Len Colby

Hi Maya, I agree, you should tell that to Jack. To him making such claims frees him from the obligation to refute their points., i.e. it's an ad hominem attack. Len

Steve T, Steve U, Matthew, John, Jack and others, I was hoping to keep this thread on the question of the 9/11 CTists inabilitity to cite ONE single solitary civil or structural engineer or certified architect who disagrees with the findings of FEMA/NIST and the American Society of Civil Engineers. I have started a new thread on the subject of what Bush did and saw on the morning of 9/11. Please continue the debate what Bush did or didn't see and what he said there [pretty please] I replied to Steve T. there http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...=0&gopid=42535& Len

Hi...I will look at it when I have time. In general CLAVIUS and BAD ASTRONOMY websites are populated by agents provocateur, and I do not bother to engage them in time-wasting arguments. I prefer not to even visit their sites. When I have time, I will look. OR, just ask me questions on THIS forum, and I will respond to any message which does not contain PERSONAL ATTACKS. Thanks for your interest in my studies. Jack In other words Jack finds it difficult if not impossible to counter the debunking of his "studies" on those sites. He claims that they are fronts for NASA but has yet to produce any evidence to back those claims.

Jack, You are down to zero qualified experts who you can cite who back your theory. The only person with a remotely applicable degree on the site you cited is David Heller. He has an MA from the S. F. Institute of Architecture The school is unaccredited, meaning its graduates cannot apply for professional licensing, it does not offer the kind of classes that would qualify him to speak authoritatively [more on that below] He displays his ignorance in his article. [ http://www.garlicandgrass.org/issue6/Dave_Heller.cfm ] He said for example, "The official story maintains that fires weakened the buildings. Jet fuel supposedly burned so hot it began to melt the steel columns supporting the towers. But steel-framed skyscrapers have never collapsed from fire, since they're built from steel that doesn't melt below 2750 degrees Fahrenheit. No fuel, not even jet fuel, which is really just refined kerosene, will burn hotter than 1500 degrees Fahrenheit." He shows here that he did not even study the official account he is supposedly debunking. The FEMA/NIST/ASCE report says that the steel was weakened not melted. According to the Popular Mechanics article "Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat." The FEMA report says that air in the towers reached 1000 C which is 1832 F this doesn't mean that the fire burned that hot but even Heller admits it should have reached 1500 F so the steel would have been reduced to 10 - 50 % of it's strength. If Heller actually had any background in structural engineering [which a real architect would] he should have know that steel would be severely weakened at 1500 F and weakens long before it melts. If he had actually read the report he would know that it never maintains the steel melted. Out of ignorance or an intention to deceive he wrote "no building prior to 9-11, in the 100-plus year history of steel frame buildings, had ever collapsed from fire" the WTC buildings didn't of course collapse from fire alone WTCs 1 & 2 obviously had there structural integrity greatly damaged by the impact of the planes and WTC was damaged by falling debris. Another sentence demonstrates his ignorance "I noticed that this plane, United Airlines Flight 175, which weighed over 160,000 pounds and was traveling at 350 mph, did not even visibly move the building when it slammed into it. How, I wondered, could a building that did not visibly move from a heavy high speed projectile collapse at near freefall speed less than an hour later?" Why would he expect the tower which was several magnitudes of of weight heavier than the plane be expected to "visibly move" when hit by it? What does it not moving have to do with the tower collapsing. The tower collapsed because of the structural damage cause by the plane striking it and the weakening of the steel from the fire. So Jack try again find me one qualified expert who studied the FEMA report and agrees with your theories. Doesn't your inability to do so raise any questions in your mind? Don't forget that the ASCE the American Society of Civil Engineers was party to and endorsed the report. If its conclusions were so totally wrong one would expect dozens or hundreds if not thousands of civil and structural engineers and acredited architects to be questioning it's conclusions. You have yet to cite a single solitary one. Back to the subject of Heller's school The main thrust of the "San Francisco Architectural Institutes's program is "natural architecture". "The school is open to all" you don't even need to have gone to college to get into it's masters degree program. Most of the classes are taught by it director and most of the others by a SFIA graduate. Only a handful of classes are tought per period. Payment is by credit card on a course by course basis. It sounds like a PC eco-friendly diploma mill to me. I looked through it's course catalogue an saw no evidence that any classes teaching the science end of architecture are taught there. Heller the CTists only expert it seems has no academic training that would qualify him as an expert. For example in Summer 2005 the classes offered were VECTORWORKS COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN AND DRAFTING E-95 INTERN STUDY FOR AN ECO DESIGN CASE STUDY . E-85 BECOMING AN ECOLOGICAL DESIGN PROFESSIONAL E-100 "EVERYTHING ECO" WORKSHOPS E-100-1 Materials & Methods E-100-2 Energy & Environment C-10 SKETCHUP: 3-D MODELING THE EASY WAY SELF-PACED STUDY D-14 COMMUNICATING YOUR DESIGNS: PERSPECTIVE DRAWING & MEDIA __ C-11 Winter 2005 • Ancient Egypt • Buddhist Architecture • Green Walls -- Hands-On Workshop • Sketch Perspective Drawing and Rendering -- Hands-On Studio • Understanding Working Drawings http://www.sfia.net/Courses.asp

Jack, Steve Bush said " I was in Florida. And my Chief of Staff, Andy Card -- actually, I was in a classroom talking about a reading program that works. I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on. And I used to fly, myself, and I said, well, there's one terrible pilot. I said, it must have been a horrible accident." http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...0011204-17.html The second plane hit at 9:03 AM and was broadcast live [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11%2C_2001_attacks ] even the CT article that I sighted previously can't place Bush in the classroom before the 2nd plane hit. Do you have any proof otherwise? He could have been confused and thought it was a replay. If 9/11 was an inside job and Bush saw some secret broadcast of the 1st tower being hit in the limo why would he say he saw in the school? He comments prove nothing.

Welcome to the forum Maya! How much credence do you put in Jacks claims? He believe a lot of bizarre things.

I couldn't say. The only thing I can say for sure about Harari recently is that he definately wasn't at Essex County Airport with Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. next to John-John's plane 2 days before it crashed!!! Where did you hear about him running guns for FARC on tomflocco.com?

This article is typical Tom Flocco, is full of wild absurd claims back only by the unsubstantiated claims of anonymous or pseudonymous sources. This one of the most loony tunes of loony tunes of CT sites. On the home page the question "Where would Jesus bank?" is posed in thinly disguised ad for an investment scheme. Among the stories reported on it's homepage: Barbara Olsen arrested in Poland, Harriet Miers "is a “deep-cover espionage agent” who is “representing as many as two or possibly three foreign governments” ", "CIA, French intelligence kill 4, capture 5 Israelis in NY subway attack ", "Bush and Cheney indicted", 20 -30 pedophile Congressmen are involved in a snuff film ring which also involved Hunter [s.] Thompson and possibly the Secret Service. This id the Weekly World News of CT cites. These stories are always based on unnamed sources or self proclaimed experts In this case were supposed to take Floco's word for it some guy who wants only to be known as "Delbert," a former Interpol operative Special Forces and CIA Division 4 team member told him "about his team’s suppressed and classified final report naming former Presidents Bill Clinton and George H. W. Bush, President George W. Bush and Senator Hillary Clinton among others as being involved in orchestrating the assassination of John F. Kennedy Jr". The only citations in the story are other Tom Flocco stewweb.com articles. [stew Webb seems to be Flocco's sidekick] The supposed motive was that John-John supposedly was thinking about running for Senator against Hillary or President against Bush. This absurd since he never expressed interest in getting involved in politics. Quite to the contrary, he resigned his job in the Manhattan DA's office, a potential stepping stone to elected office after only 4 years and when urged to run for Congress in '92 said "I frankly feel there are many opportunities and avenues outside of elective office to become involved in issues, issues that have the same broad scope that government or elected office provides you." http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/1999/kenne...file/index.html There is no way he could have been a credible threat to Bush's presidential ambitions. Except for six war hero generals [Washington, Jackson, W.H. Harrison, Taylor, Grant and Eisenhower] There never was an American president who did not have previous experience in elected office and/or held important anointed positions. And as far as I can tell that applies to VPs, major party nominees and all serious contenders for major party nomination. Ross Perot the only important third party candidate for president without such previous experience only got 19% of the vote in 1992 and 8% in 1996 and many of those were protest votes. There are no indications Kennedy was interested in the job or would have be such a strong candidate that would merit killing him. "Two witnesses told the team they saw George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush at the Essex County, New Jersey airport with Israeli Mossad agent Michael Harari and another Mossad agent who were both seen standing next to JFK Jr.’s Cessna--all four were at the airport just two days before the doomed plane took off" This the most absurd claim in the report, Even if the Bushes and the Mossad conspired to kill John John, obviously the Bushes and Harari [who would have been close to 72 and was the retired head of the Mossad] would not have gone to the airport personally. There would have been no reason for them to have done so and this would jepordise the entire mission. They would have sent agents who would not draw attention to themselves and had a cover story. I find it hard to believe that anyone who is not intellectually challenged and/or crazy would find such a claim credible. The Mossad's motives for killing John John are never explained. Also who these two witnesses were is never explained why would some who could recognize a Mossad agent be at the Essex County airport? Even for Jack White citing this article is beyond belief. Jack do you really find this story credible or are you pulling our legs?

Evan, I don't disagree nor agree with you, but did you even go to the link that Jack posted before you said It was ridiculous? Adam, Did you even go to the link that Jack posted before you asked Even if he had?

Hi Steve I'll try to answer your questions as best I can 1,Was America taken by surprise, and if so why? According to CTist no, the Bush administration knew the attack was coming and purposely did nothing or they themselves planned the attack. Defenders of the Bush administration say we were taken by surprise but blame the Clinton Administration for cutting back on intelligence and for not having killed or captured bin-Laden when it would have been easier. I like most Democrats believe the US was taken by surprise due to the Bush Administration's incompetence and disinterest in terrorism before 9/11 2,Where was the president at the time of the first strike? He was en-route to the elementary school in Florida where he read a story about a goat to some 7 year olds. 3,Did the president see the first tower struck, and if so how? This is unclear, he arrived at the school after the first tower was struck. 4,Who knew what, and when did they know it? I'm not sure. Some agencies like the FAA and NORAD might have known what was going on but when word first got to Bush is not clear 5,What did Andrew Card tell the President? I'm not sure IIRC Michael Moore answered that in Fahrenheit 9/11 6,What is the role of the S/S in protecting the Presidents life. (Protocol) They are supposed to defend his life at all costs even to the extent of "taking a bullet" for him as one agent did when Reagan was shot in 1981 7,If Airforce one is under threat why go on board? (Protocol) The Bush people say they though he was safer in the air than on the ground 8, Interceptor Jets, asleep at the wheel? (protocol) It depends on who you believe. Under US law the armed forces are general prohibited from being employed with in the US especially in combat roles, although there were some exceptions such as for use in drug interdiction and border patrol. These restrictions were lessened after 9/11. IIRC the official story is that only 14 jets were on-call on the eastern seaboard and they weren't scrambled in time. In hindsight this seems strange but before 9/11 this kind of attack was unexpected. The only time the US came came under air attack previously was during WWII 9, Hide and seek, just where did the president go? I think the Air Force one was delivered to Louisiana 10, Just what did happen to flight 93? That depends on who you believe. The overwhelming evidence supports the official story that it crashed in a field in Pennsylvania after passengers overpowered the hijackers. CTists claim that it was shotdown I have a whole lot more, but these will do for a start. Steve. I found a good article which you should find informative. It is written from a CT point of view but unlike most CT sites documents it's claims. I just disagree with their conclusions. http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timelin...restingday.html The previously mentioned PM article is once again highly recommended. CTists hate but I've never seen them rebut any of its info. The best they can do is put it down ala Jack White. To CTists Bush's behaviour that morning is evidence that he already knew. I disagree. I think if anything it is evidence he didn't know. Bush was widely criticized for not ending the photo-op immediately and taking charge. I imagine if Bush and Rove planned 9/11 they would not have put him in such a ridiculous situation. That would have scripted a way for him to look more presidential. Bush and Rove aren't stupid and if they knew what was coming they would not have squandered a chance for Bush to appear presidential and heroic. Remember when the stuffed socks in the crotch of his flightsuit on the aircraft carrier? Instead he looked like a buffoon

- If you have any rebuttals to points made in the article we love to see them. - Do you have any evidence to back this claim? - Do you have any evidence to back this claim? There is no reference to him in the article. The only description of his job title at PM is "researcher" http://www.google.com/search?q=site:www.po...GLG:en&filter=0 http://www.popularmechanics.com/specials/f...html?page=2&c=y According to PM the article was written by "the editors" the editor is James Miegs. http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1230517.html - Do you have any evidence to back this claim? Some people wrote into PM saying Chertoff edited the article and that he is the Nat. Sec. Director's cousin and I have seen the same claim on various CT site always with zero substantiation. Even if true this proves nothing. Do you have any evidence that Ben C is under Michael C's sway? Isn't it common for members of the same family to hold differing political views? - John Wilkes Booth's family supported the Union, Schartzernagger is married to Schriver, I think most of us have cousins we disagree with etc. M. Chertoff hardly seems to be a NWO fanatic. When Clinton became President Chertoff was kept on as federal prosecutor for NJ at the request of liberal Democrat Bill Bradley, he was the only prosecutor not replaced. Sen. Charles Schumer another liberal Democrat praised him, Hillary Clinton was the only Senator to vote against his confirmation. She did so not because of ideology but because of the way he treated some White House staffers during the White Water investigation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Chertoff and http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp?str...intcategoryid=5 If you want to discount the PM article you will have to do a lot better than showing one of the mag's employees, who may or may not have been involved in writing it, has the same last name as a Bush appointee with widespread support among Democrats. This from a guy who cites Tom Floco who makes all sorts of ridiculous claims without any substantiation.

Simple...I read the article. The fact that the author is related to a Bush appointee surely is just coincidence. Jack Jack if you want to dismiss the entire PM article just because it's editor is related to a Bush appointee you should dismiss everything by Bollyn and the American Free Press, they are neo-Nazis. Bollyn is the only person comparing the Windsor Building's construction and fire. He does not provide any references for his various claims including: -The fires burned at 800 Celsius/1500 Fahrenheit -The Madrid fire was far more intense than the WTC fires -The Windsor building is supported by a central core. -"no steel framed high-rise, like WTC 7, has ever collapsed due to fire" -"It would be expected that they [the WTC's central column] should have remained standing even if some of the floor trusses failed." -"WTC 7, owned by Larry Silverstein, collapsed in what appeared to be a controlled demolition." He is wrong on some major points: -He said "The Windsor Building has central support columns in its core section, which is similar to the construction of the twin towers. This central core is what supported the gravity load of the towers." However much of the WTC's gravity load was supported by its outer walls. The outer walls of course were severely damaged by the impact of the jets. -He also insists that the official story is that the fires alone caused the towers to collapse. A combination of the fires and the damage sustained due the impact of the planes is blamed -Again he says fire alone is blamed for WTC7's collapse. Falling debris is also blamed. -"There is no explanation for what caused the [the WTC towers] huge box columns to fail." - This is discussed in the FEMA/ASCE report What about the scientists and firemen quoted in the PM article Jack are they all part of the NWO too?

Sounds interesting but far fetched to me. I don't think anyone would purposely want to set off nuclear war. Did you find the author credible and compelling? Can you summarize the author's main evidence/arguments? Did he nave a national security background? Len

So far I haven't read about any. This makes me wonder about all the supposed anomalies. Why aren't they being raised by people who know what they are talking about? Economists, atomic physicists, ad. execs, neo-Nazi journalists and water safety specialists don't count. I refer specifically to questions as to whether the collapses of the WTC buildings can be explained by impact damage, fires and falling debris cause by the planes crashing into the towers. Len

You've attained *full* BUMP artist status on the board ??????????????????????? Might I make a suggestion; get a book in print! Hell, even Ann Coulter can do THAT... Jealousy, is unbecoming! Who do you think I'm jealous of you? ROTF!!! Why on earth would I be jealous of you? Exactly how many books have gotten published? I am not aware of any (didn't bother to check though) Why do you assume I'm a "wanna be" writer? I've written an article or two but that's not my ambition.

Evan there's no reason for you to get Fetzer's approval. You could also submit Fetzer's articles to them. I would be very interested to hear what they have to say.

Healy's tendency to insult instead of articulate any argument reminds me of Ann Coulter. He could be a "poor man's" liberal version of her. She wrote: "If you can somehow force a liberal into a point-counterpoint argument, his retorts will bear no relation to what you said...In the famous liberal two-step, they leap from one idiotic point to the next, so you can never nail them. It’s like arguing with someone with Attention Deficit Disorder". She is of course guilty of what she ascribes to liberals but it seems like Healy is doing his best to prove her right.

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

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

"never mind" Emma Latella

The hotel and racetrack thing don't make sense to me either 1] If it's true why hasn't this info come out earlier? 2] the guy who posted the info seemed to be unaware that Cohen had been in prison for over 7 years and hasn't replied yet. 3] I seriously doubt Cohen would have been interested in a racetrack in unglamorous San Diego. 4]According to your info some other mob type owned it. Do you remember if he was tied to Cohen? The revenge angle is an interesting one. RFK might have gotten Cohen twice, once in 61 as AG and a few years earlier as lead council for the Kefauver committe [apperently they turned up info that got him put away]. Of course if we would consider how many mob types RFK was responsible for "sending up the river" the list of suspect would be a very long one. Do you agree that the Onasis buissness is absurd? This guy Evans seems to be completely clueless. Len

From rummaging around in the garbage perhaps? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yeah his name did sound familiar. I Googled various snippets of his post in cluding parts of the "trail transcript" but the only page that turned up was this one. Mr Webberman - just where did you get this info? I am Jewish and pro-Israel too [though I hate the Likud]. But the truth is the truth and BS is BS. If this is true you should explain how you got this information, if it is BS than you should retract it. Len

Perhaps because it is nonsense? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Could be, but do you think he made the whole thing up? Or did he get it from somewhere else?

A.J., This sounds "to good to be true" where did you get this from? Why hasn't this info come before? Len

I never meant to suggest that Mr. Cohen or his associates originated this plot, only that they or their assest cooperated. If I want to kill someone in a hotel, it will be lots easier if management cooperates. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So Cohen gave an order from, Atlanta Federal Penitentiary - a maximum security facility where IIRC prisoners were held incomunicado, to get a patsy from the race track and let him and others in to the hotel to kill RFK?! Are you sure he was the owner of the racetrack and hotel in 1968? What is your source of this information? Did you know he'd been in prison for over seven years before RFK was killed? If not why not? If so why didn't you include that info in your post? You said "Sirhan worked as a groom at a racetrack, know who owned the track? Mickey Cohen. And then there is the owner of the hotel where RFK was shot, owned by ..... Mickey Cohen! I dunno about an Ari connection, but there sure seems to be an organized crime connection." That sure makes it sound like he was one of the plotters Len PS no offence I give every one a hard time