The Oslo Accords, Possible Motive for Zionists to murder Vince Foster

Salvador Astucia challenges Foster researcher Hugh Turley to a debate.

To participate in the discussion, send comments to:

salvador_astucia@yahoo.com

[Original posting was August 15, 2002, but the discussion is ongoing.]

Introduction by Salvador Astucia

Hugh Turley has researched the death of Vince Foster since it occurred on July 20, 1993.

Here is his website:

http://www.fbicover-up.com

Although I disagree with some of the information presented on Mr. Turley's website, I agree with his conclusion that Vince Foster was murdered (as opposed to taking his own life) and there was a massive cover-up perpetrated by nearly all facets of the United States government and the American news media.

Recently Mr. Turley challenged my assertion (via private email) that the motive for Foster's murder was the Oslo Accords which was in the works when he was killed.

(Reference Opium Lords, pp 311-316)

Rather than debate Mr. Turley privately, I have decided to go public.

I challenge Mr. Turley to debate the topic of Vince Foster and the Oslo Accords in a civilized manner.

Here is my response to Mr. Turley's most recent email, dated April 15, 2002:

[NOTE: On August 16, 2002, Hugh Turley contacted me and requested that I omit his speculative comments about motive from this discussion thread. He explained that he makes of a point of never discussing motive when he gives lectures about the Foster case. Consequently, he regards emailed statements on that topic as his "private thoughts" and requested that they remain private. I complied with his request. Omissions are noted.]

--- Turley <Turley@acninc.net> wrote:

> Salvador-

> My only point was that my research did not support a

> link between Foster's death and Israel via a

> Foster/Hillary romance or any trips to Norway.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you never did any research regarding motive. So what research are you discussing?

You do not need to convince me that Foster was murdered. You and DC Dave convinced me of that long ago.

Since I do not believe in re-inventing the wheel, I used your respective conclusions that Foster was murdered as the framework for my research about motive.

Therefore, it is illogical for you to cite your research in a discussion about motive when you have done no research in that regard. Again, correct me if I am wrong--and I apologize if I am--but I do not believe you have spent even one hour researching the motive for Foster's murder.

Having stated that, here are the FACTS upon which I base my conclusion that Foster was killed because of the Oslo Accords:

Fact No. 1: Israel took an enormous amount of Arab land in the Six Day War in June 1967. On November 22, 1967, the UN issued Resolution 242 which stated more or less that the land Israel took was taken illegally and must be returned. Israel has ignored Resolution 242 for 35 years, with the exception of some land returned to Egypt in the early 70s.

In 1973, the UN issued Resolution 338 which was essentially a restatement of 242. Both have been ignored by Israel and the United states for years.

Fact No. 2: In June of 1992, Yitzhak Rabin was elected Prime Minister of Israel. This was a major shift in the political climate of Israel. Likud (a radical right-wing political party) had ruled or shared power for 15 years prior. Suddenly Rabin--a moderate force--was in power.

Seeing an opportunity for peace in the Middle East, Norway intervened and brokered secret peace talks between Rabin's new government and the PLO.

There were eleven secret meetings between the PLO and Israel from April 1993 through August 1993.

These meetings set the stage for the Oslo Accords which were announced in September 1993.

The Oslo Accords stipulated the implementation of UN Resolutions 242 and 338. Again, these resolutions stated that Israel must return the land it took in the Six Day War in 1967.

Fact No. 3: The meetings were spearheaded by a Norwegian Statesman named Johan Holst (Minister of Foreign Affairs). In fact the first several meetings were held at his home. It was very informal.

Fact No. 4: Foster's death (July 20, 1993) occurred while the pre-Oslo meetings were in progress (April-August 1993).

Fact No. 5: Holst died suddenly of a heart attack on January 13, 1994 at the age of 56. (six months after Foster’s death)

Fact No. 6: Yitzhak Rabin was shot and killed in an apparent Israeli/Likud coup on November 4, 1995.

(Read this rare article by the assassin’s mother, published in George Magazine, March 1997:)

http://www.jfkmontreal.com/jfk_jr_&_rabin.htm

Fact No. 7: Bill and Hillary were "partners in power." It was essentially a co-presidency.

Fact No. 8: During the Clinton presidency, Hillary made several public statements in support of a Palestinian state.

Fact No. 9: Vince and Hillary had a "special" relationship that was both professional and quasi-romantic, although there is no evidence of a physical affair. Vince was known to do favors for Hillary because he respected her as a colleague and because he was in love with her as a woman. Bill knew of their relationship and apparently accepted it as part of the partnership with his wife. In fact, he gave Foster highly classified top-secret assignments.

Those are the facts. Now here are some logical points we can make using deductive reasoning:

Logical Point No. 1: Given America's long-standing support of Israel, it is reasonable to conclude that America participated in the pre-Oslo meetings (April-August 1993).

Logical Point No. 2: Hillary was probably the moving force behind the Oslo accords within the Clinton Administration. Bill was not opposed to the concept per se, but based on Hillary's public comments about a Palestinian state, it is reasonable to conclude that this was more her issue than Bill's.

Logical Point No. 3: Given the informal nature of the pre-Oslo meetings, it is quite possible that the Clintons sent a personal emissary to attend, probably someone who was part of their inner circle. That person could very well have been Vince Foster.

Logical Point No. 4: Given that Vince and Hillary had a "special" relationship which was both professional and romantic, it is quite possible that Vince was a mover and shaker behind the scenes at the pre-Oslo meetings. Additionally, if he attended, then he may have been extra-aggressive because of his love and admiration for Hillary.

CONCLUSION: Foster's murder was a signal to Hillary from Likud fanatics: NO RESOLUTION 242 & 338 AND NO PALESTINIAN STATE !

> I know there have been rumors and speculation from

> journalists of a Vince/Hillary romance and rumors

> from journalists of trips to Switzerland.

I never mentioned Switzerland, not via email or in Opium Lords. You brought it up, then rejected it as a rumor. Let the record state that Mr. Turley first mentioned Switzerland, not Mr. Astucia.

The eleven secret meetings that led to the Oslo Accords occurred in Norway, not Switzerland. So I do not understand why you mentioned Switzerland. You have brought it up in several emails, but I fail to understand the relevance.

I therefore respectfully request that you cease from mentioning Switzerland again because it will only confuse readers.

Regarding the "romance," there are credible sources who witnessed Hillary and Vince together for years and have stated that they had an unfulfilled romantic relationship.

Rumors of a sexual affair abound, but not by the more credible sources.

We can debate this point if you want, but I do not see the need. The evidence is overwhelming that Hillary and Vince cared for each other a great deal and that Vince went out of his way to please her. And she enjoyed the attention. It was fairly innocent really, rather sweet.

[Omitted Mr. Turley's speculation about motive per his request. 8/16/02]

[I responded to Turley's speculation as follows:]

Respectfully, this is not a guessing game. [...Omitted specific response to Turley's  speculation. 8/16/02] We must follow the trail of evidence and go wherever it leads.

It was purely by accident that I stumbled onto facts implicating Israel in Foster's murder. As part of my research for Opium Lords, I analyzed the Middle Eastern policies of every presidential administration since Kennedy. It was then that I discovered the timeline of the pre-Oslo meetings and Foster's death.

I was astonished to learn that Johan Holst died of a heart attack six months after Foster. A year and a half later, Yitzhak Rabin was murdered in what appears to have been an Israeli coup sponsored by the Likud party.

[Omitted further speculation by Turley about motive per his request. 8/16/02]

Yes, this all ties in well with my assertion that Israel (Likud) sponsored Foster's murder because he was deeply involved in the preliminary negotiations for implementation of UN Resolutions 242 and 338 via the Oslo Accords.

[...Omitted my specific response to Turley's speculation. 8/16/02]

At this point, I request that you explain what part of my thesis with which you disagree, and why.

Regards,

Salvador Astucia

by Salvador Astucia, August 16, 2002

It appears that Mr. Turley is evading my challenge to a public debate. Today he contacted me and expressed disappointment that I had made one of his emails public. To calm him down, I agreed to remove all statements in which he speculated about the motive of Vince Foster’s murder; however, Turley evidently does not want to participate in a public debate, only a private one.

Consequently, I feel compelled to publicly ask him a few questions about a central figure in his research, a man named Patrick Knowlton.

For readers unfamiliar with Knowlton, here is Hugh Turley’s description from an interview in August 2000:

(Hugh Turley, interviewed by Zoh Hieronimus with World Net Daily, August 19, 2000)

Patrick Knowlton filed a law suit against the government for harassment, but there are several aspects to Knowlton himself that are quite disturbing.

Here are some questions for Mr. Turley about Knowlton:

[1] A reliable source advised me that you (Turley) first met Patrick Knowlton when he was Chief of Security at the Saudi Arabian embassy in Washington, DC.

Is that correct?

[2] What year did you first meet Mr. Knowlton?

[3] Did Mr. Knowlton have a registered firearm when he worked at the Saudi Arabian embassy?

(As Chief of Security at the Saudi Arabian embassy, it seems reasonable that Knowlton would carry a firearm.)

[4] Was Mr. Knowlton carrying a registered or unregistered firearm with him when he was at Fort Marcy Park on July 20, 1993, the day Vince Foster was killed?

[5] To your knowledge, has Mr. Knowlton ever been considered a suspect in the murder of Vince Foster?

Have any independent researchers or crime investigators ever considered the former Chief of Security at the Saudi Arabian embassy a murder suspect?

[6] On your website, you indicate that Mr. Knowlton has a girlfriend named Kathryn who witnessed governmental harassment against Mr. Knowlton while they walked the streets of Washington, DC.

In a previous conversation, you advised me that Kathryn is Jewish. Do you acknowledge this fact? (That she is Jewish.)

[7] If my assertion that Jewish fanatics sponsored Foster’s murder to thwart the Oslo Accords, wouldn’t this undercut the reliability of Mr. Knowlton’s testimony, given that his girlfriend is Jewish? After all, the motive—as I described—involves the Jewish State.

[8] Your website indicates that the lawyer who handled Mr. Knowlton’s case was John Clarke.

A reliable source advised me that Mr. Clarke’s services were paid by Accuracy in the Media. Is this correct?

[9] Are you aware that many people believe Accuracy in the Media is a front for the Mossad?

Have you ever heard that?

What are your feelings about Israel's Mossad (a spy agency) possibly sponsoring Knowlton's law suit against the US government?

That is all for now. ª

Summarized Discussions About Oslo & Foster

The following is a summary of email and newsgroup exchanges from interested parties.

[1] August 15, 2002 (see Communiqué A, email)

Salvador challenges Turley to a public debate. Salvador further advises Turley that the URL for this webpage has already been posted on about 50 newsgroups under the following name: "The Oslo Accords, motive for Vince Foster's murder (?) (debate)"

[2] August 16, 2002 (emails omitted per H. Turley's request)

Turley responds and is quite upset about several things, but his main complaint is that Salvador publicly disclosed a private email containing Turley's "private thoughts" about the motive behind Foster's murder. Salvador agrees to omit all portions of email containing such private thoughts.

[3] August 16, 2002 (see Communiqué # 1, email)

A reader (who requests anonymity) provides background information for the discussion. He sends Salvador an email containing an interesting article about Zionism - written by Edwin M. Wright.

[4] August 16, 2002 (see Communiqué # 2, email)

Salvador advises Turley that he has prepared a list of questions about Patrick Knowlton et al. Salvador requests that Turley email answers to be added to web page.

[5] August 16, 2002 (see Communiqué # 3, newsgroup)

Salvador posts message to about 50 newsgroups. The article is entitled "The Oslo-Foster Debate - questions about Patrick Knowlton et al." It advises Usenet readers that questions have been raised about Knowlton's involvement in Foster's murder and points readers to this webpage.

[6] August 17, 2002 (see Communiqué # 4, newsgroup)

"BernardZ" from soc.culture.jewish responds to Salvador's article. He calls the debate "rubbish" because Israel supported the Oslo Accords. Bernard further cites a Palestinian leader who was critical of the Oslo Accords.

[7] August 17, 2002 (see Communiqué # 5, email)

Salvador invites Jim Robinson (founder of Free Republic <  http://www.freerepublic.com > ) to participate in the discussion. Salvador advises Robinson that all written communiqués will be made public and that everything is on the record. (NOTE: Patrick Knowlton is reportedly closely affiliated with Free Republic.)

[8] August 17, 2002 (see Communiqué # 6, newsgroup)

Salvador replies to Bernard (from Communiqué # 4). He agrees that under Yitzhak Rabin's government, Israel did in fact want the Oslo Accords to work; however, Salvador reminds Bernard that Rabin was killed by right-wing Israeli fanatics who did not. Salvador directs Bernard to an article, written by the mother of Rabin's assassin at the following URL:

http://www.jfkmontreal.com/jfk_jr_&_rabin.htm
 

[9] August 18, 2002 (see Communiqué # 7, email)

Carol Valentine asks who were the signatories of the Oslo Accords. She also points out that Turley is willing to throw cold water on Salvador's hypothesis privately, but not publicly. She wonders if he wants to avoid protecting Israel publicly, but will do so privately.

[10] August 18, 2002 (see Communiqué # 8, email)

Salvador informs Valentine that the principal signatories were Yitzhak Rabin (Israel) and Yasser Arafat (PLO), under the guidance of third-party negotiator, Johan Jorgen Holst (Foreign Minister of Norway). The following letters indicate this as fact:

http://almashriq.hiof.no/israel/300/320/327/israel-plo_recognition.html

Salvador advises Valentine and other interested readers to do a google search on "oslo accords" to read the full text of the agreements. Salvador further points out the heart of the Oslo Accords is that it stipulated enforcement of UN Resolutions 242 and 338 which direct Israel to return the occupied territories it took during Six Day War in June 1967. He provides the full text of those resolutions. Salvador also notes that Holst died a few months after the Oslo Accords were signed and Rabin was killed when they were about to be implemented two years later. When Arafat visited the White House in early 1998 as a continuation of the Oslo Accords, the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal suddenly dominated the media. When President George H.W. Bush (the elder) tried to implement Resolutions 242 and 338 during the Madrid Conference in October 1991, the Gulf War president--whose approval ratings were above 90 percent--was immediately besieged with negative press coverage and subsequently lost the 1992 presidential election, defeated by Bill Clinton.

[11] August 18, 2002 (see Communiqué # 9, email)

HUGH TURLEY REPLIES! He says Patrick Knowlton wants to talk to Salvador (obviously regarding Communiqué # 2). Turley gives Knowlton's phone number and address to Salvador and asks Salvador to call Knowlton.

[12] August 18, 2002 (see Communiqué # 10, email)

Salvador advises Turley that he will communicate with Patrick Knowlton's attorney, John Clarke, but not with Knowlton directly (for obvious reasons). Salvador further advises Turley that the simplest way to handle the Knowlton issue is for the two of them (Turley and Knowlton) to answer the questions about Knowlton's background and submit them for public disclosure on Salvador's webpage. Salvador also mentions that he has met John Clarke and wants to know if he is Jewish because he seems like he might be.

[13] August 19, 2002

Patrick Knowlton makes harassing phone calls to Salvador at work and home. Knowlton manages to get Salvador's direct line at work. (NOTE: Salvador is a pseudonym. Knowlton found out his real name and the number where he works, plus his home number.) Knowlton calls Salvador on his work number and leaves a voicemail stating that he is upset about the questions on the webpage. He also states that he left a message at Salvador's home phone number. The following is transcript of that message verbatim:

Patrick Knowlton’s voice message at Salvador's home phone, August 19, 2002

* It is unclear why Knowlton said he was going to call Salvador at his "home phone" because the above message was left at Salvador's home phone number.

[14] August 19, 2002

Salvador issued the following statement in response to Mr. Knowlton's actions:

Salvador Astucia, August 19, 2002

[15] August 20, 2002 (see Communiqué # 11, email)

Patrick Knowlton's lawyer, John Clarke, responds. Clarke does not answer any of the nine questions about Knowlton's background, or about himself. He gives Salvador permission to communicate directly with Knowlton. This advice makes little sense because Salvador specifically requested that Knowlton be kept as far away from him as possible. (see Communiqué # 10)  Clarke further states that Salvador's theories about Knowlton, Turley, AIM, and himself (Clarke) are ludicrous. He advises Salvador not to accuse him of surreptitiously working for anyone; however, he does not confirm or deny whether Accuracy in Media paid for his services in Knowlton's law suit against the US Government. (see Knowlton Question # 8) Clarke states that he does not plan to communicate further with Salvador because it is a waste of time.

[16] August 21, 2002 (see Communiqué # 12, email)

Salvador responds to Clarke by repeating most of the questions. Salvador also reveals that David Martin (aka, DC Dave) was the source for much of the information about Patrick Knowlton's background.

[17] August 21, 2002 (see Communiqué # 13 for entire email)

Questions for DC Dave from Carol Valentine. She asks the following questions about Patrick Knowlton's background:

(Excerpt from Valentine's email)

Carol Valentine calls DC Dave's response to her Knowlton questions a dodge, and says that DC Dave's credibility is at stake now.

[21] August 24, 2002 (see Communiqué # 17)

Carol Valentine discovers Hugh Turley derives income from Reed Irvine's AIM, and that Irvine recently lauded the media's coverage of 9-11. She says: what better evidence that Irvine is a seamless liar and a front man for the Zionists? She reminds Dave that AIM sponsors Knowlton, Clark, and Turely, and that when Salvador tries to throw the light on matters, DC Dave attacks Salvador. "Sounds to me like you have picked sides. I confess I'm disappointed with your choice."
 

[22] August 24, 2002 (see Communiqué # 18)

Carol Valentine tells DC Dave that the Foster death is his baby, not hers.  She says that through the years Dave has not  investigated Knowlton himself, and still shows no interest in doing so.  Valentine discusses recording phone conversations, and laments not have a recording of a certain telephone conversation.

[23] August 24, 2002 (see Communiqué # 19)

DC Dave defends Patrick Knowlton, claiming that he has never done anything suspicious. He states that Knowlton has done everything to keep the Foster case alive and his testimony checks out. DC Dave accuses Salvador of "imprudent" use of public forum and generally complains that Salvador has been unfair to Knowlton and Turley. He infers that Salvador's facts are incorrect, but he does not point out any specific inaccuracies. He states that Salvador should have called Knowlton before making public charges.

[24] August 26, 2002 (see Communiqué # 20)

DC Dave addresses Hugh Turley's income from Accuracy in Media. He trivializes the fact that Turley is a paid speaker for AIM. He states that Turley's income from AIM was very low. He also says that AIM had no input in his presentations.

[25] August 26, 2002 (see Communiqué # 21)

[26] August 26, 2002

Moderator’s Comments:

It appears that Hugh Turley, Patrick Knowlton, and his lawyer John Clarke, are all closely associated with the shadowy organization known as Accuracy in Media, headed by Reed Irvine.

[Exhibit F]

Michael Collins Piper wrote the following about Accuracy in Media and Reed Irvine's position on JFK's assassination:

(Michael Collins Piper, Final Judgment, 5^th edition, pp 277-278)

In Chapter 4 of Opium Lords, I assert that Louis Bloomfield was the primary "assassination engineer" who coordinated the details of JFK’s murder.

It seems quite odd that Reed Irvine et al. would fund a group of people (Turley, Knowlton, and Clarke) to push a conspiracy associated with the death of Vince Foster, but they (AIM) denounce any notion conspiracy associated with JFK’s murder.

Even more interesting, I first met David Martin in November of 1993, about two months after the Oslo Accords were announced. He contacted me after an article about me appeared in a major newspaper. The article dealt specifically with my interest in the Kennedy assassination and my belief that there was a conspiracy. At the time, Martin was a rabid Clinton hater and convinced me that Vince Foster was murdered, although he had no apparent interest in motive. It is beginning to look like Mr. Martin may have been keeping tabs on me for Reed Irvine ever since (nearly nine years). This would surely explain why his close friend and AIM lackey Hugh Turley wanted me to change my assertion that the Oslo Accords was the motive behind Foster's murder. It would also explain why Turley tried to get Carol Valentine to change one of her articles about 9-11. (Valentine’s 9-11 articles point to Israel as the true sponsor.)

Ask yourselves, if Israel did in fact sponsor the murder of Vince Foster in order to thwart the Oslo Accords (which stipulated that Israel must return all Arab/Palestian land taken in the Six Day War), doesn't it seem logical that pro-Israeli organizations like AIM would hire professional Clinton haters like Martin and Turley to use Foster's murder to embarrass and weaken the Clinton Administration because they supported the Oslo Accords? Doesn't it make sense that pro-Israel organizations like AIM would finance a bogus law suit against the US Government possibly to provide cover for Foster's killer?

The complete lack of candor exhibited by Turley, Knowlton, Clarke, and Martin speaks volumes. No wonder Mr. Martin is such an expert on "truth suppression."

Salvador

[28] August 28, 2002 (see Communiqué # 23)

[29] August 28, 2002 (see Communiqué # 24)

[32] August 29, 2002 (see Communiqué # 27)

Slade Farney makes the following points to Reed Irvine:

• Asks Irvine who pays his salary.

• Suggests that Irvine point out Salvador's mistakes rather than engage in psycho-babble and name calling.

• Mocks Irvine for giving the US media the "AIM blue ribbon in journalism" for its "blame-Islam-first" rhetoric.

• Subtly advises the conservative Irvine to endorse leftist Alan Dershowitz because their convoluted anti-Muslim thinking is identical.

[33] August 29, 2002 (see Communiqué # 28)

Salvador repeats his original question to Reed Irvine about David Martin: What is the nature of their relationship? Salvador asks why the question was ignored. To jog Irvine's memory, Salvador discloses Martin's Social Security Number. He advises Irvine to enter the SSN in AIM's host computer and see what turns up. Salvador reminds Irvine that "Dr. Martin" also uses a pseudonym. In fact he uses two: DC Dave and David Martin.

[34] August 30, 2002 (see Communiqué # 29)

Reed Irvine breaks off communication with Salvador.

[35] August 31, 2002 (see Communiqué # 30)

Carol Valentine replies to DC Dave's email (see Communiqué # 25). She demonstrates how DC Dave says one thing in private conversations, but says another publicly. She discloses that DC Dave passed unpublished drafts of two of her 9-11 articles—without her knowledge or permission—to AIM's Hugh Turley.

[36] August 31, 2002 (see Communiqué # 31)

DC Dave responds to Carol Valentine's previous message (see Communiqué # 30) by defending Hugh Turley. He claims the reason he agreed privately with Valentine's reservations about Patrick Knowlton was because she is difficult to disagree with. DC Dave says that, in a conversation with him, Carol defended Linda Thompson's call for an Armed March on Washington. He says Carol disagreed with his opinion on the matter.
 

I wish to remind DC Dave that if he were testifying in a court of law, he would be cited for contempt of court. When an attorney/prosecutor asks a question, witnesses must respond directly without being evasive or changing the subject. He should consider himself lucky, for now.

[38] August 31, 2002 (see Communiqué # 32)

Carol Valentine accuses DC Dave of being non-responsive to her questions (see Communiqué # 30) by redirecting attention to Hugh Turley. She reminds him that her questions were for him (DC Dave), not Turley. Regarding DC Dave's charge that she is difficult to disagree with, Valentine reminds him that the basis of their relationship is discussing the state of the world and talking about politics. She wonders why he called so often to talk, under these circumstances.
 

[39] August 31, 2002 (see Communiqué # 33)

Slade Farney comments on Patrick Knowlton's story regarding witnessing the area where Vince Foster's body was found in Fort Marcy Park. Farney raises the following questions:

• Why did Patrick Knowlton decide to urinate at Fort Marcy Park on July 20, 1993, the day Vince Foster's body was found there?

• How come the authorities/police never charged Knowlton with urinating in a public place, a misdemeanor in most states? This would make sense if the Government was truly trying to silence his testimony.

• Does Knowlton have bladder problems? (Fort Marcy Park is just outside Washington, DC. Public restrooms are minutes away in any direction.)

[40] August 31, 2002 (see Communiqué # 34)

Hugh Turley threatens to get Salvador fired from his job by informing Salvador's boss and colleagues of his activities on the Internet. Turley stated, "I want to invite people from your office to answer questions about you and your income just like you asked Irvine." This is factually incorrect because Salvador never asked Reed Irvine about Hugh Turley's income. Salvador asked Irvine to explain his association association with DC Dave. (see Communiqués 24 & 28) Irvine responded by disclosing that he had paid about $1,600 to Turley (see Communiqué 26), then broke off communication with Salvador shortly thereafter (see Communiqué 29).

(NOTE: It was DC Dave who gave Salvador's work number to Turley. DC Dave has publicly acknowledged this and has no ethical problem with it. See Communiqué # 25. It was also DC Dave, not Salvador or Valentine, who publicly introduced Turley's income into this discussion thread. See Communiqué 14)

[41] September 1, 2002

It occurs to me that Hugh Turley appears to be genuinely upset. The question is Why? So what if Salvador et al. has shown that Patrick Knowlton's harassment case is full of holes? (see 9 questions about Knowlton and Communiqués 13 & 33)  Can't Mr. Turley just admit he was wrong? Why does he want to get Salvador fired? I would like to remind readers that neither Turley or DC Dave has fully explained Turley's source of income in response to Carol Valentine's questions (see Communiqué 17) after DC Dave introduced the topic of Turley's income to this forum (see Communiqué 14). It is quite possible, given Turley's highly emotional state, that Reed Irvine fired him from whatever duties Turley might have performed for AIM (paid lectures notwithstanding).

"I want to invite people from your office," Turley wrote to Salvador, "to answer questions about you and your income just like you asked Irvine."

Interesting, Turley compared Salvador's fulltime employment to his (Turley's) association with Reed Irvine. This is almost an admission by Turley that he is/was a fulltime employee at AIM.

If Turley did in fact work for AIM as a salaried fulltime employee, I can understand why Mr. Irvine fired him. After all Turley disclosed to Carol Valentine, DC Dave, and ultimately to Salvador that AIM was funding Patrick Knowlton's lawsuit. That was highly sensitive information.

Of course I do not present this scenario as fact because Turley has never fully explained his association with Reed Irvine and AIM. All we know is Reed Irvine publicly disclosed embarrassing financial information about Turley (see Communiqué 26), broke off communications with Salvador (see Communiqué 29), then Turley sent a threatening email to Salvador (see Communiqué # 34).

[42] September 1, 2002 (see Communiqué # 35)

Slade Farney comments on Patrick Knowlton's harassment story. He calls it nonsense because the forces who killed Foster would have done the same to Knowlton rather than harass him on the streets. Slade gives a hypothetical conversation between FBI conspirators planning the job: "This Knowlton was a top security agent for the Saudi embassy. So just walk by and give him a dirty look -- that'll throw the fear into him. Security guards go nuts when you give them a dirty look." Regarding public urination by Knowlton and another witness at Fort Marcy Park (the day Foster's body was found), Slade says, "I guess when you are God's chosen eyewitness, the world is your urinal."

[43] September 2, 2002 (see Communiqué # 36)

Chet Lyle expresses great disappointment in DC Dave and the company he keeps (Hugh Turley and Patrick Knowlton). Although Lyle finds it difficult to accept that DC Dave has betrayed Salvador and Carol Valentine, he acknowledges this thread reveals complete treachery and betrayal by DC Dave et al. Lyle observes that DC Dave's friend, Hugh Turley, is a "treacherous player with a direct link to the cacophonous Zionist orchestra which is AIM, and to its Konzertmeister Reed Irvine." Lyle refers to Patrick Knowlton as "a thug, playing flat-footed tunes from the Zionist hymnal."  Lyle agrees with Slade Farney's observation that Patrick Knowlton's entire story is not believable. Lyle wrote, "In a real-life setting that little story, and a free Bud, might win the raconteur maybe a disbelieving chortle."

Postscript

[44] Moderator’s Comment

For all intents and purposes, this discussion thread ended about a week ago when Slade Farney and Chet Lyle added their criticisms of Patrick Knowlton’s version of events at Fort Marcy Park on July 20, 1993 (when Vince Foster's body was found there) and Knowlton's subsequent harassment story. (See Communiqués # 33, 35, & 36)

[45] September 9, 2002 (see Communiqué # 37)

[48] September 11, 2002 (see Communiqué # 40)

Slade reminds DC Dave of his (Slade's) earlier criticisms of Knowlton's harassment story combined with the public urination offense. (See Communiqués # 35 & 33) Slade reiterates that urinating in public is a misdemeanor, and possibly a federal misdemeanor when it occurs on public land. Slade observes that the National Park Police were in an excellent position to prosecute, negotiate a plea bargain, and exercise some of the "other fine features of the US Justice system." But no prosecution, no real threats, no plea bargains, just icy stares that were witnessed only by "[one fake*] and a Jew -- and Knowlton, of course."

Slade presents the following verse to DC Dave:

Moderator/Salvador stops discussion forum for five days, then re-opens.

[49] September 16, 2002

Moderator's Comment:

On September 12, 2002, I ended this discussion forum because I felt that (a) no new information was being presented by the participants, and (b), many of the comments were getting too personal.

Subsequent to my decision, I received several requests that I continue the discussion thread.

In the interest of fairness, I have reconsidered my previous decision and hereby decree that the discussion forum shall be re-opened and continue for a few more days.

I wish to point out that the original set of questions about Patrick Knowlton's background have not been answered fully by David Martin (aka, DC Dave) Hugh Turley, John Clarke, or Patrick Knowlton. I request that the stated individuals make answering the following questions a priority:

Belated Postings

The following messages were sent after the thread ended, on September 12th, but before it re-opened on September 16th, 2002:

[50] September 12, 2002 (see Communiqué # 41)

DC Dave debates with Slade Farney. DC Dave defends Knowlton mainly because his testimony described a car parked at the Fort Marcy Park that was not owned by Vince Foster or the Foster family. (NOTE: DC Dave and other researchers believe the license plate of Foster's grey 1989 Honda Accord was put on a much older Brown colored Honda Accord which Knowlton and other witnesses described at the crime scene.) DC Dave asserts that Knowlton's testimony destroyed the Government's case of suicide. DC Dave adds that the Park Police would have looked silly had they prosecuted Knowlton for public urination.

[51] September 12, 2002 (see Communiqué # 42)

Slade Farney responds to DC Dave. Slade advises DC Dave that Knowlton's testimony has not destroyed anything because it hasn't been reported. He reminds DC Dave that the media still reports that Foster committed suicide. Slade reiterates that the FBI would not intimidate a witness by merely starring at him in the streets.

[52] September 12, 2002 (see Communiqué # 43)

DC Dave repeats to Slade his earlier assertion that Knowlton is a great witness because he proved Foster did not drive himself to Fort Marcy Park, that a car was put there--with Foster's license plates--to give the impression that Foster drove himself there and took his life. DC Dave insults Slade by asking him to reveal his true identity (a bit hypocritical given that "DC Dave" and "David Martin" are both pseudonyms).

[53] September 12, 2002 (see Communiqué # 44)

Slade acknowledges that Knowlton's testimony is probably true. Slade suggests that DC Dave is overreacting to their differences and is somewhat rude to ask that he (Slade) reveal his true identity.

New Postings

(From this point onward, communiqué summaries are not necessarily listed in the order they were sent. For a chronological listing, see Detailed Discussions.)

[54] September 16, 2002 (see Communiqué # 45)

Salvador announces the discussion forum is re-opened.

[55] September 16, 2002 (see Communiqué # 46)

Salvador asks Carol Valentine to publicly state her recollection of conversations that transpired over the past eight years between herself, Hugh Turley, and David Martin (aka, DC Dave) regarding Patrick Knowlton’s employment at the Saudi Arabian embassy in Washington, DC.

[56] September 17, 2002 (see Communiqué # 47)

DC Dave is upset because Salvador called him a liar on a different forum. (alt.thebird) The incident dealt with DC Dave's relationship with Reed Irvine.

[57] September 17, 2002 (see Communiqué # 48)

Salvador apologizes to DC Dave about an incident in which Salvador misinterpreted something Reed Irvine stated about his relationship with DC Dave.

[58] September 17, 2002 (see Communiqué # 49)

DC Dave accepts Salvador's apology but insists on further statements of contrition.

[59] September 17, 2002 (see Communiqué # 51)

Salvador politely declines to issue additional apologies to DC Dave. Salvador reminds DC Dave that Reed Irvine did not explain his relationship with DC Dave. He only stated that AIM never paid DC Dave. Salvador adds that there are several ways of doing favors without actually exchanging money.

[60] September 17, 2002 (see Communiqué # 50)

Slade observes DC Dave's friendship with CIA chap, the late Bernie Yoh. He thinks this looks suspicious.

[61] September 17, 2002 (see Communiqué # 52)

Salvador remarks that it was DC Dave who suggested the pseudonym AstuCIA. (Note the last three letters.) He wonders if there is a cryptic meaning.

[62] September 17, 2002 (see Communiqué # 53)

DC Dave explains his relationship with AIM, Reed Irvine, Bernie Yoh, Joseph Goulden, Chris Ruddy, and others. He then insults Slade Farney by demanding he reveal his true identity.

[63] September 17, 2002 (see Communiqué # 54)

Salvador admonishes DC Dave for bullying Slade Farney about his name. He explains why people use pseudonyms. Salvador warns DC Dave that he will be banned from the forum if he continues to exhibit rude behavior.

[64] September 17, 2002 (see Communiqué # 55)

Slade Farney compares DC Dave to Mr. McGoo, the near-blind cartoon character. Slade lists several suspicious things about AIM and Knowlton that DC Dave simply cannot see. He wonders why anyone would be interested in the murder/suicide of a nobody lawyer from the Clinton administration when there are bigger issues in our midst.

[65] September 17, 2002 (see Communiqué # 56)

Salvador comments on Slade's musing over the significance of the Foster case. Salvador wonders why Turley and DC Dave were ever interested in the first place. He says their reasons (which were expressed in previous conversations) do not make sense. Salvador acknowledges that he once disliked the Clintons, but now praises them for their attempt to build a just and lasting, genuine peace in the Middle East via the Oslo Accords. He says Foster may have been a martyr in the ongoing quest for world peace.

[66] September 17, 2002 (see Communiqué # 58)

DC Dave complains that Salvador is attempting to depreciate the work that he (DC), Hugh Turley, John Clarke, and Patrick Knowlton have done.

Carol Valentine provides devastating testimony about Knowlton's Saudi connection.

[67] September 17, 2002 (see Communiqué # 57)

Carol Valentine recalls several conversations with DC Dave and Hugh Turley about Patrick Knowlton's previous employment as chief of security at the Saudi Arabian Embassy in Washington, DC.

[68] September 17, 2002 (see Communiqué # 59)

Salvador sends Carol Valentine's testimony about Knowlton/Saudi connection (Exhibit A) to Forum participants. Salvador instructs participants to focus on that topic. He states that he will only post messages about the Knowlton/Saudi connection on September 18, 2002. (next day)

[69] September 18, 2002 (see Communiqué # 59A)
DC Dave publicly reveals his real name, Gary David Martin. In response to Salvador's warning to keep a civil tone (see Communiqué # 54), DC Dave challenges Salvador to kick him off the forum and boasts of being banned from several discussion groups in the past. He also complains about Salvador's summaries of email messages.

[70] September 18, 2002 (see Communiqué # 60)

DC Dave backpedals about Valentine's testimony regarding the Knowlton/Saudi connection (Exhibit A) in a manner that is difficult to summarize. He is apparently nervous about her description of how he told her on several occasions that Patrick Knowlton was chief of security at the Saudi Arabian embassy in Washington, DC.

[71] September 18, 2002 (see Communiqué # 61)

Hugh Turley withdraws from the Discussion Forum. He requests that his name be removed from the email list.

[72] September 18, 2002 (see Communiqué # 62)

DC Dave follows Hugh Turley's lead and withdraws from the Discussion Forum. He requests that his name be removed from the email list as well.

[73] September 18, 2002 (see Communiqué # 63)

Salvador rips into DC Dave, accusing him of harboring suspicions about Knowlton's odd background for years without raising questions. Salvador states in no uncertain terms that Knowlton's background seems more like that of a professional HIT MAN than a witness who "took a leak in a park at the wrong time."

[74] September 18, 2002 (see Communiqué # 64)

Patrick Knowlton's attorney, John Clarke, withdraws from the Discussion Forum. Yahoo sends Salvador a MAILER-DAEMON indicating that Clarke's email account is either canceled or blocking Salvador's messages. (NOTE: Clarke had been ccd on the Forum emails for several days.)

[75] September 18, 2002 (see Communiqué # 65)

Salvador sends a test email to John Clarke to confirm that messages are in fact being blocked from Clarke's email account. The results are positive: Clarke has definitely dropped out as well.

Salvador introduces highly damaging evidence about the Knowlton/Saudi Connection.

[76] September 19, 2002 (see Communiqué # 66)

Salvador discloses that the Saudi Ambassador's residence was within 570 feet of the spot where Foster's body was found. Salvador's cites passages from a 1997 book written by British journalist Ambrose Evans-Pritchard to support his assertion. Salvador remarks that as former chief of security at the Saudi Embassy, Knowlton must have been quite familiar with the ambassador’s residence. Therefore, there was no need to urinate in the park. He could have knocked on the ambassador's door. Salvador labels this evidence (Communiqué # 66) Exhibit B.

[77] September 19, 2002 (see Communiqué # 67)

John Clarke formally drops out of the discussion group. He requests that his name be removed from the discussion list.

[78] September 19, 2002 (see Communiqué # 68)

Slade Farney serenades DC Dave with lyrics sung to the country tune of "Release Me."

"Please release me, le' me go
'Cause I don' love you anymo'
Mah words are only lahs* for you
And what you're saying cain't be true"  :-)

[* I believe he means, "MY words are only LIES for you..."  :-) ]

[Moderator's Note: Slade, you are hilarious!]

[79] September 16, 2002, belated UseNet posting (see Communiqué # 69)

Andrew X98 weighs in on alt.thebird (DC Dave's stomping ground) and observes that DC looks "pretty damn SPOOKY." Andrew remarked, "To characterize Carol's words as 'warped and distorted' is shocking enough, but to have passed her work on to ANYBODY without her permission is not innocent--- it is criminal." Andrew laments about DC Dave's hidden agenda stating that he hates it "when light turns to darkness."

Next Phase: Salvador presses ahead by presenting a Statement of Facts.

[80] September 20, 2002 (see Communiqué # 70)

Salvador presents Exhibit C, Statement of Facts (Communiqué # 70). He instructs Forum participants to comment only on the accuracy of the facts presented therein, not to criticize or defend Patrick Knowlton’s veracity as an eye-witness. He states that the overall objective is to reach consensus among all participants about the basic facts of the Foster case so that informed debate can continue.

[81] September 22, 2002 (see Communiqué # 71)

Salvador notifies Forum participants that he has added new information to Exhibit C, Statement of Facts, regarding Patrick Knowlton's travel itinerary on Tuesday, July 20, 1993.

Salvador destroys Knowlton's version of events.

[82] September 22, 2002 (see Communiqué # 72)

Salvador criticizes Patrick Knowlton's version of events on Tuesday, July 20, 1993 (the day Foster's body was found). Salvador instructs participants to comment only on the criticisms he has presented, or raise additional criticisms based on the facts presented in Exhibit C. Comments unrelated to these areas will not be posted.

[83] September 23, 2002 (see Communiqué # 73)

Jerry Russell asks for clarification about the remodeling work Patrick Knowlton did at a Chevy Chase home at the time of Foster's death (July 20, 1993). Russell asks, "If Knowlton was a handyman and was working to remodel someone else's home, doesn't that lend support to the idea that he was a contractor and not a full-time security chief at that time?"

[84] September 23, 2002 (see Communiqué # 74)

Slade Farney mocks Jerry Russell for asking such a rudimentary question. He advises Russell that Knowlton's career as chief of security at the Saudi embassy was prior to his career in construction. (See Exhibit A)

[85] September 23, 2002 (see Communiqué # 75)

Salvador refers Jerry Russell to Exhibit A where Carol Valentine specifically states that, according to DC Dave, Patrick Knowlton worked as chief of security at the Saudi embassy before switching careers to a lesser paying job in construction.

Moderator/Salvador shifts discussion to Israel's involvement in Foster's murder.

[86] September 23, 2002 (see Communiqué # 76)

[87] September 23, 2002 (see Communiqué # 77)

Salvador shares a personal experience (labeled Exhibit D) where Hugh Turley advised him not to speak of Jews around Patrick Knowlton because Knowlton's girlfriend is Jewish, and consequently, that is a sensitive area. Salvador argues that the incident is highly relevant not merely because Knowlton’s girlfriend is Jewish, but because it establishes Patrick Knowlton as someone who aggressively obstructs conversation about Jews, the Jewish culture, Jewish political interests, and ultimately, the Jewish State.

[88] September 24, 2002 (see Communiqué # 78)

Slade Farney wonders if Patrick Knowlton is Jewish based on his reaction to DC Dave's remarks about Jews (see Exhibit D). Slade also states that, based on the timing, the death of Foster "may have been a message for the Oslo committee as much as for the Clintons."

[89] September 24, 2002 (see Communiqué # 79)

Salvador asks Jerry Russell (the de facto emissary for DC Dave, Hugh Turley, and John Clarke) if Patrick Knowlton is Jewish. Salvador tells Slade that if Israel's Likud fanatics were trying to send a message to the Oslo committee, apparently no one received it. He lists other people who died that might be associated with the Oslo Accords. Besides Foster, the names include Johan Holst, Norwegian Minister of Foreign Affairs (Holst was the driving force behind the Accords); Jerry Parks, security executive for the Clintons who handled sensitive assignments (and was given instructions by Foster); and Yitzhak Rabin.

[90] September 24, 2002 (see Communiqué # 80)

Carol Valentine states that Knowlton's defensive behavior toward Jews and Israel is a red flag. (see Exhibit D) She says Knowlton does not sound like an American who loves America, he sounds like a Zionist who loves Israel first, last, and always. She cites another Jew, the late Benjamin Freedman, as a courageous American patriot because he broke ranks with organized Jewry after World War II. Carol says Knowlton sounds like a Zionist fanatic, like a person who might knock off Vince Foster had Foster been trying to effect the Oslo Accords.

[92] September 24, 2002 (see Communiqué # 81)

Salvador shifts the topic to Ambrose Evans-Pritchard and his possible participation in a cover-up via his Jewish boss, Conrad Black who owns the Jerusalem Post and the London Sunday/Daily Telegraph. (Evans-Pritchard works for the latter.)

[93] September 24, 2002 (see Communiqué # 82)

Salvador sends email to Ambrose Evans-Pritchard at the London Sunday/Daily Telegraph. Salvador asks Evans-Pritchard if he still believes Patrick Knowlton's story. Salvador also asks Evans-Prichard to comment on the conflict of interest created by Conrad Black's ownership of the Sunday/Daily Telegraph plus the Jerusalem Post.

[94] September 25, 2002 (see Communiqué # 85)

Carol Valentine says Ambrose Evans-Pritchard is a fake. She directs readers to an article she wrote about him in 1997 which reveals how he was less than truthful about Waco exposés that he wrote for the London Telegraph.

[95] September 25, 2002 (see Communiqué # 83)

Jewish journalists reported false claim that Foster was depressed.

[97] September 26, 2002 (see Communiqué # 86)

Salvador introduces another link to Israel in the Foster case: the media. He points out that a small group of Jewish journalists pushed the cover story that Foster was depressed, thereby providing an official explanation for why Foster took his life. Salvador quotes an excerpt from Opium Lords that identifies the Jewish individuals involved. Salvador tags this email as Exhibit H. He instructs participants to continue sending comments on all topics presented thus far that link Israel to the crime.

[98] September 30, 2002 (see Communiqué # 87)

Salvador identifies other prominent Jews who played critical roles in the Foster case. They include Nathan Landow, William Styron, Bernard Nussbaum, and Susan Thomases. Salvador instructs participants to continue sending comments on all five topics about Israeli involvement in the crime. Salvador marks his comments as Exhibit I.

Ken Starr’s vintage Talmudic theater

[99] October 3, 2002 (see Communiqué # 88)

Salvador presents evidence indicating that Ken Starr is likely a descendent of Jewish immigrants in Texas. Salvador asserts that Starr's efforts to investigate Vince Foster’s death were part of a "well orchestrated Talmudic minstrel show... merely an actor playing a part." Salvador points out that Starr's wife, Alice Mendell, is openly Jewish and their three children are Jewish by birthright. Salvador draws parallels between Starr's Judeo-Evangelical Christian background (Church of Christ) and LBJ's (Disciples of Christ/Christadelphians). Salvador marks his comments as Exhibit J.

[100] October 3, 2002 (see Communiqué # 89)

Jerry Russell says Salvador has not provided evidence linking "crypto Jews" to Ken Starr's church, the Church of Christ. He says that Starr may genuinely be an evangelical Christian which means he (Starr) is a Zionist.

[101] October 3, 2002 (see Communiqué # 90)

Salvador reiterates that the Christadelphians were an offshoot from the Church of Christ. Salvador reminds Jerry that LBJ's Aunt Jesse was not only a Christadelphian, but a member of the Zionist Organization of America as well. Regarding Ken Starr's personal faith, Salvador notes that "no one knows what someone’s core beliefs are; however, the phenomenon of crypto-Jews in Texas reveals that Judaism is, in many ways, more of a political cult than a genuine religion."

[102] October 3, 2002 (see Communiqué # 91)

Jerry Russell quibbles over details in a manner that is difficult to summarize; however, his main complaint is that Salvador has not shown absolutely that Ken Starr is the descendant of Jewish immigrants in Texas or that Starr is a crypto-Jew.

[103] October 3, 2002 (see Communiqué # 92)

Salvador says that Starr's "Jewishness" is a moot point because the fact that Starr is an evangelical Christian demonstrates, by definition, that he is also a Zionist. And if he is a Zionist, then he can be linked to an Israeli conspiracy in the Foster case.

[104] October 3, 2002 (see Communiqué # 93)

Salvador presents an article (from CBS News' website) that supports his assertion that Ken Starr's evangelical beliefs make him a Zionist by definition. The article, "Falwell Brands Mohammed A 'Terrorist'," describes a piece that aired on Sixty Minutes (CBS), on Sunday October 6, 2002, entitled "Zion's Christian Soldiers." The article is marked Exhibit K.

[105] October 15, 2002 (see Communiqué # 94)

[106] October 30, 2002

Moderator/Salvador shifts topic to Reed Irvine and AIM's  apparent tax fraud

[Exhibit M] Reed Irvine’s tax exempt org., AIM, secretly financed anti-government lawsuit

by Salvador Astucia, Oct. 30, 2002

Reed Irvine apparently committed tax fraud by claiming tax exempt status for Accuracy in Media (AIM) while secretly financing an harassment law suit filed against the United States government by Patrick Knowlton, a witness who testified before Kenneth Starr’s Whitewater grand jury regarding the death of Deputy White House Counsel Vincent W. Foster.

AIM’s annual 990 filings with the IRS reveal about $59,000 was paid by AIM, between 1998 and 2000, to finance Knowlton’s harassment law suit.

For a summarized background of the Foster case and Knowlton’s ensuing law suit, read the following Statement of Facts:

http://www.jfkmontreal.com/foster_discussion_pt2.htm#Exhibit_C

IRS records reveal that AIM’s average annual revenue was $1.85 million between 1995 and 2001, and on average 44 percent of that money came from four large contributors. Unfortunately, the IRS does not disclose to the public the identities of contributors for tax exempt organizations.

AIM’s net assets are presently $6.02 million.

AIM is a 501(c)(3) tax exempt organization located at 4455 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite # 330, Washington, DC 20008.

By law, 501(c)(3) organizations are NOT required to publicly disclose the identities of their contributors; however, the dollar amounts they receive from individual contributors are available for public examination in IRS forms 990.

AIM reported to the IRS that the stated $59,000 was paid for "Vince Foster Legal Expense," apparently shorthand for AIM’s financing of Patrick Knowlton’s law suit, a violation of IRS guidelines for tax exempt organizations and beyond the scope of AIM’s stated purpose.

AIM’s purpose (on its annual 990 reports to the IRS) is to "disseminate information to educate the general public about the deficiencies of news media reporting."

What does financing Patrick Knowlton’s harassment law suit against the US government have to do with educating the public about the deficiencies of news media reporting?

NOTE: I tried, without success, to obtain AIM’s charter as stated in its articles of incorporation. On October 3, 2002, I ordered AIM’s "Articles of Incorporation" from the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (DCRA), Corporation Division, 941 North Capitol Street, NE, Washington, DC 20002. Per DCRA’s instructions, I mailed them a check for $25 and a written request for the Articles. Nearly a month has passed and I have not received the requested document, nor has DCRA returned my $25.

On August 29, 2002, Reed Irvine publicly stated that "AIM has contributed to Patrick Knowlton's legal defense fund." Irvine did not disclose the amount of AIM’s contribution; however, he stated that AIM paid Washington, DC researcher Hugh Turley about $1,600 to lecture on the Foster case. (1)

Payments to Hugh Turley are not shown on AIM’s IRS accountings (990 reports).

British journalist Ambrose Evans-Pritchard also cited the "Knowlton defense fund" in his 1997 book, "The Secret Life of Bill Clinton." (2)

After extensive research, I have concluded the "Knowlton defense fund" does not exist. And logically, why would such a fund be created in the first place? Patrick Knowlton was the plaintiff in a harassment suit against the government, not a defendant. Consequently, there was no need to set up a "defense" fund because Knowlton was not being sued or prosecuted.

There is, however, a fund set up by Knowlton’s attorney, John Clarke, called the "Knowlton Legal Fund." Clarke, Knowlton, and Turley have a website (http://www.fbicover-up.com) which shows the Knowlton Legal Fund is located at 1730 K Street, NW, Suite 304, Washington, DC 20006. Clarke has stated publicly that the Knowlton Legal Fund does not have tax exempt status.

Reed Irvine apparently made false statements about the name of the fund for Knowlton’s legal expenses (Patrick Knowlton defense fund) in an attempt to confuse the public and the IRS about AIM’s secret financing of Knowlton’s politically explosive harassment suit.

IRS records reveal that AIM paid an additional $65,000 to finance Jim Sanders’ legal expenses. Sanders was prosecuted for allegedly revealing classified information about the downing of TWA Flight 800. Sanders wrote a book on that subject.

Writer/researcher Michael Collins Piper asserted, in his book, "Final Judgment," that AIM was a front for Israel.(3)

AIM’s tax records corroborate Piper’s assertion that AIM is in fact financed by a moneyed interest of some sort, but US tax law protects AIM and other tax exempt organizations from disclosing the specific identities of their contributors.

AIM’s tax records reveal the following information:

In 1995, an unnamed entity contributed $630,000 to AIM. Three other anonymous contributors paid $400,000; $100,000; and $75,000 respectively. AIM’s annual revenue in 1995 was $1.64 million.

In 1996, an unnamed entity contributed $250,000 to AIM. Three other anonymous contributors paid $189,000; $100,000; and $75,000 respectively. AIM’s annual revenue in 1996 was $1.95 million.

In 1999, an unnamed entity contributed $385,000 to AIM. Three other anonymous contributors paid $187,000; $100,000; and $76,000 respectively. AIM’s annual revenue in 1999 was $2.2 million.

In 2000, an unnamed entity contributed $300,000 to AIM. Three other anonymous contributors paid $223,000; $95,000; and $75,000 respectively. AIM’s annual revenue in 2000 was $1.96 million.

IRS records indicate the following individuals were on AIM’s board from 1995 through 2001.

Reed Irvine, Chairman

Washington, DC

Murray Baron, President

Rye, New York

Donald Irvine, Executive Secretary

Washington, DC

Wilson C. Lucom, Vice-President

Palm Beach, Florida

Samuel Shepard Jones, Jr.; Treasurer/General Counsel

Washington, DC

Dr. Paul Busiek, Director

Springfield, Missouri

James Davis, Director

Darien, Connecticut

Joan Hueter, Director

Washington, DC

Malcolm E. Smith, Director

Saint James, New York

John W. Ulhmann, Director

Kansas City, Missouri

Mrs. Beverly Danielson, Director

Coral Gables, Florida

Dr. Charles Moser, Director

Sofia, Bulgaria

Larry Klayman, Director

Washington, DC

-----

[A discussion forum about the Foster case, and Reed Irvine’s involvement therein, can be viewed at http://www.jfkmontreal.com/foster_oslo_debate.htm .]

NOTES:

(1) Reed Irvine’s public statement was made in an Internet discussion forum, "The Oslo Accords, motive for Vince Foster's murder(?)." (reference Communiqué # 26) http://www.jfkmontreal.com/foster_oslo_debate.htm

(2) Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, "The Secret Life of Bill Clinton," pp 177-178

(3) Michael Collins Piper, "Final Judgment," 5th edition, pp 277-278

Salvador shifts to final phase of discussion.

[107] November 18, 2002  (see Communiqué # 95)

Salvador announces that final comments are being accepted.

To view summary of final messages, click here.

To view detailed final messages, click here.

(Communiqué # 95 to end.)

Communiqué # 10: From Salvador to Hugh Turley, August 18, 2002

Synopsis: Salvador advises Turley that he will communicate with Patrick Knowlton's attorney, John Clarke, but not with Knowlton directly (for obvious reasons). Salvador further advises Turley that the simplest way to handle the Knowlton issue is for the two of them (Turley and Knowlton) to answer the questions about Knowlton's background and submit them for public disclosure on Salvador's webpage.

Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 21:38:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Questions about Patrick Knowlton et al.
To: "Turley" <Turley@acninc.net>

August 18, 2002

Dear Hugh Turley:

Salvador Astucia

From Salvador Astucia Sun Aug 18 21:38:37 2002
Received: from [205.188.201.193] by web14906.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 18 Aug 2002 21:38:37 PDT
Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 21:38:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Questions about Patrick Knowlton et al.
To: "Turley" <Turley@acninc.net>
In-Reply-To: <001901c2473e$8590d0c0$a219c943@turley>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 1752

From: "JohnClarke" <JohnHClarke@earthlink.net>
To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com
Subject: Foster
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 19:58:43 -0700

Dear [Salvador Astucia],

Please do not edit any of this e-mail before posting it, including this sentence, except editing out your name, as is your practice.

You have my permission to correspond directly with Patrick Knowlton.

If you have any evidence, as opposed to speculation, on Foster's murderers, I would be interested in seeing it. It occurs to me that your handling of the matter has a tendency to discredit whatever theory you may have, by, among other things, espousing ludicrous theories about Patrick, Hugh, AIM, and me. For your information, mere theory, without evidence, has a tendency to discredit that theory.

Do not accuse me of surreptitiously working for anyone.

I expect that this will be my only communication to you, as you seem to be a waste of time.

John Clarke

From JohnClarke Tue Aug 20 19:58:43 2002
X-Apparently-To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com via -40.-120.-31.53; 20 Aug 2002 19:58:10 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <johnhclarke@earthlink.net>
Received: from 207.217.120.22 (EHLO hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.22) by mta567.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 20 Aug 2002 19:58:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from user-2ivekb1.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.247.81.97] helo=DD07C711) by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 17hLhA-0006HI-00 for salvador_astucia@yahoo.com; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 19:58:09 -0700
Message-ID: <000801c248be$cbc2e9d0$6151f7a5@DD07C711>
From: "JohnClarke" <JohnHClarke@earthlink.net>
To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com
Subject: Foster
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 19:58:43 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01C24883.FC851150"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Content-Length: 1328

Communiqué # 12: From Salvador to John Clarke, August 21, 2002

Synopsis: Salvador repeats most of the questions and reveals that David Martin (aka, DC Dave) was the source of much of the information about Knowlton's background.

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 00:18:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Foster
To: "JohnClarke" <JohnHClarke@earthlink.net>


August 21, 2002

Dear John Clarke,

For someone who co-authored a book entitled "Failure
of the Public Trust," you are quite the master at
dodging questions. You failed to answer even one of my
nine questions about Patrick Knowlton’s background.
Your second book should be called "Failure of
Salvador’s Trust."

To see the questions, go to the following URL:
http://www.jfkmontreal.com/foster_oslo_debate.htm

Also, I am confused about the following statement you
made in your previous email:

"You have my permission to correspond directly with
Patrick Knowlton."

With all due respect, I never requested permission to
correspond directly with your thuggish client. On the
contrary, I specifically asked Hugh Turley to keep him
as far away from my house as possible. (see Communiqué
# 10 on website) Where do you get off giving me
permission to communicate with Knowlton? Are you his
legal guardian?

Please advise your client that it would be extremely
unwise to set foot on my property as he threatened to
do in his harassing phone message. (see transcript of
Knowlton's phone message, August 19th, on website)

Also, I request that you identify the low life who
gave your hoodlum client my work and home phone
numbers. That is telephone harassment and invasion of
privacy. The public and I have a right to know who
divulged that personal information to Knowlton.

In addition, Mr. Knowlton insinuated that I talked
behind his back, along with Carol Valentine. My
remarks were made in a public forum but he lacks the
courage to give a public response. He would rather
stalk me at work and home.

Regarding Carol Valentine, why is he dragging her into
this? Please ask your client to explain why her name
was mentioned. Why are his panties in such a wad?

Also, you stated that I "espoused ludicrous" theories
about Patrick Knowlton, Hugh Turley, Accuracy in Media
and yourself.

Firstly, I never espoused any theories about Mr.
Turley, ludicrous or otherwise. I merely challenged
him to a public debate because we had a difference of
opinion in a private email exchange which he
initiated. We were discussing my assertion (from my
book, Opium Lords) that fanatic Israelis could very
well have sponsored Foster’s murder in order to thwart
the Oslo Accords. Turley disagreed, but he never
explained why. It is fact, not theory, that when the
debate was taken to a public forum, Mr. Turley hid
like a scared rabbit and is still hiding.

Secondly, you advised me not to accuse you of
surreptitiously working for anyone. I did not accuse
you of anything. I just asked a question which you
have yet to answer.

Did Accuracy in Media pay you to represent Patrick
Knowlton in his harassment law suit against the United
States Government?

Regarding AIM’s connection to the Mossad, that is not
my speculation alone. Lots of people say it.
David Martin (aka, DC Dave) has told me that on
several occasions. Michael Collins Piper wrote
extensively about AIM’s Israeli connection in his
book, Final Judgment (reference page 278, 5th
edition). So other people have stated it, not just me.
You are correct that it is a theory, but it is not my
theory.

I never espoused a ludicrous theory about Knowlton
either. I merely asked a few questions which neither
he, Turley or you have answered. He has already
demonstrated to the public--through his harassment of
me--that he is a thug. The question is, Did this thug
murder Vince Foster? But that is for a jury to decide,
not me.

Before we can seriously consider asking such a
question, we must corroborate a few things.

* Was Patrick Knowlton ever employed as Chief of
Security--or in any security function--at the Saudi
Arabian embassy in Washington, DC? This information
originally came from David Martin (aka, DC Dave).
I merely want to corroborate its accuracy. Was DC Dave
spreading a false rumor, or was he telling the truth?

* What years did Mr. Knowlton work at the Saudi
embassy (if in fact he did work there at all)?

* Did Mr. Knowlton own a registered firearm when he
worked at the Saudi Arabian embassy (if he worked
there)?

* Was Mr. Knowlton carrying a registered or
unregistered firearm with him when he stopped at Fort
Marcy Park to relieve himself on July 20, 1993, the
day Vince Foster was killed?

* To your knowledge, has Mr. Knowlton ever been
considered a suspect in the murder of Vince Foster?
This includes FBI, local police, independent
researchers, and private investigators. Has he ever
been considered a suspect by any of them?

These are legitimate questions. Shame on you for
labeling them ludicrous theories. This sort of
negative labeling serves no useful purpose and does no

one any good.

I trust in your next email, you will be more
forthcoming with truthful answers.

Regards,

Salvador Astucia

[omitted Clarke's email]


=====
Salvador Astucia, author of "Opium Lords" (416 pages), the book that
solved the JFK murder.

* View online at http://www.jfkmontreal.com

* or purchase book for $29 in USA, $34 worldwide (includes shipping).
See ordering info. at http://www.jfkmontreal.com/order_hardcopy.htm


From Salvador Astucia Wed Aug 21 00:18:55 2002
Received: from [64.12.105.47] by web14903.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 21 Aug 2002 00:18:55 PDT
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 00:18:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com> | This is Spam | Add to Address Book
Subject: Re: Foster
To: "JohnClarke" <JohnHClarke@earthlink.net>
In-Reply-To: <000801c248be$cbc2e9d0$6151f7a5@DD07C711>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 3057

Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 21:00:01 -0400
To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com
From: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>
Subject: Some questions for DC Dave/Sal's website
CC: dcdave1@erols.com, dcdave1@hotmail.com
 

David [aka, DC Dave]:

Without doubt, you are one of the leading researchers on the death of
Vincent Foster.

We all know Patrick Knowlton was a key witness in the Foster case.
At the time Mr. Knowlton visited Ft. Marcy Park on the day Foster's
body was discovered there, his occupation was said to have been a
construction worker. He is now a tour guide working in Washington,
D.C.

But Mr. Turley met Mr. Knowlton before the Vince Foster case. When
Mr. Turley first met Mr. Knowlton, Mr. Knowlton was the director of
security for the Saudi Arabian Embassy. I have two reliable sources
for this information. I will cite them if you like. Just let me
know.

Saudi security chief, construction worker, tour guide. It's an
unusual career progression, I'm sure you will agree.

Up until a very short time ago, Saudi Arabia and the US were two peas
in a pod. Saudi Arabia was regarded by some observers as a testing
grounds for US police state technology and methods. It is hard to
imagine the Saudi Embassy in Washington, D.C. hired some yokel off
the street to fill their security job. Surely Mr. Knowlton had a
professional background that would have qualified him for the job.

We can imagine that secretaries at the Saudi Embassy would be
carefully screened. How much more carefully would they screen a
security man? We might expect that the Saudi Embassy consulted the US
concerning their hiring of Mr. Knowlton, and that the US did the
background check for the Saudis and gave them an "all clear, Mr.
Knowlton is a good, reliable, lad."

Have you ever asked these questions:

1. What did Mr. Knowlton do professionally before going to work for
the Saudi Embassy? Put in other words: Who was Mr. Knowlton's
employer before the Saudis, and in what capacity did he work?

2. What were Mr. Knowlton's qualifications that enabled him to be
hired by the Saudis?

3. How, why, when, etc., did Mr. Knowlton go from being the Saudi
security man to being a construction worker, and then to being a tour
guide? Most especially, when, and under what conditions, did Mr.
Knowlton leave Saudi employ?

4. If the answers to these questions are not of interest to you,
please tell why.

Thank you.

--
Carol A. Valentine
President, Public Action, Inc.
http://www.Public-Action.com

DON'T ANSWER OPINION POLLS ABOUT 9-11 OR ANYTHING ELSE.
Opinion polls and survey questions help the psywarriors design more
efficient lie campaigns.

Don't answer opinion polls, whether they are being taken by
establishment media or so-called "alternate" news sources. Don't
answer opinion polls! Don't help them fool you or your neighbor.
Don't answer survey questions!

911 Lies exposed at http://www.public-action.com/
* Pentagon RESCUE? Open, Bloody, Questions . . .
* Merry Christmas, and OFF WITH YOUR HEAD!
* Flight Of The Bumble Planes
* Did NORAD Send The "Suicide" Jets
Parts 1 & 2, "Inside Job" and 'Dumb Blondes"
* Sen. Levin, NORAD and Chabad Lubavitch
* Tooth Fairies and Suicide Bombers
* Church of The Nativity: Who's Who In Staged Siege?
* Church Of The Nativity And Waco Paradigm
* Operation 911: NO SUICIDE PILOTS
* Tom Clancy Speaks About 9-11
* Mike Rivero, Israeli Spies, and 9-11 Diversions
* Show And Tell, Mike Rivero
* The Taliban Home Video
* Osamarina bin Laden
* Bin Laden: AUTHENTIC INTERVIEW
* 911 Terror: Muslims Suspend Laws of Physics
* Operation Northwoods: The Counterfeit
* Osama bin Surplus
* Osama bin CIA Agent
* Press Uses Actors In War On Islam
* Anti-war.com: Slyly Justifying War on Islam

From Carol A. Valentine Wed Aug 21 18:00:01 2002
X-Apparently-To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com via -40.-120.-31.60; 21 Aug 2002 18:03:56 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <skywriter@erols.com>
Received: from 207.172.4.107 (EHLO smtp-hub.mrf.mail.rcn.net) (207.172.4.107) by mta426.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 21 Aug 2002 18:03:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.62]) by smtp-hub.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #5) id 17hgOB-0003aE-00; Wed, 21 Aug 2002 21:03:55 -0400
Received: from 66-44-71-14.s268.tnt9.lnhva.md.dialup.rcn.com ([66.44.71.14] helo=[192.168.123.122]) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #6) id 17hgO6-0006O4-00; Wed, 21 Aug 2002 21:03:52 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: skywriter@pop.erols.com
Message-Id: <p0432040db989bfd92297@[192.168.123.122]>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 21:00:01 -0400
To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com
From: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com> | This is Spam | Add to Address Book
Subject: Some questions for DC Dave/Sal's website
CC: dcdave1@erols.com, dcdave1@hotmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Content-Length: 1867

Communiqué # 14: From DC Dave to Carol Valentine, August 22, 2002

Synopsis: DC Dave responds to Carol Valentine. He has never asked questions about Knowlton's employment history prior to the Saudi embassy job but he adds that the "Saudi security connection was a bit overblown." He invites Hugh Turley to "help us clear the air" about Knowlton's job history. He also accuses Salvador of engaging in "spiteful trickery" on this webpage, but he does not present evidence to back up the charge. To safeguard against such trickery, DC Dave says he will post all responses to this discussion thread on alt.thebird (Usenet newsgroup). He further states that Hugh Turley does not owe anyone an accounting for his income.

From: "David Martin" <dcdave1@hotmail.com>
To: skywriter@erols.com, salvador_astucia@yahoo.com
CC: dcdave1@erols.com, Turley@acninc.net
Bcc:
Subject: Re: Some questions for DC Dave/Sal's website
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 13:04:13 +0000


Certainly the questions are of interest to me, but I am not in a position to answer them. I have been given to believe that the Saudi security connection was a bit overblown. As far as construction work is concerned, some people are very good with their hands and it provides them with a ready income and a good deal of freedom to work when and where they choose.

Knowlton could well be one of those people. I think it generally pays better than tour guide work and I wonder, too, why Mr. Knowlton would be doing the latter if he is experienced and capable in the former. Maybe he just finds it more enjoyable and the income is adequate for his chosen lifestyle.

It would help if Hugh could help us clear the air here a little bit. Vague suspicions based on third hand hearsay are one thing; public charges of involvement in a murder based upon those suspicions are something else again.

I have no problem with this response, including all addressees, being placed on Salvador's web site, as long as he puts it up straight and avoids spiteful trickery. Better yet, I think a better place for the exchange would be on Usenet, especially alt.thebird.

I would trust that Mr. Turley and Mr. Knowlton, as well, could join us in climbing down off the high horse of righteous indignation and clearing the air here, if, in fact, it can be cleared. I do not think that Mr. Turley owes anyone an accounting for his income anymore than you or I or "Salvador Astucia" do.

[Omitted Carol Valentine's email.]

----

DC Dave (David Martin)
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh," "America's Dreyfus
Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster," and the "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression." For those and collected writings go to http://thebird.org/host/dcdave.

From David Martin Thu Aug 22 06:04:13 2002
X-Apparently-To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com via -40.-120.-31.56; 22 Aug 2002 06:04:13 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <dcdave1@hotmail.com>
Received: from 216.33.241.140 (EHLO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.140) by mta404.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 22 Aug 2002 06:04:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 22 Aug 2002 06:04:13 -0700
Received: from 146.142.39.134 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 22 Aug 2002 13:04:13 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [146.142.39.134]
From: "David Martin" <dcdave1@hotmail.com>
To: skywriter@erols.com, salvador_astucia@yahoo.com
CC: dcdave1@erols.com, Turley@acninc.net
Bcc:
Subject: Re: Some questions for DC Dave/Sal's website
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 13:04:13 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F140wm77WobyuZaFUHv00016d91@hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Aug 2002 13:04:13.0595 (UTC) FILETIME=[69C50EB0:01C249DC]
Content-Length: 2993
 

From: "David Martin" <dcdave1@hotmail.com>
To: skywriter@erols.com, salvador_astucia@yahoo.com
CC: dcdave1@erols.com, Turley@acninc.net
Bcc:
Subject: Re: Some questions for DC Dave/Sal's website
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 14:38:09 +0000


Carol,

Patrick Knowlton's telephone number is listed in the Washington, DC, telephone book. It is [number omitted by moderator]. I don't know of any better way to get an answer to your questions than by calling him and asking him. Since it would be hearsay coming from me--and I have been known to get things not exactly right--I suggest that you ask him these questions yourself.

Also, if you plan to record the telephone call, I suggest that, as a courtesy, you inform him of that fact. Although, my suggestion is that it would be a greater courtesy not to record it and to inform him that you were not recording it, unless he preferred that it be recorded.

Again, in recognition of the subject title, I am treating this as a public communication.

Dave
----

DC Dave (David Martin)
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh," "America's Dreyfus
Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster," and the "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression." For those and collected writings go to http://thebird.org/host/dcdave.

From David Martin Thu Aug 22 07:38:09 2002
X-Apparently-To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com via -40.-120.-31.57; 22 Aug 2002 07:38:10 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <dcdave1@hotmail.com>
Received: from 216.33.241.110 (EHLO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.110) by mta544.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 22 Aug 2002 07:38:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 22 Aug 2002 07:38:10 -0700
Received: from 146.142.39.134 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 22 Aug 2002 14:38:09 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [146.142.39.134]
From: "David Martin" <dcdave1@hotmail.com>
To: skywriter@erols.com, salvador_astucia@yahoo.com
CC: dcdave1@erols.com, Turley@acninc.net
Bcc:
Subject: Re: Some questions for DC Dave/Sal's website
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 14:38:09 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F110BqujsclWXSZ3Zs300016eca@hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Aug 2002 14:38:10.0333 (UTC) FILETIME=[898704D0:01C249E9]
Content-Length: 2617

Communiqué # 16: From Carol Valentine to DC Dave, August 24, 2002

Synopsis: Carol Valentine calls DC Dave's response to her Knowlton questions a dodge, and says that DC Dave's credibility is at stake now.

Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 08:44:27 -0400
To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com, dcdave1@erols.com, dcdave1@hotmail.com
From: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Some questions for DC Dave (spooky AIM)


>Certainly the questions are of interest to me, but I am not in a
>position to answer them.


You don't have the answers because you never investigated the matter.
Knowlton was presented as a good guy, and you took it all at face
value, dispite his odd background.

> I have been given to believe that the Saudi security connection
>was a bit overblown.

" . . . given to understand . . . " By whom? Please be more
forthcoming.

>As far as construction work is concerned, some people are very good
>with their hands and it provides them with a ready income and a good
>deal of freedom to work when and where they choose. Knowlton could
>well be one of those people. I think it generally pays better than
>tour guide work and I wonder, too, why Mr. Knowlton would be doing
>the latter if he is experienced and capable in the former. Maybe he
>just finds it more enjoyable and the income is adequate for his
>chosen lifestyle.

This is speculation. A real honest to goodness Foster researcher --
who sees the many anomalies in the Knowlton story, as you do --
surely would have investigated.

You're a bright lad. You think logically. You appreciate SOURCE
material You know a reporter does not pull answers out of the air.
He checks them out in the real world. Yet throughout the years, you
have not investigated this aspect of the Knowlton story.

You know Accuracy in Media is rotten to the core. You know that Reed
Irvine and the man who used to be his executive director, Roger
Aranoff (still with AIM), did whatever they could to help cover up
the torture and murder of the Branch Davidians. Recall that they
promoted "Waco: The Rules of Engagement." Over the years -- even
once at one of Irvine's little lunches that all the spooks attend --
I exposed the lies in that fake opposition video. But AIM ignored it
all, and kept on pumping the govt. line. Aranoff publicly admitted
to being a friend of one of the principals of "Waco: The Rules of
Engagement."

You know the late Bernie Yoh, AIM big wig, was an intelligence
operative.

You believe Joe Goulden is a spook.

Why would the spooky AIM fund Knowlton's legal case? Yet in all the
years you have been writing about the Foster case, you have never
seen fit to dig into this. Now that Salvador turns the public light
on the anomaly, you go bananas and try to get him to back off, try to
get him to take the debate down from his website.

>
>It would help if Hugh could help us clear the air here a little bit.

Hugh Turley's credibility is not on the line at the moment. Your
credibility is on the line. It seems to me that you dropped the ball
on your Foster investigation at the 99 yard line. Or was it the 50
yard line?

>Vague suspicions based on third hand hearsay are one thing; public
>charges of involvement in a murder based upon those suspicions are
>something else again.

Again, no one I know has publicly accused Knowlton of murdering Vince
Foster. However, you keep on denying publicly what has never been
charged publicly.

Had the FBI been doing an honest job of investigating, Knowlton
should have been considered a suspect in the Foster death,
considering his background and his presence at Ft. Marcy Park at a
critical day/time. But you failed to comment on this anomaly. When
Salvador mentioned the anomaly, you attacked him.

>
>I have no problem with this response, including all addressees,
>being placed on Salvador's web site, as long as he puts it up
>straight and avoids spiteful trickery. Better yet, I think a better
>place for the exchange would be on Usenet, especially alt.thebird.
>
>I would trust that Mr. Turley and Mr. Knowlton, as well, could join
>us in climbing down off the high horse of righteous indignation and
>clearing the air here, if, in fact, it can be cleared. I do not
>think that Mr. Turley owes anyone an accounting for his income
>anymore than you or I or "Salvador Astucia" do.

From a theoretical view: If a person like Hugh, who claims to be a
whistleblower, actually derives only a portion of his income as a
magician and the rest from the spook community, are you not
interested? Good heavens, how strange.

>
>
>>From: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>
>>To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com
>>CC: dcdave1@erols.com, dcdave1@hotmail.com
>>Subject: Some questions for DC Dave/Sal's website
>>Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 21:00:01 -0400
>>
>>David:
>>
>>Without doubt, you are one of the leading researchers on the death
>>of Vincent Foster.
>>
>>We all know Patrick Knowlton was a key witness in the Foster case.
>>At the time Mr. Knowlton visited Ft. Marcy Park on the day Foster's
>>body was discovered there, his occupation was said to have been a
>>construction worker. He is now a tour guide working in Washington,
>>D.C.
>>
>>But Mr. Turley met Mr. Knowlton before the Vince Foster case. When
>>Mr. Turley first met Mr. Knowlton, Mr. Knowlton was the director of
>>security for the Saudi Arabian Embassy. I have two reliable
>>sources for this information. I will cite them if you like. Just
>>let me know.
>>
>>Saudi security chief, construction worker, tour guide. It's an
>>unusual career progression, I'm sure you will agree.
>>
>>Up until a very short time ago, Saudi Arabia and the US were two
>>peas in a pod. Saudi Arabia was regarded by some observers as a
>>testing grounds for US police state technology and methods. It is
>>had to imagine the Saudi Embassy in Washington, D.C.hired some
>>yokel off the street to fill their security job. Surely Mr.
>>Knowlton had a professional background that would have qualified
>>him for the job.
>>
>>We can imagine that secretaries at the Saudi Embassy would be
>>carefully screened. How much more carefully would they screen a
>>security man? We might expect that the Saudi Embassy consulted the
>>US concerning their hiring of Mr. Knowlton, and that the US did the
>>background check for the Saudis and gave them an "all clear, Mr.
>>Knowlton is a good, reliable, lad."
>>
>>Have you ever asked these questions:
>>
>>1. What did Mr. Knowlton do professionally before going to work
>>for the Saudi Embassy? Put in other words: Who was Mr. Knowlton's
>>employer before the Saudis, and in what capacity did he work?
>>
>>2. What were Mr. Knowlton's qualifications that enabled him to be
>>hired by the Saudis?
>>
>>3. How, why, when, etc., did Mr. Knowlton go from a being the
>>Saudi security man to being a construction worker, and then to
>>being a tour guide? Most especially, when, and under what
>>conditions, did Mr. Knowlton leave Saudi employ?
>>
>>4. If the answers to these questions are not of interest to you,
>>please tell why.
>>
>>Thank you.
>>
>>--
>>Carol A. Valentine
>>President, Public Action, Inc.
>>http://www.Public-Action.com
>>
>>DON'T ANSWER OPINION POLLS ABOUT 9-11 OR ANYTHING ELSE.
>>Opinion polls and survey questions help the psywarriors design more
>>efficient lie campaigns.
>>Don't answer opinion polls, whether they are being taken by
>>establishment media or so-called "alternate" news sources. Don't
>>answer opinion polls! Don't help them fool you or your neighbor.
>>Don't answer survey questions!
>>
>>911 Lies exposed at http://www.public-action.com/
>>* Pentagon RESCUE? Open, Bloody, Questions . . .
>>* Merry Christmas, and OFF WITH YOUR HEAD!
>>* Flight Of The Bumble Planes
>>* Did NORAD Send The "Suicide" Jets
>> Parts 1 & 2, "Inside Job" and 'Dumb Blondes"
>>* Sen. Levin, NORAD and Chabad Lubavitch
>>* Tooth Fairies and Suicide Bombers
>>* Church of The Nativity: Who's Who In Staged Siege?
>>* Church Of The Nativity And Waco Paradigm
>>* Operation 911: NO SUICIDE PILOTS
>>* Tom Clancy Speaks About 9-11
>>* Mike Rivero, Israeli Spies, and 9-11 Diversions
>>* Show And Tell, Mike Rivero
>>* The Taliban Home Video
>>* Osamarina bin Laden
>>* Bin Laden: AUTHENTIC INTERVIEW
>>* 911 Terror: Muslims Suspend Laws of Physics
>>* Operation Northwoods: The Counterfeit
>>* Osama bin Surplus
>>* Osama bin CIA Agent
>>* Press Uses Actors In War On Islam
>>* Anti-war.com: Slyly Justifying War on Islam
>
>
>
>
>----
>
>DC Dave (David Martin)
>Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh," "America's Dreyfus
>Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster," and the "Seventeen
>Techniques for Truth Suppression." For those and collected writings
>go to http://thebird.org/host/dcdave.
>
>
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
>http://www.hotmail.com

--
Carol A. Valentine
President, Public Action, Inc.
http://www.Public-Action.com

DON'T ANSWER OPINION POLLS ABOUT 9-11 OR ANYTHING ELSE.
Opinion polls and survey questions help the psywarriors design more
efficient lie campaigns.
Don't answer opinion polls, whether they are being taken by
establishment media or so-called "alternate" news sources. Don't
answer opinion polls! Don't help them fool you or your neighbor.
Don't answer survey questions!

911 Lies exposed at http://www.public-action.com/
* Pentagon RESCUE? Open, Bloody, Questions . . .
* Merry Christmas, and OFF WITH YOUR HEAD!
* Flight Of The Bumble Planes
* Did NORAD Send The "Suicide" Jets
Parts 1 & 2, "Inside Job" and 'Dumb Blondes"
* Sen. Levin, NORAD and Chabad Lubavitch
* Tooth Fairies and Suicide Bombers
* Church of The Nativity: Who's Who In Staged Siege?
* Church Of The Nativity And Waco Paradigm
* Operation 911: NO SUICIDE PILOTS
* Tom Clancy Speaks About 9-11
* Mike Rivero, Israeli Spies, and 9-11 Diversions
* Show And Tell, Mike Rivero
* The Taliban Home Video
* Osamarina bin Laden
* Bin Laden: AUTHENTIC INTERVIEW
* 911 Terror: Muslims Suspend Laws of Physics
* Operation Northwoods: The Counterfeit
* Osama bin Surplus
* Osama bin CIA Agent
* Press Uses Actors In War On Islam
* Anti-war.com: Slyly Justifying War on Islam

From Carol A. Valentine Sat Aug 24 05:44:27 2002
X-Apparently-To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com via -40.-120.-31.60; 24 Aug 2002 05:45:42 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <skywriter@erols.com>
Received: from 207.172.4.76 (EHLO smtp-hub2.mrf.mail.rcn.net) (207.172.4.76) by mta499.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 Aug 2002 05:45:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.61]) by smtp-hub2.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #5) id 17iaIP-0003gr-00; Sat, 24 Aug 2002 08:45:41 -0400
Received: from 66-44-89-232.s613.tnt1.lnhva.md.dialup.rcn.com ([66.44.89.232] helo=[192.168.123.122]) by smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #6) id 17iaIN-0000CD-00; Sat, 24 Aug 2002 08:45:39 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: skywriter@pop.erols.com
Message-Id: <p04320400b98ab10aea95@[192.168.123.122]>
In-Reply-To: <F140wm77WobyuZaFUHv00016d91@hotmail.com>
References: <F140wm77WobyuZaFUHv00016d91@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 08:44:27 -0400
To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com, dcdave1@erols.com, dcdave1@hotmail.com
From: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Some questions for DC Dave (spooky AIM)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Length: 4485

Communiqué # 17: From Carol Valentine to DC Dave, August 24, 2002

Synopsis: Carol Valentine discovers Hugh Turley derives income from Reed Irvine's AIM, and that Irvine recently lauded the media's coverage of 9-11. She says: what better evidence that Irvine is a seamless liar and a front man for the Zionists? She reminds Dave that AIM sponsors Knowlton, Clark, and Turely, and that when Salvador tries to throw the light on matters, DC Dave attacks Salvador. "Sounds to me like you have picked sides. I confess I'm disappointed with your choice."

Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 08:43:09 -0400
To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com, "David Martin" <dcdave1@hotmail.com>
From: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>
Subject: Hugh Turley's income


In a thread entitled: "Some questions for DC Dave/Sal's website," DC
Dave said this:

<text snipped -- see previous e-mail>

> I do not think that Mr. Turley owes anyone an accounting for his
>income anymore than you or I or "Salvador Astucia" do.

Mr. Turley claims to be an independent whistleblower. He has also
stated publicly that he makes his living as a children's magician --
he has made the source of his income a matter of public record. Even
the people on the whitewater board talked about "Clown Turley,"
because Turley gave the information out himself.

If a person claims 1) he is an independent whistleblower, and 2) he
earns a living as a children's magician, but 3) he actually also
derives income from a tainted source, are you not interested?

Hugh charges $350 a pop for his magician performances. This is an
expensive area (Washington, DC) in which to live. How many magic
shows would Hugh have to do a week to make a decent living? You
calculate.

Yet Hugh Turley not only does the required number of magic shows --
he also travels. Not only does he travel while doing the required
number of magic shows -- but he also does in-depth research on
various topics of public interest.

Sorry. Hugh could not do enough magic shows to support himself while
doing the rest.

Since the discussion of Accuracy In Media came up, I began to notice
a similarity between the Accuracy In Media project and what Mr.
Turley does. Accuracy in Media complains about press lies, while all
the time failing to expose the ethnic/political interests who owns
the press. Thus I began to wonder if Hugh Turley was getting
income from AIM.

Go to:
http://www.aim.org/

And click on "Speakers" on the left margin.

You will see Hugh Turley listed as an AIM speaker, along with . . .
well, read for yourself. After you read that, click on the "Hugh
Turley" button and read this:

===

Hugh Patrick Turley, a.k.a. "The Amazing Debunkerman" has been
entertaining audiences throughout the United States for the past
20 years. He has performed at White House functions and
entertained royal families, members of the Supreme Court,
Senators, Congressmen, and America's leading journalists.

His radio and television appearances include CBS's Christmas in
Washington and NBC's Today Show. His observations have also
been featured in Paul Harvey News and he has appeared in a
documentary film and is a frequent guest on talk radio programs.

Turley is co-author of Failure of the Public Trust with Patrick
Knowlton and Washington lawyer John Clarke. "Turley raises
provocative questions," said Haynes Johnson, Pulitzer Prize
winner.

===

Wow! I didn't know Turley did magic shows for members of the Supreme
Court, Senators, and Congressmen! He sounds like he's wired in
pretty tight.

And look who speaks highly of Turley: Haynes Johnson, one of the
journalists you seem to regard as a phoney.
http://www.thebird.org/host/dcdave/article3/001126.html

So Hugh Turley, the magician, receives income from the very spooky
Accuracy In Media. Some months ago, I spoke to Hugh on the phone
myself and he mentioned he was selling himself as a speaker, without
mentioning he was in AIM's stable. I can understand why. I have
made my opinion of Reed Irvine known to Hugh over the years. I have
told Hugh that anyone who would help cover up the
torture-murder-mutiliation of the innocent Davidian children, as
Irvine as done, was the scum of the earth. So I am not surprised
that since Hugh is getting income from Irvine, he would not tell me.

You and I have been having a private e-mail exchange about Hugh
Turley's source of income. You NEVER mentioned that he was getting
income from AIM. In that correspondence, you claimed to know Turley
very, very, well. When I challenged you to explain his sources of
income, you did not answer. And please don't say I should have asked
Turley. Obviously I was testing your knowledge about Turley's income.

While dodging my questions about his income, did you know Hugh was
deriving income from AIM?

*** David Martin and AIM? ***

Reed Irvine used to run an operation called Accuracy in Academia. I
know you have a great interest in what is happening among college
professors in the US. It occurs to me that work and interests pretty
strongly coincide with Irvine's projects. What I'm wondering is this:
Have you ever received income from Accuracy In Media or any of
Irvine's other fronts?

It's easy to see how a person could be led to do that. It would be
easy to say: "Let me write this for AIM. I am genuinely interested
in the Foster case/the media anyway. I can tell the public some
truth and get paid, too. Of course I'll have to drop the ball at the
99 yard line, or the 75 yard yard, but still, that's a very good
deal."

I know any number of good, decent, well-meaning people who were
prepared to make compromises like this and who eventually got
themselves in ethical binds.

*** AIM, Israel, and 9-11 ***

On August 7, Reed Irvine published a commentary which you can read at
the AIM webpage. The AIM abstract reads thus:

==
Stinking Coverage of Pew Poll. On August 4, the Pew Research Center
released the results of a survey of 1,365 adults conducted in the
last two weeks of July. It found that the public's opinion of the
news media has fallen sharply from the levels attained in November in
the wake of the media's excellent coverage of 9/11.
==

Yes, that's right . . . Irvine says "in the wake of the media's
excellent coverage of 9/11."

You can read the full article at:

http://www.aim.org/publications/weekly_column/2002/08/07.html

You could not want any better evidence that Irvine is a seamless liar
and a front man for the Zionist press and a front man for Israel.
Irvine's AIM sponsors Knowlton, Clarke, and Turley. When Salvador
throws the light of day on the mess, you attack Salvador.

Sounds to me like you have picked sides. I confess I'm disappointed
with your choice.

Carol


--
Carol A. Valentine
President, Public Action, Inc.
http://www.Public-Action.com

DON'T ANSWER OPINION POLLS ABOUT 9-11 OR ANYTHING ELSE.
Opinion polls and survey questions help the psywarriors design more
efficient lie campaigns.
Don't answer opinion polls, whether they are being taken by
establishment media or so-called "alternate" news sources. Don't
answer opinion polls! Don't help them fool you or your neighbor.
Don't answer survey questions!

911 Lies exposed at http://www.public-action.com/
* Pentagon RESCUE? Open, Bloody, Questions . . .
* Merry Christmas, and OFF WITH YOUR HEAD!
* Flight Of The Bumble Planes
* Did NORAD Send The "Suicide" Jets
Parts 1 & 2, "Inside Job" and 'Dumb Blondes"
* Sen. Levin, NORAD and Chabad Lubavitch
* Tooth Fairies and Suicide Bombers
* Church of The Nativity: Who's Who In Staged Siege?
* Church Of The Nativity And Waco Paradigm
* Operation 911: NO SUICIDE PILOTS
* Tom Clancy Speaks About 9-11
* Mike Rivero, Israeli Spies, and 9-11 Diversions
* Show And Tell, Mike Rivero
* The Taliban Home Video
* Osamarina bin Laden
* Bin Laden: AUTHENTIC INTERVIEW
* 911 Terror: Muslims Suspend Laws of Physics
* Operation Northwoods: The Counterfeit
* Osama bin Surplus
* Osama bin CIA Agent
* Press Uses Actors In War On Islam
* Anti-war.com: Slyly Justifying War on Islam

From Carol A. Valentine Sat Aug 24 05:43:09 2002
X-Apparently-To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com via -40.-120.-31.62; 24 Aug 2002 05:44:56 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <skywriter@erols.com>
Received: from 207.172.4.76 (EHLO smtp-hub2.mrf.mail.rcn.net) (207.172.4.76) by mta532.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 Aug 2002 05:44:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.61]) by smtp-hub2.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #5) id 17iaHf-0003eL-00; Sat, 24 Aug 2002 08:44:55 -0400
Received: from 66-44-89-232.s613.tnt1.lnhva.md.dialup.rcn.com ([66.44.89.232] helo=[192.168.123.122]) by smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #6) id 17iaHd-0000CD-00; Sat, 24 Aug 2002 08:44:54 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: skywriter@pop.erols.com
Message-Id: <p04320404b98bb528b83d@[192.168.123.122]>
In-Reply-To: <F140wm77WobyuZaFUHv00016d91@hotmail.com>
References: <F140wm77WobyuZaFUHv00016d91@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 08:43:09 -0400
To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com, "David Martin" <dcdave1@hotmail.com>
From: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>
Subject: Hugh Turley's income
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Content-Length: 3829

Communiqué # 18: From Carol Valentine to DC Dave, August 24, 2002

Synopsis: Carol Valentine tells DC Dave that the Foster death is his baby, not hers.  She says that through the years Dave has not  investigated Knowlton himself, and still shows no interest in doing so.  Valentine discusses recording phone conversations, and laments not have a recording of a certain telephone conversation.

Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 08:43:40 -0400
To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com, dcdave1@erols.com, dcdave1@hotmail.com
From: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Some questions for DC Dave (Phone #)


>Carol,
>
>Patrick Knowlton's telephone number is listed in the Washington, DC,
>telephone book. It is [phone number omitted]. I don't know of any better
>way to get an answer to your questions than by calling him and
>asking him. Since it would be hearsay coming from me--and I have
>been known to get things not exactly right--I suggest that you ask
>him these questions yourself.

The Foster death is YOUR baby, not mine. You're the expert -- the
expert who failed to ask pertinent questions about Knowlton's strange
background all these years. Yet even now you show no interest in
pursuing the matter.

>
>Also, if you plan to record the telephone call, I suggest that, as a
>courtesy, you inform him of that fact. Although, my suggestion is
>that it would be a greater courtesy not to record it and to inform
>him that you were not recording it, unless he preferred that it be
>recorded.

If I wanted to record a telephone call in which I was a party, the
laws of the state of Virginia would find nothing wrong with me doing
so. I would not be obligated to tell the other party.

If you can entertain the possibility that Knowlton killed Vince
Foster -- and you have -- why would you be concerned with me being
"courteous" to him? I marvel at your priorities.

>
>
>Again, in recognition of the subject title, I am treating this as a
>public communication.

Not a problem. Say, while we're on the subject, I sure wish I had a
recording of the telephone call you made to Salvador at his office
concerning this webpage:
http://www.jfkmontreal.com/foster_oslo_debate.htm

Salvador reports that even though you were at work yourself at the
time, you screamed at the top of of your lungs through the phone:

"Get that f***ing thing down!"

I sure wish I had a recording of THAT!

:-)

Salvador finally got a word in and asked if you had read the page,
and you said "No." I wonder, then, why you were demanding that it be
removed? Seems like someone else saw the page, burst a blood vessel,
and got you on the horn demanding you "DO SOMETHING." Who was that
person? If there was no such person, how were you upset by something
you had not read?

Carol

>
>Dave
>----
>
>DC Dave (David Martin)
>Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh," "America's Dreyfus
>Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster," and the "Seventeen
>Techniques for Truth Suppression." For those and collected writings
>go to http://thebird.org/host/dcdave.
>
>>From: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>
>>To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com
>>CC: dcdave1@erols.com, dcdave1@hotmail.com
>>Subject: Some questions for DC Dave/Sal's website
>>Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 21:00:01 -0400
>>
>>David:
>>
>>Without doubt, you are one of the leading researchers on the death
>>of Vincent Foster.
>>
>>We all know Patrick Knowlton was a key witness in the Foster case.
>>At the time Mr. Knowlton visited Ft. Marcy Park on the day Foster's
>>body was discovered there, his occupation was said to have been a
>>construction worker. He is now a tour guide working in Washington,
>>D.C.
>>
>>But Mr. Turley met Mr. Knowlton before the Vince Foster case. When
>>Mr. Turley first met Mr. Knowlton, Mr. Knowlton was the director of
>>security for the Saudi Arabian Embassy. I have two reliable
>>sources for this information. I will cite them if you like. Just
>>let me know.
>>
>>Saudi security chief, construction worker, tour guide. It's an
>>unusual career progression, I'm sure you will agree.
>>
>>Up until a very short time ago, Saudi Arabia and the US were two
>>peas in a pod. Saudi Arabia was regarded by some observers as a
>>testing grounds for US police state technology and methods. It is
>>had to imagine the Saudi Embassy in Washington, D.C.hired some
>>yokel off the street to fill their security job. Surely Mr.
>>Knowlton had a professional background that would have qualified
>>him for the job.
>>
>>We can imagine that secretaries at the Saudi Embassy would be
>>carefully screened. How much more carefully would they screen a
>>security man? We might expect that the Saudi Embassy consulted the
>>US concerning their hiring of Mr. Knowlton, and that the US did the
>>background check for the Saudis and gave them an "all clear, Mr.
>>Knowlton is a good, reliable, lad."
>>
>>Have you ever asked these questions:
>>
>>1. What did Mr. Knowlton do professionally before going to work
>>for the Saudi Embassy? Put in other words: Who was Mr. Knowlton's
>>employer before the Saudis, and in what capacity did he work?
>>
>>2. What were Mr. Knowlton's qualifications that enabled him to be
>>hired by the Saudis?
>>
>>3. How, why, when, etc., did Mr. Knowlton go from a being the
>>Saudi security man to being a construction worker, and then to
>>being a tour guide? Most especially, when, and under what
>>conditions, did Mr. Knowlton leave Saudi employ?
>>
>>4. If the answers to these questions are not of interest to you,
>>please tell why.
>>
>>Thank you.
>>
>>--
>>Carol A. Valentine
>>President, Public Action, Inc.
>>http://www.Public-Action.com
>>
>>DON'T ANSWER OPINION POLLS ABOUT 9-11 OR ANYTHING ELSE.
>>Opinion polls and survey questions help the psywarriors design more
>>efficient lie campaigns.
>>Don't answer opinion polls, whether they are being taken by
>>establishment media or so-called "alternate" news sources. Don't
>>answer opinion polls! Don't help them fool you or your neighbor.
>>Don't answer survey questions!
>>
>>911 Lies exposed at http://www.public-action.com/
>>* Pentagon RESCUE? Open, Bloody, Questions . . .
>>* Merry Christmas, and OFF WITH YOUR HEAD!
>>* Flight Of The Bumble Planes
>>* Did NORAD Send The "Suicide" Jets
>> Parts 1 & 2, "Inside Job" and 'Dumb Blondes"
>>* Sen. Levin, NORAD and Chabad Lubavitch
>>* Tooth Fairies and Suicide Bombers
>>* Church of The Nativity: Who's Who In Staged Siege?
>>* Church Of The Nativity And Waco Paradigm
>>* Operation 911: NO SUICIDE PILOTS
>>* Tom Clancy Speaks About 9-11
>>* Mike Rivero, Israeli Spies, and 9-11 Diversions
>>* Show And Tell, Mike Rivero
>>* The Taliban Home Video
>>* Osamarina bin Laden
>>* Bin Laden: AUTHENTIC INTERVIEW
>>* 911 Terror: Muslims Suspend Laws of Physics
>>* Operation Northwoods: The Counterfeit
>>* Osama bin Surplus
>>* Osama bin CIA Agent
>>* Press Uses Actors In War On Islam
>>* Anti-war.com: Slyly Justifying War on Islam
>
>
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
>http://www.hotmail.com

--
Carol A. Valentine
President, Public Action, Inc.
http://www.Public-Action.com

DON'T ANSWER OPINION POLLS ABOUT 9-11 OR ANYTHING ELSE.
Opinion polls and survey questions help the psywarriors design more
efficient lie campaigns.
Don't answer opinion polls, whether they are being taken by
establishment media or so-called "alternate" news sources. Don't
answer opinion polls! Don't help them fool you or your neighbor.
Don't answer survey questions!

911 Lies exposed at http://www.public-action.com/
* Pentagon RESCUE? Open, Bloody, Questions . . .
* Merry Christmas, and OFF WITH YOUR HEAD!
* Flight Of The Bumble Planes
* Did NORAD Send The "Suicide" Jets
Parts 1 & 2, "Inside Job" and 'Dumb Blondes"
* Sen. Levin, NORAD and Chabad Lubavitch
* Tooth Fairies and Suicide Bombers
* Church of The Nativity: Who's Who In Staged Siege?
* Church Of The Nativity And Waco Paradigm
* Operation 911: NO SUICIDE PILOTS
* Tom Clancy Speaks About 9-11
* Mike Rivero, Israeli Spies, and 9-11 Diversions
* Show And Tell, Mike Rivero
* The Taliban Home Video
* Osamarina bin Laden
* Bin Laden: AUTHENTIC INTERVIEW
* 911 Terror: Muslims Suspend Laws of Physics
* Operation Northwoods: The Counterfeit
* Osama bin Surplus
* Osama bin CIA Agent
* Press Uses Actors In War On Islam
* Anti-war.com: Slyly Justifying War on Islam

From Carol A. Valentine Sat Aug 24 05:43:40 2002
X-Apparently-To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com via -40.-120.-31.62; 24 Aug 2002 05:45:34 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <skywriter@erols.com>
Received: from 207.172.4.107 (EHLO smtp-hub.mrf.mail.rcn.net) (207.172.4.107) by mta492.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 Aug 2002 05:45:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.61]) by smtp-hub.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #5) id 17iaIG-0000j0-00; Sat, 24 Aug 2002 08:45:32 -0400
Received: from 66-44-89-232.s613.tnt1.lnhva.md.dialup.rcn.com ([66.44.89.232] helo=[192.168.123.122]) by smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #6) id 17iaIE-0000CD-00; Sat, 24 Aug 2002 08:45:30 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: skywriter@pop.erols.com
Message-Id: <p04320401b98ba812a4dd@[192.168.123.122]>
In-Reply-To: <F110BqujsclWXSZ3Zs300016eca@hotmail.com>
References: <F110BqujsclWXSZ3Zs300016eca@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 08:43:40 -0400
To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com, dcdave1@erols.com, dcdave1@hotmail.com
From: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Some questions for DC Dave (Phone #)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Length: 3514

Communiqué # 19: From DC Dave to Carol Valentine, August 24, 2002

Synopsis: DC Dave defends Patrick Knowlton, claiming that he has never done anything suspicious. He states that Knowlton has done everything to keep the Foster case alive and his testimony checks out. DC Dave accuses Salvador of "imprudent" use of public forum and generally complains that Salvador has been unfair to Knowlton and Turley. He infers that Salvador's facts are incorrect, but he does not point out any specific inaccuracies. He states that Salvador should have called Knowlton before making public charges.

From: "David Martin" <dcdave1@erols.com>
To: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>
CC: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Some questions for DC Dave (spooky AIM)
Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 12:48:25 -0400


I have never found it a priority to dig into Knowlton's background any further because, unlike Chris Ruddy, he has never done anything that I am aware of that undermines the search for truth and justice in the Foster case. Rather, everything he has done since I have known him has served to keep the Foster case alive, and that which is checkable in his testimony has checked out. Particularly, his description of the rust-brown car dovetails with other credible testimony. The only quibble I have with fbicover-up.com is with their drawing of Foster resisting someone attacking him with what looks like a .38 revolver when the logic of their argument would have the attackers hand holding a smaller caliber automatic.

Knowlton has also made no spook-like attempts to ingratiate himself with me to learn what I might be up to.

Therefore, I would not think of attacking Knowlton publicly and see no useful purpose served in doing so.

[DC Dave takes Salvador to task for his "imprudent" use of public forums; but he does so in a manner that might reveal Savlador's identity. The original text is therefore omitted.]

In his eagerness to impugn the integrity of Hugh Turley for having the effrontery to disagree with him over Vince Foster, he has made public charges against Knowlton with very serious implications. Anyone making such public charges has a clear obligation--and maybe what we have here is another example of an inability to act honorably--to make pretty doggone sure that he has his facts in order. As I have told you, Knowlton's phone number is in the book. He could quite easily have called him and asked him if the information he has heard about his employment and AIM's assistance on his law suit was correct, and even if they were correct to the letter he should really have thought twice before jumping to the conclusions that he has from them.

[Omitted off-topic ad hominem remarks.]

--------
DC Dave Author, "America's Dreyfus Affair, The Case of the Death of Vincent Foster"
"Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh"
"Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression"
http://www.thebird.org/host/dcdave
News group: alt.thebird

[Omitted original message from Valentine.]

From David Martin Sat Aug 24 09:48:25 2002
X-Apparently-To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com via -40.-120.-31.53; 24 Aug 2002 09:59:55 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <dcdave1@erols.com>
Received: from 207.172.4.76 (EHLO smtp-hub2.mrf.mail.rcn.net) (207.172.4.76) by mta578.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 Aug 2002 09:59:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.61]) by smtp-hub2.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #5) id 17ieFS-0002uU-00; Sat, 24 Aug 2002 12:58:54 -0400
Received: from 66-44-90-80.s588.tnt2.lnhva.md.dialup.rcn.com ([66.44.90.80] helo=WarriorPoet) by smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #6) id 17ieFP-0005NP-00; Sat, 24 Aug 2002 12:58:51 -0400
Message-ID: <000001c24b8f$85bc6c80$9865fea9@WarriorPoet>
From: "David Martin" <dcdave1@erols.com> | This is Spam | Add to Address Book
To: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>
CC: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>
References: <F140wm77WobyuZaFUHv00016d91@hotmail.com> <p04320400b98ab10aea95@[192.168.123.122]>
Subject: Re: Some questions for DC Dave (spooky AIM)
Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 12:48:25 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Content-Length: 6668

Communiqué # 20: From DC Dave to Carol Valentine, August 26, 2002

(Note: Valentine forwarded DC Dave's email to Salvador)

Synopsis: DC Dave addresses Hugh Turley's income from Accuracy in Media. He trivializes the fact that Turley is a paid speaker for AIM. He states that Turley's income from AIM was very low. He also says that AIM had no input in his presentations.

Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 20:04:26 -0400
To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com
From: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>
Subject: Subject: Re: Hugh Turley's income



X-Originating-IP: [146.142.39.134]
From: "David Martin" <dcdave1@hotmail.com>
To: skywriter@erols.com
Bcc:
Subject: Re: Hugh Turley's income
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 14:18:17 +0000
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Aug 2002 14:18:17.0903 (UTC)
FILETIME=[6C6FA3F0:01C24D0B]

You have not told me anything here that I did not know. Ray Heizer
has made a big deal of the reimbursement I received from Chris Ruddy
for the almost-new shoes he took from me after I served as his model
for the reenactment of the Foster death. This supposed expose is of
a piece with that. Turley's income from such AIM-sponsored
appearances has been disappointingly, but hardly unexpectedly small,
so small as to be inconsequential, and it is of very recent vintage.

You know nothing about the content of his presentation and I do. It
is all Turley and has no AIM input. It is a devastating indictment
of America's news media, as is his co-written "Failure of the Public
Trust."

>From: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>
>To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com, "David Martin" <dcdave1@hotmail.com>
>Subject: Hugh Turley's income
>Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 08:43:09 -0400
>
>In a thread entitled: "Some questions for DC Dave/Sal's website,"
>DC Dave said this:
>
><text snipped -- see previous e-mail>
>
>> I do not think that Mr. Turley owes anyone an accounting for his
>>income anymore than you or I or "Salvador Astucia" do.
>
>Mr. Turley claims to be an independent whistleblower. He has also
>stated publicly that he makes his living as a children's magician --
>he has made the source of his income a matter of public record.
>Even the people on the whitewater board talked about "Clown Turley,"
>because Turley gave the information out himself.

He did not volunteer it. Chris Ruddy "outed" him in a fit of pique.
Speaking of fits of pique, I do wish Turley had thought twice before
offending you with his e-mail jibe about "fooling people." Pretty
dumb move for a "spook," I'd say, right up there with spreading
suspicion about Patrick Knowlton.

>
>If a person claims 1) he is an independent whistleblower, and 2) he
>earns a living as a children's magician, but 3) he actually also
>derives income from a tainted source, are you not interested?
>
>Hugh charges $350 a pop for his magician performances. This is an
>expensive area (Washington, DC) in which to live. How many magic
>shows would Hugh have to do a week to make a decent living? You
>calculate.
>
>Yet Hugh Turley not only does the required number of magic shows --
>he also travels. Not only does he travel while doing the required
>number of magic shows -- but he also does in-depth research on
>various topics of public interest.
>
>Sorry. Hugh could not do enough magic shows to support himself
>while doing the rest.
>
>Since the discussion of Accuracy In Media came up, I began to notice
>a similarity between the Accuracy In Media project and what Mr.
>Turley does. Accuracy in Media complains about press lies, while
>all the time failing to expose the ethnic/political interests who
>owns the press. Thus I began to wonder if Hugh Turley was getting
>income from AIM.
>
>Go to:
>http://www.aim.org/
>
>And click on "Speakers" on the left margin.
>
>You will see Hugh Turley listed as an AIM speaker, along with . . .
>well, read for yourself. After you read that, click on the "Hugh
>Turley" button and read this:
>
>===
>
>Hugh Patrick Turley, a.k.a. "The Amazing Debunkerman" has been
>entertaining audiences throughout the United States for the past
>20 years. He has performed at White House functions and
>entertained royal families, members of the Supreme Court,
>Senators, Congressmen, and America's leading journalists.
>
>His radio and television appearances include CBS's Christmas in
>Washington and NBC's Today Show. His observations have also
>been featured in Paul Harvey News and he has appeared in a
>documentary film and is a frequent guest on talk radio programs.
>
>Turley is co-author of Failure of the Public Trust with Patrick
>Knowlton and Washington lawyer John Clarke. "Turley raises
>provocative questions," said Haynes Johnson, Pulitzer Prize
>winner.
>
>===
>
>Wow! I didn't know Turley did magic shows for members of the
>Supreme Court, Senators, and Congressmen! He sounds like he's wired
>in pretty tight.
>
>And look who speaks highly of Turley: Haynes Johnson, one of the
>journalists you seem to regard as a phoney.
>http://www.thebird.org/host/dcdave/article3/001126.html
>
>So Hugh Turley, the magician, receives income from the very spooky
>Accuracy In Media. Some months ago, I spoke to Hugh on the phone
>myself and he mentioned he was selling himself as a speaker, without
>mentioning he was in AIM's stable. I can understand why. I have
>made my opinion of Reed Irvine known to Hugh over the years. I have
>told Hugh that anyone who would help cover up the
>torture-murder-mutiliation of the innocent Davidian children, as
>Irvine as done, was the scum of the earth. So I am not surprised
>that since Hugh is getting income from Irvine, he would not tell me.
>
>You and I have been having a private e-mail exchange about Hugh
>Turley's source of income. You NEVER mentioned that he was getting
>income from AIM. In that correspondence, you claimed to know Turley
>very, very, well. When I challenged you to explain his sources of
>income, you did not answer. And please don't say I should have asked
>Turley. Obviously I was testing your knowledge about Turley's
>income.
>
>While dodging my questions about his income, did you know Hugh was
>deriving income from AIM?
>
>*** David Martin and AIM? ***
>
>Reed Irvine used to run an operation called Accuracy in Academia. I
>know you have a great interest in what is happening among college
>professors in the US. It occurs to me that work and interests
>pretty strongly coincide with Irvine's projects. What I'm wondering
>is this: Have you ever received income from Accuracy In Media or any
>of Irvine's other fronts?
>
>It's easy to see how a person could be led to do that. It would be
>easy to say: "Let me write this for AIM. I am genuinely interested
>in the Foster case/the media anyway. I can tell the public some
>truth and get paid, too. Of course I'll have to drop the ball at
>the 99 yard line, or the 75 yard yard, but still, that's a very good
>deal."
>
>I know any number of good, decent, well-meaning people who were
>prepared to make compromises like this and who eventually got
>themselves in ethical binds.
>
>*** AIM, Israel, and 9-11 ***
>
>On August 7, Reed Irvine published a commentary which you can read
>at the AIM webpage. The AIM abstract reads thus:
>
>==
>Stinking Coverage of Pew Poll. On August 4, the Pew Research
>Center released the results of a survey of 1,365 adults conducted in
>the last two weeks of July. It found that the public's opinion of
>the news media has fallen sharply from the levels attained in
>November in the wake of the media's excellent coverage of 9/11.
>==
>
>Yes, that's right . . . Irvine says "in the wake of the media's
>excellent coverage of 9/11."
>
>You can read the full article at:
>
>http://www.aim.org/publications/weekly_column/2002/08/07.html
>
>You could not want any better evidence that Irvine is a seamless
>liar and a front man for the Zionist press and a front man for
>Israel. Irvine's AIM sponsors Knowlton, Clarke, and Turley. When
>Salvador lays throws the light of day on the mess, you attack
>Salvador.
>
>Sounds to me like you have picked sides. I confess I'm disappointed
>with your choice.
>
>Carol

[Omitted Valentine's signature line.]


----

DC Dave (David Martin)
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh," "America's Dreyfus
Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster," and the "Seventeen
Techniques for Truth Suppression." For those and collected writings
go to http://thebird.org/host/dcdave.


From Carol A. Valentine Mon Aug 26 17:04:26 2002
X-Apparently-To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com via -40.-120.-31.59; 26 Aug 2002 17:10:27 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <skywriter@erols.com>
Received: from 207.172.4.107 (EHLO smtp-hub.mrf.mail.rcn.net) (207.172.4.107) by mta551.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 26 Aug 2002 17:10:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.62]) by smtp-hub.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #5) id 17jTwA-0001Xz-00 for salvador_astucia@yahoo.com; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 20:10:26 -0400
Received: from 66-44-62-195.s195.tnt5.lnhva.md.dialup.rcn.com ([66.44.62.195] helo=[192.168.123.122]) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #6) id 17jTvw-0007P0-00 for salvador_astucia@yahoo.com; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 20:10:16 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: skywriter@pop.erols.com
Message-Id: <p0432040bb9906bbe725c@[192.168.123.122]>
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 20:04:26 -0400
To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com
From: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>
Subject: Subject: Re: Hugh Turley's income
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Length: 4992

Communiqué # 21: From Carol Valentine to DC Dave, August 26, 2002

Synopsis: Valentine wonders why DC Dave trusts Knowlton as a crime scene witness when two out of three witnesses were tainted in Knowlton's case against the US Government. Valentine points out that DC Dave has told her that two of journalists Chris Ruddy and Ambrose Evans-Pritchard are fake opposition. (Both Ruddy and Evans-Pritchard were key witnesses in Knowlton's lawsuit.) She reminds DC Dave that he has privately discussed with her the possibility that Knowlton story was invented and he too is fake opposition. Yet he criticizes Salvador for asking these questions publicly.  Valentine points out that DC Dave's criticisms of Salvador are unjustified. She defends the manner in which Salvador's raised questions about Patrick Knowlton's story and his background. She says Salvador is courageous because he was willing to be proved wrong publicly. Yet no one has come forward to do so. Instead Knowlton, Turley, and Clarke have evoked DC Dave's Truth Suppression Technique # 2, "waxing indignant."

Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 20:05:03 -0400
To: [DC Dave c/o] salvador_astucia@yahoo.com
From: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Some questions for DC Dave (spooky AIM)


> I have never found it a priority to dig into Knowlton's background any
> further because, unlike Chris Ruddy, he has never done anything that I
> am aware of that undermines the search for truth and justice in the
> Foster case.

According to you,
http://www.thebird.org/host/dcdave/article1/america's%20dreyfus%20affair%203.html

Knowlton's case against the government for harassment was buttressed
by these witnesses:

1. Knowlton's "Jewish girlfriend,"
2. Christopher Ruddy,
3. British journalist Ambrose Evans-Pritchard

Chris Ruddy is a fake -- you acknowledge that.

You know Ambrose Evans Prichard is a fake. We have discussed the
contents of this article many times, and you have expressed no
disagreement.
http://www.public-action.com/pretenders/ambrose.html

You, David Martin, have done much to popularize the term "fake
opposition" on the Internet. Two of the three witnesses to
Knowlton's harassment are dissemblers, and you know it. Knowlton's
girlfriend is the only unknown quantity.

Yet, given Knowlton's strange Saudi Embassy background, AIM's
sponsorship of his lawsuit, and the two tainted witnesses, you will
have us believe it never occurred to you that Knowlton's story was
invented? You will have us believe it never occurred to you that the
Knowlton case was "fake opposition"?

We -- you and I -- actually discussed such a possibility. Now you
seem to indicate the thought had never crossed your mind. You want
us to believe you took Knowlton's story at face value, and still do.

> Rather, everything he has done since I have known him has served to
> keep the Foster case alive, and that which is checkable in his
> testimony has checked out. Particularly, his description of the
> rust-brown car dovetails with other credible testimony. The only
> quibble I have with fbicover-up.com is with their drawing of Foster
> resisting someone attacking him with what looks like a .38 revolver
> when the logic of their argument would have the attackers hand
> holding a smaller caliber automatic.
>
> Knowlton has also made no spook-like attempts to ingratiate himself
> with me to learn what I might be up to.
>
> Therefore, I would not think of attacking Knowlton publicly and see
> no useful purpose served in doing so.

[DC Dave takes Salvador to task for his "imprudent" use of public
forums; but he does so in a manner that might reveal Savlador's
identity. The original text is therefore omitted.]

Salvador has repeatedly invited Knowlton et. al. to respond in
writing to the hypotheses, evidence, and observations in this webpage
forum. None of them have responded in a meaningful way: They have
all "waxed indignant." See No. 2 of David Martin's "17 Techniques
for of Truth Suppression

http://www.thebird.org/host/dcdave/article3/991228.html

No, you cannot accuse Salvador of being unfair or imprudent.
Actually, he is quite courageous. He is willing to be made wrong
publicly. Knowlton has a forum in which to lay the facts concerning
his background on the table and he will not use it. Knowlton's
silence indicates he is not willing to strut his stuff.

> In his eagerness to impugn the integrity of Hugh Turley for having
> the effrontery to disagree with him over Vince Foster,

You were the one to suggest a public debate.

> he has made public charges against Knowlton with very serious
> implications. Anyone making such public charges has a clear
> obligation--and maybe what we have here is another example of
> an inability to act honorably--to make pretty doggone sure that
> he has his facts in order.

Again, Salvador has given every opportunity to Knowlton, Turley, and
Clarke to put the "facts" on the table, but the opportunity is
ignored. Instead, we see Truth Suppression Technique No. 2 (waxing
indignant) being used, over and over again.

> As I have told you, Knowlton's phone number is in the book. He
> could quite easily have called him and asked him if the information
> he has heard about his employment and AIM's assistance on his law
> suit was correct, and even if they were correct to the letter he
> should really have thought twice before jumping to the conclusions
> that he has from them.

Are you saying that you were lying when you told Salvador and me that
AIM was paying for the Knowlton suit? You and I have had many
conversations about that very anomaly.

Hugh Turley confirmed to me that AIM was paying Clarke, too.

As far as telephone calls go, "The spoken word is not worth the air
that it's written on." Much better that Knowlton respond in writing,
better for him, far better for our reading public.

Writing, of course, leaves a perfect history of who said what.
That's why some people shun the medium.

[Omitted off-topic ad hominem remarks.]

--
Carol A. Valentine
President, Public Action, Inc.
http://www.Public-Action.com

DON'T ANSWER OPINION POLLS ABOUT 9-11 OR ANYTHING ELSE.
Opinion polls and survey questions help the psywarriors design more
efficient lie campaigns.
Don't answer opinion polls, whether they are being taken by
establishment media or so-called "alternate" news sources. Don't
answer opinion polls! Don't help them fool you or your neighbor.
Don't answer survey questions!

911 Lies exposed at http://www.public-action.com/
* Pentagon RESCUE? Open, Bloody, Questions . . .
* Merry Christmas, and OFF WITH YOUR HEAD!
* Flight Of The Bumble Planes
* Did NORAD Send The "Suicide" Jets
Parts 1 & 2, "Inside Job" and 'Dumb Blondes"
* Sen. Levin, NORAD and Chabad Lubavitch
* Tooth Fairies and Suicide Bombers
* Church of The Nativity: Who's Who In Staged Siege?
* Church Of The Nativity And Waco Paradigm
* Operation 911: NO SUICIDE PILOTS
* Tom Clancy Speaks About 9-11
* Mike Rivero, Israeli Spies, and 9-11 Diversions
* Show And Tell, Mike Rivero
* The Taliban Home Video
* Osamarina bin Laden
* Bin Laden: AUTHENTIC INTERVIEW
* 911 Terror: Muslims Suspend Laws of Physics
* Operation Northwoods: The Counterfeit
* Osama bin Surplus
* Osama bin CIA Agent
* Press Uses Actors In War On Islam
* Anti-war.com: Slyly Justifying War on Islam

From Carol A. Valentine Mon Aug 26 17:05:03 2002
X-Apparently-To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com via -40.-120.-31.59; 26 Aug 2002 17:09:36 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <skywriter@erols.com>
Received: from 207.172.4.76 (EHLO smtp-hub2.mrf.mail.rcn.net) (207.172.4.76) by mta625.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 26 Aug 2002 17:09:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.62]) by smtp-hub2.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #5) id 17jTvL-0006wu-00 for salvador_astucia@yahoo.com; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 20:09:35 -0400
Received: from 66-44-62-195.s195.tnt5.lnhva.md.dialup.rcn.com ([66.44.62.195] helo=[192.168.123.122]) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #6) id 17jTvK-0007P0-00 for salvador_astucia@yahoo.com; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 20:09:34 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: skywriter@pop.erols.com
Message-Id: <p04320401b98d8155e654@[192.168.123.122]>
In-Reply-To: <000001c24b8f$85bc6c80$9865fea9@WarriorPoet>
References: <F140wm77WobyuZaFUHv00016d91@hotmail.com> <p04320400b98ab10aea95@[192.168.123.122]> <000001c24b8f$85bc6c80$9865fea9@WarriorPoet>
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 20:05:03 -0400
To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com
From: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Some questions for DC Dave (spooky AIM)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Content-Length: 3157

Communiqué # 22: From Carol Valentine to DC Dave, August 28, 2002

Synopsis: Valentine criticizes DC Dave's unyielding defense of Hugh Turley's income and the fact that Turley is a paid speaker for AIM. (See Communiqué # 20) She points out that AIM's top man, Reed Irvine, praised the media's coverage of 911.  Earlier, DC Dave trivialized Valentine's discovery about Turley being an AIM speaker as information he already knew. Valentine responds by charging that DC Dave used Truth Suppression Technique No. 8, "Dismiss the charges as 'old news.' " DC Dave had also defended Turley's association with AIM by claiming that he didn't make much money. Valentine fires back, "Sure Turley works for a whore house. But he doesn't make much money at it. Some defense!"

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 22:04:32 -0400
To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com, dcdave1@erols.com, dcdave1@hotmail.com
From: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Hugh Turley's income


>You have not told me anything here that I did not know.

Strange. For all our exchanges about Turley's income, you have never
mentioned his affiliation with AIM. Now that I found out by myself,
it is suddenly old news. That sounds a little like Truth Suppression
Technique No 8: "Dismiss the charges as 'old news.'"

http://www.thebird.org/host/dcdave/article3/991228.html

> Ray Heizer has made a big deal of the reimbursement I received from
>Chris Ruddy for the almost-new shoes he took from me after I served
>as his model for the reenactment of the Foster death. This supposed
>expose is of a piece with that. Turley's income from such
>AIM-sponsored appearances has been disappointingly, but hardly
>unexpectedly small, so small as to be inconsequential, and it is of
>very recent vintage.
>
>You know nothing about the content of his presentation and I do. It
>is all Turley and has no AIM input. It is a devastating indictment
>of America's news media, as is his co-written "Failure of the Public
>Trust."

The media cover-up of the events of September 11, 2001 is a
catastrophic event in history of the West. But fake media critic
Irvine says calls the media's coverage of 9/11 "excellent."

http://www.aim.org/publications/weekly_column/2002/08/07.html

"Stinking Coverage of Pew Poll . . . the public's opinion of the news
media has fallen sharply from the levels attained in November in the
wake of the media's excellent coverage of 9/11."

===

If you thought Turley had any credibility at all, and if you were the
"David Martin" we know and love, you would have demanded that Turley
sever his relationship with AIM immediately. For surely you would
not approve of him lending "credibility" to AIM's treasonous efforts?

Instead, you defend Turely because AIM has not thrown much money
Turley's way. "Sure Turley works for a whore house. But he doesn't
make much money at it." Some defense!

Turley would not last five seconds at AIM if he told the truth about
the media's coverage of 9-11. Pray tell -- what does Turley talk
about in his "devastating indictment of America's news media"? The
career-challenged man with a strange background who stopped to take a
pee in the wrong park and the wrong time (Knowlton)? Or does Turley
talk about the American media's cover-up of the murders of the Waco
moms and kids with AIM's assistance?

Carol

--
Carol A. Valentine
President, Public Action, Inc.
http://www.Public-Action.com

DON'T ANSWER OPINION POLLS ABOUT 9-11 OR ANYTHING ELSE.
Opinion polls and survey questions help the psywarriors design more
efficient lie campaigns.
Don't answer opinion polls, whether they are being taken by
establishment media or so-called "alternate" news sources. Don't
answer opinion polls! Don't help them fool you or your neighbor.
Don't answer survey questions!

911 Lies exposed at http://www.public-action.com/
* Pentagon RESCUE? Open, Bloody, Questions . . .
* Merry Christmas, and OFF WITH YOUR HEAD!
* Flight Of The Bumble Planes
* Did NORAD Send The "Suicide" Jets
Parts 1 & 2, "Inside Job" and 'Dumb Blondes"
* Sen. Levin, NORAD and Chabad Lubavitch
* Tooth Fairies and Suicide Bombers
* Church of The Nativity: Who's Who In Staged Siege?
* Church Of The Nativity And Waco Paradigm
* Operation 911: NO SUICIDE PILOTS
* Tom Clancy Speaks About 9-11
* Mike Rivero, Israeli Spies, and 9-11 Diversions
* Show And Tell, Mike Rivero
* The Taliban Home Video
* Osamarina bin Laden
* Bin Laden: AUTHENTIC INTERVIEW
* 911 Terror: Muslims Suspend Laws of Physics
* Operation Northwoods: The Counterfeit
* Osama bin Surplus
* Osama bin CIA Agent
* Press Uses Actors In War On Islam
* Anti-war.com: Slyly Justifying War on Islam

From Carol A. Valentine Wed Aug 28 19:04:32 2002
X-Apparently-To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com via -40.-120.-31.58; 28 Aug 2002 19:07:40 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <skywriter@erols.com>
Received: from 207.172.4.76 (EHLO smtp-hub2.mrf.mail.rcn.net) (207.172.4.76) by mta549.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Aug 2002 19:07:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.62]) by smtp-hub2.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #5) id 17kEiJ-0004Ha-00; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 22:07:15 -0400
Received: from 66-44-91-169.s550.tnt5.lnhva.md.dialup.rcn.com ([66.44.91.169] helo=[192.168.123.122]) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #6) id 17kEiH-00070P-00; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 22:07:13 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: skywriter@pop.erols.com
Message-Id: <p04320411b990ffa93e1a@[192.168.123.122]>
In-Reply-To: <F140ZO8x96PnPlpNvHX00019ef2@hotmail.com>
References: <F140ZO8x96PnPlpNvHX00019ef2@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 22:04:32 -0400
To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com, dcdave1@erols.com, dcdave1@hotmail.com
From: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Hugh Turley's income
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Content-Length: 2089

Communiqué # 23: From Salvador to DC Dave, August 28, 2002

Synopsis: Salvador says DC Dave avoids the topic of Hugh Turley's income like the Devil avoids holy water. Salvador reminds DC Dave of Valentine's prior question: Has he (DC Dave) ever accepted money from Reed Irvine et al? Salvador also asks DC Dave to clarify two recent telephone statements where DC Dave admitted that the FBI and Reed Irvine both know his (DC Dave's) work phone number.

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 21:59:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Hugh Turley's income
To: dcdave1@erols.com, dcdave1@hotmail.com
CC: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>


DC Dave,

You have made it crystal clear that any discussion of
Hugh Turley's income--particularly AIM money--is a
topic you want to avoid like the Devil avoids holy
water.

As Carol pointed out, the amount of money Turley
received from AIM is really a moot point. Turley's
admittedly a whore. You're just quibbling over price.

So let's move back to another topic that you
skillfully dodged.

You never answered Carol's question from August 24th.
(Communiqué # 17)

What is YOUR association with Reed Irvine?

Here is a reprint of her question:

----Valentine quote on----

Reed Irvine used to run an operation called Accuracy
in Academia. I know you have a great interest in what
is happening among college professors in the US. It
occurs to me that work and interests pretty strongly
coincide with Irvine's projects. What I'm wondering is
this: Have you ever received income from Accuracy In
Media or any of Irvine's other fronts?

It's easy to see how a person could be led to do that.
It would be easy to say: "Let me write this for AIM. I
am genuinely interested in the Foster case/the media
anyway. I can tell the public some truth and get paid,
too. Of course I'll have to drop the ball at the 99
yard line, or the 75 yard, but still, that's a very
good deal."

I know any number of good, decent, well-meaning people
who were prepared to make compromises like this and
who eventually got themselves in ethical binds.

----Valentine quote off----

There's another point that has bothered me lately, and
it dovetails with Carol's question.

You made an interesting comment in our telephone
conversation on August 19th, when you screamed at the
top of your lungs to "Get that f...g thing [webpage]
down!"

In that conversation, you also admitted passing my
work phone number to Patrick Knowlton, something that
got me pretty upset. After all, you had confided in me
previously that you thought it was not implausible
that Knowlton could be Foster's killer, a professional
hit man. You knowingly passed my work number to
someone who you believed might be a cold-blooded
killer.

To express my anger, I asked, "How would you like it
if I gave your work number to an FBI agent?"

You responded, "The FBI already knows my number. So
does Reed Irvine."

What did you mean by those two statements?

Salvador

[omitted redundant emails]

=====
Salvador Astucia, author of "Opium Lords" (416 pages), the book that
solved the JFK murder.

* View online at http://www.jfkmontreal.com

* or purchase book for $29 in USA, $34 worldwide (includes shipping).
See ordering info. at http://www.jfkmontreal.com/order_hardcopy.htm

From Salvador Astucia Wed Aug 28 21:59:21 2002
Received: from [152.163.188.71] by web14912.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 21:59:21 PDT
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 21:59:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Hugh Turley's income
To: dcdave1@erols.com, dcdave1@hotmail.com
CC: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>
In-Reply-To: <p04320411b990ffa93e1a@[192.168.123.122]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 3627

Communiqué # 24: From Salvador to Reed Irvine, August 28, 2002

Synopsis: Salvador asks Irvine to explain the nature of his relationship with David Martin (aka, DC Dave).

Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 22:46:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>
Subject: Question for Reed Irvine
To: ar1@aim.org


Reed Irvine, Chairman
Accuracy in Media
4455 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Suite #330
Washington, D.C. 20008
(202)...

Dear Mr. Irvine:

I am facilitating a discussion forum in which your
name has come up.

What is your relationship with the following
individual?

[David Martin--omitted his real name]
[omitted home address]

Occupation: Economist
Employer: [...]

Home phone: [...]
Work phone: [...]

Mr. Martin has told me that he knows you, that you
have his phone number at work, and so does the FBI.

Mr. Martin also claims that he was friends with your
deceased colleague and co-founder of AIM, Bernard Yoh.

Here is the URL for the previously mentioned
discussion:
http://www.jfkmontreal.com/foster_discussion.htm

Again, please describe the nature of your relationship
with Mr. Martin.

Be advised that this communiqué has been made public
as will any response I might receive from you.

Regards,

Salvador Astucia


=====
Salvador Astucia, author of "Opium Lords" (416 pages), the book that
solved the JFK murder.

* View online at http://www.jfkmontreal.com

* or purchase book for $29 in USA, $34 worldwide (includes shipping).
See ordering info. at http://www.jfkmontreal.com/order_hardcopy.htm

From Salvador Astucia Wed Aug 28 22:46:59 2002
Received: from [152.163.188.71] by web14912.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 22:46:59 PDT
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 22:46:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>
Subject: Question for Reed Irvine
To: ar1@aim.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 849

Communiqué # 25: From DC Dave to Salvador et al., August 29, 2002

Synopsis: DC Dave addresses the following points in a defensive manner:

• Admits that he "passed" Salvador's work phone number to Patrick Knowlton by giving it to Knowlton's friend, Hugh Turley. Attempts to rationalize this deed.

• Makes contradictory statements about his association with Reed Irvine. First he denies any association with Irvine or his organizations. Later he claims he discussed with Irvine the "suicide" of Enron executive Cliff Baxter.

• Admits that Reed Irvine has his work number, but the admission is extremely convoluted.

• Makes contradictory statements about Patrick Knowlton. He continues to defend him, but at one point gives a half-hearted acknowledgement that he might have told Salvador (in a prior discussion) that Knowlton could be Foster's killer, but the notion was entertained in a purely hypothetical sense. But DC Dave makes the admission using semantics that can easily be recanted later.

• Makes contradictory statements about screaming obscenities at Salvador over the phone. ("Take that f...g thing [webpage] down!") First he calls the allegation a lie, then he more or less acknowledges that it might have occurred; but again, he leaves plenty of wiggle room to deny it later.

• Continually insinuates that Salvador is a liar but provides confusing logic to support the accusation.

• States that Carol Valentine is injuring her credibility by teaming up with Salvador to stab friends in the back.

From: "David Martin" <dcdave1@hotmail.com>

To: dcdave1@erols.com, salvador_astucia@yahoo.com

CC: skywriter@erols.com, reed@aim.org, sfarney@bigfoot.com, Turley@acninc.net

Bcc:

Subject: Re: Hugh Turley's income

Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 17:12:56 +0000

"Alexis de Tocqueville once observed that it is easier for the world to accept a simple lie than a complex truth." --Naeim Giladi

http://www.bintjbeil.com/E/occupation/ameu_iraqjews.html

I don't know about the world, but it is certainly easier for you to do so, not only to believe, but to trumpet to the world as the absolute truth.

I have no association with Reed Irvine or any of the organizations with which he is connected and I never have had, your public declarations to the contrary notwithstanding.

Your statement that I passed your work telephone number to Patrick Knowlton is not true. Hugh Turley asked me for it and I gave it to him, which is what I told you.

Your statement, "you had confided in me previously that you thought it was not implausible that Knowlton could be Foster's killer," as weaselly as it is written, still manages to do considerable violence to the truth. The notion certainly did not originate with me and whatever "not implausible/could be" conclusions you might have perceived from me came at the end of a fairly long string of tenuous "if-thens." But now I see that you have proclaimed each of the private "ifs" as public gospel truth and gone right on to the "thens."

I can readily see how such quality of thought could lead one to the conclusion that I, of all people, is ultimately, in effect, taking my orders from Ariel Sharon (or whoever it is that pulls Sharon's strings).

The statement that you find so mystifying from me was my shorthand way of saying, "What kind of nitwit are you to think that if Knowlton is the sinister and malevolent spook that you think he is that he could not jolly well find out for himself quite easily where you work?" But then I keep forgetting that you really do seem to believe that you have bought complete anonymity, if not invisibility, for yourself with the use of that pseudonym, and with the safety that it has bought you, you can blast out calumnies at will on the World Wide Web.

Concerning the specifics of my statement, I mentioned Irvine because he is at the heart of your suspicions about Turley and Knowlton, and I have talked to him from my office telephone about the Cliff Baxter case. We seem to be the only two people in the whole world with an interest in looking into this suspicious death. As I recall, he asked me where I was working these days and I told him. Why shouldn't I? If he's a spook with a great interest in keeping up with me and my comings and goings he already has the ready resources to do so. Caller ID alone would do it. If he is not, then why shouldn't I tell him?

By the way, I see you continue to repeat the lie that I screamed an obscenity at you at the top of my lungs, no less, on the telephone. Knowing your propensity to put your every charge that is not denied up on your web site as a fact, I have to tell you that you are mistaken. The guy in the cubicle next to me did come over afterwards to ask me what I was so upset about, but my lungs and my larynx have quite a few more decibel levels that they can reach, and I am not given to using the "f" word, especially when it might be overheard by polite company.

The equating of taking money from AIM to give public presentations on the media cover-up in the Foster death with complete, irredeemable whoredom is yours and Carol Valentine's, not mine. If Reed Irvine wants to contribute to getting out the message found at

http://www.fbicover-up.com/press/index.php I say more power to him, and

I see no need to pillory my friend, Hugh Turley, for attempting to reach a wider audience with his message through AIM's auspices. I don't tell him what to do and he doesn't tell me.

Carol, by the way, has a new very impressive, hard-hitting piece up on her web site now on the "Seven-minute fire" at the Pentagon and I commend her for it. Too bad that she would then go around injuring her credibility and wasting her time by teaming up with you in driving knives in the backs of friends.

----

DC Dave (David Martin)

Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh," "America's Dreyfus Affair, the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster," and the "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression." For those and collected writings go to http://thebird.org/host/dcdave.

>From: Salvador Astucia <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>

>To: dcdave1@erols.com, dcdave1@hotmail.com

>CC: "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com>

>Subject: Re: Hugh Turley's income

>Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 21:59:21 -0700 (PDT)

>

>

>DC Dave,

>

>You have made it crystal clear that any discussion of

>Hugh Turley's income--particularly AIM money--is a

>topic you want to avoid like the Devil avoids holy

>water.

>

>As Carol pointed out, the amount of money Turley

>received from AIM is really a moot point. Turley's

>admittedly a whore. You're just quibbling over price.

>

>So let's move back to another topic that you

>skillfully dodged.

>

>You never answered Carol's question from August 24th.

>(Communiqué # 17)

>

>What is YOUR association with Reed Irvine?

>

>Here is a reprint of her question:

>

>----Valentine quote on----

>

>Reed Irvine used to run an operation called Accuracy

>in Academia. I know you have a great interest in what

>is happening among college professors in the US. It

>occurs to me that work and interests pretty strongly

>coincide with Irvine's projects. What I'm wondering is

>this: Have you ever received income from Accuracy In

>Media or any of Irvine's other fronts?

>

>It's easy to see how a person could be led to do that.

>It would be easy to say: "Let me write this for AIM. I

>am genuinely interested in the Foster case/the media

>anyway. I can tell the public some truth and get paid,

>too. Of course I'll have to drop the ball at the 99

>yard line, or the 75 yard, but still, that's a very

>good deal."

>

>I know any number of good, decent, well-meaning people

>who were prepared to make compromises like this and

>who eventually got themselves in ethical binds.

>

>----Valentine quote off----

>

>There's another point that has bothered me lately, and

>it dovetails with Carol's question.

>

>You made an interesting comment in our telephone

>conversation on August 19th, when you screamed at the

>top of your lungs to "Get that f...g thing [webpage]

>down!"

>

>In that conversation, you also admitted passing my

>work phone number to Patrick Knowlton, something that

>got me pretty upset. After all, you had confided in me

>previously that you thought it was not implausible

>that Knowlton could be Foster's killer, a professional

>hit man. You knowingly passed my work number to

>someone who you believed might be a cold-blooded

>killer.

>

>To express my anger, I asked, "How would you like it

>if I gave your work number to an FBI agent?"

>

>You responded, "The FBI already knows my number. So

>does Reed Irvine."

>

>What did you mean by those two statements?

>

>Salvador

>

>--- "Carol A. Valentine" <skywriter@erols.com> wrote:

> > >You have not told me anything here that I did not

> > know.

> >

> > Strange. For all our exchanges about Turley's

> > income, you have never

> > mentioned his affiliation with AIM. Now that I

> > found out by myself,

> > it is suddenly old news. That sounds a little like

> > Truth Suppression

> > Technique No 8: "Dismiss the charges as 'old

> > news.'"

> >

> >

>http://www.thebird.org/host/dcdave/article3/991228.html

> >

> > > Ray Heizer has made a big deal of the

> > reimbursement I received from

> > >Chris Ruddy for the almost-new shoes he took from

> > me after I served

> > >as his model for the reenactment of the Foster

> > death. This supposed

> > >expose is of a piece with that. Turley's income

> > from such

> > >AIM-sponsored appearances has been disappointingly,

> > but hardly

> > >unexpectedly small, so small as to be

> > inconsequential, and it is of

> > >very recent vintage.

> > >

> > >You know nothing about the content of his

> > presentation and I do. It

> > >is all Turley and has no AIM input. It is a

> > devastating indictment

> > >of America's news media, as is his co-written

> > "Failure of the Public

> > >Trust."

> >

> > The media cover-up of the events of September 11,

> > 2001 is a

> > catastrophic event in history of the West. But

> > fake media critic

> > Irvine says calls the media's coverage of 9/11

> > "excellent."

> >

> >

>http://www.aim.org/publications/weekly_column/2002/08/07.html

> >

> > "Stinking Coverage of Pew Poll . . . the public's

> > opinion of the news

> > media has fallen sharply from the levels attained in

> > November in the

> > wake of the media's excellent coverage of 9/11."

> >

> > ===

> >

> > If you thought Turley had any credibility at all,

> > and if you were the

> > "David Martin" we know and love, you would have

> > demanded that Turley

> > sever his relationship with AIM immediately. For

> > surely you would

> > not approve of him lending "credibility" to AIM's

> > treasonous efforts?

> >

> > Instead, you defend Turely because AIM has not

> > thrown much money

> > Turley's way. "Sure Turley works for a whore house.

> > But he doesn't

> > make much money at it." Some defense!

> >

> > Turley would not last five seconds at AIM if he told

> > the truth about

> > the media's coverage of 9-11. Pray tell -- what

> > does Turley talk

> > about in his "devastating indictment of America's

> > news media"? The

> > career-challenged man with a strange background who

> > stopped to take a

> > pee in the wrong park and the wrong time (Knowlton)?

> > Or does Turley

> > talk about the American media's cover-up of the

> > murders of the Waco

> > moms and kids with AIM's assistance?

> >

> > Carol

> >

> > --

> > Carol A. Valentine

> > President, Public Action, Inc.

> > http://www.Public-Action.com

[omitted signature lines]

From David Martin Thu Aug 29 10:12:56 2002

X-Apparently-To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com via -40.-120.-31.55; 29 Aug 2002 10:24:11 -0700 (PDT)

Return-Path: <dcdave1@hotmail.com>

Received: from 216.33.241.87 (EHLO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.87) by mta544.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 29 Aug 2002 10:24:11 -0700 (PDT)

Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 10:12:56 -0700

Received: from 146.142.39.134 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 17:12:56 GMT

X-Originating-IP: [146.142.39.134]

From: "David Martin" <dcdave1@hotmail.com>

To: dcdave1@erols.com, salvador_astucia@yahoo.com

CC: skywriter@erols.com, reed@aim.org, sfarney@bigfoot.com, Turley@acninc.net

Bcc:

Subject: Re: Hugh Turley's income

Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 17:12:56 +0000

Mime-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

Message-ID: <F87riCTVuy16xsoIIzQ00000338@hotmail.com>

X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Aug 2002 17:12:56.0413 (UTC) FILETIME=[515AA0D0:01C24F7F]

Content-Length: 5897

Communiqué # 26: [Exhibit G] From Reed Irvine to Salvador, August 29, 2002

Synopsis: Irvine states the following:

• Reed Irvine acknowledges that AIM paid Hugh Turley about $1,600 for "at most" 8 speeches about the Foster case. ($200 each)

• Reed Irvine acknowledges that AIM "contributed to Patrick Knowlton's legal defense fund."

• No response is given to Salvador's question about Irvine's relationship with DC Dave.

• Accuses Salvador of being anti-Semitic. Claims he (Salvador) blames the Jews for everything. Cites 9-11 and JFK's assassination as examples.

• Says Salvador "dreamed up" the Foster-Oslo hypothesis.

• Irvine then presents a "better" theory where in speculates that Foster was about to resign, was blackmailing President Clinton for his sexual indiscretions, so the Clintons had him killed.

Communiqué # 27: From Slade Farney to Reed Irvine, August 29, 2002

Synopsis: Slade Farney makes the following points:

• Asks Reed Irvine who pays his salary.

• Suggests that Irvine point out Salvador's mistakes rather than engage in psycho-babble and name calling.

• Mocks Irvine for giving the US media the "AIM blue ribbon in journalism" for its "blame-Islam-first" rhetoric.

• Subtly advises the conservative Irvine to endorse leftist Alan Dershowitz because their anti-Muslim thinking is identical.

Communiqué # 28: From Salvador Astucia to Reed Irvine, August 29, 2002

Synopsis: Salvador repeats his original question to Reed Irvine about David Martin: What is the nature of their relationship? Salvador asks why the question was ignored. To jog Irvine's memory, Salvador discloses Martin's Social Security Number. He advises Irvine to enter the SSN in AIM's host computer and see what turns up. Salvador reminds Irvine that "Dr. Martin" also uses a pseudonym. In fact he uses two: DC Dave and David Martin.

Communiqué # 29: From Reed Irvine to Salvador Astucia, August 30, 2002

Synopsis: Reed Irvine breaks off communication with Salvador.

[NOTE: Irvine used a response from Salvador to DC Dave as a pretext to break communication with Salvador. DC Dave had emailed a message to Salvador to be added to the discussion forum. DC Dave's email to Salvador was cc'd to Reed Irvine. Salvador replied to DC Dave asking him not to discuss Salvador's use of a pseudonym since DC Dave used two pseudonyms. When Salvador replied to DC Dave, he clicked "reply to all" which sent the response to Reed Irvine because DC Dave had cc'd Irvine originally. Irvine responded (as shown above0 by breaking communications with Salvador.]

Communiqué # 30: From Carol Valentine to DC Dave, August 31, 2002

Synopsis: Carol Valentine replies to DC Dave's email (see Communiqué # 25). She demonstrates how DC Dave says one thing in private conversations, but says another publicly. She discloses that DC Dave passed unpublished drafts of two of her 9-11 articles—without her knowledge or permission—to AIM's Hugh Turley.

Communiqué # 31: From DC Dave to Carol Valentine, August 31, 2002

Synopsis: DC Dave responds to Carol Valentine's previous message (see Communiqué # 30) by defending Hugh Turley. He also claims the reason he agreed privately with Valentine's reservations about Patrick Knowlton was because she is difficult to disagree with. He cites a prior instance where he disagreed with her support for Linda Thompson's call for an armed March on Washington.

Communiqué # 32: From Carol Valentine to DC Dave, August 31, 2002

Synopsis: Carol Valentine accuses DC Dave of being non-responsive to her questions (see Communiqué # 30) by redirecting attention to Hugh Turley. She reminds him that her questions were for him (DC Dave), not Turley. Regarding DC Dave's charge that she is difficult to disagree with, Valentine reminds him that the basis of their relationship is discussing the state of the world and talking about politics. She wonders why he called so often to talk, under these circumstances.

Communiqué # 33: From Slade Farney to Discussion Forum, August 31, 2002

Synopsis: Slade Farney comments on Patrick Knowlton's story regarding witnessing the area where Vince Foster's body was found in Fort Marcy Park. Farney raises the following questions:

• Why did Patrick Knowlton decide to urinate at Fort Marcy Park on July 20, 1993, the day Vince Foster's body was found there?

• How come the authorities/police never charged Knowlton with urinating in a public place, a misdemeanor in most states? This would make sense if the Government was truly trying to silence his testimony.

• Does Knowlton have bladder problems? (Fort Marcy Park is just outside Washington, DC. Public restrooms are minutes away in any direction.)

From: "sfarney2@erols.com" <sfarney2@erols.com>
To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com
CC: dcdave1@hotmail.com, skywriter@public-action.com
Subject: A Question for Pat Knowlton
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2002 18:57:35 -0400


Now that I have you all together, I'd like to ask a question or two
about this whole Foster/Knowlton crack-up.

As I understand it, Pat Knowlton was driving past Ft. Marcy Park in
the middle of the afternoon in 1993 and was taken with the
irresistible compulsion to urinate. Have I got that right?

Ft. Marcy Park a national park is on the Potomac River in the
Greater Washington civic sprawl, just down the road from the federal
headquarters of the CIA:
http://mappoint.msn.com/map.aspx?L=USA&C=38.9345178998295%2c-77.126557020427
9&A=7.16666666666667&P=|80057888|&TI=Fort+Marcy+US+Park+(national+park)%2c+V
irginia%2c+United+States

Can I ask: How many people pee in Ft. Marcy Park? Is this a regular
peeing place for Mr. Knowlton, or was this a special occasion? Does
he pee in alleys when he is in the city? Does Knowlton have a
bladder problem? Does he guzzle a pint a beer before hitting the
highway? Or is he just a guy who climbs in the car with a full
bladder, never noticing the problem until it's close to exploding?

Would Knowlton care to guess how many publicly accessible urinals in
fast food stalls, gas stations, etc. are between wherever he came
from and wherever he was going? Would he really have to pee in a
public park, where people go for a few minutes relief from the stink
and squalor of the city?

But there is another aspect to this.

Is Knowlton aware that "urinating in a public place" is a
misdemeanor in most states? Public indecency? Indecent Exposure?

If Knowlton was caught in his afternoon indiscretion, he could have
been charged with a misdemeanor, and that might have impacted future
employment opportunities. If he ever hoped to work again as a
security guard, particularly carrying a gun, this was truly a
foolish decision. It might also affect his application for a
security clearance, foreign embassy employment, and federal
government employment.

Think of it now: Here he is driving along with nature calling. He
knows that within a few minutes drive in any direction he could have
a properly legal pee with no consequences. But instead, he risks
the truly dangerous -- he pulls into a parking lot of a national
park, strolls into the woods, and pees on a tree.

I am afraid that this reflects badly on Knowlton's judgment. It
also reflects badly on his sense of ordinary decency (peeing in a
public park in the city). But most of all, it pushes the whole
story out of the court of credibility. It doesn't disprove the
story, but -- do you suppose President Clinton peed in Ft. Marcy
Park on the way to the airport? Why not?

Given that Knowlton swore under oath in a number of forums to
committing the offense, he has been in a very vulnerable legal
position. If some law enforcement organization (like the Park
Police) wanted to make life tough for Knowlton, they could really
.... wait a minute! Isn't Knowlton alleging he is an eyewitness with
information that the police want suppressed? And isn't he alleging
that the police have already attempted to intimidate him?

If the cops were trying to keep Knowlton quiet, why have they never
charged Knowlton with this offense?

Or maybe I missed just that part of the case. Is Knowlton's lawyer
available to help us out here?

--Slade

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/sfarney2

From sfarney2@erols.com Sat Aug 31 15:57:35 2002
X-Apparently-To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com via -40.-120.-31.60;
31 Aug 2002 15:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <sfarney2@erols.com>
Received: from 168.144.1.70 (EHLO relay3.softcomca.com) (168.144.1.70)
by mta587.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 31 Aug 2002 15:58:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from M2W085.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.85]) by
relay3.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Sat,
31 Aug 2002 18:57:35 -0400
Message-ID: <176730-220028631225735927@M2W085.mail2web.com>
X-EM-Version: 6, 0, 0, 3
X-EM-Registration: #00E0641810D91B008120
X-Priority: 3
Reply-to: sfarney2@bigfoot.com
X-Originating-IP: 141.156.164.212
X-URL: http://mail2web.com/
From: "sfarney2@erols.com" <sfarney2@erols.com>
To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com
CC: dcdave1@hotmail.com, skywriter@public-action.com
Subject: A Question for Pat Knowlton
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2002 18:57:35 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-Path: sfarney2@erols.com
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Aug 2002 22:57:35.0943 (UTC)
FILETIME=[CC23FD70:01C25141]
Content-Length: 1839

Communiqué # 34: From Hugh Turley to Salvador Astucia, August 1, 2002

Synopsis: Hugh Turley threatens to get Salvador fired from his job by informing Salvador's boss and colleagues of his activities on the Internet. Turley stated, "I want to invite people from your office to answer questions about you and your income just like you asked Irvine." This is factually incorrect because Salvador never asked Reed Irvine about Hugh Turley's income. Salvador asked Irvine to explain his association association with DC Dave. (see Communiqués 24 & 28) Irvine responded by disclosing that he had paid about $1,600 to Turley (see Communiqué 26), then broke off communication with Salvador shortly thereafter (see Communiqué 29).

 (NOTE: It was DC Dave who gave Salvador's work number to Turley. DC Dave has publicly acknowledged this and has no ethical problem with it. See Communiqué # 25. It was also DC Dave, not Salvador or Valentine, who publicly introduced Turley's income into this discussion thread. See Communiqué 14)

[Portions of Turley's email are omitted to protect Salvador's identity and to keep his place of employment private.]

From: "Turley" <Turley@acninc.net>
To: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>
CC: "David Martin" <dcdave1@hotmail.com>, dcdave1@erols.com, skywriter@erols.com
Subject: Re: I should give it a rest?
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2002 23:26:26 -0700

[...]

I don't like you on a personal level.

We are not friends, so don't "cut me any slack". I am not going to
cut you any. I am not in the HOT SEAT, you are.

I don't care about your silly Oslo-Foster discussion that you
moderate with a fake name.

I don't need your permission to use my website, Usenet or other
means to go public and discuss you, your names, your bigotry,
your employment and your silly friends.

I don't like you telling me what I can say. I prefer the light
to the darkness. I want to invite people from your office to answer
questions about you and your income just like you asked Irvine.
I want to know more about what you do for [company name omitted].

You have made an issue about money I was paid by AIM. BUT you forgot
that many people have [hired] me to perform at birthdays, day care
centers, cub-scouts, picnics and schools. Those people are both
Jewish and non-Jewish that also might support Israel. I don't poll
them. But a lot of people do support Israel. How about your boss?

Where does your boss stand on Israel? I want to call your boss ask
them? I'll just tell your boss it is part of your discussion at
jfkmontreal.com.

It will interest a nutball like you to know that my father had a
business partner that was a jew at the same time John F. Kennedy was
assassinated.

You are such a genius, figure that one out, a Mossad connection
perhaps?

[...]

You want to tell me to "Just tell the truth" [...]?

You lie about your own name.

I do tell the truth. I will tell everyone the truth, the whole truth
[...]. I have no secrets. I do not fear the light. It is you
that are hiding and the light is going to shine bright on you [...].

You want to rumble in a real public forum. You are going to get the
whole truth. I am ready to rock and roll. I am tired of private emails with you.

You want me to prepare a statement? Don't worry, I am going to
prepare a public statement, but not one you would post on your
discussion thread.

See you in the public forum [...].

Hugh Turley
[omitted home address and phone number]


From Turley Sat Aug 31 23:26:26 2002
X-Apparently-To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com via -40.-120.-31.59; 31 Aug 2002 20:29:33 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <turley@acninc.net>
Received: from 216.126.204.132 (EHLO mail.acninc.net) (216.126.204.132) by mta429.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 31 Aug 2002 20:29:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from turley [64.196.95.1] by mail.acninc.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-7.12) id A995317C0044; Sat, 31 Aug 2002 21:29:25 -0600
Message-ID: <003901c25180$831a5540$015fc440@turley>
From: "Turley" <Turley@acninc.net>
To: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>
CC: "David Martin" <dcdave1@hotmail.com>, dcdave1@erols.com, skywriter@erols.com
References: <20020831181111.44071.qmail@web14904.mail.yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: I should give it a rest?
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2002 23:26:26 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Content-Length: 6050

Communiqué # 35: From Slade Farney to Salvador, September 1, 2002

Synopsis: Slade Farney comments on Patrick Knowlton's harassment story. He calls it nonsense because the forces who killed Foster would have done the same to Knowlton rather than harass him on the streets. Slade gives a hypothetical conversation between FBI conspirators planning the job: "This Knowlton was a top security agent for the Saudi embassy. So just walk by and give him a dirty look -- that'll throw the fear into him. Security guards go nuts when you give them a dirty look." Regarding public urination by Knowlton and another witness at Fort Marcy Park (the day Foster's body was found), Slade says, "I guess when you are God's chosen eyewitness, the world is your urinal."

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/sfarney2

From sfarney2@erols.com Sun Sep 1 13:48:36 2002
X-Apparently-To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com via -40.-120.-31.56;

01 Sep 2002 13:48:36 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <sfarney2@erols.com>
Received: from 168.144.1.67 (EHLO relay1.softcomca.com) (168.144.1.67) by mta619.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 01 Sep 2002 13:48:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from M2W041.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.41]) by relay1.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Sun, 1 Sep 2002 16:48:36 -0400
Message-ID: <323910-22002901204836137@M2W041.mail2web.com>
X-EM-Version: 6, 0, 0, 3
X-EM-Registration: #00E0641810D91B008120
X-Priority: 3
Reply-to: sfarney2@erols.com
X-Originating-IP: 141.156.160.134
X-URL: http://mail2web.com/
From: "sfarney2@erols.com" <sfarney2@erols.com>
To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com
CC: sfarney2@erols.com
Subject: Re: A Question for Pat Knowlton (follow-up)
Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2002 16:48:36 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-Path: sfarney2@erols.com
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Sep 2002 20:48:36.0116 (UTC) FILETIME=[F141DD40:01C251F8]
Content-Length: 1321

From: "Chet Lyle" <chetlyle@bigfoot.com>
To: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>
CC: dcdave1@hotmail.com, "Carol Valentine" <SkyWriter@Public-Action.com>, sfarney2@erols.com
Subject: Comments on the Oslo Accords Thread
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2002 20:08:48 -0400


If the old adage holds that "one may judge a man's character by the friends he keeps", then the glimpse into DC Dave's soul that this thread affords is distressing indeed.

His friend, Hugh Turley: a treacherous player with a direct link to the cacophonous Zionist orchestra which is AIM, and to its Konzertmeister Reed Irvine.

Another friend, Patrick Knowlton: a thug, playing flat-footed tunes from the Zionist hymnal.

The current melody, as regards jfkmontreal.com, is a model of Zionist subtlety and persuasiveness: "Shut your mouth, or I'll embarrass your boss and get you fired".

The facilitator for this Einsatzaktion? DC Dave, David Martin. The mind cringes, rebels at the thought. But it's all there in the thread: treachery all the way down the line, including betrayal of Carol Valentine's trust.

Slade Farney of course hit the nail squarely on the head: a flimsier pretext for explaining away the coincidence of Knowlton's presence at Fort Marcy Park at a critical moment can hardly be imagined, than the weak-bladdered yarn he handed the cops. It is of a kind with tall tales spun over a campfire by fishermen to each other, bolstered by a beer or two, about their "true but sadly unrecorded" fishing exploits.

In a real-life setting that little story, and a free Bud, might win the raconteur maybe a disbelieving chortle.

--Chet Lyle

From Chet Lyle Mon Sep 2 17:08:48 2002
X-Apparently-To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com via -40.-120.-31.53; 02 Sep 2002 17:07:35 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <chetlyle@bigfoot.com>
Received: from 209.226.175.25 (EHLO tomts5-srv.bellnexxia.net) (209.226.175.25) by mta572.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 02 Sep 2002 17:07:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from b1meew16 ([64.228.190.4]) by tomts5-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.19 201-253-122-122-119-20020516) with SMTP id <20020903000639.BPJX3634.tomts5-srv.bellnexxia.net@b1meew16>; Mon, 2 Sep 2002 20:06:39 -0400
Message-ID: <002a01c252de$162165a0$04bee440@b1meew16>
From: "Chet Lyle" <chetlyle@bigfoot.com>
To: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>
CC: dcdave1@hotmail.com, "Carol Valentine" <SkyWriter@Public-Action.com>, sfarney2@erols.com
Subject: Comments on the Oslo Accords Thread
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2002 20:08:48 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Content-Length: 807

Subj: Re: A Question for Pat Knowlton
Date: 9/10/02 9:16:27 AM Pacific Daylight Time
From: dcdave1@hotmail.com (David Martin)
To: sfarney2@bigfoot.com
CC: Salvadorwriter@cs.com, skywriter@public-action.com, Turley@acninc.net, chetlyle@bigfoot.com

This is one of the great advantages of being a man, and a bachelor, at that.

From what I know of the commuting route to the west during rush hour,
which begins at 3:00 pm, closing the main route to driver-only cars,
Knowlton's account holds water, so to speak. It may be contrasted with that
of the much more heavily publicized "second pisser," Dale Kyle, also known
as "the confidential witness" or "CW." Study the analysis of Kyle's
behavior as laid out by Clarke et al. at fbicover-up.com to see what I mean.

If I were facing a relatively long drive west, were stuck in slow-moving
traffic, and had either not had a ready opportunity to do my business before
embarking or had simply let it slip, Fort Marcy Park, loaded with trees and
almost sure to be free of people at that time of the day and week, would
have loomed as attractive to me as a hydrant to a dog. Maybe the really
civilized thing to do would have been to hold it until he reached the
Virginia welcome station/rest area on I66 just short of Manassas--and had a
woman been with him that's no doubt what he would have been forced to do--,
but I know that I, for one, would have done exactly what Knowlton did. It's
the male advantage; why not use it?

On the other hand, I would not march over 200 yards uphill to the farthest
corner of the park as Kyle says he did. I would also do as Knowlton did and
call the police and report what I had seen as soon as I heard what had
happened there on that afternoon. Unlike what Kyle tells us he did,
Knowlton made no attempt, ill-considered or otherwise, to remain anonymous.
His actions, on their face, were those of a good citizen, whatever the
presumed laws might be against hiding and doing it most discreetly in the
woods.

If one considers, as well, that Knowlton was already working professionally
in the tourism business at that time, having given up professional
construction work some time earlier, and it was in that capacity that he, on
behalf of a private company, arranged for Hugh Turley to perform a magic
show for some Saudi dependents at a hotel some months later, one gets a far
less doubting notion of the Knowlton personna. This is a far cry from being
the "director of security" for the Saudi Embassy, which is the initial
impression that Turley received, and I, unfortunately, passed along to a
very limited number of people who I thought were more responsible in their
behavior than they turned out to be. (I was just reminded, by the way, that
when Turley, in the company of Chris Ruddy, first met Knowlton, it was
Knowlton who told Turley that they had met before. Turley had been the one
up and front of the audience, after all, and Knowlton is the one with the
flypaper memory. Turley had to go search his billing records to confirm
their encounter.)

I hate to see misguided citizens assuming the mantle of the FBI and
attempting to make a Richard Jewell of a man who, from all that I know as
far as the Foster case is concerned, has only taken care of both private and
public business in an exemplary fashion.
 

[Omitted Slade Farney's email entitled "A Question for Pat Knowlton," August 31, 2002, see Communiqué # 33]

----

DC Dave (David Martin)
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh," "America's Dreyfus Affair,
the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster," and the "Seventeen Techniques for
Truth Suppression." For those and collected writings go to
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave.


_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx



----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path: <dcdave1@hotmail.com>
Received: from rly-ye02.mx.aol.com (rly-ye02.mail.aol.com [172.18.151.199]) by air-ye02.mail.aol.com (v88.20) with ESMTP id MAILINYE24-0910121627; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 12:16:27 -0400
Received: from hotmail.com (f105.law8.hotmail.com [216.33.241.105]) by rly-ye02.mx.aol.com (v88.19) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINYE23-0910121607; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 12:16:07 -0400
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
Tue, 10 Sep 2002 09:16:06 -0700
Received: from 66.44.67.237 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;
Tue, 10 Sep 2002 16:16:05 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [66.44.67.237]
From: "David Martin" <dcdave1@hotmail.com>
To: sfarney2@bigfoot.com
Cc: Salvadorwriter@cs.com, skywriter@public-action.com, Turley@acninc.net,
chetlyle@bigfoot.com
Subject: Re: A Question for Pat Knowlton
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 16:16:05 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F105Md0gU0C6GhGBa9y0000122d@hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Sep 2002 16:16:06.0640 (UTC) FILETIME=[5DED8F00:01C258E5]

To: "David Martin" <dcdave1@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Re: Question for Pat Knowlton
From: sfarney2@erols.com
CC: skywriter@public-action.com, salvador_astucia@yahoo.com, ""Chet Lyle"" <chetlyle@bigfoot.com>, sfarney@bigfoot.com
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 14:50:41 +0000 (GMT)
 

[...]

The Choice of Weapon

A bullet for a president
A bat for skaters' knees
A spray for the mosquitoes, and
A collar for the fleas

For Foster it was "suicide"
For Bourda, much the same
For Knowlton it was - What? - icy stares???
Holy witness harassment, Batman, that's awful lame.

--Slade
 

[Omitted the following emails to reduce redundancy:

• Slade Farney's email entitled "A Question for Pat Knowlton," August 31, 2002, see  Communiqué # 33]

• DC Dave's response, see Communiqué # 37]

From sfarney2@erols.com Wed Sep 11 07:50:41 2002
X-Apparently-To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com via 216.136.225.60; 11 Sep 2002 07:26:07 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <nobody@texas3.legendum.com>
Received: from 64.246.15.44 (EHLO texas3.legendum.com) (64.246.15.44) by mta599.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 11 Sep 2002 07:26:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by texas3.legendum.com (Postfix, from userid 99) id 44E5766793; Wed, 11 Sep 2002 14:50:41 +0000 (GMT)
To: "David Martin" <dcdave1@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Re: Question for Pat Knowlton
From: sfarney2@erols.com
CC: skywriter@public-action.com, salvador_astucia@yahoo.com, ""Chet Lyle"" <chetlyle@bigfoot.com>, sfarney@bigfoot.com
Reply-to: sfarney2@erols.com
X-Mailer: Web2Mail 3.0
X-User: sfarney
Message-Id: <20020911145041.44E5766793@texas3.legendum.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 14:50:41 +0000 (GMT)
Content-Length: 1932

From: "David Martin" <dcdave1@hotmail.com>
To: sfarney2@erols.com
CC: chetlyle@bigfoot.com, salvador_astucia@yahoo.com, sfarney@bigfoot.com, skywriter@public-action.com
Bcc:
Subject: Re: Re: Question for Pat Knowlton
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 17:22:08 +0000


So much for the "fake" urination.
Now here's the substitute deal:
If they don't leave you pushing up daisies,
We won't believe that you're real.

DC Dave

 

[Omitted the following emails to reduce redundancy:

• Slade Farney's email entitled "A Question for Pat Knowlton," August 31, 2002, see  Communiqué # 33]

• DC Dave's response, see Communiqué # 37

• Slade Farney's response, see Communiqué # 38]

----

DC Dave (David Martin)
Author of "Upton Sinclair and Timothy McVeigh," "America's Dreyfus
Affair,
the Case of the Death of Vincent Foster," and the "Seventeen Techniques
for
Truth Suppression." For those and collected writings go to
http://thebird.org/host/dcdave.


From David Martin Wed Sep 11 10:22:08 2002
X-Apparently-To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com via 216.136.225.62; 11 Sep 2002 10:22:09 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <dcdave1@hotmail.com>
Received: from 216.33.241.15 (EHLO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.15) by mta505.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 11 Sep 2002 10:22:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 11 Sep 2002 10:22:09 -0700
Received: from 146.142.39.134 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 11 Sep 2002 17:22:08 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [146.142.39.134]
From: "David Martin" <dcdave1@hotmail.com>
To: sfarney2@erols.com
CC: chetlyle@bigfoot.com, salvador_astucia@yahoo.com, sfarney@bigfoot.com, skywriter@public-action.com
Bcc:
Subject: Re: Re: Question for Pat Knowlton
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 17:22:08 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F15vftjOUNqcUZo45Wd000175a9@hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Sep 2002 17:22:09.0282 (UTC) FILETIME=[C2427E20:01C259B7]
Content-Length: 2472

From: "sfarney2@erols.com" <sfarney2@erols.com>
To: dcdave1@hotmail.com, chetlyle@bigfoot.com, salvador_astucia@yahoo.com, sfarney@bigfoot.com, skywriter@public-action.com
Subject: Re: Question for Pat Knowlton
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 20:54:03 -0400


Original Message:
-----------------
From: David Martin dcdave1@hotmail.com
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 17:22:08 +0000

So much for the "fake" urination.
Now here's the substitute deal:
If they don't leave you pushing up daisies,
We won't believe that you're real.

DC Dave

Interesting (and humorous) take, Dave, but the connection was in
earlier posts.

You see, urinating in a public place is a misdemeanor. On federal
land, (federal park), it could be a federal misdemeanor. And the National
Park Police were in an excellent position to prosecute, negotiate a
plea bargain, and exercise some of the other fine features of the US
Justice system.

But no prosecution, no real threats, no plea bargains, just icy stares
that were witnessed only by [one fake*] and a Jew -- and Knowlton, of
course.

Now what makes this interesting is that the judge admitted his
complaint and published it in the special report as an appendix. Thus the

judge lent substance to the case on eyewitness say-so, but somehow the
physical evidence (no dirt on shoes, wrong gun, no blood, etc.) couldn't

find a forum outside the internet.

Knowlton's case functions like the FLIR tape works on Waco: a
conspiracy magnet to draw the attention off real issues, but guaranteed

to fall apart if things get tough.

Let's not worry about pushing up daisies -- that just shows there are
no rules and they can do whatever they want -- up to and including. So
why would they do something stupid like icy stares and glares when they

had real tools right there in the box? If they cared. And if they didn't
care, why do anything?

The FBI was worried as
The Foster case grew hotter
The witness, Pat
Would need a swat
So they used a mosquito swatter

--Slade

[* Slade Farney later realized that the witnesses were not "two fakes and a Jew" plus Knowlton, but rather, "one fake and a Jew." -- Moderator, 9/12/02]

From sfarney2@erols.com Wed Sep 11 17:54:03 2002
X-Apparently-To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com via 216.136.225.58; 11 Sep 2002 17:55:03 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <sfarney2@erols.com>
Received: from 168.144.1.67 (EHLO relay1.softcomca.com) (168.144.1.67) by mta414.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 11 Sep 2002 17:55:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from M2W089.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.89]) by relay1.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 11 Sep 2002 20:54:03 -0400
Message-ID: <63340-2200294120543742@M2W089.mail2web.com>
X-Priority: 3
Reply-to: sfarney@bigfoot.com
X-Originating-IP: 141.156.41.250
X-URL: http://mail2web.com/
From: "sfarney2@erols.com" <sfarney2@erols.com>
To: dcdave1@hotmail.com, chetlyle@bigfoot.com, salvador_astucia@yahoo.com, sfarney@bigfoot.com, skywriter@public-action.com
Subject: Re: Question for Pat Knowlton
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 20:54:03 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-Path: sfarney2@erols.com
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Sep 2002 00:54:03.0710 (UTC) FILETIME=[E3B7DDE0:01C259F6]
Content-Length: 1067

From: "sfarney2@erols.com" <sfarney2@erols.com>
To: dcdave1@hotmail.com, sfarney2@erols.com, chetlyle@bigfoot.com, salvador_astucia@yahoo.com, sfarney@bigfoot.com, skywriter@public-action.com, turley@acninc.net, jerry@regena.com
Subject: Re: Question for Pat Knowlton
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 17:37:50 -0400


Original Message:
-----------------
From: David Martin dcdave1@hotmail.com
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 20:42:20 +0000

> We seem to have a broken record here. You and Joseph Goulden and
> Jacob Cohen and Michael Isikoff claim not to accept that Knowlton
> was harassed. The only difference between you is that you put
> "professional" in front of the liar charge, thereby assuming what
> you and the ones you are, Mike Schneider-like, apparently trying to
> ingratiate yourself into bed with are trying to prove, that Knowlton
> is a phony. What you determinedly ignore is that where it matters
> most, on the fact that Vince Foster's car was somewhere far away
> while Vince lay dead on a park berm, Knowlton has been confirmed to
> be a most troublesome truth teller. To be sure he hasn't brought
> down the powers that be, but then, none of us have.

Of course Knowlton's testimony is troublesome. Like a speed bump.
And his testimony about Foster's car is most probably true.

I have highlighted two problems with Knowlton's story, though:

- He claims to have left the city on a long car trip at (supposedly)
rushhour -- with a full bladder, then took a chance urinating in the
park instead of finding a publicly accessible restroom, such as a
fast-food joint or a service station.

- He claims the FBI acted like school boys, instead of the most
powerful secret police orgainization in the world; he claims the FBI
failed to stop him from presenting his "troubling testimony" at
court, despite their best efforts.

> But, hey, you profess to be the real authority on how the big boys
> use their muscle in "this town," so who am I to contradict you?

The murder of Vince Foster and any number of others is clear and
convincing evidence of how dissidents are treated in this, the capitol
of freest nation of the world.

> Who is this "Slade Farney," anyway? Why has he never raised his
> head in this town?

====

Mr. Martin, I believe you have just shown the wisdom of my ways.

We have disagreed on a minor matter that touches neither of us
personally, yet you turn on me as though I had insulted your mother.
Had I ever met you in person, on what base now could I rest my trust
in your civility?

You pick a fine time and a fine tone to ask me to step into the lamplight.

--Slade

From sfarney2@erols.com Thu Sep 12 14:37:50 2002
X-Apparently-To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com via 216.136.225.55; 12 Sep 2002 14:38:18 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <sfarney2@erols.com>
Received: from 168.144.1.68 (EHLO relay2.softcomca.com) (168.144.1.68) by mta529.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 12 Sep 2002 14:38:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from M2W043.mail2web.com ([168.144.108.43]) by relay2.softcomca.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 12 Sep 2002 17:37:50 -0400
Message-ID: <4910-220029412213750707@M2W043.mail2web.com>
X-Priority: 3
Reply-to: sfarney2@erols.com
X-Originating-IP: 152.163.190.1
X-URL: http://mail2web.com/
From: "sfarney2@erols.com" <sfarney2@erols.com>
To: dcdave1@hotmail.com, sfarney2@erols.com, chetlyle@bigfoot.com, salvador_astucia@yahoo.com, sfarney@bigfoot.com, skywriter@public-action.com, turley@acninc.net, jerry@regena.com
Subject: Re: Question for Pat Knowlton
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 17:37:50 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-Path: sfarney2@erols.com
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Sep 2002 21:37:50.0705 (UTC) FILETIME=[A4DF9E10:01C25AA4]
Content-Length: 1351

MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Length: 874

Continue to next communiqué

Salvador Astucia, author of "Opium Lords, the book that solved JFK's assassination.

Read online at http://www.jfkmontreal.com

or buy book for $29 at http://www.jfkmontreal.com/order_hardcopy.htm

Back to Foster-Oslo Home Page

Back to SUMMARY Page

List of Exhibits