Jim Fetzer: The Strange Death of Paul Wellstone

[Len Colby]

OK. OUR POSITIONS HAVE BEEN STATED VERY PLAINLY. LET'S LET OTHERS TAKE A CRACK AT IT. YOU AND I HAVE HAD OUR SAY. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.

This post has been edited by James H. Fetzer: Yesterday, 12:47 PM

I don't know if it was fair for Tink to have accused Fetzer of skedaddling from the Marines but he skedaddled from http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FETZERclaimsDEBUNK/ and he is doing the same here. He hit and ran the Apollo hoax forum*. It seems he can't bear his theories being held up to scrutiny.

* http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cg...26833989&page=2

[Evan Burton]

Explanations Fetzer has given as to why agents from Minneapolis simply didn't fly to Eveleth if they were in such a hurry.

0 The airport was temporarily closed, which is standard practice, in case something about the airport had contributed to the crash. Not point in setting up a situation where those investigating the crash also crash!

According to you Ulman took the Fire Chief up after the crash was discovered. TB was no evidence that the airport had caused the crash. You might have a point But I think if the FBI said it was an emergency they would have been allowed to land. Worst come to worst they could have diverted to near By Hibbing.

YOU SEEM TO THINK YOUR UNSUPPORTED SPECULATIONS ARE A BASIS FOR REBUTTING POINTS THAT I HAVE SUBSTANTIATED WITH EVIDENCE. THAT IS NOT THE SIGN OF A RATIONAL MIND, UNLESS YOUR PURPOSE IS TO BE DECEPTIVE. THEY FLEW INTO DULUTH AND RENTED A CAR TO DRIVE UP TO EVELETH, AS I HAVE EXPLAINED IN THE BOOK. IT MIGHT BE A GOOD IDEA TO READ IT! PAUL MCCABE'S STATEMENT--THAT THEY HAD ONLY ARRIVED AT 3:30--WAS CONTRA-

DICTED BY THE ST. LOUIS COUNTY SHERIFF AND THE AIRPORT ASST MANAGER.

The airport was closed because a crash investigation was taking place. No-one (not even the FBI) would be allowed to land there unless they declared an emergency. Declaring an emergency is not ‘I have to land there because I am part of the investigation team’ but rather ‘I have an aircraft emergency and have to land immediately for the safety of those aboard’.

In this respect, Mr Fetzer has it right; until they ascertained the cause of the crash – or at least could clear the airport to resume normal operations – it would be closed to all traffic.

0 The NTSB spent hours questioning pilots from Charter Aviation about the possibility that the pilots were making a GPS rather than a VOR approach, which suggests that even the NTSB was taking the possibility seriously.

1] I read many But not all the interviews [some are not available on-line] I don't remember reading that. Please Briefly summarize these interviews and provide links if they are on-line. If not please attach them to a post B or put them up on your site. All pilots I have asked said your fly VOR or GPS not both

2] I thought that it was you position that the NTSB was trying to cover-up the case. WB they investigating all possibilities or covering up?

3] The assassins would have no way of knowing in advance if they would use GPS [Not that I think they were]. What would the killers have done if they only used VOR.

EGAD! NONE OF THIS MADE IT INTO THE NTSB REPORT, IN CASE YOU HAVEN'T NOTICED. HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF "PLAN A", "PLAN B", ETC.? I THINK IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN VARIOUS PLANS DEPENDING UPON HOW EVENTS ACTUALLY UNFOLDED. (I WILL SEE ABOUT PROVIDING A LINK.)

It’s obvious that they considered the possibility that the aircraft tried to fly a GPS approach. They requested a VOR approach, were cleared for a VOR approach, were vectored to join a VOR approach, and never indicated that they were flying anything else but a VOR approach. That’s why the NTSB didn’t take it any further.

The EVM GPS RWY 27 approach takes them along a completely different track which would have been apparent on radar. The ATCO would have questioned them as to which approach they were flying.

You continually hang on this GPS business when there is absolutely no evidence in any way, shape, or form that they flew a GPS approach.

The late-model plane had an advanced avionics package, including a GPS system. The problem is to explain why the plane was heading for landing on the wrong gamut, 268 rather than 276. The Waukegan pilot's odd GPS experience, which occurred at the same time, suggests that GPS data may have been manipulated to lead the plane into the "kill zone" and kill it.

It's wrong heading has been explained ad infinitum But I'll explain it, just for your Benefit one more time. The plane had been off course since the first overshoot of the approach.

IF THE PLANE WAS IN WORKING ORDER, AS YOU MAINTAIN, THEN THE CDI AND ALTIMITER AND AIRSPEED INDICATOR AND STALL WARNING SYSTEM ARE ALL FUNCTIONING PROPERLY. THAT MAKES IT VERY DIFFICULT TO IMAGINE HOW TWO QUALIFIED PILOTS--ONE EXCEPTIONAL--SHOULD HAVE LOST TRACK OF THEIR AIR SPEED, THEIR ALTITUDE, THEIR DIRECTION, AND A LOUD WARNING.

THIS IS ONE OF THE STRONGEST INDICATIONS THAT YOU ARE NOT TAKING THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE PLANE WAS NO LONGER UNDER THEIR CONTROL SERIOUSLY. IN FACT YOU ADMIT AS MUCH ELSEWHERE IN THIS SPECIFIC POST. SO APPARENTLY NOTHING IS GOING TO CONVINCE YOU OTHERWISE, INCLUDING THE SMOKE, THE FIRE, THE MELTED ICE CLOUD, THE CELL PHONE ANOMALY, ETC.

You have said that one pilot was “exceptional” – just how do you qualify that? Both crew were qualified and current for the flight. Having an ATPL is NOT exceptional – there are thousands of pilots in the US alone with that rating. The pilot holding the ATPL was in no way exceptional. He did not have an exceptional number of flight hours logged. He had not flown an exceptional number of aircraft types. He did not have an exceptional range of experience. he did not hold any exceptional endorsements. He was not a senior captain or instructor pilot. He was not a maintenance test pilot. He was not an experimental test pilot. He was not regarded amongst his peers or any professional organisation as an exceptional pilot. He was NOT ‘exceptional’. One pilot held an ATPL, the other a CPL. Let’s test your knowledge here. Why did one hold an ATPL, and not just a CPL?

If you find it difficult to believe that a qualified and current crew can ignore warnings and simply fly their aircraft into a dangerous situation, then you have not bothered to read the multitude of reports from around the world demonstrating that qualified and current flight crew can do just that.

0 This is a new phenomenon, of course, but that is part of the ingenuity of the plan. Use a weapon of which the public is largely unaware, but which can do the job. ...

Another words "Zero". Your speculation B is even more untenable than regards EM weapons. That the US and other countries have been working on them for years is not in dispute. Show me one article from a reliable source saying that someone is working of this type of technology or explaining how in theory this might be done. Specifically how one GPS unit could be targeted

JUST AS IT APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN PART OF THE PLAN TO USE A WEAPON THE EXISTENCE OF WHICH IS LARGELY UNKNOWN TO THE PUBLIC, THE MANIPULATION OF GPS DATA WOULD BE A PERFECT WAY TO INDUCE THE PILOTS INTO THINKING EVERYTHING WAS FINE WHILE THEY WERE BEING LED INTO A "KILL ZONE". ISN'T IT REMARKABLE THAT THE WAUKEGAN PILOT WAS HAVING HIS EXPERIENCE AT THE SAME TIME THE WELLSTONE PLANE WAS OFF COURSE BY A SIMILAR DIRECTION AND A SIMILAR MAGNITUDE? WHEN HE TAXIED UP TO THE AIRPORT, THE TIME WAS 10:22 ON 25 OCTOBER 2005. HE WAS THE ONE WHO WAS ALARMED AT THE PROSPECT THAT BOTH EVENTS MIGHT BE RELATED. IF THEY ARE NOT RELATED, THAT WOULD BE AN ASTOUNDING COINCIDENCE.

More of the GPS – a subject which you would appear to know nothing about. Time for you to put up or shut up about this matter.

1. Explain how the GPS works, specifically with relation to an aircraft and conducting a GPS approach.

2. Explain how the GPS could have been disrupted without triggering the various error-sensing systems built into a GPS receiver.

THEY WERE HEADED SOUTH, MORE THAN TWO MILES SOUTH OF THE AIRPORT. SINCE THE SIMULATIONS WITH A WEAKER ENGINE AND FLYING AT ABORMALLY SLOW SPEEDS WERE UNABLE TO BRING THE PLANE DOWN, IF IT WAS UNDER THEIR CONTROL, THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO POWER UP AND CIRCLE FOR ANOTHER TRY. THE QUESTION IS WHY. YOU SUGGEST INCOMPETENCE, BUT THERE WERE TWO OF THEM, THEY HAD A GREAT PLANE, THEY CARRIED SIX PASSENGERS, INCLUDING A US SENATOR, THEY WERE NOT DEAF, ONE OF THEM HAD AN AIR TRANSPORT PILOT'S CERTIFICATION AND HAD PASSED HIS FAA "FLIGHT CHECK" JUST TWO DAYS BEFORE THE FATAL FLIGHT, MAKING IT IS OVERWHELMINGLY MORE PROBABLE THAT THEY DIDN'T RECOVER BECAUSE THE PLANE WAS NO LONGER UNDER THEIR CONTROL THAN THAT THEY SIMPLY IGNORED THEIR AIRSPEED, ALTITUDE, CDI AND ALARM, ALLOWING A CRASH.

Once again, for all those reading (because Mr Fetzer will obviously ignore this), the simulation showed that it was possible to fly out of the situation; it did NOT show that it was unable to ‘bring the aircraft down’. Anyone could ‘bring the aircraft down’ – simply fly into the ground!

Tell me, Mr Fetzer, what is the typical reaction of a twin-engined, low-wing, turbine powered aircraft when it enters a low speed stall at low power setting?

Incompetence and inattention are more likely explanation

THIS REMARK DEMONSTRATES THAT YOU ARE NOT SERIOUS ABOUT ANY OF THIS.

And that remark simply shows you are unwilling to consider the possibility you are wrong!

THERE IS MORE THAN ONE POSSIBILITY REGARDING THE DETAILS OF EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED AT THE END. ONE IS THAT THEY WERE INCAPACITATED AT THIS POINT; THE OTHER IS THAT THEY WERE NOT.

Correct. The NTSB report is the most probable, though.

THIS IS THE "BEST CASE" SCENARIO ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT THEY WERE DOING THEIR BEST WHEN THE PLANE WAS LOSING POWER TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT OF THE CRASH.

False assumptions. There is NO evidence whatsoever that the aircraft was ‘losing power’. The flight crew had reduced power in order to regain the correct descent profile.

I WISH WE KNEW EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED. EITHER WAY, THE PLANE HAD NO FORWARD THRUST BECAUSE SOMETHING HAD HAPPENED, WHICH APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN CAUSED BY AN ENERGY SURGE THAT SET THE PROPS ON IDLE.

Again, false assumption based on absolutely no evidence. ‘Flight idle’ is a normal setting for an approach.

Mr Fetzer, I challenge you to put your hypothesis to any recognised organisation of professional pilots and publish their unedited reply here.

Edited September 30, 2005 by Evan Burton

[Josiah Thompson]

"Mr Fetzer, I challenge you to put your hypothesis to any recognised organisation of professional pilots and publish their unedited reply here."

This keeps happening again and again to the Professor.

Two years ago on the "debunk Fetzer" board a retired Air Force Colonel named Bill Rees somehow found his way to it. Rather quickly he cleaned Fetzer's clock. I remember with a smile only one part of it. Fetzer had been maintaining that the Wellstone plane had been in communication with "the Eveleth tower." Rees pointed out that Eveleth had no tower! This slowed down the Great Wind for only a short time.

Now you show up here and do pretty much the same thing. Since all evidence indicates the Wellstone plane was on a normal VOR approach, Fetzer's dim claims about GPS fiddling become immediately irrelevant. Since "flight idle" is a normal setting in an approach, the Professor's arm waving about "lack of thrust" is also exposed.

Apparently, the best Fetzer can do in the way of aviation knowledge is to cite the hop he took in a military aircraft during college with a real pilot at the controls. I'm surprised he didn't cite the time when he was eleven and the Eastern Airlines pilot gave him a pair of tin wings for flying Eastern from LA to New York! Neither Fetzer, nor Four Arrows nor the high school teacher from Australia know anything about aviation, so they continue to make the errors you point out. Fetzer then waves a wand and makes them "experts." It's sort of like that tabloid sheet, the Globe, which waves a wand and makes some dufus with a degree in divinity an expert in molecular biology.

All of us who have watched the Professor's conceptual acrobatics in the past cannot help but enjoy what happens when knowledgeable people like yourself arrive to debate him.

Thanks for coming.

Explanations Fetzer has given as to why agents from Minneapolis simply didn't fly to Eveleth if they were in such a hurry.

0 The airport was temporarily closed, which is standard practice, in case something about the airport had contributed to the crash. Not point in setting up a situation where those investigating the crash also crash!

According to you Ulman took the Fire Chief up after the crash was discovered. TB was no evidence that the airport had caused the crash. You might have a point But I think if the FBI said it was an emergency they would have been allowed to land. Worst come to worst they could have diverted to near By Hibbing.

YOU SEEM TO THINK YOUR UNSUPPORTED SPECULATIONS ARE A BASIS FOR REBUTTING POINTS THAT I HAVE SUBSTANTIATED WITH EVIDENCE. THAT IS NOT THE SIGN OF A RATIONAL MIND, UNLESS YOUR PURPOSE IS TO BE DECEPTIVE. THEY FLEW INTO DULUTH AND RENTED A CAR TO DRIVE UP TO EVELETH, AS I HAVE EXPLAINED IN THE BOOK. IT MIGHT BE A GOOD IDEA TO READ IT! PAUL MCCABE'S STATEMENT--THAT THEY HAD ONLY ARRIVED AT 3:30--WAS CONTRA-

DICTED BY THE ST. LOUIS COUNTY SHERIFF AND THE AIRPORT ASST MANAGER.

The airport was closed because a crash investigation was taking place. No-one (not even the FBI) would be allowed to land there unless they declared an emergency. Declaring an emergency is not ‘I have to land there because I am part of the investigation team’ but rather ‘I have an aircraft emergency and have to land immediately for the safety of those aboard’.

In this respect, Mr Fetzer has it right; until they ascertained the cause of the crash – or at least could clear the airport to resume normal operations – it would be closed to all traffic.

0 The NTSB spent hours questioning pilots from Charter Aviation about the possibility that the pilots were making a GPS rather than a VOR approach, which suggests that even the NTSB was taking the possibility seriously.

1] I read many But not all the interviews [some are not available on-line] I don't remember reading that. Please Briefly summarize these interviews and provide links if they are on-line. If not please attach them to a post B or put them up on your site. All pilots I have asked said your fly VOR or GPS not both

2] I thought that it was you position that the NTSB was trying to cover-up the case. WB they investigating all possibilities or covering up?

3] The assassins would have no way of knowing in advance if they would use GPS [Not that I think they were]. What would the killers have done if they only used VOR.

EGAD! NONE OF THIS MADE IT INTO THE NTSB REPORT, IN CASE YOU HAVEN'T NOTICED. HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF "PLAN A", "PLAN B", ETC.? I THINK IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN VARIOUS PLANS DEPENDING UPON HOW EVENTS ACTUALLY UNFOLDED. (I WILL SEE ABOUT PROVIDING A LINK.)

It’s obvious that they considered the possibility that the aircraft tried to fly a GPS approach. They requested a VOR approach, were cleared for a VOR approach, were vectored to join a VOR approach, and never indicated that they were flying anything else but a VOR approach. That’s why the NTSB didn’t take it any further.

The EVM GPS RWY 27 approach takes them along a completely different track which would have been apparent on radar. The ATCO would have questioned them as to which approach they were flying.

You continually hang on this GPS business when there is absolutely no evidence in any way, shape, or form that they flew a GPS approach.

The late-model plane had an advanced avionics package, including a GPS system. The problem is to explain why the plane was heading for landing on the wrong gamut, 268 rather than 276. The Waukegan pilot's odd GPS experience, which occurred at the same time, suggests that GPS data may have been manipulated to lead the plane into the "kill zone" and kill it.

It's wrong heading has been explained ad infinitum But I'll explain it, just for your Benefit one more time. The plane had been off course since the first overshoot of the approach.

IF THE PLANE WAS IN WORKING ORDER, AS YOU MAINTAIN, THEN THE CDI AND ALTIMITER AND AIRSPEED INDICATOR AND STALL WARNING SYSTEM ARE ALL FUNCTIONING PROPERLY. THAT MAKES IT VERY DIFFICULT TO IMAGINE HOW TWO QUALIFIED PILOTS--ONE EXCEPTIONAL--SHOULD HAVE LOST TRACK OF THEIR AIR SPEED, THEIR ALTITUDE, THEIR DIRECTION, AND A LOUD WARNING.

THIS IS ONE OF THE STRONGEST INDICATIONS THAT YOU ARE NOT TAKING THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE PLANE WAS NO LONGER UNDER THEIR CONTROL SERIOUSLY. IN FACT YOU ADMIT AS MUCH ELSEWHERE IN THIS SPECIFIC POST. SO APPARENTLY NOTHING IS GOING TO CONVINCE YOU OTHERWISE, INCLUDING THE SMOKE, THE FIRE, THE MELTED ICE CLOUD, THE CELL PHONE ANOMALY, ETC.

You have said that one pilot was “exceptional” – just how do you qualify that? Both crew were qualified and current for the flight. Having an ATPL is NOT exceptional – there are thousands of pilots in the US alone with that rating. The pilot holding the ATPL was in no way exceptional. He did not have an exceptional number of flight hours logged. He had not flown an exceptional number of aircraft types. He did not have an exceptional range of experience. he did not hold any exceptional endorsements. He was not a senior captain or instructor pilot. He was not a maintenance test pilot. He was not an experimental test pilot. He was not regarded amongst his peers or any professional organisation as an exceptional pilot. He was NOT ‘exceptional’. One pilot held an ATPL, the other a CPL. Let’s test your knowledge here. Why did one hold an ATPL, and not just a CPL?

If you find it difficult to believe that a qualified and current crew can ignore warnings and simply fly their aircraft into a dangerous situation, then you have not bothered to read the multitude of reports from around the world demonstrating that qualified and current flight crew can do just that.

0 This is a new phenomenon, of course, but that is part of the ingenuity of the plan. Use a weapon of which the public is largely unaware, but which can do the job. ...

Another words "Zero". Your speculation B is even more untenable than regards EM weapons. That the US and other countries have been working on them for years is not in dispute. Show me one article from a reliable source saying that someone is working of this type of technology or explaining how in theory this might be done. Specifically how one GPS unit could be targeted

JUST AS IT APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN PART OF THE PLAN TO USE A WEAPON THE EXISTENCE OF WHICH IS LARGELY UNKNOWN TO THE PUBLIC, THE MANIPULATION OF GPS DATA WOULD BE A PERFECT WAY TO INDUCE THE PILOTS INTO THINKING EVERYTHING WAS FINE WHILE THEY WERE BEING LED INTO A "KILL ZONE". ISN'T IT REMARKABLE THAT THE WAUKEGAN PILOT WAS HAVING HIS EXPERIENCE AT THE SAME TIME THE WELLSTONE PLANE WAS OFF COURSE BY A SIMILAR DIRECTION AND A SIMILAR MAGNITUDE? WHEN HE TAXIED UP TO THE AIRPORT, THE TIME WAS 10:22 ON 25 OCTOBER 2005. HE WAS THE ONE WHO WAS ALARMED AT THE PROSPECT THAT BOTH EVENTS MIGHT BE RELATED. IF THEY ARE NOT RELATED, THAT WOULD BE AN ASTOUNDING COINCIDENCE.

More of the GPS – a subject which you would appear to know nothing about. Time for you to put up or shut up about this matter.

1. Explain how the GPS works, specifically with relation to an aircraft and conducting a GPS approach.

2. Explain how the GPS could have been disrupted without triggering the various error-sensing systems built into a GPS receiver.

THEY WERE HEADED SOUTH, MORE THAN TWO MILES SOUTH OF THE AIRPORT. SINCE THE SIMULATIONS WITH A WEAKER ENGINE AND FLYING AT ABORMALLY SLOW SPEEDS WERE UNABLE TO BRING THE PLANE DOWN, IF IT WAS UNDER THEIR CONTROL, THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO POWER UP AND CIRCLE FOR ANOTHER TRY. THE QUESTION IS WHY. YOU SUGGEST INCOMPETENCE, BUT THERE WERE TWO OF THEM, THEY HAD A GREAT PLANE, THEY CARRIED SIX PASSENGERS, INCLUDING A US SENATOR, THEY WERE NOT DEAF, ONE OF THEM HAD AN AIR TRANSPORT PILOT'S CERTIFICATION AND HAD PASSED HIS FAA "FLIGHT CHECK" JUST TWO DAYS BEFORE THE FATAL FLIGHT, MAKING IT IS OVERWHELMINGLY MORE PROBABLE THAT THEY DIDN'T RECOVER BECAUSE THE PLANE WAS NO LONGER UNDER THEIR CONTROL THAN THAT THEY SIMPLY IGNORED THEIR AIRSPEED, ALTITUDE, CDI AND ALARM, ALLOWING A CRASH.

Once again, for all those reading (because Mr Fetzer will obviously ignore this), the simulation showed that it was possible to fly out of the situation; it did NOT show that it was unable to ‘bring the aircraft down’. Anyone could ‘bring the aircraft down’ – simply fly into the ground!

Tell me, Mr Fetzer, what is the typical reaction of a twin-engined, low-wing, turbine powered aircraft when it enters a low speed stall at low power setting?

Incompetence and inattention are more likely explanation

THIS REMARK DEMONSTRATES THAT YOU ARE NOT SERIOUS ABOUT ANY OF THIS.

And that remark simply shows you are unwilling to consider the possibility you are wrong!

THERE IS MORE THAN ONE POSSIBILITY REGARDING THE DETAILS OF EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED AT THE END. ONE IS THAT THEY WERE INCAPACITATED AT THIS POINT; THE OTHER IS THAT THEY WERE NOT.

Correct. The NTSB report is the most probable, though.

THIS IS THE "BEST CASE" SCENARIO ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT THEY WERE DOING THEIR BEST WHEN THE PLANE WAS LOSING POWER TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT OF THE CRASH.

False assumptions. There is NO evidence whatsoever that the aircraft was ‘losing power’. The flight crew had reduced power in order to regain the correct descent profile.

I WISH WE KNEW EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED. EITHER WAY, THE PLANE HAD NO FORWARD THRUST BECAUSE SOMETHING HAD HAPPENED, WHICH APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN CAUSED BY AN ENERGY SURGE THAT SET THE PROPS ON IDLE.

Again, false assumption based on absolutely no evidence. ‘Flight idle’ is a normal setting for an approach.

Edited October 4, 2005 by Josiah Thompson

[David G. Healy]

Evan Burton' dronned on:

Mr Fetzer, I challenge you to put your hypothesis to any recognised organisation of professional pilots and publish their unedited reply here.

_____________________

Ah, Mr. Burton, since when does ANY "organization of professional pilots" comment on American airplane crash investigations? Hypothesis included? Especially when a nationally recognized political leader found himself dead in said crash?

Sounds like right-wing rationality to me... kinda like the White House investigating Karl Rove for some sort of flight of fancy (pardon the pun).

Edited October 5, 2005 by David G. Healy

[Craig Lamson]

Healy dropped his bone and barked...

_____________________

"Ah, Mr. Burton, since when does ANY "organization of professional pilots" comment on American airplane crash investigations? Hypothesis included? Especially when a nationally recognized political leader found himself dead in said crash? "

How about the ALPA?

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive...5/04/c7414.html

[Evan Burton]

Evan Burton' dronned on:

Mr Fetzer, I challenge you to put your hypothesis to any recognised organisation of professional pilots and publish their unedited reply here.

_____________________

Ah, Mr. Burton, since when does ANY "organization of professional pilots" comment on American airplane crash investigations? Hypothesis included? Especially when a nationally recognized political leader found himself dead in said crash?

Sounds like right-wing rationality to me... kinda like the White House investigating Karl Rove for some sort of flight of fancy (pardon the pun).

I've already offered - twice - to have the report scrutinised by two senior accident investigators here in Australia. There was a resounding silence to that offer....

The reason Mr Fetzer dislikes these offers because he is aware that his own hypothesis is flawed, and will not stand up to scrutiny by experts.

[Evan Burton]

Healy dropped his bone and barked...

_____________________

"Ah, Mr. Burton, since when does ANY "organization of professional pilots" comment on American airplane crash investigations? Hypothesis included? Especially when a nationally recognized political leader found himself dead in said crash? "

How about the ALPA?

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive...5/04/c7414.html

Yep, and also this:

http://www.alpa.org/DesktopModules/ALPA_Do...d=1458&Tabid=73

and this

http://www.alpa.org/DesktopModules/ALPA_Do...d=1458&Tabid=73

and this:

http://www.alpa.org/DesktopModules/ALPA_Do...Id=785&Tabid=73

and this:

http://www.alpa.org/DesktopModules/ALPA_Do...Id=785&Tabid=73

and this:

http://www.alpa.org/DesktopModules/ALPA_Do...Id=785&Tabid=73

and this:

http://www.alpa.org/DesktopModules/ALPA_Do...Id=785&Tabid=73

Guess David Healy doesn't know what he's talking about, either!

[David G. Healy]

Healy dropped his bone and barked...

_____________________

"Ah, Mr. Burton, since when does ANY "organization of professional pilots" comment on American airplane crash investigations? Hypothesis included? Especially when a nationally recognized political leader found himself dead in said crash? "

How about the ALPA?

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive...5/04/c7414.html

Yep, and also this:

http://www.alpa.org/DesktopModules/ALPA_Do...d=1458&Tabid=73

and this

http://www.alpa.org/DesktopModules/ALPA_Do...d=1458&Tabid=73

and this:

http://www.alpa.org/DesktopModules/ALPA_Do...Id=785&Tabid=73

and this:

http://www.alpa.org/DesktopModules/ALPA_Do...Id=785&Tabid=73

and this:

http://www.alpa.org/DesktopModules/ALPA_Do...Id=785&Tabid=73

and this:

http://www.alpa.org/DesktopModules/ALPA_Do...Id=785&Tabid=73

Guess David Healy doesn't know what he's talking about, either!

[David G. Healy]

Healy dropped his bone and barked...

_____________________

"Ah, Mr. Burton, since when does ANY "organization of professional pilots" comment on American airplane crash investigations? Hypothesis included? Especially when a nationally recognized political leader found himself dead in said crash? "

How about the ALPA?

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive...5/04/c7414.html

Good article, thanks. Comments and hypothesis withdrawn - does ALPA have *influence* regarding NTSB findings? The Wellstone crash in particular? What can ALPA [the collective], tell the NTSB about ANY plane accident, other than opinion, comments and hypothesis? Can ALPA police itself when cause may be "pilot error"? When it comes to determining plane crash causes, I suspect ALPA's input-influence goes about as far as airplane manufacturers.

[Evan Burton]

Healy dropped his bone and barked...

_____________________

"Ah, Mr. Burton, since when does ANY "organization of professional pilots" comment on American airplane crash investigations? Hypothesis included? Especially when a nationally recognized political leader found himself dead in said crash? "

How about the ALPA?

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive...5/04/c7414.html

Good article, thanks. Comments and hypothesis withdrawn - does ALPA have *influence* regarding NTSB findings? The Wellstone crash in particular? What can ALPA [the collective], tell the NTSB about ANY plane accident, other than opinion, comments and hypothesis? Can ALPA police itself when cause may be "pilot error"? When it comes to determining plane crash causes, I suspect ALPA's input-influence goes about as far as airplane manufacturers.

I would imagine that they have no more or less influence than any other large professional body. They cannot INFLUENCE the findings, but they can certainly comment on them. They'd obviously be sensitive to any type of 'pilot error' findings because they are an organisation of professional airline pilots. If they had strong opinions that a finding of pilot error was wrong, they'd loudly voice that opinion. They do raise issues of perceived pressure to 'cut corners', poor maintenance practices, aircraft / system design flaws, etc.

Basically, a professional body trying to do the best for its members and the industry they work in.

[Craig Lamson]

Healy dropped his bone and barked...

_____________________

"Ah, Mr. Burton, since when does ANY "organization of professional pilots" comment on American airplane crash investigations? Hypothesis included? Especially when a nationally recognized political leader found himself dead in said crash? "

How about the ALPA?

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive...5/04/c7414.html

Good article, thanks. Comments and hypothesis withdrawn - does ALPA have *influence* regarding NTSB findings? The Wellstone crash in particular? What can ALPA [the collective], tell the NTSB about ANY plane accident, other than opinion, comments and hypothesis? Can ALPA police itself when cause may be "pilot error"? When it comes to determining plane crash causes, I suspect ALPA's input-influence goes about as far as airplane manufacturers.

I would imagine that they have no more or less influence than any other large professional body. They cannot INFLUENCE the findings, but they can certainly comment on them. They'd obviously be sensitive to any type of 'pilot error' findings because they are an organisation of professional airline pilots. If they had strong opinions that a finding of pilot error was wrong, they'd loudly voice that opinion. They do raise issues of perceived pressure to 'cut corners', poor maintenance practices, aircraft / system design flaws, etc.

Basically, a professional body trying to do the best for its members and the industry they work in.

Evan,

As a professional perhaps you could write to the ALPA and explain the Wellstone case with links and pointers to Fetzers book and ask them to comment. Since you are in the business they might respond to you.

But you are correct at least in my opinion that no person or group outside of those contracted by the NTSB should have influence over an investigation. Of course thats what Fetzer is suggesting happened in the Wellstone case....

[Len Colby]

According to Fetzer killing Wellstone would increase Coleman's chances of winning and help the GOP regain control of the Senate. Polls and political commentary contradict him. Immeadiately after the crash the consensus among pundits from across the political spectrum was that Wellstone's death would help the Democrats not only in the Minn. senate race but in other contests as well. This seriously undermines Fetzer's alleged motive. Killing Wellstone would have made more sense after the new congress took office. His replacement would been chosen by the new governor. The GOP candidate was ahead in the polls. Wellstone was not even guaranteed victory. The last poll before his death taken 3 -4 weeks before the election showed him only 6 points in front of Coleman, down from a 9 point lead a few days before. In the most recent elections GOP candidates have done better on election day than in opinion polls. Wheter this is due to vote fraud or poor pools is irrelevant in this case, such a small and possibly shrinking lead so long before the election did not assure Wellstone would prevail [see attached Wellstone/Mondale - Coleman poll chart ]

Three factors were cited, the sympathy vote, Mondale was more appealing to moderate voters, and increased mobilization of the Democrats base. In addition Coleman two main points against Wellstone, that he was too liberal and had promised not to seek a third term didn't apply to the former vice-president. I didn't find any articles that said Mondale's chances were less than Wellstone's.except for those that cited the rally as the problem.

After the rally the consensus was that it might cost the Democrats the election. After the election it was cited as the most important factor in Coleman's victory

Wellstone's death at first expected to helps Dems

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The day after the crash Real Clear Politics, a pro GOP site had this to say:

"THE SENATE: With this tragedy less than 24 hours old the speculation has now turned to how Senator Wellstone's death will effect the balance of power in the Senate. My initial gut reaction, and my feeling still, is Coleman is finished. The cold-hearted political reading to me is, this tragedy has increased the likelihood of the Democrats retaining the Senate. This is not to say the Democrats will definitely hold on to the Senate, only that it is more likely this morning than yesterday.

Wellstone had pulled slightly ahead of Coleman, due to his vote against the President's Iraq resolution. As that bump for Wellstone faded and Coleman continued to pound on Wellstone's ultra-left record and the reneging on his pledge to only serve two terms, in my mind, that in the end would be enough for Coleman to squeak out a victory. Irrespective of however you broke down the Wellstone/Coleman race with 10 days to go, the reality was this was a 50/50 contest and either guy could have easily have won. Today I think the Democrats have a very good chance of holding on to the seat. There is also the strong likelihood that this will give a boost to Senator Carnahan's struggling candidacy in Missouri.

...Mondale is unquestionably an elder statesman in the Democratic Party. That status coupled with the Wellstone sympathy vote makes him a heavy favorite versus Coleman. ...Coleman would definitely have a chance if one of these [other Minn Dems] were to be the replacement. But my gut feeling is the sympathy vote here would still be enough to let the Democrats win. However, unlike Mondale these candidates would not be an open and shut case...

The bottom line is, if Mondale decides to run this critical toss-up state becomes a safe Democratic hold. If it is Humphrey, Page or another lesser candidate I would give the edge to the Democrats based solely on the sympathy vote..."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Commentary/blog_10_20.html

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The American Mind another conservative blog felt the same way

"I'm pessimistic. Mondale has so much name power, and if Minnesota Dems are as dirty as Wisconsin ones, then they'll use plenty of dirty tricks to massage the final vote count. What's a shame is Norm Coleman has all the potential for being a national Republican leader. He's just had the unfortunate luck of running into the Jesse Ventura populist buzzsaw and a Wellstone death march."

http://www.theamericanmind.com/mt-test/archives/011653.html

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to the liberal Mineapolis Star-Tribune

"...a lot of recent political commentary, which has suggested that a surge of sympathy for Wellstone.

66 percent say they have a favorable image of him, compared with 15 percent unfavorable, and even among Republicans (39-37) and conservatives (46-34) his favorables are higher than his unfavorables. Neither Coleman nor Wellstone had approached that level of favorable sentiment among their partisan or ideological foes. "

http://www.hypocrites.com/modules.php?name...=print&sid=9156

By contrast Wellstone highest favorable rating statewide, which he obtained in September of 2002 according to MPR, was 51 favorable to 34 unfavorable

http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/feat...poll/poll.shtml

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ABC News also belived that Wellstone's death would help the Democrats

"Tomorrow night's certain-to-be-packed memorial service will create a lot of political energy in Minnesota, to Democrats' benefit. Whether the national coverage of the service creates some sort of echo effect is TBD, somewhat depending, we would guess, on how much live cable coverage there is, and who the speakers are.

...

Mr. David Sanger of the New York Times [wrote]...

"Behind the scenes, [bush] aides ...said they doubted that Mr. Bush could visit the state again under the circumstances. One participant in the conversation said that if former Vice President Walter F. Mondale agrees to enter the race, 'I think this one is over for us.'"

....

The Wall Street Journal 's front page leads with the Mondale story, and makes these key points: "Handicapping a new contest against Mr. Mondale, which may not involve any campaign appearances or TV ads by either side, is now an exercise in guesswork.

The Journal raises the specter of national fallout, but our sources don't see that (yet): "Indeed, some Democratic strategists are even holding out hope that the combination of Senator Wellstone's death and the re-emergence of Mr. Mondale's stature could do something more: a charge of emotion that could boost Senator Jean Carnahan...and galvanize the party's liberal base elsewhere. Following a national campaign debate that so far has veered from economic woes to potential war with Iraq, any resurgent liberalism could especially assist Senator Tim Johnson of South Dakota, another endangered Democrat, and Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa. Both states share the Minnesota media market."

Let's see how much national coverage Tuesday night's memorial service gets. There are no indications that it is being planned for maximum political effect, but if the tributes to Senator Wellstone, which have flowed since Friday, are any indication, we'd imagine that there will be at least a 24-hour Democratic high.

Apparently, we should have called John Podesta (something we say to ourselves, belatedly, all the time): "'Saturation coverage lauding a populist Democrat this close to an election is the Republicans' worst nightmare,' says Larry Jacobs, a political scientist at the University of Minnesota. Adds former Clinton White House chief of staff John Podesta: 'If you're a canvasser going door to door in Iowa or anywhere else, you remember this election is worth fighting for.'"

"Coleman is in a tough spot. 'Mondale is extremely well-liked in Minnesota,' said Washington University congressional scholar Stephen Smith. In a normal campaign, Coleman would try to drive up Mondale's negatives. But under the current circumstances, "being critical of Fritz Mondale won't reflect well on the mayor," Smith said."

http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/politic...Note_Oct28.html

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On the Nov. 1, 2002 edition of the McLaughlin Group, the effect of Wellstone's death and the memorial service on the election were discussed.

Liberal Newcolumnistomnist Elanor Clift said the following:

"[Wellstone's death] has fired up Democrats in Minnesota and across the country, particularly in the Midwest, and could have some spillover effect in Missouri, where Jean Carnahan lost her husband under similar circumstances, and it may remind voters there she's not just another Washington politician, and they may remember why they elected her in the first place..

...Walter Mondale is an icon in the state, and I. think he improves Democrats' chances of keeping that seat"

The host said "I think that the energizing impact is greater than the Republican backlash, but not by much."

http://www.mclaughlin.com/library/transcript.asp?id=327

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In a Newsweek piece called "He Stood Tall" published on the day he died which praised Wellstone as "respected ","beloved", "admired", [willing] "to stand up for what he believed whatever the political consequences" etc. Clift wrote, "Ironically, the sympathy vote—and the difficulty Coleman will have in continuing to campaign against the legacy of a candidate killed so tragically—could ensure that the Democrats keep Wellstone’s seat."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Another liberal Newsweek columnist Johnathin Alter echoed Clift's analysis in an essay entitled "The Wellstone Effect" he thought Wellstone's death would help Mondale and other Democrats:

"But Democrats are going to bottle that Wellstone passion on Election Day. The strange thing is, it just might work for them—and not just in Minnesota, where Walter Mondale will likely waltz into the Senate."

Passion is a key ingredient in any political contest, especially a close one. Say you're a liberal Democratic voter living in close-fought New Hampshire or Colorado. You were intending to vote for Jeanne Shaheen or Tom Strickland, the Democratic candidates for the Senate, but not work for them over the weekend or next Tuesday. But now an emotional fuse has been lit. If only a marginal number of Democrats work harder because of Wellstone, it will have an effect in the trenches, where elections are won and lost.

But there’s another reason Wellstone’s death could help his party nationally. It hobbles what for more than 20 years—election after election—has been the Republicans’ best strategy for winning campaigns: to use the dreaded L word to destroy Democrats"[Alter argued that Wellstone's death would help destigmatize being liberal]

"The Wellstone Effect isn't likely to win the House back for the Democrats, but in a closely-divided country, it should help hold the Senate for them. ... In recent years they have been reluctant to hand the White House, Senate and House to the same party. This year shouldn't be any different, thanks in part to Paul Wellstone. It wouldn't be the crowning legacy he'd have chosen, but he'd have been happy about it."

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3067969/

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Even lefty cartoonist Ted Rall, in an essay called "THE (POSSIBLE) ASSASSINATION OF PAUL WELLSTONE" which Fetzer cited, said he didn't believe Wellstone was assassinated because it wouldn't help Coleman:

"Odds are overwhelmingly in favor of a natural or mechanical explanation for the crash of Paul Wellstone's plane. For one thing, substitute candidate Walter Mondale is expected to retain Wellstone's senate seat for the Democrats. That's predictable.That's predictable. The victories of last-minute substitute candidates like Missouri's Jean Carnahan in 2000 and New Jersey's Frank Lautenberg this year provide ample evidence that losing a candidate needn't mean losing an election. If anything, Mondale is more likely to win than Wellstone was...

Ironically, Paul Wellstone would have been the last person to suspect Republicans of such a monstrous crime. One of his final acts in the Senate was to praise the career of retiring Senator Jesse Helms, his ideological counterpart on the Right. Like most idealists, Wellstone thought the best of humanity, that people would do the right thing if the choices were properly and clearly explained. Wellstone wouldn't have wanted to believe that he was assassinated.

Neither do I. So let's hope those black boxes turn up."*

Funny, Fetzer seems to have forgotten that part of Rall's piece.

* http://questionsquestions.net/docs0209/1101_rall.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mondale's advantage among. conservative voters

"It's important to keep a balance in Congress." Foldenaur said he likes Coleman but probably would have voted for Wellstone. "I'm more sure of Mondale," he said. "He's a little more conservative."

Mondale's crossover appeal shows up among conservatives, 20 percent of whom say they will vote for him.

http://startribune.com/stories/587/3406448-2.html

[Continued]

Backlash from the rally cost Mondale the election

After the funeral rally the pundits started talking about a backlash. After the election the rally was identified as one one the most important, if not the most important factors in Modale's defeat and cited as a factor in Democratic setbacks in other races. Even Jeff Blodgett, Wellstone's campaign manager apologized for the more partisan remarks from the memorial service and apologized. [http://www.theamericanmind.com/mt-test/archives/011653.html]

Fetzer claims that partisan comments from Wellstones camp and a GOP spin machine generated backlash were predictable. Unfortunately for him I don't think he'll be able find any political commentators who will agree with him.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Michael. Barone, a centrist who has edited "The Almanac of American Politics"for over 30 years, on the Nov. 1, 2002 McGlauflin Group said,

"I think what this event did was to energize Republicans who called up and contributed $150,000 to Norm Coleman in the course of this. It was broadcast live on all the Minneapolis, St. Paul, TV stations. And it also turned off a lot of those independents, including those young people that registered on Election Day to vote for Jesse Ventura in 1998. I think Ventura spoke authentically for them when -- they don't like this kind of partisan politics. And both -- tracking polls for both parties showed that this helped the Republicans and hurt the Democrats."

On the same edition of the program self described conservative Tony Blankley commented "...This was the most political funeral event since Marc Antony's funeral oration over the dead body of Julius Caesar. I think that this was a disadvantage to the Democrats."

Vaugn Ververs said "..I think it energized Republicans, it confirmed a lot of what Republicans feel about Democrats in the first place. I think it energized Democrats, but I think it might actually end up hurting Democrats..."

http://www.mclaughlin.com/library/transcript.asp?id=327

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Even an article from the "Detroit Metro Times" * about Camp Wellstone which appears on the Wellstone website says "... Mondale lost to Republican Norm Coleman, in large part, said analysts, because of a severe backlash to a memorial service that took on the trappings of a political rally, offending the electorate’s Midwestern sense of propriety."

http://www.wellstone.org/camp/news_detail....3968&catID=3629

*a liberal alternative paper

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

A few days after the election Time magazine published an article by Mathew Cooper, titled and subtitled "Fallout from a Memorial - Did the memorial service for Paul Wellstone cost Democrats the election?"

A backlash against the politically charged service almost certainly helped Norm Coleman beat Walter Mondale for Wellstone's Minnesota Senate seat. And a private poll by Bill Clinton's former pollster, Mark Penn, suggests the service backfired on Democrats nationally as well.

Penn found that 68% of voters knew about the service—a high awareness of an event broadcast live nationally only on C-SPAN. What's more, 49% of voters said the service made them less likely to vote for a Democrat—and 67% of independents said they felt that way. One Democrat who quickly sensed that the service was a political disaster was Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, a possible 2004 presidential contender.

The next morning Kerry called Senate Republican Leader Trent Lott, who had been booed at the memorial, to tell him how bad he felt. Penn believes national security was ultimately a bigger issue. His poll shows a stunning 65% of voters thought Democrats weren't supportive enough of the President's war on terror. "That was the issue," says Penn. "But the memorial didn't help."

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,...,388903,00.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The liberal pro Democrat Minneapolis Star-Tribune said the following

The latest Minnesota Poll [which showed Coleman in front] surveyed what may wind up being one of the most unpredictable electorates in years. Voters first were rocked by news of Wellstone's death, then stunned by a widely broadcast memorial service that unexpectedly turned into a full-throated partisan rally.

Poll results show the backlash from the service, which was broadcast live on radio and TV, may make its mark on the election's outcome.

Nearly a quarter of the 929 likely voters said the service made them more likely to vote for Coleman, while 16 percent said it made them more likely to vote for Mondale. An additional 53 percent said the service will make no difference in how they vote.

http://startribune.com/stories/587/3406448.html

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A poll by liberalMinnesota Public Radio after the election produced similar results. 31% of Coleman voters but only 3% of Mondale voters said their "choice in the U.S. Senate race [was] influenced by Tuesday night's memorial service for Paul Wellstone"

http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/feat...poll/poll.shtml

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Oct. 31, the Star Tribune pulished an article by Eric Black titled "Analysis: Partisan memorial aids GOP"

"By delivering a partisan harangue at what was supposed to be a relatively nonpolitical memorial service, Paul Wellstone's friend and campaign treasurer Rick Kahn gave Minnesota Republicans an opening they sorely needed, analysts who are following the campaign agreed Wednesday.

"It changes it back into a Senate race, instead of a weeklong funeral procession to the ballot box," said Jennifer Duffy, who covers Senate races for the Washington-based Cook Political Report.

assuming Kahn intended to improve former Vice President Walter Mondale's chances on Election Day -- likely to backfire"

http://www.startribune.com/stories/1752/3400400.html

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aperantly even Mondale's aides blamed the rally and Rick Kahn accepted that he was resonsible for the dabacle

"Polls immediately following the event showed Democrats took a significant hit. Overnight, Vice President Walter Mondale, Wellstone's eventual replacement on the DFL ticket, lost nearly half of the double-digit lead internal polls showed he had over Republican Norm Coleman.

A week later, Coleman won the election. Mondale has said very little about the memorial service. Sources close to the Mondale campaign say they'll never know why Minnesotans voted the way they did, but that memorial service fallout was a crucial and key factor in their defeat.

Mondale wasn't the only Democrat to suffer memorial service backlash. DFL officials say post-election polling showed their candidates, across the board, took a four- to five-point hit.

Kahn says he regrets that many voters apparently became convinced his memorial service comments were part of a DFL strategy to convert sorrow into votes.

"I could live with that, that people say, 'I hate Rick Kahn because he said that.' But I don't understand why they would then say, 'And therefore I'm going to vote against all the Democrats,'" says Kahn. "That's the part that even to this day, that really bothers me." "

http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/feat...zdechlikm_kahn/

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tom Mason,Coleman's campaign spokesman, said, "All we know is that something has happened to give our campaign a momentum and enthusiasm like I've never seen. The whole environment changed when we got back to campaigning on Wednesday."

http://startribune.com/stories/587/3406448-2.html

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to CBS News which the GOP complains is pro-Democrat "GOP sources in Minnesota told [them] that the morning after the Wellstone memorial service, money poured into the Coleman campaign in $100 chunks, overloading the campaign Web site.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/10/30/...ain527485.shtml

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ABC news had a similar take on events

-- John Cochran on Sunday’s World News Tonight: “Both campaigns believe Coleman got a huge boost when a televised memorial service for Wellstone Tuesday night turned into a Democratic political rally.”

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The conservative blogs which were glum a few days before became gleeful

"Since the death of Sen. Paul Wellstone, polls have varied widely, with one recent survey showing Coleman up six, another giving Mondale a five-point lead. Most experts remain baffled as to what the final result might be.

However, the political rally at Wellstone's memorial may help Coleman beat Mondale in the end, says NewsMax intern Christopher Ayers"

http://newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/11/5/105819.shtml

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The "Wellstone Rally" last Tuesday stole the momentum and sympathy vote away from Mondale and energized Republicans. Both sides in this race are fired up, but Coleman has the momentum and we think he came across very favorably, compared to Mondale, in their election eve debate yesterday. Two polls favor Mondale, one favors Coleman. We think Coleman wins. Coleman 51% - Mondale 47%.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Congressi...e_02_Polls.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A few days after the election Powerline, a consevative Minnesota blog, reffered to Kahn as "the guy who made Norm Coleman our senator"and 'thanked' him

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/001147.php

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Importance and alienation of independents

The vast majority on Minnesotans voted along party lines in 2002 making independants that much more important

"90 percent of Democrats voted for Mondale, and 93 percent of Republicans voted for Coleman. Norm Coleman had a substantial advantage among Independents, who voted for Coleman over Mondale by a 48 percent to 38 percent margin, and which proved decisive in the election. "

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,69297,00.html

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

British Press comments on rally backlash

Even on the other side of the Atlantic, the British press commented on the disasterous affects the rally had on Mondale's campaign

Democrats underfire for 'exploting Senator's Death' - The Times [of London]

The Minneapolis Star Tribune put Mr Mondale on 47 per cent, against 39 per cent for Norm Coleman, the 53-year-old Republican candidate, a slightly wider margin than the 47-41 lead that Mr Wellstone had before his death.

...

However, the Republicans have been handed an opening after Tuesday night’s memorial service turned from a deeply emotional occasion into a sharply political end-of-campaign rally.

http://www.freerepublic.com/^http://www.ti...-464517,00.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Former heavyweight Mondale bows out - Wednesday, 6 November, 2002 From the BBC

"But it looked as if his status as a political icon still put Democrats in with chance.

That was until a memorial service to Paul Wellstone turned into a political rally. Polls afterwards indicated that any sympathy vote may have been squandered by the Democrats."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2411463.stm

Edited October 6, 2005 by Len Colby

[Len Colby]

Retired Army colonel says EMP weapons "never quite seem to happen"

" 'It's been this elegant promise for decades that never quite seems to happen,' said John Alexander, author of 'Future War: Non-Lethal Weapons in Twenty-First Century Warfare' and a retired Army colonel who directed non-lethal weapons development at Los Alamos National Laboratory. 'The check's always in the mail.'

http://coxnews.com/cox/news//static/cwb/pr...MICROWAR15.html

I found 2 excerpts from Col. Alexanders's book online - This guy unlike Fetzer Costella and the tinfoil hat crowd know what they are talking about.

http://www.ereader.com/product/book/excerp...Century_Warfare

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0312267398...00Q#reader-link

Edited October 7, 2005 by Len Colby

[David G. Healy]

Retired Army colonel says EMP weapons "never quite seem to happen"

" 'It's been this elegant promise for decades that never quite seems to happen,' said John Alexander, author of 'Future War: Non-Lethal Weapons in Twenty-First Century Warfare' and a retired Army colonel who directed non-lethal weapons development at Los Alamos National Laboratory. 'The check's always in the mail.'

http://coxnews.com/cox/news//static/cwb/pr...MICROWAR15.html

I found 2 excerpts from Col. Alexanders's book online - This guy unlike Fetzer Costella and the tinfoil hat crowd know what they are talking about.

http://www.ereader.com/product/book/excerp...Century_Warfare

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0312267398...00Q#reader-link

I recall the same regarding the SR-71 - what do they feed you dolt's down there in the amazon basin?

[Evan Burton]

Retired Army colonel says EMP weapons "never quite seem to happen"

" 'It's been this elegant promise for decades that never quite seems to happen,' said John Alexander, author of 'Future War: Non-Lethal Weapons in Twenty-First Century Warfare' and a retired Army colonel who directed non-lethal weapons development at Los Alamos National Laboratory. 'The check's always in the mail.'

http://coxnews.com/cox/news//static/cwb/pr...MICROWAR15.html

I found 2 excerpts from Col. Alexanders's book online - This guy unlike Fetzer Costella and the tinfoil hat crowd know what they are talking about.

http://www.ereader.com/product/book/excerp...Century_Warfare

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0312267398...00Q#reader-link

I recall the same regarding the SR-71 - what do they feed you dolt's down there in the amazon basin?

Can I ask what exactly you mean by "... the same regarding the SR-71"?