Google search of my sites and the web


Monday, July 24, 2006

The Senator Wellstone Assassination

"Conspiracy Theories:
JFK, 9/11 and Wellstone"
a presentation by
Dr. James H. Fetzer, Ph. D.
given at the
University of Minnesota-Duluth
November 16, 2006

This particular recording covers the part dealing with the death of US Senator Paul Wellstone. You can watch the presentation here or on YouTube.

I think that aside from the question central to the lecture - specifically, why and how did Paul Wellstone die - the lecture is of fundamental significance to those seeking to assess the dynamics of coverups and covert operations in the modern society - specifically as pertains to the US. And while Dr. Fetzer is clearly highly emotional about Wellstone's death, and that in my opinion somewhat diminishes the quality of his presentation, I think he makes a convincing case that the official theory of this crash is highly improbable at best whereas a fairly convincing case can be made that Wellstone was murdered, along with everyone else who was on board that doomed airplane.

I personally found one allegation quite fascinatng. Apparently, the NTSB can only investigate an airplane crash as a potential crime if the US Attorney General agrees to treat it as such. Otherwise, they are required to investigate it as an accident. I wonder if an Attorney General's determination can be contested. If you possess relevant legal knowledge I would be very curious to hear from you.

But be that as it may - it looks like so long as the Attorney General plays along any mischief in the air can be covered up in a fairly straightforward manner. Just something to think about.


Anonymous said...

convenient as it was, it's far from an assassination when an unqualified airman or two launch into the sky in an airplane they're not rated to fly, all under the noses of the F.A.A., who's been painfully aware of this problem with pencil whipped airman's logbooks for years. My supposition is that if airmen were logbook audited today, 20 percent of the airline crews would be sitting in federal prison for 'pencil whipped' logs (fraud). Wellstone, as much as I found him to be a pain in the ass, wasn't murdered, but it's convenient to think he was, based on the malaise and hatred from the GOP side of the aisle for him.

Anonymous said...

That is nice speculation on your part. But, that is exactly what it is, speculation. How do you know for certain that they were not rated to fly that aircraft. %20 is a relatively small percentage. This video raises some important inconsistencies that you dismiss, perhaps due to a certain political leaning. I'm not buying your assumption.

Anonymous said...

As a retired air force colonel with over forty years of both military and civilian flight experience, I can assure you that the vast majority of logbook entries are authentic.

I actually sat on the board of a national audit effort jointly conducted by the government and the airline industry in 2003 to determine the logbook 'pad' rate through over 2000 random audits, and virtually every discrepancy we found was the result of honest error. Even then the error rate was less than .1%.

Unlike certain corporate executives in the financial sector, pilots have their resumes thoroughly checked all the time. Insurance companies demand as much before they'll insure an airline for the millions of dollars it costs to lose a single aircraft.

The prison population of this country is 1%, but you're suggesting that 20% of pilots are felonious? That's not only absurd, it's a deliberate insult against the brotherhood of pilots. That brotherhood may have its share of sex addicts (yes, I've known a Quagmire) and borrowers who forget to pay you back the five you lent them, but when they get in the air they're trustworthy or they're weeded out soon enough.

As for the previous commenter, anyone can claim to be anything on the internet, of course, and after two decades of the internet era most of us automatically snicker when we see an anonymous poster claim some sort of vast expertise in precisely the subject under discussion. I would think that most people today would realize that if they claim vast expertise, they'd better attach their names to their posts/comments, or just not make unverifiable assertions about themselves.

One sure way to tell if a person is bullshitting, of course, is that they get very angry if you dare to challenge their 'integrity.' Dearies, anyone who gets upset when asked to prove they're on the level is automatically a fraud, in my book. Decades of personal and professional experience have borne that out.

As a registered Republican who once personally met Wellstone and lived in his state for a time, I can say with supreme confidence that he was neither a 'pain in the ass' or a 'dork.' I can't imagine someone who claims to be a registered Democrat making such vilifying attacks against the personal character of a highly respected public figure of their own party, especially when that person is dead and his mere demeanor has absolutely nothing to do with the question of whether he was in fact murdered.

Since I'm going to post this comment anonymously too, I suppose that I lack credibility too. Well, think what you will, and I will think what I will. And what I think is that the previous commenter is full of Grade A shit.

Digg This!!!