Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 11 Num. 65
=======================================
("Quid coniuratio est?")
** Ted Kaczynski wanted to have a lawyer of his choosing represent him in his "trial." But, no, he can't have that; you see, it would cause a "delay." Then Mr. Kaczynski said he wanted to defend himself in his "trial." But no (apparently), if Ted Kaczynski represents himself that could mean he'd risk being found guilty -- as if he stands a snowball's chance in Hell of being acquitted as the situation now stands. And do we know that Mr. Kaczynski's request to have a lawyer of his choosing represent him was =really= made at the last minute? Maybe Mr. Kaczynski's request had been made earlier, but was hushed up. What comes next? Will Ted Kaczynski be gagged during his "trial" to prevent his inconvenient voice popping up during the charade?
Note also that the unabomber -- whoever they are -- agreed to stop their attacks after the condition of having their manifesto published by the mainstream media was granted. So after it's been agreed that no further attacks will occur, =then= Mr. Kaczynski, pondering his navel in Montana, is nabbed. But what if the real unabombers suddenly decide to renege on their agreement and renew their attacks? Wouldn't that be a funny situation?
** Our Maximum Leader, Bill Clinton, made gross sexual advances to Arkansas state employee Paula Jones -- unless you believe that Bill Clinton is telling the truth and Paula Jones is lying. Paula Jones wants to confront Clinton during his upcoming deposition in a case filed against him by Jones. Isn't this a good opportunity for Bill Clinton to unnerve Jones by staring her in the eye? If such an accusation were made against you, wouldn't you want to stare the scalawag in the face? Then why is Bill Clinton afraid, and Paula Jones is not?
** Anyone who's looked into the Oklahoma City bombings knows that no "fertilizer truck-bomb" did all that damage. Besides the unusual circumstance that Murrah Building support pillars nearer the Ryder truck were not blown out, yet pillars further away crumbled, my friend Joseph Andreuccetti pointed out something else. Next time you see a picture of the damaged Murrah Building, notice how the vertical damage is basically shear and not radial. Mr. Andreuccetti worked in a rock quarry in Italy in his youth, and tells me that he immediately noted the similarities between the damaged Murrah Building and after-effects of quarry blasting. Yet =none= of the defense lawyers, representing either McVeigh or Nichols, have challenged the prosecution to prove that it was a "fertilizer bomb," and =only= a "fertilizer bomb," that did all the damage. STILL NOT PROVEN: THAT A "FERTILIZER BOMB" AND ONLY A "FERTILIZER BOMB" KILLED 168 PEOPLE IN OKLAHOMA CITY ON APRIL 19, 1995.
** Riots in Indonesia (AP, 1/7/98). Riots in Switzerland. ("In Switzerland, where five banks have already gone bankrupt over the past three months, people have begun converging on supermarkets, pharmacies and hardware stores, buying up canned food, medicines, bottled water and other necessities. There has been rioting in Bern and Geneva." Weekly World News, 1/20/98.) Near-riots in France. And this is with the "good economy." What happens when the "bad economy" arrives?
** There is a large portion of America now calling for a proper investigation into the death of Commerce Secretary Ron Brown. The mainstream media, forced to notice, has been dragged, kicking and screaming, toward reporting on the matter. Typical to mainstream coverage have been statements like, "Well, you know, these blacks, they believe these sorts of stories." (Questions arise due to a "sense of powerlessness and vulnerability black folks feel in face of American society." AP, 1/8/98) Supposedly, suspicions that Brown might have been assassinated are all based on some sort of "peculiar psychology." But in spite of comfortable-sounding pop psychology, real and troubling questions about Ron Brown's death remain unanswered. Here is part of what radio host Joe Madison said on the Pacifica News broadcast of 1/8/98:
Steve Cogswell is an expert in ballistic pathology. He
said that it appeared to be a perfect, circular, beveling
wound [in Brown's head], that was characteristic of a .45
caliber gunshot wound.
Now also understand that four other pathologists who were
there at the examination, including an Army Lt. Colonel,
did examine Ron Brown's body and agreed with Lt. Colonel
Cogswell.
So here you have two medical examiners, both of whom are
high-ranking military officials, that now support each
other's position.
As soon as Cogswell's story became public, the x-rays [of
Brown] came up missing. They no longer exist! They are
"missing."
** These have been major stories this past week, 1/5/98 - 1/9/98:
(1) Terry Nichols avoids the death penalty, due to jury
deadlock. A supposedly representative sampling of relatives of
victims of the OKC bombings are magnified on the television
screen. Almost all of the supposed representative sampling are
like salivating dogs denied an anticipated meal. "Give us Terry
Nichols, and we'll rip him apart with our teeth!" Meanwhile, the
press amazingly includes comments by Jury foreperson Niki
Deutchman, that she believes the FBI "dropped the ball" on the
OKC case and that there are still other guilty persons out there.
Say, what's that!? FBI DROPPED THE BALL!? OTHER GUILTY PERSONS
STILL OUT THERE!? Why aren't the snarling Oklahomans snarling
about =that=?
(2) Ted Kaczynski says he is not crazy. But, "Ah-hah!" says an
"expert" interviewed on National Public Radio. "You see, don't
you," says the "expert," "that if he =is= crazy, then of course
he will say that he is =not= crazy!" So now Ted Kaczynski is
going to be "evaluated" to see whether he is "crazy." If he is
found to be "crazy," then he cannot represent himself at his
"trial." And at his "trial," his lawyers want to show he is
"crazy," and thereby get him hopefully acquitted. So if Mr.
Kaczynski is found to be "crazy" and so can't represent himself,
but then during the "trial" the jury decides he is not "crazy,"
then which is it? How can a man be "crazy" =and= not "crazy,"
both at the same time?
(3) The current U.S. President is widely and credibly believed
to have pulled down his pants in front of a stranger and told her
to "Kiss it."
(4) Many believe that former Commerce Secretary Ron Brown was
assassinated because his past corrupt deals were on the verge of
becoming public knowledge, thereby implicating or even
incriminating Mr. Bill Clinton and associates.
These are the stories floating around in the American consciousness this week of Jan. 5 - Jan. 9, 1998. And if you think all this is goofy enough, just wait until this weekend when goofy America will forget all about it!
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
For related stories, visit:
http://www.shout.net/~bigred/cn.html
http://www.netcom.com/~feustel
Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those
of Conspiracy Nation, nor of its Editor in Chief.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I encourage distribution of "Conspiracy Nation."