Bonacci, satanic panic, Jordan, MN

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Postby chiggerbit » Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:04 pm

But don't you see this as strengthening the Franklin case?


No, I'm afraid that any information from Bonacci suffers from at least some of same flaws as Prosector Morris' case suffered, too much interviewing, failure to record all interviews, every time, that kind of thing. It's just too hard to tell whether or not Stephens or deCamp may have primed Bonacci beforehand.
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby chiggerbit » Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:23 pm

Ok, I'm beginning to realize that I'm mixing up two different sets of cases brought by Kathleen Morris: one involved the Cermak family, the other, two or three years later involved 24 adults connected to the Rudd case.
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby lightningBugout » Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:27 pm

chiggerbit wrote:It's just too hard to tell whether or not Stephens or deCamp may have primed Bonacci beforehand.


Maybe. But I've never come across any reason to suspect that is the case.
"What's robbing a bank compared with founding a bank?" Bertolt Brecht
User avatar
lightningBugout
 
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:34 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Percival » Sat Oct 03, 2009 12:30 am

Project Willow wrote:
I am becoming weary of the entire Franklin story myself. I am not sure I believe much of it anymore.


WTF? ...

Nick Bryant. "The Franklin Scandal". read it.

http://franklinscandal.com/ppp.html


I know that you are very well informed about Franklin PW and I respect the hell out of you for what you have contributed here over the years, dont get me wrong as I am not here to suggest that things like Franklin do not happen, but I am very weary of Gunderson's greasy fingers all over that case and now we are also seeing that Decamp is a big LaRouchie which further calls in to question his own integrity, in addition to some of the very important questions and concerns that Chig has raised about Paul B. I want to believe and trust me I have read everything about Franklin that can be read including the link you provided and while I am not yet ready to dismiss the case I do have my concerns about the integrity of those behind the curtian and while I am certain very bad things did happen I am now begining to wonder if what we have been told is just a diversion to keep us looking in the wrong direction.

Dont mind me I am very naturally skeptical of everything as I have been burned too much to be otherwise, but I am on your side here, I have no doubt this crap happens more than we all would like to admit. I do have my problems with some of the cases we know about such as McMartian et al, but again that doesnt mean I dont believe organized abuse of children has and does happen on a very large scale and involving people who hold some of the highest positions of authority in our society.
User avatar
Percival
 
Posts: 1342
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 7:09 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Percival » Sat Oct 03, 2009 12:37 am

lightningBugout wrote:
chiggerbit wrote:It's just too hard to tell whether or not Stephens or deCamp may have primed Bonacci beforehand.


Maybe. But I've never come across any reason to suspect that is the case.


Ted Gunderson is reason enough my good buddy LBO. At least to me.
User avatar
Percival
 
Posts: 1342
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 7:09 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Project Willow » Sat Oct 03, 2009 1:58 am

Percival wrote:...but I am very weary of Gunderson's greasy fingers all over that case and now we are also seeing that Decamp is a big LaRouchie which further calls in to question his own integrity, in addition to some of the very important questions and concerns that Chig has raised about Paul B...


The best cure for superstition is education. Franklin doesn't rest on any one person's greasy fingers. Bryant easily makes the case for cover-up without relying on any of those folks. To put it nicely, you are drawing a conclusion without the requisite information.

Before anyone on this board goes off shoveling dirt into Franklin's waters, read Bryant. If I have to don hip-waders I'm going to keep even the perception of mud off that book. It doesn't deserve any dirt and neither do the victims, dead or still alive, or like Alicia, already having suffered 12 years of prison.
User avatar
Project Willow
 
Posts: 4793
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 9:37 pm
Location: Seattle
Blog: View Blog (1)

Postby lightningBugout » Sat Oct 03, 2009 2:09 am

What she said.

For clarity -- Bryant refers twice in the intro to the book to a "conspiracy theorist" he spoke with early in his research that he concluded was not "of sound mind." From the details he gives, it seems almost certain he is referring to Ted Gunderson. The case Bryant builds and presents for cover-up is precise and convincing and relies, in no way, on any of crazy Ted's speculation or bullshit.
"What's robbing a bank compared with founding a bank?" Bertolt Brecht
User avatar
lightningBugout
 
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:34 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Percival » Sat Oct 03, 2009 8:08 pm

Is there a copy of Bryants book online, I loaned out my hard copy and there is a particular passage I would like to revisit right at the moment.
User avatar
Percival
 
Posts: 1342
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 7:09 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Previous

Return to Franklin Scandal

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests