|| -----Original Message-----
|| From: owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
|| [mailto:owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com]On Behalf Of Chip Berlet
|| Hi,
||
|| Basket weaving is fun, but I have actually worked as an
|| investigator on lawsuits
|| that exposed covert operations. (...)
|| Hakki wants us to believe that the Pan Am 103 Lockerbie
|| terrorist attack that
|| brought down the jetliner was part of a U.S. government
|| operation. Part of his
|| "proof" is the claim that former FBI stooge Buck Revell (who I
|| have written
|| about in very negative terms) knew about the bombing and took
|| his son off the
|| plane. This is not only a hoax claim, but has been litigated. See:
|| http://www.dallasobserver.com/issues/2000-07-06/news.html
I'm glad you're interested in baskets because the appeals for the Lockerbie case are coming up. Chip hopes that nobody has read or understood what I wrote so that he can flummox them into thinking that Buck revell, whom he presents as a "respected" law-enforcement pro wasn't Oliver North's hatchet man. Chip would like everyone to forget I mentioned an Interfor report.
||
|| Hakki want's us to believe that the Berlin disco bombing was a
|| Mossad operation
|| when the Berlin court just ruled it was a Libyan operation.
||
Which proves what? You want to tell me OJ was innocent too?
|| The basic paradigm is that a handful of evil individuals
|| conspire to cause these
|| events.
That is what you would like to believe. You are continuously spouting out stock answers to simplistic arguments that you are projecting on imaginary opponents, whereas they are telling you something totally other. Conspiracies of evil individuals is a simplification that you can no doubt easily grasp, but it has nothing to do with what I said. Notice this thread: You started this because you _imagined_ I had proposed a conspiracy theory, whereas I have only pointed to a set of improbable circumstances without offering any sort of explanation. It was enough to immediately set off your knee-jerk.