 
              Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 11  Num. 65
             =======================================
                     ("Quid coniuratio est?")
 
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------

GOOFY-LAND USA
==============

**  Ted  Kaczynski  wanted  to  have  a  lawyer  of  his choosing
represent him in his "trial."  But, no, he can't have  that;  you
see, it would cause a "delay."  Then Mr. Kaczynski said he wanted
to  defend  himself  in his "trial."  But no (apparently), if Ted
Kaczynski represents  himself  that  could  mean  he'd risk being
found guilty -- as if he stands a snowball's chance  in  Hell  of
being acquitted as the situation now stands.  And do we know that
Mr.  Kaczynski's  request  to  have  a  lawyer  of  his  choosing
represent  him  was  =really= made at the last minute?  Maybe Mr.
Kaczynski's request had  been  made  earlier,  but was hushed up.
What comes next?  Will Ted Kaczynski be gagged during his "trial"
to prevent his inconvenient voice popping up during the charade?
   Note also that the unabomber -- whoever they are -- agreed  to
stop  their attacks after the condition of having their manifesto
published by the  mainstream  media  was  granted.  So after it's
been agreed that  no  further  attacks  will  occur,  =then=  Mr.
Kaczynski,  pondering  his navel in Montana, is nabbed.  But what
if  the  real  unabombers  suddenly  decide  to  renege  on their
agreement and renew their attacks?   Wouldn't  that  be  a  funny
situation?

**  Our  Maximum Leader, Bill Clinton, made gross sexual advances
to Arkansas state employee Paula Jones -- unless you believe that
Bill Clinton is  telling  the  truth  and  Paula  Jones is lying.
Paula  Jones  wants  to  confront  Clinton  during  his  upcoming
deposition in a case filed against him by Jones.   Isn't  this  a
good opportunity for Bill Clinton to unnerve Jones by staring her
in the  eye?   If  such  an  accusation  were  made  against you,
wouldn't you want to stare the scalawag in the face?  Then why is
Bill Clinton afraid, and Paula Jones is not?

** Anyone who's looked into the Oklahoma City bombings knows that
no "fertilizer truck-bomb" did  all  that  damage.   Besides  the
unusual  circumstance that Murrah Building support pillars nearer
the Ryder truck  were  not  blown  out,  yet pillars further away
crumbled, my friend Joseph  Andreuccetti  pointed  out  something
else.   Next  time  you  see  a  picture  of  the  damaged Murrah
Building, notice how the  vertical  damage is basically shear and
not radial.  Mr. Andreuccetti worked in a rock quarry in Italy in
his   youth,   and   tells  me  that  he  immediately  noted  the
similarities   between   the    damaged   Murrah   Building   and
after-effects of quarry blasting.   Yet  =none=  of  the  defense
lawyers,  representing either McVeigh or Nichols, have challenged
the prosecution to prove  that  it  was  a "fertilizer bomb," and
=only= a "fertilizer bomb," that did all the damage.   STILL  NOT
PROVEN:   THAT  A  "FERTILIZER BOMB" AND ONLY A "FERTILIZER BOMB"
KILLED 168 PEOPLE IN OKLAHOMA CITY ON APRIL 19, 1995.

** Riots in Indonesia (AP, 1/7/98).  Riots in Switzerland.   ("In
Switzerland, where five banks have already gone bankrupt over the
past  three months, people have begun converging on supermarkets,
pharmacies and hardware stores, buying up canned food, medicines,
bottled water and other  necessities.   There has been rioting in
Bern and Geneva."  Weekly World News,  1/20/98.)   Near-riots  in
France.   And this is with the "good economy."  What happens when
the "bad economy" arrives?

** There is a large portion  of  America now calling for a proper
investigation into the death of  Commerce  Secretary  Ron  Brown.
The mainstream media, forced to notice, has been dragged, kicking
and  screaming,  toward  reporting  on  the  matter.   Typical to
mainstream coverage have been  statements  like, "Well, you know,
these blacks, they believe these sorts of  stories."   (Questions
arise  due  to  a "sense of powerlessness and vulnerability black
folks feel in face of American society."  AP, 1/8/98) Supposedly,
suspicions that Brown might have  been assassinated are all based
on  some  sort  of  "peculiar  psychology."   But  in  spite   of
comfortable-sounding pop psychology, real and troubling questions
about  Ron Brown's death remain unanswered.  Here is part of what
radio host Joe Madison  said  on  the  Pacifica News broadcast of
1/8/98:

    Steve Cogswell is an  expert  in ballistic pathology.  He
  said that it appeared to be a perfect,  circular,  beveling
  wound  [in  Brown's head], that was characteristic of a .45
  caliber gunshot wound.
    Now also understand that four other pathologists who were
  there at the  examination,  including  an Army Lt. Colonel,
  did examine Ron Brown's body and agreed  with  Lt.  Colonel
  Cogswell.
    So  here you have two medical examiners, both of whom are
  high-ranking  military  officials,  that  now  support each
  other's position.
    As soon as Cogswell's story became public, the x-rays [of
  Brown] came up missing.  They no longer  exist!   They  are
  "missing."

** These have been major stories this past week, 1/5/98 - 1/9/98: 

  (1)  Terry  Nichols  avoids  the  death  penalty,  due  to jury
deadlock.  A supposedly representative sampling of  relatives  of
victims  of  the  OKC  bombings  are  magnified on the television
screen.  Almost all of  the  supposed representative sampling are
like salivating dogs denied an anticipated meal.  "Give us  Terry
Nichols, and we'll rip him apart with our teeth!"  Meanwhile, the
press   amazingly  includes  comments  by  Jury  foreperson  Niki
Deutchman, that she believes  the  FBI  "dropped the ball" on the
OKC case and that there are still other guilty persons out there.
Say, what's that!?  FBI DROPPED THE BALL!?  OTHER GUILTY  PERSONS
STILL  OUT  THERE!?   Why aren't the snarling Oklahomans snarling
about =that=?
  (2) Ted Kaczynski says he is not crazy.  But, "Ah-hah!" says an
"expert"  interviewed  on National Public Radio.  "You see, don't
you," says the "expert," "that  if  he =is= crazy, then of course
he will say that he is =not= crazy!"  So  now  Ted  Kaczynski  is
going  to  be "evaluated" to see whether he is "crazy."  If he is
found to be  "crazy,"  then  he  cannot  represent himself at his
"trial."  And at his "trial," his lawyers  want  to  show  he  is
"crazy,"  and  thereby  get  him  hopefully acquitted.  So if Mr.
Kaczynski is found to be  "crazy" and so can't represent himself,
but then during the "trial" the jury decides he is  not  "crazy,"
then  which  is  it?  How can a man be "crazy" =and= not "crazy,"
both at the same time?
  (3)  The current U.S. President is widely and credibly believed
to have pulled down his pants in front of a stranger and told her
to "Kiss it."
  (4) Many believe that  former  Commerce Secretary Ron Brown was
assassinated because his past corrupt deals were on the verge  of
becoming   public   knowledge,   thereby   implicating   or  even
incriminating Mr. Bill Clinton and associates.

These  are  the   stories   floating   around   in  the  American
consciousness this week of Jan. 5 - Jan. 9,  1998.   And  if  you
think all this is goofy enough, just wait until this weekend when
goofy  America will forget all about it!

 +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +

For related stories, visit:
http://www.shout.net/~bigred/cn.html
http://www.netcom.com/~feustel

-----------------------------------------------------------------
       Views expressed do not necessarily  reflect  those
       of Conspiracy Nation, nor of its Editor in Chief.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
        I encourage distribution of "Conspiracy Nation."
-----------------------------------------------------------------
  New mailing list: leave message in the old hollow tree stump.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Want to know more about Whitewater, Oklahoma City bombing, etc? 
(1) telnet prairienet.org (2) logon as "visitor" (3) go citcom
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Aperi os tuum muto, et causis omnium filiorum qui pertranseunt.
Aperi os tuum, decerne quod justum est, et judica inopem et 
  pauperem.                    -- Liber Proverbiorum  XXXI: 8-9 




