[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Part IX: Allegations re Vince Foster, the NSA, and Bank Spying (fwd)

Okay, thing is, I read all of the below, and it seems like 
the guy's trying hard to tell you that he'd bend over 
backward to make this case, even to the extent of associating
with fringebinges like you, but your stuff keeps coming up
fulla, um, thin air.  Huh?


On Mon, 24 Jul 1995, Brad Dolan wrote:

> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Mon, 24 Jul 1995 23:11:45 -0400 (EDT)
> From: [email protected]
> Subject: Part IX: Allegations re Vince Foster, the NSA, and Bank Spying
>    Allegations Regarding Vince Foster, the NSA, and
> 	 Banking Transaction Spying, Part IX 
> 		  by J. Orlin Grabbe
> July 23, 1995
> Gregory Wierzynski
> Assistant Staff Director
> U.S. House of Representatives
> Committee on Banking and Financial Services
> 2129 Rayburn Building
> Washington, D.C. 20515
> 202-225-7502
> Dear Mr. Wierzynski:
> Thank you for email letter, a copy of which is attached.
> I am not sure why you think my quoting selections from Mr. Jim Norman 
> necessarily implies endorsement or acceptance of them on my part.  I have, 
> of course, quoted many, many selections from Mr. Norman, so perhaps you 
> could be more specific with respect to the ones you are concerned about.
> Perhaps I could be of assistance to your inquiries among the spooks, if 
> only you could describe to me which points you have investigated, and how 
> you have investigated them. I certainly wouldn't want to promote anything 
> that, as you say, "flied in the face of facts."  
> On the other hand, I am greatly concerned about the use by Alltel 
> Information Services (formerly Systematics) of a libel attorney, 
> Charles O. Morgan, in an attempt to intimidate journalists and destroy 
> the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  
> And I am also gravely concerned about the possible leak of U.S. codes 
> and nuclear secrets to a foreign power, which is an issue of *real* 
> national security concern to the U.S.  (Of course you and I both know 
> that "national security" is often used to hide the truth about sell-outs 
> of national security from the American people, by clamping a lid on 
> the discussion or reporting of things that are common knowledge among 
> U.S. military and security agencies, and even common knowledge to the 
> general public of the foreign power to which these secrets have been 
> compromised.)   
> Before reading my email, and your letter, I sent you a copy of "Part VIII:  
> Allegations Regarding Vince Foster, the NSA, and Banking Transactions 
> Spying".  There you will see from the quotes that the theft of U.S. 
> nuclear secrets by Israel is openly discussed in Israeli newspapers, so 
> I am sure that this is not one of the "off-the-wall" issues to which 
> you are referring.  (With respect to that issue, I suggest that you do 
> some investigation in Tel Aviv.)
> With respect to money laundering I am not concerned,  for reasons I have 
> indicated in my essay "The End of Ordinary of Money",  Parts I and II,  
> a copy of which I previously provided the Committee.  The money-laundering 
> laws ought to be abolished, but in the meantime I do find the selective 
> enforcement of these laws troubling.
> With respect to "Chuck in Kentucky", I know more than one Chuck in Kentucky,
> so perhaps you could be more specific which Chuck you refer to.  What stories 
> did he tell you, and how is it that they didn't pan out?
> Since you have already spoken to both Jim and Chuck, I am taking the liberty 
> of sending a copy of this letter (and your letter) to Jim Norman, and to one 
> possible Chuck you may be referring to, so that perhaps they can explain to 
> me their failing to satisfy you as to the accuracy of their information.
> Now, Mr. Wierzynski, I would like to bring up an issue about your Committee's 
> behavior that is troubling me.  I am sure that there is an innocent 
> explanation that I am missing. You will recall the meeting that I had with 
> you and Mr. Stephen Ganis, the Counsel to the Committee, at the Four Seasons 
> in Georgetown on Monday, June 12, 1995.  Two days previously I had been 
> playing volleyball in the Mall with Dana Rohrbacher and Jack Wheeler and some 
> others, and I had pulled most of the muscles in my right ankle.  So I 
> asked everyone I was meeting to come over to the hotel, and you and Mr. Ganis 
> graciously consented.  We met in the Four Seasons lounge, where I was the 
> only person not wearing shoes.    
> You told me that, more than money laundering in Mena, Arkansas, you were 
> interested as to whether there were any documents connecting Vince Foster 
> to Systematics, or whether I knew the name of any Systematics programmers 
> that may have worked to modify the PROMIS software to spy on banking 
> transactions.  I told you I couldn't recall seeing any such documents, and 
> that I had come across the name of one programmer, but I had subsequently 
> forgotten it.  It was a pleasant meeting, so to be helpful I gave you a 
> copy of Jim Norman's *Fostergate* that had been spiked from *Forbes*.  
> "Why would Steve Forbes kill the article?" you asked.  I said I didn't 
> know, but that--since you appeared to know Steve Forbes--you should call 
> him yourself.
> Now, much to my surprise, I find that the following happened:  Just as 
> *Media Bypass* was about to run Jim Norman's article *Fostergate*, they 
> received a letter from Charles O. Morgan, indicating grave consequences 
> if they were so foolish as to print the article. Mr. Morgan claimed to know 
> what was in the article, because, he said, he had received a copy from Mr. 
> Stephen Ganis of your Committee!  
> I am bothered by the fact that while you alleged to me you were investigating 
> Systematics that at the same time you are passing along information to 
> Systematics.  I am sure there is an innocent explanation.  But consider this:  
> what if I had given you Foster-related documents and the names of Systematics 
> programmers?  Would these have been passed along to Mr. Morgan also?  As you 
> know, a number of people connected to this whole business have died violent 
> deaths in Arkansas.  (Of course, I understand some of them had already been 
> paid off to keep their mouths shut, and didn't, and so--under any standard of 
> morality--deserved what they got.)  
> Well, things are never what they appear, so perhaps you can clear things up 
> for me. Please pass along my concern to Mr. Ganis, and tell him I will be 
> glad to sit down with him and have a drink, or share a line, and have a frank 
> discussion about this issue. (I have nothing against the use of any drug, if 
> used in moderation, and in the appropriate context.) 
> Regards,
> Orlin
> Attachment:  Your letter to me
> - ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> From:   IN%"[email protected]" 23-JUL-1995 19:53:52.82
> To:     IN%"[email protected]"
> CC:     
> Subj:   RE:  Part VII
> Return-path: <[email protected]>
> Received: from netcom13.netcom.com by delphi.com (PMDF V4.3-9 #10880)
>  id <[email protected]>; Sun, 23 Jul 1995 19:53:50 -0400 (EDT)
> Received: by netcom13.netcom.com (8.6.12/Netcom) id QAA03469; Sun,
>  23 Jul 1995 16:51:04 -0700
> Date: Sun, 23 Jul 1995 16:51:04 -0700
> From: [email protected] (Gregory Wierzynski)
> Subject: Re:  Part VII
> To: [email protected]
> Message-id: <[email protected]>
> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
> Orlin --
> We're reading your stuff with interest. Thank you for including me in your 
> list of recipients; I pass the material on to my boss and my colleagues on 
> the Committee.
> I am somewhat surprised, however, that you accept the Norman piece without 
> raising any questions about its sources. We've talked to Jim and tried to 
> check out the sources he thought he could share with us. We have also done 
> a fair amount of investigating on our own using the resources available to 
> us--by which I mean officials inquiries to the spooks. So far we draw a 
> complete blank. Worse, the preponderance of the evidence suggests that 
> Jim's piece is pretty much off-the-wall. Worse still, it appears to fly in 
> the face not just of facts, but simple logic as well. 
> I haven't, by any means, given up on this subject, but pursuing a trail 
> grown cold is difficult to justify when you're paid by the taxpayer.
> Do you have suggestions on how we could verify some of the elements in the 
> Norman story? I've talked to Chuck in Kentucky and am still in touch with 
> him. But his stories have not panned out, even partially. I would be most 
> interested in your ideas. 
> Best regards. 
> Greg
> - -
> Version: 2.6.2
> iQCVAwUBMBP21mX1Kn9BepeVAQGP3AP9Hm/kwmUuz9kNH+q9D728Xe6rdHHPjpT8
> bAxwzIK9UsJsIF5oLfjTVWovEtGBj3QvJlmFY7hkVFZAYpx6q4R65NUX/ZpHtKaF
> csNGnDpuTq0=
> =t4hx