|
Who is the Martyr? - January 4, 2001 Did I really promise at the end of my last diary entry that I would return with another one in a week? What was I thinking? Everything, of course, stopped dead for the holidays, and to be honest I simply forgot about this weekly obligation of mine, what with celebrating the birth of Christ and all. Was the Web even up over the holidays? I don't know how they do it. Still, I haven't forgotten my promise to share an interesting, potentially Alek Hidell-related tidbit with you. So here's the story: A little-noticed piece of new information was unveiled at last month's Citizens for Truth conference in a presentation by Mark Anderson, currently the group's interim director of action. A person calling him- or herself "Johnny Rotten" e-mailed Mark with a URL that led to an intriguing December 2, 1999, post to the "alt.test" newsgroup on Usenet. You can see it for yourself at this link or by going to deja.com or another Usenet archive site and searching for the subject "martyr" in the alt.test group. Here's what the post looks like.
Subject: MartyrThe post is the real deal as far as being posted when and where it says it was--I don't think there's any way to fake the date on an archived message such as this. Which is what makes it so intriguing, because it is dated the very day of the assassination of Gates. Could a prankster totally unrelated to the assassination have had the presence of mind to write a message that contains so many tantalizing references? If the post isn't from a prankster, who did write it? Is "AH" Alek Hidell? Who is George? Could somebody have been framing Hidell? If so, what about that chilling subject header--"martyr"? Did someone know Hidell was going to die? Of course, these are just questions--it is impossible to tell at present just what this post means. But the fact of its existence won't go away. I can tell that this is a rabbit hole that many Gates-assassination researchers (myself included) will spend some time exploring. (And, no--the Garcetti Report doesn't mention it at all. And, no--Mark doesn't know who "Johnny Rotten" really is yet.) Citizens for Truth is apparently going to follow up on this with their usual dilligence, but right now they're still reorganizing themselves after a shake-up that surely put a damper on their holiday season. It looks to me like we will not soon see an end to the familiar infighting that often plagues these sorts of grassroots efforts. Yesterday I talked to David James, who left Citizens for Truth on the last day of the conference last month, and he told me he thought the bickering between him and his loyalists on one side and the rest of CfT on the other is "healthy" and "ultimately will be good for the groups." That's right--"groups." David James has officially formed Citizens for Action, effectively taking his part of Citizens for Truth and putting it under its own steam. (When you see the "MacArthur Park" documentary, you will have no problem spotting the roots of this decision.) A website for the group is "coming soon," and David tells me that CfA will concentrate on "rabble-rousing" and "getting out there" and not so much on research and investigation (although anybody who has ever talked to David James will have trouble believing he's capable to holding back on his theorizing about the assassination--we'll see). Enough about all this news (when are you coming back, Jack Perdue? I'm tired of tending the gossip grapevine). Can we talk about me for a second? I've got a problem related to post-production work on the film. One of the film's producers, Brian Clark, e-mailed me recently, excited that a reader of this site named Jeff Beck (no, not THAT Jeff Beck) had tipped him off to a song on the web called "Bill Gates Must Die." It's actually a pretty good song by a talented musican named John Vanderslice. The problem is that Mr. Clark seems to want to use the song in the film in some way, either as a subject (the song was released four days before Bill Gates was assassinated, which is probably a coincidence) or just in the closing credits. I'm not sure, though. In fact, I think it would probably be in poor taste to use the song simply because of the title. I wouldn't want the film to be accused of being exploitative, as it's really an even-handed examination of the assassination controversies. So do me a favor, if you feel like it. Listen to the song and e-mail me with your thoughts on this matter. Am I right, and it would be crude to include such a song in the documentary in any form, or is Brian Clark somehow not way off track here? Finally, a shout out to all my new homies. Thanks to everyone from around the world (literally) who e-mailed in with translation help on all those articles none of us here in the English-only U.S. could read. And a belated thanks to V.L., the aforementioned Mr. Beck and David Doering for some really specific and helpful comments on Larry O'Keefe's musical score progress. And a special thanks to this guy for not mincing words:
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 21:29:34 +0100Well, okay, Sjoerd. Thanx for SHARING!!! Until next time...
Best, |
Contact us at doc@nothingsostrange.com