All posts by gin

Just My Own Take on Pres. Trump’s Syria Attack

I get it.  I get it that he was affected by gas attack that killed babies.  I get it that Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley was badly affected by the poor dead babies.  I get it that most mothers the world over were incensed, and their hearts bled over the devastating videos of the horror of the results of a gas attack on Syrian children.

I get it that Assad reportedly used chemical weapons on his own people back some time ago.  (Although there are reports that dispute this claim.)

My heart bleeds over dead babies as well.

But the issue at hand is not just dead babies. It’s the speed with which this whole thing went down.  Evidence that Assad did order such an attack is absent.  Motive for such an attack is absent.  The President had come around to agreeing that it wasn’t necessary to eliminate Assad in order to work with Russia to fight ISIS.  Things were looking up for Assad and his government.  He’d been winning.  It makes no sense to risk that for a target that was not in any way strategic, or important.  The old question, cui bono, who benefits is such an obvious one here.

The Russians in their denial of Assad’s guilt over this gas attack make sense.  Videos to tear the heart showing up at just this time so quickly just seem fishy.  The doctor involved in these videos was on trial for aiding terrorists in the UK and his medical license lifted.  Of course, it was an enclave of rebels that was bombed.  The only other evidence I’ve seen is classic satellite pictures claiming to show a single fixed wing aircraft from the air field President Trump bombed.

Who can really say the chemical weapons were on that airplane?  Definitively?  It was a rebel stronghold, and the rebels were just as likely to have a stockpile of their own homemade sarin gas right there.  Bombs hitting it would produce the same result.  Since the rebels (too many different groups) have been accused in the past of faking gas attacks on themselves to gain political advantage, why not consider that possibility?

I’m not opposed to President Trump righteously responding to such an attack, although I do not approve of attacking a sovereign country that poses no risk or threat to us, but I think he should have waited a few more days.  I know it’s impossible to trust humint from anywhere in the Middle East these days, but no real effort was made to determine which of the two sides was culpable in the deaths of these children.

Haley and Tillerson were charging Assad before the day was out and claiming the evidence was indisputable.  I’ve long history of learning how wrong and deceitful government claims and reports are and must, must question authority.  Always.  Question.  I wish the President had done so.

We’ve allied with Russia before to defeat totalitarians.  This attack drove a wedge between our two nations and we may not recover quickly.  We have a common enemy.  And it isn’t Bashar Al Assad.  He’s secular, and has historically protected minorities in his country.

Huge numbers of President Trumps voters and devoted followers are now concerned and disgusted.  He said he would not involve us in the quicksand of the Middle East.  Yet here we are.  The Globalists must be so happy.

Recalling Pallywood deceit.

Market-ticker guy has the answer for “health care”

There’s no getting away from the fact that we don’t want government interfering in our health care, and we don’t want higher costs.  Lower costs, and freedom from government intervention so folks can choose what coverages they are willing to buy will create a free market system wherein lots of folks will be able to afford health insurance.

Ann Coulter also recommends just not bothering to repeal, but to pass a bill allowing for the selling of health insurance.  Hmmm.

Here’s Karl Denninger’s plan.  I like it.

Really, just get government out of our health care system.

Where is the Press on Vince Foster’s Death?

On occasion, we get a great analysis from and especially when we have written several times about the subject.  Here we are again, with another examination of the Foster death story.

Where’s the Press on Vince Foster’s Death?

For now, America’s mainstream Fourth Estate is ignoring the latest story about the violent death of President Bill Clinton’s deputy White House counsel, Vincent W. Foster, Jr.  That is the one about Congressman Trey Gowdy (R, SC) getting a federal judge to have Foster’s body exhumed and examined.  In this case, there’s good reason why they should ignore it because it’s made up out of whole cloth. It was obviously created to lend credibility to the idea, ginned up by our rotten press in the first place, that the Internet information alternative to the propaganda that they put out is nothing but a steaming cauldron of unsupported rumor and nonsense.

What we are witnessing here is quite simply the latest variation of #4 in the Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression, “Knock down straw men.”  Here’s one way it’s done, as we said back in 1998: “Make up wild rumors (or plant false stories) and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful alike.”  And, sure enough, right in the wake of this newly minted fake news, along comes the propaganda press’s favorite debunker, the depraved Snopes to perform the ritual:

Foster took his own life on 20 July 1993, and the circumstances surrounding his death in part formed the basis of long-circulating conspiracy theories that Clinton associates were often found dead under mysterious circumstances. Foster’s death was ruled a suicide in multiple investigations.

The claim about Gowdy’s purported order was picked up by several dubious sites, but there is no truth to it; the story originated with The Last Line of Defense (The Resistance), an openly fake news outfit…

Behind all this “fake news,” according to the shameful propagandists masquerading as truth-telling journalists, is nothing more than the desire to make money by selling popular myths, the truth be damned.  That ploy falls under #6 in the Seventeen Techniques, “Impugn motives.”  The motives of the people originating this new phony story might well be impugned, but not on the basis that they are merely chasing after filthy lucre.

Real Vince Foster News

Such knavery may be contrasted with what motivates the genuine truth-seeker in the Vince Foster case, Hugh Turley, and it has motivated him from the beginning.  He shares the web site Vince Foster Murder Cover-up with the key critical witness in the case, Patrick Knowlton and Knowlton’s lawyer John Clarke.  It is the definitive source for truthful information about Vince Foster’s death.  Turley has been involved in this endeavor for quite some time, as revealed by the email he sent me this week:

In November of 1994, Paul Harvey broadcast a comparison between the press reporting of the O.J. Simpson murders and Vincent Foster that I had sent to him.  Harvey’s producer told me it was one of the most requested transcripts of his broadcasts.  My comparison was also republished in many small-town newspapers that ran Paul Harvey’s opinion column.  Unfortunately it contained two errors promoted by Christopher Ruddy, that Foster was “left-handed” and that a paramedic had found the body in another location.  Ruddy had confused west with north in his reports.  – Hugh Turley, March 26, 2017

Where’s The Media On Foster Death?

Television, radio, movies and print media are talking about everything these days — except one thing.

Anybody can speak his piece on sick sex, infidelity, specifics of birth control, lesbianism, homosexuality, adultery, polygamy and pornography.

Daytime talk shows lick their lips at rating time over stories relating to a Chicago carnivore who raped, killed and ate young boys.  Cutting off a man’s penis was a favorite topic for a while.

It’s difficult to imagine in this atmosphere that there is one topic the media can’t seem to handle.

But there is one.

It appears nobody dares question the murder/suicide of White House aide Vincent Foster.

Hugh Turley has revisited Fort Marcy Park several times.  He has also read in tedious detail the case against O.J. Simpson.  He assembled a compelling comparison:

O.J. Simpson: There is a public hearing.

Vincent Foster: There was no public hearing (shhh).

O.J. Simpson: The media tell us everything, with updates on the hour.

Vincent Foster: The media and White House tell us nothing.  The facts are kept from the public.

O.J. Simpson: Plenty of photos are displayed of gloves, the murder scene, a Bronco, and even a live televised flight in the Bronco.

Vincent Foster: Only one photo leaked to the press by the government.  It shows Foster’s hand with a gun.  One photo tells the public a one-sided story.

O.J. Simpson: No murder weapon was found.

Vincent Foster: No bullet was found.  In fact, the gun had only two bullets, and no other bullets were found at Foster’s home.  Maybe he just bought two.

O.J. Simpson: Nicole Simpson died unexpectedly after eating a full meal.

Vincent Foster: Foster died “expectedly” after eating a full meal.

O.J. Simpson: O.J.’s estate is still intact.

Vincent Foster:  Fort Marcy Park reopened after a facelift.  There was new sod and cleared brush, even one of the two cannons was gone.  Vince wouldn’t know the place.

O.J. Simpson: Nicole’s eyeglasses were found next to Goldman’s body.

Vincent Foster: Foster’s eyeglasses “mysteriously bounced” 13 feet from his body in dense foliage.

O.J. Simpson: X-rays were taken of the victims by a medical examiner.

Vincent Foster: No x-rays were taken.  The coroner said, “Our machine was broken,” although he did check off “X-rays completed” on the autopsy report.

O.J. Simpson: The victims’ blood was everywhere.

Vincent Foster: Parts of his skull and brain were missing.  No skull bone fragments were found from a “one-inch exit wound”–even after sifting the soil to a depth of 18 inches.

O.J. Simpson: Plenty of fingerprints, footprints, and blood drops were found.

Vincent Foster: No fingerprints were on the gun, except one, but it was not Foster’s.  Did Foster wipe the gun clean after he shot himself to throw suspicion away from himself?

O.J. Simpson: Los Angeles police used experienced homicide investigators.

Vincent Foster: An inexperienced park officer — someone with no homicide experience — served as the lead investigator.

O.J. Simpson: O.J. wrote a note.

Vince Foster: A note appeared in Foster’s bag for the White House, yet it wasn’t there when Park Police searched the bag.  This note was torn into 27 pieces with no fingerprints.

O.J. Simpson: Tests were conducted on hairs found at the crime scene.

Vincent Foster: No tests were done on the blonde or brown hair or fibers found on Foster’s pants, undershirt, socks and other clothing.

O.J. Simpson: O.J. was unaccounted for during the time of the murder for less than one hour.

Vincent Foster: Foster was unaccounted for from 1 p.m. until 6 p.m.  For five hours his activities are unknown.

O.J. Simpson: Testimony was taken under oath.

Vincent Foster: [Special prosecutor Robert] Fiske and investigators questioned no one under oath.

O.J. Simpson: Blood at the scene flowed downhill.

Vincent Foster: Blood on Foster’s face flowed uphill.  These dried blood tracks disprove Isaac Newton.

O.J. Simpson: Detailed crime scene photographs can be seen daily on television.

Vincent Foster: Oops! It’s too bad crime scene photos were  “underexposed” in the Park Police labs.

O.J. Simpson: He drove a white Ford Bronco.

Vince Foster: A mysterious white van, a Mercedes, and a dark car were involved.  We don’t even know how Vince Foster got to Fort Marcy Park.

O.J. Simpson: Police investigators searched O.J. Simpson’s home.

Vincent Foster: White House aides searched Foster’s office — and then lied about it.

O.J. Simpson: Los Angeles police investigators keep a detailed list of items taken fro the crime scene and O.J.’s house.

Vincent Foster: Items removed from Foster’s office by White House staff remain a closely guarded secret.

O.J. Simpson: Investigators questioned neighbors.

Vincent Foster: Neither the Park Police or Fiske investigators questioned the many neighbors around the park.

O.J. Simpson: Witnesses who discovered the bodies came forward on television and we know names.

Vincent Foster: The workman who discovered Foster’s body has never been named.

O.J. Simpson: The murder weapon may yet be found.

Vincent Foster: Luckily, a gun was found (by the police) in his right hand (he was left-handed) — even though the workman told the FBI there was no gun in Foster’s hands when he found the body.

O.J. Simpson: Defense lawyers complain about sloppy police work by Los Angeles detectives.

Vincent Foster: Not a single complaint about sloppy police work in the Foster investigation.

O.J. Simpson: No one disputes the victims’ bodies were found in front of Nicole’s gate.

Vincent Foster: An ambulance worker found Foster’s body on the west berm.  Fiske said police found Foster’s body 200 feet away on the north berm.

O.J. Simpson: No one disputes who was the first emergency worker to come upon the victim’s bodies.

Vincent Foster: Sgt. George Gonzalez, the lead paramedic, said he was first on the scene of Foster’s body.  Fiske’s report said a Park Police officer was the first to find Foster.

O.J. Simpson: We know why articles from O.J.’s house are held by Los Angeles police as evidence.

Vincent Foster: We do not know why articles from Foster’s office were delivered by White House aides to the White House private residence as ordered by Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Turley might have mentioned that when he wrote that piece he had been deceived not just by the scoundrel Christopher Ruddy but also former FBI agent and Watergate figure, G. Gordon Liddy, who brought forward on his radio show the anonymous “workman who discovered Foster’s body.” We have since learned that the man was the late Kermit Dale Kyle, and his story of how he stumbled upon the body while in search of a secluded place to take a leak is frankly preposterous.

David Martin

March 30, 2017

See also “Selling the Foster ‘Suicide’ to Hillary Haters.”



Farkas? New York Times?

While yesterday, the video of Evelyn Farkas appearing on MSNBC having rather lots to say about the Obama officials surveiling Trump transition team, today we have Snopes claiming nothing is new here.  Hmmmm.

Then there’s the New York Times story in January.  Admits that intercepted Russian communications were being saved to investigate the Trump administration.

Just how on earth are we to surmise under the circumstances that the Obama administration did nothing illegal or “inappropriate” in surveiling the current president?  Why does he get cover and his wrong doing is ignored by media?

Where is this story in the WaPo, and why has the New York Times not revisited this story, published in it’s own pages?