Vince Foster and Ron Brown conspiracies

[BeAChooser]

The only problem with your theory is that it requires either:

There you go, putting the cart before the horse. Most law enforcement experts will tell you to first find out if a murder was committed. If expert pathologists are telling you that based on what x-rays and their visual examination show, there may be a bullet in the victim's head, you ask for an autopsy. You do this regardless of how difficult you might think it would have been to shoot that victim.

-an operational (let's call him flying ninja) doing the hit on the plane, despite the fact that they were all going to die in the crash, and exiting it in-flight at low altitude (which would be pretty much impossible);

And you presume a lot of assumptions as fact in your "scenario". Who says the hit had to be done on the plane? Who says that even if someone was on the plane they couldn't have escaped it. They lost contact with the plane when it was still 8 miles from the crash site. At altitude. That's what Aviation Week stated. Do you know that the rear door of the craft was found open when the first rescuers arrived? You can't even reliably tell us how many people were on the plane. They didn't find the passenger list.

You can't even reliably tell us how many of the passengers survived for any length of time after the crash. Judicial Watch found a confidential timeline in Warren Christopher's files (you know, one of the first men to show up in Florida in 2000 to contest the election for Al Gore) that was put together by Ira Sockowitz (who was supposed to have been on the plane but coincidentally missed it and who just happens to have connections to Chinagate), that says there were TWO survivors of the crash ... not just one like the government announced? Who was the second survivor, Megalodon?

-an operational arriving first to the crash-site, finding the target alive (among the cadavers of the rest of the people on board) and shooting him (as opposite to e.g. bashing his head in with anything heavy found in the crash)

As to the theory of an operative arriving at the site and finishing Brown off, keep in mind that if the bad guys spoofed the plane into hitting a mountain (as Aviation Week stated was a possibility given the missing beacon and the flight path), the bad guys would known where the plane was coming down. And the Air Force initially searched in an entirely wrong location ... over the Adriatic. The orders to do that seem a little suspicious, if you bother to look into the matter. Hours elapsed before the first official rescuers got to the crash site. Plenty of time for someone who was waiting to go in and make sure. And when the first rescuers supposedly did arrive, the AP reported they were met by some Americans. What a coincidence.

In any case, why are you so frantic to jump to the conclusion it was an accident when the pathologists are telling you it looked like a bullet wound and he should have been autopsied. Nervous?

 

[gnome]

Do you honestly think the authorities don't know all the facts I've noted? That should give you some cause for concern. But maybe your party affiliation is getting in the way.

By the way, do you know that James Riady (who had close ties to Ron Brown) stood up in a California courtroom and told a judge under a plea agreement that required he be honest and forthcoming that contrary to what Bill Clinton and the DNC had publically claimed, he never got any of the millions of dollars in illegal campaign contributions back from them. The judge asked the prosecutor if that was true and the prosecutor told the judge "yes, to the best of our knowledge". And the Bush administration let Riady, Clinton and the DNC walk. That should concern anyone, regardless of party affiliation.

I'm sensing a contradiction here...

You've accused anyone who disagrees with you of being a shill for the Clintons, and when some of them point out that they're conservatives and severely dislike Clinton, you cast doubt on their honesty. Yet, you claim that people who are confirmed political opponents of Clinton, who would find it a political bonanza to prove he committed murder at least twice... aren't interested either. Why do you suppose that is?

 

[SezMe]

BAC, you and McCain have one characteristic in common. You drop in that big green smile at the most inappropriate places. I can't figure out why - in your case, I mean. Why do you do that?

Yeah, yeah, it's a derail. But it's not worth a whole new thread and when you give a clear, concise answer, I'll drop it.

 

[Drysdale]

If you were skeptical you'd try to take your politics out of the equation and look for evidence instead of looking for evidence that supports your politics.

You're nothing of the sort, and that's the exact opposite of being open-minded. Skepticism is how most liberals who would love to see Bush impeached for lying about Iraq and the rest of his laundry list still manage to not believe the 9/11 horse. It's how most conservatives who hate Clinton for selling us out to China and the rest of his laundry list manage to not believe the body count horse.

Your last paragraph about the rape quote is quite telling. It couldn't possibly have less to do with the issue at hand, but to you it's evidence simply by virtue of "politicians are scumbags." Just because someone is capable of murder doesn't mean there are thousands of bodies in their basement. It still requires actually committing the crime. And as many have pointed out, it would be among the most stupid crimes in history.

Read my signature. It's what you're guilty of. So much of your stuff comes from suspect sources (worldnetdaily for instance) and so much more is bad information that has been passed around the CT universe for so long it's accepted as true by virtue of hearing it a lot. I hold out hope one day you'll grasp the notion of critical thinking as I did. It's not always as much fun as being paranoid, but in the end it's a lot more fulfilling.

Why does'nt someone just refute the accusations?

I see a lot of handwaving here saying BAC is full of it etc but not one specific claim debunked.

Why not?

 

[Hokulele]

Why does'nt someone just refute the accusations?

I see a lot of handwaving here saying BAC is full of it etc but not one specific claim debunked.

Why not?

Because it was done to death in the three threads linked by BAC here.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=3895666#post3895666

 

[BeAChooser]

If you were skeptical you'd try to take your politics out of the equation

How do you know I haven't? Do you know that I got thrown off FreeRepublic because I wouldn't let this drop after Bush was elected? I kept asking why Bush wasn't investigating and prosecuting these many crimes. You don't know me at all.

and look for evidence instead of looking for evidence that supports your politics.

You are quite obviously avoiding any actual discussion of the "evidence". If you wanted to do that, you could go to one of those 3 threads I mentioned and comment on that which I offered. Or counter what I posted about the Foster case here. You don't. Maybe because the evidence doesn't support YOUR politics?

The fact is, I have presented evidence ... a mountain of it ... from many credible sources ... including the forensic pathologists and eyewitnesses to both events. Your side is the one that has NOT presented any evidence ... just a regurgitation of the official story that the Clinton adminstration put out and which my evidence easily demonstrates is full of inconsistencies and outright lies.

Your last paragraph about the rape quote is quite telling. It couldn't possibly have less to do with the issue at hand, but to you it's evidence simply by virtue of "politicians are scumbags."

Let me ask you, regardless of whether it has anything to do with the issue at hand (and it does because you'll find that most of those people who dismiss the Brown and Foster allegations also dismiss the rape allegations out of hand), do you believe, based on the evidence, that Bill Clinton sexually assaulted and in some cases even raped a large number of women? Hmmmm?

Just because someone is capable of murder doesn't mean there are thousands of bodies in their basement.

Nice strawman. I haven't claimed there are thousands of bodies nor claimed that I think Brown or Foster were murdered just because Clinton was perhaps capable of it. In fact, all I've actually claimed is that the Clinton administration, and now the Bush administration, may have covered up two murders. I didn't say who actually committed them. Just that the Clintons certainly appeared to have motive in both cases for wanting it done.

Read my signature. It's what you're guilty of. So much of your stuff comes from suspect sources (worldnetdaily for instance)

You are absolutely wrong. You didn't even bother to check out the veracity of ANYTHING I've posted. You are attacking the messenger, not the message. Not the facts.

And so much more is bad information

Who says? YOU? NONE of you have proven any of it is bad information. I'll make the same challenge to you that I've made to all the others. Prove that anything I've posted regarding the Brown or Foster deaths is false. Prove that Christopher Ruddy is wrong about anything he stated as fact. Did you ever bother to listen to the various interviews that the pathologists (like Cogswell) and the photographer gave on radio shows ... like Larry Elders? I rather doubt it. They verified everything that Ruddy's articles claimed they'd said ... every fact that he claimed about the examination of Brown's body. Or are you so CT you think they manufactured those recordings ... faking the pathologist's and photographer's voices? If you search around, you may even still find some of those audio recordings. But I bet you won't bother to do that because you already think you know the truth.

And of course you were a Clinton critic.

 

[Drudgewire]

Because it was done to death in the three threads linked by BAC here.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=3895666#post3895666

Exactly. Done here, I'm off to spank it to a picture of Chelsea.

 

[BeAChooser]

Yet, you claim that people who are confirmed political opponents of Clinton, who would find it a political bonanza to prove he committed murder at least twice... aren't interested either.

You mean like Bush? You really should go back to FreeRepublic and listen to the reasons the biggest Bush supporters gave for moving on where the allegations of crimes involving the Clintons were concerned ... once Bush got elected. And as to why they didn't before that? Do you think there are no skeletons in the Republican house? What do you think Filegate was all about? What do you think Stephanopolis was talking about when he mentioned "mutual assured destruction"? Whose side do you think the media was on at the time? Hmmmmm?

 

[BeAChooser]

Why does'nt someone just refute the accusations?

Yes, why doesn't someone?

Drysdale, visit those three threads I linked and tell us if you REALLY think they refuted the accusations like they claim. If so, post a few examples of where they did here and we'll see if you can defend that claim. If not, I welcome your support.

 

[BeAChooser]

Exactly. Done here, I'm off to spank it to a picture of Chelsea.

Bye bye. Clinton critic.

 

[gnome]

You mean like Bush? You really should go back to FreeRepublic and listen to the reasons the biggest Bush supporters gave for moving on where the allegations of crimes involving the Clintons were concerned ... once Bush got elected. And as to why they didn't before that? Do you think there are no skeletons in the Republican house? What do you think Filegate was all about? What do you think Stephanopolis was talking about when he mentioned "mutual assured destruction"? Whose side do you think the media was on at the time? Hmmmmm?

If you believe the Clintons had so much power that even the most powerful Republicans were afraid to drop an anvil on them, how in the world did Hillary lose the nomination to a junior senator?

 

[Allen773]

Allen, I don't recall you offering any actual debate on those topics. You just a cheerleader for those who do? And should I remind you of rule 11 (see the second post of this thread)? If you want to participate on this thread perhaps you could offer something substantive about the Ron Brown or Vince Foster cases? If you can't, then why are you here? Because you are a Democrat?

I don't offer something substantive because it'd go right over your head. If you're not listening to the arguments others have offered (which you haven't been), why would you listen to my arguments which would utilize the same evidence? It's redundant and pointless.

And not offering debate is better than offering ********, which appears to be your hobby. Take care now.

 

[Megalodon]

And you presume a lot of assumptions as fact in your "scenario". Who says the hit had to be done on the plane?

What? The CT of the day is that the hit was done elsewhere and the body dumped in the crash-site? Are you out of your mind? Can't you fetch that a bit farther?

Who says that even if someone was on the plane they couldn't have escaped it. They lost contact with the plane when it was still 8 miles from the crash site. At altitude.

Well, the fact that it was a military plane full of people, who probably would have made a big fuss when someone got shot in the head in front of them.

That's what Aviation Week stated. Do you know that the rear door of the craft was found open when the first rescuers arrived?

Yes, because crashing is so becoming to the structural integrity of a airplane.

You can't even reliably tell us how many of the passengers survived for any length of time after the crash. Judicial Watch found a confidential timeline in Warren Christopher's files (you know, one of the first men to show up in Florida in 2000 to contest the election for Al Gore) that was put together by Ira Sockowitz (who was supposed to have been on the plane but coincidentally missed it and who just happens to have connections to Chinagate), that says there were TWO survivors of the crash ... not just one like the government announced? Who was the second survivor, Megalodon?

What second survivor? You claim there was one, you find out who this mysterious survivor is.

As to the theory of an operative arriving at the site and finishing Brown off, keep in mind that if the bad guys spoofed the plane into hitting a mountain (as Aviation Week stated was a possibility given the missing beacon and the flight path), the bad guys would known where the plane was coming down.

Possible is different from probable.

And the Air Force initially searched in an entirely wrong location ... over the Adriatic. The orders to do that seem a little suspicious, if you bother to look into the matter. Hours elapsed before the first official rescuers got to the crash site. Plenty of time for someone who was waiting to go in and make sure. And when the first rescuers supposedly did arrive, the AP reported they were met by some Americans. What a coincidence.

The AP reported? Great... And those americans (presumably assassins) just entered the crashed plane, found their victim, and instead of crushing his skull, or stabbing him with a piece of debris shot him in the head...

In any case, why are you so frantic to jump to the conclusion it was an accident when the pathologists are telling you it looked like a bullet wound and he should have been autopsied. Nervous?

Frantic? Nervous? You are a loony...

And guess what... It wouldn't have mattered. Someone who claims that their government crashed a plane, killing several people, and used several different operatives to confirm the hit of one single target wouldn't let something like an autopsy report get in their way. As soon as it came out that it was an accident, there would be even more cries of cover-up. More men in black and flying ninjas doing crimes after crimes... Your imagination is the limit - literally!

And they would have got away with it to, if it weren't for those pesky kids and their interwebs...

 

[BeAChooser]

If you believe the Clintons had so much power that even the most powerful Republicans were afraid to drop an anvil on them, how in the world did Hillary lose the nomination to a junior senator?

Perhaps being such a newcomer (and a Democrat at that), they never got a chance to look in his FBI file? And you and I both know the Clinton's lost the support of the media. But that happened only recently.

 

[BeAChooser]

I don't offer something substantive because it'd go right over your head.

Yeah. Sure it would, Democrat.

If you're not listening to the arguments others have offered (which you haven't been)

That's a lie. Anyone reading this or any of the threads I've linked will see that I addressed each and every point that anyone raised. It is YOUR side of this argument that has been studiously avoiding arguments and facts presented by the other side. Just as you're doing now, Allen.

Take care now.

Bye Bye. Figured that would the the outcome of your *visit*.

 

[Allen773]

Yeah. Sure it would, Democrat.



That's a lie. Anyone reading this or any of the threads I've linked will see that I addressed each and every point that anyone raised. It is YOUR side of this argument that has been studiously avoiding arguments and facts presented by the other side. Just as you're doing now, Allen.



Bye Bye. Figured that would the the outcome of your *visit*.

Wow, is "Democrat" supposed to be an insult now? Are we allowed to say it on television anymore?

The rest of your "argument" isn't worth addressing, Republican.

 

[BeAChooser]

The CT of the day is that the hit was done elsewhere and the body dumped in the crash-site?

Who suggested that? I certainly didn't. But clearly you haven't bothered to read the threads I linked because I did outline what might have happened.

Quote:
Who says that even if someone was on the plane they couldn't have escaped it. They lost contact with the plane when it was still 8 miles from the crash site. At altitude.

Well, the fact that it was a military plane full of people, who probably would have made a big fuss when someone got shot in the head in front of them.

Who said he was shot on the plane? I didn't. You really need to pay attention Megalodon, rather than continuing to throw out strawmen and red herrings. I (and Aviation Week) merely suggested the plane was spoofed into flying into mountain. Losing communications when it was still 8 miles from the airport likely would have helped that happen. IF that took someone on board to make that happen, then perhaps they had to exit the plane. I doubt anyone would have noticed until they did, and once that person was gone what could the plane have done but try to land as it did since it had no communication with the airport.

Yes, because crashing is so becoming to the structural integrity of a airplane.

The rear of the plane was found intact. Here's an image of it:

http://archive.newsmax.com/rbrown/photo3.shtml

Look closely and you'll see that the door of the plane is OPEN, not ripped off, not deformed in any way as far as I can tell. But regardless, the issue isn't the door anyway but whether expert forensic pathologists examined Brown's body and stated at the examination that the wound in his head looked like a bullet wound and he needed an autopsy. And they did. But he still didn't get one. Because the Whitehouse and JCS ordered there be no autopsy. That's what the examining pathologist later admitted.

What second survivor? You claim there was one

Megalodon, I didn't claim that. The timeline that Ira Sockowitz (of Chinagate fame) sent to Warren Christopher (Clinton's Secretary of State at the time) claimed that. You do know what I'm talking about, don't you? Or are you that uninformed?

Possible is different from probable.

The difference between possible and probable is a judgment call. And so far I haven't seen any evidence of good judgment from you.

The AP reported? Great...

What? You didn't know this? Don't you know anything about the news reports from that time?

And those americans (presumably assassins) just entered the crashed plane, found their victim, and instead of crushing his skull, or stabbing him with a piece of debris shot him in the head...

Well if they'd crushed his skull or stabbed him with a piece of debris, it would have been very difficult to avoid an autopsy. Remember, the pathologist who examined the body and decided not to do an autopsy gave as his reason that there was no penetration of the skull (he could still see bone in the hole). Of course, it turns out those were lies that he later had to retract.

Frantic? Nervous?

Well, you just seem a little concerned about this allegation being investigated. But maybe I'm wrong. Would you join me in calling for an exhumation and autopsy of Brown's body?

Someone who claims that their government crashed a plane

I didn't say "the government" crashed the plane. You really need to stop claiming I've said things I did not.

, killing several people,

Over 30 died, to be more precise.

and used several different operatives to confirm the hit

And I didn't say they used several different operatives. Please, Megalodon, pay attention to what I actually do say. Maybe going and reading those three threads I link would help you.

of one single target wouldn't let something like an autopsy report get in their way.

What autopsy report? There was no autopsy. That's the problem, Megalodon. All the real experts in this case say there should have been one. Even the expert who examined the body and helped the Clinton administration cover up the facts initially admits this now.

 

[BeAChooser]

Wow, is "Democrat" supposed to be an insult now?

Yes. You want to know what an informed Democrat is nowadays?

It's someone who stands for

Perjury (by nearly everyone defending Clinton!), Obstruction of Justice (so many instances that one can hardly list them all), Witness Tampering (Betty Currie, Sid Blumenthal, the Talking Points, etc), Intimidation of Witnesses (of Willey and Tripp, for starters), Bribery (Vernon Jordan's "Missions", Monica's Condo Offer, Betty Currie's Brand New House), Sexual Harassment (Paula Jones, Monica Lewinsky, etc.), Sexual Assault Of Women (nearly a dozen women that we know of), Rape (of Jane Doe #5 and possibly 3 other women), Fraudulent Campaign Funding Practices (including money laundering via Buddist monks, selling U.S. Trade Mission seats, the White House coffees, making illegal telephone calls, etc), Corruption Of The IRS (audits of anyone who challenges Clinton), Corruption of the Department Of Justice (Reno's refusal to appoint an IOC to investigate Campaign Finance and Filegate, as well as FBI complicity in Travelgate and the Vince Foster coverup), Drug Use In the White House (why was there cocaine on the dress? why won't Clinton release his medical records? Clinton's brother stated on videotape during a police drug sting that Bill was a cocaine user. What are all these rumors about Mena?), Blackmail (what do you think Filegate was all about), Mean-Spirited Smearing (Carville, Flynt, Blumenthal, Cliff, etc), Perjury DURING An Impeachment Trial (definitely Blumenthal and probably Jordan), TREASONOUS Selling Of Secrets And Restricted Technology To Countries That Threaten the United States (as detailed in the Cox Report and many other sources), Lax Security Practices (for example, Monica's Top Secret clearance with NO background check), Security Violations (Stuffing secret documents down pants and socks), A Non-Free Press (NBC and FOX News were THREATENED not to report rape by Clinton of Jane Doe #5), A Controlled Press (NBC doesn't report the rape), A Biased Press (CNN and others conduct fraudulent polls to support Clinton, the media misrepresents or doesn't report facts that harm Clinton ... such as the Blumenthal perjury and the Broaddrick story), Jury Nullification (that's what democratic senators did in the trial), Mob Rule (what's left if the rule of law means nothing), Trashing The Constitution (excessive use of executive privilege and executive orders in order to escape justice and bypass our government's critical system of checks and balances), Corruption Of The Military (the coverup surrounding the apparent murder of Ron Brown ... who threatened to testify against the White House only days before he died. the Sudan "Wag The Dog" bombing of an aspirin factory while the head of the FBI and several members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff were deliberately kept out the loop.), Murder (the circumstances surrounding Vince Fosters death are more than a little unusual ... what were those files that Secret Service agents saw being taken out of his office?) and, finally, the Breaking of Every Oath Possible (from Marriage to the Presidential Oath Of Office).

I didn't even get to Obama's follies.

 

[Allen773]

Yes. You want to know what an informed Democrat is nowadays?

It's someone who stands for

Perjury (by nearly everyone defending Clinton!), Obstruction of Justice (so many instances that one can hardly list them all), Witness Tampering (Betty Currie, Sid Blumenthal, the Talking Points, etc), Intimidation of Witnesses (of Willey and Tripp, for starters), Bribery (Vernon Jordan's "Missions", Monica's Condo Offer, Betty Currie's Brand New House), Sexual Harassment (Paula Jones, Monica Lewinsky, etc.), Sexual Assault Of Women (nearly a dozen women that we know of), Rape (of Jane Doe #5 and possibly 3 other women), Fraudulent Campaign Funding Practices (including money laundering via Buddist monks, selling U.S. Trade Mission seats, the White House coffees, making illegal telephone calls, etc), Corruption Of The IRS (audits of anyone who challenges Clinton), Corruption of the Department Of Justice (Reno's refusal to appoint an IOC to investigate Campaign Finance and Filegate, as well as FBI complicity in Travelgate and the Vince Foster coverup), Drug Use In the White House (why was there cocaine on the dress? why won't Clinton release his medical records? Clinton's brother stated on videotape during a police drug sting that Bill was a cocaine user. What are all these rumors about Mena?), Blackmail (what do you think Filegate was all about), Mean-Spirited Smearing (Carville, Flynt, Blumenthal, Cliff, etc), Perjury DURING An Impeachment Trial (definitely Blumenthal and probably Jordan), TREASONOUS Selling Of Secrets And Restricted Technology To Countries That Threaten the United States (as detailed in the Cox Report and many other sources), Lax Security Practices (for example, Monica's Top Secret clearance with NO background check), Security Violations (Stuffing secret documents down pants and socks), A Non-Free Press (NBC and FOX News were THREATENED not to report rape by Clinton of Jane Doe #5), A Controlled Press (NBC doesn't report the rape), A Biased Press (CNN and others conduct fraudulent polls to support Clinton, the media misrepresents or doesn't report facts that harm Clinton ... such as the Blumenthal perjury and the Broaddrick story), Jury Nullification (that's what democratic senators did in the trial), Mob Rule (what's left if the rule of law means nothing), Trashing The Constitution (excessive use of executive privilege and executive orders in order to escape justice and bypass our government's critical system of checks and balances), Corruption Of The Military (the coverup surrounding the apparent murder of Ron Brown ... who threatened to testify against the White House only days before he died. the Sudan "Wag The Dog" bombing of an aspirin factory while the head of the FBI and several members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff were deliberately kept out the loop.), Murder (the circumstances surrounding Vince Fosters death are more than a little unusual ... what were those files that Secret Service agents saw being taken out of his office?) and, finally, the Breaking of Every Oath Possible (from Marriage to the Presidential Oath Of Office).

I didn't even get to Obama's follies.

Uh huh. You can go back to Mr. Rove's office now and report on how successful you were at acting like a dumbass on the Internet.

 

[gnome]

Perhaps being such a newcomer (and a Democrat at that), they never got a chance to look in his FBI file? And you and I both know the Clinton's lost the support of the media. But that happened only recently.

Oh really? Well, now that they're not under the all-powerful protection of the media, you'd think they'd be vulnerable. Surely some of those people who were held back by these ultimatums you suppose, are a little sore and would like revenge...