Anyone know what is up with Nathaniel Heidenheimer?

[Dawn Meredith]

Nathaniel, now I think it was not just "any" hacker. And I also do not think Amazon took down all your reviews. Clearly you were targeted by someone with an agenda.

As for "Leni B" who cares what he thinks? All that work you did, just gone. David Andrews has an interesting point, I wonder if this is happening to others. But I don't see anyone but you going after the left gatekeepers.

Dawn

[Len Colby]

Look at this point It is necessary to address one of Mr. Brazil 1964s accusations, namely that I think of myself as some kind of important researcher.

O well advertised contrair.

Where did I ever say you thought of yourself “as some kind of important researcher”?

OH MY GOD AMAZON HAS DELETED ALL OF MY BOOK REVIEWS!!! look this might not be worth caps to you but consider what has happened to me all around June 4th 2012. 1) I was kicked off STL Today website which reaches tens of thousands after posting a 12/1/ 1963 article that appeared in the St. Louis Post Dispatch Front page about a bullet hole in the windshield of the JFK limo in Dallas. The article was by the lead Washington Bureau writer of the Post-Dispatch and the site is the affiliate of that paper. I had been a member on that site for ten years. 2) My FB account with 5000 friends and countless hours of typed notes that I sent around and posted where they were not supposed to be (left sites where most disinfo about political assassinations is aimed) was suddenly GONE where FB woodbines twineth 3) My hotmail account was hacked and a new password was created so I could not get in it. and now 4) about 50 book reviews NEARLY ALL OF THEM DEALING WITH CIA HISTORY, LEFT-GATEKEEPING AND COLD WAR COMMUNICATIONS RESEARCH ARE REMOVED. WHAT THE XXXX

So what did customer service from these sites tell you after you contacted them? What happened when you tried Hotmail’s password recovery process? Or didn’t you bother pursuing those remedies. Did the STL tell why you got the boot?

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

I got a message from an administrator named "Mandy" saying that I was "banned for typing gibberish". I was a very well known commodity on that site. Known primarily for posts that 1) put the extreme rightward lurch of the Democratic party in its post 1968 perspective and 2) posting about the political assassinations and how they effected the extreme rightward movement of the post June 5th 1968 Democrats. Rarely did I feel mellow, but I was very well known and lots of my threads got thousands of views.

I was able to get back on Hotmail after a lengthy process. The reason I mentioned it was because my password was changed at the same time as my FB account appeared with a false email address which I had never owned, and was hence unavailable.

I plan on contacting FB about the tens of thousands of content MOST OF IT POLITICAL ASSASSINATIONS AND RIGHTWARD MOVEMENT OF THE DEMOCRATS RELATED, that i had reposted to a monotonous degree, and planned on doing more of.

I had posted these threads in a broad variety of non- assassination related sites. Most were built with what I called "Snags" or kind of trout flies for potential newbies that would attract by some name recognition figure countering the CT baby-with-UFO-bathwater-BS we have all become too familiar with since 1992.

That is the point of this thread, and why it might still belong here, maybe.

Because if it is true that I am being censored, then it could prove my hypothesis that what is most feared is those who challenge the niche-carvers and moat-diggers who have, in effect, made what was once deemed the internet-frontier of freedom a labyrinthine political prison that makes Machiavelli seem like a breeze over a swingset. Or at least partly prove it. I look forward to the results being printed in Scientific American, right after Mr. Baby N Bathwater's monthly column.

I have not yet had the time it will take to wrestle with FB and Amazon. I work in Czar Bloomberg's Unchartered unairconditioned oven schools binding with briars dreams and uncorporate desires. And it has been Regents Week.

I have spoken with a computer expert who asked me if I used the same password on these accounts. The answer was no. He said then it was very likely it was the result of deliberate hacking.

I was trying to create the middle brow. That is what once existed. Remember when pro-conspiracy books could get reviewed by the NYT. That's not possible anymore. Its gone where woodbines twineth. We have to BE THE MIDDLE BROW or the political assassinations will continue down the pushed path of trivialization by the corporate fascists who own the five media channels of the world's mind.

[Paul Rigby]

Please note that advance orders for my “instant” book on the case, Disappearing Nate: The Abduction, Torture, and Certain Execution of an American Dissident, will be honoured, albeit after a brief delay while I rewrite bits of it entirely, and count the Langley wedge. It will now appear under the slightly tweaked title of Reappearing Nate: Conspiraloon Hysteria in the Age of the Internet. There are some additional small changes.

The publisher will not now be The Ainsdale Self-publishing Society (print-run: 10) but rather Random Souse (initial print-run: 200,000).

Noam Chomsky has agreed to write a forward – provisionally entitled Cargo Cultists in the Age of Stone – prefaced by approving comments from a diverse range of Guardian columnists, ranging from legendary parliamentary sketch-writer Simon Legge-Over, to Jon Goat-Ronson and Marina Hyde-White. Timothy Garter-Sash has already completed the afterword, The Triumph of the Chatham House Hyphenates, which will appear in green ink.

To my further astonishment, discussions about serialisation rights are apparently well advanced, with the Huffington Post, Fanity Vair, and The Sun on Sunday, pulling clear of the chasing pack; while Amy Goodman wants me on Democracy Tomorrow; and the BBC’s world-renowned bastion of uncompromising investigative journalism, Propagandarama, has scheduled an extended interview for inclusion in its latest in-depth exploration of a Kennedy assassination, The Mary Jo Files: Was Teddy a Serial Killer?

No changes are proposed, you will be relieved to learn, to the unpaginated photographic section at the original book’s heart. This remarkable portfolio, depicting the world’s elite snatch squads and their most feared members, remains entirely as originally supplied in a plain brown envelope by Mr Robert Morrow and the Siliconika Photographic Agency of Bangkok.

[Guest Tom Scully]

All are not lost. I'm sure more is to be found through google cache. I see no point in a coordinated effort to censor or silence Nathaniel while someone with a much larger audience seems unaffected.:

The alliance with Saudi Arabia makes the Muslim world, but not Americans, skeptical of U.S. rhetoric on freedom

By Glenn Greenwald

“I really consider President and Mrs. Mubarak to be friends of my family” –

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, March 2, 2009

.

* * * * *

For all the righteous talk about human rights oppression and violent assaults on democratic protesters in the Muslim world, any honest ranking would place Saudi Arabia near or at the top of that list.....

....Befitting the importance of the Crown Prince to the U.S., the Obama administration sent a high-level delegation to Saudi Arabia yesterday that included Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Obama counter-terrorism chief adviser John Brennan, former CIA Director George Tenet, FBI Director Robert Mueller, and former Bush Homeland Security Adviser (and current CNN contributor) Fran Townsend (who, like the Crown Prince, is also known for supporting Terrorists):

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta offered his condolences and “best wishes” to the newly selected Crown Prince Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud on the death of the Crown Prince Nayef bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, while leading a delegation to Saudi Arabia this week.

“The president wanted me to express his personal regrets at not being able to be here, but wanted all of us in this delegation to convey to you not only our sorrow for your loss, but also our best wishes to you in your new position and to reaffirm the great relationship and partnership that the United States has with the great nation of Saudi Arabia,”...

The democratic party is and has been a pathetic prop existing to give the appearance that there are major differences between two major political parties in a "model" "two party" democratic system.

This "model" could not be further from the truth. The "secret" is even leaked on occasion, in the NY Times:

In the emerging Democratic consensus, forged by Congressional leaders and presidential front-runners, supposedly in opposition to President Bush's war, "out now" is becoming "out when conditions permit" - which is, of course, Bush's exact position. Such conditions will never come; therefore - Garrison Forever.

Yet, speaking of history, this conjuring of the appearance of opposition where none actually exists has been mandated by the American political system since the onset of the Cold War. The quadrennial political puppet show, highlighting not opposition but its appearance, is essential to keeping the captive-taking war machine running and to inoculating the American people from the viral knowledge that they themselves were first to be captured.

Nathaniel's message is not unique to Nathaniel, and he has not been saying that it is. But I see no sign that enough are embracing it. There is one party! The democratic wing of the one right wing party is more insidious because it pretends to be something it is definitely not, helped along in a masquerade pushed by republican "rivals" and corporatist media dependent on revenue from political advertising which is totally unnecessary since its purpose is to broadcast political differences which are so slight as to be irrelevant to the outcome.

The blinders will stay on, and those who grow tired doing and saying the same things over and over again, expecting a different result will eventually leave the country, if the lockdown apparatus still permits an exit.

This is the Only Book I Have Read that Could Change History...,

June 25, 2009

By

Brookbird34 "Nathaniel Heidenheimer"

Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)

This review is from: JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters (Hardcover)

if enough people read it. It shows that the dichotomy between ""Conspiracy Theory"" and structural analysis which looks at institutions as the source of historical change is a false dichotomy. It is documented like no other historical work that I have ever read. It is one third who done it while never forgetting the real issue is why done it. One can understand why it had such an impact on someone as well versed in Cold War foreign policy of the period as Daniel Ellsberg. One can also understand why -- in this age of censorship-- in spite of its outstanding recommendations by the most credentialed key figures imaginable, it cannot be found in any bookstore in NYC. Meanwhile suddenly Mafia done it books are being pimped by foremer Lone Nutters in a rush to convert to the right church. Hmmmm.

This is not merely a book about Kennedy. It is the most important new turn in Cold War historiography since

the publication of Gabriel Kolko's The Politics of War in 1968.

In addition, it should be mentioned that this book is nicely complemented with another recent book with incredibly importatant fresh insight into Dallas-- and in this case, its continuing implications for Watergate. Russ Baker, the author of Family Of SecretsFamily of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty, the Powerful Forces That Put It in the White House, and What Their Influence Means for America has written for NYT, WaPost, Vanity Fair, and many other reputable publications. He has also served as an editor of Columbia Journalism Review. His book has incredible new insights into the mysteries of why H.W. Bush was in Dallas on 11/22/63 and why did both he and Barbara make up false alibis to suggest otherwise? Why was H.W. Bush contacted by Oswald's #1 Dallas CIA handler George deMohrenschildt, when H.W. became CIA director in 1975? (This was less than two years before deMohrenshilds's suspicious death two days before he was scheduled to testify before the House Select Committee on Assassinations.) Were Bush's claims that he had never worked for the CIA before 1975 truthful or even truthy? The author's supply of documentation is so bountiful and well sourced, that one is led to conclude no to both of these questions. Then, wait till you get to Watergate. This is not your Woodward's version. This author has the journalistic resume, attention to detail, and caution regarding overstatement, that make his questions about the official version resonate long after one has put his book down.

Aggressively Superficial,

February 5, 2010

By

Brookbird34 "Nathaniel Heidenheimer"

This review is from: Voodoo Histories: The Role of the Conspiracy Theory in Shaping Modern History (Hardcover)

This is a great book if you are a psychology major, looking for an excuse not to read any more non-fiction, due to lack of time and a preference for romance, anyways. For anyone else, I suggest Kleenex. After spending the day reading this book I am stunned. I did not think there could actually be frontier to the Superficial but I have now reached the Zip Code of No There.

This book lumps real conspiracies, such as that of JFK, with obvious frauds produced by the fluff machines of official disinformation. It is a high-school level baby with bathwater operation, that never sullies itself with evidence or argument, but remains in the realm of psychobabble (ie need for closure at infin., infirm reliance on simple narrative cause by neglect from mummy etc...) With psychobabble- cliches this tired one almost longs for the bracing airs of Siberia where at least the Soviet dissenters were treated with a few hyphenated diagnoses. The JFK assassination is a five page screed of namecalling and citations of ballistics studies that have long been refuted in by scholarly publications published by academic presses. Of these five pages much is devoted to comedians jokes about the sundry absurd theories of the assassination. These jokes are about the hardest evidence the author can come up with to convict Oswald. Then its on to the wacky anti-semites and their ProtocolShadow Play: The Untold Story of the Robert F. Kennedy Assassinations. of the Elders of Hopscotch. Baby and bathwater. Just type "conspiracy theory, " and you can trust your government boys and girls.

I suggest a real book. It is not a history of the Bush Family, for it makes no pretense to such finality. The book is better seen as real journalism, and as you will discover it is one of the first of its kind about this family, in spite of all that has been written. The book is Family of Secrets by Russ Baker. Baker has written for the New York Times, the Washington Post, Esquire and has edited for The Columbia Journalism Review. This book contains incredible new information about H.W. Bush in Dallas on the day of the JFK assassination, and the newly discovered role of H.W. Bush in a Watergate that is not your Woodward's. (See also the extremely provocative new book by Len Colodny on that topic, The Forty Years WarThe Forty Years War: The Rise and Fall of the Neocons, from Nixon to Obaa )

Baker writes the book in a somewhat unconventional style that mirrors his gradual coming to question the official Bush family narratives and fascination with new evidence and the directions that it leads. At first-- for example in his discussion of Both George and Barbaras very consciously constructed alibis designed to prove H.W. was NOT in Dallas on 11-22-63-- one might respond "well this IS very very curious, given that Poppy said he could not remember where he was on that day but still.... where's the heavy stuff."

By the time you have finished chapter 5, you will not be wondering anymore. This chapter is a tour de force that connects H.W. Bush to Oswalds #1 CIA handler George de Mohrenschildt, and so directly that you will need to epoxy your jaw. Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty, America's Invisible Government, and the Hidden History of the Last Fifty Years The following question will be difficult: which is more stunning, the information itself, or the fact that you have never heard of it before, because the US media was busy describing how silly Michael Dukakis looked driving a tank. Oh but I did not mean to sully the reputation of Mr. Aaronoviche's Vigilant Press Corps. After all they are risking their lives every day reporting from the Afghan battlefields where teenagers have just bombed a hundred more civilians with Unmanned drones--using their joysticks in Teaneck.

A Different approach: One witness as Core Sampling.,

September 1, 2011

By

Brookbird34 "Nathaniel Heidenheimer"

This review is from: The Girl On The Stairs: My Search For A Missing Witness To The Assassination Of John F. Kennedy (Kindle Edition)

The argument that JFK was killed by a conspiracy suffers from TME. There is just Too Much Evidence. That is what has led 80% of academic historians to conclude that, yes Connecticut, there was in fact a Conspiracy in the assassination of JFK. What makes this book so special is the focus on just 2 of the thousands of witnesses and other figures in the case. The narrower focus shows how smaller stories needed to be changed to fit the wider fabrication.

The narrative is brisk, but the substance is all there. The best investment of 2.99 I have made since 1970.

For a wider angle readers MUST jump to JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters. This is as much a policy book as anything else. After reading the 900 scholarly footnotes .... for chapter 1 alone.... one immediately understands JFK NSC advisor Marcus Raskin's comment that this book will become THE primary sourcebook not just on JFK but on the Cold War in general. This book is much more a current event than the last ten years of newspapers. That is because it shows the structure of power that predetermined today's current course, and led the Presidency to be downgraded to a flickering media distraction from underlying economic realities. Reading The Unspeakable we see the connections between The Assassination and today's completely corporate political structure..JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters

Implications For the Company That Made Watergate: Unspeakable Implications for "democracy",

April 14, 2012

By

Brookbird34 "Nathaniel Heidenheimer"

Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)

This review is from: Mary's Mosaic: The CIA Conspiracy to Murder John F. Kennedy, Mary Pinchot Meyer, and Their Vision for World Peace (Kindle Edition)

This book is a page turner. It appeals on many levels, to different audiences. Mary Pinchot Meyer is one person on a very very long list of mysterious (mystified?) deaths that occurred among those with close connections to JFK, and/or his killers. She was also one heck of a citizen in her own right. After her death, the patsy was defended by a famous African American lawyer who is an important historical figure worth knowing about. Mary Meyer's sister was married to Ben Bradlee of Newsweek, later Washington Post. Their neighbor was CIA head of counterintelligence James Jesus Angleton. Her former husband was Cord Meyer, one of Anglton's protege's at CIA.

This book is so important because it is a microcosm of the close relationship between intelligence agencies and the US media during the all important Cold War stage in the development of the permanent intelligence and military bureaucracy that continues to govern us today. Normally this collaboration remains a hazy abstraction. Not here, among key upper class Georgetown neighbors.

The author's evidence is more layered in some parts of the narrative than in others. One wishes, for example, that he would not detour into speculation about RFK and Marilyn Monroe based on only one, highly questionable source. But most of the time, when the sources are slimmer, the author does a good job of examining different explanations, in an even handed way. Many will rightly critique some parts of the narrative arc, arguing there is not enough evidence to support the author's conclusions. Yet, this should not distract from the overall picture, as most of the narrative is soundly argued with enough evidence and also very sound critiques of alternative explanations.

The book also has a personal angle for the author that really pulses through every page. The danger here is that this might sacrifice objectivity. The reader ends up convinced that this sacrifice is never made, partly because of the tragic personal implications for the author himself. Janney's father also worked for CIA and we are told he was a "company man"

This book arrives at a time when study of the JFK assassination has undergone a largely censored renaissance. Books such as JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters, and Breach of Trust by Gerald D. McKnight have completely overturned officially promoted books like Case Closed. Indeed, as former Washington Post writer Jefferson Morley recently pointed out in The Atlantic, since 2000, 80% of the academic historians who have written on the assassination have concluded there was indeed a conspiracy involved. The problem is these books have almost never been reviewed by the big media this conclusion challenges so profoundly.

Janney strongly endorses, as I do here, the incredible JFK and the Unspeakable.JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters I think this is the most important book written since World War II. It is not really about JFK alone. It is, rather, about the structural aspects of our economy that make wars, and their ideological justification the core of our current economy.

For far too long I believed authors on the so called left-- such as Noam Chomsky, Alexander Cockburn, and Amy Goodman-- when they made deeply critical comments to the effect that JFK was "Just another Cold Warrior." Recently such sites as Huffington Post, which are aimed at left liberals, have deepened a suspicion of mine about possible gatekeeping going on around JFK at the point on the spectrum where left-liberals meet further left... and usually the don't meet.. that is the point of such notorious gatekeeping mags like Encounter MagazineThe Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters, which was aimed at left-liberals while being conceived and funded by the CIA between the 1951-64.

Then, after many years of interest in the Cold War, I was finally nudged "over the moat," so to speak, and began studying both JFKs policies and the assassination.

The immediate cause was a pattern I noticed on a very very long C-Span retrospective on the 40th anniversary of the Assassination. It featured lots and lots and lots of journalists. What struck me was that the vast majority of them -- who were actually there in Dallas-- believed that there was in fact a conspiracy. How different from the way this seems in the MSM of today, I thought. By 2003 the assassination was being given the full "X-files treatment" i.e. being lumped together in a cowcatcher phrase Conspiracy Theory that was crowded with other obviously absurd crap about moon landings to make it seem loony by association.

How different, I later learned, from how conspiracy in the JFK assassination was treated in earlier years, when it was front page NYT, and the subject of a huge Congressional reinvestigation in 1977, one that actually concluded that there was very likely a conspiracy involved in JFK's murder.

Over the next five years I read almost exclusively about JFKs policies, other Cold War trends, such as Communications research that touched on the assassination, and many works on the assassination itself. More and more it seemed that the dichotomy that today's official McLeftists insist upon-- that between structural and institutional analysis on the one hand and something instantly dismissible called "conspiracy theory" on the other was a sloppy canard. Little more than middle class name-calling. Originally it was the claim that JFK was getting out of Vietnam that made the mass media go ape-crap when the movie JFK came out in 1992.

Yet all of the most recent historical publishing--from the top academics in the field, not the trade paperback pushers of the likes of Bugliossi and Posner's Case Closed which were pimped shamelessly in the Billionaire Corporate Press-- showed that JFK WAS in fact getting out of Vietnam! On so many other realms of foreign and domestic policy, the more I looked the more i saw disjunction between the policies of JFK and LBJ.

How strange, it seemed, that JFK was ALWAYS the most virulently attacked Democratic president by our so called ""leftists"" of today, when he was the last major candidate or president to take a markedly different stand on Wars, budget priorities, reinvestment in US industry, and nuclear arms reduction and limitation. Why did the Noam always seem to bash JFK more than even Dems like Clinton who were way way way way way to the right? Again, I can't help but wonder if the Encounter Magazine analogy might be relevant. For it is the left who are the potentially the most dangerous audience for the already abundant truth about JFK's murder during the coup d'etat of 1963: if actual POLICIES ARE CONNECTED to the who dunnit aspect... well that would be the equivalent of "weaponization" of the JFK hit: it could be used to delegitimate our present fake corporate elections and the surrounding structure of corporate control that make them the mockery of real democracy they have become.

Why would this delegitimate said structure? Well that really is what JFK and the Unspeakable is about. It shows better than any book I can imagine, how the elected officials had, by 1960 become merely the dashboard to the engine that was the permanent military industrial bureaucracy. And that is the most important lesson for today, though it is so hard to demonstrate it concretely. Douglass, here, does just that.

This book JFK and the Unspeakable is the perfect book to give to those on the left who have been subject to the most misleading of disinformation around JFK. The reason is scholarship.

You will simply not believe the level of scholarship found in this book. EACH of its CHAPTERS has BETWEEN 600 AND 900 FOOTNOTES. More important is the quality of this sourcing. It is from the top academic publications in the field of diplomatic, intelligence and foreign policy history. This sourcing is literally THE ANSWER for those younger folk who have been trained to mumble "Conspiracy Theory" and preserve their moated consciousness from fear of being called a tin foil hat at a snooty cocktail party. Of course good sourcing is just one variable in the equation of a paradigm shift in US Cold War history; and Douglass handles evidence deftly without over-interpreting the evidence: there's just no need to.

Moreover, Douglass places the Assassination in perfect context. One sees JFK up against a 13 year old National Security State that looked at the new guy in the White House as an interloping new parent for a step-child that had GRADUALLY gotten more and more freedom to do its own thing. The gradual nature of this new bureaucratic autonomy and insulation from elected pols is key here. Chomsky, Cockburn et al., go to great pains to present the national security establishment as entirely a fait accompli by 1947. In reality, as Douglass makes quite clear with an encyclopedic overview of CIA developments in the 1950s, this was far from the case.

When the new guy arrived in the White House in 1961 there was a lot of grey area, precisely because the growing power of the CIA had been incremental and not nearly as sudden as Chomsky describes. There were plenty of reasons why the CIA felt as if they were more than just humble servants of the President's will. Also, by this point there was virtually no real legislative oversight, the latter having become more of a formality through the revolving door daily business dealing of the Military Industrial Congressional Complex-- a phrase which might sound abstract to some, but is made specific with myriad examples in Douglass' structural analysis of the US Garrison State in 1960.

This book is the most important book that a US citizen can possibly read today. It is more about current events than the next ten thousand issues of the New York Times, because it outlines the structure of the Times myopia. No wonder James Bradley, author of Flags of Our Fathers, said "it changed the way I view the world". No wonder John Perkins, author of DIary of an Economic Hitman called this book "arguably the most important book yet written about a US president.". No wonder this book has gone unreviewed in the New York Times in spite of rave review by history makers like Marcus Raskin and Daniel Ellsberg. This book is just too dangerous to be legitimated by peddlers of court histories.

After reading this book you will really begin to wonder why the post 1980 "left" has so completely shied away from political history. Once this may have been very necessary. Today is has become little more than subsidized diversion. This book is where political history and the new social history can meet once again. The fake dichotomy, so lavishly funded, has been slain by Douglass, and we owe him thanks.

As a great companion read I would also recommend this book House of War: The Pentagon and the Disastrous Rise of American Power. Another book I would very strongly recommend as a first book on the JFK assassination is Breach of Trust By Gerald McKnight. This excellent academic book has the advantage of only focussing on the Warren Commission and why it is so wrong. Breach of Trust: How the Warren Commission Failed the Nation and Why

Edited June 22, 2012 by Tom Scully

[Michael Clark]

I've become interested in the history of this forum and it's members. I have not quite figured out the best place to posit my questions. It seems that Nathaniel was lost in a month long shut-down of the form in 2013. It also seems that we lost a bunch of members in December of last year, 2016; including Merideth.

Ive noticed, being a nooob, that some forum greats have died or disappeared along the way. Some have been difficult to track down and the circumstances of their demise is almost always obscure in an obituary. It seems to me like some of these folks should be momorialized in a hall-of-fame type area of the forum.

To be sure, I did not exert great effort to see how Nathaniel is doing these days. It did seem like a good post to bump in order to raise the subject of the status, well-being, and whereabouts of former members.

 

Cheers, 

Michael