Louis M. Reigel, III
Assistant Director, FBI Cyber Division
Louis M. Reigel, III
FBI Cyber Chief's patriotism questioned
by Salvador Astucia
Sep. 11, 2005
(updated Sep. 14, 2005)
Why did Reigel harass someone who discovered a possible assassination plot against President George W. Bush?
Why did Reigel lie to United States Senator Barbara Mikulski about a forged death threat email sent to the FBI?
Why is Reigel protecting the person who sent the death threat email?
The name Louis M. Reigel, III is not widely known, but my research indicates that Mr. Reigel is an individual with vast influence in the FBI's propaganda machinery. As Assistant Director in charge of the FBI's Cyber Division, Mr. Reigel is probably one of the most influential propagandists in the world today. My research also reveals that Mr. Reigel committed perjury on May 9, 2005 when he sent a letter containing false information about a forged death threat email to United States Senator Barbara Mikulski of Maryland. Senator Mikulski had made an inquiry with the FBI at the behest of one her constituents whose name was forged on a death threat email and sent to an FBI office. The constituent in question is myself, Salvador Astucia. The person/entity who sent the email is Gibson Vendettuoli; however, FBI agent Tod Muollo (Baltimore office) advised me that Mr. Vendettuoli's real name is Bud Gibson. Mr. Vendettuoli has publicly confessed to sending the forged death threat email. (See confessions) Mr. Vendettuoli also confessed to FBI agents, according to Mr. Reigel, but Mr. Vendettuoli denies his real name is Bud Gibson. Consequently, for the purpose of consistency, I shall refer to the confessed sender of the forged death threat email as Gibson Vendettuoli throughout the remainder of this article.
On Feb. 9, 2005, two FBI agents came to my home in the state of Maryland because the FBI had received an email death threat with my name forged on it. According to the agents, the death threat was sent on Feb. 6, 2005. For a full description of the events, read the following article.
"Maryland Politicians Express Bipartisan Criticism of Justice Department and FBI"
(NOTE: In the
article below, I refer to myself as John Doe.)
As the article explains, I sent letters to my representatives in the ensuing weeks after my visit from the FBI. I sent one letter to Maryland Senator Barbara Mikulski who in turn made an inquiry with the FBI at my behest. The following is a transcript of a letter, dated May 9, 2005, from FBI Cyber Chief Louis Reigel in response to Senator Mikulski's inquiry (minor edits are denoted with brackets):
The underlying message in Mr. Reigel's letter is unsettling, not only to me, but certainly to FBI agents and other employees of the bureau. Basically Mr. Reigel was saying that provided one is sufficiently annoyed, it is okay to (a) commit email forgery, and (b) send a threat of violence to the FBI. I think an appropriate name for this new FBI jingle is "Reigel's Law." It's right up there with Murphy's Law, but with more edge.
Notwithstanding the depravity of Reigel's Law, two sentences in Mr. Reigel's letter are clearly false, which means Mr. Reigel gave perjured testimony to a United States Senator. Mr. Reigel wrote: "The FBI's investigation of the matter in question determined that Mr. [Astucia] was espousing certain views in an online chat room [The Education Forum], which others found to be offensive. As a result, another individual [Gibson Vendettuoli] from the chat room retaliated by emailing to the FBI various hate threats, which were purported to be from Mr. [Astucia]."
Mr. Reigel's quoted remarks make two points which are false. First, Mr. Reigel claims the views I espoused on the Education were "offensive," extreme enough to cause someone to take an extraordinary action to silence me. Mr. Reigel's description creates the false impression that my comments were wildly extreme, completely inappropriate for the Education Forum, which resulted in people being deeply offended. Second, Mr. Reigel indicates that Gibson Vendettuoli--the individual who sent a forged death threat email to the FBI--was deeply offended by comments I made on the Education Forum. I deny both of these assertions. Mr. Vendettuoli's primary objective has consistently been to reveal my true identity. Mr. Vendettuoli made few tangible public comments regarding specific views which I held or expressed on the Education Forum. In fact, on Jan. 26, 2005, Mr. Vendettuoli publicly complimented me. "I like the work you've done," Mr. Vendettuoli said, "but you must use your real name here." (Full message shown here.) As time passed, Mr. Vendettuoli's comments began to shift, often contradicting himself, at one point making a light-hearted joke, hardly the action of someone who is truly offended.
Regarding Mr. Reigel's first point that I offended other members of the Education Forum, it is true that some members accused me of being anti-Semitic, mainly because of my online book, Opium Lords: Israel, the Golden Triangle, and the Kennedy Assassination. In particular, a few people seemed slightly offended by my assertion (in the book) that former President Lyndon B. Johnson and his wife were secretly Jewish. While some members complained about this particular assertion, the moderators defended me, specifically regarding President Johnson's ethnicity.
On Feb. 1, 2005, Shanet Clark (male) requested that my account be disabled because my online book, Opium Lords, questioned President Johnson's ethnicity and made other similar assertions, which I admit were unconventional. (Mr. Clark's full message is shown here.) Two other members, Mike Tribe and Tim Gratz, quickly agreed with Mr. Clark, but Forum moderators John Simkin and Andy Walker defended my right to express myself, particularly since the views in question were contained in my online book, and I had not introduced them in the forum in a specific way.
The following are the remarks of moderators John Simkin and Andy Walker to Tim Gratz in response to Mr. Clark's request that my account be disabled because of the contents of my book, Opium Lords, particularly because of statements I made about President Johnson's ethnicity:
The comments made by moderators John Simkin and Andy Walker flatly contradict the written statement that Louis Reigel sent to Senator Barbara Mikulski regarding my conduct on the Education Forum. Again, this is what Mr. Reigel wrote: "The FBI's investigation of the matter in question determined that Mr. [Astucia] was espousing certain views in an online chat room [The Education Forum], which others found to be offensive. As a result, another individual [Gibson Vendettuoli] from the chat room retaliated by emailing to the FBI various hate threats, which were purported to be from Mr. [Astucia]."
In Internet discussion forums, people often challenge the views of others, often in a rude manner, as some members of the Education Forum did with me. But when a discussion group's moderators publicly defend a specific individual's right to state his/her opinions, as moderators John Simkin and Andy Walker did with me, then it is misleading to claim that I was espousing certain views which others found to be offensive, as Mr. Reigel claimed. Bottom line, the forum's moderators did not believe my views were offensive. So why did Mr. Reigel lead a United States senator to believe otherwise?
"Do you think I should ban him from the Forum because he claims that LBJ was secretly Jewish?" Mr. Simkin asked Tim Gratz. "It might be a ridiculous statement, but is it really anti-Semitic? If I began banning people from the forum for making ridiculous statements we would see a sharp drop in membership." (Full message shown here.)
That's quite an endorsement from the moderator; however, there was one instance where Mr. Simkin pulled one of my articles from the forum, claiming it was anti-Semitic. The article was extremely critical of Israel, but I deny that the article was anti-Semitic, meaning that it was critical of all Jews, which the article was not. The article, "Critical Thought on Tsunami," dealt with the earthquake near Sumatra on Dec. 26, 2004 and the ensuing tsunamis. Setting aside the article's content for a moment, it would be completely false to claim that other members found the article offensive, because Mr. Simkin pulled the article immediately, and I doubt that many people read it other than him and Andy Walker; however, Shanet Clark also mentioned it briefly in a rude tirade. (Full message shown here.)
On Jan 31 2005, I received the following unpleasant email from Mr. Simkin, which he also posted publicly in the Education Forum:
I took Mr. Simkin's warning in stride, realizing that the article was controversial. I believed his charge of anti-Semitism was nonsense, but nevertheless, I gave the following diplomatic reply:
Again, if Mr. Reigel was using the tsunami article as an example of how I was espousing certain views "which others found to be offensive," that was a bad example, because only two people, moderator John Simkin and Shanet Clark, seemed offended by it. If the other moderator Andy Walker was offended by the tsunami article, he never stated it publicly (not to my knowledge, anyway) or by private email. In addition, it is worth reiterating the following point. Although Mr. Simkin publicly rebuked me on Jan. 31, 2005 for posting the tsunami article, he and fellow moderator Andy Walker vigorously defended my right to express my views the next day, on Feb. 1. 2005. Again, it is typical for people to disagree with one another on Internet discussion forums, and rudeness and name-calling is often involved. This was all that occurred on the Education Forum, and the moderators generally supported me and refused to disable my account, as Shanet Clark requested, even after John Simkin had publicly rebuked me for posting the tsunami article.
Eventually the moderators restricted my postings a great deal, but they never claimed it was because I espoused views which were offensive to others, as Mr. Reigel told Senator Mikulski. Moderator Andy Walker indicated that the action was taken purely as a security precaution. "Just for the record," Mr. Walker explained on Feb. 2, 2005, "I placed Salvador under moderator supervision because over the last 4 days he has posted from 5 separate IPs. I was concerned that the account was being shared. This has been done to us by a right wing group in the past." (Full message shown here.)
Mr. Walker took the stated action after he and another forum member, Gary Buell, tried to goad me into discussing Hitler and the Holocaust, but I refused on two different occasions on the grounds that the topics were too controversial. Immediately after I refused to discuss the Holocaust for the second time, Gibson Vendettuoli chided me for pushing "racist" "neo-Nazi stuff." (See Footnote.) This is another example of Mr. Vendettuoli's erratic behavior.
It wasn't until Feb. 10, 2005 that John Simkin finally disabled my account completely, and contrary to Mr. Reigel's description of events, Mr. Simkin stated publicly that his action had nothing to do with my postings on the Education Forum. Mr. Simkin indicated that he disabled my account in retaliation for a critical article, on my website, which I had written about the Education Forum. (See article.) The following text is moderator John Simkin's public explanation, on Feb. 10, 2005, of why he disabled my account with the Education Forum:
Mr. Simkin made two important statements in the cited transcript which bare repeating. "He [Salvador Astucia] got very angry a few weeks ago when Gibson [Vendettuoli] revealed the true identity of Salvador Astucia. His research was obviously correct."
Those two sentences confirm what I stated earlier, that Mr. Vendettuoli's primary complaint against me has been my use of a pseudonym, not the views I espoused. It's interesting, however, that Mr. Vendettuoli's messages containing the so-called proof of my true identity have mysteriously disappeared from the Education Forum's website. Apparently someone is engaging in damage control.
Refuting Mr. Reigel's false claim about Gibson Vendettuoli's motive
To recap, we have identified a new FBI policy, known as Reigel's Law. Here it is again:
In addition Reigel's Law, I have presented overwhelming evidence that FBI Assistant Director Louis M. Reigel, III committed one count of perjury by telling Senator Barbara Mikulski (in a letter dated May 9, 2005) that I had espoused views on the Education Forum "which others found to be offensive." As previously stated, Mr. Reigel obviously meant that my remarks caused something beyond normal disagreements which are commonplace within Internet discussion groups. I have demonstrated that this is completely false. Only one individual, Shanet Clark, requested that my account be "unregistered," but only because of the contents in my online book, Opium Lords, not because of anything I stated directly on the Education Forum. Two other members, Mike Tribe and Tim Gratz, quickly agreed with Mr. Clark, but Forum moderators John Simkin and Andy Walker jumped to my defense. A reasonable person would have to conclude that this does not constitute espousing views which many felt were so offensive that they lost their heads and decided to take the law into their own hands, as Mr. Reigel indicated.
Now I wish to address Mr. Reigel's second instance of perjury. In Mr. Reigel's letter to Senator Mikulski he stated that "as a result" of the offensive views which I espoused on the Education Forum, "another individual [Gibson Vendettuoli] from the chat room retaliated by emailing to the FBI various hate threats, which were purported to be from Mr. [Astucia]." It is true that an individual/entity known as Gibson Vendettuoli confessed to forging my name on a death threat email which he sent to the FBI, but it is false to claim that Mr. Vendettuoli was offended by comments I made on the Education Forum. Based on public statements made by Mr. Vendettuoli and John Simkin, Mr. Vendettuoli became obsessed with revealing my true identity. In fact, he made conflicting public statements about my research, so it is improper to conclude that he was offended by views I espoused. On Jan. 26, 2005, Mr. Vendettuoli publicly complimented me. "I like the work you've done," Mr. Vendettuoli said, "but you must use your real name here." (Full message shown here.)
Seven days later, on Feb. 2, 2005, Mr. Vendettuoli contradicted himself when he publicly clarified Shanet Clark's reason for wanting my accounted disabled. "His complaint is about your unconventional so-called 'neo-Nazi' views, which very few people share," Mr. Vendettuoli explained. "Technically, they are out of line, whether on this forum or not. I'm not saying unpopular views should be grounds for banning people, but this won't become a playground for Holocaust revisionists either. Keep that off the forum, please." (Full message shown here.)
It should be noted that when Mr. Vendettuoli issued the warning, on Feb. 2, 2005, not to discuss the Holocaust, I had already refused twice to discuss the Holocaust on the previous day, Feb. 1, 2005. Mr. Vendettuoli essentially invented an offense that I had not committed, then warned me not to commit it. This only drives home the fact that Mr. Reigel's written statement to Senator Mikulski was false, and therefore an act of perjury. Mr. Vendettuoli was not offended by my views, as Mr. Reigel claims. At least if Vendettuoli was truly offended, it is impossible to make that determination based on his conflicting comments. On one hand, Mr. Vendettuoli said he liked my work, then he warned me not discuss something which I had already refused to discuss a day earlier. Yes, Mr. Vendettuoli confessed to sending the email, but Mr. Vendettuoli's motivation was fabricated by Mr. Reigel. Mr. Reigel insinuated that I was somehow to blame for Mr. Vendettuoli's criminal behavior. All I did was express my findings and theories in a discussion forum that deals with highly controversial issues.
In addition, Mr. Vendettuoli made a light-hearted remarked on Feb. 2, 2005, in a discussion thread I started, "The Assassins, Lucien Sarti et al (Chiappe & Angeletti)." In this thread I identified the names of the three assassins I believe killed President Kennedy. Based on my research, I have concluded that the three assassins were Lucien Sarti (fired the head shot which killed JFK), François Chiappe, and Jean-Paul Angeletti; all Corsicans.
John Geraghty asked:
"Wasn't it discovered that one of them was dead at the time of the
message shown here.)
"No," Mr. Vendettuoli replied, "but someone said they were in the army or something. One of the 'assassins' famously said, 'All I know of Dallas is the show on TV'." (Full message shown here.)
(NOTE: The answer to John Geraghty's question is No. None of the three named assassins--Sarti, Chiappe, and Angeletti--were dead at the time of JFK's assassination. Their drug smuggling activities during the Nixon administration were documented in a 1973 book, Contrabandista!, by Evert Clark and Nicholas Horrock.)
On Feb. 2, 2005, Mr. Vendettuoli made some unusual remarks about neo-Nazis and the Holocaust. He accused me of pushing those beliefs on people immediately after I refused to discuss either topic. I never discussed the Holocaust or Hitler on the Education Forum. Let me repeat that again in case it wasn't clear the first time. I NEVER discussed the Holocaust or Hitler on the Education Forum. Nevertheless, Mr. Vendettuoli made the following remarks after my second refusal to discuss either topic: "I certainly didn't agree with your views at first, though you may have something on the Lennon case. But this is absolutely outlandish," Mr. Vendettuoli continued. "I am not by any means pro-Semitic, but I am not by any means anti-Semitic either. I feel, if you offend enough people, you should be removed. And you've done that much. I agree with some of your theories, but this blatant neo-Nazi stuff is just too much, be it on this forum or elsewhere; it's still the same racist position that offends people. I know Shanet would agree."
Obviously Shanet would agree. He wanted my account disabled completely. And Mr. Vendettuoli's initial statement is factually incorrect. Allow me to repeat his statement: "I certainly didn't agree with your views at first, though you may have something on the Lennon case." If you check the record, you will observe that Mr. Vendettuoli's first public comment to me, on Jan. 26, 2005, was to compliment me on my research related to John Lennon's murder. At that time, Mr. Vendettuoli's only complaint against me was the use of a pseudonym. "I like the work you've done," Mr. Vendettuoli said, "but you must use your real name here." (Full message shown here.)
On Feb. 4, 2005, I received a lengthy private email from Mr. Vendettuoli. He claimed to possess embarrassing information (silly stuff related to my true identity) which he would reveal to the public unless I would "cease talking about any parts of the JFK theory that involve Zionism." (See full text of email with expanded headers.)
"Keep it up," I replied. The Forum's actions, I advised, "are generating more traffic to my website which result in more book sales. I'm crying myself to the bank."
This was apparently the last straw for Mr. Vendettuoli. Two days later, on Feb. 6, 2005, he forged my name on a death threat email and sent it to the FBI. On Feb. 9, 2005, two FBI agents came to my house and questioned me extensively about the email.
Mr. Vendettuoli's ever-shifting comments combined with his light-hearted remarks further weaken Mr. Reigel's claim that Mr. Vendettuoli sent a forged death threat email to the FBI because he was offended by views I espoused on the Education Forum. First, Mr. Vendettuoli complimented me on my research, then he warned me not talk about the Holocaust when I had not mentioned the topic at all except to refuse to discuss it, then he made a light-hearted joke about President Kennedy's true killers, then he rebuked me for pushing "neo-Nazi stuff" after my second refusal to discuss the Holocaust. Finally, when all else had failed, Mr. Vendettuoli sent me a private email warning me not to discuss Zionist involvement in JFK's assassination. This was the first serious remark Mr. Vendettuoli ever made to me about JFK's assassination. In addition, he made constant threats to reveal my true identity to the public. These were hardly the actions of someone who was truly offended by something. Mr. Vendettuoli was obviously playing mind games, or he's mentally unbalanced. In either case, my comments had nothing to do with his decision to send a forged death threat email to the FBI, contrary to Mr. Reigel's description of events to Senator Mikulski.
After reviewing Mr. Reigel's letter to Senator Mikulski and comparing it to messages exchanged on the Education Forum, it's quite obvious that the FBI's investigation of Gibson Vendettuoli was extremely lax, assuming there was an investigation at all, and assuming the death threat email was not a complete hoax perpetrated by the FBI to intimidate an outspoken political writer. But if we accept that Gibson Vendettuoli is a real person, and a genuine teenager, it seems like an FBI agent simply asked Mr. Vendettuoli a few questions, the youngster told a pack of lies and the agent accepted the story at face value without corroborating any facts. Then Mr. Reigel endorsed this pack of lies by writing a letter containing false and misleading information which he sent it to Senator Mikulski after the senator made an inquiry at my behest.
What was Reigel's true motivation for committing perjury?
The fact that the FBI has identified Gibson Vendettuoli as an individual who sent a forged death threat email to the FBI (which is close to an act of terrorism by most people's definition) and nothing is being done about it is indeed an extraordinary situation. One has to wonder why the Patriot Act was passed in the first place. Also, why does the FBI want even more powers added to the Patriot Act when they're not using the authority they already have in the Vendettuoli case?
Mr. Reigel’s letter raises a perplexing legal question. By not prosecuting Mr. Vendettuoli, an individual who reportedly confessed to sending a forged death threat email to the FBI, are high-level officials within the Justice Department and the FBI guilty of harboring a terrorist? When Mr. Reigel sent his false and misleading letter to Senator Mikulski, not only did he commit two counts of perjury, wasn't he harboring a terrorist as well? Section 803 of the Patriot Act "makes it a crime to harbor a person while knowing or having reason to believe the person has committed or is about to commit an act of terrorism." It's ironic that the Justice Department and the FBI have violated the very law they forced on the American public over the objections of countless critics.
But setting aside charges of perjury and harboring a terrorist, a bigger question is Why? Why did Mr. Reigel commit perjury in the first place? Why did he lie to Senator Barbara Mikulski about a forged death threat email sent to the FBI? Why is Mr. Reigel protecting Gibson Vendettuoli, the person who sent the forged death threat email? Why did Mr. Reigel allow the FBI to conduct such a lax investigation of Mr. Vendettuoli's crime?
The answer to these questions appears to center around the tsunami article which I previously mentioned. The tsunami piece was the only article which was pulled from their Education Forum purely because of its content. In fact, it was the only article they pulled PERIOD! I posted several controversial articles on the Education Forum, but the tsunami article was the only one to be pulled outright from the discussion board. Mr. Simkin said it was anti-Semitic, but clearly it was not. In fact, the tsunami article was quite fact-driven. It included a substantial amount of scientific data from the United States Geological Survey, a federal agency which, in their words, is "dedicated to the timely, relevant, and impartial study of the landscape, our natural resources, and the natural hazards that threaten us." The article dovetailed Arab assertions that the United States had conducted nuclear tests off the coast of Sumatra which, in turn, set off the earthquake on Dec. 26, 2004 and the ensuing tsunamis. I concluded, however, that nuclear weapons had been used near Sumatra by Israel, not the United States.
Many people believe the Arab charge that the "tsunami" was caused by nuclear testing is ridiculous, but history indicates otherwise. Most people apparently believe that a nuclear explosion cannot set off an earthquake. This is absolutely incorrect. It has been documented that nuclear explosions have set off earthquakes in the past. This fact was revealed in a 1992 book, Teller's War: The Top-Secret Story Behind the Star Wars Deception, by William J. Broad, a man with impeccable credentials. Besides authoring several books, Mr. Broad writes about science for The New York Times and has twice shared the Pulitzer Prize with colleagues there. According to Mr. Broad, the United States government conducted an underground nuclear test in Alaska, on November 6, 1971, which set off 22 minor earthquakes. The location of the test was "some 1,400 miles west-southwest of Anchorage in the Aleutian Islands" on the "uninhabited Island of Amchitka," according to Mr. Broad. (Ref. Teller's War, page 54) The nuclear test was conducted under the direction of physicist Edward Teller and his team of scientists at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory located near Berkley, California. The following excerpts from Teller's War, by William Broader, describe how 22 earthquakes were set off by one underground nuclear test in Alaska:
(Excerpts from Teller's War, by William Broad)
(NOTE: William Broad's book, Teller's War, also contains compelling information about the Strategic Defense Initiative, SDI, which establishes a motive for Edward Teller and the antimissile proponents to want to assassinate John Lennon. See article for more information.)
Most Americans are unaware that nuclear explosions have caused real earthquakes in the past. Consequently, to accuse the United States or Israel of causing the catastrophic event known as "tsunami" seems unbelievable to most Americans. But in reality the United States has the capability of creating earthquakes through detonation of nuclear bombs, and has done so in the past. It should be noted, in the 1971 Alaskan nuclear test, that the test was conducted a mile below the earth's surface and scientists were under heavy political pressure not to set off earthquakes. Even under such conditions, the nuclear explosion set off 22 minor earthquakes. One can only imagine the level of destruction that could be created if scientists made it their objective to set off a large earthquake. My tsunami article ("Critical Thought on Tsunami") merely expanded on that capability.
In writing the article, I used information provided by the US Geological Survey. Viewing their maps, it quickly became apparent that a significant number of after large aftershocks occurred in the Andaman Sea, a body of water that provides entry to the opium-rich Golden Triangle, a mountain range that stretches across Burma, Thailand and Laos. The Golden Triangle has historically been a major source of opium used by international drug cartels for heroin production. In fact, the US Geological Survey's earthquake data revealed about ONE HUNDRED (100) large aftershocks occurred in the Andaman Sea, north of the epicenter, ranging in magnitudes of 4.0 to 7.9 on the Richter Scale. In my tsunami article, I observed that the American news media had been withholding this important scientific information from the public. The big question was why?
I presented a possible answer, but stated repeatedly that my answer was merely a theory or hypothesis. In addition, the mainstay of tsunami article was to protect President George W. Bush from harm. When I wrote the article in January 11, 2005, I concluded that there was a strong possibility that a plot was in the works to assassinate President Bush and through publication of the article on my personal website, I was taking steps to protect the President from harm. "There is a very real possibility," I wrote in mid-January 2005, "that the Israeli government, headed by Ariel Sharon, is planning to assassinate President George W. Bush sometime between now and January 30, 2005, when elections are scheduled in Iraq."
The article drew a vivid connection between the earthquake near Sumatra and a possible plot to assassinate the president. "Zionists may be hiring international drug traffickers to provide hit men to do the deed," I explained. "And the assassins' pay, of course, would be the vast opium supply in the Golden Triangle for the production and illicit sale of heroin. Detonating nuclear bombs in the Andaman Sea is a way of destabilizing the governments of Burma, Thailand, and Laos--the countries that comprise the opium-rich Golden Triangle. In the process, the Israelis killed close to 100,000 Muslims (their blood enemies) in the Sumatra Island."
I further explained
why foreign assassins would be hired as opposed to organized crime hit men in
the United States. "The reason foreign assassins would be used," I
explained, "is because few American assassins would dare kill a sitting
president for any price. It is a widely held belief that members of
organized crime in America regard themselves as patriotic, often doing dirty
work at the best of the official government. Therefore, killing the leader
of their host country would be unthinkable for any reason, regardless of the
president. Such a deed would be regarded as a cowardly act of treason for
mobsters and the general public alike. In addition, domestic assassins would
correctly view such an assignment as a suicide mission because they would
inevitably be silenced or forced to flee the country at some point to escape
death. This is why foreign assassins are needed. They're flown in, they do
the deed, they're flown out. No commitments, no reprisals."
I pointed out that the theory I was presenting about the alleged earthquake near Sumatra and a possible assassination plot against President Bush was consistent with research I had already done related to President Kennedy's assassination. "If Israel carries out the assassination of President Bush," I wrote, "the assassins will likely be foreign born elite members of an international heroin cartel, a similar group which I believe assassinated President Kennedy (see my book, Opium Lords, online). They will be mercenaries acting at the behest of Israel. Their payment will be an unlimited opium supply harvested from the Golden Triangle. The so-called 'disaster' in Sumatra and South Asia has created anarchy in the affected regions, making it easy for drug traffickers to seize control of opium harvests in the coveted Golden Triangle. If a clandestine nuclear attack has in fact occurred, this may be the rationale behind it."
The full tsunami article can be viewed at the following URL:
"Critical Thought on
Keep in mind, the Feds came knocking on my door nine days after moderator John Simkin pulled the tsunami article from the Education Forum. (NOTE: Simkin pulled the article on Jan. 31, 2005; FBI agents came to my house on Feb. 9, 2005.) Only six days had passed between the time Mr. Simkin pulled the article and Gibson Vendettuoli forged my name on a death threat email which he sent to the FBI. Perhaps this was coincidence, but it also could have been an angry reaction to a foiled assassination plot. One would think Mr. Reigel would be more grateful to someone who was concerned about the safety of the chief executive of the United States. Protecting the security of the United States may be Mr. Reigel's sworn duty, but it certainly does not appear to be his true agenda.
Postscript to Tsunami article - Gaza pullout, additional motive for assassination
the time I wrote the tsunami article, I thought that Zionist fanatics were angry with
President Bush solely because they
feared he might begin bringing US troops home from Iraq. Since then, Prime
Minister Sharon's Israeli government has forced Jewish settlers to leave
their homes in Gaza, a move that was backed by the Bush Administration, a move that many
Israelis would certainly commit murder to prevent from occurring. Many of
the Gaza settlers were so angry that they threw acid on the Israeli soldiers
sent by Sharon to clear the illegal settlements. President Bush kept a low
profile throughout the ordeal, but it is clear that his administration was
the lightening rod behind the withdrawal of Gaza, an action that was planned
for months in advance. I did not mention the Gaza pullout in the tsunami
article, but it certainly provides an additional motive for fanatic Israelis
to want to assassinate George Bush. And both motives follow a common thread:
Eretz Yisrael, the land God promised the Jews in the Old Testament. In
Genesis 15:18, the Lord promised Abram He would give the Jews land from "the
river of Egypt as far as the great river, the river Euphrates." Obviously
this includes a large piece of Iraq. Obviously all Jews do not support this
doctrine, but unfortunately, America's foreign policy--like Israel's--is
driven, to a large degree, by Old Testament religious fanaticism.
What is Reigel's true agenda?
With all the information I have provided about real nuclear tests setting off real earthquakes, a reasonable person must admit that the central theme of my tsunami article was to protect the life of President George W. Bush. Given that, why would the FBI essentially storm my house shortly after I posted the article? (Two agents in one car blocked my driveway so I could not leave by car, then they frisked me for weapons. I gave no resistance.) This raises red flags on two counts. First, it indicates that my tsunami article may have thwarted a high-level plot to assassinate President Bush, as previously mentioned. Second, it indicates that people within the FBI were probably involved. Mr. Reigel's letter to Senator Mikulski raises a third red flag. Because of Mr. Reigel's perjured written testimony to Senator Mikulski, he should be viewed as a prime suspect in a plot to assassinate President George Bush. Of course this does not mean that Mr. Reigel is absolutely guilty, or that a plot to assassinate President Bush was actually in place. But I believe I have established probable cause for concern. Consequently, Mr. Reigel should be arrested and tried for his alleged offenses. He should be given an opportunity to explain the misleading statements in the letter he sent to Senator Mikulski. With a good lawyer, Mr. Reigel may be able to escape conviction of perjury, but only technical legalistic arguments could acquit him, in my opinion. But the question remains, why did Mr. Reigel protect Gibson Vendettuoli, the person who forged my name on a death threat email which was sent to the FBI. This triggered an aggressive response by the FBI against me, a person who tried to save the life of a sitting president. And Mr. Reigel is aggressively trying to sweep the entire episode under the rug, even if it means protecting a confessed criminal like Gibson Vendettuoli, an individual who threatened the lives of FBI agents. Apparently Mr. Reigel believes sacrificing a few agents is a price he is willing to pay for the greater cause of what appears to be Eretz Yisrael.
END OF ARTICLE
(Reigel is apparently top dog)
On Feb. 1, 2005, Shanet Clark, Gary Buell and moderator Andy Walker tried to goad me into discussing Hitler and the Holocaust, but I twice refused because I suspected they were attempting to entrap me, thereby creating a pretext to ban me from the forum. Failing in their so-called attempt to entrap me by discussing the Holocaust, moderator Andy Walker placed a severe posting restriction on my account which he called "moderator supervision." The pretext he used for taking the action was because I had sent messages from five different IP addresses, he claimed, and he wanted to ensure that I was only one person. The effort to goad me into discussing the Holocaust began when Mr. Clark started a rude thread, "Nazi Race Hate on Our Forum, petition to unregister." This how the conversation went:
It should be noted that I twice refused to discuss the Holocaust and Hitler on the Education Forum, but moderator placed my account on "moderator supervision" anyway. After moderator Andy Walker placed my account in that mode, only a fraction of my messages got posted. It should also be noted that Gibson Vendettuoli chided me for pushing "racist" "neo-Nazi stuff" after my second refusal to discuss Hitler and the Holocaust.
Salvador Astucia has written a book, Opium Lords, which deals with the opium-rich Golden Triangle and how it was used to pay the men who killed President John F. Kennedy. Astucia has written a second book, Rethinking John Lennon's Assassination: The FBI's War on Rock Stars. To read either or purchase, click here: