Black Crawling Systems Archive Release 1.0/Black Crawling Systems Archive Release 1.0 (L0pht Heavy Industries, Inc.)(1997).ISO/tezcat/Clinton/Foster_WSJ.txt

Text File | 1996-07-08 | 11KB | 230 lines

From the Radio Free Michigan archives

ftp://141.209.3.26/pub/patriot

If you have any other files you'd like to contribute, e-mail them to
[e-mail].
------------------------------------------------


"CONSPIRACY BUFFS" REACT TO THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
---------------------------------------------------

Letters to the Editor in today's Wall Street Journal (April 11, 1995)
are devoted entirely to critics of the recent debunking of
investigators of the Vince Foster suicide in a front page story on
March 23. Since the editorial page has been supportive of a full
investigation of the Whitewater affair and Mena related matters, this
may be an effort by Robert Bartley to tweak the reporters and editors
of the news pages.

--------------------------------------------------------

     Your March 23 page-one article labeling critics of the botched
investigations of the death of Vincent W. Foster Jr. as "conspiracy
buffs" reflects the fact that most journalist who have written about
this case want to believe the official reports and refuse to examine
critically the evidence they present.

     You say that those who have pointed out flaws in the
investigations are "generating elaborate and scurrilous rumors about
his suicide." You describe Christopher Ruddy, the first reporter to
challenge the findings of the Park Police investigation, as "the king
of Foster conspiracy theorists." You say that Mr. Ruddy and many other
conspiracy theorists "stop short of saying they have proved murder."
You say this "may be because so many of the theorists' suspicions can
be explained away by a cursory reading of a report by Robert Fiske, the
former independent counsel."

     A cursory reading of Mr. Ruddy's stories should have shown you
that rather than weaving conspiracy theories and generating scurrilous
rumors about Mr. Foster's death, Mr. Ruddy did what you and other
journalists should have done. Hearing charges that the Park Police
investigation had been bungled, he did his own investigation. He was
the only reporter who interviewed the EMS personnel and Park Police
officers who had seen Foster's body as it lay in Fort Marcy Park. He
reported that some of them and experts he consulted had doubts about
the quick rush to judgement that this was a suicide. There was the
unusual posture of the body (laid out as if it was in a coffin), the
paucity of blood, the gun in the hand, the failure to find the bullet
or bone fragments from the exit wound in Foster's skull and his shiny
shoes in a dusty park.

     As Mr. Ruddy pursued the story for the New York Post, he found
many flaws in the Park Police investigation, all resulting from their
failure to observe the rule that unattended violent deaths should be
investigated as a homicide until there is enought evidence to rule out
that possibility. The Park Police admitted that they didn't immediately
check Mr. Foster's car for fingerprints because "it was obviously a
suicide."

     Mr. Ruddy neither generated nor disseminated rumors. He reported
facts that exposed serious flaws in the Foster investigation. Your
article's statment that many of the suspicions raised were explained
away by the Fiske report is inaccurate. The Fiske report actually
revealed even stronger evidence that cast doubt on the finding that
Foster killed himself in Fort Marcy Park. The appended FBI lab report
concluded that Foster's head had not always been in the face-up
position in which it was found. This was proven by the blood on his
right shoulder and on his right cheek and jaw.

     Mr. Fiske's rejection of the alternative explanation--that the
blood indicates that the body was moved--was based on the claim of his
four pathologists that moving the body would have resulted in a lot of
blood being spilled on Mr. Foster's clothing and skin. One of these
pathologists (Dr. Donald Reay) has since acknowledged that this could
have been controlled by bandaging the exit wound.

     The Park Police investigators apparently made no tests for gunshot
residue on Foster's hands or face, but the autopsy reported that black
marks presumed to be gun smoke were observed on both index fingers in
front of the gap between the cylinder and the barrel, precluding the
possibility of his having a firm grip on the gun to aim it. It would be
awkward to have even one hand in that position and senseless to have
two. It would have been difficult to aim the gun accurately, risking
incurring an injury that would paralyze but not kill.

     These are only a few of the unanswered questions that have been
posed by those that you berate as "conspiracy buffs" who generate
"scurrilous rumors" about Foster's death. If you don't have the
answers, you could at least tell your reader what the questions are.

Reed Irvine
Chairman
Accuracy in Media, Inc.
Washington

-------------------------------------------------------------------

     As a concerned former college mate of Vincent Foster Jr., I have
done much more that "a cursory reading" of the Fiske report, and I can
say unequivocally that the report (which is itself quite cursory) does
not "explain away" the numerous inconsistencies in the case pointed out
by Mr. Ruddy.

     The flecks of mica the FBI lab found on Foster's shoes, socks and
clothing are consistent with his body having been transported and
dumped in the park. But I have walked the 200 or so yards that Foster
would have had to walk to get to where they say his body was found, and
that simply can't be done without getting dirt on your shoes. The
barren ground in front of the second cannon where they say they found
his boy is also inconsistent with the one photograph that has been
released to the public and also inconsistent with the description of
surrounding "heavy vegetation" given by all initial viewers of the
body.

     I also wonder how it is possible for a police investigator to
write that he was told by the autopsy doctor that X-rays showed no
bullet fragments in Foster's head when the doctor, as he now maintains,
took no X-rays, and how it is possible for assiduous investigators to
overlook for almost a week a crucial note torn into 28 pieces and left
in Foster's briefcase.

Gary D. Martin
Chantilly, VA

---------------------------------------------------------------------

     If the CIA or La Securite were doing a course on professional
disinformation they could hardly find a more worthy exhibit for study
than your articles on Vincent Foster. You have helped to convince the
world that Vincent Foster committed suicide--notwithstanding compelling
evidence to the contrary.

     Your most recent article of March 23 is yet another study in
insinuation and falsehood. Your intent is plainly to discredit those of
us who have attempted to maintain public pressure for a thorough and
honest investigation of Foster's death.

     Crucial forensic evidence strongly suggests that he met foul play.
At least seven of America's leading forensic experts have stated for
the record that the pattern of powder burns on both Foster's left and
right index fingers is "not consistent with suicide." They include
Massad Ayoob, head of the Lethal Force Institute; Dr. Vincent Di Maio,
medical examiner for San Antonio, Texas; Dr. Martin Faschler, who
headed the U.S. Army's Wound Ballistics Laboratory, and Vincent
Scalise, who was for many years a New York City Police crime scene
expert as well as a forensic consultant to the House Committee on
Assassinations.

     Yet rather than report this important expert testimony, you say
that all that keeps Foster's memory alive are "elaborate and scurrilous
rumors about his suicide."

     A lot more is involved. What is at issue are not rumors, but
facts, few of which are known to most Americans. To as that the truth
be told is not to search for conspiracies.

     The thinking citizen who looks beyond your reports to review the
medical, biographical and simply descriptive facts of the case will be
left with the strongest impression this side of certainty that Foster
was murdered.

Jim Davidson
Baltimore

----------------------------------------------------------------------

     For someone who thinks conspiracists are silly (yet newsworthy),
you certainly weave a pretty good conspiracy tale of your own.

     You assert that my organization, the Western Jounalism Center, has
a political agenda because of its connections with "conservative
activists." One of those, it turns out, was a major contributor to Bill
Clinton's presidential campaign.

     Any good conspiracy theory must, by definition, do two things: (1)
explain who's behind it, and (2) reveal what really happened. In our
investigation we have scrupulously avoided doing either of these two
things. We have simply and painstakingly raised questions and
inconsistencies that our colleagues have missed.

     So what is your agenda? On April 4, 1994, your news story stated
that then Special Counsel Robert Fiske was about to conclude Foster had
killed himself. While it turned out your were right, the curious thing
about it is that by April 4, 1994, Robert Fiske had not yet conducted
any substantive aspects of his investigation--no FBI lab test, no
pathology review. This fact was reported by Christopher Ruddy in the
Pittsburg Tribune-Review on March 21.

     Mr. Ruddy's 20-page response to former special counsel Robert
Fiske's report was the only detailed critical analysis published before
Fiske was sacked by a three-judge panel. Though you apparently forgot
to mention it, Mr. Starr has empaneled the first grand jury
investigation into the case.

     Some of the substantive points raised by Mr. Ruddy: The gun did
not have Foster's fingerprints on it. The family has not been able to
positively identify the gun. The gun remained in Foster's hand despite
the explosive recoil. Gunpowder residues, as noted in the Fiske report,
demonstrate that neither of Foster's hands was on the gun's grip when
it was fired.

     There was uncharacteristically little blood at the scene,
according to the medical examiner on the scene--a direct contradiction
of the Fiske report. Mr. Foster left no suicide note and made no final
arrangements for his family. The note he allegedly left did not have
his fingerprints on it. Key crime scene photos, as well as X-rays, are
missing. Mr. Foster would have had to walk more than 700 feet through
the heavily wooded park without getting a trace of soil on his shoes
and clothing. While he had no soil on him, his clothing was littered
with unexplained carpet fibers of various colors. Several witnesses
even dispute the location of the body's discovery.

Joseph Farah
Executive Director
Western Journalism Center
Fair Oaks, Calif.

------------------------------------------------
(This file was found elsewhere on the Internet and uploaded to the
Radio Free Michigan archives by the archive maintainer.


All files are ZIP archives for fast download.

 E-mail [e-mail])