BREAKING NEWS.

THE CREWS ON THE GROUND FOUND TWO LARGE SECTIONS OF PLANE. THE TAIL SECTION WAS INTACT. THE WEATHER DID NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE CRASH, SAID THE ON THE SCENE REPORTER.

Wolf Blitzer tried to correct her.

He said, The plane was flying into the storm of freezing rain, right?

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT WEATHER HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE CRASH.

The on-the-scene reporter stuck to her guns. Wonder how long she will have her job?

Is crashed plane, spit into to two parts more consistent with an explosion on the plane, or with a plane crashing due to weather difficulties?

CNN explains why Wellstone might have been assassinated.

One CNN anchor called Wellstone the most liberal Senator--- saying he was even more liberal than Ted Kennedy!!

He was called courageous, and spoken of as putting himself at risk for opposing the President when he voted against war. Not long ago, it appeared that WellstoneâÄôs vote against the war would hurt his candidacy. Recent polling data indicated that this was not the case, and CNN did not discount the possibility that he was assassinated.

The death of Wellstone will enable the Republicans to gain control of the Senate.

Wellstone was called by CNN, a champion of worker rights, of national health care, and of parity for mental and health insurance for all citizens.

Could such a progressive stance, almost unheard of in the Senate, have incited a plot to assassinate him. He was called, the friend of the little guy, and of unions. He fought against international sex trafficking.

C-Span was hosting a live conference on the elections when the news broke. One spokesperson for the Republicans spoke of the sadness which Americans must feel at the death of Wellstone. Meanwhile, the face of this party operative betrayed no sadness whatsoever; rather he appeared very tranquil and almost pleased.

CNN spoke of the stances which Wellstone took in connection with great risks, great dangers, and personal courage, which he faced as a result of his contrarian positions. People can read between the lines. Wolf Blitzer, the cover man for CNN-- who always smoothes things over to put them in conformity with the establishment view-- read a list of many politicians who have died in plane crashes. Blitzer clearly wanted to establish this as a normal event, an accident, not due to any political machinations. However, Blitzers approach clearly contrasted with that of other anchors who spoke in detail of his risky, dangerous, and courageous stances, which could have had serious consequences from him. No CNN anchor has yet openly suggested assassination; but the implication has been near the surface. A number of aviation experts, following Blitzer, suggest that the pilots did not turn on the anti-ice. It was suggested that the work load on this flight must have been high, because the pilot had to turn on the anti-ice, and might have decided not to, to get to a higher altitude. One anchor suggested weather problems. Though independent journalists have said that the weather was normal.

The plane MIGHT have sat on the run way and accumulated ice, which was not cleaned off, said one so called expert. It appeared to me that they were clutching at straws. The flimsiness of official explanations must inevitably lead the thinking observer to consider the possibility of assassination.

Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy was asked to comment on Wellstone, in an interview on CNN, at 2:35 p.m.

Unlike others, he appeared very emotional, and upset. (Is he worried that he might be next on a list of possible targets, as well?)

Leahy said,

Whether you agreed with him politically, you had to like him. He was honest. He was not interested in the trappings of the power. He was not self interested. He was concerned about Health Care, the Environment, the Minimum Wage. He was committed.

Leahy was in tears, and had to pause, to collect himself.

Blitzer said, I can see you are all choked up. We all are. (Blitzer did not appear to be at all choked up or emotional). Blitzer said,

He was a committed man, who worked hard to advance his agenda.

Is that supposed to part of a eulogy? If Bush had died, would he not say, Bush was a man who worked hard for all Americans? Was Wellstone simply advancing HIS OWN AGENDA? A more charitable view would be, he was advancing the agenda of real working people, of people without health care coverage, the agenda of the laboring majority, working for substandard wages.



The plane which Wellstone flew was reported to be: Raytheon craft, A-100 model. Is there some irony here? Raytheon, more than almost any other company, would suffer huge profit losses, if the Wellstone anti-war stance comes to dominate national politics.

The tone on CNN had become maudlin by 2:45; Pete Dominici came on the air to speak about Wellstone. But there was silence. No tears, no choking voice. Just silence. Soon an aid came on to say the interview would not go forward. Pardon my skepticism, but is it just too difficult for Republicans to find anything good to say about Wellstone, other than: He fought for his agenda.


Another question: If Bush had died in a plane crash, would there not be immediate open speculation about the possibility of assassination? Wellstone held the balance in the Senate for the Democrats; he was as opposed to Bush policies as any Senator could be, in issues of war, health policy, and labor issues. His death has great political and social significance.

Political commentator, Bill Schneider, said,

Wellstone was admired because he stood on conviction. He was the voice of sixties idealism. He said the Democratic Party had lost his soul. He made a nationwide trip through poor areas in the late 90âÄôs, JUST LIKE ROBERT KENNEDY DID.

Could the implication be any clearer? Kennedy was assassinated during his campaign against Nixon, in what remain suspicious circumstances. Commentators can not come out now, apparently, to suggest a deliberate murder of Senator Wellstone, but more than one anchor tiptoes around it.

The Republicans TARGETED Wellstone, said Sen. Pat Murray of Washington state.

So Wellstone was targeted. Of course, Murray was speaking of the deliberate targetting of the Wellstone campaign in Minnesota, by sending in huge amounts of funding to his opponent. However, the implication is once again clear. Wellstone was one of the most crucial political figures in



Bush gave the US a very, very brief statement, which concluded with the words,

May the good lord bless those who grieve.

Bush did not say that HE GRIEVED. His remarks were curt, and, in my view, insulting in their brevity.

By 3:00 p.m. another so called expert was brought on. He spoke almost exclusively of the crash as an accident. Did he slip when he said at one point, IF THIS IS FOUND TO BE AN ACCIDENT? He did not elaborate, but went on to discuss the cockpit voice recorder, the last contact with the FAA, and other details. (This was Bob Francis, with the FTAA).




w

add your own comments

doubt it, but who knows by wasn't gonna vote for him 3:46pm Fri Oct 25 '02

I believe it's far too early to begin conspiracy theories. I think this was LIKELY an accident, but I have to say I would not be surprised if it was an assasination. Wellstone is not loved among the political right(wrong). Minnesota Public Radio is reporting that the plane was flying in light rain/slete (sp). Several people (meteorologists, aviation folks, etc...) have said the weather was less than ideal, but not particurlarly bad or unusual. The temperature was 30 degrees..... So far a spokesperson from Coleman's campaign (Wellstone's main rival) has only commented brifely, showing little remorse, though no one can expect him to be altogether displeased. They were rivals after all.

Grow Up by Ajakk 4:01pm Fri Oct 25 '02

I was wondering how long it would take for someone to come up with an off-the-wall conspiracy theory to explain Wellstone's tragic death. You look at how different people grieve, and note that those who were not as close with Sen. Wellstone did not seem as grief stricken as those who were. I was upset when Ted Kennedy and Walter Mondale used Sen. Wellstone's death to push that people should get out and vote for liberal causes. They didn't look extremely upset. Does that mean that they planned the death of Sen. Wellstone? NO. Does the fact that the last time a Senator died during a campaign (Carnahan), his party won the race make me think that the Democrats planned his death? NO. Take your tin-foil cap off of your head and join the rest of the nation in grieving for Wellstone's family, his state, and ourselves for losing a very respected and committed public servant.

To early for what?? by D.L. 4:19pm Fri Oct 25 '02

<< It is too early for conspiracy theories>> But is it too early to look for the truth? You can bet IF WELLSTONE WAS MURDERED, the assassins do not think it is too early to cover it up, and quell an investigation. It is NOT TOO EARlY, in my view, to ask questions. Why would CNN deliberately try to shut up a correspondent who reported THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT WEATHER HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE CRASH. You know that if Bush died in a plane crash, everyone on the mainstream media would be speculating about the possibility of an assassination. So why is there no speculation on CNN about this possibility? I am not talking about conspiracy theories. That is a catch phrase to dismiss rational thought. Of course, it is too early to ASSERT that an assassination took place. But is is not too early to say, assassination is something which should seriously be considered. And we should view media reports with that possibility in mind. I just saw live, an on the scene reporter goaded into denying her own assessment. When she said THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT WEATHER WAS A FACTOR IN THE CRASH. Wolf Blitzer tried to get her to change her statment. She refused to do so. She repeated her statement. And since that time, CNN has not broadcast any more statments from that reporter, or directly from the scene of the crash. CNN HAS (OR HAD) AN ON THE SCENE REPORTER. WHY HAVE WE HEARD NOTHING SINCE 3:45 FROM THIS REPORTER? WHY NOTHING ELSE FROM ANY ON THE SCENE REPORTER? I admit I am suspicious. If there was any evidence that the plane exploded, why I do I suspect that CNN anchors and editors, like Wolf Blitzer, would NOT want that information broadcast. Remember, our media think, live, and breathe the air of the establishment. Over and over, people on CNN say, Wellstone was totally out of the mainstream, was very far to the left of the all the other Senators, but we liked him anyway. The mainstream media will not countenance the thought that he was assassinated unless they are actually forced to. I could give dozens of examples. One of most obvious: when it became known that Reagan was trading arms to Iran in exchange for hostages and money (which he illegally funneled to the Contras in Nicaragua), the US papers would not touch the story. It was broken in a Lebanese newspaper, and after it circulated the world, the US had to cover the story. The US government still officially sticks to the conclusions of the Warren Commission about the assassination of JFK, even though surveys show most Americans think the lone gunman theory is absurd. That is thanks to alternative publications and filmakers like Oliver Stone. We could cite dozens more examples. I do not say, CONCLUDE AUTOMATICALLY THAT WELLSTONE WAS ASSASSINATED. The crash could have been an accident, of course. But keep an open mind, and ask the tough questions. It sure seems likely that more than half the political establishment in the US, including the governments of Colombia and Kenya, would like to see Wellstone dead. Motive is certainly there. Is it just coincidence? Are the Democrats just going to roll over and say, Well no one could ever be so devious as to contemplate assassinating a Senator? Shame on them if they do!!! The media should be asking questions, too.

Questions for Ajakk by D.L. 5:00pm Fri Oct 25 '02

Questions for Ajakk You wrote, <<I was wondering how long it would take for someone to come up with an off-the-wall conspiracy theory to explain Wellstone's tragic death. >> What is off the wall? Do you deny it is possible that Wellstone was assassinated, or even likely? Given the fact that we no longer live in nation run by a democratically elected head of state, is it not possible that the current administration would resort to assassination, when the stakes in the Senate are so high, and in the exact moment when the polls show Wellstone was likely to win the election? The pseudo Green candidate has not garnered any following, and Wellstones vote AGAINST WAR, has actually caused him to gain support. <<You look at how different people grieve, and note that those who were not as close with Sen. Wellstone did not seem as grief stricken as those who were.>> No. I noted that a Republican operative on C-Span actually appeared tranquil and almost pleased that Wellstone was dead. That is not quite the same thing. I noted that Bush said, May God Bless those who grieve, while it was clear that he was not grieving. That is not the same thing. I did not say those who were not close to Wellstone did not seem AS GRIEF STRICKEN. I said certain people who spoke formulaic eulogistic statments were CLEARLY NOT GRIEIVING. <<I was upset when Ted Kennedy and Walter Mondale used Sen. Wellstone's death to push that people should get out and vote for liberal causes. They didn't look extremely upset.>> Fair enough. I thought it was interesting that the only people who DID display grief were democrats. But I may have missed something. <<Does that mean that they planned the death of Sen. Wellstone?>> No. Does it mean that the plane crash was NOT engineered deliberately? No. I am merely suggesting that the most of the Republican political establishment is clearly happy that Wellstone was dead. <<Does the fact that the last time a Senator died during a campaign (Carnahan), his party won the race make me think that the Democrats planned his death?>> His wife took the post afterwards. The political balance did not change. Did the Democrats plan is death. I do not know. I do know that Jim Jeffords got many Death Threats when he jumped parties (research it, if you want the details). Barbara Lee received many, many death threats after voting against the patriot act; and is still under capitol police protection. Perhaps this is not relevant. Whether Carnahan was assassinated or not, I do not know. Perhaps Carnahan is not relevant. I am talking about Wellstone. The fact is, the death of Wellstone affects the entire political balance of the nation. His death may mean complete Republican control of all branches of government; that is no small consideration. Murders have been committed for much less. The stakes here are incredibly high. Assassination should be considered by an independent investigation. If there is no evidence for it, fine. << . . . join the rest of the nation in grieving for Wellstone's family, his state, and ourselves for losing a very respected and committed public servant.>> Is this just an indirect way of telling me to keep quite? I do not tell you when or how to grieve. I do not expect you to tell me either. <<Join the rest of the nation . . .>> sounds a bit like a call to conformity. You do what you like. As for my own grieving, that is my private affair. When you wrote your objection my post, were you grieving? Someone might say to you, do not engage in debate. You should be grieiving. And by grieving, we mean dressing in black and thinking only about the deceased and nothing else. No movies. No music. No dancing. No entertainment. Above all, no thinking about the possibility that Wellstone was killed by a ruthless political establishment which thinks nothing about plunging the world into an endless war-- which WELLSTONE HIMSELF OPPOSED!! I say, think what you like, grieve as you wish, and say what you want. Do not tell others what they should do, or what they should wear, or how they should think. I am only raising questions.

If foul play suspicion grows... by tom 5:01pm Fri Oct 25 '02

If there is any evidence of foul play, then it is likely that there will be a convenient arrest of someone with an arab sounding name, and it will be blamed on the terrible boogey man "al qaeda" Just a wild guess that is.

clarification by wasn't gonna vote for him 5:08pm Fri Oct 25 '02

I feel I should clarify my earlier statement about it being too early for conspiracy theories. It is certainly the time to ask questions. If they are not asked now, they will likely never be asked, because as has beeen pointed out... the media is a tool of the machine. Chances are even if it was an assasination, we would never hear it. My point is that it is far to early to draw any solid conclusions. Now is only the time for questions.....lots of questions......not conclusions. I also did not mean to infer that the original posting was stating that the senator WAS assasinated. I just felt like it was the appropriate place to voice my oppinions.

the punks in power right now by mike 5:21pm Fri Oct 25 '02

won't hesittate to do ANYTHING, absolutely anything to remain in power and acheive their agenda. remember JOhn John a coupole of years ago--that was kind of weird too. The Bushies are monsters, abnsolute monsters.

no ice? by Bill Du Bois 5:38pm Fri Oct 25 '02

One of the early Reuters stories included the following (notice that the assistant airport manager did NOT mention ICE) the media has filled that in later....) Eveleth-Virginia Municipal Airport assistant manager Gary Ulmond said there was light snow at the time of the crash at about 10:30 local time. The plane -- a Beechcraft King Air 100 -- was making its approach on instruments and there was no unusual radio contact indicating trouble, Ulmond said. The crash happened about 2 miles from the airport.

weather by ghost 5:52pm Fri Oct 25 '02

Cspan was airing the coverage of a Minneapolis TV station They reported that at the time of the crash, visibilty was 3 to 4 miles, the ceiling was 200 to 400 feet, and the temperature was 34 degrees. The weatherman on this station then plainly said that iceing only occurs when the temperature is between 28 and 31 degrees. The only part of this that sounds dangerous to a plane would be the ceiling of 200 to 400 feet. However, other reports have indicated that the plane was on instrument approach. If the plane was approaching on instrument, then there would be no reason for the pilot to try to come down out of the clouds to see where he was. Ie, this local Minneapolis TV station is basically saying that there was nothing in the weather at the time that should have contributed to a crash.

Warning! by anon 5:59pm Fri Oct 25 '02

For god sakes people, please do ANYTHING to prevent Brooklynite Jew Norm Coleman from becoming a senator of your state! Focus all your energy on the defeat of Coleman. There's obviously more at stake here than any of us could have guessed.

fuck you Ajakk. by Mepatt 6:00pm Fri Oct 25 '02

off the wall conspiracy theories and tin foil hats? As stated in the article If Bush was killed in a plane crash on a CLEAR DAY the press would NOT suggest bad weather and would INSTANTLY start speculating about assassination and NO ONE would cry out that we need time to mourn -WE WOULD PROBABLY START CARPET BOMBING CIVILIANS IN SOME THRID WORLD COUNTRY. and If not and investigation now, when? lets wait another 15 years to investigate this -WHEN IT DOESNT MATTER ANYMORE. I'm not convinced one way or another but shutting off your brain to possibilities just because of your BELIEFS is so stupid. God, seriously indymedia is so retarded sometimes.

Pilot's Perspective by Flyboy 6:37pm Fri Oct 25 '02

In response to ghost, temperature typically decreases by approximately 3 1/2 degrees F. with every 1,000' increase in altitude. Freezing rain presents the most treacherous flight conditions, with the possible exception of flying through severe thunderstorms. With a surface temperature of 34 degrees F., the airplane was probably descending through some very nasty icing conditions. The added weight of the ice would have required an increase in angle of attack to maintain flight. In addition, ice messes with the smooth airflow over the wing. If severe enough,with a fully loaded airplane, it's entirely possible that the angle of attack required to maintain flight would have exceeded the wing's critical angle of attack, meaning that the wing would no longer be generating lift, meaning that the aircraft would have rapidly lost altitude (stalled). If this happened close to the ground, there would have been to time to recover. Another possibility is that one or both of the turbine engines ingested enough ice to make it flame out. Again, if this happened close to the ground, there would have been no time to recover. This kind of accident is not all that rare, unfortunately.

Above Comment by Ron 6:38pm Fri Oct 25 '02

I am referencing the following: For god sakes people, please do ANYTHING to prevent Brooklynite Jew Norm Coleman from becoming a senator of your state! End of quoted post. I am just curious why the poster chose to identify Norm Coleman as a "Brooklynite Jew" as if to imply this is somehow a bad thing. I fear, sometimes, that, too often, people post things of an anti-Jewish nature without being taken to task for it. Let us keep indymedia free of such prejudices based on religion.

Pilot's Perspective by Flyboy 6:40pm Fri Oct 25 '02

In response to ghost, temperature typically decreases by approximately 3 1/2 degrees F. with every 1,000' increase in altitude. Freezing rain presents the most treacherous flight conditions, with the possible exception of flying through severe thunderstorms. With a surface temperature of 34 degrees F., the airplane was probably descending through some very nasty icing conditions. The added weight of the ice would have required an increase in angle of attack to maintain flight. In addition, ice messes with the smooth airflow over the wing. If severe enough,with a fully loaded airplane, it's entirely possible that the angle of attack required to maintain flight would have exceeded the wing's critical angle of attack, meaning that the wing would no longer be generating lift, meaning that the aircraft would have rapidly lost altitude (stalled). If this happened close to the ground, there would have been to time to recover. Another possibility is that one or both of the turbine engines ingested enough ice to make it flame out. Again, if this happened close to the ground, there would have been no time to recover. This kind of accident is not all that rare, unfortunately.

If you don't want potential assassinations . by Green Voter in CA 7:42pm Fri Oct 25 '02

Then for gods sake VOTE and vote for anyone left from the family of anyone who gets killed like this!! Forget everything and fight the power!! Everyone vote . .. .please. The rest of the country is counting on you to do the right thing and make sure they can NEVER win elections this way!!!!!!!!!!!!! If it was an assassination, then sooner or later that will become clear as they take out more and more people. And if it wasn't, then these candidates need to learn not to fly in small planes like crazy right before elections when there's snow and ice! Either way, something will change. But each one of you has a role to make that change happen. It's up to you. Make sure - if this was what we'd hope it wasn't - that we give them no reason to EVER try this again!!!!!!! If they f---k up twice by losing elections this way, it way decreases the sense for them to keep trying it!

icing? by ghost 8:28pm Fri Oct 25 '02

Crash site is listed as "2 miles" away from the airport. The plane was on approach to landing. Info on the plane lists a landing speed of 103 mph. They may not have been down to that speed at that time. Anyways, they were between 1 min to 1 1/2 min from landing. Can't find what the descent rate for the plane is, nor what the instrument approach to that field is. But my guess is that two miles out they were unlikely to be more than 1000 feet up in the air. By the math given here, that puts the temperature at the upper limit for icing. And that's if they were as high as 1000 feet. The plane has devices to aid against icing. There are surfaces along the front of the wings that expand under airpressure to break ice of the wings. Also the turboprops are equipped with deicing devices. Since the icing conditions were probably only at two thousand feet altitude or higher, a pilot who was worried about icing could make an approach to the field at a lower altitude. By the math given here, if a pilot came down to 1000 ft, they get away from any zone where icing is happening. So far, from what we know, the pilot made no communication whatsoever to the air traffic control nor the tower at the field indicating a problem. If they were experiencing icing problems en route, this probably would have been reported. Especially if the pilot were making a request to come to a lower (ie warmer) altitude to cure a icing problem. If the pilot was having problems with icing during the descent to the field, again he didn't mention it. And again, with the warmer air near the surface, one solution to icing problems during the descent would have been to call off the approach, circle the field at a low altitude in the warmer air, let the deicing devices clear the ice off the plane now that you are clear of the icing conditions, then come in and land. It just doesn't seem to me that these conditions were that bad. If these are conditions that cause crashes, then planes should be dropping out of the air in Minnesota on a daily basis for the next six months.

Fuck Me? What's wrong? DId I hit a nerve? by Ajakk 8:42pm Fri Oct 25 '02

<<Begin Quote>> Questions for Ajakk You wrote, <I was wondering how long it would take for someone to come up with an off-the-wall conspiracy theory to explain Wellstone's tragic death. > What is off the wall? Do you deny it is possible that Wellstone was assassinated, or even likely? <<End Quote>> Yes, I deny that it is likely that this Wellstone was assassinated. Quite a number of people die in the United States every year from airplane crashes in small prop planes. I think too many people try to spin too many things to fit their political views even if there is no evidence to support it. <<Begin Quote>> Given the fact that we no longer live in nation run by a democratically elected head of state, is it not possible that the current administration would resort to assassination, when the stakes in the Senate are so high, and in the exact moment when the polls show Wellstone was likely to win the election? The pseudo Green candidate has not garnered any following, and Wellstones vote AGAINST WAR, has actually caused him to gain support. <<End Quote>> So, because the 2000 election was so close, and the U.S. Supreme Court decided it against how you would have preferred, the president would assassinate his political rivals? Is it possible? By qualifying everything you say with "could it possibly be", you prove that you are just making crap up. Anything is possible. You are using rumor and innuendo to try to advance your political views. Is it possible that the democratic party killed Wellstone so that they could get the 'Carnahan Effect' and make sure they keep their seat. <<Begin Quote>> <You look at how different people grieve, and note that those who were not as close with Sen. Wellstone did not seem as grief stricken as those who were.> No. I noted that a Republican operative on C-Span actually appeared tranquil and almost pleased that Wellstone was dead. That is not quite the same thing. I noted that Bush said, May God Bless those who grieve, while it was clear that he was not grieving. That is not the same thing. I did not say those who were not close to Wellstone did not seem AS GRIEF STRICKEN. I said certain people who spoke formulaic eulogistic statments were CLEARLY NOT GRIEIVING. <<End Quote>> "Republican Operative"? Gee, I wonder if your mind is already too closed to believe that anyone who isn't a Democrat could grieve for Wellston at all. Bush saying, "May God Bless those who grieve" does not mean that Bush did not feel a loss. Would you have felt better if you saw a tear going down Bush's face? Come on. People grieve in different ways. Also, just because someone isn't "grieving" doesn't mean that they don't care about someone's loss. I wasn't grieving everytime someone was killed by the sniper in Washington. I did, however, feel sympathy for the families and their loss. The only public person who I saw even close to grieving in all of the coverage was Jesse Ventura (of all people). <<Begin Quote>> <I was upset when Ted Kennedy and Walter Mondale used Sen. Wellstone's death to push that people should get out and vote for liberal causes. They didn't look extremely upset.> Fair enough. I thought it was interesting that the only people who DID display grief were democrats. But I may have missed something. <<End Quote>> Maybe that grief over someone's loss is normally only shown by people who are extremely close to that person. Personally, I didn't see anyone truly grieving for this loss. I would have been shocked if I had. I wonder about anyone who would be hopping on national TV if they were truely grieving. This doesn't mean, however, that they were not sad about the loss, nor, as it has been implied, that they were happy that it actually happened. <<Begin Quote>> <Does that mean that they planned the death of Sen. Wellstone?> No. Does it mean that the plane crash was NOT engineered deliberately? No. I am merely suggesting that the most of the Republican political establishment is clearly happy that Wellstone was dead. <<End Quote>> You are suggesting that the Republican political establishment is "clearly"(?) happy that Wellstone was dead. You look through the world in Deep Blue tinted glasses. There was NO evidence that anyone was happy that Wellstone was dead. Anyways, don't you think that if someone had engineered the death of Wellstone, they would have been the first one out on the news decrying his death? A man tragically died. Why do you feel the need to cheapen his death by insinuating that his rivals were the ones who caused it? <<Begin Quote>> <Does the fact that the last time a Senator died during a campaign (Carnahan), his party won the race make me think that the Democrats planned his death?> His wife took the post afterwards. The political balance did not change. Did the Democrats plan is death. I do not know. I do know that Jim Jeffords got many Death Threats when he jumped parties (research it, if you want the details). Barbara Lee received many, many death threats after voting against the patriot act; and is still under capitol police protection. Perhaps this is not relevant. Whether Carnahan was assassinated or not, I do not know. Perhaps Carnahan is not relevant. I am talking about Wellstone. <<End Quote>> My point was, that it is just as likely that the Democrats were the ones who engineered the Wellstone's death as the "Republican Establishment(tm)" was. Ie. THEY DIDN'T. You say that whether or not Carnahan was assasinated is not relevent, but you think it is relevent to spew a few things about Jeffords and Lee. Is that relevent. You yourself say that "Perhaps [it] is not". Then why did you saw it? Because the only "proof" you have is rumor and innuendo. <<Begin Quote>> The fact is, the death of Wellstone affects the entire political balance of the nation. His death may mean complete Republican control of all branches of government; that is no small consideration. Murders have been committed for much less. The stakes here are incredibly high. Assassination should be considered by an independent investigation. If there is no evidence for it, fine. <<End Quote>> What evidence is there that the Republican's did this. There will be an independent investigation. It is called the NTSB. They investigate every plane crash, and they are quite independant. <<Begin Quote>> < . . . join the rest of the nation in grieving for Wellstone's family, his state, and ourselves for losing a very respected and committed public servant.> Is this just an indirect way of telling me to keep quite? <<End Quote>> No, it is an indirect way of telling you to keep quiet. :) <<Begin Quote>> I do not tell you when or how to grieve. I do not expect you to tell me either. <Join the rest of the nation . . .> sounds a bit like a call to conformity. You do what you like. As for my own grieving, that is my private affair. When you wrote your objection my post, were you grieving? Someone might say to you, do not engage in debate. You should be grieiving. And by grieving, we mean dressing in black and thinking only about the deceased and nothing else. No movies. No music. No dancing. No entertainment. Above all, no thinking about the possibility that Wellstone was killed by a ruthless political establishment which thinks nothing about plunging the world into an endless war-- which WELLSTONE HIMSELF OPPOSED!! <<End Quote>> You are basing your entire "theory" around the fact that the Republicans are not grieving when and where you would like them too. Don't you think that they should be allowed to grieve in thier own way? Then why do you think that they are the ones that planned it just because they are not grieving how you think they should be? <<Begin Quote>> I say, think what you like, grieve as you wish, and say what you want. Do not tell others what they should do, or what they should wear, or how they should think. <<End Quote>> I think that people should be able to grieve as they would like. I think that people should start spreading rumors and innuendo about how Wellstone was assasinated by President Bush. There is absolutely no proof that this was an assasination, nor anything that points towards Bush doing it. <<Begin Quote>> I am only raising questions. <<End Quote>> Except that, by "raising questions", you are making it seem like there is some type of proof that what you are saying is true. How about a couple of questions of my own. "Al Gore could be the reanimated body of Adolf Hitler." "Does Tom Daschle have a deal with ADM to poison the food supply of the midwest with mind-control drugs to keep getting himself reelected?" Should we have independant investigations of those claims? NO. Because they are total and complete crap. Just like something else I recently read (Scroll to top of page).

Weather (documentation) by X 12:26am Sat Oct 26 '02

I posted (for archive) the NOAA weather reports. Go here: http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=212421&group=webcast See the three PDF's under my article (by "X"). Eveleth reported 33 deg.F on the ground at the time of the crash, so it's entirely possible that icing on the plane's wings happened (it's a little colder as you move higher up, and 33 deg.F is the ground temperature reported). It's always wise to call into question EVERYTHING that is reported in the media. But it's also wise to look at solid evidence and move on to other questions when that is supported by the evidence. I doubt the NOAA weather data is incorrect or manipulated. So, focusing on the media's focus on the weather should be seen in that context. Read my article linked above for further commentary.

Reply to Ajakk by Daniesha L. 12:30am Sat Oct 26 '02

I addressed a series of questions to you, and made clear that I am open to the possiblity that Wellstone may have been assassinated, and to the possibility that the crash was an accident. You said, << My point was, that it is just as likely that the Democrats were the ones who engineered the Wellstone's death as the "Republican Establishment(tm)"was. Ie. THEY DIDN'T.>> So it seems you are only open to one possibility: that the crash was an accident. Without any evidence, without any investigation, without any more news, one way or another, you assert THEY DID NOT DO IT. So the Republican establishment could not have engineered the death of Wellstone. End of story as far as you are concerned. You make a few rather far fetched comparisons, Daschle and conspiracies to poison people and so on. I have never heard of such a thing. It is possible, I suppose, that Daschle tried to kill someone by poisoning. After all, someone sent anthrax to his office and presumably tried to kill him (Who did that, do you think? Would I be out of line to wonder if someone in the administration did it? No, I suppose I should be required to assume, ipso facto, that it was Saddam Hussein). You can read the posts above, and many on the indymedia newswire, which indicate thinking people can take seriously the idea of Wellstones deliberate assassination. I am just raising questions. These questions do not prove that Wellstone was assassinated. Questions must come prior to investigation. I have a few more questions you can look at here if you want to: http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=212583&group=webcast If you are already convinced that any allegations regarding an assassination are, a priori, false, then you can conjure up answers out of the fountain of absolute knowledge, which enables you to know with certainty what did happen. : )