniversaries have come and gone once more, the crash of TWA Flight
800 off the coast of Long Island on July 17, 1996 and the death of White
House deputy counsel Vincent Foster on July 20, 1993. Neither of these
incidents has been provided with a satisfactory explanation, although one
would never guess it from reading the mainstream press. But then, just
what is so unique about that? Coverups are as much an American tradition
as apple pie and the Fourth of July.
Does the public really believe the official version of Foster's death? No,
but then they don't believe the official line on the death of JFK, or his
brother Bobby, or Martin Luther King either. Why should they? None of
these stories is particularly believable. If the truth be known there are
many more such events that people just don't think much about, because
they were reported sotto voce by the mainstream press before being slid
under the carpet.
How many Americans know about the massive corruption of Lyndon Johnson,
for example? The man was poor as a church mouse when he entered politics,
yet he retired a multi-millionaire. How did he manage to do that on the
salary of a public official? Strangely enough, nobody in the mainstream
press -- that vaunted watchdog of democracy -- ever thought to ask. Isn't
that odd? Although rumors had abounded for years of Johnson's corruption,
the subject didn't surface in the press until Robert Caro's second book on
Johnson was published in 1990, in which he only hinted at the full extent
of LBJ's corruption -- he hadn't even gotten to the part where Johnson was
accepting bribes from the Carlos Marcello organization for killing
legislation that would regulate gambling, while Johnson was majority
leader of the Senate. Even so, the Washington Post jumped all over him --
Caro, not Johnson -- for denigrating a public figure who had done so much
to advance the cause of civil rights, declared war on poverty and
performed many other good works. (Johnson's role in mismanaging the
Vietnam War was hardly mentioned).
Do you begin to get the picture? The law really only applies to the lower
orders (that's us folks). A public figure whose policies are considered to
be "correct" by the power elite is entitled to a little graft on the side.
It's only those awkward types such as Richard Nixon, who run afoul of the
bureaucracy, who are humiliated, degraded and hounded out of public life
-- besides, the press never liked him. No doubt Nixon was guilty of
obstructing justice, a serious matter, although it is treated very lightly
in the mainstream press these days. You see, perjury doesn't really count
unless it involves something the press regards as "serious." A chief
executive getting it on with a 20-year-old intern in the Oval Office just
isn't serious enough for these enlightened times.
Let's face it, we live in a country where presidential elections can be
stolen with impunity, and the mainstream press, instead of reporting the
theft, turns the corrupt politician who stole it into a sort of popular
icon, an object of mindless adulation to millions. The whole Kennedy image
was phony from top to bottom. The press dutifully covered up his dissolute
lifestyle, his drug taking, his Mafia contacts, and worst of all, his
gross incompetence in the office to which he was (not really) elected. And
then when he was murdered (most likely by the Mafia) they covered up the
truth about that, as well.
The mainstream press also covered up the fact that JFK and his brother
Bobby had both been having affairs with actress Marilyn Monroe. This would
have been a bombshell of nuclear intensity had it been revealed at the
time, but the mainstream press uttered not a word about it. Is it possible
that they didn't know about this? Is the Pope a Presbyterian? There are no
secrets about such things in Washington, except to the mind-numbed,
propaganda-befogged public. Shortly after Monroe's death, a conservative
columnist wrote a bitter piece about a "liberal politician" who took
advantage of the actress at a time when she was clearly not playing with a
full deck and may have contributed to her death. If the columnist knew
about this at the time, you can be sure that everybody else in official
Washington knew about it as well.
Indeed, we will probably never know the extent to which Bobby Kennedy may
have contributed to Monroe's death. Neighbors have placed him at her
residence on the afternoon of her demise, but a wealthy rancher in
northern California swears that Kennedy was visiting him the entire day.
Nevertheless, two former Los Angeles Chiefs of Police have stated publicly
that RFK was in L.A. that day. They would be in a position to know since
the presence of such a highly placed public official would have to be made
known to local police by the Secret Service for security reasons.
All of this was revealed in a BBC documentary -- ABC also did a
documentary on this story, but it was suppressed by network executive
Roone Arledge, who directed the news department. Arledge was a close
friend of the Kennedy family, but he assured the Associated Press that,
"My longtime friendship with Ethel Kennedy had no part in that decision."
He explained that the story "needed a larger context than simply whether
the Kennedy brothers engaged in separate, illicit affairs with Marilyn
Monroe."
Clear? Good, I guess that settles it then. Peter Brown and Patte Barham,
the authors of "Marilyn, The Last Take," mention that another highly
placed ABC executive speculated that the program had been canceled because
"talking about the Kennedys in terms that linked them with illicit affairs
and, perhaps murder," was a bit too much for the network to take on.
The BBC documentary, "Say Goodbye to the President," created a sensation
when it was shown in Europe in 1986, but no major American network would
carry it. An NBC executive was quoted as saying that the BBC program was
"extremely dangerous." No doubt, but dangerous to whom? To a benighted
public who might be expected to keel over en masse at the revelation that
their popular idol had feet of clay? Or to a "free press" that might
suffer a drastic loss of credibility if the public finally realized the
extent to which they had been hoodwinked for decades on end? Isn't it time
that we grew up enough to face a few basic facts about the way we are
governed instead of feeding on a steady diet of sugary lies and cosmetic
fantasy provided by the degenerate institution that is supposed to report
the news?
The corruption of our government goes back a long way, all the way to the
Civil War and its aftermath. Certainly Prohibition was a boon to corrupt
politicians throughout the land. Still, Prohibition was small change
compared to the present traffic in illegal drugs which must have spread
the tentacles of corruption into government at every level. And yet, we
seldom hear of this -- I wonder why? Have our public officials simply
resisted the temptation to profit from such a bonanza, or does our "free
press" just not know about such things? Are they too innocent to
understand, or maybe too corrupt themselves to write about it? Remember
all those nasty things they said about J. Edgar Hoover after his death?
How he had allegedly turned a blind eye to the Mafia and all that? Why
didn't they say any of those things while Hoover was alive? Assuming they
are true, are we supposed to believe that the press didn't know about
them? Or was it that Hoover, in his long tenure as head of the FBI had
gotten the goods on too many powerful people? And what does that say about
the mainstream press? Are they really anything more than lapdogs of the
power elite? You would never guess it from the way they cover up the
stories they are supposed to cover.
IT'S STILL THE SAME OLD STORY
"The trooper lay belly down in the grass. It was a late summer afternoon
in the early '60s, and sweat had soaked his clothes and made a dark, wet
stain on his shirt front. . . He tightened his finger on the trigger of
the rifle, practicing the feel. Pow. In his mind, he could see the
editor's head in his sights. Pow."
Thus began the prologue to Gene Wirges' book, "Conflict of Interests."
Wirges was, at that time, the editor of the Morrilton Democrat, a small
town newspaper that had taken on the corrupt political machine that ran
Conway County, Arkansas, and was a power in the state as well. The state
trooper, Jack Stone, once a part of the corrupt machine, later told Wirges
that he had been assigned to kill him. He had fallen out with the
politicians and agreed to testify against the Sheriff of Conway County for
skimming public funds in a speed-trap scam, in a suit Wirges had brought
to oust the corrupt official from office. By the time the trooper had
arrived at the court house, he was a nervous wreck. Wirges describes the
scene:
"Inside, Stone sat in the courtroom while other state troopers were
deposed. Apparently a collective amnesia had infected the troops, because
beyond verifying their own signatures at the bottoms of various documents
and tickets, the troopers universally 'couldn't remember' anything much
beyond that."
Change the scene to a congressional hearing in Washington, DC, and the
characters to Bruce Lindsey, Roger Altman, or the unfortunate young man
who lied even to his own diary, and the performance seems strangely
familiar. Altzheimer's would seem to be endemic among the Arkies and age
does not appear to be a factor.
The corrupt sheriff was eventually removed from office, but only after
years of dilatory legal maneuvers, aided and abetted by corrupt state and
county officials, including judges. Was anyone surprised by the dismissal
of the charges against Webster Hubbell, or the release of Susan McDougal
from custody? They would not have wondered had they been familiar with the
recent history of Arkansas jurisprudence.
The same goes for the charges brought against David Hale and Linda Tripp.
Mr. Wirges was tried and convicted of "perjury" by a rigged jury and
sentenced to three years in prison. His conviction was later overturned by
the state supreme court -- the charges were obviously without foundation.
The same could be said of the charges made against Tripp. She is being
"investigated" by a Maryland grand jury for tapping a phone call between
her apartment in that state and Monica Lewinsky's phone in New York. Now,
interstate calls fall under federal, not state law, so the Maryland grand
jury has no jurisdiction in this case. And under the relevant federal
statute, what Tripp did was perfectly legal.
So why bring the case before the grand jury? For the same reason perjury
charges were brought against Wirges -- to smear and harass him and delay
his legal actions against a corrupt political machine. Much of the press
in Arkansas was complicit in the campaign against editor Wirges, and not
all of the journalists involved were local. A dubious witness was found by
the machine who was prepared to charge Wirges with "bribery." The judge,
although a political hack, found the allegation so ridiculous he dismissed
the witness. The following morning the Arkansas Gazette carried a front
page story describing the testimony that had not been given. When Wirges
confronted the author of the story, the local Associated Press Bureau
Chief, John Starr, the latter admitted that he had been fed the fake story
by Marlin Hawkins, the High Sheriff of Conway County. Apparently it hadn't
occurred to the sheriff that a local judge might reject one of his
hand-picked "witnesses."
And what became of the state trooper who had turned against the corrupt
machine? Wirges recounts that a few months after the trial "Trooper Jack
Stone was killed in a freak automobile accident on a straight stretch of
road in broad daylight. No other cars were involved, and no clear-cut
reason for the accident was ever uncovered."
Sound familiar? Sort of like what happened to the man who discovered that
check made out to Bill Clinton in the trunk of an old auto. Or Kathy
Ferguson, the former wife of a state trooper who had been tapped to
testify in the Paula Jones lawsuit. Or her boyfriend, a local cop who
couldn't quite believe that Kathy had committed "suicide", but wound up
committing "suicide" himself shortly thereafter. (Like Alzheimer's,
"suicide" is endemic in Arkansas). Of course, Arkansans do occasionally
die of other causes. Like Luther "Jerry" Parks who ran a business that
supplied bodyguards for Clinton during his presidential campaign. Parks
was found riddled in his automobile near a posh neighborhood in Little
Rock. According to British journalist Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, Parks had
been gathering information on Clinton's nocturnal activities at the behest
of Vince Foster. The case has never been solved, although there is a rumor
that a witness identified the shooter as an Arkansas state trooper. That
might explain why Parks stopped his car.
If one gets a feeling of deja vu reading Wirges' book, perhaps it is
because Mr. Clinton learned his craft at the same school as the Sheriff of
Conway County. He seems to have done the complete course, including
dilatory legal tactics, harassment of witnesses, denigration of
prosecutors, cultivation of amnesia among his cronies, general obstruction
of justice, and other matters concerning which one can only speculate.
Like the corrupt Arkansas political machine that spawned him, Mr. Clinton
gets a favorable press. Oh, they try to pretend that they are tough on
him, but with a few honorable exceptions, journalists seem quite content
to lick his boots and do his bidding. It has become a convenient source of
cheap entertainment to watch the presstitutes slither on their bellies
each morning on C-SPAN, while dutifully spinning the latest news to
Clinton's advantage. At the mere mention of Kenneth Starr they bare their
fangs and hiss. It's better than the snake house at the Washington Zoo.
Of course, all of this foolishness brought about by the independent
counsel is much ado about nothing. (It is almost never mentioned that
Janet Reno had to approve every investigation undertaken by Starr). And
whenever a caller is so awkward as to mention any Clinton scandal other
than the Monica Lewinsky affair, the subject is quickly brushed aside,
giving the impression that, at worst, this is a light summer sex farce.
Nobody ever attempts to explain why Webster Hubbell was paid nearly a
million bucks for very few services rendered after being accused of
cheating his partners at the Rose Law Firm. Within the Clinton coterie,
being charged with grand larceny would seem to be somewhat like winning
the lottery. Mainstream pundits such as "Fat Jack" Germond give the perp
high marks for obstructing justice to his best advantage, and badmouth the
prosecutor for being such a spoil-sport as to go after a guy who has
gotten away with it. To mention the possibility that Hubbell had been paid
handsomely to keep his mouth shut about Clinton would be considered
impossibly gauche in that enlightened, progressive company.
And then we have the example of St. Sue of Ark., the mainstream media's
martyr of preference in the Whitewater affair. Never mind that the lady
has already been convicted of multiple felonies in Arkansas and is about
to go on trial for yet more felonies (unrelated to Whitewater) in
California. Mainstream newsies have been weeping copious buckets of
crocodile tears over Susan's cruel incarceration at the behest of the
villainous prosecutor Kenneth Starr. Actually, St. Susan Martyr, who had
been jailed by a judge for contempt of court, could have obtained her
freedom at any time by agreeing to answer a few simple questions about her
business dealings, such as whether or not Bill Clinton had pressured David
Hale to authorize an illegal government loan to her on the basis that she
was a disadvantaged minority person. What made the loan illegal was the
fact that the only minority Susan ever belonged to was the millionaire's
club. She and her husband Jim McDougal had assets well in excess of a
million dollars at the time the loan was made. What could Clinton's motive
have been in promoting an illegal loan? Well, about a third of the
proceeds went right into Whitewater development Corp. in which he was a
partner, but of course Mr. Clinton professes to know nothing about that.
Those who have followed the Clinton scandals closely will have noticed by
now that the martyrs and sympathetic figures are invariably discovered by
the mainstream press among the ranks of those who have remained loyal to
Clinton -- Webster Hubbell, Susan McDougal, Monica Lewinsky, and the like.
The mainstream newsies vie with each other providing them tea and
sympathy. For "turncoats" such as Susan's erstwhile husband Jim, however,
they have little more to give than the back of their hand. When, according
to accounts given by some of the inmates at the "medical" facility where
Jim McDougal had been incarcerated, he was hassled in a dubious "drug
test," thrown into solitary confinement for being unable to urinate on
demand, and denied his heart medication, the liberal minions of the
mainstream press, whose warm, throbbing hearts bleed for all humanity,
were all strangely looking the other way. They really weren't interested
in the accounts of McDougal's fellow inmates that told of his cries for
help as he lay dying on the floor of his frigid solitary cell, while the
guards, seated a short distance down the hall, played cards, callously
ignoring his calls for help.
Notice that it is not a question of the press investigating these
allegations and finding them baseless -- they just don't give a damn
whether they are true or not. Jim McDougal picked the "wrong side" in a
battle involving the prerogatives of the power-elite and therefore had to
pay the price. Just because Diamond Jim wasn't smart enough to survive in
the cold reptilian world of corrupt Clintonian politics, is that any
reason for a mainstream journalist to endanger his career prospects by
betting against the house? Jim had changed his testimony to incriminate
Bill Clinton in the matter of the illegal loan to his wife Susan. What did
he expect? The same goes for David Hale, who was the first to accuse
Clinton of promoting the illegal loan to Susan. He has been indicted on
state charges, over the objection of the independent counsel, by a cynical
Arkansas prosecutor named Stodola who was paid off in lavish campaign
contributions to harass Hale in the interest of obstructing justice. No?
Then why on earth did he do it? Whatever one may think of Mr. Clinton, it
is unheard of for a local prosecutor to impede a federal criminal
investigation in this way.
And yet, our glorious, heroic "free press" continue to look the other way
and do nothing. And if Hale, whose state trial was delayed when he was
hospitalized with a heart condition, were to drop dead before their very
eyes do you believe the mainstream press would give a hoot, any more than
they cared about what happened to Jim McDougal? It is largely their fault
that national politics, never very clean, have been allowed to sink to the
abysmal level of corruption that prevailed in Conway County, Arkansas,
circa 1960. Are these journalists any less corrupt than the criminals in
public life they are protecting? Granted they don't share in the spoils,
but by kowtowing to the power elite who want Clinton and his pals to be
protected, they protect themselves and promote their career prospects. So
it isn't that they do not benefit from political corruption -- they just
sell themselves more cheaply than the crooks in government they are
protecting. Does this enable them to see themselves as honest, decent
human beings?
THE MOST BRAZEN COVERUP OF OUR TIME
When I mention the Kennedy assassination in print I often get mail from
people who have theories about who did it and why and how. I have my own
theories which have changed over the years, but I have long since given up
hope that the truth about this murder will ever be known to the public.
The problem would seem to be that the ruling class of that era, including
the Kennedy family, did not want the truth to be known -- they were afraid
of the truth. There were just too many dirty little secrets tied up in
that affair, and uncovering the truth might have sent them all spilling
out into public view. That was the last thing any true Keeper of the Flame
wanted to happen because, you see, JFK, as known to the American public,
was only about 1/5 real -- the rest was fiction, carefully orchestrated by
speechwriters, publicity agents, and servile, belly-crawling sycophants
who represented themselves to the public as "objective" journalists, even
as they sang Kennedy's praises in high falsetto.
Not that the man did not have an inner core. Unlike Clinton, he was not a
physical coward -- the role he played in the Second World War was
admirable, if not particularly valuable to the war effort. JFK had many
fine qualities, unfortunately they were overshadowed by those instilled in
him by his father, Joseph P. Kennedy, who was a world-class scoundrel in
his time. His performance in the presidency was vainglorious, shallow,
amoral, irresponsible and incompetent -- he came within an ace of getting
us all barbecued in a pointless nuclear exchange, and all because he made
a terrible impression on Khrushchev when he met with him in Vienna while
high on speed. (I am not making this up -- Kennedy's drug-taking at the
time of the Vienna meeting is well documented. As for the Cuban Missile
Crisis, I know some things about it that are probably unknown to the
reader. I can't say more than that).
Why mention this? Because a press that would cover up anything as
outrageous as the excesses of Camelot is capable of telling almost any
lie. That is the context in which the coverup of Vince Foster's murder
must be seen.
Murder, he says? [Fade to newsreel image of Roland Freisler, presiding
judge of Adolf Hitler's Volksgerichtshoff, gesticulating wildly as he
shrieks at the defendant, "Murders? MURDERS? In Poland? How dare you
slander the Reich . . . " Becomes incoherent].
Don't let him get to you, Rolly babes -- he's probably just another one
a'them conspiracy theorists. Of course the difference between a
whacked-out conspiracy theorist and someone who is determined to tell the
truth despite impossible odds may lie entirely in the intellectual honesty
(or lack thereof) of whomever is telling the story.
But how can I go on this way? Don't I realize that there have been no less
than Five Investigations, all of which prove conclusively that Foster
committed suicide? It's very simple really -- the first investigation into
Foster's death, conducted by the Park Police with a little help from the
FBI, was a grotesque shambles that makes the Keystone Kops seem like
highly skilled professionals by comparison. The subsequent
"investigations" plowed the same furrows and repeated many of the same
mistakes. You see, all of the investigations were conducted by the same
investigators in the field. How could they change their conclusions
significantly without admitting that they had blundered?
Only Starr was innovative enough to hire O.J. Simpson's onetime "expert"
witness, Henry Lee, who introduced some fresh absurdities into the case
such as the peripatetic oven mitt that was supposedly found in the glove
compartment of a car alleged to be Foster's. The mitt was said to contain
traces of materials such as might be found on a gun and were also found in
Foster's pocket. This was supposed to imply that the gun belonged to
Foster, a crucial point since the revolver found in his hand was not the
same color as the one his wife identified as his.
The problem with the mitt is that it wasn't turned over to the authorities
until May of the following year, months after Foster's death, thus there
was no "chain of custody." What this means is that no court in the land
would accept the mitt as evidence. For those who are impatient with such
legal niceties, let me pose the following dilemma. Why did the Park Police
go to the trouble of cataloging such items found in this car as small
coins and a guitar pick, while failing to note the existence of the oven
mitt? Those who are capable of answering that one to their satisfaction
will probably be able to swallow the rest of Lee's "evidence" as well and
believe the Starr Report. Since I covered this topic in some detail last
year in a column I did about the Starr Report on Foster's death, I see no
point in wasting further space on it.
Enough beating about the bush -- how can I have the temerity to assert,
against the weight of all respectable, "informed" opinion, that Foster was
murdered? It's a matter of elementary physics, really. A .38-caliber
revolver was found in Foster's hand. Thus, if he shot himself, it must
have been with that gun. According to the Fiske report, the muzzle of the
revolver was shoved into Foster's mouth, all the way to the soft palate,
at the time it was fired.
Now, anyone who has fired a .38-caliber revolver will be aware that the
recoil will cause the barrel of the weapon to jerk upward in a roughly
circular motion. That is due to the way the weapon is balanced. The heavy
parts are well below the barrel, which means that the action and reaction
induced by firing a bullet occur well above the center of gravity -- that
is the pivot point about which the weapon rotates due to the force induced
within the barrel when the slug is expelled. Anyone who has fired a .38 on
a range, or seen one fired, will be aware of this abrupt upward motion.
One does not see this in the movies because their guns fire blanks, which
have very little momentum.
My question is a simple one: how was the barrel of the revolver able to
exit Foster's mouth without damaging his front teeth? To point up the
issue, there was a raised sight on the front of the barrel. Elementary
physics would dictate that the poor man's front teeth should have been all
over the ground, yet the Fiske report assures us that they were not
damaged.
The obvious way out of this conundrum is to assume that Mr. Foster was
shot with a small caliber weapon that had little recoil. The forensic
evidence: paucity of blood, small exit wound, minimal powder burns inside
the mouth, would seem to indicate this as well.
But if Foster was shot with a small caliber weapon, somebody must have
placed the .38 in his hand and taken the death weapon. What investigator
(other than a member of the Park Police or Inspector Clouseau) would not
take this as evidence of foul play? QED.
See how easy it is? In case anybody finds this demonstration unconvincing,
I have about a hundred more to make -- but not now. The point is, when the
available evidence is indicative of an obvious conclusion and somebody
stretches it, or ignores it as was done in this instance, their agenda
obviously does not include getting at the truth. But when they start
"finding" oven mitts in the glove compartment months after the
investigators have gone over a vehicle with a fine-tooth comb, it is a
sign of real desperation.
MUTED COMMENT FROM THE MAINSTREAM PRESS
After five years, the press comment generated by the passage of yet
another anniversary of Vince Foster's death is noticeably sparse. I noted
only two articles this year, one of which appeared in Washington Weekly
last week, evaluating the effect of the Foster coverup on the rest of
Starr's investigation. Mr. Starr would appear to have become so entangled
in compromise that the effectiveness of his investigation has been
blunted. Having blown off the Foster investigation and allowed Webster
Hubbell to slip through his grasp, while Susan McDougal defiantly refuses
to talk, bolstered no doubt by the prospect of support from on high, Starr
is left with little more than Monica Lewinsky to attract the attention of
a jaded and cynical press. The other article, which appeared in the July
20 Washington Post, undertook to evaluate the effect of Foster's death
upon the Clinton administration.
The first half of the Post article by Peter Baker consisted largely of
conjecture about how Clinton's tenure might have developed if Foster had
lived. Since I find the construction of alternate universes, based upon
speculation about what might have been, to be a tedious and essentially
useless exercise -- trying to determine what actually did happen in the
real universe is enough of a puzzle for most of us -- I will comment only
on the second half of Mr. Baker's article. (Except to note in passing his
obligatory invocation of the snide, sophomoric putdown of anyone who
questions the official lies regarding Foster's death as being comparable
to "the same people obsessed by the John F. Kennedy assassination and
Roswell UFOs.")
Farther along Mr. Baker makes the mandatory reference to "every
investigation that has looked at the case" -- he names them off: the Park
Police (whose investigators assigned to the case had never worked on a
homicide before), two congressional inquiries (one of which lasted all of
a day and a half. The other one failed to call on the two Arkansas state
troopers who took the phone call from White House employee Helen Dickey,
announcing Foster's death before the White House was supposed to have
known of it), Fiske (who used the same FBI investigators as were involved
in the original investigation), and Starr (who used the same investigators
yet again, adding a bit of highly dubious pizzaz produced by O.J.
Simpson's "expert" witness Henry Lee). So those are the five wholly
objective, completely independent investigations into Foster's death. And
what does Mr. Baker represent as their finding? They "came to the same,
unequivocal conclusion that Foster died at his own hand in Fort Marcy
Park." (Surprise, surprise).
This reminds me of the emotional statement made by the governor of
Washington state after the Tacoma Narrows Bridge came crashing down as the
result of resonant oscillations induced by a high wind. He vowed that
bridge would be rebuilt, piece by piece, exactly as it had been before.
Which prompted the dean of a nearby engineering school to comment, "If you
rebuild it exactly as it was before, it will fall down exactly as it did
before."
To state the issue more succinctly, five times zero equals zero. It goes
without saying that Mr. Baker fails to mention the resignation of Miquel
Rodriguez, the lead prosecutor probing Foster's death early in the Starr
investigation, and the fact that his resignation raised doubts about
Starr's determination to get at the truth. Nor does Mr. Baker mention the
role played by Starr's Washington deputy, Mark Tuohey, in frustrating Mr.
Rodriguez's attempts to conduct an effective investigation, which
ultimately led to his resignation. Tuohey is a liberal Democrat, said by
the Washington Post to be "close to some Clinton administration officials,
including Associate Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick..." Reporter Chris
Ruddy noted in his book "The Strange Death of Vincent Foster" that "Tuohey
was also a friend of Robert Fiske." Ruddy further noted that Tuohey had
been "seen with Webster Hubbell at one of Washington's power restaurants."
This caused comment at the time, since Hubbell was known to be a target of
Starr's investigation. The mainstream press did not report Rodriguez's
resignation, nor did they mention the friction between Rodriguez and
Tuohey. Quite a glaring omission, wouldn't you say? But then this is a
coverup, after all.
The worst of it is that the Washington Times, the only "anti-
establishment" rag in town has not done a very good job of covering the
Foster investigation either. What terrible secret could they be so
determined to keep from the public that it would unite such rancorous
political adversaries in their resolve to hide the truth?
[ Edward Zehr can be reached at ez...@capaccess.org ]
Published in the July 27, 1998 issue of The Washington Weekly Copyright 1998
The Washington Weekly (http://www.federal.com)
Reposting permitted with this message intact
--
Democracy: Three wolves and a sheep voting on dinner.
Republic: The flock gets to vote for which wolves vote on dinner.
Constitutional Republic: A sheep's "Bill of Rights" is appended to the
document codifying the desire of wolves to vote on dinner.
Federal Government: The resturant employing and catering to the wolves.
Mike>Schnedier
By Edward Zehr
jmo...@bubbaworld.com
>jmo...@bubbaworld.com wrote:
>>mig...@winXXXterBBBnet.com (Mike\>Schnedier) wrote:
>>>In article <35b968c4....@news.supernews.com>, jmo...@bubbaworld.com
>>>(Jerry Morgan) wrote:
>>Yeah sure, that's why they simply refuse to "let go" of the "Bill and
>>Monica Story" (tm), and this in spite of the fact that a large portion
>>of the population considers it a "non-story".
>Guess you haven't heard the latest rumors, Jerry. It seems as though
>the President and Monica weren't necessarily playing "hide the salami"
>but in fact, Monica was acting as Clinton's mule. She had a complete
>access pass to the White House, and the current dirt that I've read
>says that Starr is actually trying to uncover cocaine use by the
>President. THAT is why he's been so insistent about having the Secret
>Service testify. And that's why it's taken so long to come to an
>agreement between Lewinsky's lawyers and Starr.
That's the neat thing about *rumors*, anyone can crank them out,
anyone can pass them on and no one has to *prove* anything. ;-)
Personally, I don't care if Bill and Monica were playing "hide the
salami" or more likely she was simply "sucking on his salami". ;-)
If Bill is "Flying on the Snow Bird" that's a bit different, but not
much. Previous to Bill we had a President that was so senile that he
could not formulate two ideas in a row to save his life and one that
was hooked on "presciption drugs".
Neither of the previous two, nor the current President seems to have
"gone off the deep end", so it'll probably be alright if Monica was
Clinton's mule, his blow job gal or a both.
*****
Bill and Monica - adding new meaning to the terms:
"Blew Room" and "Oral Office"
*****
Jerome A. Schroeder
>
>Guess you haven't heard the latest rumors, Jerry. It seems as though
>the President and Monica weren't necessarily playing "hide the salami"
>but in fact, Monica was acting as Clinton's mule. She had a complete
>access pass to the White House, and the current dirt that I've read
>says that Starr is actually trying to uncover cocaine use by the
>President. THAT is why he's been so insistent about having the Secret
>Service testify. And that's why it's taken so long to come to an
>agreement between Lewinsky's lawyers and Starr.
>
You guys are great. If one artificial slander doesn't work, you'll trot out
another. I'd ask Joe Welch's famous question: "Have you no shame?" But, I
already know the answer.
Jerry
jmo...@bubbaworld.com
>>>jmo...@bubbaworld.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>Yeah sure, that's why they simply refuse to "let go" of the "Bill and
>>>>Monica Story" (tm), and this in spite of the fact that a large portion
>>>>of the population considers it a "non-story".
>CORRUPTION AND COVERUP
>You Can't Have One Without The Other
Konspiracies and KOOKS
You Can't Have One Without The Other
That said, I do find it slightly interesting that you would choose to
post this 550 Line "Compendium of Konspiracy Kook Theories", TWICE
within 27 seconds.
First as:
Message-ID: <miguel-2607...@ppp-67-76.dialup.winternet.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 18:28:46 -0500
And turn right around, just 27 seconds later, and post it again as:
Message-ID: <miguel-2607...@ppp-67-76.dialup.winternet.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 18:29:13 -0500
Are you getting paid by "the word", "the character" or simply by
"volume"?
Or are you going to keep posting basically the same thing repeatedly
until some spam cancel bot decides to cancel the lot of it so that you
can scream "SEE, SEE THEY ARE CENSORING ME!!!"???
Anyhow, I wasn't impressed with your re-hash of "Konspiracy Kook
Theories" from the past 50 years, but thanks anyhow.
Be sure and come back when you have some *FACTS*.
Until then, here's something for you. :-)
WHACK !!!
TarlaStar
>TarlaStar wrote:
>>
>> jmo...@bubbaworld.com wrote:
>>
>> >mig...@winXXXterBBBnet.com (Mike\>Schnedier) wrote:
>>
>> >>In article <35b968c4....@news.supernews.com>, jmo...@bubbaworld.com
>> >>(Jerry Morgan) wrote:
>>
>> >[snip]
>>
>> >>>Ask "Woodward and Bernstein" of "Watergate" fame and I'm sure they
>> >>>could enlighten you regarding the fame and fortune that motivates
>> >>>reporters to search out "the big story" (tm).
>>
>> >> Nixon, if you forget, was wanted *out* by the establishment press.
>>
>> >> Clinton is wanted *in*.
>>
>> >Yeah sure, that's why they simply refuse to "let go" of the "Bill and
>> >Monica Story" (tm), and this in spite of the fact that a large portion
>> >of the population considers it a "non-story".
>>
>> Guess you haven't heard the latest rumors, Jerry. It seems as though
>> the President and Monica weren't necessarily playing "hide the salami"
>> but in fact, Monica was acting as Clinton's mule. She had a complete
>> access pass to the White House, and the current dirt that I've read
>> says that Starr is actually trying to uncover cocaine use by the
>> President. THAT is why he's been so insistent about having the Secret
>> Service testify. And that's why it's taken so long to come to an
>> agreement between Lewinsky's lawyers and Starr.
>Cut it out, Deming.
>Gary McManus
Hey, what did I ever do to YOU?
I'm just passing the gossip. I didn't say I believed it one way or the
other. If you're interested though, I can post the original article
that I got it from.
Mike>Schnedier
>> Your rote dismissals are totally worthless, as you will discuss none of
>>the *facts*. I was looking for *verification*. Did you *miss* that part in
>>your heady rush to bitch about conspiracy mongering? Either you are able
>>to provide verification or you are not - in which case your opinion is
>>completely useless to me.
>>
>Useless or not, you got my opinion. Just as you will every time you
>post this "Konspiracy Kook Krap" to ok.general. Get used to it. ;-)
Oh, I highly doubt that I'll find myself in that position.
(Mouse arrow zips toward a certain menubar command....)
Mike>Schnedier
Jerkin' Morgan wrote:
>That said, I do find it slightly interesting that you would choose to
>post this 550 Line "Compendium of Konspiracy Kook Theories", TWICE
>within 27 seconds.
>
>First as:
>
>Message-ID: <miguel-2607...@ppp-67-76.dialup.winternet.com>
>Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 18:28:46 -0500
>
>And turn right around, just 27 seconds later, and post it again as:
>
>Message-ID: <miguel-2607...@ppp-67-76.dialup.winternet.com>
>Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 18:29:13 -0500
>
>Are you getting paid by "the word", "the character" or simply by
>"volume"?
>
>Or are you going to keep posting basically the same thing repeatedly
>until some spam cancel bot decides to cancel the lot of it so that you
>can scream "SEE, SEE THEY ARE CENSORING ME!!!"???
Hmm....
I see Winternet has finally got it's anti-cancel software up and
running. True, I can't cancel my own posts if I wish to reformat them
(which is what happened in this case), but then again neither can that
legion of assholes collectively represented by mssrs. Horwath and Eden.
Cool.
>Anyhow, I wasn't impressed with your re-hash of "Konspiracy Kook
>Theories" from the past 50 years, but thanks anyhow.
I myself am wonfering how much impression a .38 high-velocity round
would make on the interior of your thick skull.
>Be sure and come back when you have some *FACTS*.
>
>Until then, here's something for you. :-)
>
>WHACK !!!
Put it back in yer pants.
Jerry Morgan
>Jerkin' Morgan wrote:
>>That said, I do find it slightly interesting that you would choose to
>>post this 550 Line "Compendium of Konspiracy Kook Theories", TWICE
>>within 27 seconds.
>>
[snip]
>>Are you getting paid by "the word", "the character" or simply by
>>"volume"?
>>
>>Or are you going to keep posting basically the same thing repeatedly
>>until some spam cancel bot decides to cancel the lot of it so that you
>>can scream "SEE, SEE THEY ARE CENSORING ME!!!"???
> Hmm....
> I see Winternet has finally got it's anti-cancel software up and
>running. True, I can't cancel my own posts if I wish to reformat them
>(which is what happened in this case), but then again neither can that
>legion of assholes collectively represented by mssrs. Horwath and Eden.
> Cool.
Well at least you can't whine that they are censoring you, hell they
aren't even letting you censor yourself. I'm not sure this is a "good
thing" (tm) however.
>>Anyhow, I wasn't impressed with your re-hash of "Konspiracy Kook
>>Theories" from the past 50 years, but thanks anyhow.
> I myself am wonfering how much impression a .38 high-velocity round
>would make on the interior of your thick skull.
If it didn't kill me, it would probably make me so stupid I'd fall for
all the Kook Konspiracies, spend most of my money and time on
conspiracy books and then waste what little was left posting
"Konspiracy Kook Theories" to usenet. No thanks, I rather be dead for
for sure, make it a .357, please.
>>Be sure and come back when you have some *FACTS*.
>>
>>Until then, here's something for you. :-)
>>
>>WHACK !!!
> Put it back in yer pants.
I will, but not before I piss on your leg and into your shoe. ;-)
See Mikey, just like I said, isn't it fun to get down and wallow in
the mud?
Much more so than all those silly "theories".
Sometimes you take life and yourself way, way too seriously. None of
us are going to get out of it alive. Reckon it must be some kinda'
conspiracy? :-)
Jerry Morgan
>(Jerkin' Morgan) wrote:
>>> Your rote dismissals are totally worthless, as you will discuss none of
>>>the *facts*. I was looking for *verification*. Did you *miss* that part in
>>>your heady rush to bitch about conspiracy mongering? Either you are able
>>>to provide verification or you are not - in which case your opinion is
>>>completely useless to me.
>>>
>>Useless or not, you got my opinion. Just as you will every time you
>>post this "Konspiracy Kook Krap" to ok.general. Get used to it. ;-)
> Oh, I highly doubt that I'll find myself in that position.
You can count on it, whether you want it or not.
Post to ok.general and I will reply. I care not whether you see the
reply as others will and THAT'S why I'm doing it and will continue to
do it as long as you choose to post to ok.general.
> (Mouse arrow zips toward a certain menubar command....)
You can mouse your arrow any damn where you wanna', makes no
difference what's so ever.
Go ahead, do it.
Whether or not *you* read my words means NOTHING, I could not care
less if you ever read them.
I follow up your posts to ok.general for the enlightenment of others.
Others that might not know your reputation, others that might be
fooled into believing the rantings of "Konspiracy Kook" and others
that deserve the truth about fools such as you and the "Konspiracy"
theories you espouse. I do it for those that might by some small
chance take you seriously.
Go ahead, do it and make my task a lot easier, please.
Les Cargill
<snip>
>
> I myself am wonfering how much impression a .38 high-velocity round
> would make on the interior of your thick skull.
>
Be advised not to threaten violence over a common carrier, Mr.
Schnieder.
Michael+Schneide®
(Just as a parting shot)
In article <6phlc5$as3$2...@usenet47.supernews.com>, jmo...@bubbaworld.com
(Jerry Morgan) wrote:
> Whether or not *you* read my words means NOTHING, I could not care
> less if you ever read them.
Yes you do.
> I follow up your posts to ok.general for the enlightenment of others.
No you don't.
> Others that might not know your reputation, others that might be
> fooled into believing the rantings of "Konspiracy Kook" and others
> that deserve the truth about fools such as you and the "Konspiracy"
> theories you espouse. I do it for those that might by some small
> chance take you seriously.
You mean, for that small percentage which will be immediately impressed
by your wielding of the phrase "Konspiracy Kook" as some kind of
comfortably satisfying and adequate defense of the "appeal to authority"
which underlies your position.
> Go ahead, do it and make my task a lot easier, please.
I doubt it.
Anyone with a lick of sense will be able to figure it out for
themselves, once they have the *information*, and those who lack any sense
really don't need you around to show them the ropes in terms of human
stupidity.
--
Email: Replace everything before the @ with "mike1" and delete any CAPS.
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
The tree, as tall as a fifteen story building, held at least a hundred
nests, with 60,000 or so bees in each one. Bahadur was amused by my
climbing gear, without which I could not scale such a tree. By contrast,
his bare hands and feet moved like a whisper over the limbs, every move
meticulous and full of certainty. I asked Bahadur if anyone ever falls
from the trees. "Yes," he said. "You fall when your life is over."
-- Raji Honey Harvesters, National Geographic, June 1998.
Mike|>Sçhnedier
<lcar...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Mike>Schnedier wrote:
><snip>
>>
>> I myself am wonfering how much impression a .38 high-velocity round
>> would make on the interior of your thick skull.
>
>Be advised not to threaten violence over a common carrier, Mr.
>Schnieder.
You really don't know what I'm referring to, do you?
I supposed I should have expected that.
Jerry Morgan
> (Just as a parting shot)
Thank goodness, YES!!!
>In article <6phlc5$as3$2...@usenet47.supernews.com>, jmo...@bubbaworld.com
>(Jerry Morgan) wrote:
>> Whether or not *you* read my words means NOTHING, I could not care
>> less if you ever read them.
> Yes you do.
Better not try to get a job as a "physic reader", you'd starve to
death with clueless opinions such as that.
Better stick with what you do best, trying to influence the gullible.
Hell, you might even be able to sell a book or two.
>> I follow up your posts to ok.general for the enlightenment of others.
> No you don't.
Damn, two stikes. One more and your out. :-(
>
>> Others that might not know your reputation, others that might be
>> fooled into believing the rantings of "Konspiracy Kook" and others
>> that deserve the truth about fools such as you and the "Konspiracy"
>> theories you espouse. I do it for those that might by some small
>> chance take you seriously.
>
> You mean, for that small percentage which will be immediately impressed
>by your wielding of the phrase "Konspiracy Kook" as some kind of
>comfortably satisfying and adequate defense of the "appeal to authority"
>which underlies your position.
Did you have a "difficult" relationship with yo' momma?
It sure seems that way, owing to your concerns regarding "authority"
or is it "authority figures"?
I'll guess you were a "mamma's boy", weren't you?
>> Go ahead, do it and make my task a lot easier, please.
> I doubt it.
Well at last we've found *something* you don't claim to be certain of.
This is an improvement, there may be hope for you yet. Then again,
nah, ain't a gonna' happen.
> Anyone with a lick of sense will be able to figure it out for
>themselves, once they have the *information*, and those who lack any sense
>really don't need you around to show them the ropes in terms of human
>stupidity.
I'm pleased to see that you used the term "information" above, as at
least you are not claiming *facts* are even remotely involved in your
rants. I guess I should give you a couple points for that. :-)
Anyhow, don't let the door knob hit you in the ass on the way out.
Kurt Lochner
>
> Les Cargill wrote:> >>I myself am [wondering] how much impression a .38 high-velocity
> >>round would make on the interior of your thick skull.
> >
> > Be advised not to threaten violence over a common carrier, Mr.
> > Schnieder.
>
Let me guess, "Vince Foster" and your 'conspiraloonie theory'..
><tab>I supposed I should have expected that.
--Your "theories" are just so much debris on the Information Highway..
Robert Lindsay
Mike\>Schnedier <mig...@winXXXterBBBnet.com> wrote:
>(Jerkin' Morgan) wrote:
>
>>> Your rote dismissals are totally worthless, as you will discuss none of
>>>the *facts*. I was looking for *verification*. Did you *miss* that part in
>>>your heady rush to bitch about conspiracy mongering? Either you are able
>>>to provide verification or you are not - in which case your opinion is
>>>completely useless to me.
>>>
>>post this "Konspiracy Kook Krap" to ok.general. Get used to it. ;-)
>
>
> Oh, I highly doubt that I'll find myself in that position.
>
don't forget to Killfile me too. I'm tired of your drivel also.
BTW your taste in wargames is abysmal also.
--
Robert Lindsay, Computational Minion, Storm Prediction Center, Norman OK
rob...@zorak.spc.noaa.gov -- Oh, God, could it be the weather... T. Amos
#include <standard_disclaimer.h>
Robert Lindsay
<jmo...@bubbaworld.com> wrote:
>
>Personally, I don't care if Bill and Monica were playing "hide the
>salami" or more likely she was simply "sucking on his salami". ;-)
I always like the phase, "slob on the knob", myself...
>Bill and Monica - adding new meaning to the terms:
> "Blew Room" and "Oral Office"
>*****
Jerry Morgan
>In article <6pgfab$fk9$1...@usenet51.supernews.com>,
> <jmo...@bubbaworld.com> wrote:
>>
>>Personally, I don't care if Bill and Monica were playing "hide the
>>salami" or more likely she was simply "sucking on his salami". ;-)
>I always like the phase, "slob on the knob", myself...
Around military installations in the Orient and South East Asia the
term "knob job" was used quite a lot, as was "steam job and blow
bath". ;-)
Come to think of it, "knob" is a pretty common term, isn't it? ;-)
- - - - -
The Older I get - The better I *WAS*.
- - - - -
TarlaStar
>>
>>Guess you haven't heard the latest rumors, Jerry. It seems as though
>>the President and Monica weren't necessarily playing "hide the salami"
>>but in fact, Monica was acting as Clinton's mule. She had a complete
>>access pass to the White House, and the current dirt that I've read
>>says that Starr is actually trying to uncover cocaine use by the
>>President. THAT is why he's been so insistent about having the Secret
>>Service testify. And that's why it's taken so long to come to an
>>agreement between Lewinsky's lawyers and Starr.
>>
>You guys are great. If one artificial slander doesn't work, you'll trot out
>another. I'd ask Joe Welch's famous question: "Have you no shame?" But, I
>already know the answer.
Monica Lewinsky was just given full immunity from prosecution for her
testimony today.
Les Cargill
>
> In article <6pj3i2$q...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>, Les Cargill
> <lcar...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> ><snip>
> >>
> >> I myself am wonfering how much impression a .38 high-velocity round
> >> would make on the interior of your thick skull.
> >
> >Be advised not to threaten violence over a common carrier, Mr.
> >Schnieder.
>
Sure do. But reread your post again. It's a double
entendre.
>
> I supposed I should have expected that.
>
> --
> Democracy: Three wolves and a sheep voting on dinner.
> Republic: The flock gets to vote for which wolves vote on dinner.
> Constitutional Republic: A sheep's "Bill of Rights" is appended to the
> document codifying the desire of wolves to vote on dinner.
> Federal Government: The resturant employing and catering to the wolves.
> =======================================================================> Email: Replace everything before the @ with "mike1" and delete any CAPS
> Claire Wolfe: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1797/essay.htm
> A con's advice to Hillary: http://www.sonic.net/maledicta/penpal_pr.html
> All burundanguiado test peons report to: http://www.mk.net/~mcf/barr.htm
--
Les Cargill - lcar...@worldnet.att.net
Jerry Morgan
[snip]
>Monica Lewinsky was just given full immunity from prosecution for her
>testimony today.
And I'm pretty certain that "Bill" experienced a certain sinking
feeling about the same time. Such a sinking feeling that I doubt that
Monica could ever "get it up for him again". ;-)
*****
Mike|>Sçhnedier
<lcar...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>> >> I myself am wondering how much impression a .38 high-velocity round
>> >> would make on the interior of your thick skull.
>> >
>> >Be advised not to threaten violence over a common carrier, Mr.
>> >Schnieder.
>>
>> You really don't know what I'm referring to, do you?
>
>Sure do. But reread your post again. It's a double entendre.
Ah. So you knew what I really meant, but pretended not to until I
called you on it, whereupon your desire to avoid appearing clueless won
out.
>> I supposed I should have expected that.
--
Mike|>Sçhnedier
(Robert Lindsay) wrote:
>>>Useless or not, you got my opinion. Just as you will every time you
>>>post this "Konspiracy Kook Krap" to ok.general. Get used to it. ;-)
>>
>> Oh, I highly doubt that I'll find myself in that position.
>> (Mouse arrow zips toward a certain menubar command....)
>
>don't forget to Killfile me too. I'm tired of your drivel also.
Whatever you say, gov.bum. Keep suckin' those tax bucks and hope you
never find yourself out on the street relying on "voluntary exchange" to
put chops in the pan.
>BTW your taste in wargames is abysmal also.
Right. Tell me ALL about "Attack of the Mutants" and "Freedom in the
Galaxy". And I made my IQ-roll right off the bat and didn't get stuck with
any Shiloh and Bullrun CCG decks which I then had to try and fob off onto
unsuspecting suckers in rec.games.board.marketplace. (You guys are a
marvel; don't you *know* by now that one of the pleasures in my life is
using DejaNews to reveal hypocrisy?)
>Robert Lindsay, Computational Minion, Storm Prediction Center, Norman OK
>rob...@zorak.spc.noaa.gov -- Oh, God, could it be the weather... T. Amos
>#include <standard_disclaimer.h>
A wx geek too, eh?
I can see why you're feeling acute pain - ya can't get away from me.
Pity you weren't around last year (or were you?) to that tenured hack
Amberson have his complete naivette regarding tornado structure get its
pants dropped around its ankles in sci.geo.meteorology. Now politely
*expode* and blow some of that crap over Dallas up here to Minnesota. It's
freezing up here and I'm bored of October altocumulus three months early.
= = = = =
One finds the most interesting things in DejaNews:
Subject: Re: TWA-800 Eyewitness statements (inconclusive)
From: wj...@mindspring.com (Billy Beck)
Date: 1997/12/12
rob...@zorak.spc.noaa.gov (Robert Lindsay) wrote:
>Craig Shields <cshi...@removethis.graymills.com> wrote:
>>Michael Rivero wrote:
>>> Many years ago I worked in Germany. I had a chance to see those
>>> strange old men who wander around with glazed eyes, trying to
>>> convince various municipal fixtures that the holocaust didn't really
>>> happen, that Hitler was misunderstood, and that the Nazi's were
>>> really okay guys.
>>
>>And this proves WHAT? Talk about going on a tangent.
>
>It proves Godwin's Law. About time too.
It's "about time" that the next jabbering fuck-up who cites
"Godwin's Law" should have his or her *ass* kicked up around their
*neck*.
Billy
Anthology
http://www.mindspring.com/~wjb3/free/essays.html
Robert Lindsay
Mike|>Sçhnedier <migu...@winQQQternetWWW.com> wrote:
>In article <6pl12b$3dr$1...@zorak.spc.noaa.gov>, rob...@zorak.spc.noaa.gov
>(Robert Lindsay) wrote:
>
>>>>Useless or not, you got my opinion. Just as you will every time you
>>>>post this "Konspiracy Kook Krap" to ok.general. Get used to it. ;-)
>>>
>>> Oh, I highly doubt that I'll find myself in that position.
>>> (Mouse arrow zips toward a certain menubar command....)
>>
>>don't forget to Killfile me too. I'm tired of your drivel also.
>
>
> Whatever you say, gov.bum. Keep suckin' those tax bucks and hope you
>never find yourself out on the street relying on "voluntary exchange" to
>put chops in the pan.
Eh. Whatever. Not all of us with *.gov address are goverment bums. I work
for a private contractor for the goverment. I suppose you wouldn't approve
of that either, but you probably believe that that gov should just disband
the weather service and get it's data from the weather channel.
>>BTW your taste in wargames is abysmal also.
>
>
> Right. Tell me ALL about "Attack of the Mutants" and "Freedom in the
>Galaxy". And I made my IQ-roll right off the bat and didn't get stuck with
>any Shiloh and Bullrun CCG decks which I then had to try and fob off onto
>unsuspecting suckers in rec.games.board.marketplace. (You guys are a
>marvel; don't you *know* by now that one of the pleasures in my life is
>using DejaNews to reveal hypocrisy?)
Well, FitG is a nice Star wars clone that I got a good deal on, if I don't
like it I'll sell it in a auction for more than I paid. Attack is a nice
fun little tongue in cheeck game that plays very well. As for Dixie, well
it's hardly the disaster that say Echelons of Fury was as a CCG. But on the
other hand I know better than to argue about "realism" in axis and allies...
I'm glad you've learned how to use dejanews. Your So 31EeT3 dQQd. Here,
have some more old addresses of mine to search on:
rob...@rex.re.uokhsc.edu
rob...@curly.spc.nssl.uoknor.edu
>>Robert Lindsay, Computational Minion, Storm Prediction Center, Norman OK
>>rob...@zorak.spc.noaa.gov -- Oh, God, could it be the weather... T. Amos
>>#include <standard_disclaimer.h>
>
>
> A wx geek too, eh?
Uh, no. I'm a programmer. I work with lots of weather weenies, but I'm
not one myself. See what happens when you leap to conclusions?
> I can see why you're feeling acute pain - ya can't get away from me.
>Pity you weren't around last year (or were you?) to that tenured hack
>Amberson have his complete naivette regarding tornado structure get its
>pants dropped around its ankles in sci.geo.meteorology. Now politely
>*expode* and blow some of that crap over Dallas up here to Minnesota. It's
>freezing up here and I'm bored of October altocumulus three months early.
Yawn. I trained the little geek who created s.g.m. He's a nice kid. Pity
he's being worked to death by Kelvin, but that's another story. I used
to read s.g.m way back when Claire first arrived during the Kuwait oil
fires.
As for explosions, even if I were to, Norman is north of Dallas. Me exploding
would just drive the warm air south to Dallas.
> One finds the most interesting things in DejaNews:
quite possibly, but this is hardly one of them...
>Subject: Re: TWA-800 Eyewitness statements (inconclusive)
>From: wj...@mindspring.com (Billy Beck)
>Date: 1997/12/12
>
>rob...@zorak.spc.noaa.gov (Robert Lindsay) wrote:
>
>>Craig Shields <cshi...@removethis.graymills.com> wrote:
>
>>>Michael Rivero wrote:
>
>>>> Many years ago I worked in Germany. I had a chance to see those
>>>> strange old men who wander around with glazed eyes, trying to
>>>> convince various municipal fixtures that the holocaust didn't really
>>>> happen, that Hitler was misunderstood, and that the Nazi's were
>>>> really okay guys.
>>>
>>>And this proves WHAT? Talk about going on a tangent.
>>
>>It proves Godwin's Law. About time too.
>
> It's "about time" that the next jabbering fuck-up who cites
>"Godwin's Law" should have his or her *ass* kicked up around their
>*neck*.
And a post of Beck's lame attempt at a flame proves what?
--
Mike>|Sçhnedier
(Robert Lindsay) wrote:
>In article <miguelUUU-300...@ppp-67-117.dialup.winternet.com>,
>Mike|>Sçhnedier <migu...@winQQQternetWWW.com> wrote:
>>In article <6pl12b$3dr$1...@zorak.spc.noaa.gov>, rob...@zorak.spc.noaa.gov
>>(Robert Lindsay) wrote:
>>
>>>>>Useless or not, you got my opinion. Just as you will every time you
>>>>>post this "Konspiracy Kook Krap" to ok.general. Get used to it. ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Oh, I highly doubt that I'll find myself in that position.
>>>> (Mouse arrow zips toward a certain menubar command....)
>>>
>>>don't forget to Killfile me too. I'm tired of your drivel also.
>>
>> Whatever you say, gov.bum. Keep suckin' those tax bucks and hope you
>>never find yourself out on the street relying on "voluntary exchange" to
>>put chops in the pan.
>
>Eh. Whatever. Not all of us with *.gov address are goverment bums. I work
>for a private contractor for the goverment. I suppose you wouldn't approve
>of that either,
You're grubbing for stolen money, so no I would not.
>but you probably believe that that gov should just disband--
*Sold*. End that sentence right there.
>the weather service and get it's data from the weather channel.
Lesse now.... An end to taxation in exchange for giving up a few
"free" jpegs I download off the net. Real tough decision there....
>>>BTW your taste in wargames is abysmal also.
>>
>> Right. Tell me ALL about "Attack of the Mutants" and "Freedom in the
>>Galaxy". And I made my IQ-roll right off the bat and didn't get stuck with
>>any Shiloh and Bullrun CCG decks which I then had to try and fob off onto
>>unsuspecting suckers in rec.games.board.marketplace. (You guys are a
>>marvel; don't you *know* by now that one of the pleasures in my life is
>>using DejaNews to reveal hypocrisy?)
>
>Well, FitG is a nice Star wars clone that I got a good deal on, if I don't
>like it I'll sell it in a auction for more than I paid. Attack is a nice
>fun little tongue in cheeck game that plays very well. As for Dixie, well
>it's hardly the disaster that say Echelons of Fury was as a CCG. But on the
>other hand I know better than to argue about "realism" in axis and allies...
But apparantly not enough to fall for the lotto aspects of CCGs.
Les Cargill
>
> In article <35BE70...@worldnet.att.net>, Les Cargill
> <lcar...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> >> >> I myself am wondering how much impression a .38 high-velocity round
> >> >> would make on the interior of your thick skull.
> >> >
> >> >Be advised not to threaten violence over a common carrier, Mr.
> >> >Schnieder.
> >>
> >> You really don't know what I'm referring to, do you?
> >
> >Sure do. But reread your post again. It's a double entendre.
>
> Ah. So you knew what I really meant, but pretended not to until I
> called you on it, whereupon your desire to avoid appearing clueless won
> out.
No, 'fraid not. Since you intentionally left it ambiguous, it
was open to interpretation. I interpreted. I still don't have
any evidence except your word for your intent.
Besides which, being ignorant of the details to the Vince Foster suicide
would be *ignorance*, not cluelessness.
Besides which, it is not like I care what you think one way or the other.
>
<snip>
Les Cargill
Mr. Schnieder:
The whole problem with the "Vince Foster was murdered" thing is that
it would require a conspiracy in which a medical examiner returns a
fraudulent cause of death. Given the fragility of conspiracies, this
seems unlikely at best.
As stated before, repeatedly, again and again, the implication
that a conspiracy of *that* magnitude implies that the number of
people in the conspiracy grows exponentially. Some reporter
could become the King of All Reporters by reporting the story.
One breach in the conspiracy collapses the whole house of cards.
Therefore the probability of such a conspiracy maintaining its
integrity for any extended length of time rapidly approaches
zero.
I answered the original post like I did for a reason. I "interpreted"
your remark "spinfully" in order to show that it's possible to
twist things about. It was purely a "smartass" remark on my part
which made a point about how this sort of discussion generally
degenerates into ad homenim ( which you quickly utilized :).
If you have serious doubts about the circuimstances of Vince
Foster's death, find an unbiased journalism professional (yes,
they actually *do* exist), make your case to him/her, and
take the debate to the real media. Please do not berate us about the
"liberal bias of the media" here. It's been done.
Usenet is *not* a good place to do serious investigation. It's
a forum for inane banter, people trying to be clever and
other useless prattle. Plus people bring biases, there
are few if any checks and balances, and ya get people
pulling wordplay like I did.
M Soja
>On 30 Jul 1998 17:20:03 -0500, rob...@zorak.spc.noaa.gov (Robert
>Lindsay) wrote:
>>And a post of Beck's lame attempt at a flame proves what?
>It proves that Beck's no better at flaming than he is at thinking. :-)
>However, "BS'ing Billy" and "Maniac Mike" could probably get a gig as
>a tag team act on some of the small time wrestling circuits in some of
>the really small, out of the way towns. ;-)
I'm glad you end your sentences with smileys. You don't even take
your own statements seriously.
Mike>|Sçhnedier
<lcar...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Mike|>Sçhnedier wrote:
>>
>> In article <35BE70...@worldnet.att.net>, Les Cargill
>> <lcar...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> I myself am wondering how much impression a .38 high-velocity round
>> >> >> would make on the interior of your thick skull.
>> >> >
>> >> >Be advised not to threaten violence over a common carrier, Mr.
>> >> >Schnieder.
>> >>
>> >> You really don't know what I'm referring to, do you?
>> >
>> >Sure do. But reread your post again. It's a double entendre.
>>
>> Ah. So you knew what I really meant, but pretended not to until I
>> called you on it, whereupon your desire to avoid appearing clueless won
>> out.
>
>No, 'fraid not. Since you intentionally left it ambiguous, it
>was open to interpretation. I interpreted. I still don't have
>any evidence except your word for your intent.
>
>Besides which, being ignorant of the details to the Vince Foster suicide
>would be *ignorance*, not cluelessness.
>
>Besides which, it is not like I care what you think one way or the other.
But of course you did.
Mike>|Sçhnedier
<lcar...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Mr. Schnieder:
>
>The whole problem with the "Vince Foster was murdered" thing is that
...you would rather count angels dancing on the head of a pin rather
than look at the evidence because you're afraid of facing the
*implications*.
Coward.
=======================================================================
Michael Rivero
<lcar...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Mr. Schnieder:
>
>The whole problem with the "Vince Foster was murdered" thing is that
>fraudulent cause of death. Given the fragility of conspiracies, this
>seems unlikely at best.
>
That's what you get for not doing your homework.
Clinton's rise to power has been marked with a succesion of medical
examiners who returned fraudulent causes of death.
The first (and still most notorius) was Fahmy Malek, Clinton's
pet Arkansas M.E. who once ruled that a decapitated man had died
of natural causes and who ignored clear evidence of stab wounds
in Don Henry and Kevin Ives to rule they had simply fallen asleep on
the railroad tracks.
As for the Foster case, Dr. Beyer DID return a fraudulent cause
of death. That's been documented by the eyewitnesses at Fort Marcy
who reported that there didn't appear to be any exit wound out the back
of Foster's head, and that there was a second gunshot wound to Foster's
neck.
These assertions have since been confirmed by other official documents
including the signed report of the M.E. who actually examined Foster's
body at the park, plus an FBI telex dated the day after Beyer signed the
official autopsy in which Beyer reports too the FBI that there is no
exit wound to the head.
Dr. Beyer told police he took X-rays and checked and signed the
appropriate box on the autopsy report. But those X-rays are nowhere
to be found. Beyer now claims the X-ray machine was broken (no record
of a service call on that machine exists for four months after Foster's
death) and that the police are just being silly.
Dr. Bayer has a prior record of concealing homicides behind phony
suicide claims. That's probably why Foster's body was dumped in
Virginia, to make sure a "friendly" M.E. was around to clean up the
mistakes.
------------------
In order to believe the suicide theory to be valid, one must accept that
Vincent Foster placed a .38 revolver into his own mouth and pulled the
trigger without getting any of his fingerprints or his blood on the gun
or powder or bullet fragments from the gun into the wound.
A short list of FACTS from the OFFICIAL RECORDS.
No blood on the gun. FBI lab report dated May 9th 1994, page 10.
No fingerprints belonging to Vincent Foster on the gun. FBI Memo attached
to lab report dated May 9th 1994, page 2.
No powder, which could be matched to the dark blued steel gun, was found in the wounds.
FBI lab report dated May 9th 1994, page 8.
No bullet fragments in the wounds. Beyer Autopsy, Gross Description
page, next to last paragraph.
I repeat: The claim of suicide requires Vincent Foster to have inserted
a .38 revolver into his own mouth and pulled the trigger without getting
hi fingerprints or blood on that gun or powder or bullet fragments from
that gun in his wounds.
Dr. Beyer's autopsy, on which every claim of suicide has been based, has been
utterly destroyed by the discovery of the official report of Dr. Haut, the
M.E. that examined Vincent Foster at Fort Marcy Park. This report was
uncovered at the National Archives during a document search by Hugh Sprunt,
Hughie2U, and Patrick Knowlton. While part of the official records of the
Foster case, Dr. Haut's report was notably absent from the report published
by the Senate Banking Committee.
Dr. Haut reconfirmed the report to Reed Irvine of "Accuracy In Media"
and in that report, confirms the presence of a gunshot wound exiting
Vincent Foster's neck. This corroborates the sworn deposition of EMS
technician Richard Arthur who described a gunshot wound along Foster's
jaw line under the right ear.
Dr. Beyer did not include that wound in his autopsy report. Indeed, that
wound was obliterated by the drastic measure of removing Foster's entire
tongue and soft pallet prior to allowing investigators to view the remains,
under the excuse that the removal was needed to properly inspect the
entrance wound.
Beyer's past history isn't the most reassuring. Indeed he seems to be
the Virginia version of the infamous Dr. Fahmy Malek, the Arkansas
M.E. who ignored clear evidence of homicide in the deaths of Don Henry
and Kevin Ives and in one case ruled that a man who had been beheaded was dead
of natural causes.
Beyer himself, in the case of Tommy Burkett, ignored a broken jaw in order
to rule that Burkett had killed himself with a gun. Despite having shown
the autopsy photos to Burkett's father, Beyer later claimed (as he did with
the Foster X-rays) that they had never really existed.
Likewise, in 1989 there was an autopsy on establishing the death of a man
named Tim Easley. Mr. Beyer, the coroner, ruled that Easley killed himself
by stabbing himself in the chest. He failed to notice a defensive wound on
the man's hand. The case was reopened, and, after an outside expert reviewed
the case, Easley's girlfriend confessed to murdering him.
In short, Dr. Beyer's consistent performance (indeed his "specialty")
appears to be the cover-up of murder by declaration of suicide!
Beyer testified before the Senate Banking Committee Whitewater Hearings
on July 29, 1994, specifically stating that there is an "absence of trauma
to the jaw." It should be noted that Beyer has therefore committed perjury
before the United States Senate.
Scans of Dr. Haut's actual report are available for viewing and download
at http://www.accessone.com/~rivero/POLITICS/FOSTER_COVERUP/NECK/neck.html
Scans of Dr. Beyer's flawed autopsy are available for viewing and download at
http://www.accessone.com/~rivero/POLITICS/FOSTER_COVERUP/AUTOPSY/autopsy.html
Then there is the matter of the silver gun.
Vincent Foster was found with a .38 Revolver made by Colt Arms. It was
built from parts taken from two other guns, and as a result had two
serial numbers. The Frame number was 355055, and according to the
records of the Colt Arms company (scanned and available at my website)
the gun was manufactured with a standard dark blue, almost black, finish.
In the Park Police record, the gun is describes as black. The accompanying
photographs in the Park police report show a black gun. (Also scanned and
available at my website.)
The photograph leaked by the White House to ABC-TV also shows a dark gun.
Outside of a glint from the camera flash, the gun image is too dark to
even detect the manufacturers blue color. One thing is quite clear, and that
is that the sharp protruding edges of the gun, where the finish would wear
off preferentially, show no signs of wear. Compare the albedo of the gun to
Fosters gold ring on his finger, just an inch away.
In all the Fort Marcy Park witnesses, in the Park Police, in the experts
at the FBI and ballistics lab, the gun is never described as anything but
dark blue or (more often) black.
No connection exists between that gun and Vincent Foster. Not even
fingerprints. Not even blood. Even the DNA traces on the gun, while "not
inconsistent" with Foster, were more likely to have originated with a black or
an Hispanic than a Caucasian.
Despite this, Robert Fiske (the ex-BCCI lawyer) inserted a comment on
page 38 of his report on Foster; a statement that Lisa Foster thought the gun
found with her husband was one she had brought up from Little Rock, Arkansas.
This statement came from an interview of Lisa Foster conducted by the FBI
several months after the murder of Vincent Foster, under the watchful eyes
of attorney Jim Hamilton and Fiske's representative on the scene, Roderick
Lankler.
In the original FD-302a report of the interview, as well as the handwritten
notes (scanned and available at my website), the interviewing FBI agents
describe the gun being shown to Lisa Foster as "silver colored", not just
once, but several times. The gun is never described as dark blue or black.
The FBI agents are not quoting Lisa Foster, they write down THEIR impressions
of what is being said and done, and in their own words, "LISA FOSTER believes
that the gun found at Fort Marcy Park may be the silver gun, which she brought
up with her other belongings when she permanently moved to Washington."
In order for Lisa Foster to believe that the gun presented to her as the
Fort Marcy Park gun might be the family silver gun, the gun presented to
her as the Fort Marcy Park gun must also be silver. Lisa Foster doesn't
have to be a gun expert to know that silver is not black.
From both the FD-302a form (released as part of the first Senate
Whitewater hearings) and the handwritten notes (pried loose via Chris
Ruddy's FOIA lawsuit), it's clear that Lisa Foster was shown a gun she
recognized as the gun she brought up from Little Rock, but it's equally
clear that this is not the same gun as that found with Vincent Foster.
Black is not silver.
Once found out, this lie generated more lies to try to keep the cover-up
in place, including the ludicrous suggestions that Lisa Foster cannot tell
silver from black, and that two FBI agents, and two lawyers heard and saw
a black gun described as silver in writing and did not request a clarification
or (as would be standard procedure) note the gun's serial number to preserve
the chain of evidence.
One thing is clear, regardless of just exactly how the FBI's report came to
describe a silver gun, it is utterly worthless in connection to the dark
blued steel .38 found with Vincent Foster, yet that is precisely how Fiske
chose to use it, paraphrasing (minus gun color, of course) Lisa's statement
into his report to link the .38 revolver to Vincent Foster.
The Fiske Report, having based its conclusion that Vincent Foster owned
the dark blued steel revolver he was found with solely on Lisa Foster's
recognition of a silver gun, is invalidated.
The FBI, already in court for evidence tampering in another area of the
Vincent Foster affair, manufactured the testimony of Lisa Foster as it
was used in the Fiske Report.
This pattern of repeated alterations in evidence and testimony proves
the existence of a cover-up, which in turn proves murder.
Scans of the official FBI records regarding the showing of the wrong
gun to Lisa Foster are available for viewing and download at
http://www.accessone.com/~rivero/POLITICS/FOSTER_COVERUP/foster.html
--
Mike & Claire - The Rancho Runnamukka http://www.accessone.com/~rivero/
MY WEBSITE HAS JUST FINISHED A MAJOR OVERHAUL
STOP BY FOR A VISIT!!
They.a...@the.whitehouse
wrote:
> In order to believe the suicide theory to be valid, one must accept that
>Vincent Foster placed a .38 revolver into his own mouth and pulled the
>trigger without getting any of his fingerprints or his blood on the gun
>or powder or bullet fragments from the gun into the wound.
>
I read the Starr report and according to it, there were obvious
poweder burns in Foster's mouth and there was evidence of metal
fragments in the wound. What do you say otherwise?
>
> A short list of FACTS from the OFFICIAL RECORDS.
>
>
> No blood on the gun. FBI lab report dated May 9th 1994, page 10.
>
Dr. Henry Lee says this is not that unusual.
> No fingerprints belonging to Vincent Foster on the gun. FBI Memo attached
>to lab report dated May 9th 1994, page 2.
>
>No powder, which could be matched to the dark blued steel gun, was found in the wounds.
>FBI lab report dated May 9th 1994, page 8.
>
But this is not consistent with other reports.
> No bullet fragments in the wounds. Beyer Autopsy, Gross Description
>page, next to last paragraph.
>
Again, not consistent with other reports.
Have you seen the photo that supposedly shows a bullet hole on the
side of Fosters neck under his chin? Is this picture available on the
internet?
Robert Lindsay
Mike>|Sçhnedier <migu...@winQQQternetWWW.com> wrote:
>In article <6pqrij$ejq$1...@zorak.spc.noaa.gov>, rob...@zorak.spc.noaa.gov
>(Robert Lindsay) wrote:
>
>>In article <miguelUUU-300...@ppp-67-117.dialup.winternet.com>,
>>Mike|>Sçhnedier <migu...@winQQQternetWWW.com> wrote:
>>>In article <6pl12b$3dr$1...@zorak.spc.noaa.gov>, rob...@zorak.spc.noaa.gov
>>>(Robert Lindsay) wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>Useless or not, you got my opinion. Just as you will every time you
>>>>>>post this "Konspiracy Kook Krap" to ok.general. Get used to it. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, I highly doubt that I'll find myself in that position.
>>>>> (Mouse arrow zips toward a certain menubar command....)
>>>>
>>>>don't forget to Killfile me too. I'm tired of your drivel also.
>>>
>>> Whatever you say, gov.bum. Keep suckin' those tax bucks and hope you
>>>never find yourself out on the street relying on "voluntary exchange" to
>>>put chops in the pan.
>>
>>Eh. Whatever. Not all of us with *.gov address are goverment bums. I work
>>for a private contractor for the goverment. I suppose you wouldn't approve
>>of that either,
>
>
Well, whatever. I'm sure you recieve no benefit from this goverment that
you so detest...
You do realize that USENEt was developed as a goverment project?
>>but you probably believe that that gov should just disband--
>
>
> *Sold*. End that sentence right there.
Hey, if you wanna go someplace with no goverment, their are lots of options.
select parts of africa and Russia would make a idea home. Good luck getting
a netlink from their though...
>>the weather service and get it's data from the weather channel.
>
>
> Lesse now.... An end to taxation in exchange for giving up a few
>"free" jpegs I download off the net. Real tough decision there....
Well, of course, if that's all that the NWS is to you, I understand your
belief. If, on the other hand, you believe that's all the NWS really does,
then you are well on your way to a degree in advanced Loon.
Let's face it, UNISYS isn't going to build and maintain all though WSR-88D's
for free. PRC isn't going to put up GOES-11 just for grins either.
The brits were right. Americans want everything for free. The taxes under
British rule were slight compared to what they had to pay in England, yet
we screamed bloody murder...
>>>>BTW your taste in wargames is abysmal also.
>>>
>>> Right. Tell me ALL about "Attack of the Mutants" and "Freedom in the
>>>Galaxy". And I made my IQ-roll right off the bat and didn't get stuck with
>>>any Shiloh and Bullrun CCG decks which I then had to try and fob off onto
>>>unsuspecting suckers in rec.games.board.marketplace. (You guys are a
>>>marvel; don't you *know* by now that one of the pleasures in my life is
>>>using DejaNews to reveal hypocrisy?)
>>
>>Well, FitG is a nice Star wars clone that I got a good deal on, if I don't
>>like it I'll sell it in a auction for more than I paid. Attack is a nice
>>fun little tongue in cheeck game that plays very well. As for Dixie, well
>>it's hardly the disaster that say Echelons of Fury was as a CCG. But on the
>>other hand I know better than to argue about "realism" in axis and allies...
>
> But apparantly not enough to fall for the lotto aspects of CCGs.
Which of course again shows your lack of knowledge of the Columbia CCG
games. There's not equvalent of a Magic Black Lotus in Dixie. The cards
are all Leaders, units, or terrian. It's nice to have a full historical
set, but you cand certainly play without a regiment or two. With gettysburg
they even went to selling full complete sets so you didn't have to do any
trading at all. Admitted the whole gold/silver/bronze trim on the Eagles
CCG game was silly...
>=======================================================================
>Email: Replace everything before the @ with "mike1" and delete any CAPS
and you still use lame 'spamblocker' techniques.
Bill Beesley
>>>>never find yourself out on the street relying on "voluntary exchange" to
>>>>put chops in the pan.
>>>
>>>Eh. Whatever. Not all of us with *.gov address are goverment bums. I work
>>>for a private contractor for the goverment. I suppose you wouldn't
approve
>>>of that either,
>>
>>
>
>Well, whatever. I'm sure you recieve no benefit from this goverment that
>you so detest...
Jeesh, what is this guy's deal? Just because you happen to work for the
government you're somehow stealing from someone or getting some sort of free
ride? (Scratches his head)
I don't see the connection.....or perhaps I am just a bum sucking on the
teat of my private sector employer.
At least some of work for a living and provide useful services to others.
Bees
Billy Beck
"Bill Beesley" <bee...@ftalk.com> wrote:
>Jeesh, what is this guy's deal? Just because you happen to work for the
>government you're somehow stealing from someone or getting some sort of free
>ride?
Yes.
Billy
VRWC fronteer - sigdiv
http://www.mindspring.com/~wjb3/free/essays.html
Les Cargill
>
> On Fri, 31 Jul 1998 02:03:08 -0500, mi...@winternet.com
> (Mike>|Sçhnedier) wrote:
>
> >In article <35C124...@worldnet.att.net>, Les Cargill
> ><lcar...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> >
>
> >>Besides which, it is not like I care what you think one way or the other.
> >
> >
> > But of course you did.
>
> telling *you* what you think and how you feel.
Why, that's just lovely!
Figured I'd try a little reason on him first. You know
how it is Jerry, they can tell ya the stove's hot, but
a burnt finger drives the lesson home.
I borrowed ( and returned ) the mallet in another post.
Hope you don't mind.
>
> Better watch out, before long he will be speaking for you completely.
Uh, right.
>
> And you probably wouldn't want that. Here's an example of how this
> loon thinks:
>
> - - - - -
> "Get this, you fucking lame geek: I'd never vote to stick a gun up
> *your* ass to make you cough left to the IRS to pay my salary."
> Mike Schneider - 12/12/97
> - - - - -
Oh well. It's his life, not mine.
Les Cargill
> But of course you did.
Hey, Jerry? Kin I borry yer mallet? Just for a second.
Yeah, thanks....
Hey Mike....
*WHACK*
Here's it back, Jerry. Nice balance, easy on the wrist.
>
> =======================================================================> Email: Replace everything before the @ with "mike1" and delete any CAPS
> Claire Wolfe: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1797/essay.htm
> A con's advice to Hillary: http://www.sonic.net/maledicta/penpal_pr.html
> All burundanguiado test peons report to: http://www.mk.net/~mcf/barr.htm
--
Les Cargill - lcar...@worldnet.att.net
Michael Rivero
<They.a...@the.WhiteHouse> wrote:
>On 31 Jul 1998 08:42:26 -0700, riv...@accessone.com (Michael Rivero)
>wrote:
>
>
>>Vincent Foster placed a .38 revolver into his own mouth and pulled the
>>trigger without getting any of his fingerprints or his blood on the gun
>>or powder or bullet fragments from the gun into the wound.
>>
>
>poweder burns in Foster's mouth and there was evidence of metal
>fragments in the wound. What do you say otherwise?
>
The unburned powder granules recovered from Foster's mouth were a
different shape than those found in the gun itself.
The statement that there were no metallic fragments in the wounds come
from the Beyer autopsy.
Robert Lindsay
Billy Beck <wj...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>"Bill Beesley" <bee...@ftalk.com> wrote:
>
>>Jeesh, what is this guy's deal? Just because you happen to work for the
>>government you're somehow stealing from someone or getting some sort of free
>>ride?
>
> Yes.
Ah, but it would be so easy to live in Billy's little world, a nice bipolar
us-vs-them world were the evil "they" wear lots of badges and ways of
opression, while if all the rest of us 'dupes' would just wake up to
the One True Way we'd have this neato-peachy-keen world...
Uh-huh.
I'll pass. my world is everything BUT black and white, sifting through the
sades of gray...
The Bill Mattocks
(Mike>|Sçhnedier) wrote:
>>The whole problem with the "Vince Foster was murdered" thing is that
Who is Vince Foster? Oh, yeah, the "good Democrat."
As in, "The only good Democrat..." and you know the rest.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
Billy Beck
rob...@zorak.spc.noaa.gov (Robert Lindsay) wrote:
>Billy Beck <wj...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>>"Bill Beesley" <bee...@ftalk.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Jeesh, what is this guy's deal? Just because you happen to work for the
>>>government you're somehow stealing from someone or getting some sort of free
>>>ride?
>>
>> Yes.
>
>Ah, but it would be so easy to live in Billy's little world...
It's quite large, actually, but you're right about the rest of
it.
Mike>|Sçhnedier
(Robert Lindsay) wrote:
>In article <35c25591...@news.mindspring.com>,
>Billy Beck <wj...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>>"Bill Beesley" <bee...@ftalk.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Jeesh, what is this guy's deal? Just because you happen to work for the
>>>government you're somehow stealing from someone or getting some sort of free
>>>ride?
>>
>> Yes.
>
>Ah, but it would be so easy to live in Billy's little world,
Frankly, I doubt you could hack it "in Billy's little world"...
>a nice bipolar
>us-vs-them world were the evil "they" wear lots of badges and ways of
>opression, while if all the rest of us 'dupes' would just wake up to
>the One True Way we'd have this neato-peachy-keen world...
...where you can't *force* the fans to buy shitty music.
>Uh-huh.
>
>I'll pass. my world is everything BUT black and white, sifting through the
>sades of gray...
>--
Intellectual purgatory.
>Robert Lindsay, Computational Minion, Storm Prediction Center, Norman OK
>rob...@zorak.spc.noaa.gov -- Oh, God, could it be the weather... T. Amos
>#include <standard_disclaimer.h>
=======================================================================
Mike>|Sçhnedier
wrote:
>On 31 Jul 1998 08:42:26 -0700, riv...@accessone.com (Michael Rivero)
>wrote:
>
>
>> In order to believe the suicide theory to be valid, one must accept that
>>Vincent Foster placed a .38 revolver into his own mouth and pulled the
>>trigger without getting any of his fingerprints or his blood on the gun
>>or powder or bullet fragments from the gun into the wound.
>>
>
>I read the Starr report and according to it, there were obvious
>poweder burns in Foster's mouth and there was evidence of metal
>fragments in the wound. What do you say otherwise?
He lied about taking X-Rays.
Lee Harrison
>
> On 31 Jul 1998 23:53:35 GMT, Les Cargill <lcar...@worldnet.att.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Jerry Morgan wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, 31 Jul 1998 02:03:08 -0500, mi...@winternet.com
> >> (Mike>|Sçhnedier) wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <35C124...@worldnet.att.net>, Les Cargill
> >> ><lcar...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >>
> >> >>Besides which, it is not like I care what you think one way or the other.
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> telling *you* what you think and how you feel.
> >
> >Why, that's just lovely!
> >
>
>
> >Figured I'd try a little reason on him first. You know
> >how it is Jerry, they can tell ya the stove's hot, but
> >a burnt finger drives the lesson home.
> >
>
> through the conspiracy theories around which his life evidently
> revolves.
>
> >I borrowed ( and returned ) the mallet in another post.
> >Hope you don't mind.
> >
>
>
> >>
> >> Better watch out, before long he will be speaking for you completely.
> >
> >Uh, right.
[snip]
About a month ago, somebody claimed that people associated with Iran-Contra
were dropping like flies. There were about 5000 people total, and of that
5000, about 450 had died since 1986. Turns out that the national death rate
from 1986-1998 was about 9 per 1000 (a little less, actually); so multiplied
times 5 that allowed 40 deaths per year, for 12 years, came to 480 deaths for
the national average. The death rate for Iran-Contra related people was a
little less than the national average.
Has anybody tried that test with OKC bombing witnesses? Just curious.
Lee Harrison
___________
Vide et crede.
Rob Robertson
> Clearly Billy doesn't yet understand that a world without government is
> anarchy.
Please email this to him RIGHT AWAY! He may not be clear on this point.
> Oh, well.....perhaps Billy should be careful what he wishes for....someday
> he just might get it!
>
> Bees
So,... were you just trying to provide comic relief, or what?
_
Rob Robertson
Jerry Morgan
[snip]
>About a month ago, somebody claimed that people associated with Iran-Contra
>were dropping like flies. There were about 5000 people total, and of that
>5000, about 450 had died since 1986. Turns out that the national death rate
>from 1986-1998 was about 9 per 1000 (a little less, actually); so multiplied
>times 5 that allowed 40 deaths per year, for 12 years, came to 480 deaths for
>the national average. The death rate for Iran-Contra related people was a
>little less than the national average.
Better watch out,
Providing information such as the above risks having the various
"Konspiracy Kooks" (tm) claim you are an agent of government and
planting disinformation to cover up some wild conspiracy where "the
'gumit" is killing off everyone even remotely connected with a crime.
>Has anybody tried that test with OKC bombing witnesses? Just curious.
If they did "Maniac Mikey Schneider" would probably come back with
something akin to:
- - - - -
"You lying sack of spook shit."
Mike Schneider 12/04/97
- - - - -
--------------------------- Whack A Loon, Inc. ------------------------------------------
The next "conspiracy theory" will probably be that a chunk of the
Murrah building was blasted into space and eventually re-entered
the atmosphere and knocked TWA Flight 800 out of the sky!
-- Loons whacked - Charlatans Exposed - Liars Confronted -----------
Robert Lindsay
Mike>|Sçhnedier <migu...@winQQQternetWWW.com> wrote:
>
> Frankly, I doubt you could hack it "in Billy's little world"...
Maybe, maybe not. my next door neighbor does his lighting rig kinda stuff
but I'm certain he could hack it in mine.
>>a nice bipolar
>>us-vs-them world were the evil "they" wear lots of badges and ways of
>>opression, while if all the rest of us 'dupes' would just wake up to
>>the One True Way we'd have this neato-peachy-keen world...
>
>
> ...where you can't *force* the fans to buy shitty music.
Spice Girls, Hanson, Milli Vanilli, need I go on? Don't you believe
PT Barnum?
>>Uh-huh.
>>
>>I'll pass. my world is everything BUT black and white, sifting through the
>>sades of gray...
>>--
>
>
> Intellectual purgatory.
Well, to you. But it's a lot closer to the real world (tm). Like any filter
pulling data into only 2 buckets is going to create a lot of wrong choices...
--
Mike€Schneider
(Robert Lindsay) wrote:
>In article <miguelUUU-010...@ppp-67-126.dialup.winternet.com>,
>Mike>|Sçhnedier <migu...@winQQQternetWWW.com> wrote:
>>
>> Frankly, I doubt you could hack it "in Billy's little world"...
>
>Maybe, maybe not. my next door neighbor does his lighting rig kinda stuff
>but I'm certain he could hack it in mine.
>
>>>a nice bipolar
>>>us-vs-them world were the evil "they" wear lots of badges and ways of
>>>opression, while if all the rest of us 'dupes' would just wake up to
>>>the One True Way we'd have this neato-peachy-keen world...
>>
>>
>> ...where you can't *force* the fans to buy shitty music.
>
>Spice Girls, Hanson, Milli Vanilli, need I go on? Don't you believe
>PT Barnum?
Everybody's heard: "There's a sucker born every minute".
Fewer have heard: "...and two to take 'em".
Wayne Mann
(Mike>|Sçhnedier) wrote:
>In article <35c20920...@nntp.netcruiser>, They.a...@the.WhiteHouse
>wrote:
>
>>On 31 Jul 1998 08:42:26 -0700, riv...@accessone.com (Michael Rivero)
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>> In order to believe the suicide theory to be valid, one must accept that
>>>Vincent Foster placed a .38 revolver into his own mouth and pulled the
>>>trigger without getting any of his fingerprints or his blood on the gun
>>>or powder or bullet fragments from the gun into the wound.
>>>
>>
>>I read the Starr report and according to it, there were obvious
>>poweder burns in Foster's mouth and there was evidence of metal
>>fragments in the wound. What do you say otherwise?
>
>
> He lied about taking X-Rays.
>
Dr. Beyer testified to the committee that HE did not take
any X-rays, because his X-ray machine was broken,
although he had written on the autopsy form that he had,
and the two policemen who were in attendance at the
autopsy said that he told them that he had. However, in Dr.
Beyer's Deposition to the Committee, he stated that he sent
the body out to another facility for the X-rays. He further
said that the X-rays were not processed and back to him by
the time he did the autopsy. And furthermore, the X-ray
machine service company was never called, and never did
any repairs on the _NEW_ X-ray machine for many months
before or after the date of the autopsy. Which testimony is
the truth and which is a lie?
Also contained within the Park Police Report is the
following statement: "Dr. Beyer stated that X-rays indicated
that there was no evidence of bullet fragments in the head."
Bear in mind this statement is in the OFFICIAL Park Police Report
issued to the public. Later testifying before the U.S. Senate in
1994, Dr. Beyer swore he took no X- rays and
"had no explanation" for telling Detective Peter Simonello
Bill Beesley
>Ah, but it would be so easy to live in Billy's little world, a nice bipolar
>us-vs-them world were the evil "they" wear lots of badges and ways of
>opression, while if all the rest of us 'dupes' would just wake up to
>the One True Way we'd have this neato-peachy-keen world...
>
>
>I'll pass. my world is everything BUT black and white, sifting through the
>sades of gray...
Clearly Billy doesn't yet understand that a world without government is
anarchy. I am not saying that our government is perfect (far from it, needs
much reform), but in my experience travelling to other countries I can say
that this thing we got here is the best I have seen to date.
Besides, it is no shame to work for the government. Many folks do so an
provide useful services we have all come to depend on. God love the folks
who keep water coming to my house, pick up my trash and help predict storms
here in OK (winks to Rob). I am in the Army Reserve and spend my free time
serving my country, does this make me a low-life government employee? My
wife works for OETA (a in part, state funded organization) as a director,
producing tv programs like Lawrence Welk, does this make her a low life
government employee?
JerryF...@large.com
>>>The whole problem with the "Vince Foster was murdered" thing is that
THERE WAS LITTLE BLOOD FOUND AROUND FOSTER'S BODY AT
FT. MARCY PARK.
Head wounds tend to bleed profusely, yet an emergency medical worker
at the scene stated that he could find little blood around Vince
Foster's body. This is physically impossible.
JF
David Goldman
> FT. MARCY PARK.
>Head wounds tend to bleed profusely, yet an emergency medical worker
>at the scene stated that he could find little blood around Vince
>Foster's body. This is physically impossible.
>JF
Not physically impossible for those under pressure to tamper evidence
- from the FBI and CIA........
Bill Beesley
Rob Robertson wrote in message <35C37...@gte.com>...
>Bill Beesley wrote:
>
>> Clearly Billy doesn't yet understand that a world without government is
>> anarchy.
>
Thought about doing so, but the problem with the zealous is that they are
never wrong. Would be like talking to a brick wall for me to suggest he
have an original thought.
>
>> Oh, well.....perhaps Billy should be careful what he wishes
for....someday
>> he just might get it!
>>
>> Bees
>
> So,... were you just trying to provide comic relief, or what?
Nope, deadly serious. The above statement is meant to bring up the point
that nothing in life comes without cost. Most people wander around pissing
and moaning that things are terrible and would only be better if there were
no government to interfere, a lottery to entertain, legalized drug use to
numb their minds, add your current want here. What they don't realize is
that the change each of these bring would have some sort of negative effect
as well as whatever postive attribute they may perceive.
Whether you believe in Yin and Yang or Newton it is always true that for
ever action there is an opposite and equal reaction, or as I previously
stated....be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.
Bees
Mike€Schneidre
<bee...@ftalk.com> wrote:
>Clearly Billy doesn't yet understand that a world without government is
>anarchy.
Clearly Beesley hasn't read more than one or two of Beck's posts.
Lemme guess: He doesn't know how to use DejaNews either.
=======================================================================
Email: Replace everything before the @ with "mike1" and delete any CAPS
"Without a glow-stick, you can't get into Heaven!" -- Homer Simpson
"I'll take four!!!" -- Ned Flanders
Mike€Schneidre
>it is no shame to work for the government.
If those who do are able to smother the remaining dim flickers in their
minds to the fact that they are the recipients of stolen money and agents
of force, then perhaps, like dogs licking their balls, they will have no
shame.
>(It) provide(s) useful services we have all come to depend on.
"The proverb warns that 'You should not bite the hand that feeds you.'
But perhaps you should, if it prevents you from feeding yourself."
-- Thomas Szasz, "The Untamed Tongue".
TarlaStar
>>Ah, but it would be so easy to live in Billy's little world, a nice bipolar
>>us-vs-them world were the evil "they" wear lots of badges and ways of
>>opression, while if all the rest of us 'dupes' would just wake up to
>>the One True Way we'd have this neato-peachy-keen world...
>>
>>Uh-huh.
>>
>>I'll pass. my world is everything BUT black and white, sifting through the
>>sades of gray...
>Clearly Billy doesn't yet understand that a world without government is
>anarchy. I am not saying that our government is perfect (far from it, needs
>much reform), but in my experience travelling to other countries I can say
>that this thing we got here is the best I have seen to date.
How would you know? Ever been in a country that lived without
government?
>Besides, it is no shame to work for the government. Many folks do so an
>provide useful services we have all come to depend on. God love the folks
>who keep water coming to my house, pick up my trash and help predict storms
>here in OK (winks to Rob). I am in the Army Reserve and spend my free time
>serving my country, does this make me a low-life government employee? My
>wife works for OETA (a in part, state funded organization) as a director,
>producing tv programs like Lawrence Welk, does this make her a low life
>government employee?
Yes. It makes all of you who cannot get a job doing these things in a
commercially viable job, leeches. Absolutely. I don't have anyone
coming to my house to pick up my trash or keep water coming in. I can
predict a storm by looking outside. You have come to be dependant upon
someone other than yourself to do things for you and instead of seeing
that as allowing yourself to be infantilized, you consider it a GOOD
thing.
>Oh, well.....perhaps Billy should be careful what he wishes for....someday
>he just might get it!
I certainly hope so.
Rob Robertson
>
> Rob Robertson wrote in message <35C37...@gte.com>...
> >Bill Beesley wrote:
> >
> >> anarchy.
> >
>
> Thought about doing so, but the problem with the zealous is that they are
> never wrong. Would be like talking to a brick wall for me to suggest he
> have an original thought.
I was being facetious. Billy Beck fully understands that a world without
government would be anarchy; that's *why* he's an anarchist!
You're confusing 'chaos' with 'anarchy', and though it may be generally
true that a system of government may impose or ensure some level of social
order, it does not necessarily mean that a lack of government *must* lead
to social disorder. *That* is the substance of the issue being debated by
the various proponents of anarchism.
> >> Oh, well.....perhaps Billy should be careful what he wishes
> for....someday
> >> he just might get it!
> >>
> >> Bees
> >
> > So,... were you just trying to provide comic relief, or what?
>
> Nope, deadly serious. The above statement is meant to bring up the point
> that nothing in life comes without cost. Most people wander around pissing
> and moaning that things are terrible and would only be better if there were
> no government to interfere, a lottery to entertain, legalized drug use to
> numb their minds, add your current want here. What they don't realize is
> that the change each of these bring would have some sort of negative effect
> as well as whatever postive attribute they may perceive.
The police state is *here*, *now*. We're 'fortunate' that we're 'allowed'
to live a relatively unemcumbered life, which is why most people don't run
through the streets hacking the damned revenuers to bits with machetes, but
it is the nature of power and governments to acquire more control, and it
is the nature of freedom to passively acquiesce until the break point is reached.
In case you haven't noticed, the "federal" government has vastly overreached
it's intended scope and is now interfering in nearly every aspect of our lives
with disasterous results. I have no comment on your lottery charge, which I
view as a tax on the mathematically challenged, but as far as your ignorant
whine about 'legalized' drugs, there's a whole array of drugs, legal and
illegal, *still* available for people to numb themselves with. The War On
Drugs is completely inimicable to freedom and should be abolished immediately.
> Whether you believe in Yin and Yang or Newton it is always true that for
> ever action there is an opposite and equal reaction, or as I previously
> stated....be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.
...and it appears that we wished for more and more government, and we're
going to get, good and hard.
> Bees
_
Rob Robertson
"The big thieves hang the little ones."
Czech proverb
Rob Robertson
>
> On Mon, 03 Aug 1998 19:48:46 -0500, mik...@QQQwinterWWWnet.com
> (Mike€Schneidre) wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> >
> > If those who do are able to smother the remaining dim flickers in their
> >minds to the fact that they are the recipients of stolen money and agents
> >of force, then perhaps, like dogs licking their balls, they will have no
> >shame.
> >
>
> rival the following "Mikey" quote, but it's better than most of the
> stuff he puts out.
>
> Bill you gotta' realize you can't get very far trying to educate Mikey
> and da' boyz, as they don't want to hear anything that contradicts
> their favorite "Konspiracy Kook Theory".
>
> Here it comes again, my very favorite "Mikey"...
> - - - - -
> *your* ass to make you cough left to the IRS to pay my salary."
> Mike Schneider - 12/12/97
>
> the above????
Yes.
_
Rob Robertson
Michael Rivero
>
>
>>>>The whole problem with the "Vince Foster was murdered" thing is that
>
> FT. MARCY PARK.
>
>Head wounds tend to bleed profusely, yet an emergency medical worker
>at the scene stated that he could find little blood around Vince
>Foster's body. This is physically impossible.
>
Any doctor will tell you that when the brain is destroyed, the heart will
continue to beat for as long as it has oxygenated blood to feed it.
Individual heart cells in a petri dish will continue to pulse on their
own. The heart does not need the brain to keep it beating (or half the
Clinton shills would be dead by now).
This simple fact is why most donor hearts come from head trauma victims
and why illustrations of the tumbrils and guillotines of the French
Revolution showed heaps of straw to absorb the blood that pumped from the
severed necks.
Likewise, inthe video of a genuine suicide by gunshot to the mouth which
can be seen at my website (new formatting; hope it works for everyone)
it's clear that the heart is still beating after the brain is destroyed.
A bullet fired into the mouth and up into the brain will also tear through
the rear of the sinuses, and as any child in a schoolyard fight will tell
you, those tissues bleed very easily!
The fact that there was only a "trickle" of blood (the pattern of which
even the FBI admits proves that the headd was moved post-mortem while the
blood was still wet) strongly suggests that Vincent Foster was already
dead by other means when the headshot (intended only to conceal those
other means) was inflicted. The available evidence and eyewitness testimony
also suggests that the attempt to fire a small caliber bullet into Foster's
mouth actually failed to penetrate the skull and rebounded downward
and out the neck. That is why the official autopsy had to conceal the neck
wound (which would have been non-fatal)) and manufacture the exit wound
out the back of the head.
Michael Rivero
Wayne Mann <t...@callamerica.net> wrote:
>On Sat, 01 Aug 1998 06:28:33 -0500, migu...@winQQQternetWWW.com
>(Mike>|Sçhnedier) wrote:
>
>>In article <35c20920...@nntp.netcruiser>, They.a...@the.WhiteHouse
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On 31 Jul 1998 08:42:26 -0700, riv...@accessone.com (Michael Rivero)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> In order to believe the suicide theory to be valid, one must accept that
>>>>Vincent Foster placed a .38 revolver into his own mouth and pulled the
>>>>trigger without getting any of his fingerprints or his blood on the gun
>>>>or powder or bullet fragments from the gun into the wound.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I read the Starr report and according to it, there were obvious
>>>poweder burns in Foster's mouth and there was evidence of metal
>>>fragments in the wound. What do you say otherwise?
>>
>>
>> He lied about taking X-Rays.
>>
>
>Dr. Beyer testified to the committee that HE did not take
>any X-rays, because his X-ray machine was broken,
It was a brand new machine and a check of the records of the company that
holds the service contdact showed that no service calls were made for four
weeks after the Foster death.
Dr. Beyer is a proven liar. Foster was hardly the first case he had in
evidence of a murder was being concealed.
Michael Rivero
David Goldman <da...@erols.com> wrote:
>>THERE WAS LITTLE BLOOD FOUND AROUND FOSTER'S BODY AT
>> FT. MARCY PARK.
>
>>Head wounds tend to bleed profusely, yet an emergency medical worker
>>at the scene stated that he could find little blood around Vince
>>Foster's body. This is physically impossible.
>
>
>Not physically impossible for those under pressure to tamper evidence
>- from the FBI and CIA........
Frances Del Rio
: In article <6q4q4c$e5$1...@pornstorm.geo.net>, <JerryF...@large.com> wrote:
: >
: >
: >>>>The whole problem with the "Vince Foster was murdered" thing is that
: >THERE WAS LITTLE BLOOD FOUND AROUND FOSTER'S BODY AT
: > FT. MARCY PARK.
: >
: >Head wounds tend to bleed profusely, yet an emergency medical worker
: >at the scene stated that he could find little blood around Vince
: >Foster's body. This is physically impossible.
: Any doctor will tell you that when the brain is destroyed, the heart will
: continue to beat for as long as it has oxygenated blood to feed it.
: Individual heart cells in a petri dish will continue to pulse on their
: own. The heart does not need the brain to keep it beating (or half the
: Clinton shills would be dead by now).
So the conclusions of the FBI, the Justice Dept., Bob Fiske AND your
favorite, Kenny Starr, who wants nothing more than to bring Clinton down,
are all wrong? You clowns.....
-f-
Rob Robertson
Yes, you are correct. Of course, this list is duplicious since the FBI
is the investigative arm of the Justice Department, and both Fiske and
Starr used the same source investigation materials to come to thier
(faulty) conclusions. In essence your argument is that the initial
investigation was wrong, and so was every photocopy of that investigation.
> You clowns.....
...your hair's on fire. Thank God you have your own seltzer bottle, eh?
> -f-
-u-
_
Rob Robertson
Bill Beesley
Mike€Schneidre wrote in message ...
>
>>Clearly Billy doesn't yet understand that a world without government is
>>anarchy.
>
>
Perhaps I have missed a few, but his current rantings led me to that
conclusion.
>
> Lemme guess: He doesn't know how to use DejaNews either.
hmm, perhaps a jab...well, I'll try not to be insulted. Yes, I am quite
familiar with DejaNews, but it is much too slow on most days to be as useful
as a simple newsreader. Thank you for your attempt to enlighten us with
your great knowledge.
Bees
Bill Beesley
>
>
>minds to the fact that they are the recipients of stolen money and agents
>of force, then perhaps, like dogs licking their balls, they will have no
>shame.
OOOH! Now that's good. Be careful, your intelligence is showing!
Bees
Bill Beesley
TarlaStar wrote in message <6q6tuk$h...@enews3.newsguy.com>...
>"Bill Beesley" <bee...@ftalk.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>Ah, but it would be so easy to live in Billy's little world, a nice
bipolar
>>>us-vs-them world were the evil "they" wear lots of badges and ways of
>>>opression, while if all the rest of us 'dupes' would just wake up to
>>>the One True Way we'd have this neato-peachy-keen world...
>>>
>>>Uh-huh.
>>>
>>>I'll pass. my world is everything BUT black and white, sifting through
the
>>>sades of gray...
>
>
needs
>>much reform), but in my experience travelling to other countries I can say
>>that this thing we got here is the best I have seen to date.
>
>How would you know? Ever been in a country that lived without
>government?
Hmm... good point.
>
>>Besides, it is no shame to work for the government. Many folks do so an
>>provide useful services we have all come to depend on. God love the folks
>>who keep water coming to my house, pick up my trash and help predict
storms
>>here in OK (winks to Rob). I am in the Army Reserve and spend my free
time
>>serving my country, does this make me a low-life government employee? My
>>wife works for OETA (a in part, state funded organization) as a director,
>>producing tv programs like Lawrence Welk, does this make her a low life
>>government employee?
>
>Yes. It makes all of you who cannot get a job doing these things in a
>commercially viable job, leeches. Absolutely. I don't have anyone
>coming to my house to pick up my trash or keep water coming in. I can
>predict a storm by looking outside. You have come to be dependant upon
>someone other than yourself to do things for you and instead of seeing
>that as allowing yourself to be infantilized, you consider it a GOOD
>thing.
Actually we have all become much too dependant on things in society today.
How many times do you get on an elevator, pump gasoline in your car, or put
food in your refrigerator and actually think about the technology behind
what is going on? There are few in society today that are self-reliant
enough to survive if the technological or even the government infrastructure
were to go away completely but that isn't the point here.
I am simply stating that because one takes a job that has goverment money
attached to it. It is shameful that many who get positions both in
goverment and private sector either through some sort of affirmative action
or nepotism and are not qualified to hold that position.
If you are a qualified individual who does a good job attempting to provide
a service to your employer and the community you have no reason to be
ashamed of what you do. There are few enough people who can pull themselves
up by their bootstraps and get to work these days. I say we should commend
hard work, yes even in the goverment not cut it down by suggesting to do so
is the equivalent of a canine licking it's own genitals.
>
>>Oh, well.....perhaps Billy should be careful what he wishes for....someday
>>he just might get it!
>
>I certainly hope so.
I am surprised by this statement. Are you implying that we would be better
off with no government influence whatsoever? I think that any extremist
position like this is equivalent to the foaming at the mouth Christians that
you have so despised in this forum in the past. They cannot be flexible
enough to recognize that not all believe as they do and allow these folks to
participate in society. It is as if they are taking Matthew 12:30
literally. "He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather
with me scatters."
I, like most am for less government intervention into our lives. I don't
see any reason why the government should be interested in raising children
or any other personal issue in our lives. And a smaller government with
less taxes means I keep and spend more of my own money thus creating more
jobs and a healthier economy. I too am frustrated that nearly half of what
I earn goes into government coffers to be ill spent. BUT....I do not think
for a moment that simply removing the government altogether is a viable
solution. Extremist thoughts like these produce results that are often
worse than the situation they are trying to correct.
Bees
P.J. Gladnick
> Yes, you are correct. Of course, this list is duplicious since the FBI
> is the investigative arm of the Justice Department, and both Fiske and
> Starr used the same source investigation materials to come to thier
> (faulty) conclusions. In essence your argument is that the initial
> investigation was wrong, and so was every photocopy of that
investigation.
>
Check out my "J'Accuse!" comix story. It presents some of the important
facts of the Foster case in an entertaining comix format.
Foster Case Comix: ONLINE NOW!!!
http://www.angelfire.com/fl/pjcomix/zola1.html
Zepp
wrote:
>Frances Del Rio wrote:
>>
>> In alt.politics.usa.republican Michael Rivero <riv...@accessone.com> wrote:
>> : In article <6q4q4c$e5$1...@pornstorm.geo.net>, <JerryF...@large.com> wrote:
>> : >
>> : >
>> : >>>>The whole problem with the "Vince Foster was murdered" thing is that
>> : >
>> : >THERE WAS LITTLE BLOOD FOUND AROUND FOSTER'S BODY AT
>> : > FT. MARCY PARK.
>> : >
>> : >Head wounds tend to bleed profusely, yet an emergency medical worker
>> : >at the scene stated that he could find little blood around Vince
>> : >Foster's body. This is physically impossible.
>> : >
>>
>> : Any doctor will tell you that when the brain is destroyed, the heart will
>> : continue to beat for as long as it has oxygenated blood to feed it.
>> : Individual heart cells in a petri dish will continue to pulse on their
>> : own. The heart does not need the brain to keep it beating (or half the
>> : Clinton shills would be dead by now).
>>
>> So the conclusions of the FBI, the Justice Dept., Bob Fiske AND your
>> favorite, Kenny Starr, who wants nothing more than to bring Clinton down,
>> are all wrong?
>
> Yes, you are correct. Of course, this list is duplicious since the FBI
>is the investigative arm of the Justice Department, and both Fiske and
>Starr used the same source investigation materials to come to thier
>(faulty) conclusions. In essence your argument is that the initial
>investigation was wrong, and so was every photocopy of that investigation.
Yes! The whole world, save for you and your band of 50 other
crackpots nationwide, are in on the Great Foster Conspiracy!
It has to do with the upcoming invasion by the Pleideans...ooops.
Said to much already. Well. You're a smart guy. You'll figure the
rest out for yourself. Don't listen to your electric toaster. It is
your enemy. You must destroy it.
>
>> You clowns.....
>
> ...your hair's on fire. Thank God you have your own seltzer bottle, eh?
Is Foster's hair on fire?
>
>> -f-
>
>-u-
>
>_
>Rob Robertson
-------------------------------------------
"Courage, Ma"
I'm a Weasel. You can trust me.
----------------------------------------------------
Not dead, in jail, or a slave?
Thank a liberal.
-----------------------------------------------------
Be good, servile little citizen-employees:
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
When in doubt, call a stoat!
-----------------------------------------------------
Michael J. Kiraly
>
> > Yes, you are correct. Of course, this list is duplicious since the FBI
> > is the investigative arm of the Justice Department, and both Fiske and
> > Starr used the same source investigation materials to come to thier
> > (faulty) conclusions. In essence your argument is that the initial
> > investigation was wrong, and so was every photocopy of that
> investigation.
> >
>
> facts of the Foster case in an entertaining comix format.
>
> Foster Case Comix: ONLINE NOW!!!
> http://www.angelfire.com/fl/pjcomix/zola1.html
Uh, I'm not sure this is relevant, but is there any special
significance to the fact that Zola seems to gain about forty
pounds between the first panel and the last? Who's in charge
of continuity editing over there, anyway?
Jerome A. Schroeder
>>You guys are great. If one artificial slander doesn't work, you'll trot out
>>another. I'd ask Joe Welch's famous question: "Have you no shame?" But, I
>>already know the answer.
>
>Monica Lewinsky was just given full immunity from prosecution for her
>testimony today.
>
So what!. She's terrified that Starr will throw her in the slammer no
matter what she sez. If I were her, I'd demand immunity also.
Jerry
Mike€Schneider
<bee...@ftalk.com> wrote:
>I am simply stating that because one takes a job that has goverment money
>attached to it. It is shameful that many who get positions both in
>goverment and private sector either through some sort of affirmative action
>or nepotism and are not qualified to hold that position.
>
>If you are a qualified individual who does a good job attempting to provide
>a service to your employer and the community you have no reason to be
>ashamed of what you do. There are few enough people who can pull themselves
>up by their bootstraps and get to work these days. I say we should commend
>hard work, yes even in the goverment...
By what standard is the work "hard" (let alone *valuable*), if it is
paid for out of looted property?
>not cut it down by suggesting to do so
>is the equivalent of a canine licking it's own genitals.
You weren't talking about "hard work" in that case, but "shame".
Lemme tell you something, Scott Erb could slave 80 hours a week grading
papers and standing in front of a chalkboard, and I couldn't care less if
it was "hard work".
=======================================================================
Email: Replace everything before the @ with "mike1" and delete any CAPS
> >It is no shame to work for the government.
>
>If those who do are able to smother the remaining dim flickers in their
>minds to the fact that they are the recipients of stolen money and agents
>of force, then, like dogs licking their balls, they will have no shame.
John Moore
Rivero) writes:
>
> In article <35C12B...@worldnet.att.net>, Les Cargill
> <lcar...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> >Mr. Schnieder:
> >
> >The whole problem with the "Vince Foster was murdered" thing is that
> >fraudulent cause of death. Given the fragility of conspiracies, this
> >seems unlikely at best.
> >
>
> That's what you get for not doing your homework.
>
> Clinton's rise to power has been marked with a succesion of medical
>examiners who returned fraudulent causes of death.
>
> The first (and still most notorius) was Fahmy Malek, Clinton's
>pet Arkansas M.E. who once ruled that a decapitated man had died
>of natural causes and who ignored clear evidence of stab wounds
>in Don Henry and Kevin Ives to rule they had simply fallen asleep on
>the railroad tracks.
>
> As for the Foster case, Dr. Beyer DID return a fraudulent cause
>of death. That's been documented by the eyewitnesses at Fort Marcy
>who reported that there didn't appear to be any exit wound out the
[snipped]
Many interesting and good points, Mike. We have yet to see a suicide
supporter that can use evidence, as you have here. It has been over two
years that this discussion has waged and the homicide conclusion has
become more assured with each succeding revelation.
The weak response above that conspiracies are to "fragile" to endure is
not based on any study of large conspiracies. The mafia is clearly a
criminal conspiracy that spans generations and decades. Until the
mid-60's J. Edgar Hoover denied the existence of La Cosa Nostra which
had been around (and been very succesful) since the 20's. LCN exists to
this day and continues it's criminal ventures.
How is it that the suicide supporters just don't seem too involved with
reality?
pjgla...@hotmail.com
Remember, Zola came back from the dead. He finally got to eat some good pasta
after all those years in the grave. Plus Vince Foster actually gained some
weight after arriving in Washington even though he was initially reported to
have lost some weight due to depression.
-----P.J. Gladnick
Foster Case Comix: ONLINE NOW!!!
http://www.angelfire.com/fl/pjcomix/zola1.html
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
TarlaStar
>TarlaStar wrote in message <6q6tuk$h...@enews3.newsguy.com>...
>Actually we have all become much too dependant on things in society today.
>How many times do you get on an elevator, pump gasoline in your car, or put
>food in your refrigerator and actually think about the technology behind
>what is going on? There are few in society today that are self-reliant
>enough to survive if the technological or even the government infrastructure
>were to go away completely but that isn't the point here.
It isn't?
>I am simply stating that because one takes a job that has goverment money
>attached to it. It is shameful that many who get positions both in
>goverment and private sector either through some sort of affirmative action
>or nepotism and are not qualified to hold that position.
It is shameful that the government thinks that giving jobs to people
who are paid with tax money is equal to promoting the creation of jobs
that DON'T exist solely off tax money. Not to bitch about your wife in
particular, but ...The Lawrence Welk show? Jesus, it went off the air
when it was no longer commercially viable, but OETA, using govt.
grants in addition to corporate funding and private donations is able
to make that horrifying old fucker STILL able to give me nightmares
...and on my damned dollar!
>If you are a qualified individual who does a good job attempting to provide
>a service to your employer and the community you have no reason to be
>ashamed of what you do. There are few enough people who can pull themselves
>up by their bootstraps and get to work these days. I say we should commend
>hard work, yes even in the goverment not cut it down by suggesting to do so
>is the equivalent of a canine licking it's own genitals.
Well the way I see it, hard workers who actually care can get a job
anywhere. If we reduce the size of this government by 3/4, it would
still be too fucking big and I doubt that 1/4 of those discharged by
such a move, would be able to find gainful employment in their field.
>>
>>>Oh, well.....perhaps Billy should be careful what he wishes for....someday
>>>he just might get it!
>>
>>I certainly hope so.
>I am surprised by this statement. Are you implying that we would be better
>off with no government influence whatsoever?
Implying? No, I think it was pretty clear.
> I think that any extremist
>position like this is equivalent to the foaming at the mouth Christians that
>you have so despised in this forum in the past. They cannot be flexible
>enough to recognize that not all believe as they do and allow these folks to
>participate in society.
I'm not trying to stop anyone from participating in society. I just
don't want them doing it on my dime while telling ME what to do. I
recognise that others don't believe as I do. I'm not the one trying to
tell them what they can and cannot do with their business, their
religions, their bodies, or their children.
> It is as if they are taking Matthew 12:30
>literally. "He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather
>with me scatters."
Well I guess that's YOUR interpretation.
>I, like most am for less government intervention into our lives. I don't
>see any reason why the government should be interested in raising children
>or any other personal issue in our lives. And a smaller government with
>less taxes means I keep and spend more of my own money thus creating more
>jobs and a healthier economy. I too am frustrated that nearly half of what
>I earn goes into government coffers to be ill spent. BUT....I do not think
>for a moment that simply removing the government altogether is a viable
>solution. Extremist thoughts like these produce results that are often
>worse than the situation they are trying to correct.
Yeah, tell it to Thomas Jefferson.
Bill Beesley
>>There are few in society today that are self-reliant
>>enough to survive if the technological or even the government
infrastructure
>>were to go away completely but that isn't the point here.
>
>It isn't?
Hmm...ok maybe it is, but that wasn't the point I was trying to make.
>>I am simply stating that because one takes a job that has goverment money
>>attached to it. It is shameful that many who get positions both in
>>goverment and private sector either through some sort of affirmative
action
>>or nepotism and are not qualified to hold that position.
>
>It is shameful that the government thinks that giving jobs to people
>who are paid with tax money is equal to promoting the creation of jobs
>that DON'T exist solely off tax money. Not to bitch about your wife in
>particular, but ...The Lawrence Welk show? Jesus, it went off the air
>when it was no longer commercially viable, but OETA, using govt.
>grants in addition to corporate funding and private donations is able
>to make that horrifying old fucker STILL able to give me nightmares
>...and on my damned dollar!
Well, I would agree that there are plenty-o-jobs that shouldn't exist out
there but to say that all government workers are slugs is simply wrong. It
would be like saying all waitresses are undereducated bimbos who can't do
anything else but suck up tips while slopping hash. It is an absurd
statement that is not true because it assumes everyone is what the few are.
It is the same premise that is used in racism. All them "insert the group
you want to hate here" are just a bunch of low life, undereducated slobs who
are living off of the money stolen from my taxes!
As to Lawrence Welk, I too don't care for it. Case in point...it is not
funded by goverment money but by private money. It is still so popular
around the world that the Welk resort in Branson can afford to pay OETA to
produce it. And...once again just because YOU don't care for it you should
not automatically assume that no one does. It is again presumption that
your belief is the only correct one that will always trip you up in the eyes
of another. And you can rest easy that your damned dollar is not paying for
it, unless that is you actually gave to OETA last year?
But I am glad that PBS exists, though I only watch a few programs. When I
was a kid there was Sesamee Street and Mister Rogers. Now we have mutant
power rangers and I think that says much about what we teach kids. But
without PBS who would show the art, opera, science and other fine programs
that exist. Some government programs are necessary if we are to continue to
try to promote a learned society because without them society is like a
child that would only consume pablum for the remainder of it's life. The
networks would only show Montel, Cops, Wheel of Fortune, Melrose Place and a
slew of other mindless drivel if we would let them. With PBS, the few of us
who don't follow the pack get the opportunity to have access to some
culture.
>Well the way I see it, hard workers who actually care can get a job
>anywhere. If we reduce the size of this government by 3/4, it would
>still be too fucking big and I doubt that 1/4 of those discharged by
>such a move, would be able to find gainful employment in their field.
>
Possibly, some jobs don't exist in the private sector and since the
goverment also gives back to the private sector by buying products from it
then the private sector might suffer just as much. Also keep in mind that
those people who are on goverment payroll spend their money in the private
sector purchasing goods and services. Without that money flowing in the
economy wouldn't those private companies risk going out of business and thus
have no jobs to provide?
>
>>I am surprised by this statement. Are you implying that we would be
better
>>off with no government influence whatsoever?
>
>Implying? No, I think it was pretty clear.
I disagree that no goverment would be better than what we have now. It is
extreme and I don't think that the only option here is to turn the lights
off. I do believe we need less goverment in our lives and we need to keep
more of our money. Perhaps we can come to a comprimise on this position or
maybe we can just agree to disagree.
>
>> I think that any extremist
>>position like this is equivalent to the foaming at the mouth Christians
that
>>you have so despised in this forum in the past. They cannot be flexible
>>enough to recognize that not all believe as they do and allow these folks
to
>>participate in society.
>
>I'm not trying to stop anyone from participating in society. I just
>don't want them doing it on my dime while telling ME what to do. I
>recognise that others don't believe as I do. I'm not the one trying to
>tell them what they can and cannot do with their business, their
>religions, their bodies, or their children.
Ah, yes...but you have stated in the past that they cannot do what they
want. Everytime someone comes here with a belief (bachelor parties,
Scientology, etc) that you disagree with you have stated that no one should
be afforded the opportunity to particpate in them.
>
>> It is as if they are taking Matthew 12:30
>>literally. "He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not
gather
>>with me scatters."
>
>Well I guess that's YOUR interpretation.
No actually that is YOUR interpretation, I was just making the point. You
have stated in many threads here that it is either your way or the highway.
I have been trying to advocate tolerance and the free expression of thoughts
and ideas. By talking things out and every now and then listening to the
other guys point of view, however bizzare it might seem, we might actually
get better at this. I am so confident of my belief system that I am willing
to question it daily and even change it if I am shown to be wrong.
>
>Yeah, tell it to Thomas Jefferson.
Would that I could.
Bees
JerryF...@large.com
>>>>The whole problem with the "Vince Foster was murdered" thing is that
>THERE WAS LITTLE BLOOD FOUND AROUND FOSTER'S BODY AT
> FT. MARCY PARK.
>Head wounds tend to bleed profusely, yet an emergency medical worker
>at the scene stated that he could find little blood around Vince
>Foster's body. This is physically impossible.
Vince Foster was a very high ranking govt official, the President's
lawyer! Wasn't it Kenneth Starr who was principally in charge of the
ensuing whitewashed investigation? This doesn't bode well for any
future grand revelations regarding the Clinton administrations other
areas of questionable conduct. Was this the real reason Starr was
appointed by J. Reno to also investigate the White House? He has
proven that he'll come to the "proper conclusions".
How could anyone's even superficial investigation of a supposed
suicide overlook the glaring fact that THERE WAS NO BLOOD AT THE
SCENE. (It would be obvious that the body had been deposited there)
Let alone all the other corroborating evidence of like: no dirt on his
shoes, bullet fragments and weapon questions, carpet fibers all over
his clothes, Foster's large bank accounts in foreign countries, forged
suicide note etc...
JF
mjki...@my-dejanews.com
pjgla...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <35C7CD...@ameritech.net>,
> m...@ameritech.net wrote:
> > P.J. Gladnick wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yes, you are correct. Of course, this list is duplicious since the FBI
> > > > is the investigative arm of the Justice Department, and both Fiske and
> > > > Starr used the same source investigation materials to come to thier
> > > > (faulty) conclusions. In essence your argument is that the initial
> > > > investigation was wrong, and so was every photocopy of that
> > > investigation.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Check out my "J'Accuse!" comix story. It presents some of the important
> > > facts of the Foster case in an entertaining comix format.
> > >
> > > Foster Case Comix: ONLINE NOW!!!
> > > http://www.angelfire.com/fl/pjcomix/zola1.html
> >
> > Uh, I'm not sure this is relevant, but is there any special
> > significance to the fact that Zola seems to gain about forty
> > pounds between the first panel and the last? Who's in charge
> > of continuity editing over there, anyway?
> >
>
> Remember, Zola came back from the dead. He finally got to eat some good pasta
> after all those years in the grave.
Ah, OK. But wouldn't most of what Zola had eaten have passed through huge
gaping holes in his stomach, rendering digestion nearly impossible? I mean,
assuming that he did, in fact, rise from the dead? Plus how do you know it
was pasta?
John Moore
writes:
>On 31 Jul 1998 08:42:26 -0700, riv...@accessone.com (Michael Rivero)
>wrote:
>
>
>> In order to believe the suicide theory to be valid, one must accept
>>that
>>Vincent Foster placed a .38 revolver into his own mouth and pulled
>>the
>>trigger without getting any of his fingerprints or his blood on the
>>gun
>>or powder or bullet fragments from the gun into the wound.
>>
>
>I read the Starr report and according to it, there were obvious
>poweder burns in Foster's mouth and there was evidence of metal
>fragments in the wound. What do you say otherwise?
>
>>
>>
>>
>> No blood on the gun. FBI lab report dated May 9th 1994, page 10.
>>
>
>Dr. Henry Lee says this is not that unusual.
Hmmm.... can you cite the reference for this?
>
>> No fingerprints belonging to Vincent Foster on the gun. FBI Memo
>> attached
>>to lab report dated May 9th 1994, page 2.
>>
>>No powder, which could be matched to the dark blued steel gun, was
>>found in the wounds.
>>FBI lab report dated May 9th 1994, page 8.
>>
>
>But this is not consistent with other reports.
What other reports and can you provide a cite and quote?
>
>> No bullet fragments in the wounds. Beyer Autopsy, Gross Description
>>page, next to last paragraph.
>>
>
>Again, not consistent with other reports.
Hmmm..... what reports are you referencing?
Robert Lindsay
TarlaStar <!!!bmy...@ionet.net> wrote:
>"Bill Beesley" <bee...@ftalk.com> wrote:
>
>>TarlaStar wrote in message <6q6tuk$h...@enews3.newsguy.com>...
>
>>Actually we have all become much too dependant on things in society today.
>>How many times do you get on an elevator, pump gasoline in your car, or put
>>food in your refrigerator and actually think about the technology behind
>>enough to survive if the technological or even the government infrastructure
>>were to go away completely but that isn't the point here.
>
>It isn't?
Well we love to deounce our goverment (all political spectrums do this),
but we certianly want the service only a large goverment can provide.
Certianly their are a wide variety of thing certain groups would like
to get rid of (standing armies, welfare, weather service, epa, osha,
Education dept, NEA, IRS just to list a few)
But by god we also want our water clean, our streets safe, the latest
weather info (see USA today as a example), smart kids, and if somebody's
killing somebody over there, by god we better do something about it.
>>I am simply stating that because one takes a job that has goverment money
>>attached to it. It is shameful that many who get positions both in
>>goverment and private sector either through some sort of affirmative action
>>or nepotism and are not qualified to hold that position.
>
>It is shameful that the government thinks that giving jobs to people
>who are paid with tax money is equal to promoting the creation of jobs
>that DON'T exist solely off tax money. Not to bitch about your wife in
>particular, but ...The Lawrence Welk show? Jesus, it went off the air
>when it was no longer commercially viable, but OETA, using govt.
>grants in addition to corporate funding and private donations is able
>to make that horrifying old fucker STILL able to give me nightmares
>...and on my damned dollar!
well, their are those who apparently seem to like him (I don't) but it's
not like we as a individual get to specify where every dollar goes,
(wheather that would even be a good idea is debateable)
>>If you are a qualified individual who does a good job attempting to provide
>>a service to your employer and the community you have no reason to be
>>ashamed of what you do. There are few enough people who can pull themselves
>>up by their bootstraps and get to work these days. I say we should commend
>>hard work, yes even in the goverment not cut it down by suggesting to do so
>>is the equivalent of a canine licking it's own genitals.
>
>Well the way I see it, hard workers who actually care can get a job
>anywhere. If we reduce the size of this government by 3/4, it would
>still be too fucking big and I doubt that 1/4 of those discharged by
>such a move, would be able to find gainful employment in their field.
OK, what services would you be willing to give up?
Like I said a great example of a country with virtually no goverment is
russia right now? Your phone doesn't work? tough. Haven't gotten paid at
work? big deal. Somebody dumping chemicals is your towns water supply?
harsh dude. Don't have the money for a doctor? stop bleeding on my street.
Thugs shaking you down for money? pay up. Leaky reactor near your house?
move.
Maybe some would like to live in such a society, it certainly is nice
if you are one of the very small group at the top, but I see no mass
sampede of russia right now...
>>I am surprised by this statement. Are you implying that we would be better
>>off with no government influence whatsoever?
>
>Implying? No, I think it was pretty clear.
It's a nice theory, but marxism works well in theory (as does the ARPS model
but that's another story...)
>> I think that any extremist
>>position like this is equivalent to the foaming at the mouth Christians that
>>you have so despised in this forum in the past. They cannot be flexible
>>enough to recognize that not all believe as they do and allow these folks to
>>participate in society.
>
>I'm not trying to stop anyone from participating in society. I just
>don't want them doing it on my dime while telling ME what to do. I
>recognise that others don't believe as I do. I'm not the one trying to
>tell them what they can and cannot do with their business, their
>religions, their bodies, or their children.
Then what are you doing living in a town? head on up to the hills. I don't
think anybody was shaking Kazinski down for taxes in his cabin (I don't
like ted, but at least he was willing to live his beliefs)
>Well I guess that's YOUR interpretation.
>
>>I, like most am for less government intervention into our lives. I don't
>>see any reason why the government should be interested in raising children
>>or any other personal issue in our lives. And a smaller government with
>>less taxes means I keep and spend more of my own money thus creating more
>>jobs and a healthier economy. I too am frustrated that nearly half of what
>>I earn goes into government coffers to be ill spent. BUT....I do not think
>>for a moment that simply removing the government altogether is a viable
>>solution. Extremist thoughts like these produce results that are often
>>worse than the situation they are trying to correct.
>
>Yeah, tell it to Thomas Jefferson.
Of course the folks who seceded to form the confederacy liked to quote
Jefferson also. Would your goverment (if any) have fought to free the slaves?
would it be even wrong to have them in your goverment? If so, how would
they enforce this decree?
--
Robert Lindsay, Computational Minion, Storm Prediction Center, Norman OK
rob...@zorak.spc.noaa.gov -- Oh, God, could it be the weather... T. Amos
#include <standard_disclaimer.h>
TarlaStar
>Well, I would agree that there are plenty-o-jobs that shouldn't exist out
>there but to say that all government workers are slugs is simply wrong. It
>would be like saying all waitresses are undereducated bimbos who can't do
>anything else but suck up tips while slopping hash. It is an absurd
>statement that is not true because it assumes everyone is what the few are.
>It is the same premise that is used in racism. All them "insert the group
>you want to hate here" are just a bunch of low life, undereducated slobs who
>are living off of the money stolen from my taxes!
I never said, "all." I rarely use absolutes.
>As to Lawrence Welk, I too don't care for it. Case in point...it is not
>funded by goverment money but by private money. It is still so popular
>around the world that the Welk resort in Branson can afford to pay OETA to
>produce it. And...once again just because YOU don't care for it you should
>not automatically assume that no one does. It is again presumption that
>your belief is the only correct one that will always trip you up in the eyes
>of another. And you can rest easy that your damned dollar is not paying for
>it, unless that is you actually gave to OETA last year?
Sure, I give every year, and to public radio too! I'm just all kinds
of a liberal cunt. That's not the point. I don't mind paying for
something I want. I do mind the government telling me I have to pay
for something, whether I want it or not.
>But I am glad that PBS exists, though I only watch a few programs. When I
>was a kid there was Sesamee Street and Mister Rogers. Now we have mutant
>power rangers and I think that says much about what we teach kids. But
>without PBS who would show the art, opera, science and other fine programs
>that exist.
The Discovery channel, The History Channel, A&E, etc.
> Some government programs are necessary if we are to continue to
>try to promote a learned society because without them society is like a
>child that would only consume pablum for the remainder of it's life. The
>networks would only show Montel, Cops, Wheel of Fortune, Melrose Place and a
>slew of other mindless drivel if we would let them. With PBS, the few of us
>who don't follow the pack get the opportunity to have access to some
>culture.
>>Well the way I see it, hard workers who actually care can get a job
>>anywhere. If we reduce the size of this government by 3/4, it would
>>still be too fucking big and I doubt that 1/4 of those discharged by
>>such a move, would be able to find gainful employment in their field.
>Possibly, some jobs don't exist in the private sector and since the
>goverment also gives back to the private sector by buying products from it
>then the private sector might suffer just as much. Also keep in mind that
>those people who are on goverment payroll spend their money in the private
>sector purchasing goods and services. Without that money flowing in the
>economy wouldn't those private companies risk going out of business and thus
>have no jobs to provide?
The Private sector will accommodate the lack of a government.
NEVER have I said that! Try getting it through your head that one can
publically disapprove of a behavior without any attempt at stopping
the behavior through legal means. I have a right to an OPINION. That
doesn't mean that I have said ANYWHERE, that my opinion should be made
in to law.
>No actually that is YOUR interpretation, I was just making the point. You
>have stated in many threads here that it is either your way or the highway.
I have stated (in essence) that it is my way or stay away from me.
>I have been trying to advocate tolerance and the free expression of thoughts
>and ideas. By talking things out and every now and then listening to the
>other guys point of view, however bizzare it might seem, we might actually
>get better at this. I am so confident of my belief system that I am willing
>to question it daily and even change it if I am shown to be wrong.
I question my belief system regularly. But please don't make the
mistake of believing that in order to be tolerant of others, that
means that we have to forego stating our own opinions. I can tolerate
a lot of shit that I don't like, but I don't have to be quiet about
it.
*****
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the
beans of Java, that the thoughts acquire speed, the hands
aquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by
caffeine alone I set my mind in motion."
*****Rev. Mutha Tarla Star*****