compared2what? wrote:Jeff wrote:Quite apart from the controversies regarding, or perhaps imputed to, desertfae, I think this paragraph contains insights worth considering. Too many to bold:Virginia McCullough wrote:
Pg. 11 fascinated me because of the discussion between Penguin, Percival and Nathan 28 re the reality of the Promis software. Certainly Danny Casolaro became involved in "The Octopus" because of Bill and Nancy Hamilton and the Inslaw case. Behind the introduction of Danny to the Hamiltons was Jeffrey Steinberg of the LaRouche origanization. Therefore the reality of the fabled Promis software and whether or not it was/is truly "the Cadillac" of all software iwas at the core of his investigation, at least it was in its infancy. But like all good investigations, the center of the investigation changes with time and the information obtained. So it did with Danny. I know this because in the months before his murder I often talked to him three or four times a day, evidenced by both his and my phone records in my possession. So the discussion on page 11 clearly demonstrates that over time Inslaw was not everything that was being hyped so intensely in the media and promoted by Michael Riconosciuto in the later part of 1990 and throughout 1991. Most scientists in Silicon Valley the Cobol-based Promis software is old and slow...by today's standards it is a dinosaur. It was Michael Riconosciuto's allegations that turned Promis into the super software of legend. During the last several weeks of Danny's life his attention had clearly shifted to the gold transfers conveyed by various intelligence operatives as so well detailed by Unsolved Mysteries reporter Don Devereaux. The two Unsolved Mysteries programs covering Danny's killing and the misplaced hit intended for Don Devereaux following the Casolaro airing clearly demonstrates the danger in delving into government/mob secrets .
For me anyway, this makes better sense of Promis and Riconosciuto and places Casolaro's murder in clearer context.
Jeff, this woman may have accidentally written a very manipulative email just coincidentally. But I don't think so. The above paragraph is the spoonful of sugar. The one below:What I see now is the same manipulation of the Alvarez executions, several years after the fact, by the same brilliant individual Michael Riconosciuto. The story that Desert Fae is centering on and conveying to Nathan Baca and to law enforcement is the one promoted by Michael; i.e. the reason that Fred Alvarez was killed is because he was going to expose the Wackenhut/Cabazon Joint Venture and the arms manufacturing and sales that would be generated had that venture been successful. To be totally fair Desert Fae is also now saying that Robert Booth Nichols and his access to CIA funds might have been a motive for murder. In my opinion, based on my knowledge, documents and other books written about the Alvarez murders, there was a far greater, long term monetary incentive for the Alvarez executions. And that motive was control of land and the income it would bring to support our dirty little wars around the globe. I am currently working on a detailed article about this issue but it probably will not be post until next week. In any case, I have seen no proof, aside from Michael's allegations, that Promis was either developed and/or altered on the Cabazon reservation or that Dr. Gerald Bull's work product from Valleyfield ended up at the Cabazon Resevation, as also alleged by Michael.
...is way, way out of bounds. And gives the appearance of saying something when it's saying nothing. For example: If you free yourself from the flow of compelling, self-assured words for long enough to grasp its meaning of that bolded section, you'll see that first of all she's imputing to Rachel a kind of power to run the investigation that irrational in real-world terms and requires explanation if the charge is going to be made. I mean, the woman isn't herself a member of law enforcement, afaik. Further, and still worse her one and only criticism of this woman is fully self-contradictory. It more or less says: "I assert without proof that Desert Fae is carrying water for Michael Riconosciuto because as I also assert without proof she's been telling the same story he tells. Although to be fair, she actually tells exactly the story I think is correct too."
Rachel was posting about the gold smuggling as central when she was here last. Which was not that recently. Further, as VM herself says, investigations evolve. There may be a reason for her antagonism that justifies this degree of badjacketing based on vague correlation of behavior for which we only have VM's word. But if there is, she's not even hinting at it. She's just doing a very good job at making it look like actions are suspect that are in fact quite ordinary and no different from those of any other person who's honestly trying to get information about a crime out there under difficult circumstances -- ie, when it's tightly held for both legal reasons and reasons of personal safety.
Also that "I base my authority on my documents and knowledge" thing, however she phrased it exactly: Come on. That's totally B-movie, and not how investigation actually works. She's talking to us as if we were fools.
I don't trust it. It's pure malice, and for no apparent reason.
Something stinks for sure, I dont know what or who yet.
