Myra Bronstein

"Yes, we found this choice little quote tucked away in a recent New Scientist interview with Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales. It’s official: “Wikipedia is not controlled by the CIA, Martians, or Elvis.” Jimmy says so.

To be fair, he didn’t just come out and make such a bald statement. He was answering a question that implied the CIA had doctored the site to remove links to conspiracy theories about the agency (allegedly) killing President Kennedy."

http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/news/9...C257299000847A2

On edit:

Discussion about propaganda on Wiki is continued here:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=10738

Well worth a read.

An interesting article. Makes some good points both Pro, and con assassination.

Steve.

Very good article.

Thanks for posting it Steve.

Paul,

When you ask, "Was the white Fiat introduced into the tale as a 'grassy knoll' piece of mis-direction from the Merc itself?" you are precisely on target.

The operation to blur the perceptions -- of witnesses and post-event investigators -- is an all-important component in an illegal public execution.

Uno/MB contact supports a plausible hypothesis of "accident" and simultaneously sends suspicious types like us speeding down our own dark tunnels.

If one were to undertake what I guess would be called a time-motion study of the MB from the Ritz to the crash scene, one would come across conflicting eyewitness testimony as to the configuration, speed, and route of what amounted to at least one motorcade. Why?

Let's stipulate that witness reports can be unreliable. Of course this is not to say that ALL witness reports are unreliable ALL THE TIME.

That being established, let's game the assassination. Given all we've learned about the overworld's underworld, how would we have done it?

Apres vous.

Charles

I admit to not be an expert on the physical situation in the tunnel, but generally:

-jimmy with seatbelts so they don't work or don't hold, if used.

-lure targets through kill zone

-target car bugged & radio beacon GPS; and under possible remote control

-have the kill zone [tunnel] all set up with lethal obstacles, cameras, diversions, doubles.

-clear out normal traffic prior to ambush and slow down follow-up traffic

-lanes blocked or bettter

-car rigged to be taken over by remote radio control [no control actual driver]

-strobe lights to confuse the target car and any others [though they would have been likely held-back by conspirator cars

-after accident first responders dressed in costume are conspirators

-if Diana and Dodi dead...end of game

-if not let them bleed and go slow

-if all else fails administer lethal substances in tunnel, ambulance or hospital, as last resort

-control of autopsy and media

-whisk body away immediately

-crocodile tears from appropriate persons

-sell stock in landmines you bought before kill

And embalm Di immediately so her pregnancy is hidden.

...

-sell stock in landmines you bought before kill

Good one.

...

This is an excellent article David; thank you for posting it.

In fact it's so good I made it the first entry in the new Propagandapedia:

http://www.propagandapedia.com/index.html

I'm sure there will be no shortage of material.

Something that is probably worth mentioning regarding LeMay. Network Electronics, a company that LeMay had been a board chairman, said that during LeMay's run for VP, Nelson Bunker Hunt, son of H.L. Hunt, set up a $1 million investment fund for Lemay so he wouldn't suffer any financial losses during the campaign.

It's good to have friends in high places.

FWIW.

James

The same Nelson Bunker Hunt that paid for the "Wanted for Treason" ad that greeted the doomed President Kennedy upon his arrival in Dallas?

Yep, that's him. Hunt was one of three who financed that ad. The other two were Edgar Crissey and Harvey Bright.

James

That's fantastic information James. I never even heard of Crissey and Bright.

Thanks...

You will find out about Harvey Bright here:

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKbrightH.htm

I am sorry I do not have a page on Edgar Crissey. How much have you got on him James?

Thanks John.

Something that is probably worth mentioning regarding LeMay. Network Electronics, a company that LeMay had been a board chairman, said that during LeMay's run for VP, Nelson Bunker Hunt, son of H.L. Hunt, set up a $1 million investment fund for Lemay so he wouldn't suffer any financial losses during the campaign.

It's good to have friends in high places.

FWIW.

James

The same Nelson Bunker Hunt that paid for the "Wanted for Treason" ad that greeted the doomed President Kennedy upon his arrival in Dallas?

Yep, that's him. Hunt was one of three who financed that ad. The other two were Edgar Crissey and Harvey Bright.

James

That's fantastic information James. I never even heard of Crissey and Bright.

Thanks...

Does anyone still believe that propaganda about needing the atom bomb to end WW2?

Even high ranking military men of the era knew better, as shown in this interview with one:

Military man: The war would have been over in two weeks without the Russians entering and without the atomic bomb.

The Press: You mean that, sir? Without the Russians and the atomic bomb?

Military man: Yes, with the B-29…

The Press: General, why use the atomic bomb? Why did we use it then?

Military man: Well, the other people were not convinced…

The Press: Had they not surrendered because of the atomic bomb?

Military man: The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war at all.

The military man was Curtis LeMay.

http://www.antiwar.com/henderson/?articleid=11405

LeMay knew that the Japanese were done for before the big bombs were dropped 'cause he had already bombed the snot out of them with conventional bombs:

"Take, for example, Curtis E. LeMay, the Air Force general who led B-29 bombing of Japanese cities late in the war. LeMay once said, "There are no innocent civilians, so it doesn't bother me so much to be killing innocent bystanders." And he was as good as his word: in one night of fire-bombing Tokyo, he and his men killed 100,000 civilians. So we can be confident that any doubts he had about dropping the atom bomb would not be based on concern for Japanese civilians."

So was he crazy?

He was a sociopath for sure, but that also describes many of his peers and colleagues and everyone in the massive plot to murder President Kennedy.

I guess LeMay was just a man of his time.

And Kennedy wasn't.

Something that is probably worth mentioning regarding LeMay. Network Electronics, a company that LeMay had been a board chairman, said that during LeMay's run for VP, Nelson Bunker Hunt, son of H.L. Hunt, set up a $1 million investment fund for Lemay so he wouldn't suffer any financial losses during the campaign.

It's good to have friends in high places.

FWIW.

James

The same Nelson Bunker Hunt that paid for the "Wanted for Treason" ad that greeted the doomed President Kennedy upon his arrival in Dallas?

There is a piece on this by John Borland on Wired today -

See Who's Editing Wikipedia - Diebold, the CIA, a Campaign

On November 17th, 2005, an anonymous Wikipedia user deleted 15 paragraphs from an article on e-voting machine-vendor Diebold, excising an entire section critical of the company's machines. While anonymous, such changes typically leave behind digital fingerprints offering hints about the contributor, such as the location of the computer used to make the edits.

In this case, the changes came from an IP address reserved for the corporate offices of Diebold itself. And it is far from an isolated case. A new data-mining service launched Monday traces millions of Wikipedia entries to their corporate sources, and for the first time puts comprehensive data behind longstanding suspicions of manipulation, which until now have surfaced only piecemeal in investigations of specific allegations.

Wikipedia Scanner -- the brainchild of CalTech computation and neural-systems graduate student Virgil Griffith -- offers users a searchable database that ties millions of anonymous Wikipedia edits to organizations where those edits apparently originated, by cross-referencing the edits with data on who owns the associated block of internet IP addresses.

Inspired by news last year that Congress members' offices had been editing their own entries, Griffith says he got curious, and wanted to know whether big companies and other organizations were doing things in a similarly self-interested vein.

"Everything's better if you do it on a huge scale, and automate it," he says with a grin.

This database is possible thanks to a combination of Wikipedia policies and (mostly) publicly available information.

The online encyclopedia allows anyone to make edits, but keeps detailed logs of all these changes. Users who are logged in are tracked only by their user name, but anonymous changes leave a public record of their IP address.

The organization also allows downloads of the complete Wikipedia, including records of all these changes.

Griffith thus downloaded the entire encyclopedia, isolating the XML-based records of anonymous changes and IP addresses. He then correlated those IP addresses with public net-address lookup services such as ARIN, as well as private domain-name data provided by IP2Location.com.

The result: A database of 5.3 million edits, performed by 2.6 million organizations or individuals ranging from the CIA to Microsoft to Congressional offices, now linked to the edits they or someone at their organization's net address has made.

Some of this appears to be transparently self-interested, either adding positive, press release-like material to entries, or deleting whole swaths of critical material.

Voting-machine company Diebold provides a good example of the latter, with someone at the company's IP address apparently deleting long paragraphs detailing the security industry's concerns over the integrity of their voting machines, and information about the company's CEO's fund-raising for President George Bush.

The text, deleted in November 2005, was quickly restored by another Wikipedia contributor, who advised the anonymous editor, "Please stop removing content from Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism."

A Diebold Election Systems spokesman said he'd look into the matter but could not comment by press time.

Wal-Mart has a series of relatively small changes in 2005 that that burnish the company's image on its own entry while often leaving criticism in, changing a line that its wages are less than other retail stores to a note that it pays nearly double the minimum wage, for example. Another leaves activist criticism on community impact intact, while citing a "definitive" study showing Wal-Mart raised the total number of jobs in a community.

As has been previously reported, politician's offices are heavy users of the system. Former Montana Senator Conrad Burns' office, for example, apparently changed one critical paragraph headed "A controversial voice" to "A voice for farmers," with predictably image-friendly content following it.

Perhaps interestingly, many of the most apparently self-interested changes come from before 2006, when news of the Congressional offices' edits reached the headlines. This may indicate a growing sophistication with the workings of Wikipedia over time, or even the rise of corporate Wikipedia policies.

Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales told Wired News he was aware of the new service, but needed time to experiment with it before commenting.

The vast majority of changes are fairly innocuous, however. Employees at the CIA's net address, for example, have been busy -- but with little that would indicate their place of apparent employment, or a particular bias.

One entry on "Black September in Jordan" contains wholesale additions, with specific details that read like a popular history book or an eyewitness' memoir.

Many more are simple copy edits, or additions to local town entries or school histories. One CIA entry deals with the details of lyrics sung in a Buffy the Vampire Slayer episode.

Griffith says he launched the project hoping to find scandals, particularly at obvious targets such as companies like Halliburton. But there's a more practical goal, too: By exposing the anonymous edits that companies such as drugs and big pharmaceutical companies make in entries that affect their businesses, it could help experts check up on the changes and make sure they're accurate, he says.

For now, he has just scratched the surface of the database of millions of entries. But he's putting it online so others can look too.

The nonprofit Wikimedia Foundation, which runs Wikipedia, did not respond to e-mail and telephone inquiries Monday.

Original article link is -

http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights...08/wiki_tracker

This is an excellent article David; thank you for posting it.

John,

Lately it seems like we've accumulated enough threads on the Military to justify adding that group to the index.

There are links for "Military Industrial (Congressional) Complex" but they're quite general.

And there is a CIA link.

Can we please get one to track the high level military suspects?

I'd think the following threads would be part of it, for starters:

Operation Northwoods:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=4363

(Which is listed elsewhere in the Index but can be cross-referenced.)

Edwin Walker:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2544

Lyman Lemnitzer:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=10692

Curtis LeMay and John F. Kennedy:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=10711

And of course American Security Council:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=10696

Seems like it should have its own Index entry given the possible significance.

Thanks.

Good point Myra, I have added them all to the JFK Index. I have also added the threads on Robert Anderson, Fred Black, George R. Brown, George H. W. Bush, Tommy Corcoran, Irving Davidson, C. Douglas Dillon, Allen Dulles, Patrick Frawley, Paul Lional Helliwell, Fred Korth, John Jay McCloy, Robert McNamara, John McCone, William Pawley, Ted Shackley, John Singlaub, Earl T. Smith.

Thanks John!

http://takingaimradio.com/mp3/takingaim070710.mp3"]http://takingaimradio.com/mp3/takingaim070710.mp3[/url] This is the 7/10 edition of Taking Aim with Raph Schoenman, Mya Schon, and guest

Joan Mellen.

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

Hi Joan-- I am at this point a perplexed fan.

...

What happened? Seems like two different Joan Mellens.

Let's hope not.

I hope you're ready for her response Nathaniel, properly attired with asbestos goggles.

Flag set post.

John,

Lately it seems like we've accumulated enough threads on the Military to justify adding that group to the index.

There are links for "Military Industrial (Congressional) Complex" but they're quite general.

And there is a CIA link.

Can we please get one to track the high level military suspects?

I'd think the following threads would be part of it, for starters:

Operation Northwoods:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=4363

(Which is listed elsewhere in the Index but can be cross-referenced.)

Edwin Walker:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2544

Lyman Lemnitzer:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=10692

Curtis LeMay and John F. Kennedy:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=10711

And of course American Security Council:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=10696

Seems like it should have its own Index entry given the possible significance.

Thanks.

Does anyone have any information on just how "Tight" Lemnitzer, & Walker were. The Senate committee investigating Walkers attempts to indoctrinate his troops with far right wing propoganda, exonorated Lemnitzer, for lack of evidence. But there must have been a close connection to have warrented examination in the first place. Thanks, Steve.

They did have that common denominator: President Kennedy damaged or destroyed their careers.

At least that's likely how they'd see it.

David Talbot argues in his book, Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years, that Walker's indoctrination program had been endorsed by General Lyman Lemnitzer. Talbot quotes a letter from Lemnitzer to Walker saying that he found his efforts "interesting and useful."

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKwalker.htm

I believe there is much about Walker's discharge from the U.S. Military that has a certain hollow ring to it; Yes he was definitely prosecuted for treasonous activities while Bobby was AG. but he didn't just terminate every relationship with every military person he ever knew the day he was no longer an "active" member of the US military, I still get irritated when the old story [whether true or false] about Ruby and Oswald being arrested and released before the assassination is mentioned; either it happened or it didn't......Walker mentioned this incident 20 years after it happened, and I for one, still am in the dark as to whether it did or didn't happen.

The HSCA didn't seem to address the issue conclusively.....unless it is buried in one of the 500,000 documents that have been de-classified over the last couple of years. Until then....what a pathetic situation.....

The real problem with resolving the JFK assassination is that it takes a historian, researcher and somebody with a considerable amount of time and money to wade through the wheat and chaff of doc's allegations and theories, and even if you know what happened, unless you are a high profile person like an established writer or official, you will get the media treatment, but there are some very good researchers who will, I would estimate, never give up....David Talbot is one of them

I wonder if there will be a second edition of "Brothers."

And We Are Still All Mortal

Thomas Dodd and Lee Harvey Oswald

By George Michael Evica

(from "Agent LHO," a chapter in a work in progress, The Iron Sights)

...

http://www.spitfirelist.com/rfa.html [items 14 and 15]

Interesting link Peter; thanks.

John, hidden somewhere in the vast depths of the Forum, is a thread I started on Lemnitzer, LeMay and Lems sidekick Craig, with special emphasis on the enmity that existed between the Kennedy Administration, and the JCS. I'll see if I cant dig it out.

Lemnitzer and LeMay are prime suspects. If there is a list of the

"military brass" at the JFK autopsy "who seemed to be in charge"

and "dictating to the autopists", I'd bet they were there. It the

operation was a military coup, their hands were unclean...all the JCS.

Jack

Agreed. Lemnitzer and LeMay are prime suspects.

In fact they and the joint chiefs should be looked at as closely as the CIA.

The prime suspect in the JFK assassination is Gen. Curtis LeMay.

After all, he detested both JFK and RFK.

In fact, the Kennedys were trying to put him in jail and/or deport him on the very date that JFK was assassinated.

He had made threats against the life of JFK.

Jack Ruby had ties to the organization he headed.

While hospitalized and sedated in the 1980s, he made statements about killing kennedy when Kennedy got to Dallas.

At the time of the assassination, David Ferrie was working for him.

Oops, sorry, that description fits Carlos Marcello, not Curtis LeMay! As far as I know, LeMay had a distinguished and unblemished military record and no history of ever participating in any criminal enterprise. And unless I missed something he never expressed to anyone taking any violent action against the Kennedys. Nor did he have any connection with Jack Ruby.

Me thinkust the Tim doth protest to much.

LeMay was a cold war lunatic, during his time in the JCS, defcom was CONSTANTLY on red alert, he advocated dropping America's entire nuclear stockpile on the Soviet Union, and doing the same thing to Cuba, he was also one of the main supports/advocates of operation Nortwoods. He christened Kennedy a "no win chief" and an appeaser of Communism.

Does this mean he was instumental in the assassination, no, but neither does it earn him a get out of jail free card. I find it entirely reasonable that LeMays troubled relationship with his Chief is examined in light of his well documented enmity towards all things Kennedy.

I'll clarify.

LeMay is one of many prime suspects, listed them in post #5 of this thread:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=106828

Good to see prime suspect LeMay get the attention he richly deserves. Very good summary.

On 20th July, 1961, at a National Security Council meeting, General Lyman Lemnitzer presented Kennedy with an official plan for a surprise nuclear attack on the Soviet Union. LeMay was known to be a strong supporter of this strategy.

Chillingly, all the joint chiefs approved the plan.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/northwoods.html

...

In February, 1965, LeMay retired from the army.

...

Correction: retired from the Air Force.

Paul and Myra,

As one who had previously not considered Diana's death as anything more than a reckless accident, I must say you are making a strong case that there was more to this than we have been told.

...

Thanks Mark.

I've just recently become convinced of her murder myself.

The tipping point was when news emerged that US espionage was bugging her calls in the hours before she was killed in Paris.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/sto...1968664,00.html

That hit me right between the eyes because a few people in the forum, Terry for one, emphasized that US and British intelligence are "joined at the hip." I agree with that (in fact I think British espionage largely created the OSS in WW2). So it seems likely that any US spying was done for, or in conjunction with, MI5/MI6.

Still I didn't research her death until the later part of this thread. The list of motives I posted was just off the top of my head. Now that I've read up a little I'd mention:

-Her campaign against Charles becoming king:

"Events had certainly reached a crisis in recent weeks, beginning with Diana's televised confessions on Nov. 20. Not only did she tell of her own bulimia, self-mutilation and adultery, but she also suggested that Charles is ill-suited to be king. She also offered that the monarchy itself could use a bit of a makeover ("more contact with people, more in-depth understanding"). She concluded with the salvo that she wished to be "queen of people's hearts," as well as an ambassador for Britain."

http://thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.c...s=M1ARTM0010555

-And I'd add that the Windsors did not want the Muslim Dodi to be a step father to the king of England.

And Myra, your reasons for suspecting foul play are convincing, imo. In relation to landmines, Diana was well known for her campaign to end the use of these weapons. She would have been a powerful foe of the US on this issue. According to this 2005 article about proposed changes by Ambassador Bolton to a draft document on UN Reform, the US said this (in relation to landmines):

"The targeting and deliberate killing of civilians and non-combatants is without justification or legitimacy but only when committed by terrorists"

Of course, further down the document, the US submits its definition of what it considers 'terrorists' to be:

http://www.nuclearpolicy.org/ArticleID/2568

Diana would have been horrified at the elevation of these criminals to high office in the US. Were she alive today I suspect that a vocal campaign from her targeting the land mine issue would shame the US Government into doing the right thing in very short order, considering her enormous popularity throughout the world.

-I think it's entirely possible that the factor that made the US eager to see her dead and willing to participate was her campaign against land mines (documented elsewhere in this thread). It's hard not to notice how often outspoken peaceniks (John Lennon, MLK, RFK, JFK) die a violent death.

According to this 2005 article about proposed changes by Ambassador Bolton to a draft document on UN Reform, the US said this (in relation to landmines):

"The targeting and deliberate killing of civilians and non-combatants is without justification or legitimacy but only when committed by terrorists"

Of course, further down the document, the US submits its definition of what it considers 'terrorists' to be:

http://www.nuclearpolicy.org/ArticleID/2568

Diana would have been horrified at the elevation of these criminals to high office in the US. Were she alive today I suspect that a vocal campaign from her targeting the land mine issue would shame the US Government into doing the right thing in very short order, considering her enormous popularity throughout the world.

That sure is a fascinating link you provided Mark.

It's like a sneak peak into the plans of the new world order.

Here's a noteworthy passage:

"In a similar vein, the US insisted on the removal of language urging "parties to the Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention and Amended Protocol II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons to fully implement their respective obligations." In his letter accompanying the revisions, Ambassador Bolton explained that "[t]he U.S. did not and will not ... become a party to the Ottawa Convention, and that is why the U.S. cannot accept references to the Ottawa Convention." The US certainly has the right to refuse to become a party to the Convention. That being the case, why demand that States that are parties to the Convention not be urged to implement their obligations thereunder? Isn't it bad enough that the US retains the "right" to cause untold civilian casualties with anti-personnel mines? Why interfere with other States' agreement not to cause such casualties?"

I guess they're still trying to undo the 'damage' that pesky Diana did to their landmine sales.

...

Yep, it's a fair bet we've been dudded by the media again. I'm beginning to believe that starting with the assumption that the media is lying and work back from there is the shortest route to establishing the truth.

Yep Mark. That's the "negative template" method used so effectively by Peter Dale Scott. He observes which evidence the Warren Commission and HSCA refused to investigate and assigns it extra significance.

I think he and you are on to something with that negative template.

Finally this, imo much underrated film is going to be released on DVD in October! At the moment it's only available on the US Amazon.

http://www.amazon.com/Executive-Action-Bur...8433&sr=1-1

Excellent. I read the book but haven't seen the movie.

I wonder how closely the movie follows the book.

I also wonder why Mark Lane distances himself from the movie.

"Another powerful motive for murdering Diana was that she had become a loose cannon, politically speaking. Her aggressive campaigning toward the instituting of a ban on the use of land mines and a reduction in armaments sales, was anathema to the major armaments consortiums such as the Carlyle Group, whose stockholders includes the Bush and bin Laden families, Condoleezza Rice and, by proxy purchase, the House of Windsor."

http://www.dianaprincessofwales.net/didbri...dianasdeath.htm

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

"FEATURE-Decade after Diana campaign, few use landmines

16 Jul 2007 18:04:53 GMT

Source: Reuters

By Peter Apps

LONDON, July 16 (Reuters) - Ten years after the death of Princess Diana and the first global treaty against antipersonnel landmines, experts say only a handful of rebel groups and perhaps one state dare use what has become a pariah weapon.

...

"The supply of mines is drying up. I wouldn't say we have won the war but we have won the battles so far. We have to stop people slipping back and we have to get the mines out of the ground."

Activists say global opinion was already turning against antipersonnel mines even before Diana, Princess of Wales, began using her fame to draw attention to the issue. But they say her campaigning sped up the process.

Diana joined a British Red Cross campaign against landmines in 1997 and before she died visited Angola and Bosnia with landmine charities.

...

"Landmine warfare is not over," said one British demining specialist. "They are very effective weapons. They are not as easy to get hold of as they used to be but they are very cheap to produce."

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L13920373.htm

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

"Top 25 Censored Stories of 2007

#12 Pentagon Plans to Build New Landmines

Inter Press Service, August 3, 2005

Title: “After 10-Year Hiatus, Pentagon Eyes New Landmine”

Author: Isaac Baker

...

The Bush administration plans to resume production of antipersonnel landmine systems in a move that is at odds with both the international community and previous U.S. policy, according to the leading human rights organization, Human Rights Watch (HRW).

Nearly every nation has endorsed the goal of a global ban on antipersonnel mines. In 1994 the U.S. called for the “eventual elimination” of all such mines, and in 1996 President Bill Clinton said the U.S. would “seek a worldwide agreement as soon as possible to end the use of all antipersonnel mines.” The U.S. produced its last antipersonnel landmine in 1997. It had been the stated objective of the U.S. government to eventually join the 145 countries signatory to the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty, which bans the use, production, exporting, and stockpiling of antipersonnel landmines.

The Bush administration, however, made an about-face in U.S. antipersonnel landmine policy in February 2004, when it abandoned any plan to join the Mine Ban Treaty, also known as the Ottawa Convention. “The United States will not join the Ottawa Convention because its terms would have required us to give up a needed military capability,” the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Political-Military announced, summing up the administration’s new policy, “The United States will continue to develop non-persistent anti-personnel and anti-tank landmines.”

...

To sidestep international opposition, the Pentagon proposes development of the “Spider” system,

...

The U.S. Army spent $135 million between fiscal years 1999 and 2004 to develop Spider and another $11 million has been requested to complete research and development. A total of $390 million is budgeted to produce 1,620 Spider systems and 186,300 munitions. According to budget documents released in February 2005, the Pentagon requested $688 million for research on and $1.08 billion for the production of new landmine systems between fiscal years 2006 and 2011."

http://www.projectcensored.org/censored_2007/index.htm

Myra wrote:

The royals needed a sperm bank for Prince Tampex; she squirted out an heir and a spare; they had no further use for her; she refused to go quietly out to pasture when the royals deemed it time; they had her neutralized.

Can tell us what headaches she was causing that were big enough for them to want to kill her? Why would the British, French and/or American intel. services get involved?

Len,

I already answered that very question in post #15, then referenced it again in post #25.

If you can't or won't read existing answers to your questions, it makes it difficult to have much of a discussion.

But, for your convenience:

Oh c'mon, there are numerous obvious reasons:

-The royals had to protect the purity of their arian bloodline, as Dodi's father has charged.

-The royal bluebloods didn't want her marrying a foreigner, and middle easterner no less.

-Charles wanted to marry the rottweiler and a living ex wife made that awkward to impossible.

-The family didn't want her influencing her sons, one a future king, any more than she already had.

-She would likely have been the mother of the King of England.

How awkward would that have been for her estranged ex inlaws?

-She had the gall to blab to an author who then wrote a bio about her airing all the dirty royal laundry.

-Di embarrassed the stuffy old family by fraternizing with icky commoners and hugging lepers and aids patients.

The horror.

Not only that but she took on causes like eradication of land mines. She made them look cold and uncaring by contrast.

-They despised her.

-She was a superstar and out shined them.

-They detested her.

It's Agatha Christie all over again.

Then there's this from post #28, another one you somehow overlooked:

"Another powerful motive for murdering Diana was that she had become a loose cannon, politically speaking. Her aggressive campaigning toward the instituting of a ban on the use of land mines and a reduction in armaments sales, was anathema to the major armaments consortiums such as the Carlyle Group, whose stockholders includes the Bush and bin Laden families, Condoleezza Rice and, by proxy purchase, the House of Windsor. Until the advent of WWII, land mines had been used to impede the progress of enemy troops, but the introduction of tanks equipped with rotary flails which detonated land mines, provided a safe passage through minefields, thus diminishing their effectiveness. Their principal widespread use at the present time is to kill or maim children to prevent them from becoming future soldiers who might kill their aggressors. Cluster bombs serve a similar purpose, which is why they frequently contain bomblets disguised as toys.

At the time of the couple's death, production was scheduled to commence on a movie based upon a screenplay written by Gordon Thomas concerning the abolition of land mines. The executive producer was to have been Diana, with Dodi as producer. The movie was scheduled to star Gene Hackman and Brad Pitt."

And I'm not going to source it because I already did that in the afore-mentioned post.

Myra quoted a web page:

"Three paparazzi later claimed that Paul departed the Ritz at a high speed. This claim was contradicted by footage from the hotel's security cameras showing the Mercedes leaving at a normal speed, with Paul driving in a responsible manner.

According to the police, Henri Paul's blood alcohol level was very high, yet the Ritz security cameras revealed that Paul arrived at the hotel shortly after 10:00 pm and displayed no erratic behavior while parking his car, nor later in the hotel. Upon arrival at the hotel, Paul was in regular contact with Al Fayed bodyguards Trevor Rees-Jones and "Kes" Wingfield. Neither of them observed any evidence suggesting that Henri Paul was intoxicated."

1) I’ve never heard of the site or the author before, can you find a more authoritive source for the above claims?

2) People can have blood alcohol levels high enough to impair their driving without appearing obviously drunk.

3) IIRC he was believed to have had a few drinks at the hotel if that and the above are true did the other bodyguards see him and was he filmed before or after his visit to the bar?

4) The bodyguards as employees of Al Fayed and possibly friends of Paul were hardly disinterested parties.

1) So sourcing isn't enough? It has to be what you subjectively deem authoritative. What do you consider authoritative? Mainstream media? I consider them liars. You seem to like Wiki. I consider them propaganda. As I said, subjective.

But you probably consider Time and CNN authoritative:

"Family representatives also produced a 26-minute videotape, edited from two hours by the Fayeds, taken by hotel security cameras. It partly shows that, at least when he took off from the hotel, Paul accelerated at a moderate rate."

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/...,138280,00.html

" VAN SUSTEREN: Did you notice Henri Paul as being intoxicated that night? WINGFIELD: No, not at all.

VAN SUSTEREN: There was nothing unusual about his conduct?

WINGFIELD: No. His demeanor was exactly the same as it was during the day.

VAN SUSTEREN: What do you make of the fact that the blood alcohol suggests that he was intoxicated?

WINGFIELD: I was -- I was stunned when I heard that. And I accept the findings of the judicial inquiry in Paris, but I was stunned because of the way he came across, you know, there was nothing that would have suggested that he'd been drinking."

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0003/21/lkl.00.html

2) Blood tests can be faked just as autopsy photos can be faked.

3) Your statement/question is not coherent and I have no idea what IIRC is.

4) Jones repeatedly states that Paul didn't look drunk.

Trevor Rees-Jones and al Fayed are hardly friends. They've spent years suing each other and sniping.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/667486.stm

(I hope the BBC is authoritative enough for you.)

IN fact Jones wrote a book--"The Bodyguard's Story"--that infuriated al Fayad:

" VAN SUSTEREN: Mohamed al Fayed has attempted to stop this book from being published in England. Why do you think he did that? And failed.

REES-JONES: Yes, he failed. It was thrown out. The injunction proceedings were turned down."

http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/.../21/lkl.00.html

Yeah, like the 1979 threats against Jimmy Carter from Raymond Lee Harvey and Osvaldo Ortiz.

Citation?

Oh, right, a parenthetical remark that has nothing to do with Diana, but by all means must have citation and it must be authoritative.

Viola:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/...,920351,00.html

We'll stick with Time magazine.

Myra wrote:

Do you find it odd that the ambulance crew took 1 hour & 45 minutes to transport Diana to a hospital 3.8 miles away passing three other hospitals with excellent emergency facilities in the process?

1) Citation?

2) Was David Rosenbaum’s death a plot as well?

http://www.justice.org/homepage/lawreporter.aspx

1) "It took nearly two hours to get Princess Diana from the scene of the accident to La Pitié-Salpétrière Hospital, only four miles away.

...

They also point to the fact that Diana's ambulance passed a few other hospitals along the way, including one reserved for VIPs."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/6162121.stm

Again, BBC.

2) I don't know or care who David Rosenbaum is. Let's not change the subject.

We're discussing Diana.

Now Len,

Do you find it odd that the ambulance crew took 1 hour & 45 minutes to transport Diana to a hospital 3.8 miles away passing three other hospitals with excellent emergency facilities in the process?

Kathy, I'll ask again. Is it your contention that the ambulance crew that treated Diana were part of the conspiracy.

As someone else said in this thread, the first responders were conspirators. I wonder if the ambulance paramedics could be identified by the ER staff. Of course, all eyes were on Diana.

Kathy

A question back atcha Stephen.

Do you find it odd that the ambulance crew took 1 hour & 45 minutes to transport Diana to a hospital 3.8 miles away passing three other hospitals with excellent emergency facilities in the process?

Myra, Charles, Peter etc, etc.

There is an old saying, "Never go to a gun fight armed with a knife"

Here's the deal, I'll go away and do the leg work I should have done before shouting my mouth off. I will attempt to debunk your points one by one, if I am unable to do this I will happily admit so.

Steve.

Well Stephen,

I appreciate your honesty and willingness to actually do some of your own research, in contrast to Len's demands of additional sources that he considers "authoritative"-- a subjective yardstick that only he can judge, and predictably won't judge favorably.

It makes one wonder why this sort of thing does not happen more often. A large group acting in solidarity will always defeat a few individuals. However, the same could be said of human beings. Marx would argue that animals lack the concept of class consciousness. I wonder if this event will change their behaviour in the future. Do you thing the young animal survived? It walked away but it must have suffered terrible injuries.

The tour guide was interviewed on the news and said he didn't see any remains in the next few days/weeks, and he did look for them. So--as incredible as it seems--the calf may have survived.

One of the comments posted in response to this video clip also refers to it being an example for group action :

"This is an incredible lesson given to us by members of nature. teaching us it possible to fight our corrupt Government and Institutions provided we all gang together in unison!"

Apparently, the claws of cats often introduce bacteria into the victim's system and they die a few days later from the infection.

Of course. The young calf's prognosis is guarded given what it endured.

I focused on the upbeat words of the tour guide to maintain a sense of blissful self-delusion, a sense I also choose to nourish in the battle with the Big Bad.

At worst, the herd did not abandon this calf, their actions were worthy of super-heroes, and the little guy is with its mother if the end does come.

Then again, the tour guide never found any remains, and he searched specifically for them at length.

Young bones are malleable; clearly the leg wasn't dislocated because we saw the calf walk back to the herd.

I did not see any blood.

And, perhaps most significantly, those animals must have exceedingly tough hides. Terrifically tough hides...

I wouldn't rule the little guy out John...