Forum

TruthMove Forum

TruthMove Forum » TruthMove Main Forum

Arianna Huffington, John Judge and Jonestown - NY Times scans posted (5 posts)

  1. christs4sale
    Administrator

    He is a statement by Arianna Huffington about 9/11 truth from her blog:

    More full disclosure: I despise 9/11 "truther" conspiracies. Indeed, one of the guidelines for bloggers on HuffPost is a ban on posts putting forth those kinds of theories. And it was stupid of Van to put his name on a very stupid "9/11 Truth Statement." I've spoken to Van. He doesn't believe that the Bush administration orchestrated the 9/11 attacks or allowed the attacks to happen in a cold-hearted attempt to gin up support. The 9/11 "Truthers" are fringe-dwellers and Van was completely wrong to allow himself to be associated with them.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/t...

    Here is a letter from John Judge to Arianna Huffington after she had Gerald Posner on her show "Equal Time" and Posner used John Judge as an example as someone who believes that "there is a conspiracy behind every aspect of American history." Posner then said that Judge believes Jonestown was a conspiracy and Huffington and the other women on the show began laughing uproariously and Huffington called it "the Kool-Aid Hit Squad." I believe that this was in 2002.

    Ms. Hufffington:

    Since you once laughed your head off on your inaptly-titled show "Equal Time" on MSNBC as Gerald Posner maligned me for suggesting that the people who died at Jonestown did not commit suicide but were murdered, and your producers would not allow me "equal time" to respond to his castigations, I thought I'd drop a note just to clear up the record. The "kool-aid hit squad," as you found it so hilarious to call them, did exist and they used something much more lethal.

    The source of one of the largest (915) black (85%) and female (90%) mass deaths in modern history was officially ruled as murder, not by me, but by the Guyanese Grand Jury that heard the evidence presented by the country's leading forensic pathologist Dr. Leslie Mootoo, who was the first to examine and count (along with the Guyanese Defense Forces -- GDF -- present), a total of 408 dead, mostly elderly and children.

    Mootoo found no evidence of cyanide pathology in the corpses, which is quite visible in the form of splayed limbs, arched backs, and a certain death grin known as rictus. These bodies were in calm repose, many lying limp where they fell. Mootoo, upon close examination, found fresh needle marks in the backs of almost all of them (85-90%), bent and broken needles (indicating forced injections). The remaining dead were either "shot or strangled" according to Mootoo. The Guyanese grand jury, hearing the real medical evidence, ruled not a single suicide happened at the Jonestown camp.

    The Armed Forces Institute of Pathology arrived after Mootoo had finished his work, following a call for assistance, but claimed they had "forgotten" to bring their medical kits. A simple fluid autopsy on site could have determined the actual cause of death. Instead the bodies were left to rot for days before huge transport planes brought them back to Dover AFB for quick burial or cremation. The American College of Medical Examiners wrote an open letter to the Army complaining that they had failed to do autopsies on the dead.

    Over the next 5 days, the body count rose inexplicably from 408 to 915. By all accounts, internal and external, there had been 1,100 at the camp. There were only 16 official "survivors" named in the press. Do the math. The Army made several official statements about the climbing body count, which rose by over 500 at final count:

    "The Guyanese can't count"
    "Bodies fell in piles"
    "Bodies fell on top of other bodies"
    And on the fifth day:
    "We went around to the other side of the pavilion and found 500 more bodies" (this is an open air pavilion no larger than 50 feet in diameter).

    There were no bodies covering bodies. Can 408 cover the remaining 507? Do the math. Mootoo and survivor Odell Rhodes tagged the toes with identifying names as they were examined, though all these were later removed on orders of Zbigniew Brzesinki, Alexander Haig and Robert Pastor, who was on site. (see Kenneth Wooden, Children of Jonestown, McGraw-Hill, 1980).

    I challenge you to find one photograph, aerial or otherwise that shows a single body on top of another body at Jonestown. The GDF had the grisly task of poking holes in the corpses with bayonnets to prevent them from exploding in the heat. They would have seen a body below another body, as would Mootoo and Rhodes, and counted them the first day. What you can see in the pictures are rows of bodies, clearly dragged across the grass, some in small groups on blankets or tarps, all face down. These were killed over the ensuing days and brought back to the camp.

    The original NYT headline (Nov. 18, 1978) correctly read "400 dead, 700 flee into jungle". Unfortunately, they were already surrounded by GDF, British Black Watch and eventually Green Beret troops. I and other researchers/journalists have spoken to some of these killers.

    Jonestown is no laughing matter. I have read over 3,000 press reports, including Guyanese, all the popular books, and interviewed key witnesses to the events surrounding the formation and termination of Jonestown. Anyone who thinks a white preacher can get hundreds of black women to kill themselves and their children at his command needs to check their racist assumption level. Posner, as is the case in all his writing and speaking, has neither done his homework nor convincingly argued his case.

    How do you know the people at Jonestown killed themselves, Arianna? Because you read it in the press or because you took any time to really investigate it? So, laugh your head off if you like. Keep bringing Gerald Posner around to comment on history and reality. Meanwhile the dead sit silent, unless we let them speak for themselves and for the real history of their oppression.

    Posner mentioned my name, which is completely unknown at the national level anyway, as some sort of example of what was worse than having Holocaust deniers speak at a California campus. I was among those who said, God forbid, that JFK was killed by a conspiracy. I am not a Holocaust denier, nor am I a reality denier like Posner. He said I think that there is "a conspiracy behind every aspect of American history", and then pointed to my work on the Jonestown dead, which you found so amusing.

    Perhaps you should read my well footnoted piece "The Black Hole of Guyana: The Untold Story of the Jonestown Massacre" and judge for yourself instead. As my friends will tell you, I think there are at least two or more conspiracies behind most aspects of American history. You can call me a "conspiracy theorist" if you call everyone else a "coincidence theorist". It doesn't change the facts.

    You write as if you have moral outrage and care about the truth nowadays. Do you only vent about the scandals everyone else knows about through the corporate press? There are far more profound scandals behind current events if you care to look for them. But, then, perhaps you'd get mocked on MSNBC without any "equal time" to respond.

    Come clean,
    John Judge -- for the truth

    http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/JohnJudge/Jone...

    Here is the front page from the 20th:

    name

    I think John got the date incorrect as the 18th. Here is the 21st front page:

    name

    Here is the 22nd front page:

    name

    Here is the 23rd front page:

    name

    But you get the following two on the 25th:

    name


    name

    From 12/17/78:

    name

    Article from 12/8/78 about the questionable actions of famed Warren Commission critic Mark Lane:

    name

    Posted 14 years ago #
  2. truthmod
    Administrator

    Huffington's attitude is disgusting.

    And it was stupid of Van to put his name on a very stupid "9/11 Truth Statement."

    She sounds like the stupid one here.

    The 9/11 "Truthers" are fringe-dwellers and Van was completely wrong to allow himself to be associated with them.

    She makes no attempt to critique the substance of what the 9/11 TM brings up. She's just calls us stupid and fringe.

    Posted 14 years ago #
  3. Victronix
    Member

    Yes, I only realized about the "suicides" being most likely something else just in the past couple of years when we went to the then-new documentary on Jonestown with a friend of ours who was once in a cult, and we started doing research after that. What was really interesting was who was controlling the information just to research it, and how it was being managed -- it was transparent how they were trying to manipulate readers and limit the information, while appearing to be open and academic.

    That's a great letter from John Judge. Thanks for posting it.

    Huffington is sickening, but then, look who she married. And when we ran Peter Camejo for CA governor and she was in the race, she did underhanded stuff then too, sell-out back-stabbing crap. That's who she is.

    Posted 14 years ago #
  4. In regards to Huffington's comments about 9/11 "truthers" being "fringe-dwellers":

    During this American culture war, counterculture of any sort is what is really being attacked. Questions about 9/11 function as pretty intense examples of counterculture, considering much of The Left and The Right really galvanized their positions in response to 9/11 and the War On Terror.

    Huffington does not support, and apparently strongly discourages, counterculture activity, and her response seriously betrays that, through her choice of fact-free shame-based language.

    Posted 14 years ago #
  5. truthmod
    Administrator

    Huffington is enjoying the social and financial benefits of being a prized member of the culture. It's pretty clear that considering any real counterculture would entail questioning herself, her privilege, and the entire structure of the system which props up her ego.

    When many in the media equate 9/11 truthers with "anarchists," I understand. To them the thought of there being any validity to these claims is anarchy, because their lives and psyches are so correlated to the structure of the system. For it to be true, would be like the breaking down of every social institution and cultural norm--all of which they have assimilated and now depend upon for their reality.

    In a way, it is an anarchist pursuit to promote 9/11 truth. It seeks to disrupt the authoritarian inculcation of reality onto the populace and put the power to accurately shape one's own reality back in the hands of the individual.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianna_Huffington

    It was during this time that Huffington (then Stassinopoulos) was first known as a liberal/left-wing/Democrat, the position she returned to once again in the post-90s following the right-wing years of the 1980s to late 1990s.[citation needed]

    She met oil millionaire Michael Huffington, a family friend of the Bushes, at a 1985 party hosted by Ann Getty in San Francisco. The couple were married in 1986 at a wedding paid for by Getty, who had declared that she needed to find Arianna a husband. They moved to Washington, D.C., when he was appointed to serve as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Negotiations Policy. They later established residency in Santa Barbara, California, in order for him to run in 1992 as a Republican for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives, which he won by a significant margin. He was a political conservative on most issues. Arianna campaigned for her husband, courting religious conservatives, arguing for smaller government and a reduction in welfare. In 1994 he narrowly lost the race for the U.S. Senate seat from California to incumbent Dianne Feinstein.


    In the late 1980s, Huffington wrote several articles for National Review.

    Posted 14 years ago #

Reply

You must log in to post.