Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
To: LurkedLongEnough
The Vince Foster cover-up is now sealed and completed. FWIW, I don't think the Clintons had him killed - but it's hard to understand how a man can drive to the park without car keys, walk down a dirt trail without getting the soles of his shoes dirty, and shoot himself without getting blowback on his hand. But who am I to second-guess our omniscient government?
2 posted on
03/30/2004 7:29:31 AM PST by
dirtboy
(Howard, we hardly knew ye. Not that we're complaining, mind you...)
To: LurkedLongEnough
Bump.
3 posted on
03/30/2004 7:38:49 AM PST by
First_Salute
(May God save our democratic-republican government, from a government by judiciary.)
To: LurkedLongEnough
"Favish, known as a Clinton antagonist" Gina, Gina, Gina... does your husband write
all your stories?
I believe (without reading it) that it's a reasonable decision but also that Favish was right to bring the case. At least some more people have seen the pictures.
6 posted on
03/30/2004 7:44:22 AM PST by
mrsmith
("Oyez, oyez! All rise for the Honorable Chief Justice... Hillary Rodham Clinton ")
To: LurkedLongEnough
Next, JFK investigation completed-- he actually committed suicide...
9 posted on
03/30/2004 7:51:11 AM PST by
SteveH
To: LurkedLongEnough
" Justices said the privacy rights of survivors outweigh the benefits of releasing some photographs."The real reason: Some things so shocking to the prestige of the nation that it should be covered up, such as evidence that may one day prove a first lady commited murder.
11 posted on
03/30/2004 7:54:32 AM PST by
Nateman
(Socialism first, cancer second.)
To: LurkedLongEnough
Justices said the privacy rights of survivors outweigh the benefits of releasing some photographs. There is no "survivor" in the suicide. The only affected party is deceased. His friends, family, relatives, and co-workers really have no place in this discussion.
12 posted on
03/30/2004 8:02:31 AM PST by
weegee
(From the way the Spanish voted - it seems that the Europeans do know there is an Iraq-Al Qaida link.)
To: LurkedLongEnough
...and pictures of unidentified remains from the Sept. 11 attacks Virtually NO photos of dead bodies from 9.11 have surfaced in print (I did see a French magazine that had a photo of a corpse sealed in a bodybag on 9.11). Do Holocaust survivors have a right/desire to supress images of the horrors endured or do such materials make it undeniably clear that a wrong was perpetrated?
14 posted on
03/30/2004 8:08:15 AM PST by
weegee
(From the way the Spanish voted - it seems that the Europeans do know there is an Iraq-Al Qaida link.)
To: LurkedLongEnough
How is the release of the Vince Foster photos ANY different than the release of JFK's morgue photos? If the President of the United States is not shielded from such an "invasion of privacy", then certainly another public official like Vince Foster should be treated equally in life and in death.
If he had died after working in the private sector this could be treated as a different matter (although plenty of photos of dead civilians are released without consent from the families and relatives).
15 posted on
03/30/2004 8:11:21 AM PST by
weegee
(From the way the Spanish voted - it seems that the Europeans do know there is an Iraq-Al Qaida link.)
To: LurkedLongEnough
Truth is all bottled up in DC.
16 posted on
03/30/2004 8:12:04 AM PST by
bmwcyle
(<a href="http://www.johnkerry.com/" target="_blank">miserable failure)
To: LurkedLongEnough
Kennedy said that means child molesters and murders cannot use the law to get photographs of deceased victims. "We find it inconceivable that Congress could have intended a definition of `personal privacy' so narrow that it would allow convicted felons to obtain these materials without limitations at the expense of surviving family members' personal privacy," he wrote.
Stats and facts. NOW! Mr. Kennedy, just how many convicted killers have requested photos of their victims under the FOIA?
17 posted on
03/30/2004 8:13:46 AM PST by
weegee
(From the way the Spanish voted - it seems that the Europeans do know there is an Iraq-Al Qaida link.)
To: LurkedLongEnough
Foster may have shot himself .. but IMO .. he didn't do it in that park
18 posted on
03/30/2004 8:14:21 AM PST by
Mo1
(Do you want a president who injects poison into his skull for vanity?)
To: LurkedLongEnough
The Bush administration maintained that a victory for Favish, known as a Clinton antagonist, could lead to the release of other sensitive informationNow Bush don't have a dog in this fight, or does he...They surely stick together, don't they???
20 posted on
03/30/2004 8:17:08 AM PST by
Iscool
To: LurkedLongEnough
The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the government does not have to release.....unanimous decisionSo much for conservative appointments differing when the chips are down.
To: LurkedLongEnough
there's always a judge or some judges somewhere spoiling all the fun. phooey on you, judges.
26 posted on
03/30/2004 8:34:52 AM PST by
isom35
To: LurkedLongEnough
The stupid crooks go to jail, the smart ones get elected or appointed.
BigMack
To: LurkedLongEnough
Blood doesn't run uphill, and you can't walk deep into the woods without any trace of soil on your shoes.
Witnesses saw a neck wound. Now no one else will.
I am assuming the Supremes were focused SOLELY on the right to privacy of the deceased's family. Maybe they have a point in general, but not in this case.
I am not a lawyer, but I believe that even members of religions that do not permit autopsies have to submit to one if ordered by a court. Isn't that right? So why couldn't people have privacy of their relative's corpse unless the photo or video would be necessary to solve a crime?
This case was surely also stymied by the prior "investigations" and their "conclusions."
Allan Favish, if you are reading this, you did the best you could and got this to the Supreme Court. Great work! So sorry it turned out this way.
There has to be another way to reopen this case. A more suspicious suicide you wouldn't find.
32 posted on
03/30/2004 8:57:39 AM PST by
Yaelle
To: LurkedLongEnough
I will never forget the day I heard on the news that Foster had been found dead, and I was very active in the early discussions on this board. I am firmly convinced that the evidence overwhelmingly points to a coverup of what actually happened. About the only scenario that completely stretches credibility is that he shot himself where he was found. Except for him being found there, there is no compelling reason to suspect he actually killed himself there. The release of these photos could have finally provided us with an answer, one way or the other. This is a judicial tragedy. Any time the Supreme Court has a unanimous decision, the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. Looks like they thought this one was for the good of the country, so they would rather see the guilty go free than a scandal that would likely destroy a political party forever.
The tactic by those running this coverup has never changed... simply drag things out as long as possible and wait until, inevitably, the opposition drops from sheer exhaustion. You have just heard a lot of tired bodies hit the ground, one of them being mine.
Nevertheless, I am convinced that no matter who pulled the trigger, Vince Foster died for the Clinton's sins. But don't look for a blockbuster movie about it any time soon.
34 posted on
03/30/2004 9:05:59 AM PST by
jeffo
(Who killed Vince Foster?)
To: LurkedLongEnough
We live in a system of feedback and control,
but not as envisioned by the founders of the USA.
21st Century CONTROL OF AMERICA:
Some Democrats now control enough stolen FBI files
to dominate the flow of history and count of votes as they want it
and to conveniently enable their own coverups as well.
35 posted on
03/30/2004 9:11:57 AM PST by
Diogenesis
(If you mess with one of us, you mess with all of us)
To: LurkedLongEnough
44 posted on
03/30/2004 11:13:51 AM PST by
LurkedLongEnough
(Bush '04 --- in a F'n landslide.)
To: LurkedLongEnough
"A more suspicious suicide you wouldn't find"
It was Arkincide, not suicide, and two Republican special prosecutors helped to cover it up. Why???
47 posted on
03/30/2004 11:42:06 AM PST by
doug9732
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson