Wikileaks releases what could be evidence of the murder of Reuters journalists as well as civilians in Iraq

WWW--This is a very big deal and gives some more context to possible harassment of Wikileaks by American military and/or intelligence personnel as well as of anyone trying to report the reality on the ground in American occupied Iraq and Afghanistan.

I don't even know how to put this into words, but I do recall this incident from July 12th, 2007 where Iraqi Reuters journalists Namir Noor-Eldeen and Saeed Chmagh were killed by "friendly fire"...only now it appears that the fire was quite intentional and anything-but-friendly. There also seems to be an element of bloodlust and cowardice on the part of the crew of the Apaches. Did they know the two were journalists? This is unclear, but there is mention in the communications transcript from the copters that seems to connotate that they knew they were "civilians."Is this yet another "isolated" event?

Recall that in early April 2003, three Al-Jazeera journalists were killed by "friendly fire," and also calls to mind the "accidental" shooting of hostage and Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena who was fired on by American troops just outside of the Baghdad International Airport and nearly killed. One of her Italian intelligence agent rescuers--Nicola Calipari--died of his wounds. Sgrena worked for the Italian Communist paper, Il Manifesto. One might think you're life might be in danger as a correspondent if you're not towing the line for the Pentagon.

A separate site from the main Wikileaks home has been created for the release, possibly for security measures to prevent its hacking:

5th April 2010 10:44 EST WikiLeaks has released a classified US military video depicting the indiscriminate slaying of over a dozen people in the Iraqi suburb of New Baghdad -- including two Reuters news staff.

Reuters has been trying to obtain the video through the Freedom of Information Act, without success since the time of the attack. The video, shot from an Apache helicopter gun-site, clearly shows the unprovoked slaying of a wounded Reuters employee and his rescuers. Two young children involved in the rescue were also seriously wounded. (www.collateralmurder.com/index)

The military has been mostly silent on how the event occurred and how the slain died, but ruled in an inquiry that the rules of engagement at that time were observed. The whole story underscores the weakness of the FOIA as well, but whatever works, it's out now. Reuters demanded an inquiry and action in the aftermath in 2007, just as they've had to in obtaining the release of other Iraqi Reuters employees/journalists, from Iraqi prisons, and got very little from the Pentagon--at least not copies. They were shown the materials off-the-record. Criminals don't tend to indict themselves, especially when they're the ones in power.

There's no indication from any source of any combat or exchanges of fire immediately before the Apache helicopter gunner opened-fire on civilians and the two journalists, killing as many as eleven. One individual was viewed brandishing an RPG (soviet-designed rocket propelled grenade), but was seen after the event began and shots had already been fired. Two U.S. Army Apache helicopters were involved the 2007 incident with some ground forces nearby. Footage from one helicopter has been leaked to Wikileaks by a military whistleblower(s) and the activist site itself claims to have conducted interviews with other journalists, military personnel and other witnesses at the scene, including consulting with Reuters over the basic facts and timeline.

...WikiLeaks obtained this video as well as supporting documents from a number of military whistleblowers. WikiLeaks goes to great lengths to verify the authenticity of the information it receives. We have analyzed the information about this incident from a variety of source material. We have spoken to witnesses and journalists directly involved in the incident.

WikiLeaks wants to ensure that all the leaked information it receives gets the attention it deserves. In this particular case, some of the people killed were journalists that were simply doing their jobs: putting their lives at risk in order to report on war. Iraq is a very dangerous place for journalists: from 2003- 2009, 139 journalists were killed while doing their work. (ibid)

Wikileaks makes a fine point that occurred to me almost immediately: if we're seeing what we think we're seeing (and hearing), the event could even be part of a pattern of violence, harassment, and intimidation against members of the press in American war zones, especially considering that Reuters has had other incidents of harassment directed against their personnel in Iraq. A few of these journalists were arrested under flimsy pretenses and ferried off to the palatial Abu-Ghraib prison where God knows how they were treated. Now is a time of scoundrels. It hasn't ended with the national elections of 2008.

Wikileaks appears to have done their homework and have even included photographs, a timeline, documents, and even the transcript of the communications between the helicopters, also very telling when taken with the rules of engagement at the time and the 38 minute video. This exchange is most galling and not honorable behavior for soldiers of any army, of any nation:

...17:46 Well it's their fault for bringing their kids into a battle.

17:48 That's right. ...

18:29 I think they just drove over a body.

18:31 Hey hey!

18:32 Yeah!

18:37 Maybe it was just a visual illusion, but it looked like it.

18:41 Well, they're dead, so. ...

(http://www.collateralmurder.com/en/transcript.html)

After these comments, there were more shots fired by the crew of the main Apache helicopter and a missile was fired into a building filled with armed civilians. There's no indication that any shots had been fired at the military personnel at any point in the roughly 38 minute event. It should be noted that many Iraqis carry AK-47s into dangerous areas, which one can assume, is when occupying troops and militias are present. Johnny got his gun, was instilled with fear and trained to kill, and imbued with a hair-trigger mentality. This isn't how soldiers are supposed to behave, not at all. Yet, the Pentagon says that this was part of the rules of engagement at the time. Are they sure they want to stand by that one?

Contrary to popular belief, life isn't a videogame.

"BREAKING NEWS-LEAKED VIDEO FOOTAGE EXPOSES PENTAGON MURDER COVER-UP," The Elf Wax Times, 04.05.2010: http://www.elfwax.com/news/breaking-news-video-footage-to-expose-pentagon-murder-cover-up/

Wikileak's page on the 2007 slaughter: http://collateralmurder.com/en/download.html

Tyler Bass's blog: http://spectaclemonopolized.blogspot.com/

NYTimes article on original Baghdad attack in July 12, 2007
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/13/world/middleeast/13iraq.html

"The war on Wikileaks and why it matters," Salon.com, 03.27.2010: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/03/27/wikileaks?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%253A+salon%252Fgreenwald+%2528Glenn+Greenwald%2529

http://www.collateralmurder.com/en/transcript.html

"U.S. Bombing Raid Kills Three Journalists in Bagdad," Fox News.com, 04.08.2003: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,83503,00.html

Official: Romanov Princess Anastasia and Prince Alexander were slaughtered by Bolshevik forces in 1918

Russia--It's a lieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!! She's in Atlantis with Bigfoot, D.B. Cooper, and all those missing planes and ships from the (fictional) Bermuda Triangle! Lieeeeeeeeeeeessssss!!!!!!

Well, at least something along those lines. Hey, it sold books for decades, what with dumbells speculating for dumbells what had happened to the Prince Alexander and Princess Anastasia. Armies of crazy old Slavic ladies claimed that they too were Anastasia, and even a few faceless cranks claimed they were Alexander. All of it was a lie, a body of completely worthless literature.

Nobody should have cared. The only thing that matters now is what really happened, and now we know: all of the Romanovs were killed by the Ural Soviet under orders of Lenin and the Central Committee in the month of July, 1918.

Of course they were going to slaughter all of them. That was the M.O. of the Bolsheviks, beginning with the deposed Tsar's family. Like the "Night of Long Knives" for the Nazis, this was what kicked-off the slaughter that was to come, the crossing of a threshold. Nothing could be the same after the Ural Soviet's deed, under orders from the Central Committee under V.I. Lenin.

Lenin directly ordered the murders of the Romanovs, and it was hidden until around the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. One of the first publications to note Lenin's orders (in memo form) was in Lenin: A New Biography (1994, first published in Russia years earlier) a book by the late Major General Dmitri Volkogonov that details most of the known machinations at the time it was written. Volkogonov had unparalleled access to the Party archives during the last years of the Cold War and was finally able to release his discoveries during Glasnost and the final fall of the Soviet regime.

The Truth (I think this is the original article on the findings by U.S. Military pathologists): http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0004838

Rene-Thierry Magon de la Villehuchet, bilked Madoff investor found dead (A Charming Tail)

“We are each our own devil, and we make this world our hell.”

---Oscar Wilde

Wall Street/Madison Ave.--No, no, the conspiracists haven't seized on this one...yet, but I'm about to. Besides, it's only been a few hours, the corpse is still warm and some of the ambulance chasers are still sleeping, what with all these goddamned time zones.

Yes folks, that's right, he was "murdered," it was "the government" (which is comprised of the American people), and they even kilt some before there was a Washington D.C.. Medics at the scene checked Rene-Thierry Magon de la Villehuchet (could he have a longer name? please?) for a pulse.

There was none. Normally, they wouldn't be alarmed by this as Villehuchet ran a hedge fund on Wall Street, but the patient was 65 so there were rules and procedures to follow. His papers were in disarray, pointing to...uh, something sinister, and he knew certain shady characters.

Losing $1.4 billion for your clients can be deliterious to one's health, and it appeared that Villehuchet's wrists--Agatha Christie stylee--were found cut, clearly by some intruder who wanted their money back, or at least coffee and a doughnut, some paper clips, and a reference.

The New York Medical Examiner stated today in the French newspaper "La Tribune" that Villehuchet's condition had not improved or changed--still no pulse. Members of the Religious Right were notified as to his condition at all times, and weren't going to be caught off-guard. They knew the chances this was an assisted suicide, the single most important issue facing the human race today. A videotape of Villehuchet was sent to former doctor/politician/human Bill Frist: "I say, I say, he's alive!" exclaimed the perfect human simulacrum of Foghorn Leghorn. God hates Pinellas County, it seems.

It didn't matter. The patient wouldn't budge, there was still no change in his condition. Neither would the economy, or Mr. Villehuchet's chances of recovering his investors' money from Bernard L. Madoff, death being that final mitigating circumstance.

So, the medics tagged-and-bagged the stiff and sent him to the Smithsonian where he'll be on-display next year.

Yes, it breaks one's heart that stellar names like the Rothchilds and Swiss bank clients are losing their asses these days, it's a crying shame. The phones at Access International Advisors are ringing and ringing, while Madoff's is ringing off-the-hook with one death threat after another. And what of the Astors? John Jacob Astor--the first American millionaire--made his first fortune selling bad whiskey to the Indians, there's worse, there's far worse.

$50 billion isn't chicken feed, after all. Like a good business Samurai...no, a clean murder by "the government" sounds better. It wasn't me, it was the big, bad government. It wasn't that I was stupid, greedy, and avaricious--it was the big, bad government, because they control everything, even when they don't (if you know what I mean, I don't).

Belly up to the bar boys: the Republicans knew that the 80th anniversary of the Great Depression was coming, they yearned for that underdog status since they don't know much else, and it was time to create another one just for nostalgia's sake. Besides, the little people needed some reminding, and they're looking wan and fat these days, but it won't last. They say that every country is three meals away from insurrection, but for America, it's just two snacks.

"Why not?" said the RNC's central committee members, "It's been too long, so very, very long. We miss it. Yes, why not?" They all agreed to agree with themselves as is their wont to do, and they all shook their own individual hands. Forbidden sex soon followed as the sun set on the Watergate...

And yet, Mr. Madoff keeps smiling on his way in and out of his now confiscated townhouse, wearing his dopey baseball hat and lookin' significantly more nebbish than he did just weeks ago. Stick 'em up! Bye-bye dumb old order, hello new one. It was 7:50 A.M. when they found Villehuchet's cold, dead body. The conspirator Madoff got out of the office before they came, months before.

Early to bed, and early to rise, though they say the morning sun at Rennes-Le-Château tends to get in your eyes. God knows Melville would love what's happening in New York City these days.

"Sunny Von Bulow dead after 28 years in coma"

WWW--I'm underwhelmed, except that it's the exact same length of time America has been in a coma. It cost a minimum of half-a-million to maintain her body every year. That's a waste of money, a total waste that could have helped the living. By all accounts, she was dead before the coma...just ask Klaus. I hear he's a real hoot at a party, a great conversationalist with an aristocratic sense of humor.

Obama invokes the late, great Wild Bill Hickok as an ancestor

Springfield, Missouri--Obama's claim of descent to James Butler "Wild Bill" Hickok (where he engaged in a duel, possibly during the Civil War) today is an interesting one.

The Democratic presidential candidate came to this town on the edge of the old West on Wednesday and laid down a challenge for his GOP rival.

"If Sen. McCain wants a debate on taxes in this campaign, I'm ready," Obama said, noting that Hickok is said to have fought a duel here. "I'm ready to duel John McCain on taxes right here, quick draw," Obama said before closing the loop with Hickok.

"The family legend is that he is a distant cousin of mine. I don't know if it's true but I'm going to research it." ("Political Play: Obama claims link to the Wild West," AP, 07.30.2008)

He doesn't need to, a noted genealogist named Chris Child has confirmed it. Never mind that-- 25% of everyone roaming the Wild West was Black (it's true). Obama went to the heart of the matter, to one of the legends, Wild Bill.

And he's correct: he is descended from Wild Bill, a distant cousin. But does he really want to make a comparison? Perhaps. But his challenge of a dueling debate over taxes in Springfield with John McCain doesn't bode well when you look at how Wild Bill ended his days, but people settle their differences in other ways nowadays. Nonetheless, there's an even more intriguing fact about the Hickok family that few will recognize:

Wild Bill Hickok James Butler Hickok in Troy Grove, Illinois on May 27, 1837 to was born William Alonzo Hickok and Polly Butler Hickok. Bill had four brothers and two sisters and his parents were God-fearing Baptists who expected Bill to keep up his chores on the farm and to attend church every Sunday. Bill's parents also operated a station along the Underground Railroad, where they smuggled slaves out of the South. It was during this time that the lean and wiry young man got his first taste of hostile gunfire when he and his father were chased by law officers who suspected them of carrying more than just hay in their wagon. ("Wild Bill Hickok and the dead man's hand," LegendsofAmerica.com)

And so, James Butler Hickok came from very upstanding Americans, from people who saw Black Americans as human beings when few bothered to care. On top of this, they risked their lives, and so did Bill. He was a real man. But then, we should remember that there's that other side of America, where Republicans and sell-out Democrats dwell. It's the domain of the Coward Jack McCall, the world of the back-stabbing scoundrel and the yellow-belly.

Not much is known about McCall except that he was stupid, cock-eyed, a braggart, and a drunk who had once run with some buffalo hunters, possibly in the Wyoming territory. Kind of sounds like the current president, doesn't it? McCall was from Kentucky while Hickok was from Illinois, but both men wrestled with the beast within. Hickok was a lawman with an itchy trigger-finger. We'll never know how many people Hickok killed, and it's positive we never will with McCall either.

But you know a man by his actions, and we only remember McCall because of one of his last ones when he shot Wild Bill Hickok in the back of the head for beating him at cards.

On August 1, 1876 Wild Bill was playing cards in Nuttall and Mann’s No. 10 Saloon when one of the players dropped out and bystander Jack McCall took his place. McCall kept losing and at the end of the evening was broke. Hickok gave him money with which to buy dinner. The next day, on August 2, Hickok returned to the No. 10 and joined in a game of cards. A few hours later Jack McCall entered the bar and stopped a few paces behind Hickok. He pointed his gun at Hickok’s head, pulled the trigger and shouted, “Damn you, take that!” The gunshot instantly killed Wild Bill. McCall ran out of the saloon and attempted to escape on a horse that was tethered nearby, but the saddle had been loosened, and he fell to the ground. McCall ran down the street and hid in a butcher’s shop where he was captured by a large crowd. ("Deadwood History-JackMcCall," AdamsMuseumandHouse.org)

How is this different from John McCain dropping bombs on innocent North Vietnamese civilians over forty-years-ago, then being captured? Can someone like Obama--coming from the Chicago political machine--embody the morality of what was good about James Butler Hickok and America, or will he unleash the spirit of Jack McCall, John Rockefeller Sr., the Vanderbilts, Andrew Carneige, and the Pinkertons on the world as Commander in Chief?

Will he be a backstabbing assassin like the man who murdered his distant cousin, or will he side with the robber barons, the mine owners, and railroad men of our times? The signs aren't good, but one can hope, since that's all we're left with voting within the two party system. Will Obama be the man from Illinois (Lincoln/Hickok) or the malcontent, booze-swilling long-knife from Kentucky (McCall)?

When a candidate evokes the memory of the Old West in America, it's an important event that carries the responsibility of getting the history right. Yes, it makes him look and sound "tough," but does it make him a hero (McCain isn't one either), a man who can enter his home justified? If Senator Obama decides to stand on the side of the law, he's going to have a lot of cleaning-up to do from the last president. This is mandatory. It should be a part and parcel of his own agenda, because no nation can survive lawlessness for very long.

Just 100-years-ago, Pat Garrett was murdered along a lonely road in New Mexico.

He'd been shot in the back of the head and in the chest. Long before we were arguing over which angle JFK was shot from in Dealy Plaza, parties were arguing the same over Pat's murder. They say a big time rancher named W.W. Cox wanted him dead, and that he wasn't alone. Rich "coyotes" smuggling Chinese immigrants across the Mexican-American border might have wanted to bring them through his Bear Canyon ranch. Had they murdered him for money and power? What side of history is Obama on? We already know about John McCain.

"Political Play: Obama claims link to the Wild West," AP, 07.30.2008: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gyXVIfZ2F2CTuuxH3_93vuTP-ywwD928D6QO0

"Wild Bill Hickok and the dead man's hand," LegendsofAmerica.com: http://www.legendsofamerica.com/WE-BillHickok.html

On the Coward Jack McCall:http://www.adamsmuseumandhouse.org/answers/jackmccall.html

"Surprising New Information on Pat Garrett's Death: Details from the Fornoff Report," by Chuck Hornung, WesternOutlaw.com: http://www.westernoutlaw.com/stories/files/NewInfoPatGarrett.pdf

Jackass of the Month: DC Madam's Former Condo Manager, Joe Strizack

Orlando, Florida--No, it's not Alex Jones, but the same kind of vulture. Proving that the parapolitical is a great way to get attention (and dollars), Joe Strizack is making-the-rounds of everyone with a working-microphone, lunch, and some cab money, telling us that Jeane Palfrey was "afraid for her life."

This is untrue, and it's unlikely that Strizack met her more than a few times in-person (I never did, our correspondence was via-e-mail, and a few phone calls). It's even doubtful that he talked to her personally.

He's doing what Larry Flynt, Alex Jones (whose show he spoke on), and the rest of the Internet and media are doing: milking a horrible tragedy for as much money and advertising as they can. Mr. Strizack is a liar and a blackguard. Never mind the wild leaps of logic it requires to believe there's a conspiracy in Jeane's death, and forget that the courts already did all of the real work in destroying her--"she was murdered." [Ed. 04.05.2010--Correction, it would be "She were murdered."]

I understand that thinking hurts, and that there is no "bottom" for how low human beings can sink, but there's more to this mad dash towards a conspiracy: most casual-onlookers cannot understand the story, and neither could the mainstream press. Most people cannot think about more than one concept at once. Nothing new here, move along.

Things will die down, and nobody will remember the vapid Strizack or the stupid remarks he has made--lies--about Jeane Palfrey and his very casual association with her. Now, if only we could all forget Larry Flynt, but that's impossible, since he's that untreatable form of the clap. One has to wonder if he's going to bother releasing those other names from her phone records that I trumped hydraulic-man on: John McCain, Dick Cheney, and Fred Thompson.

Conspiracism: what a cottage industry. So much for the truth, but since when did most of humanity ever care about that? You think Rob Capriccioso has jumped on the bandwagon of untruth and wild exaggeration? It's even money. Here's hoping that his blog at least got him laid.

On the Exhumation of Indiana Serial Killer Belle Gunness: New Questions Arise

LaPorte/Indianapolis,Indiana--The
more digging in the case of Belle Gunness, the more questions there are. In a piece that I wrote on the matter way back in November 16th , I commented that there appears to be a human skull in the photo to the right. That might be because there is one, but everyone's an expert (I'm not) and an anthropologist (ditto). From November 16th's comment from someone who wandered into the store:

Anonymous said...

Where do you see a skull in the photo? Most of the light-colored areas are the zinc which lined the casket. Sorry. No skull.

Mrithi

And yet there is a skull in the Gunness plot in Forest Park, Illinois photo [click-to-enlarge]. It's never easy to admit when one's wrong, but this isn't one of those moments. In late-February, the Post-Tribune did a piece that--lo-and-behold--there were bones of children found in the grave of Belle Gunness, along with the expected find of an adult-skeleton minus a skull. Yet, there it is, and in other photos--what could be a child's skull above the adult-skeleton. The forensic team even found another human skull at the former location of the Gunness farm:

But [University of Indianapolis lead researcher Andrea] Simmons, who speaks about the case Saturday at the Memorial Opera House in Valparaiso, has found a problem. The deeper the case gets, the more questions arise. Why were the bones of children found in her casket? Whose skull was found on the property? "We're finding every time we investigate something, it opens up a whole new question," Simmons said. ("Cracking the Belle Gunness Mystery," The Post-Tribune, 02.28.2008)

And that's how investigations like this play-out. It's possible that there will be no answers, it being 100 years since the Gunness farm burned-to-the-ground as a mob of authorities and vigilantes rushed to the residence to arrest the portly serial killer, the black widow of LaPorte. It was 1908.

In case you don't know, the charred-corpse identified as that of Gunness was found in the remains of the cellar of the ruined farmhouse...without a head. Ever since that time it has been a source of wild speculations, namely that she got-away and started a life elsewhere. One good theory has the "Lady Bluebeard" chopping-off the head of a female maid, and there is evidence to support this. There are a good number of theories, which isn't that hard to believe. A century ago, people didn't have social security cards and photo identification was a rarity outside of passports, criminal and military records, and the like. Gunness lured her widower victims to her farm through Norwegian-language newspapers in the big cities, the myspace or facebook directories of the ass-end of the Victorian-era.

Some individuals were social ghosts in 1908, and the "Wild West" was just ending. Back then, it was easier to be someone else, a strange echo of today's phenomena of "identity-theft." Forget being ripped-off. Someone could murder you, take everything you owned, and simply vanish becoming you or someone else. 100-years-ago, it was far more widespread, and vice and labor, criminal and social violence were rampant. If Gunness recalls anything-at-all, it's the danger of almost no regulations in our society. It's a reminder of what a lawless society looks like, and what can happen when nobody is looking.

So here's what we have kids: an additional-skull found on the original site of the Gunness farm, and the bones of children in the grave of the serial killer along with what appears to be a headless skeletal-corpse, presumably that of the killer or a luckless ringer.

http://chickasawpicklesmell.blogspot.com/2007/11/theyve-dug-up-indiana-serial-killer.html

http://laportecountyhistory.org/

http://laportecountyhistory.org/belleg1.htm

West Memphis 3 Update: Terry Wayne Hobbs vs. John Mark Byers?

West Memphis, Arkansas--In a case that has had as many twists-and-turns as the aftermath of WWII, there is another bizarre development: John Mark Byers is alleged to have come out for the innocence of the West Memphis 3. At this time, it's impossible to corroborate as Byers is alleged to be claiming that he's been doing "undercover work" towards whether another step-father might have been involved in the murders of the three eight-year-olds back in 1993--Terry Wayne Hobbs.

[John] Mark Byers has recently come out in favor of the innocence of those in prison. He has said he has helped perform undercover work, making tapes of his conversations with Terry Hobbs. He has made some remarkable allegations about Hobbs past. The supporting evidence for these allegations have yet to appear. (http://www.jivepuppi.com/Terry_Hobbs.html, November 15th, 2007)

What's interesting is that there have been suspicions that Byers did in fact do "undercover" informant work for the West Memphis Police Department prior to the murders of his own step-son and the other two children. It's likely that the informant work was related to drug interdiction, as West Memphis is a well known corridor for the flow of illegal drugs through that part of Arkansas. It should be noted that Hobbs's and Byers' step-sons suffered some of the most brutal mutilations and violence to their bodies. This includes what could be a bite-mark (or the lashing from a belt-buckle) on his face. Christopher Byers, step-son of John Mark Byers, suffered mutilation of the genitals.

Is Byers innocent? So far, DNA-evidence found at the scene has not fully exonerated the man, now purported to reside outside of Millington, Tennessee. Some of the results of the DNA testing are still unknown, but one of the hairs found on the bodies of the children in a a shoestring ligature (binding) has a positive ID: Terry Wayne Hobbs. John Mark Byers and Terry Wayne Hobbs--what's common to these men? That's answered easily: both were step-parents, and both were involved in patterns of criminal violence, breaking-and-entering, and heavy drug-use. They also show signs of being abusive in their homes and with the children of others. Both Hobbs and Byers also came from strictly religious and economically comfortable backgrounds. They did not grow-up poor as the West Memphis 3 had. Then, there is the mysterious David Jacoby:

THOMAS FEDOR, FORENSIC EXPERT: None of the defendants could have been the source of that hair. None of the victims could have been the source of either hair. None of the DNA evidence from the crime scene connects any of the defendants to the scene of the crime.

MATTINGLY: So, who could the hairs belong to? A defense petition in federal court says the DNA from one hair is consistent with that of Terry Hobbs. Hobbs is the former stepfather of victim Steve Branch.

(on camera): Mr. Hobbs, do you feel like that the attorneys are accusing you of this crime?

ROSS SAMPSON, HOBBS'S ATTORNEY: The answer to that would be no.

MATTINGLY (voice-over): Hobbs agreed to go in front of our cameras while his attorney did the talking. And through most of my questions, Hobbs remained silent.

(on camera) Is it possible, Mr. Hobbs, that that was your hair?

SAMPSON: Sure. It was his son, Stephen Branch, who was murdered, and he's had to deal with this for the last 15 years.

MATTINGLY (voice-over): Defense attorneys say a second hair found at the scene is consistent with the DNA of Hobbs's friend, David Jacoby, and that the two were together in the hours before and after the victims disappeared.

Jacoby did not return our calls, but he did volunteer DNA samples to the defense. Authorities say they stand by the old convictions. West Memphis police have no plans to question anyone. ... (CNN transcipt, November 8th, 2007, http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0711/08/cnr.01.html)

And what of David Jacoby? What is his background? Who is he? His hair sample was found at the site where the bodies of the three murdered children were found, located on a tree stump. This is a relatively new name, and it should be noted here that Hobbs and Jacoby--both friends supporting each other's alibis on that day--have all generally remained out of the spotlight of this whole affair, ever since 1993. Hobbs in-particular has gone out of his way to avoid interviews until recently, while Jacoby has been relatively unknown to the general public until 2007.

While the cops try to get their stories straight and lose more evidence in their custody, a real move towards exoneration of the West Memphis 3 is building. It is long-overdue.

On November 18th of 2007, Pamela Hobbs was arrested for domestic abuse of her sister, Sheila Muse. Drug abuse is the suspected reason for her behavior, a trait she shares with her ex-husband (as well as problems with drugs). Her own daughter aided her in the beating of Muse.

In an about-face, Pamela Hobbs is now siding with the calls for a new trial for the West Memphis 3. Still, there's the nagging question: what's John Mark Byers up to? Whatever it is, it appears that the real murderers of Steven Branch, Michael Moore, and Christopher Byers are growing restless. Everyone has to confess to their transgressions, and it's just a matter of when. When is coming soon.

They've Dug-Up Indiana Serial Killer, Belle Gunness

Forest Park, Illinois/Laporte, Indiana--I'm about 10-15 miles from the location of the Gunness farm, the site on McClung Road where as many as 40 murders by the infamous Belle Gunness took place. Gunness was a hulking, ugly Norwegian immigrant woman who placed ads in big city papers (nearly all Norwegian-language, so as to attract others of her ethnicity) to lure rich widowers to her home to be dispatched.

She sometimes took-out insurance policies on the men--often widowers--if they didn't have much to steal, and murdered them with poison in their coffee or tea. After that, she dismembered some of their bodies with an ax. Legend has it that the men flocked to her like flies to honey, which is strange since she was incredibly ugly.

Why the disinterment last week? A farm hand who was jailed after the 1908 fire at the Gunness farm contended that the murderer got away. After that, there were the obligatory sightings, but no solid-proof of his assertion.

With current DNA technology, we're probably going to find-out. There are a few letters known to have been sent by Gunness to some parties that has traces of her DNA on them, and are going to be matched with the now disinterred-corpse. All that's left are the bones, naturally, but there's going to be some DNA left in either the teeth, or within some of the other bones. There has been a legend attached to the story: that the corpse found in the burning embers of the farm house weighed too little to be her, and that it was headless.

In addition, there is a story that one of Gunness's domestics went missing at that time, and that someone's head was found in a cornfield nearby the ruins. What does it mean? What's the veracity of this legend? From the above image, it appears that the corpse in Gunness's grave has a skull. Sometimes the truth about the "Black widow," the "Lady Bluebeard" isn't so sexy, considering her girth and dour appearance. It should be of no surprise that there are women who kill. There's more than corn in Indiana.

http://laportecountyhistory.org/
http://laportecountyhistory.org/belleg1.htm

Ed Gein (2000) review

Modern American horror began on November 16th, 1957 in a little farming community named Plainfield, Wisconsin: This movie gets a lot more criticism than it generally deserves. Indeed, it is extremely low-budget, but it basically nails the whole point of Ed Gein better than anyone ever has, or possibly ever will. What seems to disappoint most people is the fact that the film sticks so closely to the story of what actually happened, rather than the speculations and additions. Not that Eddie didn't kill anyone, mind you...

The reality is, Ed Gein was not a serial killer in any respect, and murdered only two women whom he may have felt resembled his dead mother. It's unknown factually beyond that, though he might have killed his brother in an argument when both men were hunting. The photograph to the right is of the body of his second victim, Bernice Worden. What he is most remembered for, in reality, are the ghoulish excavations he committed, and his "articulations" of dead bodies.

It's very difficult for us to imagine in our current era how much of a bombshell Ed Gein was in late-1950s America. People didn't talk about mental illness or domestic abuse in those days. In fact, it's my own humble opinion that we still haven't entirely coped with the knowledge of such aberrant-behavior.

Why do people do such things? There really are no answers here, which can a very disturbing reality in a modern world that appears to have explanations for nearly everything. But sometimes, there are no clear answers. The makers of "Ed Gein" have shed some much-needed light on what is really known about Gein's metamorphosis into a full-blown ghoul. Surprisingly, a great deal of the psychological subtext of his life has leaked-into films "based" on his "true story."

Most successful of all--naturally--is Hitchcock's "Psycho," but Steve Railsback and Chuck Parello have shown us a very clear scenario into why Ed Gein became the man we know-of today. Gein was basically bisexual and had a strong desire to BE a woman, like his domineering mother. Gein's real problem was being schizophrenic, however. The addition of the strident religious fanaticism of his mother probably didn't help, as many sufferers hold a fascination with the cosmological.

As stated in "Psycho" so well, he wanted to "...become his mother," in a sad-attempt to "bring her back to life." His father was a pathetic drunk, and as is well-known, his mother had a god-like dominance (coupled with religious-fanaticism and sociopathological attitudes) over the young boy. Ed was also deeply traumatized by an incident on the family farm where he saw his parents slaughtering a pig--Ed was unable to assist them, and was often called a "panty-waist" by his mother.

The incident, and a few others, are reenacted convincingly by Parello and company, and much of the film takes-place in Gein's head (where it belongs). Feeding his insanity with detective pulp-magazines, published accounts of cannibalism and head-hunting in the South seas, and a deep fascination with the Holocaust and war crimes committed under the Third Reich, it was clear that Ed Gein was obsessed with death. In time, he would attempt to embrace and control it, wearing the tanned-skins of cadavers that he had stolen from a nearby cemetery. Ed Gein was a ghoul, not a serial killer, and he sometimes wore the skins taken from these bodies so he could be a woman. Insofar as anyone can tell, all the "parts" came from deceased women.

Also interesting is the story behind Gein's brother Henry and his mysterious death. While it could be viewed as speculative, it's known that Henry was found dead (allegedly of a heart attack while hunting) with bruises to the back of his head. A fire had been started around his body, pointing-to Gein again, as he must have panicked after murdering his brother and either tried to dispose of the corpse or create a scenario that would explain-away his involvement.

The film also speculates on whether Gein fed human flesh to people he knew--this is unknown, but some of the stories around Plainfield attest that he did, and that hunting deer was repugnant to him. The detail is pretty amazing, with some incredible asides by Railsback that add to our understanding of Ed Gein. One scene has Gein at the local watering-hole mentioning how he'd like to have a sex-change, which was explosive news at that time, from Sweden.

This event --like nearly all others in the film--really happened, and Gein's comments were taken as they often were: a joke, that he was pulling everyone's leg. That's how Ed Gein was viewed--a leg-puller, an oddball flake and a shitter. He wasn't taken seriously, which is why it was so hard for people in Plainfield to comprehend what he was up to out at the farm.

There are a few continuity errors: the headlights of a car are clearly from the 1990s in one insert-shot, and there are a few moments where the production design could have been closer to what 1950s America looked like. But, all-in-all, what you have here is the definitive film on Ed Gein. It's all here, in all its pathetic glory. This is what happens when someone is neglected by family and society, both spiritually and medically; this was simply a sick man who needed help. Nobody did so until it was too late, leaving just another example of how we are not a very proactive culture.

It's telling that Augusta never had her son taken to get help, and one has to assume she was also deranged in a way that found expression in the sickest, darkest pages of the Bible--especially her fixation on the Book of Revelations, a tome that should be read as metaphor only. None of this is sexy and exciting to gorehounds and thrill-seekers who come to a film like this, not to learn something, but merely to stimulate their hunger for viscera. Grow-up.

An excellent film! How can you lose with ole' Steve Railsback, anyway? He bankrolled this one, and it was a wise move, they got a lot of bang for their buck. If the movie says anything, it's how insensitive we were as a culture at that time. Hardly anyone thought it that strange that Ed Gein had shrunken-heads hanging from his bedroom walls. His excuse was taken at-face-vaule: he'd gotten them from a relative who had fought in the Pacific during WWII.

Trophies of this sort were common, but should have been taken as a good example of the sickness and psychopathology of their owners. During the late-1950s, people might have thought it odd, but rarely would have blinked over it. That's how sick a culture we were at that time, and we aren't out of the woods surrounding Plainfield yet. We haven't coped entirely with Ed Gein as a culture yet, let alone Jeffrey Dahmer. Pity poor Ed, he's earned it.

Postscript: It seems possible Mr. Railsback was a target-for-death of Robert Blake at one time!

FOR NATO: Pier Paolo Pasolini's Salò (1975) review

Social order at the expense of liberty is hardly a bargain. ---The Marquis de Sade

So you say you've seen nearly every major Italian giallo? You've seen your Argento, Mario Bava, Lucio Fulci, Michele Soavi, and even all of the "classics" of Italian film? You've seen your Leone, Fellini, DeSicca, Bertolucci, Martino, and even most of the world classics? By this point, you've probably seen it all, and you think there's no film that will shock you?

If you haven't seen Pier Paolo Pasolini's "Salo: 120 Days of Sodom," you are flatly wrong. Pasolini didn't even live to see the release of this film. He was "murdered" by a male hustler (or so the official story plays).

Who was Pier Paolo Pasolini? Pasolini was the most important postwar intellectual in Italy, period. Like a Renaissance polymath, he was adept at journalism, the novel, poetry, screenwriting, directing motion-pictures, painting and drawing, and more. The polymath also liked cruising teenage boys, was a walking scandal, and yet paradoxically truly was the conscience of postwar Italy until his murder on November 2nd, 1975. He could only be an irritant in the culture he arose in, and he pricked the conscience of a nation. It's likely that he engineered his own murder, placing its date on the day of the dead as a frame...

Pasolini's revolutionary philosophy was simultaneously opposed to fascism and communism, and he had many enemies in the political arena, as well as the religious one with the Vatican. All said, however, it's possible that Pier Pasolini was murdered by a right wing assassination team under the aegis of "GLADIO," a NATO program of secret armies throughout Western Europe. GLADIO began, ostensibly, as a defense against a hypothetical Soviet invasion of Europe.

Overall, GLADIO was more often used to attack legitimate leftist political parties, trade unions, and populist groups. GLADIO operations were responsible for breaking the Marseilles dock strikes in the late 1940s as just one example of their handiwork. Their activities in Italy during the Cold War are known to be extensive. Italy is a flashpoint, a fixed, coordinate in the nexus of control of the Western power structure.

In Italy, the Red Brigade bombings in the 1970s were even instigated by GLADIO operatives to justify a law and order crackdown on the Italian Communist Party who were poised to take power at that time. It's a mystery as to how much influence the CIA had in all of this. The existence of the P-2 conspiracy (oddly, involving the Vatican, the CIA, KGB, and renegade Freemasons!) had yet to break in the international media. All this aside, there were dozens of politically motivated killings in 1970s Italy, and Pasolini's was just one of many.

One has to ponder the Vatican's involvement in his murder, as they were a primary adversary of Pasolini. And so, Salo enters this bloody fray. It could not be more controversial, and it's a scream of rage against how little we all really care about or value human life. Pasolini was outraged and disappointed with the human condition, and Italian politics had become a bloody chaos, leading director Sergio Leone to remark at the time that, "Italian politics have become ridiculous." Both directors were friends.

The scenario of Salo is fairly simple: a group of Italian fascists retreat to a palace in Northern Italy (where there was a great deal of support for Italian fascism and the Monarch) with a group of sixteen captive boys and girls. One is a bishop, a judge, a politician, and-so-on, representing symbols of established authority. It is Mussolini's short-lived Republic of Salo, created especially for him by the disintegrating Nazi regime. Hence, "Salo" is a title that almost any Italian of the 1970s (or today) might recognize. For 120 days, they degrade their victims in almost every imaginable--and unimaginable--manner.

There is homosexual rape, sundry forms of buggery, forcing people to eat excrement, forced heterosexual couplings, forced marriage, sadism of every kind, and finally, death. Just about everything you could imagine occurs, and worse. Of course, it's all based loosely on De Sade's tale and stays pretty close to the text's themes and scenarios.

Pasolini chapters each section with some of the structure of Dante's "Inferno," which is a real mark of his genius. One can even sense an atavistic Manichean influence in the work, which isn't surprising: Friuli has been historically known as an ancient citadel on the Northern "boot" of Italy, where the ideas of the world hating sect are still evident in the local culture. Pasolini's home state, Friuli, has been thought of as a place of subversion for centuries.

The Italian polymath understood that, under the right circumstances, we are all capable of these depredations. This is a lesson that he and others learned during the resistance to Italian and German fascism in Italy during WWII. Pasolini witnessed and experienced injustices committed by the partisans, losing his own brother to a firing squad.

There's a little Hitler in everyone, and we all the potential to become assassins under the proper conditions. Beyond that, To say this film is merely a statement on fascism would be wrong--it's a manifesto on what cruelty rests within all human hearts, especially once one has supped on power. In Salo and his other works in other mediums, Pasolini is saying that humanity has a dark heart and that nothing is really true.

This was the point that "Italy's conscience" had reached artistically by 1975, though his existential crisis regarding the future of humanity had begun much earlier. Salo was always lurking there in Pasolini's mind, waiting for its time to emerge. Some online reviewers have stated that they didn't find the film shocking--they should check themselves into a clinic somewhere, as Salo is beyond shocking. But it should be remembered that De Sade was only writing about the sexual habits of his kind--the aristocracy before the French Revolution of 1789. De Sade wasn't simply trying to shock. He was chronicling the sexual tastes and behaviors of the French aristocracy before the revolution.

I've noticed that even avid fans of contemporary directors such as Takashi Miike respect the power of this film. Miike has some similarities in theme and style with Pasolini, but goes for a more genre, stylized look (it's not the heady 1970s anymore). Even John Waters lists this film as sicker than his own worst offenders. It could be argued that Desperate Living (1977) is an oblique spoof of Salo. To say I was shocked by this film would be an understatement. But, besides being pretty sick, this film looks astonishingly lush and challenges the audience by shoving the beautiful and the grotesque in our faces. This is another aspect of Pasolini's genius of showing us depredations in such a lovely setting.

Salo transcends the subversive and never fails to shock. The late Tonnino della Colli's cinematography lends the film a look that could be hung in the Louvre, and it gives the film a greater subversive edge overall. Several of the shot compositions resemble well-known works of Western art. Della Colli was director of photography for Fellini, Sergio Leone, and many other classic Italian directors. It should be noted that the film is not "legitimately available" in the United State for copyright reasons. However, there are very good copies out there even though it's not in print. I found a copy that's an exact duplicate of the original US edition for a decent price, so it is out there to be found with a little searching.

The Criterion edition is reportedly the most expensive collector's DVD in the world, going for as much as $1,000.00 USD. [Ed., 08.31.2008--Which is now probably devalued with the new Criterion edition.] This was the best transfer in 1998, but it appears that there is a new continental European DVD purported to be definitive, as well as a BFI edition that's unexceptional. This writer possesses a few Ken Russell DVDs ("Salome's Last Dance") that are worth as much as $300.00 USD, so this is a shocker! It's funny to see used DVDs of the big Hollywood fare at $3.99 USD, while these are in the hundreds! It says a lot about what is lasting and meaningful to people, and it's not blockbuster movies.

A dubious company called "Water Bearer" has a set of Pasolini's other works, but I have it on good word that they are of extremely poor quality and aren't restored and come from aging 35mm prints. It would be nice if Criterion did a Pasolini Box that included a new HD transfer of "Salo" with extensive restoration. Salo is one of the most important films ever made. We all stand accused, even the filmmaker, and that's the point. Be forewarned: not for children or adults who fear soul-searing, raw existentialism. So, why? Why would anyone want to watch this? 

NOTE: The "ass-judging-scene" is similar to photos of the "flesh pyramid" at Abu-Ghraib. The new Criterion edition will bring a fresh reassessment of this Italian masterpiece, with only the omission of one extraneous 25 second scene. It will be HD from the best film elements. Brace yourselves.

(Revised 07.06.2008)

[Ed., 10.05.2008--I see no reason why Pasolini couldn't have been murdered by various rightist elements, while at the same time having brought it about purposefully. Why not?]

ED NORRIS: THE GENESIS OF DEBORAH JEANE PALFREY'S LEGAL PREDICAMENT?

Washington D.C./Baltimore, Maryland--"The criminal charges in this indictment are the result of a joint investigation by the United States Postal Inspection Service, the Internal Revenue Service-Criminal Investigation Division and the United States Attorney's Office.

This case was prosecuted by Steven H. Levin and Jason M. Weinstein," states the June 21st, 2004 press release from the U.S. Attorney's office for the District of Maryland. This was the summation into the embezzlement from "the Supplemental Account" by former Baltimore police commissioner Edward T. Norris and his former Chief of Staff, John Stendrini. At this same time, the investigation into "DC Madam" Deborah Jeane Palfrey had begun, according to court documents.

The money that Norris and Stendrini embezzled was--ostensibly--used to spend on "girlfriends" (probably prostitutes he was simply ferrying to prominent clients), nights out at fine restaurants, and vacations. The case was brought forward by U.S. Attorney Thomas DiBiagio. What's interesting here is that you have a joint investigation by these three departments of government in a fashion that strongly resembles their (with different players) investigation into Deborah Jeane Palfrey.

Question: does Ms. Palfrey get her own radio show in Vallejo after her trial? Sure, that happens to everyone after serving time in a federal prison. Like Ollie North, Ed Norris has his own talk radio show out of the town he disgraced, through WHFS (owned by the very right-leaning Viacom/CBS). How does this happen? You have to have powerful friends in the right places--like then (2004) Baltimore mayor Martin O'Malley, and even former GOP governor Bob Ehrlichman, Jr. You couldn't have a better friend than one who does this:

For some observers, O'Malley hasn't been quick enough to switch commissioners. The mayor didn't waste any time getting rid of Daniel. But O'Malley stuck by Norris when The Sun first questioned his use of a departmental expense account, calling the commissioner a good cop but a poor accountant. The mayor resisted calls for an independent investigation and narrowly limited the scope of the audit eventually conducted for the city. [my emphasis] O'Malley seemed heartbroken when Norris left the Baltimore job of his own accord to lead the Maryland State Police. Only later, when Norris was indicted on federal corruption charges, did O'Malley say he felt "betrayed" by Norris' behavior. (Baltimore Sun, 11.11.2004)

And O'Malley's poor-judgement would continue, until he was rewarded with the office of Governor on January 17th of 2007. O'Malley's still making poor decisions on who should lead the Maryland Police as superintendent, just as he did in choosing Ed Norris as police commissioner. Running parallel with O'Malley's rise--and former GOP Governor Bob Ehrlich's and Norris's descent--is the case of Ms. Palfrey.

Limiting the scope of any investigation should raise some alarms, and it most certainly has in the state of Maryland with Norris, while somehow O'Malley has survived unscathed. When then mayor Martin O'Malley fired police commissioner Kevin P. Clark in November of 2004 (after Norris's departure as a convict), Baltimore had had four commissioners in five years. Martin O'Malley doesn't have a good record overseeing his responsibilities governing local law enforcement (or the federal ones operating in his state).

There's always something missing in the picture: "Thomas DiBiagio, who was the U.S. Attorney back in 2004, up in Baltimore, was trying to bring down [Robert] Ehrlich who was the Republican governor of Maryland, and tie him in with all of Jack Abramoff's shenanigans, the mob, and the whole push for [legal] gambling," states Jeane Palfrey. She tells me it has taken "many months" for her to come upon these tendrils. "Is this partisan?" I ask her.

The story that unfolds isn't unfamiliar, and she continues in more detail: "Now, I think what happened here is that Thomas DiBagio--who I have been told is no angel--was out to get Bob Ehrlich[, Jr.], Ed Norris, Jack Abramoff--[to stop] all these corrupt players out to push gambling in Maryland. We all know what Jack Abramoff was about. ...He was playing with the mob, he was playing with the governor [Ehrlich], and I think Thomas DiBiagio was out to get him. ...It's well-documented." Indeed, it is, and DiBiagio has been very vocal about his firing in recent months, tying his "departure" directly to the current U.S. Attorney scandal.

As in those cases, there are conflicting accounts of the circumstances that led to Mr. DiBiagio’s ouster. The Justice Department disputes his version. His office had been looking into whether associates of Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. had improperly funneled money from gambling interests to promote legalized slot machines in Maryland. Mr. DiBiagio said that several prominent Maryland Republicans had pressed him to back away from the inquiries and that one conversation had so troubled him that he reported it to an F.B.I. official as a threat. But he said that the Justice Department had offered little support and that that made it “impossible for me to stay.” (New York Times, 03.06.2007)

Palfrey continues onto Edward T. Norris, the aforementioned former police commissioner of Baltimore, citing some important similarities in investigatory procedure between their cases--it seems federal investigators were paying visits to Norris's father (he signed a mortgage on Norris's home, making him technically culpable), and hanging a 30 year sentence over his head. IRS investigator Troy Burrus and Postal Inspector Maria Cuvillon (phonetic) visited Ms. Palfrey's mother at her Florida home, perhaps wanting to entrap her into making similar admissions that Jeane had bought her...anything.

The New York Times makes an interesting assertion in the DiBiagio article, that "[the] investigation appears to have ended after Mr. DiBiagio left office in January 2005." (ibid) Has it? How would anyone in the public know this without an FOIA request?

"In May of 2004, Ed Norris pleas out to six months. That's a mighty big drop from 30 years to six months.This is what I think happened: I think that Thomas DiBiagio took Ed Norris's plea deal..., and part of the plea agreement was to offer up people on the platter. I believe I was one of those people, and possibly Brandy Britton was one of those people." Palfrey contends that she could be "queen for the day" in a case where DiBiagio was attempting all these things, as well as catching "bad actor" agents within Baltimore's U.S. Attorney's office, specifically FBI agents gone criminal.

This might be where the Jonathan Luna connection comes in. She believes she could be the "lead witness" in what's a submerged conflict between political elements, the mob, the FBI (both "good" and "bad" actors), and sundry other elements that could be on her remaining phone records (like the other nine years). [Ed.-'AS WELL AS 2002 TO 2006 – THE YEARS ABC INVESTIGATED, BUT CHOSE NOT TO REPORT,' states Palfrey in a June 21st e-mail to myself].

Did DiBiagio tip off IRS agent Troy Burrus about Palfrey via Norris? Mr. Burrus should answer this question in a court room, and soon. www.crippledchimp.com has some interesting observations dating-back to May 12th:

The murder of [assistant U.S. Attorney Jonathan] Luna and the firing of DiBiagio eliminated the threat that the well-heeled customers of the DC/Baltimore prostitution ring, many of them GOP stalwarts, would be exposed prior to the December 2004 presidential election [Ed.-'AND THE 2006 ELECTION – HENCE THE RATIONALE FOR THE VISIT TO CALIFORNIA, LAST OCTOBER,' writes Ms. Palfrey in the same e-mail]. The attempt by Justice prosecutors and Judge Kessler to limit the criminal case to Palfrey continues the effort to punish the DC Madam and her employees and divert attention away from the customers. In May 2004, at the same time Norris and his chief of staff agreed to a plea deal in the prostitution case and received light semtences, Palfrey came under intense federal investigation.

Throwing in Jack Abramoff to this mix broadens its scope, with potential leads to the Justice Department under one Alberto Gonzales, a man appointed by one George W. Bush. But then, the very investigators into the case provide a route to the embattled Gonzales and Bush administration anyway. Their backgrounds seem to portend an outing as "Bushies," totally obedient to the GOP and the Bush administration's agendas.

Without any doubt, this case is patently political--it's not about prostitution, a tangential-link in an almost overwhelming web of corruption, deceit, bribery/graft, and even the murder of an assistant U.S. Attorney. Another feature of the Ehrlich investigation that resembles the so-called investigation into Ms. Palfrey: the use of grand jury subpoenas. Regardless of the killing of ABC's 20/20 segment, Deborah Jeane Palfrey is caught in the middle of a political war. More later.

The US DOJ's June 21st, 2004 press release on their plea deal with the convicted ex-Baltimore City police commissioner, Edward T. Norris: http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/usaopress/2004/txdv04Norris-StendriniSentencePR.pdf

The Baltimore Sun on Ed Norris & Martin O'Malley, 11.11.2004: http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/news/hits/041111bs.htm

An article on the love between former Gov. Bob Ehrlich and current Gov. Martin O'Malley (Washington Post, 10.25.2006): http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401699.html

"Former Prosecutor Says Departure Was Pressured, The New York Times, 03.06.2007: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/06/washington/06prosecutor.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5088&en=04ae190ec7fb2b8e&ex=1330837200&adxnnl=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1182455116-nRQnUB7SLtixwsgWS8SCzg

Crippled Chimp, May 12th, 2007: http://www.crippledchimp.com/Hookergate-Expands-to-Cheney-Fired-US-Attorney-and-Former-MD-Gov-Ehrlich-Staff
Ed Norris's website (but does he have a CD?): http://ednorris.com/

Ed.--Revised on Ed. notes June 25th, 2007.

D.C. Stephenson: An Old Case of Molestation

"Everything is fine in politics as long as you don't get caught in bed with a live man, or a dead woman."--D.C. Stephenson, Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan, circa 1920s

If you think that the Foley scandal is some kind of aberration--as the GOP will try to convince-you--think again. In the 1920s, there was no man more powerful in Indiana than D.C. Stephenson. He had the Governor and a Senator in his pocket. Like the GOP incumbents today, he was arrogant and a braggart at the apex of his power--until it was found that he had forced a young woman onto a train, and got her drunk and violently raped her:

In 1925 he had met a statehouse secretary, Madge Oberholtzer, at an inaugural ball for Governor Ed Jackson. She was later abducted from her home in Irvington, a neighborhood of Indianapolis and taken by Stephenson and some of his men to the train station. While on a trip to Hammond, Indiana, Stephenson repeatedly attacked and raped Oberholtzer in one compartment of his Pullman railcar. In Hammond she took poison to frighten Stephenson into letting her go. He immediately rushed her back to Indianapolis where she died a month later, either from the effects of the poison or the severe bite marks she incurred during the rape. Stephenson was arrested and charged with second-degree murder. (NICH site)

She died weeks later but named Stephenson as her attacker before she died. Shortly before the scandal, Stephenson stated without a trace of irony that "I am the law in Indiana." At the time he said it, he was right. But once the scandal broke, he was finished, just as the GOP has been wrong in thinking that they could do anything they wanted in private. Life doesn't work that way, especially public life.

Imagine a victim taking poison to escape their attackers, it's truly unbelievable.


Stephenson started as a Democrat, but changed his affiliation with the most hardcore racists in America: the GOP.

Stephenson supported the candidacy of Ed Jackson (GOP), who became Governor of Indiana in 1924. It's my opinion that at this point, the Republican Party gradually began to take-up the gauntlet of racism from the Democrats who were still headed in an essentially progressive direction. FDR's New Deal, the Great Society, and the Civil Rights movement, would cement this in the 1960s, and a peculiar trading-of-places occurred. There are few original "Dixiecrats" left today besides Senator Robert Byrd.

Since then, the GOP has been the national party of racists (not that the DNC doesn't have its own problems). Why? If you are going to be the political arm of the business sector, you have no choice. Exploitation and abuse requires that the oppressor become racist, and not just to have some "justification" in their minds for their criminal policies against minorities and the poor. Choosing to separate yourself from the rest of humanity as an exploiter makes one a racist by definition and has little to do with color or cultural differences, but a form of nihilism. These creatures use the weapon of legislation, and it is informed by a primal hate. Their rhetorical flourishes tend to state the obverse of what they're actually guilty of in just another permutation of the big lie.

Remember that D.C. Stephenson spoke frequently about the Klan's desire to "protect Protestant womanhood," and then raped a young German-American woman to death. This is similar to Foley's numerous public statements against pedophiles and it was a cover created with just as much forethought. Where do scoundrels hide? Out in the open.

The saddest aspect of Stephenson was that he had been active with the Socialist Party for a time, but was gradually corrupted by power. It appears Foley was always a greedy scumbag who never believed in anything, so he can be viewed as a step down from Stephenson. The onetime Grand Dragon served 31 years of a life sentence and was paroled twice. The first time, it was alleged that he had attempted to molest a 16-year-old girl while on release. The Indiana authorities put him back inside right away. He was finally paroled in the early 1960s and died in-obscurity in Tennessee where he was probably a minor hero to some. Even to the Klan, he was an embarrassment, and that's saying something in America.

Stephenson was just someone who got caught, just as former Rep. Mark Foley (Fla.) is now busted. The rest of them...that's anyone's guess. This is why we need a politically insulated investigation of Foley and wherever the trail leads us. [Ed.-11.24.2009: this of course never happened.] Expect to be horrified by upcoming revelations this week. As a kid, I remember reading about the 1920s as being the most corrupt decade in American history. This is simply no longer true. This is the most corrupt era in American history to date.

It's obvious that all of this--from 1980-on, worsening in 1994 until very recently--has been an era of an omni-pervasive culture of corruption. But it isn't just the GOP. This includes the Democrats, too, and some will eventually be caught, although they're much smarter than their Republican cohorts at hiding their criminal behavior. The Teapot Dome scandal, runaway stock speculation on Wall Street, our reckless loans to Germany to pay-off war reparations to France and the rest of the Allied powers--it all just pales-in-comparison to the GOP's current reign of corruption and fiscal misrule. It is ending, and we must not spare the guilty, not even when they've left office.

One last note: Stephenson was abandoned by his political allies while he was in prison. In 1927, he threatened to "name-names"' of all the politicians who helped him, and then he finally did. It took down the Mayor of Indianapolis, the Governor, and several other fellow scoundrels. D.C. Stephenson never held public office because he didn't need to. He raped and murdered a wonderful young woman who taught poor people and black children to read. He stole her life, just as the majority of politicians steal ours, a piece-at-a-time. These are the kind of degenerates that the wealthy hire to flay us all.

Lightly Revised and Corrected, 11.24.2009

More on Stephenson and His Scandal:

http://experts.about.com/e/d/d/D._C._Stephenson.htm
http://www.centerforhistory.org/indiana_history_main7.html
http://www.thepress.purdue.edu/Books%20Pages/Book%20Descriptions/GrandDragonLutholtz.asp
http://www.historycooperative.org/cgi-bin/justtop.cgi?act=justtop&url=http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/imh/100.2/safianow.html
http://experts.about.com/e/i/in/Indianapolis,_Indiana.htm
http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=8390