Time: Sun Dec 14 12:31:04 1997
To: <ignition-point@majordomo.pobox.com>
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: The Facts the FBI does not want you to Know
Cc:
Bcc:
References:
I did! I tah!!
I tot I tah a pooddy tat!!
Didn't I? I didn't?
Imagine that, then!
At 10:45 AM 12/14/97 -0800, you wrote:
> WITNESSES ALLEGE NTSB COVERING EVIDENCE OF MISSILE ATTACK
>
> NTSB Claims Witnesses Didn't See What They Saw
>
>
> Copyright c 1997, The WINDS.
> ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
> http://www.TheWinds.org
>
>
>
> After an exhaustive examination, officials investigating TWA
>Flight 800 say they still don't know what caused the crash. The
>National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and the FBI have spent
>more than $40 million in the "most extensive examination of an
>aircraft accident in history", and the best official guess of the
>cause is the explosion of the center wing fuel tank from a spark of
>unknown origin, but no final conclusion has been announced.
>
> The events, as viewed by independent investigators, are not
>conclusive as to the exact source of the initial explosions that hit
>the plane, but they are very definite that it was not the center wing
>fuel tank that initiated the catastrophic explosion that destroyed
>the aircraft, killing all 230 people aboard.
>
> Although the government's investigative agencies say they don't
>know the exact cause, analysts at the Central Intelligence Agency
>have concluded that a missile was not the cause of the fiery crash of
>the jetliner. "There is no way a missile brought down the plane,"CIA
>spokeswoman Carolyn Osborn said. "Based on analysis using 244
>eyewitness reports, radar data, infrared data, and cockpit recorder
>information, CIA analysts have determined that the eyewitness
>sightings thought to be that of a missile actually took place after
>the first of several explosions on the aircraft.... What these
>eyewitnesses saw was, in fact, the burning 747 [jet] in various
>stages of crippled flight, not a missile," Osborn said. (The
>Press-Enterprise 9-25-97).
>
> The facts as revealed by independent investigators, however, show
>an entirely different picture with a massive amount of supporting
>evidence that runs counter to almost every detail of the official
>conclusions. The WINDS recently talked with William Donaldson, a
>retired navy commander, who has done extensive research into the
>cause of the crash. He is a graduate of Crash Analysis from the
>NavyPost Graduate School, with a twenty-five year career in the navy.
>
> Commander Donaldson's research has led to a congressional
>investigation that is still under way into the circumstances and
>causes that led to the crash. He said that he has "gotten access to
>inside information which is disheartening", showing the duplicity of
>the agencies responsible for the inquiry. "There are several
>individuals internal to the investigation that don't like the way
>this has gone", CDR Donaldson said. "I've gotten documents over the
>months, and one of those documents shows the debris field. When it is
>graphically displayed, it immediately refutes the entire scenario
>that the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is pushing with
>the way [they claim]the aircraft broke up.
>
> This former navy crash investigator said normally the debris field
>evidence is a critically important facet in determining the sequence
>and cause of a crash. He said, "this debris field shows that there
>wasa tremendous hit made on the left side of the plane. The nose
>itself was broken into four major groups of pieces." Donaldson went
>on to describe how the plane was impacted. "Frame 240 which is
>located approximately twenty feet back from the nose of the aircraft,
>was dislocated more than 2,000 feet to the right of the extended
>track of the aircraft in the debris field. In order to do that, you
>must have a tremendous push operating perpendicular to the flight
>path of the aircraft."
>
> Donaldson said, "even worse than that, when you go a little
>further back along that nose section, frame 840 to 860, forward lower
>left cargo compartment, the left side and center of that cargo
>compartmentwas dislocated 3,000 feet to the right of the track of the
>aircraft. You would expect normal dispersal of heavy parts probably
>up to several hundred feet left to right of center line if they were
>just falling off the aircraft. But that's not what happened. You have
>maybe 200 feet to the left, but you have a 3,000 foot dispersal to
>the right which means that either a freight train hit that plane up
>there at 13,000 feet, or a missile, or some high energy object did."
>
> THE HIGH ENERGY OBJECT
>
> One of the leading eyewitnesses to the events that led up to the
>explosion and subsequent fiery crash of TWA Flight 800 is Major
>Fredrick C. Meyer. He and co-pilot Chris Bauer were with the
>AirNational Guard and were practicing helicopter landings at the time
>the plane came down.
>
> Meyer, an attorney from New York, spoke with The WINDS about his
>observations and his eyewitness account of three separate explosions
>involved in the crash of the TWA jet. While coming in for a landing
>"I leaned forward in the seat to look up andlook forward and began to
>scan the sky more intently than I would normally" because a small
>plane had also been cleared for landing on the same runway. "At that
>moment, I saw a streak of light moving to my left. It was very
>curious because it looked like the streak that you would see from a
>shooting star at night, except that it was broad daylight and the
>streak was red-orange in color. It lasted three to five seconds.
>There was an interval in which I saw nothing and then on the same
>trajectory, further to the left, I saw a high velocity explosion
>which to me looked like ordnance, a war-head exploding. Whether it
>was a naval rifle, or a missile, or even a bomb, I couldn't
>distinguish. Then a second high velocity explosion took place; it was
>brilliant white light. The third event was the fuel explosion" [from
>the jet].
>
> What followed, "is a moment in time that I remember. We were
>headed toward the lake of fire in the ocean [the burning aircraft]
>and I looked up and saw debris still falling out of the sky, and I
>told my co-pilot to 'slow it down, let the stuff fall' so that we
>wouldnot fly under the falling debris." They were the first to arrive
>at the scene, but found no survivors in the water.
>
> When asked whether he had formulated any sort of conclusion from
>what he'd seen, Meyer said, "I stay away from it because I really
>believe that I had a unique view and that it was my responsibility to
>be as precise and as accurate and to make no assumptions. I really
>believed that the NTSB would probably do video tapes of an interview
>and be very interested in having a very accurate, very carefully
>explained, but not analyzed eyewitness report to help them determine
>thecause. I was wrong....That is what leads me to suspect, not to
>know, but to suspect that they knew before they asked the first
>question, what brought that aircraft down, because they did not seem
>to be interested in anything they heard [from eyewitness accounts]."
>
> As a military pilot, Meyer has twenty-five years experience with
>aircraft and he sees many fatal flaws in the NTSB, FBI and CIA's
>official scenario. "Let's focus on the aircraft accident and a
>rational determination as to what caused it", he said, "and the
>[probabilities of an] explosion of a fuel cell with slosh quantities
>of Jet A. It is an extraordinarily safe fuel. And all this talk about
>wires [causing a spark to ignite the fuel tank]--there are no wires
>in the center fuel tank. The electric [fuel pump] motors and the
>wires areon the outside of the fuel tank. They are bolted to the
>outside wall of the tank, the rotating shaft of the pump penetrates a
>gland seal into the fuel tank, the impeller and the housing are
>inside, but there are no wires in the fuel tank.
>
> "So then, the NTSB comes out and says 'there was an arc in the
>wiring.' We're talking about a 12-volt system here, measured in
>milliamps, and they say 'an arc between two 12-volt wires'. There are
>no wires! Tell me that the NTSB doesn't know that?
>
> Could an overheated air conditioner be the cause of the aircraft
>explosion? Major Meyer unequivocally says "no". "The circuit breakers
>are set at 130 degrees Fahrenheit [temperature at JFK airport was in
>the 70's]. People came to me who fly the 747and said 'if an
>overheated air conditioner could set off the center fuel tank, I
>wouldn't be talking to you. Because I've set on the tarmac at Riyad
>[Saudi Arabia] in 130 degree ambient temperature, popping those
>circuit breakers back on and keeping those air conditioners running
>so that I wouldn't fry in the cockpit while I was waiting for
>take-off clearance, with an empty center fuel tank! I am one of
>five-hundred pilots who have done that since the 747 came out, and
>none of them have ever exploded.' It doesn't happen. The [NTSB]
>stories are scientifically impossible."
>
> HOW SAFE IS THE 747?
>
> According to Commander Donaldson, "jet airliners built by
>the American aerospace industry have logged at least 150 thousand
>years of flight time. Not oncehas there ever been a spontaneous fuel
>tank explosion on any fuel tank while airborne." (Letter to NTSB
>11-14-97).
>
> Consider that until TWA-800's purported midair fuel tank
>explosion, the only Boeing 747's that came out of the air in pieces
>were blown out. In 1978 an Air India jetliner was downed, in 1983
>KAL-007, in 1985 another Air India plane, in 1988 Pan Am-103 was
>blown out of the air. All of these downings were due either to
>bombings or missile hits.
>
> In a letter to NTSB director James Hall, Commander Donaldson said,
>"no aircraft loaded with Jet A-1 [fuel] has ever had an internally
>ignited fuel tank explosion due to latent fuel vapor in the ullage
>[tank]. NTSB Safety Recommendations make the point clearly that there
>has never been a fuel tank explosion in an airborne commercial jet
>aircraft that was not ignited by an external source (hundreds of
>millions of flight hours in all types of jet carriers)."
>
> THE EYEWITNESSES
>
> The FBI has interviewed 244 eyewitnesses and there are many more
>who were not interviewed, according to investigators. This was not an
>obscure event. It had high visibility over a wide area by hundreds of
>individuals, many of whom are very credible.
>
> Witnesses were very clear in what they saw.
> Those witnessing the events leading up to the explosion were
> located along eleven nautical miles of shore- line. Some were in
> aircraft, some in boats, some on the beach, some within their
> homes. The nearest eyewitness reached the crash site in three
> minutes by air. The eyewitnesses give similar descriptions of the
> events they saw.
>
> "Several eyewitness like Mr. Roland Penney and his group of eight
>not only saw a missile-like object rise up from the haze at sea,
>leaving a thin gray smoke trail. They distinctly describe abright
>white flash, 'like a flashbulb' when it hit TWA Flight 800."
>(Donaldson letter 11-14-97).
>
> "We know what we saw. We weren't drunk," said [Jim Naples]. "I
>looked up and my immediate response was, I never saw an alert flare
>like that. It was projecting upward with a stream of smoke behind
>it." On July 17, 1996, Jim Naples was out on his boat with his wife
>and two daughters. Hundreds of other coastal people were out on the
>water too, and scores of them saw what Jim Naples saw in the southern
>sky: a white jet trail streaking up from near the horizon andarcing
>through the sky for many seconds and later a fireball." (New York
>Observer November 24, 1997).
>
> "It would be one thing if just three or four or five people saw
>it," said Anita Langdon at her boat motor shop at the Senix Marina.
>"But fifty or sixty people saw it in Center Moriches, well respected
>citizens, and they know what they saw." ibid.
>
> "A commercial fisherman was out there south of Long Island putting
>along. He sees on his left a missile [like object] rise over the
>horizon, a reddish-orange flare. He watches it as it goes overhead
>and he saw it smack into the plane. He didn't see TWA Flight 800
>until the missile [like object] hit it and then he said, 'my God! It
>just hit a plane!' And then he watched Flight 800 as all the guts
>came streaming out of it and down it goes." (James Sanders- Reagan
>Radio Broadcast, Oct. 16, 1997).
>
> Senator Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, chairman of the Judiciary Committee,
>was interviewed by CNN two days after the disaster. His conclusions
>come after 'various conversations' with government officials.
>
> "'I won't go so far as to say it was terrorism, but there was
>sabotage here,' Hatch said. 'We're looking at a criminal act. We're
>looking at somebody who either put a bomb on it or shot a missile, a
>surface-to-air missile.'" Hatch said, 'the National Transportation
>Safety Board should now turn the investigation over to the FBI
>because the crash was not related to an aviation problem.... It's
>very --almost 100 percent unlikely that this was a mechanical
>failure,' Hatch said. 'It looks pretty darn conclusive that it was an
>explosion caused either internally or externally by a criminal act.'
>Investigators told CNN that there is no indication that the Boeing
>747 suffered a catastrophic mechanical failure." (CNN 7-19-96).
>
> EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY EXCLUDED FROM NTSB'S PUBLIC HEARING
>
> The public hearing conducted by the NTSB in Baltimore seems to be
>calculated to bring resolution to this major air disaster which still
>has many unanswered questions. Yet, itseems doomed to failure from
>the outset. Bringing closure to this tragedy will require honest and
>candid evaluation of all the evidence, including what the hundreds of
>eyewitnesses have seen. It will require more than pleadings from
>James Kallstrom saying, "all I can do is try to impress upon them
>[the family members] that we're telling the truth."
>
> As with any accident, eyewitness testimony is crucial in
>establishing what actually happened and in what sequence. In a court
>of law eyewitness testimony is essential in achieving accuracy and
>justice and is indispensable before issuing a verdict. However, in
>the NTSB's public hearing involving TWA 800, this critical evidence
>will not be permitted. "Responding to pressure from the FBI on the
>eve of the first public forum on the explosion of TWA Flight 800, the
>National Transportation Safety Board has canceled the discussion of
>eyewitness accounts and explosive residue at the five-day hearing
>into the cause of thecrash." (Newsday , 12-8-97).
>
> Requesting that the NTSB avoid issues touching on the possibility
>that a missile or bomb brought down Flight 800, James Kallstrom said
>his agency found broad public acceptance after the FBI saidit
>discovered no evidence of a missile or bomb. He indicated that the
>agency has concerns that reconsidering the issue could create new
>controversy. James Hall, NTSB chairman, agreed, stating that
>"although it would normally be a part of NTSB practice to evaluate
>eyewitness observations of a particular accident, we have agreed not
>to do so."
>
> Officials conducting the week-long public hearing showed little
>tolerance toward the suggestion of alternative causes of this
>tragedy. When a reporter from Worker's World called for an
>independent investigation, he was quickly removed from the hearing
>while shouting, "we have to know the truth!" He was implicating the
>navy as a possible source of a missile which downed the plane.
>
> FRENCH FAMILIES DENIED DOCUMENTS BY U.S.
>
> According to a November 29 AP report, French families of TWA
>Flight 800's victims said they can no longer trust U.S.
>investigators. They accuse American officials of "dragging their
>feet" in investigating the crash.
>
> Michel Ney who represents the families said that the FBI and NTSB
>had refused to hand over important documents to a French judge
>studying the crash. Ney said investigating magistrate Chantal Perdrix
>had requested copies of autopsy reports of French victims, results of
>clothing analysis, chemical and metal tests conducted by U.S.
>authorities, a copy of the cockpit voice recorder,and Boeing and TWA
>maintenance reports.
>
> Ney said, "The judge received practically nothing, just a few
>innocuous documents already made public." He indicated the U.S.
>Justice Department wanted Judge Perdrix to promise to keep the
>information confidential...and that she declined. "This is
>unacceptable. We will do everything possible to find out the truth,"
>Ney said.
>
> THE DARK SIDE
>
> A recent airing of TV's Hard Copy discussed the mysterious
>disappearance of Jeremy Crocker, a "renowned engineer" who had become
>obsessed with the TWA explosion. Crocker, a Palm Springs resident,
>had become convinced, after much research, that the government was
>hiding the truth and he was determined to find it.
>
> Crocker's son Jonathan said his father was "somewhat of a
>crusader. He wanted people to be accountable and honest and he felt
>that wasn't happening. He was willing to dig for evidence that might
>point fingers."
>
> Crocker's work had come to the notice of Peter Ford, a Los Angeles
>radio host. Just five days before his disappearance, he had been a
>guest on Ford's program where the subject was TWA 800. Ford indicated
>that Jeremy Crocker was "absolutely convinced that there was a lot of
>foul play involved" in the downing of TWA Flight800.
>
> Continuing his research on December 9, 1996, Crocker traveled to
>Los Angeles where he put some of his current findings into an
>envelope and mailed them to Ford. That was the last anyone has heard
>from Jeremy Crocker. "The dark side theory would be that hewas taken
>out. That someone, somewhere felt he was a threat", said Ford. The
>Crocker family is still searching, but police have never found a
>trace. They say he simply vanished. (Hard Copy, November 27,1997).
>
> THE FBI vs THE INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATOR
>
> James Sanders has been an independent investigator with an
>interest in Flight 800 from the beginning. As a retired California
>police officer, he began looking into the possibility of a missile
>being the primary cause of the destruction of the plane. Sanders,
>like Commander Donaldson, calls attention to the debris field.He says
>it shows that the center fuel tank did not explode until eight
>seconds after the break-up of the plane began, indicating the fuel
>tank could not have been the initiator of the explosion. "Every
>anomaly they have works with a missile but doesn't work with the
>center fuel tank being the primary [cause]." (Reagan Radio).
>
> Sanders, who chronicled the information in his book,The Downing of
>TWA FLIGHT 800, became the object of a Justice Department probe
>inquiring into his telephone records. At issue is a small fragment of
>the plane's seat fabric containing red residue which Sanders says
>independent analysis proved was missile fuel. The seat fabric
>originated from the investigative site at Calverton hanger in New
>York.
>
> Sanders says the fabric showed up in his mailbox from an
>undisclosed source. In August, however, Janet Reno issued a written
>subpoena to Atlantic Bell for his telephone records. The FBI, in
>collusion with the Justice Department, has been investigating how
>Sanders obtained the fabric since his material was published earlier
>this year.
>
> Sanders and his wife Elizabeth, a longtime TWA flight attendant
>trainer, have now been charged with stealing "parts of a civil
>aircraft involved in an accident," a felony, according to a criminal
>complaint filed in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn. Terrell Stacey, a
>senior 747 pilot who has been with TWA for thirty-one years, is
>charged with stealing government property, a misdemeanor offense for
>supplying the scrap of fabric to Sanders.
>
> Jeff Schlanger, attorney for Sanders says, "the FBI has spent
>millions creating a videotape and holding a lengthy press conference
>to make sure their theory got the public's attention. Why are
>theymoving to arrest a man who holds that up to a little scrutiny?"
>
> Sanders' claim that a missile was the primary cause for the
>downing of the plane and that the red residue on certain of the
>aircraft's seats is consistent with missile fuel, would at least
>assign a sourcefor the elusive spark which the NTSB has thus far been
>unable to place.
>
> In an interview with CNN, Sanders said he was being "harried by
>the FBI for raising uncomfortable questions about the investigation.
>Actually, what the feds want to do isget even. They are livid."
>
> Supporting Sanders' claim Mr. Kallstrom fumed, "this criminal
>investigation is far from over. These defendants are charged with not
>only committing a serious crime, they have also increased the pain
>already inflicted on the victims' families. [Of course, this is not
>mentioning the many families working for TWA who are made to believe
>they have some responsibility in the disaster]. This investigation
>will continue in an effort to identify any other individuals who may
>have played a role in this scheme." The maximum sentence possible for
>Sanders is ten years imprisonment.
>
> Schlanger said, "every action that he [Sanders] has taken in his
>investigative reporting on the crash of Flight 800 was taken pursuant
>to moral and journalistic imperatives protected by the First
>Amendment's guarantee of a free press." (Newsday 12-10-97).
>
> In a move that may reveal the true implications of the red
>residue, James Kallstrom contacted the NTSB asking that it not
>discuss the residue during its public hearings.
>
> WHAT DO THOSE WITH EXPERIENCE SAY?
>
> Outlining his concerns, Commander William Donaldson wrote a series
>of letters to NTSB chairman James Hall expressing his outrage at the
>way his agency was conducting the investigation. "I have been closely
>following the NTSB's position, your statements and congressional
>testimony concerning the TWA Flight 800 mishap with with
>ever-increasing alarm.
>
> "It is apparent to me and other professionals within the aircraft
>manufacturing, airline, and petroleum industries that [regarding] TWA
>800 your agency has been conducting a campaign in the media to
>misinform the public and willfully assign the leastprobable cause to
>this mishap. Your agency has been depicting the volatility of the
>fuel as if it were nitrobenzene.
>
> "Because of your agency's successful permutation of facts
>essential to this investigation, the incredible crash scenario you
>have tabled apparently designed to subvert eyewitness testimony, and
>your stonewalling of simple congressional questions, I have received
>funding to conduct an independent investigation.
>
> "Mr. Hall's logic would have us believe that a pedestrian killed
>by a hit-and-run driver in front of thirty eyewitnesses died from
>unexplained natural causes. He would discount all eyewitnesses simply
>because the victim's body showed no evidence of tire marks."
>(Donaldson letter to Hall).
>
> Another man with twenty-five years experience flying military
>aircraft is Major Frederick C. Meyer with the Air National Guard. He
>was an eyewitness to the object streaking across the sky followed by
>two aerial explosions into Flight 800. Meyer and others have been
>incensed with the "show" the official investigation has been
>producing. "Every time I move into a circle of pilots or mechanics or
>anyonein the circles of private or commercial aviation, they all say
>the same thing, 'it's such a bloody lie, it's ridiculous; we know
>they're lying.' Meyer stated further that "I don't believe anything
>of this magnitude has remained as guarded as it has without direct
>intervention from the White House."
>
> MORE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE = MORE OFFICIAL MYSTERY
>
> Well over one year after the crash, more evidence was revealed
>that focuses hard questions on the official version of the cause. In
>September, 1997 it was disclosed that the nose gear doors on the
>plane were blown inward. The doors are located well forward of the
>center fuel tank and would not have been impacted by that explosion.
>It was also determined that they were one of the first things to come
>off the plane in flight. Exterior doors blown inward are strong
>evidence of an outside event impacting the plane.
>
> One crash investigator told CNN that "the discovery keeps open the
>question of whether the fuel tank explosion was the primary or
>secondary event in the in-flight breakup of TWA Flight 800."(CNN
>9-5-97). Officials are said to be "mystified" about the significance
>of damage to the doors, "but Shelly Hazle, an NTSB spokeswoman,
>downplayed the significance, emphasizing that investigators will have
>to see how this newly discovered evidence fits into their theory of
>how the plane blew up." (ibid.)
>
> CDR Donaldson said that "military warheads cause hundreds of P.S.I
>overpressure, blowing in hatch doors, shearing off antenna.... The
>hinges of the failed nose gear doors were pushed inward and came off
>the plane very early. This is solid physical evidence, "one of the
>smoking guns." Why do we hear about this only now, fourteen months
>after the fact?"
>
> FBI, CIA AND NTSB'S "SOPHISTICATED WITNESS ANALYSIS"
>
> When asked by the Press-Enterprise about the eyewitnesses, CIA
>spokeswoman Carolyn Osborn said, "our technical analysis concludes
>that what these eyewitnesses saw was, in fact, the burning [Boeing]
>747 in various stages of crippledflight, not a missile."
>
> "I know what I saw. I saw an ordnance explosion", declared
>Frederick Meyer, the Air National Guard helicopter pilot. "The
>explosion of the fuel was not the initiator of the event, it was one
>of the results." Meyer said he contacted the FBI the second dayafter
>the crash, but they did not ask any questions. He also spoke with
>NTSB investigators who "spent about five minutes" with him, he said.
>
> "We know what we saw. We weren't drunk", said another group of
>witnesses who saw the the ascending object rise in the sky, then
>strike the plane.
>
> The New York Post reported that "witnesses to the fiery TWA crash
>don't accept the FBI's explanation of the mysterious streaks they saw
>in the sky that fateful night. The FBI concluded that the witnesses
>were confused. (NYP 11-19-97).
>
> "I'm not satisfied at all," said East End fisherman Roland Penney,
>who insists he saw a "streak of light" racing into the sky just
>before the plane exploded. "I don't think they're being honest with
>the people. They're telling us we saw something else than what we
>say."
>
> In September, 1997 James Kallstrom said the FBI and CIA were still
>doing "a sophisticated and detailed" analysis of witness accounts.
>(AP, September 18, 1997). The CIA said that "based on 244 eyewitness
>reports, analysts have determined that the eyewitness sightings
>thought to be that of a missile actually took place after the first
>several explosions on the aircraft." (Press-Enterprise , September
>25, 1997).
>
> "I know what I saw," agreed Barbara Pacholk, a fifty-year old
>housewife from Quogue. "I saw ... fires go across the sky. One hit
>the plane at the tail and the second hit at the front, just before
>the wings...I understand that when a plane bursts into flames the
>flames fall, but this was a fire going up towards the plane."
>
> "The investigators' arrogance toward the eyewitnesses angered
>Representative James Traficant Jr., Democrat of Ohio, who earlier
>this fall...began investigating the possibility that the government
>is shortchanging the citizens' views. 'Ms. Osborn said they were
>mistaken in what they saw. That's not very professional, and it's not
>the way to dispute eyewitness statements,' said Paul Marcone, press
>secretary for the congressman." (NY Observer , 11-24-97).
>
> Perhaps the bottom line was best stated by Philip Weiss of The New
>York Observer . "Now the FBI has reached its conclusion in the
>matter. Its message to the eyewitnesses: shut up, you didn't see
>anything."
>
>
>
>
> Copyright c 1997, The WINDS.
> ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
> http://www.TheWinds.org
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail