Jim Hackett II Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 Allan: OK this is news to me about Mr. David reconsidering his position. I'll consider this, however I must run right now for prior commitments. Back this evening most likely. Thanks and Best Regards Jim Hackett II Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DangerousDan Posted May 12, 2004 Share Posted May 12, 2004 John Simkin and Forum Members, I am in the process of sorting all of my files on the many crusades I have been working on into one chronological file. As soon as I have that completed, and have had the time to go through to ascertain certain facts relating to this and other matters (such as the almost $1 million dollar lawsuit that was filed in Federal Court in an attempt to squelch my book) I will be back to the forum with some additional information. Again, I thank it is interesting that Dr. Allan Eaglesham is not one to respond to any questions from the undersigned and nobody else, other than Wim Dankbaar (another who has come upon the truth and is bombarded on all sides from those who would want the truth left buried and many of those anti-truth bombs come from the direction of Dr. Eaglesham) seems to dare to demand a response from him. Don't any of you wonder why he won't anser the question about Robin Palmer's forked tongue? I shall return. I am also surprised - even downright concerned - that Kent Heiner would stand up so strong for Dr. Eaglesham. I hope and pray there are no surprises for me in his manuscript that I have yet to go through in detail that relate to this very subject. I pray that my trust in him is maintained upon an in-depth scrutiny of "Without Smoking Gun" - which I pray will be a book that should be a spark to ignite the fire of public demand for a reinvestigation of the Pitzer assassination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hackett II Posted May 12, 2004 Share Posted May 12, 2004 Mr Marvin: I look forward to your return and input. I for one am very glad to have your book Expendable Elite. I would wish you the best and we both know speaking truth can carry a heavy price. As a certain Non com once told me "truth shines bright like a diamond in a goat's Axx." My opnion is only that an opinion about Mr. Pitzer's death. My opnion now holds with what Mr. David said both on TV and in the 2001 Lancer Banquet speech as well as yourself on TV and on Len Osanic's Black Op Radio internet interview. I don't have to rely on opinion to know the reality of what you wrote about in Expendable Elite. I cannot go into why, but I know truth when I read it. I'll be out of touch for a few days, but I hope to see you here in a few. Sincerely Jim Hackett II Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antti Hynonen Posted May 12, 2004 Share Posted May 12, 2004 (edited) Here's my view. I'm surprised LTC Dan Marvin is still alive after having disclosed top secret government information regarding black-ops. I salute him for doing that, and being open about his knowledge pertaining to the case. I'm trying to separate factual statements from opinions and speculation. After stating basic facts I have attempted to draw my own conclusions. Please see how I'm doing....Experts, please tell me if I'm missing/misstating key points related to the death of William B. Pitzer: • In early August 1965, in Ft. Bragg NC, Dan Marvin says he was asked by a CIA man to take on a contract killing, where the target was a LT CMDR working at the Bethesda Naval Medical School. His name was William B. Pitzer. • Dan Marvin rejects the mission because the subject is an American, currently in the USA. It was not part of standard procedure for military black-op personnel to get involved in assassinations inside the USA. • Dan Marvin claims the next person to go see the CIA man was Capt. David H. Vanek. However, Dan Marvin does not know the subject of their discussion. • Apparently we do not know if yet another or several more Green Beret's approached the CIA man regarding the Pitzer contract. • In October of 1966 Pitzer was found dead in the film studio at Bethesda Naval Medical School, with a gunshot wound to his head (right temple). • The death certificate was withheld from the next-of-kin for a very long time. • There was both an FBI investigation on the death of Pitzer as well as a Navy investigation. • The officials eventually ruled the death of Pitzer a suicide. • There are claim(s) that Pitzer was left handed and claims that he was right handed. Apparently he skillfully used both. Depending on the task, he would prefer his left hand to his right and vice-versa. • From what I understand, Pitzer's wife and his other family members claim he was not depressed nor had he ever attempted suicide before. He also had plans for the time after retirement from the Navy and his life seemed generally worry free. • Petty Officer Dennis David knew Pitzer well, played cards with him and saw Pitzer working on some film regarding President Kennedy's autopsy. • Mr. David also says Pitzer had offers for employment from local TV stations. • It is rumored that Pitzer had a personal copy of the films which Mr. David saw. • Pitzer's copy of the film(s) has never been found. • Dan Marvin never met or knew Pitzer personally. Based on the facts??? above I would claim the following: • Due to Pitzer's ability to use both hands, (without preference of the other) he could have used either hand to shoot himself on either side of his head, if he so desired. • We do not know Pitzer's exact involvement regarding the film, whether he simply made a copy of the film he had obtained for himself, whether he actually filmed it himself, or whether he wanted to sell what he had to some other party. • Pitzer may simply have been asked to work on the film to cover some details that the conspirators wished to conceal, and he may not have had a copy at all. • At any rate Pitzer was an insider with sensitive information on the death and autopsy of JFK. • Based on Dan Marvin's claim there was a CIA contract to kill W. B. Pitzer. • Due to the existence of a cover-up regarding President Kennedy's assassination and autopsy, it is likely that Pitzer was killed by these same conspirators due to his involvement (whatever his involvement was) with the films. Based on (i) the facts in the first section of my posting and (ii) the conclusions I have drawn in the second part, it seems to me that it is far more likely that Lt. Cmdr. Pitzer was murdered than the alternative suicide theory. Has anyone ever considered that Pitzer may have been forced to pull the trigger, with the pistol pointing at his head? He could have been coerced to do so, or his wife and kids would have been next... If there is a will there is a way. Based on what I read on Dr. Eaglesham's website, I agree that there were some mistakes and discrepancies in the documentary aired in Russia; however, they do not change any of the basic fundamental facts. Any other thoughts or comments based on this? Kind regards, Antti Hynönen Edited May 12, 2004 by John Simkin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wim Dankbaar Posted May 12, 2004 Share Posted May 12, 2004 (edited) I talked to Dennis David when the question whether Pitzer was left or right handed came up for me. He said he could have been wrong in his statements that Pitzer was left handed. He had only concluded he was left handed because Pitzer dealt cards with his left hand. Apparently Pitzer could use both hands. This issue has created confusion indeed. However, it goes much too far to call Daniel Marvin a xxxx because of it. After all, it doesn't change he fact that Marvin was asked to killl Pitzer and Marvin had a good source for the left hand issue. Dennis also claims he saw Pitzer working on the autopsy film and photos, and told me personally these photos showed an entrance wound in the right temple. They were very similar to the "stare of death pictures". Why does Eaglesham not shout that Dennis David is a xxxx too? He doesn't seem to believe Marvin, so what makes Dennis better? Secondly, the classified report on the FBI investigation into Pitzer's death was sent anonymously to Daniel Marvin, not to Eaglesham, the so called greatest expert on this case. It is Marvin who raised heaven and hell to get it (to no avail), not Eaglesham. Why was that report still classified and why would the sender want to stay anonymous? Hurray for him/her by the way. Why was Mrs Joyce Pitzer told to keep her mouth if she wanted to keep her widow's pension. Why these secrecies, threaths and surpressions if Pitzer's death was an apparent suicide, as Mr. Eaglesham wants to have us believe? Wim Edited May 12, 2004 by dankbaar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Eaglesham Posted May 12, 2004 Share Posted May 12, 2004 Hello Antti: >I'm surprised LTC Dan Marvin is still alive after having disclosed top secret government information regarding black-ops.< This is a fair observation, but one that comes with an assumption. Better wording would be "I'm surprised LTC Dan Marvin is still alive if he did as he claims, i.e. disclosed top secret government information regarding black-ops." >I'm trying to separate factual statements from opinions and speculation.< Not an easy thing to do, as some opinions and speculation have, over the years, become accepted as fact by some. >After stating basic facts I have attempted to draw my own conclusions. Please see how I'm doing....Experts, please tell me if I'm missing/misstating key points related to the death of William B. Pitzer:< I wish to make comment on the following points you raised: • Dan Marvin claims the next person to go see the CIA man was Capt. David H. Vanek. However, Dan Marvin does not know the subject of their discussion. Vanek's middle initial was actually "V." • Apparently we do not know if yet another or several more Green Beret's approached the CIA man regarding the Pitzer contract. The aspect of possibly several more GBs was introduced only recently by LTC Marvin, on his Web site. Until then the CIA agent spoke only with Marvin and the man with whom Marvin had walked, i.e. Captain Vanek. • The death certificate was withheld from the next-of-kin for a very long time. The autopsy report was released to the family in approximately 1990 with the help of James Lesar. I am now not certain if the term "withheld" is applicable; it may be that they did not go through formal channels to obtain it. • The officials eventually ruled the death of Pitzer a suicide. The investigation was completed in early February 1967. • There are claim(s) that Pitzer was left handed and claims that he was right handed. Apparently he skillfully used both. Depending on the task, he would prefer his left hand to his right and vice-versa. He used his left hand to deal cards. I am not aware of other activities in which he used the left hand. He played golf right-handed, for example. • From what I understand, Pitzer's wife and his other family members claim he was not depressed nor had he ever attempted suicide before. He also had plans for the time after retirement from the Navy and his life seemed generally worry free. As revealed by LTC Marvin and Jerry Rose in their article The Pitzer File, William Pitzer was in an extra-marital relationship. • Mr. David also says Pitzer had offers for employment from local TV stations. I believe there were two offers, made over the telephone, from a national network. • It is rumored that Pitzer had a personal copy of the films which Mr. David saw. Dennis David has stated a belief that Pitzer had copies of the photographic materials. I am aware of no other information indicating that Pitzer was in possession of those items, although Mrs. Pitzer's words to Marvin may be interpreted along those lines. I have lifted the following passage from my Web site: "Mrs. Pitzer’s actual words to LTC Marvin on 5 January, 1995, were: “I understood that he had parts of the autopsy.” She did not say “Bill had parts of the autopsy” or “He had parts of the autopsy.” Her choice of words, “I understood…” suggests that she was passing along hearsay. I discussed this with a family member who agreed that it indicates that someone other than her husband said this. Pitzer's son told me that from 1966 to approximately 1990, when he read High Treason, he was unaware that his father may have been linked to the Kennedy autopsy. Furthermore, until reading High Treason, he believed that his father had committed suicide." • Due to Pitzer's ability to use both hands, (without preference of the other) he could have used either hand to shoot himself on either side of his head, if he so desired. If he used both hands, then this becomes a moot point. A wound to the right side of the head is no longer indicative of murder. • We do not know Pitzer's exact involvement regarding the film, whether he simply made a copy of the film he had obtained for himself, whether he actually filmed it himself, or whether he wanted to sell what he had to some other party. Well stated. Dennis David told me that he does not believe that Pitzer would have sold the film. • Pitzer may simply have been asked to work on the film to cover some details that the conspirators wished to conceal, and he may not have had a copy at all. If the original was generated via a closed circuit television system, the videotape product would need to be converted to film. It is possible that Pitzer did that, and then edited out non-necessary footage. • At any rate Pitzer was an insider with sensitive information on the death and autopsy of JFK. Do not forget that only Dennis David saw a movie film in Pitzer's possession. This vital aspect remains uncorroborated. • Due to the existence of a cover-up regarding President Kennedy's assassination and autopsy, it is likely that Pitzer was killed by these same conspirators due to his involvement (whatever his involvement was) with the films. I suggest that you conclude how Pitzer died on the basis of the information on his death. Extrapolation from one case to another is risky, to say the least. >Based on A) the facts in the first section of my posting and the conclusions I have drawn in the second part, it seems to me that it is far more likely that Lt. Cmdr. Pitzer was murdered than the alternative suicide theory.< You are entitled to declare what seems likely to you. But, what aspects of the physical evidence would bring you to the conclusion that he was murdered? >Has anyone ever considered that Pitzer may have been forced to pull the trigger, with the pistol pointing at his head?< Yes, I have considered it, and you are not the first to suggest it to me. It cannot be ruled out, but, in my opinion, there is no evidence for it. >He could have been coerced to do so, or his wife and kids would have been next... If there is a will there is a way.< It cannot be ruled out. But, is there any evidence for it? >Based on what I read on Dr. Eaglesham's website, I agree that there were some mistakes and discrepancies in the documentary aired in Russia; however, they do not change any of the basic fundamental facts.< Antti, "mistakes and discrepancies" will never change facts. The information pointing to homicide on the documentary boils down to two aspects: Pitzer was left-handed, and the gun was found in his right hand. Neither is true. >Any other thoughts or comments based on this?< Please see above. Thank you for giving thought to this and for raising salient points. Regards, Allan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antti Hynonen Posted May 12, 2004 Share Posted May 12, 2004 Dr. Eaglesham, Thank you for providing the additional insight and elaborations to my statements. I'm glad to see my individual statements were not too far off from what you apparently also consider probable and reasonable. It seems like the main part we disagree with is the final conclusion; whether Lt.CMDR. Pitzer was actually murdered or whether he did in fact commit suicide. To sum up, now that I also have the additional information you kindly provided me with, I'd like to say that I can only believe in what makes sense to me. The murderer and the "would be" murderer: In this case there is a (would be) candidate for murdering Pitzer = Dan Marvin. (Who in their right mind would make up such a thing?). Therefore probably likely the actual murderer of Pitzer also exists, I doubt the CIA cancelled this because Dan Marvin said no thanks. I'm sorry I haven't heard or seen anything to consider Dan Marvin insane, seems like he is rather sane to me, considering what I've heard him say so far. Ok, I'm not an expert, but anyhow, such is my strong opinion. The motive and witness to the film material: There is a witness (Mr. David) claiming to have seen extra sensitive material pertaining to the death and autopsy of President Kennedy, in the hands of Pitzer. The potential of exposing to the public or using such material contrary tothe spirit of the cover-up, would absolutely expose the cover-up. (motive to kill) Well if you can prove something along the lines that Mr. D. David has totally made up what he saw Pitzer working on in Bethesda or that Dan Marvin is crazy you will have turned me around in my thinking. Until then the search for the truth continues. Thank you. Antti Hynönen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wim Dankbaar Posted May 12, 2004 Share Posted May 12, 2004 Well, shame on you, Antti! The middle initial of Vanek is a V, not an H! Wim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Eaglesham Posted May 12, 2004 Share Posted May 12, 2004 Antti: You said, >Well if you can prove something along the lines that Mr. D. David has totally made up what he saw Pitzer working on in Bethesda or that Dan Marvin is crazy you will have turned me around in my thinking.< Until then the search for the truth continues." Are you saying that you put more stock in ancillary events in November 1963 and August 1965 than in the information that is available from October 29 1966? On reading the FOIA-released material from the FBI, I felt that the case for murder was strongest in terms of bullet wounds in the left as well as in the right temple. However, the autopsy photographs show no bullet wound in the left temple. What remains then, that directly indicates homicide? I see nothing. >Until then the search for the truth continues.< Agreed. We need to obtain copies of the autopsy photographs and have them examined by experts. But, if the experts deduce suicide, would you accept it -- or would you continue to give more weight to uncorroborated accounts of events of November 1963 and August 1965? Allan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antti Hynonen Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 (edited) Allan: Surely you have looked into this event in greater detail than I have, no question about that. Just as an additional question to you; Does it seem to you that there are suspiciously many suicides and murders among individuals having been associated (e.g. reporters, investigators etc.) with the death of JFK? I bet the ratio of suicides and murders, as causes of death, among individuals associated with the JFK case tops any similar statistic in any country. You said, "Are you saying that you put more stock in ancillary events in November 1963 and August 1965 than in the information that is available from October 29 1966?" Well, in my opinion the historical events seemed to build up and contribute to what happened to Pitzer on October 29th 1966. "Agreed. We need to obtain copies of the autopsy photographs and have them examined by experts. But, if the experts deduce suicide, would you accept it -- or would you continue to give more weight to uncorroborated accounts of events of November 1963 and August 1965?" I do not have adequate information on the wounds or on anything related to Pitzer's autopsy to offer a comment on the issue. I have merely formed my opinion on the cause of Pitzer's death by relying on statements by witnesses and next-of-kin. Didn't the "experts" already rule suicide once? So, no - I doubt that would change my mind. Antti Edited May 13, 2004 by Antti Hynonen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Eaglesham Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 Antti: Yes, I feel that too many unusual deaths have occurred among people with some association with the JFK assassination. But, I feel that each death on the "mysterious" list should be examined in isolation from all of the rest. Someone once put it to me like this: "Connection with the Kennedy assassination is no guarantee of longevity." I took this approach: 1. Was William Pitzer murdered? 2. If so, did it have anything to do with the Kennedy assassination? Obviously, it is possible that he was murdered for reasons totally separate from the events of 11/22/63. If he committed suicide, then his name should be taken from the "mysterious deaths" list. You said, "Well, in my opinion the historical events seemed to build up and contribute to what happened to Pitzer on October 29th 1966." I feel that this thinking is valid only if the physical evidence points to murder. Establish mode of death then look for reasons. He was having an affair, for example. Could he have been shot by a jealous lover? You said, "I have merely formed my opinion on the cause of Pitzer's death by relying on statements by witnesses and next-of-kin." This is a good rationale for taking an interest in the case. It was my rationale also. For about four years I felt strongly that the available information pointed to murder -- and gave a lot of precious time to trying to understand how he died. My belief in murder was strongest when I took a photograph of the death scene to a forensice expert who agreed with me that it seemed to show a bullet wound in the left temple. However the autopsy photographs show no wound in the left temple. In other words, the death-scene photograph shows a pooling of blood in the left temple that only looks like an oozing wound. Now to make the case for murder we have to invent scenarios such as he was drugged and overpowered, the gun placed in his right hand and held tightly against his head. You said, "Didn't the 'experts' already rule suicide once? So, no - I doubt that would change my mind." So, you have already made up your mind and don't wish to be confused with the facts. Then, what is the point of this discussion? Regards, Allan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judyth Baker Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 While I cannot comment on the Pitzer case directly, I would like Allan to please address the questions raised by Mr. Dankbaar instead of refusing to because of his dislike for Mr. Dankbaar. I would like to add that I highly respect Allan Eaglesham and consider him trying to do his honest best. He has done his level best to get to the bottom of the Pitzer case. Even if Pitzer committed suicide, this doesn;t mean he might not have been harrassed by somebiody into doing so, since he had a bright future when this event occurred. If Pitzer committed suicide, but Dan Marvin says he was approached to kill him, that does not mean Pitzer did not commit suicide. However, the reasons for the suicide must be explored. He might have been driven to it. And the suicide might have been staged. I do not like the fact that there is a footpriont on top of a piece of paper left on the floor. A crime scene is respected: there is cause, therefore, to believe the paper was stepped on before the crime scene was discovered. As to handedness, there was also concern raised about Lee Oswald's being left-handed or right -handed. I would like to see an actual statement from Pitzer's wife that she, a living person, writes herself, because we have a good friend of Pitzer saying he was left-handed, and the wife only reported second-hand as saying he was right-handed. We need the direct report. It is very important. As to the integrity of Dan, in my personal correspondence with him, he has seemed the soul of honor. He freely admits when he has made an error, even online in the newsgroups, he will admit when he's done so. Since he is an elderly man now, I think that needs to be taken into account: a person can say something in error and apologize for it later and should not thereby be considered necessarily a xxxx. I would also like to see examples of how Dan is supposed to have changed his story, since the gentleman he mentions has something to lose by admitting he, too, may have been approached. MANY witnesses deny ever being involved. I offer tjis review from amazon.com about Dan's book EXPENDABLE ELITE. Dan is being sued for writing it. You'd think the events described by Dan Marvin never happened, to read the complaints coming in from Special Forces. But read this: Truth by all Means!!!!!, February 29, 2004 Reviewer: Nam Phuong Nguyen from Los Angeles This review is in response the people who think they know better without having any true knowledge at all. This book is, without even the littlest of doubt, truthful to the core. I personally know Major Phoi, the Vietnamese SF officer and a very competent and religious man, who is included in the book and by no means do I discredit what LTC Marvin has written about this topic. Instead of what some other people might say, this is a wonderful book, not only outlining the realities of our government but also gives proper homage to the South Vietnamese soldiers who fought for right and freedom. Thank you for reading and God Bless, Cdt Nguyen USC ROTC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Eaglesham Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 Judyth: You said, "I would like Allan to please address the questions raised by Mr. Dankbaar instead of refusing to because of his dislike for Mr. Dankbaar." This has absolutely nothing to do with my like or dislike for Mr. D. (That is insulting.) The points he has raised are ancillary and I have addressed them before in other locations. It is a game for him, and I won't play it. All of the salient information is on my Web site. If you are truly interested, then make the effort and take the time to find it there. You also said. "I would like to see an actual statement from Pitzer's wife that she, a living person, writes herself, because we have a good friend of Pitzer saying he was left-handed, and the wife only reported second-hand as saying he was right-handed. We need the direct report. It is very important." Again, you should read my Web-site. Mrs. Pitzer told Daniel Marvin that her husband was right-handed. I have a copy of the tape-recorded phone call. I suggest you ask LTC Marvin why he chooses to ignore the very best source of information on this issue, rather than suggesting that an old woman be bothered with this nonsense. I have never made any comment whatsoever on the content of LTC Marvin's book. It is irrelevant. Whether LHO was right-handed or left-handed is also irrelevant. Allan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judyth Baker Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 (edited) Dear Allan, Thanks for clarifying these things. I was unaware that Dan Marvin was given that information (that Pitzer was right-handed) and that you also have a tape recording of it. That means: 1) Dan needs to confirm that he was told this fact by Pitzer's wife on this website to make this matter clear to all of us. He has to tell us why the Canadian film shown in Russia seems to say the opposite. I have corresponded with Dan and found him consistent and sincere, so I expect him to answer in kind. 2) I never had any intention whatsoever of insulting you. I was surprised that you would think I was insulting you. Why would I do that? 3) We need direct quotes and citations, because these are very serious charges you are bringing against a decorated war hero. You need to put these statements into quotes so their precise content is able to be analyzed by all. I suggest: For example, you say Mrs. Pitzer said her husband was right handed. Was this to you as well as to Dan Marvin? PLEASE give us the quote from your tape recording, with context (showing how the material was elicited, such as did YOU directly ask, "Was your husband left handed or right handed, Mrs. Pitzer?"). Or was it Dan who asked? We really need to know. We need the direct quote, the date, and who witnessed this statement. Is Mrs. Pitzer aware that she was tape recorded saying this statement? It's not much to ask, and I believe it is fair to ask for (a) direct quote(s), since you have the tape recording. And/or Dan has it. Then we can see for ourselves exactly what was said, and the context. Your information is important to the case and I take it seriously. Many thanks, Judyth Vary Baker Edited May 13, 2004 by Judyth Baker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Eaglesham Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 Judyth: The following passage is lifted from my Web site at http://www.manuscriptservice.com/Article-8.html ------------- The source of greatest confusion in this case is the misconception that William Pitzer was left-handed. When Dennis David, a bridge partner of Pitzer’s, learned of his friend’s death of a gunshot wound to the right temple, he immediately doubted the official verdict of suicide because he had a strong memory of Pitzer dealing cards with his left hand. However, in a January 29, 1995, telephone call to Mrs. Pitzer, LTC Marvin asked, “Was he -- was Bill -- right-handed or left-handed?” To which she replied, “He was right-handed.” In response, Marvin said in confirmation, “Right-handed.” I have confirmed that William Pitzer was right-handed with two other members of the family and a colleague, himself left-handed, who saw Pitzer sign his name on many occasions. Author Harrison Livingstone has contributed to the confusion. In his book High Treason 2, he chose [like Marvin in a documentary made for Russian TV, see the URL above] to give more weight to how William Pitzer dealt cards than to what he was told by Mrs. Pitzer. In HT2, Livingstone wrote, “Dennis David...states that Pitzer was left-handed,” whereas his earlier book High Treason (co-authored by Robert Groden) states, “His widow said...he was right-handed." ------------------- I hope that this is clear enough for you. And I hope that my point has gotten across that salient information is freely available on my Web-site; the main Pitzer page is at: http://www.manuscriptservice.com/Pitzer.html Allan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now