|
|
Post by elantric on Nov 19, 2020 18:10:25 GMT -6
 Where does money come from? Where does it go? Who makes it? The money magicians' secrets are unveiled. We get a close look at their mirrors and smoke machines, their pulleys, cogs, and wheels that create the grand illusion called money. A dry and boring subject? Just wait! You'll be hooked in five minutes. Reads like a detective story - which it really is. But it's all true. This book is about the most blatant scam of all history. It's all here: the cause of wars, boom-bust cycles, inflation, depression, prosperity. Creature from Jekyll Island is a "must read." Your world view will definitely change. You'll never trust a politician again - or a banker.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jekyll_Island#Planning_of_the_Federal_Reserve_SystemPlanning of the Federal Reserve System See also: History of the Federal Reserve System At the end of November 1910, Senator Nelson W. Aldrich and Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury Department A. Piatt Andrew, and five of the country's leading financiers (Frank Vanderlip, Henry P. Davison, Benjamin Strong, and Paul Warburg) arrived at the Jekyll Island Club to conduct a secret meeting to plan the country's monetary policy and banking system, formulating during the meeting the Federal Reserve as America's next central bank.[14][15] According to the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, the 1910 Jekyll Island meeting resulted in draft legislation for the creation of a U.S. central bank. Parts of this draft (the Aldrich plan) were incorporated into the 1913 Federal Reserve Act.[citation needed] web.archive.org/web/20200516050137/http://www.jekyllislandhistory.com/federalreserve.shtmlThe Jekyll Island duck hunt that created the Federal Reserve
By Tyler E. Bagwell
-
Knickerbocker Bank Advertisement
In October of 1907 several banking firms, starting with the Knickerbocker Trust Company of New York, collapsed as depositors withdrew funds for fear of unwise investments and misuse of money. Lines of people waited in front of the Knickerbocker to close their accounts. Days later, the Trust Company of America had droves of depositors removing their money. Then, shortly thereafter, a run took place at the Lincoln Trust Company. Across the country apprehension that the panic would continue to spread occurred. In the fall of 1907 the United States was in a recession, it's banking system lacked a lender of last resort mechanism, and an intricate network of directorships, loans, and collateral bonded the fate of many financial institutions together.
Several banking leaders including Jekyll Island Club members George F. Baker, president of the First National Bank, and James Stillman, president of National City Bank, met with financier J. Pierpont Morgan and began examining the assets of the troubled institutions. A decision was made to offer loans to any of the banks that were solvent. The secretary of the treasury George B. Cortelyou was eager to divert the situation and offered the New York bankers use of government funds to help prevent an economic disaster. President Theodore Roosevelt, while the panic of 1907 transpired, was on a hunting trip in Louisiana.
-
Jekyll Island Clubhouse and Annex
Ron Chernow in his book The Death of the Banker offers this account of the 1907 Panic, "In the following days, acting like a one-man Federal Reserve system, [J. Pierpont] Morgan decided which firms would fail and which survive. Through a non stop flurry of meetings, he organized rescues of banks and trust companies, averted a shutdown of the New York Stock Exchange, and engineered a financial bailout of New York City." In the end, the panic was blocked and several young bankers including Henry P. Davison and Benjamin Strong Jr. were recognized for their work organizing personnel and determining the liquidity of the banks involved in the crises. In 1908 J. Pierpont Morgan asked Henry P. Davison to become a partner in his firm J. P. Morgan & Co. and in 1914 Benjamin Strong Jr. was selected to be the first president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
Soon after the 1907 panic, Congress formed the National Monetary Commission to review banking policies in the United States. The committee, chaired by Senator Nelson W. Aldrich of Rhode Island, toured Europe and collected data on the various banking methods being incorporated. Using this information as a base, in November of 1910 Senator Aldrich invited several bankers and economic scholars to attend a conference on Jekyll Island. While meeting under the ruse of a duck-shooting excursion, the financial experts were in reality hunting for a way to restructure America's banking system and eliminate the possibility of future economic panics.
The 1910 "duck hunt" on Jekyll Island included Senator Nelson Aldrich, his personal secretary Arthur Shelton, former Harvard University professor of economics Dr. A. Piatt Andrew, J.P. Morgan & Co. partner Henry P. Davison, National City Bank president Frank A. Vanderlip and Kuhn, Loeb, and Co. partner Paul M. Warburg. From the start the group proceeded covertly. They began by shunning the use of their last names and met quietly at Aldrich's private railway car in New Jersey. In 1916, B. C. Forbes discussed the Jekyll conference in his book Men Who Are Making America and illuminates, "To this day these financiers are Frank and Harry and Paul [and Piatt] to one another and the late Senator remained 'Nelson' to them until his death. Later [, following the Jekyll conference,] Benjamin Strong, Jr., was called into frequent consultation and he joined the 'First-Name Club' as 'Ben.'" This book as well as a magazine article by Forbes is the only public mention to the conference until around 1930, when Paul Warburg's book The Federal Reserve System: Its Origin and Growth and Nathaniel Wright Stephenson's book Nelson W. Aldrich: A Leader in American Politics were published.
-
Train Station in Brunswick, Georgia
Nathaniel Stephenson, in the Notes section of his biography on Senator Aldrich, suggests that B.C. Forbes learned of the Jekyll conference from an incident taking place at the Brunswick train depot. Stephenson writes, "In the station at Brunswick, Ga., where they ostentatiously talked of sport, the station master gave them a start. 'Gentleman,' said he, 'this is all very pretty, but I must tell you we know who you are and the reporters are waiting outside.' But Mr. Davison was not flustered. 'Come out, old man,' said he, 'I will tell you a story.' They went out together. When Mr. Davison returned he was smiling. 'That's all right,' said he, 'they won't give us away.' The rest is silence. The reporters disappeared and the secret of the strange journey was not divulged. No one asked him how he managed it and he did not volunteer the information." From the Brunswick train station the men boarded a boat and traveled on to Jekyll Island.
The Jekyll Island conference offered a secluded location to discuss banking ideas and enabled the development of a plan that eventually became the Federal Reserve Banking System. The Federal Reserve System is the name given to the twelve central banks regulating America's banking industry and it insures that depositors will not lose their money in the event of funds mismanagement from an accredited bank. Paul Warburg in his book The Federal Reserve System: Its Origin and Growth explains the reason for secrecy behind the meeting. He states, "It is well to remember that the period during which these discussions took place was the time of the struggle of the financial Titans- the period of big combinations [of businesses], with bitter fights for control. All over the country there was a deep feeling of fear and suspicion with regard to Wall Street's power and ambitions."
Obtaining permission from J. Pierpont Morgan to use the facilities of the Jekyll Island Club, the conference attendees most likely resided in the clubhouse for about ten days. The meeting required long days and late nights of contemplation and reflection. European banking practices were assessed and numerous conversations held regarding the best way to craft a non-partisan banking reform bill. Paul Warburg in the book Henry P. Davison: The Record of a Useful Life recalls, "After we had completed the sketch of the bill, and before setting down to its definitive formulation, it was decided that we had earned 'a day off' which was to be devoted to duck shooting." The Jekyll Island Club was originally formed in 1886 as a hunting preserve and in the 1910s was well stocked with animals such as pheasants and wild hogs. Several ponds on the island attracted numerous game birds and wild ducks.
-
View from water tower toward Indian Mound Cottage
William Barton McCash and June Hall McCash in the book The Jekyll Island Club: Southern Haven for America's Millionaires offers this narrative of the Jekyll conference. They mention, "How long the surreptitious meeting lasted is uncertain, although the group spent Thanksgiving on the island, where they dined on 'wild turkey with oyster stuffing.' They worked throughout the day and night, taking only sporadic time out to explore Jekyl and enjoy its delights. Aldrich and Davison were both so taken with...[Jekyll Island]... that they joined the club in 1912."
For years members of the Jekyll Island Club would recount the story of the secret meeting and by the 1930s the narrative was considered a club tradition. The conference's solution to America's banking problems called for the creation of a central bank. Although Congress did not pass the reform bill submitted by Senator Aldrich, it did approve a similar proposal in 1913 called the Federal Reserve Act. The Federal Reserve System of today mirrors in essence the plan developed on Jekyll Island in 1910. |
|
|
|
Post by kmik on Nov 19, 2020 9:06:51 GMT -6
Hope said:
You are right Hope. My question is WHY does a discrepancy in what the counselor said vs what Crim and Bradley said mean that Crim and Bradley falsified a report? Because Josh Hancock, DMAC, and the Counselor said so? Why is it that nobody ever questions what the counselor said or why he might have even said what he said? This is my take on the story:
* One thing to consider is that Josh was a school teacher living hours away from Plumas County and limited to how much time he could spend on research and filming this documentary - he also has a love for horror and wanted to release the documentary on Halloween
1. Josh Hancock was allowed access to the Keddie Room for his second documentary. He claims near the end of filming the documentary he found the Cheeseman report and contacted the counselor.
2. He spoke to the counselor via phone more than once before he, his film crew, and Sheila met him in person to interview him (no doubt these discussions helped to jog the counselor's memory a bit - and for Josh to layout his Marty theory to him)
3. Josh stated in the documentary that he never found a follow up report to the Cheeseman Report so I'm pretty sure that he told the same thing to the counselor - no follow up report - to which the counselor told him yes the DOJ came and interviewed him then sent him a letter telling him that Marty had been arrested (isn't that funny didn't know the DOJ sent letters to people they had interviewed)
4. Since Josh had access to the case files I'm sure the counselor felt confident that Josh knew for sure there was no follow up reports of the incident and he could tell the story with nothing to contradict what he told.
5. Sheila was there for the interview and surely he had a desire to give her some kind of closure.
6. This man was a counselor in a Vet Center not the VA Hospital
7. This was just a small informal place - you didn't even have to have an appointment.
8. According to what I've read there were two men who worked in this center as counselors and one woman over the center as the team leader. The only requirement that I saw for the counselors were experience counseling veterans, working with veterans organizations was desired, and being a combat veteran was preferred. Some of the professional fields appropriate for the team leader (which would have been the lady who was over this center) were psychiatrist, psychologist (PH.D), social worker (MSW), psychiatric nurse.
9. By the counselor's own admission in the documentary outtakes he never thought about the incident again after receiving the letter from the DOJ. How in the world could this man remember so clearly, 29 years later, when he also claimed he hadn't thought about the incident since 1981?
I don't think the counselor intentionally lied but I do think he relied on what Josh told him to be fact so much that Josh talked him into going back to Plumas after the interview and telling the PCSO the story he had just told on film - and he did. The counselor had no idea that all along the PCSO DID have a follow up report to the confession that Josh Hancock never saw.
There you go - no corruption, just Josh trying to end the second documentary with Marty's confession and rushing to release it on Halloween. I feel sure that he thought the PCSO would close this case after the counselor talked to them and he would be praised for closing the Keddie case - the same thing Dmac thinks.
If this is wrong in any way would someone who knows please come forward and correct me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Nov 19, 2020 8:43:06 GMT -6
"Bones found on the property" are not evidence that Charles is guilty of 11 counts of capital murder. The one videotape proves he is the last known person to see one of the victims alive. That's it. It proves NOTHING else. At all.
"The video was a "simulation"? Care to offer proof?" Yeah. The video, shit for brains. It's on Youtube. WATCH it. (NOT the fictional one made a couple of years ago. The one presented at Charles's trial.) NO actual violence. It isn't even pornographic. The woman isn't even naked, let alone injured. It's just like the "Zodiac Killer" letters. The LETTERS THEMSELVES prove the letters were some kind of hoax. So does that video. It is NOT a "snuff film." It's a FAKE "snuff film."
"Could you imagine losing a loved one like that" How many fucking times do I have to tell you people that feeling sorry for people will accomplish NOTHING in uncovering the truth? If you don't have the stomach for homicide investigation, then bow out. There's no shame. But pity is no substitute for logic. Let alone justice.
"There's hardly ever a smoking gun in murder cases." Yes. There is. Oswald. OJ. Dahmer. Bundy. Let alone everyday murders.
"there's more evidence against these two guys being killers than most other cases." Where the fuck did you get THAT idea? Just because you fell for the media hype is not the same thing as presenting evidence that Charles Ng murdered ELEVEN PEOPLE.
"how anyone could come away with the idea they had nothing to do with it." Where the FUCK did I say THAT?
"is proof they were involved with the killing of at least 7 people" He wasn't convicted of murdering 7 people. He was convicted of murdering ELEVEN people.
"I can see why the prosecution might withhold some evidence" Rule Number One: An EXCUSE for a lack of evidence is NOT the same thing as evidence.
"but I guarantee" I couldn't give a shit less what you "guarantee." Period.
Whilst (snicker) I'm at it:
"but that doesn't mean Ng deserved" Let me clarify one thing: I don't give one single solitary shit about what Charles Ng or anyone else "deserves." I only care about hosing away the horseshit and uncovering the truth. That's it. Nothing else. Not revenge. Not entertainment. Not morbid thrills. Just the truth.
"And it is an understandable approach to make a clear separation between what we know to be true and what we merely suspect to be true" No, Mario, it is not "understandable." It is the STATED PURPOSE of my website and podcast. They have NO OTHER purpose. And again, thanks for getting it. We will make NO progress until people get it.
The "evidence" against Charles includes claims by Klaralyn that she and Leonard made violent S&M pornography. Which does NOTHING to prove Charles guilty of murdering ANYONE. Klaralyn's not dead. So, not every person who appears in one of Lake's "movies" is the victim of murder. Are they? Anthony Hopkins appears in several movies in which he is a serial killer. That doesn't prove he WAS a serial killer. Does it?
Here is the "evidence" presented at Charles Ng's trial by the prosecution: 1. He lived there from time to time. 2. He talked to fellow jailbirds about violent fantasies. That's called "hearsay," but it was entered into "evidence," anyway. 3. He appears in a video that purports (by the prosecution) to show Charles mentally--NOT physically--"torturing" a woman who shortly thereafter turned up murdered.
ONE problem with that video is, the woman seems to have been "playing along" until a point where Charles tells her something about her husband and child that she DIDN'T know before. That is, it SEEMS to show that she DIDN'T know that Leonard and Charles had perhaps kidnapped (let alone murdered) them. She is SURPRISED by the threat. So, if she wasn't coerced into making the video by threats against her husband and child, then why WAS she appearing in the video? I'll say it again--Klaralyn told investigators that she and Leonard had made S&M porno for years. But she never said anything about murdering anybody in those pornos. And she sure as shit wasn't murdered.
It is EXACTLY like the "case" against Tex and Patty. Fingerprints showed that they had been at the Tate house recently (just like the video of Charles and the woman.) Then, hours and hours of horseshit "testimony" by Kasabian, et al. Klaralyn didn't even actually testify at Charles Ng's trial. Only a couple of jailbirds. Oh, and the video of LEONARD talking about his FANTASIES. He even SAYS on the video that it's his FANTASY. Which "proves" WHAT about CHARLES'S actions, exactly?
That was the entire prosecution case. A highly fictionalized trial by media, a sham "trial" where, AT BEST, Ng is directly implicated in ONE murder (just like Tex and Patty being implicated by fingerprints in the Tate massacre, but not LaBianca) and bingo! ELEVEN death sentences. Just. Like. "Manson." Just. Like. Berkowitz. And THEN in turns out that not only is this "case" very much like those two "cases," but there are lots of OTHER links between them. For example, the myth that the victims were mostly chosen at "random." That turns out NOT to be the case in Manson, and it turns out NOT to be the case in Leonard Lake/Charles Ng. NONE of the victims were "random." And they knew each other in surprising ways. Another example: the media hype, AND the trials (Berkowitz didn't even get a trial) is all about the MOTIVE. Not the "evidence" of guilt. Just. The. Motive.
I'm not saying I can prove that Ng, Tex, and Patty are all "innocent." I don't even care. What I care about is, these cases are not only the same, they are connected to each other in other specific, concrete ways. And THAT, kids, is evidence of some kind of conspiracy. (There are other murders and murderers which also seem to be connected to various people connected to this apparent conspiracy, but those may not be part of the "plan" or part of the same "plan." For example, in OJ, Dahmer, and Oswald, at least there is a mountain of ACTUAL EVIDENCE to prove them guilty. Oh, I know, I knoooooooowwww, it was aaaalllll "fake" evidence. But, that's NOT the same thing as NO evidence. Can you comprehend that? At all? Even if those cases are related in other ways, they are NOT the pattern I'm talking about.) Which I will discuss this Saturday on the podcast.
I know I take all the fun out of murder. Morbid curiosity is NOT "justice."
|
|
|
|
Post by james1983 on Nov 18, 2020 17:43:00 GMT -6
Mario. Proof and evidence are the same thing. As I've stated now numerous times, there were most likely others involved. That's one reason to not present all evidence if they had any. My point is the video and bones are damning evidence that any juror would have convicted on no matter what the defense came up with.yes the video is proof they were involved with the killing of at least 7 people. Mr. Horan putting the thought of a "simulation" video out here, he's basically claiming the dead woman were actors, as that's precisely what a simulation video would mean. I'm sure he'll back out of the claim since it's obviously preposterous. If he doesn't, then he's basically discredited himself on this issue, and his other claims should be taken with a grain of salt. Could you imagine losing a loved one like that and someone else claiming they were part of a "simulation" even when the bones were found on the same property the video was taped at? Crazy
|
|
|
|
Post by marionumber1 on Nov 18, 2020 16:36:18 GMT -6
Saying there's no proof is correct, though. There is evidence of their guilt such as the videotape and the bones found on the property, but as suggestive as that evidence is, it doesn't rise to the level of proof of their guilt. I personally think it's likely that Lake and Ng were involved with the murders but I'm also troubled at how the state obtained a conviction without truly proving Ng's responsibility for the murders. McGowan even makes the point in his section on the Lake/Ng case that the tape was primarily used to prejudice the jury and thus serve as a substitute for evidence that could actually prove their case.
It is the same thing with John Wayne Gacy as well. Do I think he is guilty of at least some of the murders he was convicted of? Yes, most likely. But did the state prove their case against him? Like with Lake/Ng, we have evidence that he tortured victims and human remains buried on his property (actually identifiable, unlike the bones at the Lake property), but none of that shows Gacy was personally responsible for the murders. Certainly I think it's pretty unlikely that all of these bodies could be buried under his house without him having any involvement. Yet it is not entirely out of the question, based on the evidence we have thus far, that Gacy could have been used by people like Michael Rossi and Phillip Paske, and be a sadistic monster but not a murderer.
Again, I am inclined to think Lake and Ng were murderers (not alone, of course), but that doesn't mean Ng deserved to be convicted on the basis of what was presented at trial. And it is an understandable approach to make a clear separation between what we know to be true and what we merely suspect to be true about these "serial killer" cases.
|
|
|
|
Post by james1983 on Nov 18, 2020 13:06:28 GMT -6
The video was a "simulation"? Care to offer proof?
|
|
|
|
Post by james1983 on Nov 18, 2020 12:51:17 GMT -6
They found the skeletons of 7 of the 11 people at the cabin site they were accused of killing, the same site where the filming happened. Please Mr Horan tell us what the videotape shows if not rape and the plot and laid out plan of murder. Ng claims he's going to kill one victim in the video, and they find her bones ther Mr Horan. Also what do you mean by putting innocent in quotation? Was Ng bluffing in your opinion? What does "innocent" mean?
I'd also like to state that the videotape is a helluva lot more evidence than the testimony of Susan Atkins. ALOT. Also "debunking" a serial killer myth doesn't mean you should try and shit all over obvious evidence to somehow fit a narrative you concocted in your mind. That's not called research. What does Lakes connections with Manson (if there is any) have to do with the videotape evidence or his guilt or innocence? Nothing at all. It would mean that there were more people involved than claimed.
Instead of trying to reinvent the wheel, maybe it would help a bit to look into how Ng somehow traveled here from China to visit a relative, then somehow "fooled" the US government into allowing him in the military even though he barely knew a lick of English at the time, but even that there doesn't prove he's somehow innocent of any of the crimes placed on him.
|
|
|
|
Post by james1983 on Nov 18, 2020 12:32:44 GMT -6
My response was only about Mr. Horans claim that there is no proof against Ng or Lake. Thats it. His continual claim that there is no proof against them, and his dimissal of the videotape evidence does seem like he's claiming they're somehow innocent. Why else would he claim such things? If there's no proof and the videotape is somehow skewed, then what? McGowans whole premise of his book was that more people were involved in the crimes than what was being officially reported, and I agree as my statement above shows.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Nov 18, 2020 10:29:17 GMT -6
See what I mean? People who bust their ass proving there's no Santa Claus turn right around and claim "But, the Easter Bunny is real!" Jesus. Why do I bother?
Mario gets it. There's a fucking PATTERN, here. Does it mean something? What ELSE do Leonard Lake and Charles Manson have in common, besides a pop culture propagated myth--fueled by higher-ups in law enforcement--that turns out is not supported by a single solitary shred of evidence? They BOTH hung around the SAME shady people--LOTS and LOTS of the same shady people--in the Haight, at the exact same time. And they engaged in several of the EXACT SAME ILLEGAL BUSINESSES, with the EXACT SAME CRIMINAL ORGANIZATIONS.
I didn't say Charles Ng was "innocent." Can you understand one single solitary syllable (alliteration provided at no extra charge) of that sentence? At all? What I said is, and more importantly, what the prosecution's OWN CASE against Ng says, the EVIDENCE says, is, Ng was convicted of ELEVEN counts of capital murder--not just the one you think he's guilty of--ELEVEN counts, on No. Actual. Evidence. Those videotapes are of the precise same probative value as Susan Atkins's "testimony" against her fellow Mansonites. One hell of an entertaining story, but proves less than jack shit. Is there enough evidence to put Ng on the list of prime suspects? Yes. Enough to CONVICT HIM OF ELEVEN CAPITAL MURDERS? No. Not even close. There is 20 times more evidence--REAL EVIDENCE--against OJ than the prosecution presented against Ng. Oh, I know, the "case" against Ng, as propagandized in the Mass Media that feeds on murder, is very entertaining, and therefore, to weak, impressionable, gullible minds, "convincing." But not if you look at it the way I looked at Zodiac. And the way we've been looking at Manson, SOS, etc etc etc.
And the funny thing is, there are all these OTHER connections between Lake/Ng and may of these other cases we're looking at.
Jesus H Motherfucking Jumped-Up Zombie Christ on Flaming Rubber Crutches. How much simpler and clearer can I possibly make this? This website is NOT about defending the existence of your favorite serial killer comic book character. It's about DEBUNKING all that official and unofficial horseshit, examining the ACTUAL evidence all over again, and finding out what's REALLY been goin on. And the "case" against Leonard Lake associate Charles Ng is obviously, blatantly, one of these cases.
Fuck.
|
|
hope
Full Member
Posts: 139
|
Post by hope on Nov 18, 2020 10:11:11 GMT -6
Forgot to mention the news report you posted in your previous post. That is why this case is so confusing. Everything is contradictory. I understand a lot of people feel the discrepancy in the therapists previous statements vs. what he said in the documentary is proof of corruption by Crim & Bradley. But without seeing any of these actual reports with our own eyes how can we know for sure? How can we know if their reports were faked.
It is interesting Hagwood gave/allowed Seabold to view the corresponding reports such as the follow up not mentioned in the documentary. Hagwood must have been upset with the way the therapist issue was portrayed in the documentary and therefore wanted to get the truth, as he knew it at the time, out there to the public. And I also know his belief of what the truth is has changed since then. Obviously, he has access to all the information and we do not. But for me personally, I can't make a decision on if they were faked or not without seeing the reports. The thing is everyone in case seems to have lied so who do you believe? People ask why would the therapist make something up like that, it must be the truth. I have no idea what the truth is, I wasnt there.
That is why it would be helpful to know what came of the court ordered record release from that VA Center. And regardless whether Marde did confess or made a fake confession or the confession came from Marilyn, DNA is what is going to solve this case. I hope that is being worked on so we the victims can finally have justice after all these years! The DNA would answer all these questions.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Nov 18, 2020 10:07:48 GMT -6
Speaking of "rigged [government] contracts," I think this is the FDR tape where he talks about planting fake news stories about Wilkie and about how when he was a partner at Emmet, Marvin & Roosevelt, he got the job of the vice-president in charge of the New York office of the Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland. So, what? Well, you can't even BID on a government contract of any kind until AFTER you are approved for a surety [completion] bond. And you can only purchase such a bond from a SHORT list of banks. Very short. And FDCM was one of the most important. Long story Short: if FDR didn't sign off on your company, you didn't get a surety bond to bid on government contracts. And I think on this tape he explains he got that job BECAUSE of his success in planting fake news stories about Harding.
|
|
|
|
Post by kmik on Nov 17, 2020 22:46:49 GMT -6
Or at least wondered why he wasn’t called to court as a witness to the “confession”.
|
|
hope
Full Member
Posts: 139
|
Post by hope on Nov 17, 2020 21:28:19 GMT -6
Yes, I find that difficult to believe as well. You would think he would have followed the case. At the very least been on the lookout for a news report stating there had been an arrest. Or perhaps seen one the news articles that were released, whether one of the anniversary articles or just an update. He never wondered if poor Tina had been found? It never crossed his mind once the internet became available? Never came up in conversations with Dr. Cheeseman or anybody else? I had forgotten he went into law enforcement afterwards. That shows in has an interest in such things. Never discussed it with is law enforcement buddies? Yes, hard to believe.
|
|
|
|
Post by marionumber1 on Nov 17, 2020 18:17:40 GMT -6
Danny Casolaro's suspicious death had a parallel a little over a decade later: the "suicide" of Florida state investigator Ray Lemme. Lemme was investigating allegations concerning Florida state house speaker Tom Feeney and a technology contractor that Feeney represented called Yang Enterprises (YEI). The allegations included rigged contracts, overbilling the state, YEI's involvement in Chinese espionage, election fraud, and even potentially human trafficking. A former YEI employee named Clint Curtis who had gone over to the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), one of YEI's state clients, blew the whistle to Lemme, an investigator in FDOT's Inspector General office. Higher-ups in the Florida government (all the way up to Jeb Bush, reportedly) shut down the investigation, but Lemme kept investigating. Weeks after telling Curtis he was about to break the case, he wound up dead in a Valdosta GA motel room. Like Casolaro, he supposedly cut himself in a motel room bathtub, and like Casolaro, his folder full of investigative files was found mysteriously empty. The allegations regarding YEI are similar to the ones regarding the PROMIS software. YEI was accused of inserting electronic backdoors into the software it built for agencies like FDOT and NASA, similar to how PROMIS was used for espionage. (Potentially disturbingly, one of YEI's contracts was the later-abandoned HomeSafenet foster care case management system for Florida's Department of Children and Families. One can only imagine what a backdoor to that might be used for...) In addition to YEI, Feeney also represented Wackenhut, the security contractor and CIA front that was implicated in putting a CIA backdoor into the PROMIS software. And the evident China connection to YEI is interesting because Chinese intelligence also lurks in the background of the PROMIS scandal. It has been widely reported that PROMIS was used for espionage on the global banking infrastructure through the complicity of Systematics Inc., a distributor of back-office banking software owned by Little Rock billionaire and Clinton benefactor Jackson Stephens, who was a business partner with the Riady family of Chinese intelligence fame. |
|
|
|
Post by marionumber1 on Nov 17, 2020 18:00:58 GMT -6
There is still a lot of value in criticizing the basis for these prominent serial murder convictions even if we believe circumstantially that they were in fact guilty as charged. This is exactly the point Dave McGowan made in Programmed to Kill over and over: that very few of these prominent "serial killers" had anything remotely resembling a fair trial. I believe this remark from the Professor is worth repeating:
Even if the defendant truly is guilty, the state might prefer to get a bullshit conviction rather than delve into the full evidence of the case which would begin exposing others who were also involved.
I also find it the ease with which these dubious convictions can be attained to be a disturbing commentary on the justice system as a whole. And part of me wonders if this is not being pushed by design. If the public is continually primed to accept manipulated/manufactured evidence against defendants because they are painted as sufficiently abhorrent individuals and "were probably guilty anyway", it only strengthens the state's ability to do the same against genuinely innocent dissidents in the future.
|
|
