Len Colby

Fetzer please explain how this GPS manipulation worked I imagine your high school teacher is an expert on that too. Explain how this contraption diverted one plane until its doom and then affected another plane 500 miles [+/- 800 Km] away but no other planes or people reported any problems? O'Hare the World's busiest airport is probably only 10 - 20 furthur away. Since the target was the Wellstone plane we would have to assume what ever was done had a 500 mile radius which would include all of Minnesota and Wisconsen and parts of Illinos, Iowa, Nebraska, North and South Dakota, Manitoba and Ontario. Do you have any evidence that such technology exists? Do you have any evidence that they were using GPS? They were definately using VOR my understanding is that pilots use one or the other but not both [Evan?]. How could the assassins know they would use GPS?

Evan beware Dr. Fetzer has nasty streak and is a bit paranoid. Get ready to be attacked. He accused me of being "cognitively impaired", then decided I was disreputable and probably an agent of the US gov't and now he thinks I'm crazy!! Funny he also claimed I (the stupid, corrupt, crazy spy) was making ad hominem attacks. If you go back over the older posts you will see that he lashed out at Steve and Pat for very mildly and politely disagreeing with him. He accused one of being "massively ignorant" among other things and then denied having called him an idiot. I saw in your bio that you are a military officer. I wouldn't be surprised if Fetzer starts insinuating that you must be an intelligence asset working on a joint US/Australian project to discredit him. How far is Norwa from Melbourne? Maybe you are one of the "spooks" keeping track John Costella the grammar school teacher who fancies him self a major threat to the US gov't. Len

The attached file show the flight path of 401 If you can't get the file to download go to this link http://www.super70s.com/Super70s/Tech/Avia...29(Eastern).asp another interesting link relating to the crash is http://www.freshgasflow.com/flight401.htm

I disagree I think it does. There actually were 4 crew members in the cockpit because an Eastern Maintenance specialist who was in one of the "jump-seats" came in. With four highly trained crew members in the cockpit some one should have notice that the plane was loosing altitude. The pilots were being distracted by only one light the landing gear indicator. Fixing such glitches is the responsibility of the flight engineer but all three of them became fixed by the landing gear light. . The NTSB speculated that the problem with the autopilot is why they remained oblivious to their decent. The question is why none of the three airline pilots who were far more experienced and qualified than Conry and Guess noticed what was going on. The lead pilot had been flying for Eastern for 30 years and had nearly 30,000 hours almost 9x as many as Conry [about 3400]. Conry never would have gotten hired by and airline. He had to lie to get a part-time job a Aviation Charter the only company that would hire him. Aviation charter was cited for numerous violations of FAA regulations. Guess got fired from both of his previous piloting jobs. With 4:48 to go the plane began to loose altitude. There were three other crew members looking into it but the captain was so distracted by it that he failed to notice, none of them did, he commented on his heading several times so must have been looking at the control panel but still no one noticed. The light was also on the control panel. 1:34 before the crash AN ALTITUDE DEVIATION ALARM went off but still none of the crew members noticed. With 32 seconds to go the plane was at 900 and no one noticed. The pilot asked for permission to make a turn and was granted it. seven second later [25 seconds to go] he began turning, he must have been looking at the control panel but still failed to notice. Only when the plane was 300 off the ground did the co-pilot notice and said "We did something to the altitude" this was seven seconds before impact. But the pilot still didn't get it, five seconds before crashing, when plane was probably at about 220 - 250 feet he asked "We're still at two thousand right?" The co-pilot had seven second to make a distress call - but did not So to summarize only 4:41 after the plane began loosing altitude and had fallen from 2000 - 300 did any of the flight crew notice. Even though they were trying to fix a light on the control panel none of them noticed the altimeter on the same control panel. The pilot who was far more experience that Conry even though he had three other crew members to look into was so distracted by the light that he literally flew the plane into the ground. The NTSB final report of that crash can be found at http://www.airdisaster.com/reports/ntsb/AAR73-14.pdf That 401 had two glitches in a certain way strengthens my case. I read several accident reports. Several had some similar glitches cited as contributing factors, these problems only became apparent during the fatal flights. Some of the Wellstone's plane could had some defect that could have contributed to the crash, was the stall alarm working properly? Was the VOR working properly? There is no was to tell because the plane was to badly damaged. Also 401 was not the only one see some of my earlier posts for descriptions of other crashes. In one case the Detroit control tower asked a plane to reduce its speed and the pilot complied. Unfortunately the speed he slowed down was below the minimum speed for that model aircraft during icing conditions. Is there any evidence that similar glitches distracted and confused the pilots of Wellstone's plane? If so, is there any evidence to demonstrate that these glitches occurred purely by accident, and were not helped along by someone with a screwdriver or a remote control device? If not, then we're back at square one, with Fetzer's argument that it would be highly unusual for two pilots to just sit there while their plane goes down. The crew could have been distracted by a few things namely being lost! Also who ever was flying had not properly "set up" the approach which increased workload and thus the ability to be distracted."As previously discussed, simulations performed by the Safety Board indicated that the later stages of the approach flown by the accident flight crew were more difficult in terms of mental and physical demand and time pressure than it would have been if they had not overshot the approach course and had not delayed their descent and landing gear extension" The approach they had set up would have difficult for good pilots unfortunately both were prone to distraction. Conry had accumulated a few serious screw ups during very little flying time but was saved by his co-pilot. This time his co-pilot was one who had difficulty maintaining power during landings. Conry has complained of having difficulty landing A 100s only a few months before. If this was a hit the culprits were lucky because the two pilots were very much sub par and they started screwing up before the last radio communication. They went off course in the same direction as the FAA test pilots. The hit men got very lucky indeed. I'll try to answer that one later Len

The only things you go right are not in dispute: Bush didn't like Wellstone, he died in a crash Oct. 25 2002, the US gov't has been developing EM weapons for decades, the FBI got to the site around noon etc. etc. Jim it's impossible for the fire to have been an electrical fire! Why don't you try and figure out why with that PhD in Physics grammar school science teacher friend of yours? Hint there is a message about it on the Yahoo forum. I'll give you till Sat. to figure it out!! ROTFLMHO!! I'll explain that to you too! LOL Jim did you see "Spinal Tap"? You remind me of when the guitar player looked blankly at Rob Reiner and said "these go up to eleven" The question at hand is not merely if EM's have a range of 1000 or 2000 feet. It that all you comprehended from that post Jim? I know you have problems with reading comprehension but even so this is a little much. The question still remains very much open as to whether or not working EM beam weapons exist. The author of the Time article written in 2002 says that some EM weapons might have been ready for use in the 2nd Gulf War. He got his information from Rumsfeld and other DoD 'sources'. You can't argue that the US government is trying to keep EM weapons secret if Rumsfeld and his flunkies are talking about them!!! These are the same people who told us that Saddam had WMDs and that Iraq would be a cake walk, the same people who told us "Star Wars" and anti-ballistic missile technology was just around the corner. Since there aren't any reliable reports of EM weapons being used the most logical conclusion is that these weapons are not ready for use. Rumsfeld and the others could have give this false info to journalists for the following reasons: 1] To intimidate Saddam and the Iraqi military. In the software business they call this 'vaporware' 2] To con the US public into thinking victory would be easy 3] To con Congress into approving funding for additional research for EM weapons 4] Due to wishful thinking Jim you have yet to come up with one link RELIABLE link [Hustler magazine, UFO sites rumormillnews.com, the tin foil hat crowd and canabis.com etc. don't count!!!] that says that working EM beam weapons exist [not ones that say that the US is DEVELOPING them or that they are ALMOST ready or that they MIGHT be ready] Try this find one or two articles from reliable sources that say that working models of such weapons exist. Cut and paste the appropriate passages into a message here and provide links. It is almost as if they knew the actual cause of the crash and were well-positioned to point out weaknesses in accounts that were not exactly right! They? I know I can dance circles around you arguementwise but I'm just one guy!! So you still think I'm a spy If you insist on implying this I will call you collect from Brazil to confirm my location. The work day in Brazil starts at 8am I get up at 7. 7 here is 4 in Duluth! I hope you like your wake up call!!!

Several flights with 2 - 3 men flight crews have crashed without making a distress calls. See post 68 for more about that or go to this link for various CVR transcripts MOST without distress calls http://www.airdisaster.com/cvr/transcripts.shtml I missed that Jim please provide a link - didn't Guess ask for and get the VOR heading? I think Craig just killed that notion anyway. LOL Jim, Eveleth and Waukegan are 503 miles apart by car so what would that be in a straight line a little under 500? So you think they manipulated GPS for the entire upper Midwest? O'Hare the busiest airport in the world is about the same distance. Why didn't any of the thousands of other planes in the region report problems? http://maps.yahoo.com/dd_result?newaddr=&t...ry=us&oerr=3003 The more you talk and write the less sense you make!!! Costella is fool, he has PhD and teaches grammar school. He does not even understand the basics of fire. 1) cloud cover was 400 - 700 feet see post # for comment from someone who knows what they are talking about 2) Yes they should have been able to. The question is why they didn't. Distraction is a strong possibility see post # and remember Eastern 401 The alarm could have been defective or turned off. Since it was badly damaged by the fire the NTSB could not determine if it was working properly or turned on. The last time an A100 crashed was another Aviation Charter flight in which thew pilot got lost in bad weather, the NTSB determined the stall alarm was turned off. The board also identified situations in which the alarm would not provide timely warning. I have pointed all this out to you before Jim

So you now admit they were only 8 degrees off the right heading and NOT "traveling away from the airport" as you previously insisted? Look at the map Jim. the plane continued travelling in a straight line after turning because they had overshot the radial. once already. they over shot it again and kept going straight [ http://www.ntsb.gov/Events/2003/Eveleth/Ev...Meeting_IIC.pdf. pg. 28] Whoever was flying might have been confused because: 1) "When the airplane was less than about 1/2 mile south of the published VOR runway 27 approach course" the controller told Guess, “King Air one bravo echo is one zero miles from the VOR turn left heading three zero zero... " [ http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2003/aar0303.pdf pgs. 4-5 (16-17) ] 2) Conry or Guess could have set the plane's navigation system incorrectly. Conry had already done this once before [same link as above pg. 10(22)] 3) the VOR beacon at Eveleth was 'out of tolerance' "The day after the crash, FAA pilots tested the VOR. The inspection pilots reported to the NTSB that when they flew the approach without their automatic pilot engaged, the VOR repeatedly brought them about a mile south of the airport. In one written statement an FAA pilot told the NTSB that the signal guided him one to two miles left or south of the runway. That's the same direction Wellstone's plane was heading when it crashed." http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/feat...likm_wellstone/ The distraction of being lost could explain them not paying attention to airspeed - if a highly experienced three man airline crew like that of Eastern 401 could be so absorbed by a malfunctioning landing gear light that they did not notice that they were rapidly loosing altitude [900 feet in 32 seconds] even AFTER an alarm sounded, why couldn't we expect two substandard pilots who were lost in poor visibility and light snow to ignore their airspeed? According to someone who unlike Drs. Fetzer, Arrows and Costella knows what he is taking about said this could have contributed to the pilot error that triggered the crash. "The director of flight operations at the University of North Dakota's School of Aerospace Sciences, Alan Palmer, says: 'If they were that far off course, then that would have meant that the airport probably wasn't off of the nose of the airplane and having said that, maybe they started to look around for the airport and during that process of looking around, both pilots were looking and perhaps they forgot to fly the aircraft.' " [ http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/feat...likm_wellstone/ - same link as above]

Craig you got that wrong. Rumsfeld is the one who controls the sun! Rove is one who changed the path of Katrina!! Jim's fruit loop buddy Jack White is already charging the later and that the levees were exploded [irrefutable photo evidence of course ] and is probably working on evidence of the former as well! Len

God Jim it's almost like we are two broken records arguing. You keep on raising the same incorrect and irrelevant points and I keep on replying to them. Reread your sources you misunderstood 1] Bollyn's article, 2]NTSB accident site regulations, and 3] Mrs. Conry's interview!!! I have pointed all this out to you back on Yahoo and again here go back through my old posts. In the article from your Nazi buddy Bollyn that you cite all that he says is that the FBI in Duluth said that the 'recovery team' came from Minneapolis. This not in dispute. McCabe [the FBI spokesman] said that agents from Duluth got to site between noon and 2. The recovery team arrived later. Wrong again !!! Jim you misread the NTSB regulations I think this the 3rd or 4th time I have brought this to your attention!!! I pointed this out to you a few times on Yahoo and once before here see the excerpt from post 45 below Not ludicrous because similar crashes have happened before. Just one example. How about this scenario - THREE airline pilots [much more qualified than Conry who was a part time charter pilot] flying a jetliner simply neglected their altitude and let the plane crash even after a warning horn sounded. Explain this one away Fetzer!!! Eastern Flight 401 "In this example, we have three highly qualified flight crewmembers (captain, first officer, and flight engineer), each with a substantial amount of flight time and experience. This flight, from New York to Miami, was routine and uneventful until arriving in the Miami vicinity. At that point, when the landing gear was extended, the nose gear light failed to illuminate. The main gears were confirmed down. All three crew members became so fixated on the landing gear light, no one noticed that the autopilot had disengaged at 2000 feet and the L1011 was slowly descending towards the Everglades. At the time the air traffic controller asked "how are things coming along out there" (in reference to working on the nose gear problem), the aircraft was at 900 feet. By the time the crew had recognized how dangerously low they were, it was too late. The aircraft had impacted the ground." "So again, we have an accident where a perfectly airworthy aircraft, under complete control of the pilot (s), was inadvertently flown into the ground, with little or no awareness by the pilot (s) until it was too late." http://www.airlinesafety.com/editorials/Hu...rrorVsTerrorism 1] The pilot had 30,000 flight hours 8 - 9 x more than Conry 2]the plane was descending at about 200 feet/min. 3]even after the altitude alert horn sounded the crew remained oblivious. the cockpit voice recorder transcript can be found at http://www.airdisaster.com/cvr/cvr_ea401.shtml Excepts from the transcript - All times below are min:sec until impact all dialogue is from the flight crew except APP which is the control tower. My comments are in blue. - 9:48 transcript starts -8:50 the flight crew notice the problem with the light and try to fix it - 7:52 Uh, Bob, it might be the light. Could you jiggle tha, the light? All three continue trying to fix the light - 6:08 Put the ... on autopilot here All three continue trying to fix the light - at some point the pilot accidentally disengages the autopilot but due to a miscalibrated switch the autopilot light remains lit - 4:40 This won't come out, Bob. If I had a pair of pliers, I could cushion it with that Kleenex All three continue trying to fix the light - 2:02 Naw that's right, we're about to cross Krome Avenue right now All three continue trying to fix the light - 1:34 [sound of altitude alert horn] No reaction to altitude alert horn the next thing said is - 1:31 We can tell if that # # # # is down by looking down at our indices All three continue trying to fix the light -0:32 APP Eastern, ah 401 how are things comin' along out there? The plane is at 900 feet but the oblivious crew thinks they are at 2000 - 0:30 pilot talks to tower changes heading doesn't notice that he is a less than half the altitude he should be - 0:23 Huh? - 0:21 One eighty - 0:07 We did something to the altitude -0:06 What? - 0:05 We're still at two thousand right? -0:03 Hey, what's happening here? [sound of click] - 0:02 [sound of six beeps similar to radio altimeter increasing in rate] 0:00 [sound of impact] Jim you misread the interview, the log book you are talking about WAS NOT THE DUPLICATE reread the interview or see my post on that point in this thread. Even his wife said he had only 3000 - 4000 hours. He forged his logbooks and had about 3400 hours Airline [not Air] Transport Pilot is the highest of only TWO professional ratings. according to the BLS 80% of professional pilots are ATPs http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos107.htm This is getting tiring Jim. You keep on bringing up incorrect or irrelevant points and I keep on replying The check is irrelevant pilots are tested every 6 months - and he had a problem during the test after a simulated stall the head pilot had to cue him to fly faster look back through my old posts for details or reread the NTSB reports. There is no way to know if he or Guess were flying. Conry normally had the co-pilot fly. He was praised by a friend who had not flown with him in 12 years!! His colleagues were mixed at best some said he was careful, most said he did not like to fly or was a bad pilot, four said he almost crashed one of them urged him to retire! He complained to a childhood friend he had difficulty flying and landing A 100s. Jim except for Flight 401 and the statistic about ATPs I have brought all of this to your attention many times!!! Why don't even try to reply to my points? I think I know whats wrong "Facts got your tongue" I will reply to the rest of this crap tomorrow Len

As per John's request I've uploaded my photo. On the subject of photography I started a new thread with some questions for photographers. I saw that Craig and Jack White already answered. All photographers pro and amateur are invited to answer, I'd even like to hear what Jim and David have to say! The link is http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=4961 Len

These questions are related to CT research but I can not disclose why I am asking them. The results should be interesting. I will let the survey run a week or so and reveal why I am asking these questions. 1] Which best describes you? Explain a] professional photographer b] scientist/researcher etc, who uses photography for their work c]advanced amateur d] beginner 2] How long have you been a photographer? 3] Do you use digital or film cameras? If you use both explain when you use which format. 4] When you fly do you put your cameras / film / memory card in your suitcase or do take them as carry on? 5] Briefly describe the equipment you have.

A few quick observations about Fetzer's EM weapon theory. According to Fetzer one of these weapons knocked out all the plane's electrical systems and/or incapacitated the pilots and set the plane on fire. 1] The plane would not have made an easy target. It was at 2000 feet and travelling at 165 KCAS [knots = 190 mph]*. Cloud cover was at 700 feet so the plane would have been invisible to anyone on the ground. 2] None of the witnesses who saw the plane before it crashed said anything about the plane being on fire. 3] None of the reports that I read about EM weapons mention the ability to set something on fire. 4] The plane only crashed about 2 minutes after being hit. Fetzer believes at least one of the wings caught fire before the crash. Most of the plane's fuel is in the wings [the tanks were close to full] why didn't the plane explode in a fireball? 5] Only a few of the victims had smoke in their lung's which is a sign they were alive after fire broke out. If the plane was burning before it crashed all of the victims should of had smoke in their lungs. * http://www.ntsb.gov/Events/2003/Eveleth/Ev...Meeting_IIC.pdf page 15 He believes that the plane was hit just after the last communication with the control tower in Duluth at 10:19:30, because this almost corresponds with the time of John Ogano's strange cell phone call at 10:18 [i.e. it was before the last radio communication]. "Just a few minutes prior to reaching the Hwy #53 and #37 intersection" http://www.assassinationscience.com/FuturisticWeaponry.pdf The intersection is about 7 or 8 miles from where the plane was at the time of the "attack". You can see Hwy 53 on the NTSB map the Hwy 37 intersection is about a mile south of the airport**. If he was travelling at 60 MPH he would have been a "just a few miles" further away so presuming he was driving north on Hwy 53 he would have been near Wilson Rd [on NTSB and Yahoo maps]. That still would have put Ogano 7 - 8 miles from where the plane was. So the beam [or was that a lightning bolt?] hit plane at 2000 feet and then bounced back to affect Ogano's cellphone about 8 miles away! Strangely no one else in the area reported anything strange except perhaps some malfunctioning garage doors. Fetzer claims that an unnamed doctor told him that an undisclosed number of nameless patients told him their garage doors acted strangely at "about the time of the crash" ** http://maps.yahoo.com/maps_result?addr=hig...ew=1&name=&qty= <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Edited for correction: the plane was at about 3400/3500 feet above sea-level when Fetzer believes it was hit, but the terrain is about 1360 feet so the plane was about 2000 feet above ground level.

I will be very busy the next few days and won't be able to reply to the rest of Fetzer non-facts and nonsense till Friday!!! Len P.S. Jim maybe in the meantime you can post 1 link that says that a weapon capable of bringing down a plane at 2000 feet is operational! Edited for correction: the plane was at about 3400/3500 feet above sea-level when Fetzer believes it was hit, but the terrain is about 1360 feet so the plane was about 2000 feet above ground level.

ROTFLMHO!!!!!!!!! Jim I asked you for links that were from RELIABLE sources, not CT sites, that say that WORKING directed energy weapons exist none of the links that I looked at provided met those criterion. Fetzer is using his quantity not quality approach. None of the articles I read say that WORKING directed energy weapons "of the kind [they] claim were used to take down the Wellstone plane" exist. Many state that the US and other countries have been working on them for decades. This is true. A few based on PR from the Defense Dept. written before the 2nd Gulf War speculated that early models of such weapons might be functional and be used in that conflict, but the lack of any report of them being used makes those article seem like claims that Saddam had WMDs. The Defense Department employees including Rumsfeld who spoke about such weapon were either thinking wishfully, trying to psych-out the Iraqis or both. Haven't these same people been trumpeting "Star Wars" and anti-ballistic missile technology since the Reagan administration. It's an inherent contradiction to cite public statements by these people that "top secret" weapons exist Many of the articles talk about weapons that are much too big to have been deployed or have different applications altogether like pulse bombs, heat rays, "mind control" devices etc. Some it seems wouldn't have the range Wellstone's plane was at about 2000 feet when Fetzer believes it was hit. One report discuses cruise missiles shooting lighting bolts. I find it hard to believe no one would have noticed a lightning bolt shooting 2000 feet in the air or that the assassins could have run the risk that they would. Jim if this is the best you can do you've proven my case LOL talk about putting your WORST foot forward This come from the site of "A human rights group working for the rights and protections of mental integrity and freedom from new technologies and weapons which target the mind and nervous system." which sounds very crackpot CT to me. It is for paranoid nut cases who believe they are the "victims" of mind control weapons. But even here there is NOTHING that backs Fetzer's claims A collection of books and articles that weaken you case Jim? Porno mags, tinfoil hat wearers and people who say that EMP don't exist are or aren't even plausible. Can't you do better that this? It starts out with a list of books and articles that discuss wave weapon and their application for mind control a few focus on their potential as weapons. Most or all are quoted at the end. Most come from reliable sources but many come from questionable ones like Hustler Magazine!! Others seen positively loony tunes they call into question the sanity of the claimant and the judgement of the person who assembled the list "His aluminum foil hat has tiny holes in it, says Rex Niles, proof that the government is bombarding him with microwaves in an attempt to kill him. "They were aggravating my conscious as well as my subconscious mind," he stated." Some books sound like supermarket titles - Zapping of America by Paul Brodeur,1977 There are some articles many from reliable sources quoted at length at the end. None of them say that there are working directed energy weapons. Some speculate they will come into existence, some say they don't exist yet or aren't plausible. Most deal with electromagnetic [EM] wave weapons' "mind control" capabilities and not their potential to 'fry' electronics "The Lockheed Martin neuroengineer hopes to turn the "electrohypnomentalophone," a mind reading machine...into science fact". ""I am not aware of military antipersonnel weapons using em radiation. There was alot of talk about it some years ago. I believe the potential for such weaponry is small since em radiation field strength decreases inversely with the distance square in the "distant" field." "But nothing has ever come of it," he said, "That is too science fiction and far-fetched." "Suppose it becomes feasible to affect brain cells by low frequency waves or beams, ..." "Assessments quoted in international literature of the potential danger of the development of a new weapon of mass destruction..." "Once it is matured the new technology will be extraordinarily significant ..." "Weapons based on new physical principles would include, ... beam, radio-wave, infrasonic, geophysical and genetic weapons. In their strike characteristics these types of weapons might be no less dangerous than mass strike weapons. The Soviet Union considers it necessary to establish a ban on the development of arms of this kind." Eight articles mostly from mainstream newspapers or magazines are reproduced or excerpted. All I saw here was speculation that EM weapons are almost ready for use or are experimental. Three don't discuss the capability to knock out electronics Article 1 - "Crowd control weapons, to be used by US troops on Iraq rioters" from the Daily Telegraph Makes no mention of being able to disable electronics. Does not say weapons are ready for use. "The non-lethal weapons, which use high-powered electromagnetic beams, will be fitted to vehicles already in Iraq, which will allow the system to be introduced as early as next year. " "the beam rapidly heats water molecules in the skin to cause intolerable pain " "The beam could be used to scatter large crowds in which insurgents operate at close quarters to both troops and civilians." Article 2 - "E-Bombing Civilization" from lewrockwell.com an "anti-state, anti-war, pro-market" site It is based on media reports. It does not say the weapons are ready for use "Several news sources have reported that the e-bomb may see its first use in the attack on Iraq" Article 3 - "America's Ultra-Secret Weapon" from Time Says that these weapons might be ready for use in the 2nd Gulf War. None of the weapons are said to be operational yet. This is one of the articles based on military sources. "HPMs are man-made lightning bolts crammed into cruise missiles...The HPM is a top-secret program, and the Pentagon wants to keep it that way. Senior military officials have dropped hints about a new, classified weapon for Iraq but won't provide details. Still, information about HPMs, first successfully tested in 1999,* has trickled out,."High-power microwave technology is ready for the transition to active weapons in the U.S. military," Air Force Colonel Eileen Walling wrote in a rare, unclassified report on the program three years ago. "There are signs that microwave weapons will represent a revolutionary concept for warfare, principally because microwaves are designed to incapacitate equipment rather than humans." "But that hurt can cause unintended problems: beyond taking out a tyrant's silicon chips, HPMs could destroy nearby heart pacemakers and other life-critical electrical systems in hospitals or aboard aircraft (that's why the U.S. military is putting them only on long-range cruise missiles)." This contradicts Fetzer's contention that portable or truck based pulse weapons exist or are being developed. "...That pulse can destroy any electronics within 1,000 ft. of the flash by short-circuiting internal electrical connections, ..."** *no details about the test are provided ** remember the plane was at about 2000 when Fetzer believes it was struck Article 4 - "US puts microwave bomb on Iraqi menu" from The Times of India This is another article based mostly on Defense Department PR. The author only says that such weapons could be ready for use. There is no mention of land based ray weapons. The implication here as with the article in Time is that weapons safe enough for a human to be near by when in use aren't even close to being ready. "The Pentagon has accelerated development of a new generation of advanced precision weaponry that could be ready for use in a high-tech battle for Baghdad, according to US military sources." "Weapons ready for battlefield deployment include a microwave bomb that emits powerful pulses of energy to destroy enemy electronics, disable communications and even block vehicle ignitions, without hurting bystanders. " "Pentagon officials have been racing to develop previously experimental weapons that might prove invaluable should US troops be ordered into action in Iraq. " "US officials believe a single microwave device carried by an unmanned aircraft could hit 100 targets with 1,000 pulses of high-intensity energy on a single sortie." Article 5 - "The Pentagon's Secret Psychopharmacological Warfare Program" from counterpunch.com Doesn't discuss EM weapons Article 6 - "Israelis blast church with invisible weapon" from the Daily Telegraph Doesn't discuss EM weapons. The weapon uses sound waves "Getting an earful ... loudspeakers held up near the Nativity Church pump out the noise. " Article 7 - "US non-lethal weapon reports suppressed" from New Scientist [makes only 1 reference to directed energy weapons] "Bugs that eat roads and buildings. Biocatalysts that break down fuel and plastics. Devices that stealthily corrode aluminium and other metals. These are just a few of the non-lethal weapons that the US has tried to develop, or is trying to develop...But quite how close such weapons are to reality we may never know..." "...Others propose directed energy weapons." Article 8 - "Just a normal town..." from New Scientist. This article it mostly speculative, no one says that the weapons exist. Some unnamed scientists say directed energy weapons are easy to make and can be bought mail-order! Others speculate they may have used by criminals. I find this hard to believe. If these weapons are so easy to make why haven't any terrorists or lunatics used them? Why isn't there use by criminals widespread? In another article sited by Fetzer an expert "scoffs at the suggestion that a do-it-yourselfer could build" such weapons. Why is the military only "doing lots of work to protect against this type of thing," and not taken concrete steps to protect it systems against attack, if such weapon are so easy to make and acquier? At other times the article indicates such weapons are still experamental and says that powerful explosives are needed to trigger powerful pulses. "E-bombs may already be part of the military arsenal. According to some, these weapons were used during NATO's campaign against Serbia last year to knock out radar systems. So do they really exist? "Lots of people are doing lots of work to protect against this type of thing," says Daniel Nitsch of the German Army Scientific Institute for Protection Technology in Muster, Lower Saxony. "You can make your own guess." "Marx generators are at the heart of an experimental weapons system...Marx generators have the advantage of being able to operate repeatedly. But to generate a seriously powerful, one-off pulse, you can't beat the oomph of old-fashioned explosives. The energy stored in a kilo or two of TNT can be turned into a huge pulse of microwaves using a device called a flux compressor" see article 2 above "the U.S. military is nowhere near fielding a narrowband HPM weapon" Another speculative article . But even the prototypes mentioned are too much to large to have used against Wellstone. The author says "...the perfect weapon would literally stop an enemy in his tracks, yet harm neither hide nor hair...In fact, it almost certainly is already here, in the form of high-power microwave (HPM) weapons." But the rest of the text contadicts the 'already here' assesment. ""HPM sources are maturing, and one day, in the very near future, they will help revolutionize how U.S. soldiers fight wars," says Edl Schamiloglu, a professor of electrical and computer engineering at the University of New Mexico..." Even the prototype ray devices mentioned seem to bulky to be used as Fetzer imagines "With a huge cylinder at one end connected to the long microwave source, the Sinus-6 looks like a giant torch lying on its side" this would have to coupled with to a micro-wave source "Among the best candidates for supplying microwaves is the backward wave oscillator" "One disadvantage of this oscillator, however, is that it needs an external magnetic field to create the microwave beam, a major hurdle to making the whole system smaller. The size of the Sinus-6 and attendant equipment in Schamiloglu's basement suggests that the U.S. military is nowhere near fielding a narrowband HPM weapon. "When I first started working on high-power narrowband sources, we joked that you can do more damage dropping this equipment on someone than you can by using it," he recalls" "Among those agreeing that narrowband HPM weapons will need more refining before they become truly useful to the military is Loren B. Thompson, chief operating officer of the Lexington Institute, a military think tank based in Arlington, Va. He looked at the technology as principal investigator of "Directed-Energy Weapons: Technologies, Applications and Implications," "Thompson's report speaks of a future with satellites delivering missile-debilitating microwaves, unmanned vehicles that fly by and destroy communications systems" NO MENTION IS MADE OF LAND BASED SYSTEMS "Arthur Varanelli, a Raytheon Co. engineer...says. "I just don't see people running around with Buck Rogers ray guns. It's great for a science fiction writer, great to prey upon people's fears." He scoffs at the suggestion that a do-it-yourselfer could build a microwave weapon potent enough to do real damage". That was about as far as I got I don't have the patience to read all the crap. So come from obviously crackpot sites like I could not get http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/cst/csat11.pdf to open but I believe it is a report by USAF Col. Wahling [cited in the Time article] which was a funding proposal that says such weapons are not yet ready for use. Fetzer pasted the text of another article that says we are close to developing such devices but "Such weapons are now nearing fruition. But logistical issues have delayed their battlefield debut" Only one weapon is described as operational "Among the simplest forms are inexpensive, handheld lasers that fill people's field of vision, inducing a temporary blindness to ensure they stop at a checkpoint, for example. Some of these already are used in Iraq." The prototypes seem impractical "At present, StunStrike is a 20-foot tower that can zap things up to 28 feet away. The next step is to shrink it so it could be wielded by troops and used in civilian locales like airplane cabins or building entrances". The StunStrike is only capable of stunning people not taking out electronics SO FETZER I'LL ASK YOU AGAIN GIVE US A LINK TO 1 RELIABLE SITE THAT SAYS SUCH WEAPONS EXIST!!!! Edited for correction: the plane was at about 3400/3500 feet above sea-level when Fetzer believes it was hit, but the terrain is about 1360 feet so the plane was about 2000 feet above ground level.

He likes to make sarcastic remarks about what people do for a living. He did it to you and to me and to some other guy. [see previous post on the thread I cited] that must be because he not very happy about his current state of employment. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ost&p=38521I won't respond to any of his posts here if they continue to be of this low level and I suggest you do the same. Our bickering with him only serves to distract from discussion of the details of this case which is to Fetzer's advantage. So does getting into debates over the Z-film and other JFK issues Len <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Healy just likes to go WOOF WOOF...he's the guard dog here for Fetzer, White and Costella. Don't ever expect him to actually offer anything of substance to the discussion, thats just not his job, nor does it seem that he is qualified to do anything more. <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Fetzer contends that the Wellstone crash must have been do to foul play because he finds it hard to believe that 2 "such highly rated pilots" as Conry and Guess could have simply let the plane crash. I searched the database of airdisaster.com for the word "stall" it returned approximately 47 matches all were commercial airliners except for a few cargo flights and one Russian supersonic jet. The database does not cover on-demand charter flights like the one Wellstone was on. On demand charters are the most dangerous types of passenger flights*. Many of the crashes were due to pilot/crew error. For many of the crashes the cause of the stall is not clear. The attached chart shows 16 accidents that were due to gross pilot error and/or there were cockpit voice recorder transcripts. In most cases the pilot seems to have "simply let the plane crash". Since these flights were commercial airline flights [only one was a cargo flight] and all or almost all the planes were jets, the pilots would have held much higher ratings than Conry or Guess and probably had more flight hours. For all of Fetzer's talk about Conry the truth is he had applied to various companies and the only one that hired him was Aviation Charter a company with numerous safety violations. *And they only hired him because he claimed to have professional experience he didn't* and exaggerated his flight time* [He claimed to have about 4500 hours when hired but only had about 3000]** and they only employed him part time he flew 598 hours in 17 months an average of only 35 hours a month. He was obviously at a much lower level than commercial airline pilots. We can also presume that there were 2 -3 person flight crews even without a transcript. Where a tape transcript is available I indicate the approximate amount of time the plane was in distress and the number of flight crew members, THERE WERE NO DISTRESS CALLS for the four crashes with transcripts. The url for the search results is http://www.airdisaster.com/cgi-bin/search_...gi?search=stall OK Jim explain these away. 2 - 3 person flight crews, higher rated and more experienced pilots than Conry, simply letting the plane crash, no distress calls. If you can't explain ALL of them away you have to admit there is a major hole in your thesis. I compared your theory to a three legged table and said it had one wobbly leg. Well guess what that one just fell off. You should offer every one who bought your book their money back!! Len * I am tired. I will add links to my sources tomorrow. **According to company records Conry had 5116 hours based on his claimed previous experience and them 598 he flew for the 5116 - 598 = 4518. The NTSB could not document 1460 of his claimed hours 4518 - 1460 = 3058

Craig - This Healy guy seems like a complete moron. As much as I jibe at Fetzer I have to admit he's not an idiot - he is just blinded by his preconceived notions!! This guy on the other hand, only knows how to insult people who call into question the findings of his "intellectual fellow travelers" Fetzer and White. His comments don't even serve to advance his friends' ideas - he does not seem to be capable of anything beyond insults and sarcastic remarks. Elsewhere of this forum some had this to say http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ost&p=38521I won't respond to any of his posts here if they continue to be of this low level and I suggest you do the same. Our bickering with him only serves to distract from discussion of the details of this case which is to Fetzer's advantage. So does getting into debates over the Z-film and other JFK issues Len

For some reason the 'quote box' funtion isn't working Fetzer's quotes are in blue. From what I know about White's work on JFK, the Moon landings, 9/11 and now Katrina I think he should be described as "one of the more experienced disseminators of disinformation" on the face of the planet!! That's a great Catch 22 to use against your debunkers when you can not easily counter their arguments. What about your "intense attack" on the Warren Commission Report, the Zapruder film, and the NTSB reports of the Wellstone crash! Using YOUR own logic against you they must be very close to the truth. I can't say with the former, doubt your arguments about the second but know you are wrong about the latter. LOL - Then why are you sweating so much? Jim you're right I did cut that out. That was an editing error I will correct it. You can hardly call that a "cover up" since you had it in your post on the same page! Now why don't you TRY to debate the merits of the case? I said why I though it was irrelevant and pointed out that he had a 'small' problem during the test that was eerily reminiscent of the crash. What do you have to say about that? What's wrong 'Facts got your tounge'? LOL - I think you were the only person who did not get it Jim! I live in Brazil where I teach English and sell art among other things as explained in my bio which there is a link to at the bottom of all my posts. If it will make you happy I will you collect from here so that you won't have any doubts as to my location. For the record I am not now nor have I ever been an employee of the US or any other government. I did take the State Department's entrance exam but did make the cut [only 2% of the takers do]. A very good description of your work. See the inconsistencies I pointed out in my reply to Craig and my other posts and try to explain them. I am glad that you no longer classify me as "cognitively impaired"!!! And you on mine. If my case has so many fallacies why can't you counter them. Jim do you know what ad hominem means? I believe your misuse of the word was brought up in the Yahoo forum. This is the definition from Webster's 1 : appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect 2 : marked by an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made http://m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dic...ominem&x=14&y=9 We both have attacked each other's character but I am the one arguing the merits of the case which something you avoid doing. 1] Saying I've done my homework is not the same as saying I'm right Jim. They just recognized the obvious that I know a lot about the case. 2] Wasn't it I who provided the links to the reports and urged everyone to read them and urged people to read YOUR articles? I point out various fallacies with your arguments. Funny only after I provided the links do you now urge people to read the reports. When you don't have a good reply all you can say is "read the book". Since you are the author I would expect you to be able to make reasonable replies to the following. Nothing at length just a few sentences. 1] Why kill Wellstone BEFORE the election? How would this be expected to help Coleman? In the first poll with him as a candidate Mondale as would be expected INCREASED Wellstone's lead over Coleman. The Dems lost the election because of 1) the partisan nature of the funeral 2) unfair and exaggerated spin of funeral by the GOP 3) and possibly by vote stealing by the Republicans. Polls taken after the funeral showed Mondale with a reduced lead or trailing. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Congressi..._Polls.html#MN/ Tell me how the Max Cleland thing worked. It doesn't make sense The Republican Senatorial candidate in Georgia gets to spend an extra $700,000 because the Democratic candidate in Minnesota died!?!? 2] I have already asked you a few times here and we asked you back at Yahoo repeatedly for ONE reliable link stating that operational EMPs that could bring down a plane exist. If they did you should be able to come up with a few but you have yet to give us one! I already answered that one in post # 57. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...indpost&p=39518 When did I tell people not to read the book? I think I made comments like "Don't waste your time and money or at least your money" get it from the library and "If you're not convinced by my arguments go ahead and buy the book" I made the second after you had already accused me of dissuading people to read your book. LOL That's because they aren't CT nuts like you fantasising about not existent weapons. As for the gas canister, was it shot into the plane from the ground or was it planted? Why didn't the coroner detect anything during the tox screens of the victims? Are you really that thick Jim or are you pretending for arguments sake? Didn't we go over this in the Yahoo group? Of course they don't know what happen exactly because there were no voice or data recorders on the plane. The info they had about speed, direction and altitude was approximate. A plane with 2 incompetent pilots stalled and crashed. They did not have enough info to know EXACTLY how and why this happened. Since there have been several similar crashes WITHOUT distress calls including one where a commercial airliner simply flew into the ground with a THREE member crew and another were the crew simply let the plane run out of fuel there is no reason to doubt the NTSB's conclusions. http://www.airlinesafety.com/editorials/Hu...rrorVsTerrorism Even very competent people can make mistakes but improperly trained incompetent ones are more likely to. And what about all the people who used to work for Wellstone many of whom work for Wellstone Action none of them want to have anything to do with you. Also you skipped answering the part about the lack of any experts who back you claims. I agree Beyond belief is that don't seem to understand the question, or are you pretending? HOW WOULD WELLSTONE'S DEATH BENEFIT COLEMAN? HOW WOULD IT BE EXPECTED TO INCREASE HIS CANCE OF WINNING? Niman wrote something a few days after the crash has he said anything since? Oh yeah your Nazi buddies don't you think it degrades you to constantly associate yourself with them aren't your worried that by citing them as reliable sources to give them credibility? For the record the American Free Press and Bollyn believe there is a Jewish plot to take over the World and that the Holocaust was a hoax and there were no gas chambers http://www.read-all-about-it.org/archive_e...on_afp1203.html. Bollyn said on one of his various appearances on "white civil rights" leader David Duke's radio show that the Jewish media promotes interracial relationships so that "no one know who they are anymore" http://www.whitecivilrights.com/duke-inter...live-web-radio/ The author of the Sherlock Holmes books had no doubt that faries existed. <http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/doyle.htm> There is a Ph.D. at Northwestern who doesn't believe the Holocaust took place and there is a Philospher of Science [just like you] who uses "the scientific method of inference to the best explanation [also just like you] who believes in intelligent design http://www.newsobserver.com/politics/v-pri...p-9179039c.html and http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/fte/darwinism/chapter3.html and you have a lot of nutty ideas. As usual you make claims without any evidence Thanks!!! I totally agree [LOL]

Craig - Good to 'see' you again, I haven't seen you since our last debriefing at Langley [lol]. Yes our rival proves the old adage "the more people stay the same the less the change". I hope the reader sees through his pandering. Funny this guy's ego is big that he assumes that anyone he can't match wits with is a spy. Yes Mr."eminent" Ph.D. how many years did it take him to get tenure at a lowly ranked school? I predicted that he would not argue the merits of the case he briefly proved me wrong but now seems to be falling back to form. Notice how he has not even bothered to rebut most of my most recent claims? He has not even attempted to explain his changing story about what Sheriff Wahlberg told him and the differences between what his sources said and how he quoted them [bollyn, NTSB regulations, the logbook discrepancies and who found which logbook]. I will take his continuing silence as an admission of error. On the subject of avoidance notice how he has yet to address the subject of his other crackpot ideas about 9/11 [WTC was a demolition job, Pentagon was hit by a missile], the Moon ['we' never went there], and the Dallas Parks Department's involvement in the JFK cover up. Also that the Challenger was shot down with a 'death ray' just like the Wellstone plane!. Explain for the benefit for the rest of us about "the principal of the lever" debate. Even I missed that because it was before my time on the Yahoo forum. I sure we will all find it enlightening. I need to call you on your usage error, fetzer and fetzering should not be capitalised. I should know I am an English teacher and I coined the word! Craig let's try to avoid bringing in the JFK mess here as much as possible. This only works to Fetzer's advantage because it draws attention away from the Wellstone case. Len

I think Fetzer, Costella and Arrows believe that Wellstone was murdered by Bush. In Fetzer's case at least it seems clear to me that he is willing to stretch, bend and distort the truth to prove his case, like a DA or cop who would fake evidence against a suspect they were sure was guilty. Several eminent people have come to have strange beliefs. There are Ph.D. university professors who don't believe the Holocaust happened or that we went to the Moon, there are others who believe in "Intelligent Design" [i.e. Creationism]. Without exception [as far as I can tell] these profs. who believe these things are outside their area of specialty. For example there aren't any European [general], Jewish, German, Polish etc. History/Studies profs. who doubt the Holocaust, no Physics, Geology or Aero-space engineering profs. who don't think man has been to moon and no natural sciences [biology etc.] profs., who believe in Creationism. This makes sense because these crackpot ideas are based on misconceptions that people who know there stuff don't suffer from! So I ask Fetzer have any pilots, aviation or crash scene experts endorsed you theories? Has anyone with expertise in fire backed you ideas in that regard, have any experts in the area said publicly that EMPs exist? Now that we are on the subject has anyone associated with Wellstone or any of the other victims expressed anything but disdain for your theories? The Wellstone people and family seem to want to distance themselves from you as much as possible! They complain that it is a distraction from his legacy. http://www.wellstone.org/news/news_detail....=4054&catID=298 There is also the interesting case of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle who believed all manner of strange things! <http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/doyle.htm>

Jokes aside his and Healy's and the rest of their gangs paranoid assumption that anyone who questions their beliefs is a closet right-winger, spook or working with Tink a bit odd!

I think his nasty/contemptuous replies to Pat and Steve politely questioning his ideas puts a lie to this contention. Part of the reason that I dedicate the amount of time that I do to debunking Fetzer is that when I questioned him on the forum he was extremely obnoxious. As Fetzer knows I've been debating him for months on another forum. I was one of a few debunkers there. Some of them have been at it for years! So it's does take that much time, at this point the research has already been done! Sometimes all have to is cut and paste posts from the other forum. As for my professional status there are two versions. You can read the first in the link at the bottom of this post but that's just my "cover story"! For the real deal read on. I posted this in the other forum Tink is of course Josiah Thompson, Craig is Craig Lamson who many of you know from this forum, Hobo is the "self described former NSA official" mentioned by Fetzer and Rees is a right-wing retired USAF Col./pilot we were Fetzer's main debunkers. From: "Leonard" Date: Sun Jun 26, 2005 6:49 pm Subject: Jim was right all along - Tink, Craig, Rees, Hobo and I killed Wellstone "You have acknowledged you are a "former" intelligence officer ... I have been told that there are no truly "former" intelligence officers. ... I am becoming less confident that your presence here is some kind of coincidence...So I am beginning to form doubts about you, Hobo." Jim's suspicions are actually right, Hobo IS a secret agent. He works for the ultra secretive MIBH [Men in Black Helicopters]. So are Craig and Rees. Tink is their handler. They work out of that dam in Tennessee referred to in one of Jim's previous posts. The only reason for their participation in this forum is to discredit Fetzer who has discovered our crimes. I say our crimes because I just defected. I hope they don't find me, I´m now hiding in a location that for obvious reasons I can't disclose with Osama bin Ladem, Elvis and Jim Morrison. Due to extreme boredom we have formed a barber shop quartet. Osama has been teaching the King about the Koran and he will soon convert to Islam. We were directly involved in the hit. I pulled the trigger, Rees did recon, Hobo was the wheel man and Craig was the spotter at the Minneapolis airport. Our EMP equipped van was disguised as an ice-cream truck. We are responsible for the Kobe earthquake, 911, Waco, OKC, the 1st WTC bombing, the downing of the shuttle and the murders of Mel Carnahan, John Lennon, John Tower and Sonny Bono. Our predecessors killed JFK, RKF, MLK jr., Malcolm X and Mama Cass. We are from the same agency that listens to the 'rain sensors' in Dealy Plaza. We were the ones who put the holes in Dr. Costella's shirt. I was the 'substitute teacher' who went through his desk. Hobo my old friend I ask you just one favor. When you find me, and I have do doubt that you will, make it painless. Len

duplicte message deleted

Welcome to the thread Tim! Do you think she might have cost Kerry the election? With the count so close in so many states any number of small factors could have changed the result. I don't want to sound bigotted but think at least a few people with "small town" "middle American" mentality could have been turned off at the prospect of having a foreign first lady with a funny accent? But back to the topic, what's your take on the Wellstone crash? Have you read the other posts here? Len

I think you are giving him too much credit. Maybe that's because you are sympathetic to his beliefs. No acknowledgement of error was made, I didn't see any attempt to find common ground. You said something like you admire his ability to get angry. Being able to get angry can be a good thing but only when it is justified and your mild questioning in no way justified his obnoxious remarks. You appologised to him but he didn't appologised to you. He denied calling you an idiot which he plainly did. I suggest again how detached from reality this shows he is. I mean is he using Bill Clinton [hey I voted for him twice] I didn't inhale, I did not have sex with woman it was only a blowjob and a cigar, I didn't call you an idiot just said you were "massively ignorant" logic? Did he forget what he had typed only two day earlier? Either case this alone enough should be to undermine his credibility. And talking about credibility read my posts carefully. Look especially at the parts where I show the discrepancies between how he reports what a source said and their actual words. For example the what he says about who found which logbook, the discrepancies in the logbooks, what Herr Bollyn said about the FBI, what the final report said about stall alarms etc. In future posts I will point out further such discrepancies. I don't tout "the official government position" on most issues I was involved in the ACLU after all! I think Bush is a total asshole ditto "Uncle Ron". As for the flag I think people should be free to burn or even take a dump on it if they so desire - I chewed out a friend of mine who stuck one his kid's baby carriage after 9-11 [thankfully he took my advice and ditched it]. I always though Cronkite was cool didn't he call the Chicago cops who were hassling Dan Rather "a couple of thugs" and question the Vietnam War? The history between us is this. I started participating in the FETZERclaimsDEBUNK forum in June. His arrogance and obnoxiousness there spurred me on to debunk him even more. Also as I've said before he gives us liberals a bad name because people lump him with people bringing up legitimate questions about Bush's disastrous administration. Getting moderate voters to reject the GOP is the key to bring this country back sanity, wild unfounded CT's from Fetzer and his ilk don't help. I was an active participant in that forum as was Fetzer. He fled the forum, because we poked too many holes in his contentions, a few weeks ago. Craig Lamson who many of you know pointed out that he posts here. Not being that into the JFK thing I did not post until John started this thread. I am not stalking him I just want him to answer my questions an stop spreading false information. As for his paranoia it was infamous long before I even knew who he was. I have given you no reason to doubt my political leanings. Do think I am flat out lying? I moved to Brazil in 1993 and have been a bit removed from American politics - I mean I still vote and follow the news on the Net and satalight TV but it's not the same as when I lived in the US [ those poor little kids by the railroad tracks?????]. From afar the Vince Foster, Clinton Chronicles etc seemed to ridiculous to be taken seriously. Bush's attempt to shift blame for 9/11 did piss me off but worse was knowing that if his administration had done their job the disaster might well have been avoided. Worse even was his snowballing of the American public in the push for war. But Fetzer and friends make debating these issues more difficult with their weird claims that the WTC collapse was a demolition job and that the Pentagon was hit by a missile etc. He belongs in the same boat as that Jim Marrs guy he brings discredit to those legitimately questioning the misdeeds of the Bush junta. To be honest the FETZERclaimsDEBUNK group was the first Internet forum I got involved in As for the other issues there already were so many people debating them I don't know if my participation would have made much of a difference. I almost got involved in a debate over those Swift Boat assholes' crap about Kerry but it seemed pointless everyone on the board had already made up their minds. As for Fetzer's claims I do think they are totally unfounded. A plane crashing in the manner it did is not common but similar accidents have occurred. It seems unlikely until you look closely at who those two pilots were. Having two pilots does not always increase safety. It does if one becomes incapacitated or if one screws up and the other catches it [as happen with Conry at least 5 times during his brief employment with the company] but when then the plane is about to crash it could make things worse. The two could "work at odds" one trying to pull the plane one way and the second the other. It also seems unlikely when you consider that Fetzer can't produce one reputable citation of the weapon he claims was used existing or that it would have made more sense that to kill Wellstone after he was sworn in for his third term if he did indeed win. Because it's not true and for the reasons stated above