Posted on 08/07/2017 10:18:39 AM PDT by Seizethecarp
But Sunday, as he promoted his book on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Flake took his assault on Trumpism back years further — all the way to the pre-dawn of Trump’s political rise, to “when the birtherism thing was going on,” as Flake put it to host Chuck Todd.
“Some people did stand up, but not enough,” the senator said. “That was particularly ugly.”
“Did you do enough?” Todd asked.
Flake smiled. “On that, I think I did.”
Flake was a congressman in 2011, when Trump flirted with a presidential run against President Barack Obama.
The current president did so “spouting all sorts of Four-Pinocchio innuendo that had long ago been debunked,” as The Washington Post wrote at the time.
Trump wrote a letter to the editor in the New York Times, for example, advancing a host of bogus evidence against Obama’s birth in the United States and, thus, his legitimacy to occupy the White House.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
What we will **not** see is justice.
Hundreds of Hawaiian didn’t need to know, so wouldn’t. Same on the military side. Locals generally know how to keep it zipped. I don’t see very many people who would’ve needed to know anything that might look like an overall picture. Some were just told what to do, or what not to bother doing, without imagining any grand conspiracy. The TV news probably awakened a grander potential problem than even most of those involved could have imagined.
A little extra in the pay envelope, assurance from Mr. Bossman that they’ll be considered favorably in the promotion list with a wink and a smile, and they were probably good-to-go. If they mess up, they’ll be in deep do-do, ostracized without friends or ohana anywhere—or worse.
Those that “needed” to know Fuddy was alive are incredibly few and far between, but they’re in very loft places, too. Their fealty has been strengthened, I trust.
I think you’re putting words into my keyboard I didn’t type and representing thoughts I don’t share to any large degree.
Frankly, I don’t think those are real family. They just had their payday and are happy to be on their own without further contact. When they turn 68, they’ll be frittering away the small remainder by pulling the lever in Vegas as they superstitiously look for another big payday.
What you posted is true. However, Obama has hidden more than just the fact that his LFBC is a fabrication that incorrectly represents the facts of his birth. When I speak of the truth, I’m talking in a more comprehensive way.
When, for example, will the full details of his birth location become public? What’s on his college transcripts? Why have his college applications been hidden all these years? Why did he tell his own literary agent he was born in Kenya?
Etc.
‘Frankly, I don’t think those are real family.’
You don’t think Fuddy is related to her family??
Facts matter. I don't matter. You still believe wrongly.
To elaborate. Any theory that requires a vast, hundreds-of-participants conspiracy to work is unrealistic. For example, take the idea that Fuddy is not actually part of her family. That’s an implausible theory. The family did not exist in a vacuum. There were friends, neighbors, relatives, teachers, classmates, church-associates, pediatricians, yearbooks, etc, etc. If the Fuddy’s hadn’t had a daughter named Loretta, we’d know it by now.
This goes for all theories. Once they get too vast and complicated, they’re not viable. A simple conspiracy is workable on certain levels. One that requires too many participants will simply not succeed.
The loose ends don’t get tied up if Fuddy is actually dead. Fuddy knows who did what. She knows who needs to be silenced. Without that knowledge, a lot of surprises could show up. It only takes one person going rogue - like Edward Snowden - to screw up the whole thing.
Everybody on that plane knew there was no engine failure. Everybody in the water knew there were divers and equipment there. It was all planned in advance. In fact, somebody from the island had seen Fuddy that morning in Honolulu as they both awaited the flight to Kalaupapa and told Fuddy she should not take the flight back to Honolulu that afternoon - as if she knew there was an “accident” planned. I suspect that a LOT of people knew what was planned.
I don’t think that Fuddy would have agreed to a plot to kill her, and I don’t think that the other passengers would agree to take part in a plot to kill her.
I believe the whole thing was justified by the HI AG as necessary to PRESERVE her life. And it may well be that she offered to be fake-killed, knowing the other option was to be real-killed. To be real-killed would look fishy, whereas everybody would think this dramatic plane crash is too hard to be faked. So being fake-dead would benefit both Fuddy and the regime.
This way also allowed the family to know she was OK AND allowed their silence to be bought. Not only is there the “carrot” of financial gain, but there is also the “stick” that they could lose their “cover story indemnity” if they ever went back on their part of the agreement - and could end up actually paying for the fraud, perjury, and other crimes committed. That’s a good way to keep people silent - AND keep them from potentially suing if they knew that Fuddy really WAS dead.
Part of the thing with Montgomery, Petraeus, etc is a pattern that we need to understand: the deep state uses people who either are compromised already or who can be compromised. That’s what the NSA virus/trojan/ breaches/fingerprints are all about. They can plant whatever they have to plant in order to make a potential whistleblower “non-credible”, or to threaten being framed/charged/imprisoned if the potential whistleblower decides to blow the whistle.
I got a taste of that when “someone” responded to my post about the deep state’s ability to alter written history via altering/planting emails... by suggesting that child porn would be found on my husband’s computer. I was on vacation and desperately calling the church IT people to try to cauterize his computer so that nothing could be planted while we were gone.... That’s what these creeps do. They can make a “guilty” person out of ANYBODY. It’s what they tried to do to Sharyl Attkisson by planting classified records on her computer.
If a plan can automatically make the participants criminal, it means that they can be kept afraid to come forward. If Fuddy was really dead, her family would NOT have taken part in the hoax AND they would not have to fear coming forward about what happened. So the regime would have to deal with people who actually loved Fuddy and might not watch her be off-ed without giving a peep.
Remember, early on Louis Fuddy commented that the autopsy was fishy because his sister was not a weak-nerved person. To me that suggested that he - unlike Fuddy’s sister who took part in the hoax - did not know what had really happened. But after that he filed (and won out-of-court so that nobody could know who paid him what) a lawsuit against everybody but the pilot (who is the one who would be criminally liable if Fuddy was actually dead - and who in discovery might have balked at lying in a court of law...), and from then on he played the part the Obama regime wanted him to play...
Try using the right keywords and Google it. That’s how I found the one I referred to.
I should add that those who knew something was up didn’t necessarily know all the details - whether she would actually die, be injured, by whisked away, or what.
And very, very few would know where she was whisked away to.
Once she had a new face and physique it could reach a point where she COULDN’T whistleblow, even if she wanted to, because there would not be a way to prove who she was.
Particularly if she was hypnotized into believing her new, false identity was who she really was...and had no recollection of her life before she was fished out of the water and re-engineered into a new life form?
Butter, you simply CANNOT be serious...
Either Fuddy was cooperative or she wasn’t. If she wasn’t, she wouldn’t have agreed to give up the life she loved. If she was, she could have conveyed all her insider information in well under half an hour.
There is a string of dead bodies stretching out behind the Clintons a mile long. None of them would have agreed to be killed. But they’re all dead.
The simplest and most believable scenario is that Fuddy willingly conveyed her special information sometime prior to the crash. Then a simple ‘accident,’ happened, and she died.
What’s her family supposed to do? Deny that accidents happen? Seth Rich’s parents are not on the warpath against the Clintons. On the contrary, they disparage anyone who talks conspiracy re their son’s death.
For your theory to work, too many people would have to know about it. Only in theory do so many people cooperate perfectly. In reality, with a cast that big. Someone leaks. The absolute absence of leakers tells against your theory.
The simplest explanation is the most probable. In this case, the simplest explanation is that Fuddy died. I’m not going to belabor it. I know you won’t relinquish your theory. I personally don’t find it convincing. We’ll just have to agree to disagree.
I do admire all the work and research you’ve done. A lot of what you discovered is quality info. I hope you and your family stay safe and healthy. Thanks for the post also. Appreciate your input.
In addition to billions of dollars in US Naval hardware on site were divers that brought their transports and equipment with them.
I imagine you are referring to the bottom of the luggage compartment fitted to the undercarriage, which was torn off the aircraft when it hit the water...and that's why we see a suitcase floating near one the passengers. As none of them left the aircraft carrying a suitcase, this suggests the luggage came out of the damaged luggage compartment. You choose to interpret this as some sort of flotation device. Just as you choose to portray the exhaust system floating above the engine compartment as mystery personnel, although one can clearly see the steam rising from the still hot engine in another image.
I was going to illustrate my comment with images that I had saved, but frankly, this game is too juvenile to bother. Please don't include me in your pings to this subject in future, the sheer stupidity is beyond my endurance.
Spoken like somebody who has never had a dose of what the deep state in the US would resort to.
I am DEAD serious.
DEAD serious.
Serious question: How many people had to know about the concentration camps in Nazi territory when Hitler was in power? Why didn’t it matter that any of those people could have spilled the beans?
The truth is that we have people who have spilled the beans on this story. But if a tree falls in the forest and nobody is there to hear it, does it make a sound? Who has been willing to report seriously on those who have already spilled the beans on this?
Talk, talk, talk. Congressional investigation, congressional investigation, congressional investigation. People can talk all they want, Congress can put on their circus-pony shows all they want. Nothing ever comes of it. I don’t buy this whole thing that conspiracies can’t work if there are a lot of people who can talk. What matters is whether there is anybody who will truly LISTEN.
And with the propaganda arms we’ve got right now, we KNOW that Benghazi, Fast and Furious, IRS-gate, IG-gate, Extortion 17, etc ad nauseum all required large numbers of people to not be able to get the truth out to the general public. And that has been the case on every one of those conspiracies. It is willful blindness to insist that such a large conspiracy “can’t happen here.” It already HAS happened here. Many times. Right in front of our faces.
That argument has been debunked many times over. A lot of people aren’t buying it any more. And that probably contributed in large part to why Donald Trump is POTUS right now.
Which is something that all the conventional-wisdom folks told us would never happen either.
| FLAKE OUT 2018 |
Life under Hitler was not like life in the US. With Hitler in power, summary executions were common. He didn’t even bother with kangaroo courts. He just gave the word and people died. It was not an atmosphere conducive to leaks.
People involved in Benghazi, Fast and Furious, etc., HAVE talked. We know a vast amount about these criminal undertakings. Just because McConnell and Ryan haven’t, and likely won’t, act doesn’t mean the facts are unknown. They are known, and will continue to dog the perps.
The Fuddy crash is widely understood too. Time and again I have read comments from people—often the last people I’d expect—that underscore the fact that the only fatality ***just happened*** to be the one person who could refute Obama’s LFBC most devastatingly. People just don’t buy that ‘coincidence.’ They smell a rat.
It’s gratifying to see people grasping such issues. As you said, the very fact of Trump’s presidency is evidence of the electorate’s savvy when it comes to the MSM—and not a moment too soon.
As for me, you have to remember that I saw a pic of a dead Fuddy. There is zero doubt in my mind that’s what it was. While I don’t expect to convince you, I would think the same would be true in return. I.e.: that you would realize that a person who has seen Fuddy dead isn’t going to buy the idea that she’s still alive. Each of us is going to trust our own eyes and judgement more than we trust other people’s theories. We’d be foolish not to.
You are right to note that none of the passengers was carrying a suitcase--or a purse.
What you call the exhaust system was not. The engine would have completely cooled to the surrounding water temperature in just a few minutes. We have a picture from roughly that time frame, and there's no grand water-heating event, even then. (The exhaust system is along the lower edge, horizontally in the following underwater picture.)
The picture you put in your post was taken roughly 35 minutes after the ditching, even though its video time stamp is closer to the 8 minute mark. No spewing bubbles at that point would have been coming from a hot engine.
Given the preponderant evidence of out-of-place electronics on scene, however, the one curiously-patterned (black with yellow stripes) luggage which would unfold for several minutes without any effort on the part of the passengers, to transform itself into an entirely submerged, unconventional PFD with an antenna, whose tip this (trained) wearer would studiously work to keep above water, is so not out-of-place after all. Those undeniable pieces of electronic evidence really are sitting in the midst of a Deep State hoax with a budget only found among other black ops.
In normal life, one doesn't see the NTSB falsifying evidence in multiple ways, either. Neither does the FAA destroy evidence that policy would tell them in four ways they should have been preserving for 5 years.
To believe you poo-poo'ers and ridiculers who call this a juvenile exercise is to allow the Deep State to make slaves of all of us. That's not a normal response from your typical Conservative Patriot. (Oh, sure a Conservative wants to judge things on the merits, but we've seen all-too-many hoaxes and government manipulation by now.) By your actions, words, and denigrating speech ("juvenile," "sheer stupidity," "idiot," "sweetiebuns") you folks have been telling us who you are--someone who's OK with the Deep State turning us into their controllable slaves. You're someone who's pleased to see a weaponized NTSB take its place right alongside Lois Lerner's weaponized IRS. In that sense and only that sense, I believe you.
I've seen this material vetted material with many an aviation professional, current and past Navy Seals, multiple USMC pilots, and long-time Intelligence Community people. Nobody from any of those groups has responded with your, 4Zoltan's or HG's antics. Not one. I've had a senior FAA investigator and a former NTSB investigator in Charge each separately tell me that I should be up in front of a class of FAA/NTSB personnel training them with this in-depth material. It's clearly your heel-nipping responses that are out of place.
The baggage pod is made of fiberglass. You'll be able to see it was broken up, not breaking off in one nice, big flexible piece as we see along side the plane.
The baggage pod color is entirely different and could not be considered green in any lighting. There were internal fiberglass bulkheads every four foot or so. That's entirely different from the smooth, continuous green, unbroken Slipe-N-Slide (R) alongside the plane. (See bulkhead rivets to the left side of the following picture, on both side and bottom panels.)
The upper part of this following picture is the internal floor of the baggage pod, with the outer being painted white as was the rest of the plane.
It's unclear how you could have made that misidentification, except perhaps through wishful thinking.
All the rest of the baggage pod contents were strewn a good distance behind the plane as it came to a stop, as can be seen in the following picture.
It's beyond curious and coincidental that that one particular piece of baggage which would unfold and transformed itself into a lifejacket cum 20" phallic antenna, would just happen to be something one of the passengers (the passenger-author's wife), would wait 15 minutes for in the water without another life jacket. In had been doing that all that time in apparent noncompliance to the pilot's claimed instructions, which were that everyone should put on his PFD before exiting the plane, just to strap this one on after it had fully engorged itself with water.
Immediately after Fuddy is extracted from the situation, she all of a sudden has lost her phallic life jacket and now has an adult life jacket from the plane (She's on the right.).
Could that have been the adult life jacket taken from Fuddy, which Fuddy was seen to be wearing earlier in the scenario? No, but since Fuddy was said later said to be wearing an infant life jacket someone certainly should have been investigating that angle. But neither the Maui county police nor the FBI did!
IT ISN'T GREEN.
Same object in my opinion, that's IF anyone but yourself is ALLOWED to have an opinion. No matter the quantity of words and conjectures you offer, you haven't convinced me. And if you can't convince a freeper, your diatribe is going nowhere. I don't know why you bother. You can't bully my eyes.
And that brown thing you can see above the nose is the exhaust extractor, partly ripped off its fastenings to the aircraft.
Can you hear yourself? That's no way to talk to a little old lady sitting on her veranda in Australia, just because you can't convince her that it took a cast of thousands and the budget of a small nation, to do away with one overweight public servant 'of a certain age' - she was described as 'a tireless worker for the health and wellbeing of the people of Hawaii
I sure wouldn't be persuaded to follow her diet, her arteries must have been nicely clogged:
Wow. I guess you speak for all Freepers, then, and if you merely claim not to be convinced, no one would be convinced and I am therefore merely in the midst of some kind of fact-filled, bullying diatribe.
The color of the thing against the plane's starboard passenger exit door in your first picture is probably closer to chartreuse than green, but chartreuse is generally accepted as a variety of green. But fine, the color of the baggage pod floor is nowhere near green and/or chartreuse. The pod floor color, by contrast is clearly some shade of brown, perhaps khaki or tan. In any event those two pieces in your first and third images are very far from being the same color.
Neither does what's against the plane's door in your first picture sport rows of rivets or evidence of an internal bulkhead every four feet or so, as does the internal bottom surface of the baggage/cargo pod in your third picture.
The baggage pod shows a gash only on the starboard sign, with internal structures still present on the port side of the pod. Thus, there's strong evidence that the symmetric, brownish, half-oval one sees near the engine at the tip of the red arrow could not be the front portion of the baggage pod.
You're welcome to claim an opinion, but the chartreuse SlipNSlide(R) has already been factually identified by a person who knows. Though you pretend that your difficulty to hold to your opinion justifies accusing me of bullying--and what a snowflake thought that is!--it's nonetheless useless to undo such an expert confirmation (perhaps a snowflake should think of such a person's determination as implicitly "mounting an attack"), no matter how justified that may make you feel in labeling all this my diatribe.
The chartreuse part we've all seen against the starboard side is a very modern diver transport that became unbalanced when the likely corporate contractors (friend of yours, maybe?) didn't time their re-balancing quite right after they rolled off. If it had been wartime, they would all have been spotted by the enemy and killed.
The camera's lens sees that SlipNSlide for only a very few "deadly" frames and never again. Same for the thing pointed to by the red arrow. If those parts had been there and seen as a natural consequence of a plane part breaking off, it would likely been seen over the course of several successive minutes in the video. Obviously, however, the divers had an awareness that their stuff shouldn't be captured on the video they must've known was being shot less a short football field away.
We know there were divers there at that time. We also know from photos taken on the salvor's barge that two different engine/propeller combinations had been cut from their respective mounts, one of them having been cut off Fuddy's Crash plane. One doesn't go through all that trouble for no good reason. Those divers whose company was already there for dealing with Fuddy's extraction had means, motive, (also the orange equipment shown in your second picture) and opportunity to cut that engine off at that time rather than have to wait for a later return visit. As the divers' activity clearly shows the aircraft rising in the water (as seen in the three, successive following pictures), cutting things off the engine area would account for that. What else might you posit to account for the fact that these three successive pictures, left-to-right show the plane having been made to rise in the water?
You're of course welcome to have your own opinion. Even good logic won't necessarily make a wrong answer right, but logic that figuratively leaks like a sieve is only going to arrive at a correct answer almost never. Your logic doesn't seem to hold much water in this case, as many of the facts are in, and confirm what we had suspected. Your logic, by contrast, doesn't seem to have arrived at (m)any correct answers. Love the purse idea, however. Did you think your calling Jim Robinson to your purse post was sufficient and reasonable justification to shut down exposition of facts surrounding the Deep State's hoax? Fair dinkum, --NOT!
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.