How Corrupt Was the Clinton Presidency, Compared to Other Administrations

[Ron Ecker]

Vince didn't have his car keys at the park? "Give 'em to Craig Livingstone and send him to the morgue to, uh, identify the body."

"I don't care who has already searched Vince's briefcase. Put this suicide note in it, torn into several pieces so no one can miss it."

A bullet hole in the top of Ron Brown's head? "Bury him, fast. An autopsy? Not unless the Bethesda three stooges are still available. Or that guy with the broken x-ray machine who did Foster."

(From The Clinton Chronic Kills)

[Guest Robert Morrow]

.................

CIA AGENT AND PILOT CHIP TATUM TAPED BUDDY YOUNG (CLINTON'S TOP AIDE)

AND MIKE HARIRI (MOSSAD) ON A COCAINE FLIGHT 3-16-85

BUDDY YOUNG CALLS BOB NASH A "YES MAN" AND A "MISTAKE"

..................

Robert, aside from quoting other people who bought Tatum's claims and repeated them, what primary research can you post to support the idea that Tatum was CIA, and before that, in Special Ops?

I found Tatum's claim that he accidentally shot down the 210 Cessna Nir and Adriana Stanton were passengers in Mexico in Dec., 1988, to be the hollow claims of an well read opportunist. If something is repeated often enough, do you simply believe it and quote others who've spread it? What has Tatum himself brought to the table to prove his claims, that is not sourced solely from his mouth or keyboard?

Good point. Tatum is pretty much the only one. I believe. Usually elite counterintelligence agents don't "defect" en masse or in groups of 5 to 10. However, Tatum initially was charged with "TREASON" by the government and I think that counts for lot. Who the heck gets charged with "treason?" ... then convicted on fraud. Then there is the matter of the "diesel therapy" that was administered to Tatum while he was in jail; clearly he was a high value target; the government certainly does not treat everyone that way.

Ted Gunderson believed his story. Jon Gentry of Dallas interviewed Chip Tatum 4 times and found him to be credible.

Edited April 2, 2012 by Robert Morrow

[Guest Robert Morrow]

Note to Tom Scully: the following is "documentation." You make not like the ugly truth; you may question the sources, but it is "documentation."

As for Bill Clinton being a sexual predator, I believe that completely. Clinton has assaulted or made crude passes at a lot more women than just Juanita Broaddrick on 4/25/98.

Yes, the vast majority of Clinton's trysts were consensual. That does not excuse the man's behavior in cases like this:

Biographer Roger Morris, on page 238 of his book Partners in Power, tells of another savage sexual assault by Bill that involved his lip biting modus operandi for sexual assaults:

"A young woman lawyer in Little Rock claimed that she was accosted by Clinton while he was attorney general and that when she recoiled he forced himself on her, biting and bruising her. Deeply affected by the assault, the woman decided to keep it all quiet for the sake of her own hard-won career and that of her husband. When the husband later saw Clinton at the 1980 Democratic Convention, he delivered a warning. 'If you ever approach her,' he told the governor, 'I'll kill you.' Not even seeing fit to deny the incident, Bill Clinton sheepishly apologized and duly promised never to bother her again." [Roger Morris, Partners in Power, page 238]

Investigator Rick Lambert (for Paula Jones lawyers) talked to Judy Stokes who was a close friend to Liz Ward Gracen. Lambert says, “I talked to Judy Stokes for an hour and a half. At first, she was reluctant to burn her bridges with Liz. But I finally asked, ‘Do you believe Clinton raped her?’ She said , “Absolutely. He forced her to have sex. What do you call that?’ Stokes was totally convinced it was rape.”

[www.papillonsartpalace.com/janedoe.htm, accessed 5/5/07]

Here is what Elizabeth Ward Gracen, the 1982 Miss America, who tearfully confided to friends that she did not want the sex with Bill in 1983, later said in 1998:

“I think [bill] is a very dangerous, manipulative man and I’ve had to be very careful. There was a lot of pressure on my family and friends, people were being staked out. I was a little bit afraid for my safety at one point. It’s just not an area where you are safe.” [Toronto Star, 9-17-98]

"Yes, I was physically scared. We are talking about the presidency of the country here, and between the friendly calls on one hand telling me to get out of town for my own good and then talking about smear tactics on the other, I got scared. Yes, physically scared. There were always veiled threats. Always. I did nothing wrong except one stupid night a long time ago. But now this last year has become very frightening." [NY Post, 9-27-98, by Steve Dunleavy]

Elizabeth received threatening phone calls and her belongings were ransacked while Elizabeth was on vacation in St. Martin by 3 men in suits (according to a witness). Her manager Vincent Vento said these intimidating phone callers said “You should really keep your mouth shut about Bill Clinton and go on with your life. You could be discredited. You could have an IRS investigation.” [NY Post, 1-13-99] Within a few weeks, the IRS was sending audit letters to Elizabeth’s parents’ home, which was not listed on her tax filings.

And as for what Bill Clinton did to Paula Jones: simply put, the man exposed himself to her in 1991. Unprompted and uncalled for. To this day Clinton says he has never met Paula Jones.

Author Ed Klein interviewed a Wall Street guy who met the Clintons on vacation in 1979.

Edward Klein, in his book The Truth about Hillary, quotes an anonymous New York investment banker who met the Clintons while on vacation in June, 1979.

The boys were drinking at the hotel bar and Bill, filled with alcohol, announces to his new friends “I’m going back to my cottage to rape my wife.” [p.90, The Truth about Hillary]

The next day, Bill, always looking for contributors, calls the banker up for breakfast. The banker and wife come over to the Clintons’ room. The banker says “When we get there the place looks like WWIII. There are pillows and busted up furniture all over the place. Obviously, Hillary’s got pissed at Bill, and threw a few things across the room. I guess that’s the price he paid for going back to his room and taking the initiative and demanding sex.” [p.91, The Truth about Hillary]

Kathy Fergusen was the former wife of Danny Fergusen, an Arkansas state trooper for Bill. She committed suicide by gunshot on May 10, 1994. Kathy’s friend Sherry Butler stated in an affidavit on 11-7-94:

“Kathy Fergusen had been a friend of mine from 1991-1994 and on occasion had mentioned that while attending functions at the Governor’s mansion then Governor Bill Clinton had cornered her in the kitchen of the mansion and pinned her to the counter. Shortly before her death Kathy stated that what Paula Corbin Jones was saying about Clinton was the truth and quote ‘I wouldn’t put anything past Bill Clinton.’”

Kathy, a nurse, had also told Dr. Samuel Houston that she had been “trapped” by Bill in the governor’s mansion at a party during one of his sexual advances (same incident that Sherry describes).

Dolly Kyle Browning, Bill’s longtime girlfriend, was told by her own brother, Walter Kyle, an aide in the ’92 Clinton campaign, “If you cooperate with the media, we will destroy you.” [sellout, p. 120] The Clintons corrupted Dolly’s own brother.

Edited April 2, 2012 by Robert Morrow

[Michael Hogan]

Note to Tom Scully: the following is "documentation." You make not like the ugly truth; you may question the sources, but it is "documentation."

Why would Tom question the source ? An anonymous investment banker accusing Clinton of rape? Why would anyone question that source?

There is a difference between documentation and "documentation." I believe Morrow favors the latter.

....Edward Klein, in his book The Truth about Hillary, quotes an anonymous New York investment banker who met the Clintons while on vacation in June, 1979.

The boys were drinking at the hotel bar and Bill, filled with alcohol, announces to his new friends “I’m going back to my cottage to rape my wife.” [p.90, The Truth about Hillary]

The next day, Bill, always looking for contributors, calls the banker up for breakfast. The banker and wife come over to the Clintons’ room. The banker says “When we get there the place looks like WWIII. There are pillows and busted up furniture all over the place. Obviously, Hillary’s got pissed at Bill, and threw a few things across the room. I guess that’s the price he paid for going back to his room and taking the initiative and demanding sex.” [p.91, The Truth about Hillary]

Morrow calls this kind of stuff the ugly truth. He's half right.

And he will never change.

Here is a liberal blog's take on Edward Klein:

A Media Matters for America examination of The Truth About Hillary finds that Klein recycles long-debunked claims about the Clintons;

relies on anonymous sources for much that isn't recycled -- more than 70 footnotes refer to unnamed sources; and is chock-full of misleading

claims and outright factual errors. It's also marked by a juvenile obsession with sex and a reliance on "convenient rather than complete evidence"

that are rapidly becoming the author's trademark.

http://mediamatters.org/research/200506230001

Not unlike some of the charges Forum members have made about Morrow.

[Guest Robert Morrow]

Michael Hogan, you have every right to question what anonymous sources say. Anonymous sources have told various authors about Clinton:

1) That Bill found out about Hillary's pregnancy by reading the newspaper (to Edward Klein). That Bill said he was going back to his room to "rape my wife."

2) That Bill was making out in the bathroom with another woman at his own wedding reception on 10/11/75. And it was not Hillary (I think Chris Anderson)

3) That Bill severely attacked a woman, biting her lip (Roger Morris interviewed the victim and her husband twice)

4) The State Dept official who told Capital Hill Blue that Bill had raped a 19 year old student Eileen Wellstone while at Oxford.

5) Michael Isikoff was called by a woman who said that she rebuffed Bill's advances and in her words, Bill "finished it himself."

Judge those "anonymous" sources and those authors however you like.

Now there have been several on the record sources of Bill exposing himself (2 Paula Jones, Carolyn Moffet), making a very crude pass (Kathleen Willey), raping someone (Juanita Broadrick) and Elizabeth Ward Gracen's girlfriend said that Bill raped her friend. Not to mention Bill's cocaine use allegations by Gennifer Flowers, Sally Perdue, Bobby Ann Williams and Sharlene Wilson who said Bill was so cocaine intoxicated that he slid against the wall and sat down in a trash can looking like an idiot/clown.

Then there is Jerry Parks' wife who said that Bill, as governor, used to party with high school girls.

I could go on an on and on and on and on ...

Also, there is another anonymous source that said Bill had a *minimum* of 30 women - and I stress the word "minimum" at Oxford, where he did not graduate, was accused of raping a student, and per Cord Meyer was recruited into the CIA to rat on his anti-war buddies.

Bob Shrum says wild Bill used to take his girlfriends to stay overnight at Pamela Harriman's and that she thought this was very trashy (Bill was married.)

Bill also hit on Ron Brown's daughter.

And don't forget all those hilarious and disturbing stories that the Arkansas state troopers had about Bill's and Hillary's dysfunctions.

Really, Monica Lewinsky is just a tiny blip on the radar screen compared to what Clinton has been up to for literally decades.

Edited April 3, 2012 by Robert Morrow

[Michael Hogan]

Michael Hogan, you have every right to question what anonymous sources say....

Robert Morrow would do well to exercise that right himself. But he doesn't and he won't.

Instead, he refers to anonymous quotes allegedly given to an agenda-driven author as "documentation" and truth.

One can fabricate an endless number of fantasies using that criteria.

I could go on an on and on and on and on ...

It's known as a lack of critical thinking.

Edited April 3, 2012 by Michael Hogan

[Michael Hogan]

Deleted

Edited April 3, 2012 by Michael Hogan

[Guest Robert Morrow]

The reason I think these anonymous sources are credible is the incredible volume of people who have gone ON THE RECORD about the perversions and unhinged sexual dysfunctions of Bill Clinton. That and the fact that these authors are so varied: Edward Klein, Roger Morris, Michael Isikoff, Capital Hill Blue, Chris Anderson and that is just a starter list.

There is a reporter I know who sometimes appears on national TV and he knew the reporters in Little Rock. Every time there used to be a new "hottie" TV reporter hired by the local TV media when Clinton was governor, Clinton would announce an open house after work party for the media at the governor's mansion.

Of course, Hillary would be out of town.

Well, the media would come; Clinton would mingle around with everyone, then he would laser focus on the young, hot TV girl newbie. And the next thing you know Clinton and the girl would be leaving to another room while he made his move.

This reporter said he saw the same process repeated about 10 times. Clinton for decades was so over the top and blatant about his behavior.

No doubt the man is a lothario, I think the evidence is strong Bill Clinton is a rapist, pervert and serial sexual predator. And he has never been held to account for it. Forget impeachment, the man should have been in an Arkansas jail a long, long time ago!

Edited April 3, 2012 by Robert Morrow

[Michael Hogan]

The reason I think these anonymous sources are credible is the incredible volume of people who have gone ON THE RECORD about the perversions and unhinged sexual dysfunctions of Bill Clinton. That and the fact that these authors are so varied: Edward Klein, Roger Morris, Michael Isikoff, Capital Hill Blue, Chris Anderson and that is just a starter list.

If there is an "incredible volume of people who have gone ON THE RECORD" then there should be no need to cite anonymous sources and refer to them as "documentation" and the truth.

They simply are not that. Morrow is unable to make that distinction.

No doubt the man is a lothario, I think the evidence is strong Bill Clinton is a rapist, pervert and serial sexual predator. And he has never been held to account for it. Forget impeachment, the man should have been in an Arkansas jail a long, long time ago!

Whether Clinton is or isn't "a rapist, pervert and serial sexual predator" is not the issue. The issue is Morrow's blanket acceptance of questionable sources as "documentation" and truth.

Why does Morrow not stick to claims that can be verified or actually corroborated? That is what is required to put a man in jail.

[John Dolva]

I think this is ridiculous when the real issue here, imo, is the Iran-Contra affair and the possible ties to JFK. I'm not into this attack on Clinton. I never met the guy. Besides, looking at things from here the whole thing about Clinton was a sour joke. What wasn't known generally was the organisation and execution of the counter FSLN efforts pre victory and how even then things were guided by yankee imperialisms (sorry that just slipped out) I mean Reagan and Co long term interests amongst others the placing of forces in Costa Rica which etc etc etc... . Anyway, the implications are far greater and here there is an obsession at work that negates getting any thing of value. That becomes the focus. I think there should be a topic that deals with sex in general and this look into Clinton to shift towards a no agenda paradigm. I would certainly learn a lot. This is ordinary and old.

[Len Colby]

You know Ron, I am really surprised you would put in that stuff about Henry Lee without placing his reply to it. Very unfair to him:

http://riverdeepbook.blogspot.com/2011/03/dr-henry-lees-email-to-la-times-phil.html

I mentioned it because I just discovered it in trying to find Lee's report on Foster with a web search. But I probably shouldn't have included it because I don't believe in killing the messenger on something, whether it's Henry Lee or Christopher Ruddy.

As per the final verdict on Foster's death, I saw a report by Lee on this in which he specifically went after a couple of points by Ruddy, namely the carpet fibers and the tracing of the handgun. He showed they were simply distorted beyond meaning.

It's been years since I researched the Foster case. I don't remember much about fibers and the handgun. Two things that have stuck in my mind are, one, an autopsy with no x-rays. Why wouldn't Lee address that? And two, the car keys that were not in Foster's pockets when they were searched at Fort Marcy Park, but which somehow turned up in his pocket after a visit to the morgue by White House personnel to "identify the body." If Lee has a magic car keys theory, I would like to hear it. I'll read Lee's report when I have the time, but I'll fall out of my chair if he even mentions car keys.

BTW, there were 35 people on Brown's plane. Someone killed him with 33 witnesses, knowing the plane would crash? Or like Weekend at Bernie's, they killed him before, and planted his body on the plane?

Or maybe he was still alive and then they killed him?

Maybe Free Republic will buy this stuff Ron.

He was apparently still alive and killed by someone on the ground. I'm quite sure that whoever had the power to arrange the crash had the power to have people be the first on the scene for anything that needed to be done.

Military pathologists found what they considered to be a bullet hole in the top of Brown's head, but in spite of that there was no autopsy. Why? As I recall, the White House demanded that the body be brought to the U.S. ASAP, the excuse used by the military officer who decided against an autopsy. IOW the Clinton administration stole the body just like JFK's body was stolen from Parkland. Except that JFK eventually got an "autopsy," while Ron Brown's body was promptly sent to molder in the grave.

Why do I "buy this stuff"? If military pathologists say they saw a bullet hole in the top of Brown's head, why don't you "buy it," particularly after an autopsy to settle the matter was avoided?

Do you "buy that stuff" about a big hole in the back of JFK's head? Why do you buy it?

There are a few problems with the Ron Brown was murdered theories:

1) The crash was investigated by the USAF, 5 crewmembers were killed and the US military was known not to very favorable to Clinton. Yet we are to believe career AF officers would not only cover-up for his murder of 35 people including 5 of their own but actually blame their colleagues (the pilots) for what happened.

2) The only person known to have survived the crash died in an ambulance on the way to a hospital, but we are to believe Brown really survived and needed a coup de grace to finish him off.

3) The hit man/team would had to have gotten to and away from the crash site without being observed.

4) Why shoot him in the head? Several other methods (smothering, air embolism etc.) would have been less detectible.

5) Lt. Col. Steve Cogswel the pathologist who started this only said the injury was "an apparent gunshot wound" adding "Whether it's a bullet or something else, we don't know."

6) Cogswel never actually saw, let alone examined, Brown’s body.

7) There seems not to have been an ‘exit wound’ nor even an embedded bullet.

8) No clear motive for killing Brown has been provided; he (supposedly) had dirt on Clinton blah, blah, blah.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/CRASH/BROWN/bullet.html

[Ron Ecker]

Len,

I spent a good deal of time writing a post that responded to each of your points, only to receive a message that I "posted more than the allowed number of quoted blocks of text." I didn't know there was any such limit. I'm not going to spend more time trying to respond to you now, maybe later.

Edited April 4, 2012 by Ron Ecker

[Ron Ecker]

Len said:

There are a few problems with the Ron Brown was murdered theories:

1) The crash was investigated by the USAF, 5 crewmembers were killed and the US military was known not to very favorable to Clinton. Yet we are to believe career AF officers would not only cover-up for his murder of 35 people including 5 of their own but actually blame their colleagues (the pilots) for what happened.

Ron says:

Who says Clinton murdered Brown? Clinton clearly had friends in high places, regardless of what the military thought of him. The USAF investigation was irregular, according to Lt. Col. Cogswell, in that it simply skipped over consideration of whether or not the crash was suspicious. And Ron Brown's body, the "best evidence" in a murder case, was not investigated, i.e. no autopsy. But insofar as it was investigated (by the U.S. military), there was an apparent bullet hole in the top of his head. Why wouldn’t someone find out if that’s what it was?

Len said:

2) The only person known to have survived the crash died in an ambulance on the way to a hospital, but we are to believe Brown really survived and needed a coup de grace to finish him off.

Ron says:

If someone survived the crash, why couldn't Brown?

Len says:

3) The hit man/team would had to have gotten to and away from the crash site without being observed.

Ron says:

That wouldn't be very hard to do in a remote location, especially if the team was right there waiting. (It was 12 hours before U.S. military personnel officially got there.) The crash location would be known beforehand, assuming that the ground beacon that had been stolen from the airport was used, as suspected, to guide the plane into a mountain. (The person responsible for the airport beacons "committed suicide.")

Len says:

4) Why shoot him in the head? Several other methods (smothering, air embolism etc.) would have been less detectible.

Ron says:

Shooting him in the top of the head would leave the bullet somewhere down inside the body. No telltale exit wound. I never would have thought of that. Must have been professionals.

Len says:

5) Lt. Col. Steve Cogswel the pathologist who started this only said the injury was "an apparent gunshot wound" adding "Whether it's a bullet or something else, we don't know."

6) Cogswel never actually saw, let alone examined, Brown’s body.

Ron says:

There was more than one AFIP witness who "started" it, whether Cogswell himself saw the wound or not.

Len says:

7) There seems not to have been an ‘exit wound’ nor even an embedded bullet.

Ron says:

See answer to 4 above. No embedded bullet? Who looked for one? No autopsy, remember? (No one wanted to find an embedded bullet.)

Len says:

8) No clear motive for killing Brown has been provided; he (supposedly) had dirt on Clinton blah, blah, blah.

Ron says:

It can be hard to determine motives without real investigations to find the culprits. American political assassinations never seem to get real investigations. There must be some reason for that.

Edited April 5, 2012 by Ron Ecker

[Guest Robert Morrow]

Vince Foster committed suicide because his affair/relationship with Hillary Clinton was going very poorly and because of intense work-related pressures. The two were intertwined.

Many people to this day do not know that Vince Foster and Hillary Clinton were having an intense love affair for a long period of time. Former Arkansas state troopers L.D. Brown and Larry Patterson have talked about this in detail.

Much of the rightwing to this day believes the Clintons murdered Vince Foster. But most them still have not figured out that Hillary and Vince Foster were what I call emotional husband and wife. That is why the rightwing could not figure out why Foster would want to commit suicide or the personal reasons for it.

I do think that Vince Foster's body may have been moved to Fort Marcy Park, by a panicked White House staff.

Ken Starr was actually covering for the Clintons by not including the Hillary/Foster affair in his Starr Report. I think Ken Starr wanted a Supreme Court appointment under the Republicans and he did not want the Clintons to block it. Most folks don't know Ken Starr called the Clintons for lunch after Clinton left office, and the Clintons just laughed at the offer with contempt.

Broad public knowledge of the Hillary/Foster affair would obviously have affected her Senate and presidential races. Not to mention knowledge that - in my highly researched opinion - that Webb Hubbell is the biological father of Chelsea, not Bill Clinton.

More importantly, Ken Starr did not delve into the 1980's Iran-contra CIA drug smuggling which the Clintons and the Bushes (and Oliver North) were in up to their ears. Funny how the liberals think Starr was such an ogre; it reality he was protecting them (and the Republicans).

[Ronald Kessler, "The Secrets of the FBI, pp. 108-110]

"Former FBI agent Coy Copeland was the senior investigator who read the reports of the other agents. According to Copeland, what never came out publicly was that the agents learned that about a week before his death, Hillary Clinton and Foster, who was her mentor at the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock, held a meeting with other White House aides to go over the health care legislation she was proposing. Those who were present told the FBI agents working for Starr that Hillary violently disagreed with a legal objection Foster raised at the meeting and humiliated Foster in front of the aides, Copeland says.

"Hillary put him down really, really bad in a pretty good-size meeting," Copeland says. "She told him he didn't get the picture, and he would always be a little hick-town lawyer who was obviously not ready for the big time."

Based on what "dozens" of others who had contact with Foster after that meeting told the agents, "The put-down that she gave him in that big meeting just pushed him over the edge," Copeland says. "It was the final straw that broke the camel's back."

After the meeting, Foster's behavior changed dramatically. Those who knew him said his voice sounded strained, he became withdrawn and preoccupied, and his sense of humor vanished. At times, Foster teared up. He talked of feeling trapped.

On Tuesday, July 13, while having dinner with his wife, Lisa, Foster broke down and began to cry. He said he was considering resigning...

But in his report, Starr never referred to the meeting where Hillary humiliated Foster in front of aides, nor to the change in his disposition after that. The findings are included in the agents' reports of interviews, according to David Paynter, the archivist who read the reports when cataloguing them and making them available under the Freedom of Information Act at the National Archives. However, those reports are now missing from the appropriate files at the archives.

Starr never told Copeland why he decided to exclude the material from his report, and Copeland can only speculate on his reasoning."

[Ronald Kessler, "The Secrets of the FBI, pp. 108-110]

Edited April 11, 2012 by Robert Morrow

[Len Colby]

Len said:

There are a few problems with the Ron Brown was murdered theories:

1) The crash was investigated by the USAF, 5 crewmembers were killed and the US military was known not to very favorable to Clinton. Yet we are to believe career AF officers would not only cover-up for his murder of 35 people including 5 of their own but actually blame their colleagues the pilots.

Ron says:

Who says Clinton murdered Brown? Clinton clearly had friends in high places, regardless of what the military thought of him. The USAF investigation was irregular, according to Lt. Col. Cogswell, in that it simply skipped over consideration of whether or not the crash was suspicious. And Ron Brown's body, the "best evidence" in a murder case, was not investigated, i.e. no autopsy. But insofar as it was investigated (by the U.S. military), there was an apparent bullet hole in the top of his head. Why wouldn’t someone find out if that’s what it was?

LEN REPLIES:

Let’s not split hairs to dodge bullets. Brown is listed on the ‘Clinton Body Count’ he supposedly was killed to protect Clinton and if the person who ordered the ‘hit’ were tied to him he would at the minimum would be forced to resign. Clinton tried to force the military to openly accept homosexuals and imposed ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”; sent forces into a poorly defined mission in Somalia, then humiliatingly pulled them out and imposed massive cuts to Pentagon budget. So why would the 40 USAF investigators, presumably mostly career officers, not only cover-up for the murder of 35 people including 5 of their own but actually blame their colleagues the pilots and 3 senior officers who were relieved of their command for what happened? The sacked commanders, a general and 2 colonels allowed themselves to be made into scapegoats and covered up for murder for reasons unknown as well.

Cogswell is a pathologist not a crash investigator or even (I presume) a pliot, get back to us when someone with relevant expertise says the investigator was irregular or insufficient. The doctor who actually examined the body, as opposed to merely looking at x-rays said it wasn’t a bullet hole.

==============================================================================

Len said:

2) The only person known to have survived the crash died in an ambulance on the way to a hospital, but we are to believe Brown really survived and needed a coup de grace to finish him off.

Ron says:

If someone survived the crash, why couldn't Brown?

LEN REPLIES:

It’s mathematically improbable, 33 of the 34 other people on the plane (97%) died instantly or before 1st responders arrived, the ‘survivor’ was so seriously injured she died in the ambulance. Amazing coincidence if the one person they were trying to kill was the only, or one of only two survivors.

==============================================================================

Len says:

3) The hit man/team would had to have gotten to and away from the crash site without being observed.

Ron says:

That wouldn't be very hard to do in a remote location, especially if the team was right there waiting. (It was 12 hours before U.S. military personnel officially got there.) The crash location would be known beforehand, assuming that the ground beacon that had been stolen from the airport was used, as suspected, to guide the plane into a mountain. (The person responsible for the airport beacons "committed suicide.")

LEN REPLIES:

By the same token the “remote location” would have been difficult for the killer(s) to access unless he/she/they was “right there waiting”. Point me to a source with aviation experience that says this could have been easily arranged. The beacon was not the only navigation aids the pilots had at their disposal, there were a few beacons, visibility was supposedly a few miles and the plane should have had a Ground Proximity Warning System. And wWho says “the ground beacon…had been stolen”? According to Wikipedia “Five other aircraft had landed prior to the CT-43A and had not experienced any problems with the navigational aids” according to the USAF “at seven minutes prior to impact, a pilot on the ground at Dubrovnik made a radio call to IFO-21 and told them he had landed about an hour earlier”. Apparently several errors were made in the planning and execution for the flight.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_Croatia_USAF_CT-43_crash

http://cryptome.info/0001/ct43-060796.htm

==============================================================================

Len says:

4) Why shoot him in the head? Several other methods (smothering, air embolism etc.) would have been less detectible.

Ron says:

Shooting him in the top of the head would leave the bullet somewhere down inside the body. No telltale exit wound. I never would have thought of that. Must have been professionals.

LEN REPLIES:

Other methods would have been harder to detect

==============================================================================

Len says:

5) Lt. Col. Steve Cogswel the pathologist who started this only said the injury was "an apparent gunshot wound" adding "Whether it's a bullet or something else, we don't know."

6) Cogswel never actually saw, let alone examined, Brown’s body.

Ron says:

There was more than one AFIP witness who "started" it, whether Cogswell himself saw the wound or not.

LEN REPLIES:

OK so another pathologist, who didn’t see the body also thinks it MIGHT have been a bullent would.

==============================================================================

Len says:

7) There seems not to have been an ‘exit wound’ nor even an embedded bullet.

Ron says:

See answer to 4 above. No embedded bullet? Who looked for one? No autopsy, remember? (No one wanted to find an embedded bullet.)

Len says:

8) No clear motive for killing Brown has been provided; he (supposedly) had dirt on Clinton blah, blah, blah.

Ron says:

It can be hard to determine motives without real investigations to find the culprits. American political assassinations never seem to get real investigations. There must be some reason for that.

LEN REPLIES:

There were all sorts of reasons powerful people would have wanted to eliminate JFK etc. this is less obvious with Brown. I have yet to see any evidence he could have made damaging revelations about Clinton or others. “Researchers” have had 16 to come up with something substantial and AFAIK they have not yet been able to do so.