Nick Bryant book discussion thread: The Franklin Scandal

Moderators: DrVolin, 82_28, Elvis, Jeff

evidence

Postby sw » Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:13 pm

My existence is evidence. Or better yet, the parts are the evidence.

My favorite example is the example of a bombed home. You drive up to the bombed home. No one saw it blow up. No one saw who blew it up. But, there is a blown up home in front of you. People, say, show me proof of the bomb and I cannot produce any proof of the actors or the event. All I have is the blown up home. But, the bombed home is not proof.

I was the blown up home. DID parts scattered all over the place. All of them children blown to hell. Boys. Girls. No one can hear their screams because the silence is louder.

On Edit: The victims are the evidence. Not the evidence you are looking for though.
Last edited by sw on Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
sw
 
Posts: 764
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 2:08 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby lightningBugout » Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:14 pm

Percival wrote:Several people have mentioned the word 'evidence' and just to be clear and have a record of such here in this thread would anyone mind listing what they feel is actual evidence presented in the Bryant book, that proves the existence of the child-sex ring?


Perc, I find that request pretty tough. The details of the case are very complicated. Which is not to say the evidence is any less striking. I wouldn't know where to begin. And I'm not sure an evidence list can really be successfully isolated from the book. Or at least not without creating a series of hierarchical connection diagrams that would be equally as labor-intensive to comprehend as the book.

If others feel differently, maybe it would make sense to create a new thread in the data dump solely for that purpose. I'm picturing well over a thousand posts to get the basics down.
"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)

Re: the book

Postby Percival » Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:28 pm

sw wrote:I would say all the jets were chartered jets.

I don't know why Omaha is such a hub. I've wondered that for awhile now.

None of the kids would talk on the planes. It was like zombieville. Tranced out. No one used the bathroom either. I'm guessing that they were told as I was told that the plane bathrooms were dangerous as in if you fell into the toilet, you'd get sucked out of the plane. I fully believed this too. That toilet noise scared the hell out of me even as a result even to adulthood.

I would pray for the plane to crash so we'd die, but that never happened.

The B.Grove was scary too. They'd put us in these very poorly put together wooden boxes that were supposed to look like coffins but they didn't. They put the kids in the "coffins" and then put the "coffins" on this big cart that I think might have been horse drawn. Maybe six or eight coffins per load. They were not double stacked. It was really late at night in the forest and they's cart us to the outer circle of the bon fire which was near the owl. They men were drunk and dancing and smelled of really bad vomit and Body odor. B.O. to this day is a really bad trigger for me.

They would have us kids set back from the bon fire kind of in the dark shadows. The men would pick which service station they wanted based on which kid they wanted to rape. I remember being on my back on what I think was a picnic table being raped. They men were in line waiting. A boy part was made being put in the coffin, a girl part was made during the rape and I think another kid part was made after the rape. It took me awhile to get the whole memory because each part only held a segment. There were all white men, no black men there. Bodyguards who looked like SS were on the very outer perimeter.

At a different event on a different date or year, they were doing a ritual at the owl. That is were I saw what I thought was a little boy being sacrificed by Kissinger who was in a robe doing all the altar stuff like in church. I felt guilty because I was relieved that the kid picked for the owl altar was not me. That kid never moved so my therapist said he was probably drugged and they fake killed him.

One time they took as out to a desert area that I later believe to be the China Lake area. It was really strange. It was hills, desert area. There was this half basketball court. They had driven us out in a van and we were made to play basketball with another group of kids. We only played for about 10 minutes when they stopped the game, took the other team of about six players and put them in another white van. They drove the other team away with all of us just watching. The van drove to a nearby cliff and then pitched the kids off the cliff to their deaths. They told us those kids were killed because they did not follow the rules. We were terrified. As I related this to my therapist, she asked if I ever lost site of the van and I said yes. The van had gone on a turn and then I saw it again on top of the hill. She asked if I saw the kids being thrown off up close and I said well they were wearing the same colored jerseys, it had to be them. She asked me if they were moving or screaming and I said no. I was really getting mad because she was acting like she did not believe me and I was sure they chunked those kids off the cliff. As we went through it , I realized my therapist was right. They must have had another van out there with dummies dressed in those colored jerseys because she was right, there was not movement or screams. So we were tricked into thinking they killed all of those kids.

I always did everything I was told not because I thought they'd kill me so much as they said if I didn't do it, they'd go after my sister and my little brother. That's why I get kind of mad at my family. I did a lot just to protect my siblings and they don't even believe me.
\


How did you first get involved in this stuff, sorry if you have already told that part of the story and I missed it, I am just trying to understand, did they just kidnap you off the street or what, did you return home to your parents after these events and they had no idea what was happening or what?

My companion's story is very similar to yours but she doesnt know exactly how she came to first be involved in this stuff. She has many, many parts that were created over the years to disassociate herself from the pain we are still working through them all and discover new ones all the time.
User avatar
Percival
 
Posts: 1342
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 7:09 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Percival » Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:30 pm

lightningBugout wrote:
Percival wrote:Several people have mentioned the word 'evidence' and just to be clear and have a record of such here in this thread would anyone mind listing what they feel is actual evidence presented in the Bryant book, that proves the existence of the child-sex ring?


Perc, I find that request pretty tough. The details of the case are very complicated. Which is not to say the evidence is any less striking. I wouldn't know where to begin. And I'm not sure an evidence list can really be successfully isolated from the book. Or at least not without creating a series of hierarchical connection diagrams that would be equally as labor-intensive to comprehend as the book.

If others feel differently, maybe it would make sense to create a new thread in the data dump solely for that purpose. I'm picturing well over a thousand posts to get the basics down.


Oh I understand what youre saying, I just hoped we could all come up with a list of actual evidence that points to and proves these events happened aside from the actual witness testimonies that fill Bryants and DeCamps books. The talk of flight manifests is certainly a step in the right direction as that would be smoking gun type material.

Let me clarify my interest in such. I have a law degree as well as working press credentials although I have never been a member of any state bar I went to law school for the sole purpose of handling the internal legal affairs of a family business that my family has owned and operated for over 120 years. I would, however, consider taking the bar exam in any jurisdiction where this case could be tried, law suits filed and subpoenas issued, but I would first need to see exactly what real concrete evidence exists in this case aside from simply victim/witness testimony because such evidence is highly circumstantial and wouldnt really get the case itself off the ground. What I would need is actuall photographs, video/audio tapes, DNA evidence etc, so the question is do any such things like that even exist because I have never seen such in all my years of researching the case. Also, if there are any other practicing attornies on this forum who would be interested in collaborating and working together to see if actual justice could be brought to these victims in the way of civil lawsuits I would be interested in hearing from you and discussing ideas.



***nothing in the above post is intended to be taken as legal advice or establish any sort of attorney-client priviledge. consider it friendly chat only.
User avatar
Percival
 
Posts: 1342
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 7:09 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Col. Quisp » Wed Oct 28, 2009 12:31 am

I am a practicing attorney and would be interested in collaborating on this
User avatar
Col. Quisp
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:43 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 8bitagent » Wed Oct 28, 2009 3:17 am

I think the fact you haven't had bellhops, hotel clerks, politicians, limo drivers, flight attendents, law enforcement, etc. substantiating or speaking out on places/times/date and especially high level people involved in this whole thing to me doesn't show a "hoax"...but shows how well hidden this was. That or this level of black mail is taken to the grave.

What does everyone think of Rusty Nelson? He finally came out of hiding last year to do a couple of interviews that ended up on youtube. He stands by his story to this day.

I personally feel that Franklin and 9/11 are the two most important modern America stories and events that are important to not just understand but get to the bottom of.

Given Bryant negates the "Woo"ier stuff and other things that may have scared people from Decamps book, one would think it would have more traction

But why is Bryant relegated to the ghetto of conspiracy radio talk, instead of being on freaking Air America, Democracy Now, hell NPR?

Given the murky waters surrounding Cathy Obrien/Transformation,
Bryce, Wilder(not to invalidate what they claim, just there seems to be a lot of controversy even within the conspiracy movement) etc. I can understand why many progressive radio and even "fringe" radio has a hard time getting into this subject for discussion.

Now you'd think pissed off friends of Caridori, Colby, etc, or just any high level person of common decency would spill the beans on *something*
Hell didnt the Spence story make the front page news and NBC with Tom Brokaw?

Sadly, like 9/11(Muslims!), JFK(lone nut), etc. Franklin coverup has been forever stamped it a "hoax"
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12098
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby lightningBugout » Wed Oct 28, 2009 3:55 am

Oh I understand what youre saying, I just hoped we could all come up with a list of actual evidence that points to and proves these events happened aside from the actual witness testimonies that fill Bryants and DeCamps books.


Can you clarify something, if you don't mind -- have you read (completed) the book? Because this characterization is incorrect in my opinion. Nick uses a great deal of victim interview material but he does so in a way that is fundamentally legalistic. And I don't think it fills the book.

I appreciate your interest in a legal case but just want to make clear -- if you have yet to read the book, I think you will be pleasantly blown away. It is about as close to a slam-dunk as it could be. That said, I'm looking forward to finding its weaknesses because it will prepare myself and others to defend it carefully, anticipating the angle critics (and worse) will try to use against it.
"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 Free » Wed Oct 28, 2009 9:33 am

LBO wrote:

Can you clarify something, if you don't mind -- have you read (completed) the book? Because this characterization is incorrect in my opinion. Nick uses a great deal of victim interview material but he does so in a way that is fundamentally legalistic. And I don't think it fills the book.

I appreciate your interest in a legal case but just want to make clear -- if you have yet to read the book, I think you will be pleasantly blown away. It is about as close to a slam-dunk as it could be. That said, I'm looking forward to finding its weaknesses because it will prepare myself and others to defend it carefully, anticipating the angle critics (and worse) will try to use against it.


Thanks for this. I was thinking the same thing.

I don't think people should voice opinions until they have at least read a few chapters of the Franklin Scandal. This book has a completely different tone than any "conspiracy" literature (if we keep using this term we're sunk) we've seen in the past. Everything Bryant covers rests firmly on evidence.

Because of the subject matter, it's triggering for survivors, who may have to read it slowly, in small bits, but I think The Franklin Scandal would satisfy any journalist's need for fact based sources.
User avatar
Free
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 3:31 pm
Location: USA
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Wombaticus Rex » Wed Oct 28, 2009 9:33 am

It's worth noting, in terms of the turn this thread has taken, and the other one which was locked, that once this book gains media traction, most of the critics dismissing it will have never read it.

Perhaps RI is not the forum for actual "e-activism" organization, and perhaps it's not our "job" to be defending and promoting Bryant's work, but working backwards to prepare for a backlash does make a lot of strategic sense...assuming the goal is promoting this to a broader audience and making some noise about it's contents.
User avatar
Wombaticus Rex
 
Posts: 10313
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Vermontistan
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Jeff » Wed Oct 28, 2009 9:55 am

Wombaticus Rex wrote:working backwards to prepare for a backlash does make a lot of strategic sense...assuming the goal is promoting this to a broader audience and making some noise about it's contents.


That makes sense to me as well. I locked the other thread because, regardless of intention, it looked like it was about to become an energy sink, rebutting the false premise that Bryant's work is little more than a compendium of victim statements.

On the other hand, I don't think much is served by cheerleading; maybe even less than nothing. We should read this book as critically as we should read every book. Only by answering our own questions can we hope to address the incredulities of others.
User avatar
Jeff
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11133
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2000 8:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Free » Wed Oct 28, 2009 9:58 am

Whoops. Just read the other thread, the one that was locked.

I see where you're coming from Wombaticus, and it's a valid point.

But, in the context of this relatively small group, working with limited time and resources, I would see getting out there to get this book some press as the top priority right now.

And Percival, I'd like to make a friendly suggestion- if you haven't already, please get the book and read it. Then, I'll bet you'll then be able to think of some media contacts who would be willing to consider it.

I'm spending time this week and next, to contact media. The way The Franklin Scandal is written and documented gives it a high credibility quotient.

Then, (if we have the legal power), would be the time to prepare for filing a lawsuit. (BTW Thanks for suggesting it and offering to dedicate your time.)
User avatar
Free
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 3:31 pm
Location: USA
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Wombaticus Rex » Wed Oct 28, 2009 9:59 am

^^I appreciate the clarification. Wasn't too upset either way...there are a lot of other threads here that are still open, after all.
User avatar
Wombaticus Rex
 
Posts: 10313
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Vermontistan
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Percival » Wed Oct 28, 2009 12:15 pm

Wombaticus Rex wrote:It's worth noting, in terms of the turn this thread has taken, and the other one which was locked, that once this book gains media traction, most of the critics dismissing it will have never read it.

Perhaps RI is not the forum for actual "e-activism" organization, and perhaps it's not our "job" to be defending and promoting Bryant's work, but working backwards to prepare for a backlash does make a lot of strategic sense...assuming the goal is promoting this to a broader audience and making some noise about it's contents.


I agree but PW doesnt so I guess thats how it goes. I am not happy this morning, but its Jeff's forum fuck it. I will take my discussion elsewhere.

I simply thought a discussion about the whole carefully crafted hoax thing was needed and from the response I have in PMs this morning a lot of people wanted to talk about it but one person didnt like it and they got their way, as usual.

Also the thread itself wasnt an energy sink, my intentions were simply to take the carefully crated hoax verdict head on and see whats there so we could all dismantle it and set it aside once and for all. The energy sink was created by ONE POSTER and instead of warning that poster to behave themselves the whole thread got shut down, which is akin to feeding a screaming child candy.

Carry on, there are plenty of other places I can have this discussion without being attacked and having the thread closed. I am interested in real hard hitting investigative journalism that requires taking a look at both sides, ARGUING to the EXTREME in favor of each side then sitting back and taking a closer look at what you came up with. This pussyfoot shit around here lately where we all have to watch what we say for fear we might offend is just ridiculous and there is nothing rigorous at all about it. If you want to ARM YOURSELF to fight the critics who will soon be rearing their heads and showing their ugly faces and chanting 'carefully crafted hoax' then you need to look closer at that side of the argument and lay it all out there for them to see and show them how such a conclusion is flawed.

I didnt want to hijack this thread because it is something else entirely so I started another, one poster took issue and bam, it was closed. That poster will from here on out be ignored and not rewarded for childish behavior by this member.

None of this has anything to do with Bryant's work and I wasnt suggesting his research was flawed I simply wanted to look more closely at how that GJ came to the conclusion that it was a carefully crafted hoax and I wanted to use our RI collaborative research efforts to lay that case out there for all to see.
User avatar
Percival
 
Posts: 1342
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 7:09 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby monster » Wed Oct 28, 2009 1:32 pm

Awesome, sounds like we're all going to read this book and discuss, kinda like the RI Book Club that I've hoped would materialize.

I will order it today.
"I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline."
User avatar
monster
 
Posts: 1712
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 4:55 pm
Location: Everywhere
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby bks » Wed Oct 28, 2009 1:54 pm

Percival wrote:

I am interested in real hard hitting investigative journalism that requires taking a look at both sides, ARGUING to the EXTREME in favor of each side then sitting back and taking a closer look at what you came up with. This pussyfoot shit around here lately where we all have to watch what we say for fear we might offend is just ridiculous and there is nothing rigorous at all about it. If you want to ARM YOURSELF to fight the critics who will soon be rearing their heads and showing their ugly faces and chanting 'carefully crafted hoax' then you need to look closer at that side of the argument and lay it all out there for them to see and show them how such a conclusion is flawed.


Do it here, Percival. That's what this thread is for. Seems to have Jeff's blessing. Just ignore the bullshit.

None of this has anything to do with Bryant's work and I wasnt suggesting his research was flawed I simply wanted to look more closely at how that GJ came to the conclusion that it was a carefully crafted hoax and I wanted to use our RI collaborative research efforts to lay that case out there for all to see.


Percival, Bryant spends a ton of ink on this. Bryant very clearly makes the case for investigative misconduct on the part of Samuel Van Pelt, and he says he believes the grand jurors were "most likely good citizens" overcome by the four-month process in which they heard truth, lies, irrelevancies and outright absurdities hurled at them. (p. 269).

Van Pelt, for instance, knew that the phantom phone call between Boner and Owen (the one in which Boner and Owen supposedly concocted the whole imaginary story) could not have taken place as Boner contended, because Van Pelt was in possession of a review of Caradori's company's phone records during the time in question. Van Pelt "never questioned Boner about his veracity concerning the call". (p. 271)

The call is obviously bullshit, as records show that no call was placed to or from the York facility where Owen was being held, to or from Caradori's office. So, too is the story of Boner's supposed hashing out of the story with Danny King later at the Residence Inn bar bullshit (The Residence Inn didn't have a bar). If there's no call, then Owen couldn't have been the source of the hoax as described by Boner.

Most damning, to me, was the grand jury's complete failure to interview employees from the charter plane companies King used. "The grand jury had access to scores and scores of Larry King's flight receipts, as accumulated by both the (Franklin) Committee and the feds, "and the overwhelming majority of them did not have accompanying FAA_mandated passenger manifests."

The GJ also had the names of pilots who flew the flights. Why no subpoenas? This is of course inexcusable, and demonstrates most clearly the fraud that was the GJ investigation.

There are plenty of other examples of the GJ lacking in thoroughness and the most basic due diligence in Bryant's book.
bks
 
Posts: 1088
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 2:44 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to The Franklin Scandal

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest