Scholars smell a rat in the Paul Wellstone assassination

[Mefistofeles]

In this 2008 article, six things are mentioned as reasons why David Mantik (ph D) and others scholars don't buy the official story regarding the assassination of the liberal Paul Wellstone of Minnesota, 5 months prior to the invasion of Iraq:

(1) persistently misleading reports about the weather at the time of the crash;
(2) the absence of a distress call;
(3) the miraculously early responses of the FBI;
(4) the FBI’s refusal to permit photography by fire or ambulance teams;
(5) odd meteorological phenomena consistent with the use of a directed-energy weapon; and
(6) a statement by one signatory of the official report that the NTSB actually “had no idea” what had caused the crash.

http://www.ctka.net/2010/mantik_sunstein.html

The article is about government employee Cass "let's-cognitively-infiltrate-blogs" Sustein and I recommended to all.

[SDuderstadt]

1. "odd meteorological phenomena consistent with the use of a directed-energy weapon"

I was trying to figure out where someone would get such a bizarre conspiracy theory. Then I saw CTKA was your "source:.

Nevermind.

[Mefistofeles]

2. CTKA is not a person

The name of the author is right there, His name is not CTKA. Plus you expect readers to say, "I shall now disregard CTKA because certain DU member said CTKA is a bad source".

[SDuderstadt]

4. Dude...

if I cite an article in the Washington Post as proof of something, are you arguing that the Washington Post is not a "source".

CTKA is a well-known (and, I might add, goofy) CT website, dude.

[Mefistofeles]

5. 1) David Mantik was the author of the piece 2) Oh noes! CTKA is a conspiracy theory website!

"Website X is bad because it believes in conspiracy theories" is not an argument. It does not address whether the CT they believe in are right or wrong.

You have no doubt as to who wrote the piece, but you pretended you had doubts. It's David Mantik.

[SDuderstadt]

6. Nevermind, dude...

this is obviously over your head.

[Mefistofeles]

7. 3 comments and zero opinions about the article in question

Thanks for your contribution, which can be summarized as "I don't like that website."

[zappaman]

8. here's a comment

"directed energy weapon" discussions = bullshit.

[Mefistofeles]

9. Are you claiming directed energy weapons do not exist?

?

[KDLarsen]

10. Do they exist? Sure

And here's some not-so-convenient facts about them:
- They heat their targets
- The most powerful of them are approaching a power output of a few Megawatts
- They are mostly in their testing phase, or already phased out
- The amount of energy that they can direct at a target is roughly equivalent to the energy contained in a small jar of chocolate spread

[Mefistofeles]

11. "mostly" in their testing phase

And do you dispute that the "small jar of chocolate" kind of energy has shot down missiles?

Do they all have the energy output you cited? Allow me to see the source of the chocolate jar claim for further analysis.

[KDLarsen]

12. The only one I'm aware of is the YAL-1

And then you'd have to ignore that it didn't start testing until 2007, and wasn't even able to intercept a missile and destroy it until 8 months ago.

And as far as I know, yes, the energy output is not exactly impressive.

[Mefistofeles]

13. Well, I concede they never announced "we just killed Paul Wellstone with one of these things"

But seriously. Wouldn't testing of this high-tech weapon be super-secret for many years? Why do we expect to believe that the first test was conducted when the military says it was conducted?

We learned of mkultra by accident.

[KDLarsen]

14. In which case, this whole discussion is moot

Since we'll be stuck of guessing

[KDLarsen]

3. Oh FSM..

Is there anything DEW can't do?

[spooked911]

15. I remember when Wellstone's plane went down and seeing the news on CNN

I cried a little.

Wolf Blitzer was the announcer. He kept saying how bad the weather was, trying to blame it on the weather. I thought it was a bit suspicious right away.

I read Fetzer's book. Their evidence is a bit thin, but I don't think they had much to work with. I think it's pretty clear Wellstone was knocked off. He was too dangerous to the Bush administration.

[zappaman]

16. amazing

so when CNN said the weather was bad, you immediately got suspicious?
is there anything that isn't a conspiracy to you?

[LARED]

17. I know I may regret this but, how exactly was Wellstone

so "dangerous to the Bush administration" that he needed to be "knocked off"?

[Ter]

18. They just knocked off former Sen. Ted Stevens too

And the prosecutor in the case just commuted suicide. How convenient.

[zappaman]

19. yes

how convenient...
:crazy:

[defendandprotect]

21. Think so, too --

and presume someone will tell us clearly at some later point

the necessity for it at this time!?

Think everyone is simply exhausted from 50-60 years of out-in-the-open right

wing political violence! Would Ted Stevens have talked?

hmmm...

[defendandprotect]

22. Wolf Blitzer was, ironically, a weather man -- but agree I'd also be suspicious of him....

Agree re motivation --

though I thought Fetzer's -- and others -- work on this one was convincing.


:)

[zappaman]

23. yes, Wolf Blitzer was definitely in on it!

:crazy:

[defendandprotect]

20. K&R ... Jim Fetzer also did a great job on this one ... thank you for the link ....

Will look at it tomorrow --

We also very easily ignore the POLITICAL implications -- they should constantly be repeated --

and the fact that the right wing can only rise via political violence!

Thanks for staying after this --