The notion that they should have gone along to get along with unprofessional and inept FBI leadership is unacceptable to the American people and congress, certainly since 9/11.
Posted on 07/10/2002 7:35:52 AM PDT by JohnFiorentino
Secret FBI report refutes sworn testimony of William Tobin
A recently declassified FBI report appears to refute the sworn testimony of the FBI's former chief metallurgist assigned to the TWA800 crash case.
As disclosed in the recently declassified document (excerpts printed below) it appears William Tobin's testimony before the Senate during the Grassley hearings had little basis in fact.
Tobin testified that by September of 1996, approximately 4-6 weeks after his arrival on the case, there was a general consensus that there was "no bomb or missile damage" evident on the TWA wreckage. At the time frame indicated in Tobin's testimony, approximately one half of TWA800 was still at the bottom of the ocean.
The FBI's James Kallstrom, dismissed Tobin from the probe. Kallstrom believed Tobin's "conclusions" were hasty and unprofessional.
As evidenced by the once secret FBI report, it wasn't until November of 1996 that the FBI considered alternate investigative methods. This was two months after Tobin had already arrived at his conclusions. The report also states that even in November 1996, salvage efforts were still ongoing.
The document indicates that investigators had "little forensic documentation or guidance on large-body aircraft missile engagements, and no supportable mechanical or operational explanation for the crash."
FBI, TWA Flight 800 Brookhaven National Laboratory Examinations. Declassified FBI Report, 1997. (excerpts)
"It became apparent by the end of November 1996, about four months into the FBI's criminal investigation, that no aircraft debris recovered to that time had clear indicia of a high explosive event, although evidence recovery (i.e., ocean trawling for aircraft debris) and subsequent examination by bomb technicians for such indicia was continuing. In the face of no "classic" explosive artifacts little forensic documentation or guidance on large-body aircraft missile engagements, and no supportable mechanical or operational explanation for the crash of Trans World Airlines (TWA) Flight 800, FBI management decided that "... any investigative or scientific avenue that was reasonable and which could assist in providing a factual cause of the incident should and would be pursued."
The report goes on to say, that the initial metallurgical findings were reviewed, stating: A "cursory metallurgical peer review was conducted......" The report further states however, "No analysis or microscopic examinations were conducted." This would seem to indicate a review of the methodology used, and not a review of actual findings, as no further tests were performed.
Reproduced below, are excerpts from William Tobin's sworn testimony at the Grassley hearings.
Excerpts of FBI Metallurgist William Tobin’s testimony during the Grassley hearing.
GRASSLEY: Within 30 days of arriving at Calverton, what was your professional assessment of as to whether the cause of the crash was a bomb?
TOBIN: It progressed from an inclination of viewing the earmarks as possibly a bomb, but it changed rather quickly to confirmation within my mind that there was no indication of a bomb and unlikely to be that of a missile within the first 30 days.
GRASSLEY: At some point, did the bomb techs agree with yours and the NTSB's assessment that the cause of the crash was not a bomb?
TOBIN: Yes, Senator. I would estimate that probably four to six weeks -- after about four to six weeks, we were all unanimously or near unanimously on the same page. And all being the bomb techs, the National Transportation Safety Board and the metallurgy or the material science interests in the FBI laboratory. We were all unanimously -- we were united in our observations and conclusions that there was no bomb or missile damage evident on those aircraft parts.
GRASSLEY: The term four to six weeks brings you to what date on the calendar approximately? Just approximately.
TOBIN: My guess would be mid September, early to mid September.
It would appear that the FBI report and Tobin's testimony are at odds. This is just another glaring example of the inept and inconclusive investigation into one of the worst air disasters in history.
Copyright 2002, John E. Fiorentino -- All rights reserved. Distribution to wire services and recognized news media is allowed. No other use, distribution, or reproduction can be made without the express consent of the author.
In view of the fact that the FBI leadership DID belatedly agree with Tobin that there was NO physical evidence that Flight 800 was the victim of a missile or bomb, why do you state in your title that it is an "ongoing dissent"?
FBI: No criminal evidence behind TWA 800 crash
November 18, 1997
NEW YORK (CNN) -- The FBI formally ended its 16-month investigation Tuesday into the crash of TWA flight 800, and agents said there was no evidence it was a criminal act. The probe now shifts to the National Transportation Safety Board, which plans to hold public hearings next month.
"No evidence has been found which would indicate that a criminal act was the cause of the tragedy of TWA flight 800," FBI Assistant Director James Kallstrom told a news conference. "We do know one thing," Kallstrom said. "The law enforcement team has done everything humanly possible, has pursued every lead, has looked at every theory and has left no stone unturned." He said the cost of the FBI probe ranged from $14 million to $20 million.
The FBI's conclusion left mechanical failure -- not a bomb or missile -- as the most likely cause of the crash on July 17, 1996, when the Paris-bound Boeing 747 exploded in a fireball minutes after taking off from Kennedy International Airport, killing all 230 people on board.
It was the complaints of government experts about Kallstrom's unprofessional and "inept" conduct that led to the Grassley hearing.
ll May 1999 - FBI Probe of TWA Crash Criticized
Several federal officials told a Senate subcommittee yesterday that the FBI's role in the investigation of the crash of TWA Flight 800 was overbearing and at times inept. According to that testimony, the agency clung to the theory that a bomb or missile had downed the plane months after its own chief scientist on the case had reached the opposite conclusion.
The hearing before the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on administrative oversight and the courts is the culmination of a two-year congressional review of the TWA investigation. Witnesses portrayed a probe riddled with sloppy investigative techniques and dominated by a powerful FBI agent-in-charge, who seemed determined to prove that the crash resulted from an act of terrorism.
"Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), the subcommittee chairman and a frequent FBI critic, said the crash investigation was "a model of failure, not success." He described the bureau's leadership in the case as "a disaster," adding that the bureau hindered the investigation and "risked public safety" with its alleged attempt to suppress a report on the cause of the crash by another government agency. The Jan. 20, 1997, report by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms concluded that the plane crashed after a mechanical flaw ignited an explosion in its central fuel tank, a finding that became official and was endorsed by the FBI several months later. But Andrew Vita, ATF's assistant director of field operations, testified that when he sought to submit the report in March 1997 to the National Transportation Safety Board, he "met resistance" from the FBI."
Grassley has accused the FBI of suppressing important public safety information in an act that could have endangered airline travelers. That charge was vigorously denied yesterday by Lewis D. Schiliro, head of the FBI's New York office, who called it "ludicrous" and defended the TWA investigation as "professional, responsible and methodical." Schiliro produced an unsigned copy of a letter from his predecessor, James K. Kallstrom, apparently forwarding the report to the NTSB along with a complaint that it was "unsolicited and premature." But safety board officials have said they have found no record that they received the ATF report and Grassley said he remains convinced it was never sent. Kallstrom, who has retired from the FBI and is now a bank executive, was the dominant figure in the TWA investigation. He was also, according to yesterday's testimony, obsessed by the bomb or missile theory – a scenario that would have kept the case under FBI jurisdiction.
William A. Tobin, the FBI's former chief metallurgist, said that by September 1996, about six weeks after the crash, he and other scientists working on the case unanimously agreed that there was no evidence that the crash was caused by a bomb or missile. But Kall strom resisted this conclusion, Tobin said, once coming within six inches of Tobin's face as he "advised me in graphic terms that it was a bomb." "I ended up wearing several particles of his saliva," Tobin said.
The FBI's attitude was "not whether but when they would get evidence of a bomb," said Frank Zakar, the NTSB's former chief metallurgist. Asked about the FBI's treatment of ATF agents working on the case, Hank Hughes, a senior accident investigator for the safety board, replied: "Unkind is the best way I can put it." Hughes compiled a list of what he described as the FBI's missteps, which included mishandling of evidence and an unauthorized invitation by an agent on the case to a psychic to view the wreckage and render an opinion.
By the way, isn't it a fact that you do NOT support the "missile shootdown" notion?
Do you suspect that TWA Flight 800 may have been the victim of a suitcase bomb?
ALL the readers, particularly the "shootdown" tinfoil hats, would obviously like to know your answers to those questions.
I would love to see a video of the actual event. Obviously, none exists. Amazingly, folks like you seem willing to believe such a video exists despite there being no evidence of it. And what exactly IS proven by a laboratory spectrometer analysis that draws no specific conclusions?
Your final assertion that people who dare to question poorly supported theories are paid to post those questions indicates you live in a world of paranoia worthy of medical study. Do you really think the government gives a damn about crackpot theories posted on FreeRepublic. 95% of the people who read FreeRepublic don't even give a damn about the crackpot theories posted here.
Hey, don't bogart that doobie, pass it over here
1. In view of the fact that the FBI leadership DID belatedly agree with Tobin that there was NO physical evidence that Flight 800 was the victim of a missile or bomb, why do you state in your title that it is an "ongoing dissent"?
But then you knew it is NOT and "ongoing dissent", didn't you, and that your real objective was to make another of your sleazy attacks on FBI whistleblower Tobin.
2. Isn't it a fact that you do NOT support the "missile shootdown" notion?
Here's just one example of what your paper trail discloses.
Yahoo TWA800 forum - April 12, 2002
From: John Fiorentino
Subject: Re: [twa800] Kabofovic revisited
[excerpt][quote][emphasis added]
Most here are convinced a "missile" did the dirty deed. I'm not, not yet at least. The initial assessment was "bomb". I thought so to. I still do. [end quote]
Which, of course, also pertains to the 3rd question you dodged.
3. Do you suspect that TWA Flight 800 may have been the victim of a suitcase bomb?
Here's another tidbit from your paper trail on that subject.
Yahoo TWA800 forum
From: John Fiorentino - 28 May 2001
Subject: Seeking comments on this story
FBI questions crash victims' families about mysterious luggage tag
October 27, 1996 NEW YORK (CNN) -- Investigators probing the crash of TWA Flight 800 want to know more about a man named William Kabofovic, whose name was not on the passenger list but did turn up on a piece of luggage in the wreckage.
The FBI has been interviewing family members of the crash victims, asking if they recognize the name.
"I told them I never heard of him," said Richard Penzer, whose sister Judy died in the crash. Questioned by federal agents, Penzer said, "I assumed it had something to do with my sister. They never told me why they were interested in that person."
"They did not infer in any way that this man Kabofovic's bag was the reason the plane blew up. In fact, they suggested it may have been a bag borrowed by one of the TWA passengers," Aurelie Becker told CNN. Becker's daughter, Michelle, died in the crash. Becker said the FBI showed her a photograph of a badly mangled beige canvas bag with a leather shoulder strap and trim and asked whether she recognized it. "They didn't say where the blown up bag was located," said Mrs. Becker. "It was pretty well blown apart, but still recognizable as a bag." According to Mrs. Becker, FBI agents did not suggest that bomb had been in the bag, nor that the bag in the photograph was the one with Mr. Kabofovic's name on it. She said FBI agents asked a series of questions intended to rule out the possibility that a passenger might have been inadvertently part of a plot to destroy the plane. Among these were: did the passenger pack his or her own bags, did they carry a bag on board on behalf of someone else, did someone recently take out a life insurance policy in the name of the passenger, and did he or she have an ex-partner or spouse who would want to do them harm.
The FBI began interviewing family members after sending out a letter from FBI Assistant Director James Kallstrom asking for assistance in the investigation.
[JF] Several people on the Flight 800 discussion forum know the background on my interest in this lead. Any comments are appreciated. John Fiorentino
You also conveniently omitted Tobin's testimony on that subject.
[excerpt],quote][emphasis added]TOBIN: I was ordered to, in a rather frenzied manner, to go conduct an exhaustive search in contact with my NTSB liaison, liaison capacity, to find a certain overhead bin that was characterized as in pristine condition.
But it was in a very emotional, very frenzied manner, so I inquired as to why I was looking for this particular pristine overhead bin on the port side of the aircraft, that was from the left-hand side of the aircraft. I was told that that was proof that NTSB was quote "squirreling away evidence" and stashing evidence, which again flies in the face of my interpretation of whose aircraft this was.
But, so I inquired as to why the pristine overhead bin was of such significance. I was told that that was demonstrative proof that they were squirreling away evidence. That the recovery had been captured on a video tape from the USS Grapple or the USS Grasp which-- one of the recovery ships. And on the videotape it showed this overhead bin being raised or set on the deck.
And I said, well I'm still missing some critical information, why is this important, why is this critical? To which I was advised that it had a suitcase, a badly charred and damaged suitcase inside the overhead bin. And my response at that point was, well I'm still missing some critical information. Why are we looking for this quote "pristine overhead bin"? Are you suggesting that there was a bomb in the suitcase that went off? Yes. Well that went off instantaneously brought down the 747 with no reporting on the FDR or CVR, flight data recorder or the cockpit voice recorder, and didn't put a scratch on the overhead bin. And I was told, yes, we want that overhead bin and I was continued -- told to go find that overhead bin. [end quote]
[excerpt][quote][emphasis added]GRASSLEY: This is my last question. Your observations or recommendations you might have of what went wrong with the system with regard to the flow of scientific information?>/font>
TOBIN: A major flaw that I do see in the system is that it's too easily ignored by the strategic decision makers. I think if you look at the Unabomb situation, the Richard Jewell Centennial Park Bombing, the TWA 800, the common thread is that the scientific flow of information is ignored when it doesn't support the prevailing theory.
GRASSLEY: You're a breath of fresh air, Mr. Tobin. You've been very helpful to us for not only appearing today but for our getting the necessary background that needs to be done to make this a valuable contribution to the process of constitutional oversight by the Congress.
I don't know how to thank you other then to say thank you. And obviously you set an example for a person who was trained to seek the truth, to work for an organization that is always supposed to seek the truth and let the truth determine guilt or innocence and I think you have lived up to that very well and in particularly you shine in this black hole of investigation that we had in regard of the TWA case. I thank you very much and I'll dismiss you at this point. [end quote]
Here's part of Tobin's bio.
On June 27, 1971, Mr. William A. Tobin was appointed a Special Agent for the FBI. Before joining the Bureau, Mr. Tobin served three years in the Marine Corps - two in active combat duty in the Republic of South Vietnam. While in the Marines he received the Bronze Star with Combat "V," two crosses of Gallantry and twenty additional military combat decorations. After joining the FBI he worked organized crime and police corruption in Chicago, and general crimes in Detroit. In September, 1974 Mr. Tobin was assigned as a forensic metallurgist in the FBI crime laboratory in Washington, D.C. In 1976 he was promoted to a Supervisory Special Agent and in 1986 became the civilian equivalent of the FBI's Chief Forensic Metallurgist.
In this position, Mr. Tobin was the leading expert, nationwide, in the law enforcement community on forensic metallurgy (i.e. the examination and analysis of material's deformation and damage).
Isn't this yours?
Author--Record Producer--Independent researcher & Paralegal Investigator. Author of forthcoming book on the assassination of President Kennedy.
Does James Kallstrom have ANY forensic metallugy experience?
Do you have ANY forensic metallurgy experience?
Do ANY of your "scientist friends" have ANY forensic metallurgy experience?
Yahoo TWA800 forum - 18 June 2001
From: John Fiorentino
Subject: The most likely scenario so far
From: John Fiorentino - 18 June 2001
Subject: The most likely scenario so far
[excerpt][quote][emphasis added]
Just for s--ts and grins my son and I popped off a road flare and placed it close to the back of a discarded child car seat which had a foam backing to it. Left a reddish brown residue very similar to Sanders' swatch. Remember My scientist friend who thought the chem analysis resembled residue from a "flare?" [end quote]
By the way, doesn't your paper trail include your denial that you have ever reviewed The "Missile Witnesses" Myth in all the years it's been available on the internet? If not, perhaps you'd care to explain to the readers specifically step by step how you independently arrived at the conclusions you included in the following.
Yahoo TWA800 forum - 15 March 2002
From: John Fiorentino
Subject: Re: [twa800] A little sensitive, aren't we?
[excerpt][quote]
However, based on Meyer's statements, I don't believe he witnessed the IE. Fl. 800 didn't explode in a MF at 13000+, the MF was somewhere 7500-8500ft. Look at his timeline, Please explain, HOW he could have witnessed the IE? [end quote]
10 May 1999
SENATOR GRASSLEY
[excerpt][quote][emphasis added]
Today's hearing is the result of a 2-year review by the subcommittee into how Federal agencies handled the investigation of what caused the crash of TWA Flight 800. The subcommittee conducted dozens of interviews of professionals from various agencies who were either on the crash scene or were at high levels within the various headquarters of the various agencies.
A consensus emerged from the interviews, supported by documentary evidence, about the conduct of the investigation. The collective testimony from today's witnesses will leave a very clear picture of that conduct, and, of course, it is a troubling picture.
This investigation was run by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. There is much doubt about whether the FBI had statutory authority as the lead agency. There will be more on that point later.
What the public knows about the crash and its cause is what they know through countless press conferences and leaks to the press. The public also has heard numerous conspiracy theories and myths or disinformation.
The purpose of this hearing is to provide a much more real picture of what happened and, hopefully, why it happened. The motivation for the subcommittee's efforts is to continue to help restore public confidence in Federal law enforcement. It is my intention to examine some very basic and systemic problems uncovered in this investigation.
The goal is to have a constructive dialogue with the FBI to ensure similar problems are not repeated in the future. No one will be fingered as a scapegoat. However, if the FBI says today that its problems are of the past and it is now fixed, I will not buy that, and I warn the public not to buy it, either. There is a whole lot more to be done before the root causes of the problem are fixed. It is a systemic cultural problem that transcends any simplistic fix.
I would like to give a word about today's witnesses, because it is not easy for them to be critical of questionable actions that they saw by FBI personnel. These witnesses will likely have to work with the FBI again, and the FBI is bigger and more powerful than their agencies. So there is an intimidation factor here.
But that is not why these witnesses are coming forward. They are coming forward because of what they saw and what they saw offended them, both from a law enforcement standpoint and from the standpoint of public safety. They are coming forward because they truly believe it will serve the public interest and will improve the way that we investigate future incidents. This is an honorable thing for these people to do. The subcommittee appreciates their testimony and I am confident that the public will, as well.
This is a story about how the world's preeminent law enforcement agency, at least in terms of image and expectation, sometimes acted like it did not even have a clue.
I believe that each and every FBI agent and employee who showed up on the scene of that tragic crash did the best job they could and had the best motives. The same goes for the employees of the other agencies and groups that worked so hard. Many volunteered to do that, and they sacrificed their time and their commitment to a greater and humanitarian good.
There was a basic problem, however. In my view, it was one of leadership. FBI leadership in the case of the TWA Flight 800 was a disaster.
The FBI says that its investigation in this case is a model for the future. The FBI believes that even now. I say that because of their testimony they submitted for this hearing. If the FBI still believes that after this hearing, then I think the American people should be very alarmed about whether or not the FBI gets the message, because this investigation, which by statute was supposed to be run by the NTSB but which was commandeered by the FBI, is a model of failure, not success. And anyone who doubts that is not confronting reality.
The testimony that we will hear today will describe three things. First, it will show how the FBI lacked the proper training to handle an investigation of this type and violated the most basic standards of forensic science in terms of collecting evidence, handling that evidence, and preserving the evidence.
It is the kind of thing that would make even rookie cops wince.
Second, we will try to understand the culture within the FBI that allows this sort of thing to happen. Why does the world's preeminent law enforcement agency make the kinds of mistakes that even rookies do not make?
And third, why is it that the FBI would try to prevent critical public safety information from getting to the proper authorities? [end quote]
The notion that they should have gone along to get along with unprofessional and inept FBI leadership is unacceptable to the American people and congress, certainly since 9/11.
The "signals" that were not heeded was the evidence of the systemic problems in the FBI that both Tobin and Crowley, among other whistleblowers, brought to the attention of congress.
10 May 1999 - over two years before 9/11
SENATOR GRASSLEY: The purpose of this hearing is to provide a much more real picture of what happened and, hopefully, why it happened. The motivation for the subcommittee's efforts is to continue to help restore public confidence in Federal law enforcement. It is my intention to examine some very basic and systemic problems uncovered in this investigation.
The goal is to have a constructive dialogue with the FBI to ensure similar problems are not repeated in the future. No one will be fingered as a scapegoat. However, if the FBI says today that its problems are of the past and it is now fixed, I will not buy that, and I warn the public not to buy it, either. There is a whole lot more to be done before the root causes of the problem are fixed. It is a systemic cultural problem that transcends any simplistic fix.
WILLIAM TOBIN: . . . . my first observation is that the outcome or practice of science for such public safety issues of such magnitude should not be dependent on a single individuals agenda, biases, idiosyncrasies or the strength of their personality which it clearly was in this case.
My second observation or suggestion is that scientists are not on an equal footing inside the law enforcement community in the strategic decision making process. There are a number of examples of that but basically scientists are, I won't say viewed as second class citizens but basically what happens inside the forensic community is if we collaborate or validate the prevailing theory, we walk on water.
If the science does not validate the prevailing theory, then the science is just basically ignored. There are some other issues, I think the third would be that if there is some fine tuning, additional fine tuning, I would suggest that we revert back to the way that FBI and NTSB have worked these cases in the past. That the FBI's interests can be preserved by the presence of a material scientist who is experienced in materials deformation and damage working along side the NTSB, whether it's rail, maritime or aircraft disasters, represent the FBI's interest in determining whether there is or could be potential criminal activity involved in the cause.
And then allow that contingent to ratchet up whatever additional support or FBI involvement that there should be. So, that would be my, basically that the -- I think part of the problem that occurred here was that with the process and the system being so singularly dependent upon a single individual, strong personality individual, that what I was seeing there in the first four to six weeks is what psychologists have found or concluded to be basically what was called group think.
GRASSLEY: You're a breath of fresh air, Mr. Tobin. You've been very helpful to us for not only appearing today but for our getting the necessary background that needs to be done to make this a valuable contribution to the process of constitutional oversight by the Congress.
I don't know how to thank you other then to say thank you. And obviously you set an example for a person who was trained to seek the truth, to work for an organization that is always supposed to seek the truth and let the truth determine guilt or innocence and I think you have lived up to that very well and in particularly you shine in this black hole of investigation that we had in regard of the TWA case. I thank you very much and I'll dismiss you at this point.
Whistleblower Tobin is an American hero - except to the "shootdown" tinfoil hats and you, a book author with a "suitcase bomb" theory, because Tobin's testimony as a metallurgy expertthat there was NO physical evidence of a missile or bomb scuttles both of those theories.
ALL of the material damage experts who have examined the wreckage agree with Tobin.
It's obviously long past time for you to practice what you preach and "prove conclusively" that Flight 800 was IN FACT the victim of a suitcase bomb. It should go without saying that if you could have done so by now, you would have.
Only one person has ever supported your daffy suitcase bomb theory.
Yahoo TWA800 forum
From: "reednfolink"
Date: Sat Jul 13, 2002 8:14 pm
Dear Asmodeus/Elmer, First of all, I really appreciate your efforts in getting me kicked off "Free Republic"! Didn't suprise me at all! It was predictable! I don't know whether "you" are a think tank, a propaganda front for the trial lawyers or just a brainwashed SUCKER! Only thing that matters to me is that you are a BACKSTABBING COWARD. I notice quite some time has elapsed since Mr. Fiorentino's post #38, asking you to provide some simple answers re: TWA 800. I asked you the same questions back in March of 2002. Funny, though, that all of my posts were removed by your moderator buddies- only your 100 liner pastes and Rokkes patronizing dribble remains.(for the most part) What other schemes or dirty tricks will Barr/Asmodeus employ to futher his agenda? BEWARE! [emphasis his]
Interestingly, there doesn't appear to be any such member in the Yahoo TWA800 forum. But, of course, any member can post with any name they wish after signing in. You, of course, are a member there. Would you do such a deceitful thing to try to show that you do have some support for your suitcase bomb theory?
By clicking here the readers can see for themselves that you are adept at nice and tidy HTML coding - when you want to be. By clicking here the readers can see for themselves that you don't always want to be neat and tidy with your HTML coding. Interestingly, you included the following in the midst of your supposed review of an official report.
[quote]TOBIN: I was ordered to.......But it was in a very emotional, very frenzied manner, so I inquired as to why.....I was told.......which again flies in the face of my interpretation of whose aircraft this was.......But, so I inquired as to why........And I said, well I'm still missing some critical information, why.......And my response at that point was, well I'm still missing some critical information. Why.........And I was told, yes, we want that overhead bin and I was continued -- told to go find that overhead bin. [end quote]
You conveniently deleted Tobin's repeated references to the fact that the "overhead bin" was reportedly in pristine condition. That's the "critical information" he referred to. A suitcase bomb that detonates in an overhead bin could not leave that overhead bin in pristine condition.
Your paper trail includes abundant evidence that you ask lots of questions but do not answer questions you are asked. When coupled with the fact that you routinely deceitfully spin, distort and fabricate information and answers you receive, you obviously had no constructive purpose in the barrage of questions you included in your last posting here.
Simply put, you have demolished your own credibility as a supposedly "sincere seeker of the truth" - with everybody [except, of course, "reednfolink"]
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.