Steve Thomas

Donald Trump is not going to accept the results of the election, because all those satanic cannibals rigged it. Steve Thomas

Pete, You asked an interesting question. The last anybody saw of Oswald, he was running down the street with the gun in his hand. Nobody saw him put the gun in his jacket pocket. Callaway’s affidavit: https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339021/m1/1/?q=Callaway Said he saw the gun in the hand of a running man he later identified as Oswald. He did not say he saw Oswald put it in his pocket. Sam Guinyard’s statement to the police: https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth340305/m1/1/?q=Guinyard: Said he saw a man running down the street with a gun in his hand. He did not say he saw the man put the gun in his pocket. I got curious to know if the witnesses were shown the actual jacket the day of Tippit's killing. In their WC testimony, neither Ted Callaway nor Sam Guinyard speak of being taken up to the fourth floor and being shown the actual jacket. Detective Jim Leavelle said they were. Ted Callway’s WC testimony” http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/callaway1.htm Mr. BALL. Did he have the same clothes on in the lineup--did the man have the same clothes? Mr. CALLAWAY. He had the same trousers and shirt, but he didn't have his jacket on. He had ditched his jacket. Mr. BALL. What kind--when you talked to the police officers before you saw this man, did you give them a description of the clothing he had on? Mr. CALLAWAY. Yes, sir. Mr. BALL. What did you tell them you saw? Mr. CALLAWAY. I told them he had some dark trousers and a light tannish gray windbreaker jacket, and I told him that he was fair complexion, dark hair. Mr. BALL. I have a jacket here Commission's Exhibit No. 162. Does this look anything like the jacket that the man had on that you saw across the street with a gun? Mr. CALLAWAY. Yes; it sure does. Yes, that is the same type jacket. Actually, I thought it had a little more tan to it. How would Ted Callaway know Oswald had ditched his jacket unless someone had told him so? Callaway described the jacket to police, but doesn’t say anything about being taken up to the fourth floor to identify the jacket itself. Mr. BALL. Did he have the same clothes on in the lineup--did the man have the same clothes? Mr. CALLAWAY. He had the same trousers and shirt, but he didn't have his jacket on. He had ditched his jacket. Mr. BALL. What kind--when you talked to the police officers before you saw this man, did you give them a description of the clothing he had on? Mr. CALLAWAY. Yes, sir. Mr. BALL. What did you tell them you saw? Mr. CALLAWAY. I told them he had some dark trousers and a light tannish gray windbreaker jacket, and I told him that he was fair complexion, dark hair. Sam Guinyard’s WC testimony: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/guinyard1.htm Guinyard said he saw a brown shirt in Oak Cliff and again down at the courthouse, (presumably the shirt he was wearing during the lineup), but doesn’t say anything about being shown a jacket. Jim Leavelle’s WC testimony: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/leave_j1.htm Mr. LEAVELLE. Well, I--Mr. Graves and I took Helen back home and after we dropped her off we stopped by this carlot, 501 East Jefferson, and talked with the manager or owner of that and found out that he was the one that had seen the man running. He had heard the shots and seen the man running, from the scene of the shooting and the colored porter there also had heard it, and they had gone to the scene and they said, each of them said, that they thought they might be able to identify the man that they saw running; they heard the shots and they ran outside and saw him running down the sidewalk across the street from the lot with the gun in his hand. Mr. BALL. Did you also show them a jacket? Mr. LEAVELLE. Yes; I took them to the fourth floor and asked them to look at a jacket which---- Mr. BALL. I show you Commission Exhibit 162. Does that look anything like the jacket? Mr. LEAVELLE. It looks like the jacket that I showed them; yes. Mr. BALL. Do you know what Callaway said when he saw the jacket? Mr. LEAVELLE. He said this was definitely the jacket or one exactly like it. Mr. BALL. Do you know what Guinyard said? Mr. LEAVELLE. He said it was also the same type jacket. Just as aside, I liked this part of Sam Guinyard's WC testimony: Mr. GUINYARD. Yes--four men--handcuffed together. Mr. BALL. What did you say? Mr. GUINYARD. They was handcuffed together. Mr. BALL. They was handcuffed? Mr. GUINYARD. Yes; all four of them. Mr. BALL. Were they of different sizes? Mr. GUINYARD. Well, they was pretty close together--there wasn't much difference in size. Mr. BALL. In height--they were about the same? Mr. GUINYARD. About the same. Mr. BALL. Were they all about the same color? Mr. GUINYARD. No, sir; they wasn't all about the same color. Mr. BALL. All about the same color? Mr. GUINYARD. No, sir; they wasn't all about the same color. (You said you saw a white guy running down the street. Here's a brown guy and a white guy. Which is the one you saw?) Steve Thomas

Suitcases. I think every person in America should send Donald Trump one suitcase. Steve Thomas

Trump is now saying that God is talking to him. I have no doubt that Trump hears voices in his head, but I kinda sorta don't think it's God. Steve Thomas.

Irregular Periods and Horrible Headaches: How Tear Gas Is Making Portland Sick https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/4ay5mn/an-endless-barrage-of-tear-gas-is-making-portland-sick?utm_source=digg "PORTLAND, Oregon — For many of the past 78 nights, clouds of tear gas have wafted through downtown Portland and its surrounding neighborhoods. Local cops and federal officers have recently turned Portland into the biggest test case for sustained exposure to tear gas, possibly in American history. They’ve repeatedly doused parts of the city in gas and other riot-control munitions since protests over the police killing of George Floyd began in late May. The city was gassed so heavily in July that clouds showed up on the Federal Aviation Administration’s radar, according to The Nation. The use of chemical weapons, like tear gas, was initially banned in international warfare by the Geneva Protocol in 1925 and then again by the United Nations’ 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention — which the United States signed. The compound is composed of chemicals like chloroacetophenone and chlorobenzylidene malononitrile that are designed to irritate the mouth, nose, and throat. In the last two months alone, a number of U.S. cities have moved to limit or ban the use of tear gas. But many police departments are still allowed to use the substance. Since the protests began in late May, protesters in more than 100 cities have been tear gassed. And the effects can be severe. The Centers for Disease Control states on its website that exposure to large amounts of gas or “long-lasting exposure” can lead to blindness, respiratory failure, and even death. Steve Thomas

Tommy, No policeman that I am aware of ever made this assertion about a "note". I once wrote an essay asking the question, "How did the police first learn that Oswald lived at 1026 N. Beckley?" You can read it here if you'd like: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/2331-how-did-the-police-first-learn-of-1026-n-beckley/ Steve Thomas

Cliff, I've always said, it's not too bad when you talk to yourself. And, it's even not too bad when you start answering yourself. It's when you start ignoring yourself that you have a problem. "What did you say?" "I'm not talking to you." Steve Thomas

Joe, I think the more cynical historians will tell you that's what wars are for - to take the domestic pressure off (and cull the population, if you want to get really cynical). Look at Hitler or Japan in the 1930's. Steve Thomas

David, Thank you, but I was referring to the note supposedly found in his shirt pocket. The bus transfer was, but no note listing 1026 N. Beckley that I am aware of. Steve Thomas

David, Do you remember who was supposed to have said this? Steve Thomas

I wish I had this gift of doublespeak, but I just don't. White House Chief of Staff is explaining why we can't have vote-by-mail, because there is widespread fraud going on. https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-chief-of-staff-mark-meadows-says-lack-of-evidence-of-mail-in-voting-fraud-is-the-definition-of-fraud?ref=home “But there’s no evidence of widespread voter fraud,” Tapper added after Meadows reiterated his concern with voter rolls. “There’s no evidence that there’s not either. That’s the definition of fraud, Jake,” the chief of staff shot back, causing the CNN anchor to do a double-take." Steve Thomas

Oh my. https://twitter.com/jayfeely/status/1294744576629014531?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw Jay Feely @jayfeely·18h "Had the distinct honor to play golf today with @POTUS and be his partner! Truly enjoyed talking about our families, politics and his earnest desires for our great country. he’s still got game." “Trump faced criticism over the weekend after he played golf while his brother was dying on Saturday.” "It was not immediately clear if the president planned to spend another day playing golf on Sunday. Asked if Trump’s campaigning schedule has changed this week, Senior Advisor Jason Miller said, “I don’t have any changes at the moment.” https://t.co/zeWI15PMfu pic.twitter.com/aMCAfDWsxE " Steve Thomas

Some of America’s billionaires have been illegally profiting off the pandemic while Rome burns: Clinton economist Published on August 16, 2020 By Robert Reich https://www.rawstory.com/2020/08/some-of-americas-billionaires-have-been-illegally-profiting-off-the-while-rome-burns-clinton-economist/ “Since the start of the pandemic, American billionaires have been cleaning up. As more than 50 million Americans filed for unemployment insurance, billionaires became $637 billion richer. Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg’s wealth has ballooned 59 percent. Amazon’s Jeff Bezos’s, 39 percent. Walmart’s Walton family has added $25 billion. Big drug company CEOs and their major investors are doing nicely, too. Since the start of the pandemic, Big Pharma has raised prices on over 250 prescription drugs, 61 of which are being used to treat Covid-19. This much is clear: Trump and his Republican enablers won’t provide $600 per week to tens of millions of Americans who need the money to survive the pandemic, because Trump and the GOP believe the money undermines incentives to work. Yet Trump has no problem letting billionaires illegally profit off the pandemic. He thinks that as long as they buoy the stock market, they’re helping the American economy. That’s pure rubbish. The stock market is not America. The richest 1 percent of Americans own half the value of all shares of stock held by American households. The richest 10 percent owns 92 percent. For years now, stock prices have risen largely because profits have been siphoned from the wages of ordinary workers. In the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, stock prices are almost back to where they were before the pandemic began. Big corporations and major investors are doing fine. Billionaires are doing better than ever. But most Americans are sinking fast.” Steve Thomas

Douglas, There has always been a struggle between labor and capital. This plague has just shined a spotlight on that struggle. I have always said that it is not a case of the rich and the poor. The rich are rich, because the poor are poor. Our planet only has a finite amount of resources, and would not support all 4.5 billion of us living the lifestyles of the "rich and famous". Steve Thomas

I have spent hours and hours and hours poring over Invoices of Property seized from Lee Harvey Oswald, reading the after-action reports from the police officers who arrested him, and examining the contents of his wallet. No such piece of paper exists. That being the case; either the Johnsons lied to us, or the police lied to them. If the Johnsons were lying, it's a lie they maintained for more than 15 years, with no motive for doing so. If the police lied to them, you have to ask why. How did the police learn of 1026 N. Beckley, and who directed them there? Steve Thomas

Arthur C. Johnson, the owner of the rooming house on Beckley told the Warren Commission (10H303) http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/johnso_a.htm Mr. JOHNSON. Well, they just came down there looking for--uh--Oswald. Mr. BELIN. Did they say what his full name was? Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, I believe they did. Mr. BELIN. Lee Harvey Oswald? Mr. JOHNSON. I believe they did. Mr. BELIN. Did they say how they happened to come there? Mr. JOHNSON. "Well, uh--after he was--uh--apprehended out there, they searched him and found my address in his pocket. Mr. BELIN. Your address of 1026 North Beckley? Mr. JOHNSON. That's right. Gladys Johnson’s WC testimony: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/johnso_g.htm Mr. BALL. Did you ever know his true name was Lee Harvey Oswald? Mrs. JOHNSON. No; not until we saw his picture flash on the television as the officers were out. Those particulars was found in his pocket after he killed Tippit, after his arrest. \Mick Purdy in the ROKC Forum 12/08/2019 https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1180p125-did-oswald-deny-living-at-1026-n-beckley Washington Post reporter and Editor and General Manager of the Texas Observer, Ronnie Duggar Duggar interviews Johnson (perhaps in the 1966-67 time frame? (me) HSCA Interview with Amy Gladys Johnson 10/14/77 Bart Kamp in the ROKC Forum 02/08/2020 https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1180p125-did-oswald-deny-living-at-1026-n-beckley I personally think that that itty-bitty little piece of paper is a key to unraveling the mystery of Lee Harvey Oswald and the murder of John F. Kennedy. 1) Either that little piece of paper existed;, or, 2) It didn’t Steve Thomas

I'm waiting for stories to emerge of ballot drop boxes being stolen. Steve Thomas

QAnon says, "Save the Children!" QAnon Promotes Pedo-Ring Conspiracy Theories. Now They’re Stealing Kids. https://www.thedailybeast.com/qanon-promotes-pedo-ring-conspiracy-theories-now-theyre-stealing-kids?ref=home Steve Thomas

Deleted Steve Thomas

Douglas, States Attorneys General in both New Jersey and Arizona are looking into filing criminal charges. With the possibility of Trump being charged in state court and DeJoy being charged in state court, I think that is the only way we are going to be able to stop these people. The evening after he testified before Congress, DeJoy went back to his office and fired 23 people. They have nothing but contempt for Federal officials. I think Biden is right. Federal prosecution of former political opponents sets a bad precedent. It looks too much like banana republic countries. But state courts on the local level though are a different matter. In Arizona, they are saying that it's a violation of the state's constitution to infringe on a citizen's voting franchise. Steve Thomas

Ron, During her WC testimony on April 8, 1064, Earlene Roberts was challenged by Assistant Counsel, Joseph Ball about her FBI interview wherein she supposedly said she saw car number 207. http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/robertse.htm Roberts replied that she never said 207. This staff meeting took place on March 2, 1964 and her FBI interview took place on November 29, 1963. Mr. BALL. On the 29th of November, Special Agents Will Griffin and James Kennedy of the Federal Bureau of Investigation interviewed you and you told them that "after Oswald had entered his room about 1 p.m. on November 22, 1963, you looked out the front window and saw police car No. 207? Mrs. ROBERTS. No. 107. Either she misled the FBI, or Griffin and Kennedy got it wrong, or the transcriber mis-typed it. What I was more interested in was that she said this car had two uniformed policemen in it. Who was using a two-man police car that day? She said it was a black car, and not a regular accident prevention patrol car. I have not gone back and tried to find this alleged claim that Mr. Johnson called the police after he saw Oswald's picture on the TV. This goes against everyone's account of what happened that afternoon. Who made this claim? I have never heard of such a phone call. Steve Thomas

I ran across this today, and I went, "Whoa". Warren Commission Memo of Staff Meeting of 2 Mar 1964 https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10393&search=%22Earlene_Roberts%22#relPageId=8&tab=page The following task was assigned to Mr. Ball and Mr. Belin: Does anybody know if the FBI followed up on this alleged phone call by Mr. Johnson? This refutes the whole story of Earlene Roberts seeing Oswald on the TV after the police had already arrived. The following task was assigned to Mr. Stern: Steve Thomas

Ron, That would mean that any orders they give are invalid. Wolf has been spearheading the paramilitary forces deployed in Portland. Steve Thomas

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2020/08/all-enemies-foreign-and-domestic-open-letter-gen-milley/167625/ An Open Letter to Gen. Milley By John Nagl and Paul Yingling August 11, 2020 Dear General Milley: As chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, you are well aware of your duties in ordinary times: to serve as principal military advisor to the president of the United States, and to transmit the lawful orders of the president and Secretary of Defense to combatant commanders. In ordinary times, these duties are entirely consistent with your oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic…” We do not live in ordinary times. The president of the United States is actively subverting our electoral system, threatening to remain in office in defiance of our Constitution. In a few months’ time, you may have to choose between defying a lawless president or betraying your Constitutional oath. We write to assist you in thinking clearly about that choice. If Donald Trump refuses to leave office at the expiration of his constitutional term, the United States military must remove him by force, and you must give that order. Due to a dangerous confluence of circumstances, the once-unthinkable scenario of authoritarian rule in the United States is now a very real possibility. First, as Mr. Trump faces near certain electoral defeat, he is vigorously undermining public confidence in our elections. Second, Mr. Trump’s defeat would result in his facing not merely political ignominy, but also criminal charges. Third, Mr. Trump is assembling a private army capable of thwarting not only the will of the electorate but also the capacities of ordinary law enforcement. When these forces collide on January 20, 2021, the U.S. military will be the only institution capable of upholding our Constitutional order. There can be little doubt that Mr. Trump is facing electoral defeat. More than 160,000 Americans have died from COVID 19, and that toll is likely to rise to 300,000 by November. One in ten U.S. workers is unemployed, and the U.S. economy in the last quarter suffered the greatest contraction in its history. Nearly 70 percent of Americans believe the country is on the wrong track. The Economist estimates that Mr. Trump’s chances of losing the election stand at 91 percent. Related articles The Military Won’t Save Us – and You Shouldn’t Want Them To Who Decides Who Is a ‘Domestic Enemy’? Milley's Chance to Right His ‘Mistake’ Faced with these grim prospects, Mr. Trump has engaged in a systemic disinformation campaign to undermine public confidence in our elections. He has falsely claimed that mail-in voting is “inaccurate and fraudulent.” He is actively sabotaging the U.S. Postal Service in an effort to delay and discredit mail-in votes. He has suggested delaying the 2020 election, despite lacking the authority to do so. The stakes of the 2020 election are especially high for Mr. Trump; in defeat, he will likely face criminal prosecution. The Manhattan District Attorney is investigating the Trump Organization for possible bank and insurance fraud related to the overvaluation of financial assets. New York’s Attorney General is conducting similar investigations, having successfully subpoenaed Trump’s financial records from Deutsche Bank. Mr. Trump allegedly pressured the U.S. ambassador to Great Britain to pressure the British Government to move the British Open golf tournament to Trump Turnberry Resort in Scotland. This incident is but one of many examples of self-dealing that may lead to federal criminal charges against the president. Given this dizzying array of threats not merely to his political prospects, but also his liberty and wealth, Mr. Trump is following the playbook of dictators throughout history: he is building a private army answerable only to him. When Caesar faced the prospect of a trial in Rome, he did not return to face his day in court. He unleashed an army personally loyal to him alone on the Roman government. No student of history, Mr. Trump nevertheless appears to be following Caesar’s example. The president’s use of militarized Homeland Security agents against domestic political demonstrations constitutes the creation of a paramilitary force unaccountable to the public. The members of this private army, often lacking police insignia or other identification, exist not to enforce the law but to intimidate the president’s political opponents. These powerful crosscurrents—Mr. Trump’s electoral defeat, his assault on the integrity of our elections, his impending criminal prosecution, and his creation of a private army—will collide on January 20. Rather than accept the peaceful transfer of power that has been the hallmark of American democracy since its inception. Mr. Trump may refuse to leave office. He would likely offer as a fig leaf of legitimacy the shopworn lies about election fraud. Mr. Trump’s acolytes in right-wing media will certainly rush to repeat and amplify these lies, manufacturing sufficient evidence to provide a pretext of plausibility. America’s greatest Constitutional crisis since the Civil War will come about by a president who simply refuses to leave office. America’s political and legal institutions have so atrophied that they are ill-prepared for this moment. Senate Republicans, already reduced to supplicant status, will remain silent and inert, as much to obscure their complicity as to retain their majority. The Democrat-led House of Representatives will certify the Electoral College results, which Mr. Trump will dismiss as fake news. The courts, flooded with cases from both Democrats and Mr. Trump’s legal team, will take months working through the docket, producing reasoned rulings that Trump will alternately appeal and ignore. Then the clock will strike 12:01 PM, January 20, 2021, and Donald Trump will be sitting in the Oval Office. The street protests will inevitably swell outside the White House, and the ranks of Trump’s private army will grow inside its grounds. The speaker of the House will declare the Trump presidency at an end, and direct the Secret Service and Federal Marshals to remove Trump from the premises. These agents will realize that they are outmanned and outgunned by Trump’s private army, and the moment of decision will arrive. At this moment of Constitutional crisis, only two options remain. Under the first, U.S. military forces escort the former president from the White House grounds. Trump’s little green men, so intimidating to lightly armed federal law enforcement agents, step aside and fade away, realizing they would not constitute a good morning’s work for a brigade of the 82nd Airborne. Under the second, the U.S. military remains inert while the Constitution dies. The succession of government is determined by extralegal violence between Trump’s private army and street protesters; Black Lives Matter Plaza becomes Tahrir Square. As the senior military officer of the United States, the choice between these two options lies with you. In the Constitutional crisis described above, your duty is to give unambiguous orders directing U.S. military forces to support the Constitutional transfer of power. Should you remain silent, you will be complicit in a coup d’état. You were rightly criticized for your prior active complicity in the president’s use of force against peaceful protesters in Lafayette Square. Your passive complicity in an extralegal seizure of political power would be far worse. For 240 years, the United States has been spared the horror of violent political succession. Imperfect though it may be, our Union has been moving toward greater perfection, from one peaceful transfer of power to the next. The rule of law created by our Constitution has made this miracle possible. However, our Constitutional order is not self-sustaining. Throughout our history, Americans have laid down their lives so that this form of government may endure. Continuing the unfinished work for which these heroes fell now falls to you. Lest you forget: “I, Mark A. Milley, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.” The fate of our Republic may well depend upon your adherence to this oath. Respectfully yours, John Nagl and Paul Yingling John Nagl, a retired Army officer and veteran of both Iraq wars, is Head of School at The Haverford School outside Philadelphia. Paul Yingling, a retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel, served three tours in Iraq, another in Bosnia, and a fifth in Operation Desert Storm. Steve Thomas

Pete, This is from an exchange Larry and I had back in 2018: The way I see it, you've got three tracks to the "French Connection" 1) You've got Steve Rivele and his work with Christian David and Lucien Sarti. 2) You've got Fensterwald and his work on Mertz and Souetre 3) You've got William Reymond and his work on the Three Tramps. JFK : autopsie d'un crime d'État http://oasassassinatjfk.e-monsite.com/pages/les-vraies-clochards-et-vagabonds.html He identified Souetre as being one of the shooters using the code name, "Max" (A tantalizing clue here is that "Maxime" was the radio call sign for the 40/541 parachute unit Souetre commanded in Algeria between 1957 and 1960). If anything, I'm inclined to go along with Rivele who said in later years that if he were to do it over again, he'd concentrate on Paul Mondolini - drug trafficker out of Montreal (where Mertz was also sent after his double-cross in the Pont-sur-Seine affair and also involved in narcotics trafficking). As I read it, the Americans were tracking Mertz the drug smuggler, but lost him shortly before JFK's assassination. This is what Lamar Waldron says in his Legacy of Secrecy. The "French did it" is just as bad as people who say, "The CIA did it." It doesn't' lead anywhere except in circles. - END OF EXCHANGE - I have some raw notes I've taken on Mondolini. I can post them if you'd like, but they go back about 13 years, and run to about 20 pages. After his escape from prison camp in February, 1962, Souetre and Mura sent this letter to the prison commandant: “Monsieur. Respectueux des décisions de justice qui ont fait de nous des hommes libres, nous avons jugé de notre devoir de nous soustraire à une mesure incompatible avec notre état d’officier. Nous aurions été indignes de notre uniforme en acceptant de remplacer dans votre camp ceux que la France nous avait donnés pour mission de combattre. Respectueux de nos serments, fidèles aux traditions de notre Arme, convaincus de la justice de notre cause, nous ne pouvions demeurer plus longtemps dans une expectative coupable. Nous sommes persuadés Monsieur qu’il vous est facile de comprendre. Nous en appelons à votre dignité en vous demandant de vous refuser à remplir à l’avenir des fonctions qui déshonorent le Corps de la Police française. Mura et Souètre.” (Arch. dép. du Gard, CA 1568). “Respectful of the judicial decisions which made us free men, we felt it our duty to avoid a measure incompatible with our position as officers. We would have been unworthy of our uniform by agreeing to replace in your camp those whom France had given us to fight. Respectful of our oaths, faithful to the traditions of our Arms, convinced of the justice of our cause, we could not remain longer in a guilty expectancy. We are convinced Monsieur, that it is easy for you to understand. We appeal to your dignity by asking you to refuse to fulfill in the future, functions that dishonor the French Police Corps. Mura and Souètre." I just don't think assassins talk like that. I believe that Souetre was a patriot as he understood patriotism to be. Steve Thomas