Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Was JonBenet Murder an AIM Signature Crime?
Vanity | February 5, 2005 | Vanity

Posted on 02/05/2005 8:41:49 AM PST by Snapple

For some historical background link to

Don't blow me off too fast. I am pretty up to speed on my radical (alleged) Indian groups and their activities.

TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: 1aimkilledkenny; 2thosebassturds; aim; aimwardchurchill; aolinstantmessage; buildaburgercrimes; colorado; conspiracyjunk; delusions; garbage; illuminatiprints; jonbenet; leehill; murder; notnews; ramsey; signaturetinfoil; snappletinfoiler; stupidvanity; themasonsdidit; tinfoil; tinfoilbodysuit; wardchurchill; whiskeysnapple
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-195 last
To: ken21

I think the investigators should do their jobs. I just think this is a possible way to look at the evidence.

151 posted on 02/05/2005 2:09:21 PM PST by Snapple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: Snapple

i thought the ramsey case was supposed by a satanic crime.

years after the murder, and the ramseys had left boulder, a woman emerged in san luis obispo, ca who claimed that she had been raped by fleet white sr. i think this was reported in the los angeles times.

fleet white jr. was a close friend of the ramseys.

she said that fleet white sr. in california was a member of a satanic cult. she was backed up by her therapist.

and then later a spokesperson for the san luis obispo police department said that this woman was crazy.

152 posted on 02/05/2005 2:11:37 PM PST by ken21 (most news today is either stupid or evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: Snapple

and the symbolism is:

fleet white = flee white = black = satanic.

153 posted on 02/05/2005 2:12:33 PM PST by ken21 (most news today is either stupid or evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: Snapple
Burroughs is dead now, but he loved weapons. He had a real armoury. It is not me that is crazy--it is them. And they are REALLY CRAZY.

Burroughs performed as Hassan Sabbah? Yes, he really was crazy. I saw him once at a book signing in North Beach (SanFran) at City Lights, the bookstore founded by Ferlinghetti, another far-out far-left radical whose best buddy Alan Ginsburg was a big supporter (founding member?)of NAMBLA, North American Man-Boy Love Association. So kiddie porn was just a step away,if that, from Burroughs...and I've often wondered whether some kid porn creep murdered JonBenet.

Burroughs was extremely bizarre, almost demonic, but the North Beach crowd practically genuflected before him.

So, yes, this group is REALLY CRAZY and also prone to dramatic metaphore.

154 posted on 02/05/2005 2:15:03 PM PST by Veto! (Opinions freely dispensed as advice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: my_pointy_head_is_sharp

Hmm didn't John Ramsey have some kind of connection to the Philipines?

155 posted on 02/05/2005 2:21:09 PM PST by Freedom Dignity n Honor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Houmatt
"You want to know who killed JonBenet? It was not some domestic terror group. IT WAS HER PARENTS."

Oh good grief! You actually believe that? I guess you must read the National Enquirer. I would sooner believe that nutty AIM theory.
156 posted on 02/05/2005 2:47:50 PM PST by Kirkwood (Liberals gave the world "Rock the Vote." George W Bush gave the world "Iraq: The vote!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Snapple
"Hill and his minions propagandized that the FBI and Boulder authorities were protecting a powerful ring of pedophiles. This is the latest in radical propaganda and radical Indian propaganda--that the US government is behind powerful pedophile organizations."

"...the killer was mainly motivated by his mental illness--not his radical affiiliations. But he needed some sort of ideological justification for his sick perversions. ... The ideology makes his murder ok, heroic even."

All right, let's put these two points of yours together. Frankly, this drew my interest most because it is very true that sick people who cannot accept that they are sick will adopt ideological reasons for their crimes. You say the ideological goal is to discredit the government, the FBI, local law enforcement, etc., and to stir up animosity between Indians and Whites. You say one of the ways they try to discredit the government is to claim that the government is somehow tied to a powerful ring of pedophiles. I think in one post you said they accuse government law enforcement agencies themselves of being made up of pedophiles. Didn't You? Not just protecting them but acting as pedophiles themselves. Another thing sick people do is project their sick ways onto others. Could they have chosen to brand the government as pedophiles because that is what THEY are? And I mean more than just a handful of people who are using AIM ideology to justify their crimes. Yes, them, but many, many more who are involved with AIM, whether directly involved or indirectly through adopting their ideology.

I won't dismiss your thoughts out of hand, but my thinking about sick people involved is this: if a lot of these AIM-connected people might, and I stress might, because I have no actual evidence, be pedophiles, I believe that alone would draw them to the Ramsey case even if none of them were the actual murderers. Jon Benet poor child had to have incited a lot of sick interest from such people both before and after her murder, and especially after with all of the publicity and photos of her and speculation about who killed her and why. They might even pretend to themselves that they did it, as a way to fantasize themselves into the story. They might go so far as to involve themselves with the case, telling themselves they were doing it to discredit the government but in reality they were drawn to it like moths to a flame. Perhaps JonBenet became a type of cult High Priestess to this cult of pedophiles.

As I said, though, I don't automatically discount your thinking that one or more of them was involved in the actual murder. I just want to consider tangential possibilities.

157 posted on 02/05/2005 2:52:20 PM PST by txrangerette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: Snapple

"He carries guns, bags of knives and little thin knives that I think are burglar knives. They have a special name."

This proves your theory to me. NOT

158 posted on 02/05/2005 2:56:45 PM PST by HuntsvilleTxVeteran (So I talk to myself, at least I am talking to a mind that is my equal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Houmatt
Then how do you explain the ransom note?

I know one possible explanation. It is far-fetched, but nothing in this saga makes sense, so here goes:

Patsy enters Jon-Benet in pageants, weekend after weekend. There is also a pedophile that attends these pageants, but perhaps has a "cover" (maybe he is a photographer or some such thing), so that people don't get suspicious of him.

Patsy and the pedophile, since they frequent the same pageants every weekend, get to know one another. He wants Jon-Benet, but develops a very tight friendship with Patsy just to get close to the child. In fact, he and Patsy start to have an affair. He is aware of everything going on in the house socially due to his relationship with Patsy.

Then, he sees his opportunity -- what he has wanted all along -- a chance to get the child.

So, he does. And Patsy discovers what has happended, probably even while the guy is still there. She writes the note not to protect him, but to protect herself. If it is discovered how the pedophile got access to Jon-Benet, Patsy is toast. Not only is her daughter dead, but when her husband learns of her affair and how it lead to the death, her lifestyle is gone.

Yeah, I know it is far-fetched, but there are possible scenarios that would explain why she might write the letter even though she or John didn't kill Jon-Benet.

159 posted on 02/05/2005 3:49:02 PM PST by RedWhiteBlue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: ken21

This lady's lawyer was Lee Hill. Her therapist was named Bienkowski. She may have had some previous contact with Lee Hill when he lived in California.

The lady often had made allegations that she was being abused by some ring and was still being abused. The California police didn't find her credible. She claimed the abuse was still going on, but couldn't seem to prove anything.

Lee Hill brought her to Boulder and "hid" her with AIM people from these supposed pedophiles that were after her.
If she is in such danger, why is he telling all this to the media???? Why not just be quiet? Why grandstand about how AIM is protecting this "victim" when the FBI won't??

When the police questioned her in Boulder, they didn't find her credible. Lee Hill depicted this lack of evidence as proof that the law enforcement were protecting the pedophiles. No evidence was seen as "proof" of a government conspiracy.

The therapist Bienkowski was real into recovered memories.
I believe this happens, but this lady claimed she was still being aboused by people who abused her when she was little. Yet there was no evidence.

Lee Hill is a smart guy. He could see that this lady was not telling the truth.

HE also blamed the FBI for not protecting her, but this is not the FBI's job. She didn't need protection from this phantom pedophile gang.

Bienkowski may have known Hill in California, but I don't know this for sure. He did work briefly in a county prosecutor's office.

Why do I know all this--Lee Hill told a lot of it in an interview he gave to Westworld Magazine.

Lee Hill is full of it.

160 posted on 02/05/2005 4:10:12 PM PST by Snapple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran

It is one thing in a big picture. He also assaulted his wife with a gun and was not allowed to carry weapons. Then he got caught with weapons.

The main thing is what Hill was doing to confuse the investigation with theories of a government-protected ring of pedophiles.

He was supposed to go to court for assault and weapons violations, but jumped bail.

Now maybe you are not old enough to remember when AIM was blowing up Mt Rushmore's visitor center, but I do.

This was Leonard Peltier's lawyer, and not just his lawyer, but an activist.

161 posted on 02/05/2005 4:15:17 PM PST by Snapple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: Veto!

Thank you. Once people have seen it close up, they know what I am talking about. These are really crazy people.

Lee Hill writes about his relationship with Burroughs.

Hill claims to have met him when he was very young.

I read Hill talk about it on the Internet.

Burroughs made a record--which I bought for research purposes--where he pretends to be Hassan Sabbah. He basically does this fatwa against America. This is way before we ever heard of Osama.

Burroughs spent time in N. Africa after he accidently shot his wife in the middle of her forehead and fled Mexico probably after paying off some official.

He picked up a lot of that radical left Arab nationalism over there. I think he also picked up young boys and smoked a lot of dope, too.

He was a heroin addict.

162 posted on 02/05/2005 4:23:36 PM PST by Snapple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: Snapple


i can see you're really into this.

there was no follow up as i remember in the times. sometimes this serves a purpose--to convey mis-information.

163 posted on 02/05/2005 4:25:10 PM PST by ken21 (most news today is either stupid or evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus

Citric Cycle...or IOW, the Krebs Cycle

164 posted on 02/05/2005 4:25:35 PM PST by Osage Orange (Why does John McCain always look as confused as a goat on Astroturf?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: Snapple
He was a heroin addict.

Yes. He had the most negative energy I've ever experienced, sort of like a giant toilet that's perpetually flushing. All of the energy and oxygen just got sucked out of the room leaving everyone debilitated. The liberals apparently like the feeling.

165 posted on 02/05/2005 4:35:36 PM PST by Veto! (Opinions freely dispensed as advice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: Snapple

Patsy, the son or one of the father's buddies makes more sense.

166 posted on 02/05/2005 4:38:54 PM PST by thathamiltonwoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thathamiltonwoman

I'm real inclined to think the mom or the brother.

The brother might have just lost it after all the attention that got paid to Jon Benet, and the mom scribbles out the note as a cover.

167 posted on 02/05/2005 4:46:12 PM PST by djf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: Houmatt

"You want to know who killed JB?Her parents."You may be right,but they'ed have to both be exceptionally good liars.They came across as sincere on tv imo.What do you think about the intruder theory?

168 posted on 02/05/2005 5:02:31 PM PST by thombo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: djf

So how do you account for the fact that Lee Hill, Leonard Peltier's lawyer, was manufacturing all kinds of false evidence about this case. His clients got in trouble for trying to influence a grand jury--and then he claimed they weren't his clients. He made a big production aobut this crazy woman from California who was making allegations about pedophile rings. He claimed the FBI failed to hide her from the pedophiles so he had to hide her with AIM.
But why is he telling the papers if she is really in danger???

You have to look at how what happened in Boulder is like what happened to the Indians at Pine Ridge. In Pine Ridge and Boulder people were fed conspiracy theories against the FBI.

The Indians were being told people were dying suspicious deaths and that the authorities (on the reservations it is the FBI that investigates serous crimes) were not investigating and were posibly complicit with the killers.
They got the idea for this fairy take from reading the FBI files on the Osage Indian Murders, except that the FBI really helped the Indians by catching and prosecuting the killer John Ramsey.

In Boulder people were told that the FBI and Boulder authorities were protecting a ring of pedophiles who were highly-placed. When there was no evidence of a ring of important pedophiles, this was seen as proof that the FBI was doing a cover-up. It is so stupid, like the Salem witch trials.

AIM always tries to make the FBI look like they are a pack of criminals instead of the pretty good, if not perfect, law enforcement organization they are.

Now that Ward Churchill has gone too far, people will start looking at who all these AIM folks are and how they are manipulating the media.

169 posted on 02/05/2005 5:07:42 PM PST by Snapple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: thathamiltonwoman

Just because something makes more sense doesn't mean it is always the explanation. You need to look at the evidence. You need to look at the creeps in Boulder. Boulder has some real bad people. It is a breeding ground for radicals and terrorists. There are a lot of derelicts who use drugs hanging about. The wealthy people there are looked at with envy by many.

People who kill their children usually have problems. The Ramseys were not alcoholics or addicts. They were successful, churchgoing, active community members.
I find the beauty pagent thing sort of pretentious, but it is quite popular in the South where Patsy and John were from. It's not my thing, but so what?

It is not easy to hide the evidence you killed someone.
And the child has made DNA on her underwear supposedly.
The police are a bit vague about exactly what they've got.
I don't believe what I hear on TV. I listen to the police.

170 posted on 02/05/2005 5:16:25 PM PST by Snapple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: thathamiltonwoman

Here is a CNN article about the DNA. Now it does quote the Ramsey's lawyer, not the Boulder officials.

171 posted on 02/05/2005 5:24:54 PM PST by Snapple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: Houmatt
You want to know who killed JonBenet? It was not some domestic terror group. IT WAS HER PARENTS.

Nope. She was their rice bowl. People don't usually break their own rice bowls.

She was the one that got all the praise and attention. IT WAS HER BROTHER!

172 posted on 02/05/2005 5:32:44 PM PST by null and void (God must love stupid people - He made so many of them... (Not enough to win an election!) -restornu)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Zechariah11
Sorry it took so long to respond -- busy day.

I don't know if anyone else has posted that CBS 48hrs., although I think the second WAsh. Times article might be referencing that. That was posted here, but I found it at google.

173 posted on 02/05/2005 8:20:48 PM PST by Tuscaloosa Goldfinch (THANK YOU LORD -- John Kerry is still just a senator.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Snapple
Maybe we were taught to be "above it all" -- as if to react would put us at their level. Or maybe to react would expose us to the power of their evil and make them see us. And we don't want that. Nope. But to ignore evil is to let it grow, and that's worse. Find the line and you'll know why so many don't "get this".

Why doesn't anyone get this?????

174 posted on 02/05/2005 9:08:35 PM PST by GOPJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Snapple

One of the supermarket tabloids disclosed the identity of the killer last month.

175 posted on 02/05/2005 9:19:47 PM PST by bayourod (Unless we get over 40% of the Hispanic vote in 2008, President Hillary will take all your guns away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Snapple

I can't believe AIM would kill a little girl if they simply wanted to discredit the Boulder Police and the FBI.

There was an FR article within the last few months that suggested Jon Bonet's murderer might have been involved in an attempted kidnapping of another beauty pageant contestant that competed against her.

Basically, that the murderer was someone, possibly an acquaintance, who knew both of them.

176 posted on 02/06/2005 7:30:39 AM PST by BradyLS (DO NOT FEED THE BEARS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BradyLS

I don't think that AIM as an organization did this.

I think the person who did this is really a predator, but he doesn't like to think that about himself; so he uses AIM ideology to give a veneer of justification to this crime.

These old AIM activists live to discredit the FBI. That is what they do. If you can discredit law enforcement, you can take over the town or the reservation.

A lot of AIM people were criminals--burglars and drug dealers--who wanted the FBI (which investigates serious crimes on reservations) to be discredited so the Indians wouldn't come to the FBI for help or to report crimes.

177 posted on 02/06/2005 7:41:18 AM PST by Snapple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: bayourod

I am only interested in evidence that meets the test of a courtroom. Lee Hill was influencing the media about this investigation.

The police will be quiet and do their jobs.

178 posted on 02/06/2005 7:43:27 AM PST by Snapple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]


I think you are right. People are afraid so they pretend they don't see the bulllies.

179 posted on 02/06/2005 7:45:05 AM PST by Snapple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: Snapple
I don't think that AIM as an organization did this. I think the person who did this is really a predator, but he doesn't like to think that about himself; so he uses AIM ideology to give a veneer of justification to this crime.

Ah! I see now. Thanks for clearing it up.

180 posted on 02/06/2005 7:51:43 AM PST by BradyLS (DO NOT FEED THE BEARS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: BradyLS

You need to study about AIM. It attracts very violent, hate-fulled people.

AIM has different chapters and some are not so bad.

The organization is not a monolith.

Probably some AIM people are trying to help the Indians with legal issues.

Other people belong to AIM so that they can claim to be persecuted when they are arrested for selling drugs.

Others are leftists who hate the US. They don't care about Indians.

I don't know if these are really different organizations or just different faces of the same organization.

I don't trust anything to do with AIM.

181 posted on 02/06/2005 7:59:52 AM PST by Snapple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: nw_arizona_granny

According to another poster, the Fox News show Heartland with John Kasich said that Ward Churchill was fired once for sexual harrassment but got his job back when he sued.

I don't know. I didn't hear the program.

I am just going to say this, AIM people--at least these hard-core ones--can be violent. They have these men called Dog Soldiers (Lakota Sioux Dog Soldier clan) who cause trouble and violence on reservations.

Lee Hill also assaulted his wife with a glock pistol and threw her around.

The Indian paper "Indian Country Today" says that Ward Churchill is not an Indian and that he does not represent most Indians, who have sympathy for the victims of 9-11 and helped with relief work.

They don't like getting a bad reputation because of Ward Churchill.

The editors said that Ward Churchill spoke the other day while protected by his (AIM) security. I think that is the Dog Soldiers. They do security and enforcement for AIM.

AIM should not be enforcing anything since they are not a government.

182 posted on 02/06/2005 10:10:54 AM PST by Snapple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Snapple
"I am only interested in evidence that meets the test of a courtroom."

Well I'm only interested in evidence I don't have to buy the tabloid to get.

183 posted on 02/06/2005 12:34:09 PM PST by bayourod (Unless we get over 40% of the Hispanic vote in 2008, President Hillary will take all your guns away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: Snapple

I was not making fun of anything. I just have my own theory, that is all. Are you sure you are responding to the right person?

184 posted on 02/06/2005 12:44:41 PM PST by Conservatrix ("He's a barf." --- Sophia T., Age 4, on John Sawed-Off Baldrick "I have a cunning plan" Kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: nw_arizona_granny

Thanks for the ping.


185 posted on 02/07/2005 8:52:28 AM PST by Velveeta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Snapple
First thought: You really need to /wear/ the tinfoil, not eat it. After all, you don't know what's in that stuff. It might be causing these hallucinations.

Second thought: Yet again, you referenced the "Lakota Sioux Dog Soldier Clan" in this post. There is NO Lakota Dog Soldier clan or society. If there were, I'd probably know more than half of the members, because I know an awful lot of Lakota folk. I've made a couple phone calls just to be certain of this, and no, there is no Lakota Dog Soldier Clan, nor is there a Lakota Dog Soldier Society. (For the record, I called people on multiple Lakota reservations, not just Pine Ridge.)

And now, I'm going to focus on this anti-tribal piece of fodder you've whipped out of your... well, you know.

AIM does not hate Mt. Rushmore. In fact, while there was a faction which bombed the visitor center, it was a faction which later got tossed out of AIM. You might be familiar with that faction, because they now are mostly people who comprise the group which calls itself Denver AIM. (Not Boulder AIM, because there is no such group.) The actual AIM groups which are out there do not hate Mt. Rushmore. Yes, they may laugh over the fact that the visitor center was bombed, because there is a general distrust of the government amongst many tribal groups (no surprise there; the most recently broken treaty was only a year ago, and the government still screws them over). But they wouldn't condone it.

Secondly, attacking or killing children is against one of the base principles which AIM was founded upon. The American Indian Movement was an organization that, in its infancy and now, wanted to protect tribal society for the future generations. They also wanted to make certain that the tribes were not wiped out by the federal government in the interrim. There is no person I can think of who is an actual member of AIM who would actually even remotely think of hurting a child. I admit that I do not know every single AIM member, but it's highly improbable at best.

Thirdly, it's quite a stretch to assume that someone would go and attack a child based on a name from an Osage book. By the by, the vast majority of the "old AIM members" that you accuse in this theory hate the Osages, and likely wouldn't have had any interest whatsoever in reading a book on Osage murders from the 1930's. In fact, it would be far more likely that, if they heard of that book, that they would cheer the murderer(s) on. But it's highly doubtful that they would attack someone because they happened to be named Ramsey, and even more improbable that they'd do it to their children.

Fourthly, you refer to these people as "card-carrying AIM". The only "cards" issued to AIM members are the ones which Russell Means sells on his website for pocket change (he makes a fortune on 'em, I understand, from foreigners who want to support the Indians). AIM does not issue membership cards. They probably should, just to prevent any further confusion about who's AIM and who isn't... but they don't.

Fifthly, AIM is not and has not been a terrorist organization. An example of a terrorist organization is Al-Queda, which instructs its membership to hate Americans and to kill them whenever possible. AIM does not instruct its members to hate or kill. There are no training camps to teach AIM members how to shoot at Americans, because they are not needed nor wanted.

Some members of AIM were involved in the Wounded Knee 1973 standoffs. Others have been accused of crimes. However, there are bad apples in any group, and one cannot blame an entire organization - or even a faction of an organization - for the act of one person. There are criminal Republicans, yet you don't see people saying that all of the Republicans steal, lie, cheat... oh, wait, the Democrats say that. Whoops. But you get my point - it's irrational to assume that AIM is a terrorist organization when they not only don't promote terrorist activities, but when they actively work against 'em. (And yes, they do work against them.)

Another point: AIM does not have a goal to damage the prestige of the FBI. In fact, many AIM members are trying to get the FBI to actually finish investigating cases that they have not completed. Furthermore, not all tribal folk are members of AIM, and many of them are quite comfortable with the FBI investigating crime on reservations.

The killer of two FBI agents at Pine Ridge, if you go by court records, is Leonard Peltier. Yes, Peltier was a member of AIM. But no, AIM did not kill those two agents. Peltier did, according to the courts. Nobody else has proven otherwise, including Peltier himself. This does not make AIM likely to have an agenda of killing people, nor does it mean that AIM would have killed a child.

Another thought: if anyone from AIM killed someone as a coup for AIM, it would have been spread around AIM. Something that's a "major coup" wouldn't have been able to have been kept quiet. That being the case, someone in AIM would've turned in the killer or killers, just the way that someone in AIM turned in Peltier when he was presumed to have killed two FBI agents. Since nobody has, I'd say that you're wrong, just on that count.

You obviously haven't studied AIM very well, either. They aren't as subtle of a group as you seem to think they are. Heck, they're lucky if they can organize well enough to stage a protest of a high school mascot, much less come to a conclusion to kill a kid because of a book.

What all of this says to me is that you had far too much time on your hands, you were busily chugging firewater, and you watch too much FBI Files on TV. But it doesn't give any remote possibility of being reality, not in the slightest.
186 posted on 02/15/2005 9:42:05 PM PST by Ladypixel (Not all Indian activists act like lefty Churchills... thank goodness!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ladypixel

If you read the other posts on the thread, I explain that this criminal was a really sick, vicious indivudual, not an organization.

This was a sick individual who needed to justify his murder in terms of his ideology.

I have a lot more.

You need to look at all the things Lee Hill did after the killing to promote the propagands that a ring of highly-placed pedophiles was operating WITH FBI PROTECTION.
This is like the propaganda of Ward Hill and others that the FBI was protecting some vague killers at Pine Hill.}

That is the main thing you need to see--everything was orchestrated to promote this conspiracy theory.

I can't go into all of it right new, but there is substantioal evidence Hill and others were doing this.

When I read the Osage Indian Murders it sounded just like the Pine Ridge stories Ward Hill tells. Especially all the claims about people being murdered in ways that are made to appear accdiental.

When I read about the Osage, I saw the name John Ramsey. He was this infamous killer of Indians.

This name would be known to someone involved in AIM propaganda.

The signature on the vicious ransom note was "Victory! SBTC." The internet service for MT Rushmore (which AIM bombed) was

I think the killer left these little clues as a signature to his identification with AIM.

Now I agree that this does not mean that AIM as an arganization did this.

The reall evidence is to watch how Lee Hill used a variety of people to promote this absurd anti-FBI agenda--that the FBI was protecting a ring of highly-placed pedophiles.

For this you have to go back through the papers. It is very complicated. You have to look at the similarity of the propaganda themes.

187 posted on 02/16/2005 3:20:29 AM PST by Snapple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: Ladypixel

I accidently wrote "sounded just like the Pine Ridge stories Ward Hill tells. ."

Correct to read Ward Churchill, not Ward Hill.

Killing the child was not the main goal. The propaganda was the main goal.

I am not saying that the killer is an Indian at all. I am saying that the killer identifies with this very radical, anti-FBI, anarchistic AIM ideology.

Ward Churchill teaches it to a lot of kids. He writes it in books. Lee Hill and Churchill promote it. Neither of these people was raised in an Indian culture.

It doesn't bother me that you have to use mockery. This means you are afraid of what I am explaining.

188 posted on 02/16/2005 3:28:26 AM PST by Snapple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: Ladypixel

You write, "you had far too much time on your hands, you were busily chugging firewater, and you watch too much FBI Files on TV."

I have a very busy and successful life. I am also an expert on radical propaganda themes and the manipulation of media to prejudice people against minorities. I am a published writer.

I don't drink much at all. I don't watch about the FBI on TV. I researched the Osage Indian Murders FBI file. These are documents. These are interviews with Osage Indians and others to investigate the murders. The Osage were naturally afraid and secretly contacted the FBI via their lawyer. The FBI files are the words of the Osage and other people who were near to the murder investigation.

Ward Churchill has read it, too, I think. He plagiarized the story line and even used the term "reign of terror" that was used to describe the Osage murders.

The FBI file on the Osage is the subtext for AIM (Churchill/Hill); therefore, the name John Ramsey would mean a lot to Ward Churchill and others with his same anti-FBI agenda.

They have done nothing for Indians and are just hiding behind Indians who will suffer from their lies.

189 posted on 02/16/2005 3:40:00 AM PST by Snapple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: Ladypixel

This has some information about the history of the Osage Indian murders. I think this is important to understanding what the Lee Hill/Ward Churchill/Colorado AIM is up to.

190 posted on 02/19/2005 7:18:00 PM PST by Snapple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: ken21

This lady was Lee Hill's client. He made a big fuss that the FBI wouldn't help protect her from a gang of pedophiles so he had to hide her with a friend in AIM.

Then he had a reporter write about it. If you are really hiding someone, do you put it in the news?

191 posted on 02/19/2005 8:49:33 PM PST by Snapple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Snapple

to be honest, i'm confused about this.

i had never in my wildest imagination connected aim to the ramseys.

however, if you are correct, i fear for you.

192 posted on 02/20/2005 7:33:48 AM PST by ken21 (the terrorists didn't blow up the new york times because the times supports them. (/s))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: ken21

I am not afraid and I am only gearing up. See this:

Ward Churchill is going straight down to Hell in flames.

193 posted on 02/20/2005 2:57:53 PM PST by Snapple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: Ladypixel

I'd appreciate your input. And pass this along.

You said AIM is not too smart. I am talking about Boulder/Denver AIM. That means Lee Hill and Ward Churchill.

They are not so dumb. But neither am I.

This is a HUGE FRAUD they have perpetrated.

Lee Hill at least had the sense to turn tail and head for the hills.

194 posted on 02/20/2005 3:04:04 PM PST by Snapple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: Snapple
I said this politely on the other thread at the end of my last post, and you promptly ignored it. I am now saying this without the attached politeness, and quite firmly in the hopes that it might, perhaps, penetrate this time.

Stop pinging me. I do not wish to have any more contact with you. I have no interest whatsoever in your absolutely ridiculous conspiracy theory, and you have deeply offended me with your ignorance and your insistance that you are correct when you're not. None of your theory has basis in reality, and I say this as someone who is intimately familiar with AIM and the Native American community.

I do not wish to speak with you, to read any more of this crap, or to have anything whatsoever to do with you. I don't have time for you or for this idiocy. Period. End of discussion. Go away. Don't bother responding to this, I won't be reading anything from you again. Goodbye.
195 posted on 02/20/2005 9:22:27 PM PST by Ladypixel (People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-195 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson