Fwd: 6th closed door ...Kraig

March 18, 2008

At 09:35 AM 3/17/2008, you wrote:

First, are you aware that writing in caps connotes yelling? Which means,

you have been yelling at me throughout your response. And, I would prefer

you didn't. Plus, I find it difficult to read. I find the whole scenario

upsetting......Let's get a couple of things straight - I said I WAS a

reporter, I'm not one any more, and haven't been one for a number of

years. Even so, all reporters don't know about, or follow all the news.

People usually have areas they cover, and that's what they know. They may

have cursory knowledge of other areas, but certainly not the in depth

knowledge they should have in their particular field. Even though you

have made this personal towards me, I'm going to try and be as objective

as I can in my responses to you. You have made a number of accusations,

which I don't particularly appreciate. Accusations based on assumptions,

which are, for the most part wrong. The only reason I mentioned I had

been a reporter was to show how weak it is when someone says they got

information from " leaks " or an " un-named source. "

It's one of the oldest tricks in the book to try to bolster an argument

or opinion. If my having been a reporter makes what I say suspect to you,

so be it. It's baseless, but It's certainly your right. I have no idea

what you think my agenda could be.

Let's get something clear - there are a lot of different types of

reporters, just as in any field. You have ones who toe the party line

(actually, the paper's party line), and the majority of their stuff

reflects either their or there paper's bias through the choice of words

and what is included in an article, versus what is not. The bulk of the

mainstream media has a liberal bent (if you are really interested, I can

show you many examples) and writes or reports (on TV or Radio) with that

bias firm in place. There are also conservative reporters, most of whom

write or report with that bias. Some " reporters " aren't really

reporters - they merely transcribe information from sources such as AP or

UPI. Most of those types do little, if any, independent research. You

have the reporters who go to meetings and such and just report on the

facts of that meeting or event. Sometime they present some

background information, but not always. Then, there are your

investigative reporters. They find out all they can, from multiple

sources and research (some of it very in depth). Depending on where

and/or who they write for, their stories are usually the most informative

ones and are the most fully flushed out. A reporter is supposed to be

objective, and present all sides of the issue. Especially an

investigative one. It's not uncommon to begin a story with one thought in

mind, but have it change as the facts come to light. That being said, I

think it is abundantly clear that many present a lopsided view of the

issue - usually because they are unable to separate their POV from the

story, and wind up including, or excluding, material that supports their

particular POV.

When I was a reporter, and did investigative pieces, I always tried

to give a balanced view of whatever it was that I was covering. It's not

always easy, as one develops a POV. The key is, to try to separate one's

POV from the story, and include facts that don't support it, as well as

those which do. Although people didn't always like what I wrote, they

respected the fact that I did write balanced pieces. I was in a unique

position, because the paper I wrote for didn't have too much of a bias

one way or another. But, when I did write some things they were concerned

about (about the way certain groups might react), they let me because I

could show sources, research and other substantiations - AND my stuff had

greatly increased the circulation of the paper. People from all groups

were anxious to read what I had written. I didn't do Op-Ed pieces and

tell my opinion about things.....As far as I'm concerned, pieces like

that damage the credibility of a reporter, clearly showing what their

bias is - thereby damaging people's view of that reporter as being an

objective purveyor of facts or a particular situation.

As far as who pulls the strings - well, that depends on who you work for.

In my case, it was a local paper, owned by a woman who'd been in the

business for 50 years. No one told her what she could or could not have

in the paper. Unlike papers such as the New York Times, or the Washington

Post etc where reporters are somewhat more limited, because whatever they

write has to fit into the editorial bias of that particular paper - if

they want to keep their job, that is. Plus, often a reporter will write a

story one way, and by the time it's edited, it comes out entirely

different.

I don't know any of the things you accuse me of....the CIA plots, that

only the richest of the rich get served and so on. And, I have to wonder,

who would I be a plant for? Even if, by some stretch of the imagination,

there was a " plant " or someone who was monitoring this group -

to what purpose? It's not as if much original comes out of this group.

It's primarily a clearing house for health related information,

with some political stuff thrown in here and there. Although, lately, it

seems more here than there.

As far as me not addressing the " important points " in the email

- I choose not to address any but one or two, and then only to show how

ridiculous I felt the claim was. My biggest concern was - and usually is

- how accurate the " information " and statements made were, and

were any of them verifiable. This isn't supposed to be a political group,

even though some stuff of that nature comes through. Lately, a lot more.

But, I saw no need to try to rationally discuss something that was

clearly irrational. There are other forums for that. If you like doing

that sort of thing, perhaps you ought to visit AboveTopSecret.com where

you can discuss your various conspiracy theories to your heart's content.

But, don't get nasty when someone in this group doesn't want to. That's

not what this group is supposed to be about.

You said you " toed the line for freedom. " I'm guessing that

means you were in the military? Couple years? Many years? I'm also

guessing you're asking me if I was in the military? Is that what you were

trying to say? I haven't been. I grew up in a military family, all three

of my brothers joined difference branches of the service and I have been

married to a Marine for almost 14 years. Among other things, my father

was an Admiral in the USN. So, I have a pretty fair knowledge of how the

military works. I wouldn't have said what I did if I wouldn't have.My

family also has a rich and long history of service to this country - even

further back than Jim Bowey, who is kin on my father's side. Oh, and I'm

very aware of what's happening to veterans. Not in some hypothetical way,

but also on a personal level.

I don't know where you've gotten the notion that I have all this faith in

congress. Or the senate. I've never even once implied that, and I defy

you to find anything I've ever written that says I do. I think all

politicians are suspect......and the more I've met, the more I feel that

way. I do have to say, that even if some of your points are valid

and verifiable, you will never get them across to anyone who might be

able to do something about some of them, because of the way you present

them. Which, I suspect, may also be the reason why many in the political

arena don't listen to what folks like you have to say. Your argument is

emotional, scattered and not to the point. It needs to be objective,

concise, to the point and backed up by valid research. Even then, the

most one can hope for is to educate. If you, or anyone else thinks a rant

like yours will change a person's mind - well, you've got a lot to learn.

Even if there is something valid buried within. most people will dismiss

everything you say because of how you said it.

Oh, and I am familiar with G. Edward Griffin (not Griffith) and

the Crearture from Jeykll Island. If I wanted to discuss stuff like that,

it would be in a different forum - not a Health and Healing group. I

think some people are losing sight of what this group is supposed to be

about. Not that there aren't a number of health related issues that don't

have a political spin. They do. but, frankly, if I wanted to discuss the

NWO, government conspiracies, the down-turn of our economy - or any of

those things - it wouldn't be here. It would be someplace where I would

know the deck isn't stacked. When I discuss or debate issues, I prefer

there be a balance of opinion. Both sides of the coin, if you will. But,

I don't chose to discuss those issues - there isn't a thing I can do

about them. For the most part, I would prefer to focus on things I can do

something about - things which have a practical application in my life.

And, when I do change my mind about something, it won't be because

someone is yelling at me, or has gone off in a rant. That sort of

behavior always tends to make me dig my heels in. Even when I may agree,

on some level, with what that person said. It will be because they have

presented a good argument that is factually based. But, like I said, if I

wanted to discuss or debate a lot of the issues you brought up, I'll go

to ATS and find a forum there.

I hope this finds you in good health,

Lynn

MY FEELING IS YOU SHOULD GET

UPSET, BUT NOT WITH ME OR THE

KNOWLEDGE..........BUT YOUR HAVING BEEN ONE OF THE WELL INFORMED

REPORTERS, MAKES EVERYTHING YOU SAY SUSPECT.......YOUR BUNCH IS WHO

BURRY'S THEIR HEAD IN THE SAND ON EVER MAJOR EVENT, YOU CLOWNS ARE THE

LAST ONES TO GET IT RIGHT AND YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHO YOU TRULY WORK FOR,

WHO PULLS YOUR STRINGS.......THE PRESS HAS BEEN ABOUT IN FRONT OF THINGS

AS

THE C.I.A. AND THEY ARE NEVER IN FRONT OR PREVENT ANYTHING......AND YES,

I

KNOW WHY, THE CIA IN ALL IT'S FORMS [ANY GOVERNMENT

" INTELLIGENCE " AGENCY "

ONLY PURPOSE IS TO SERVE THE RICHEST OF THE RICH.]EXISTS..........BUT YOU

BEING A REPORTER, YOU KNOW THIS........ACTUALLY OF ALL THE THINGS YOU

MIGHT

PICK AT IN THIS PIECE, IN TYPICAL REPORTER FASHION, YOU TOUCHED NOTHING

OF SUBSTANCE IN THIS PIECE., MAKES ONE WONDER IF YOU AREN'T A

PLANT?.......AND PLEASE DON'T TRY TO TELL ME ANY THING ABOUT THE

MILITARY, I'VE TOED THE LINE OF FREEDOM FOR MY COUNTRY AND SO HAS MY

FAMILY, TO THE TUNE OF 150 YEARS OF SERVICE, WHAT HAVE YOU DONE! ARE

YOU SO BLOODY BLIND THAT YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT IRAQ AND AFGANISTAN ARE

ABOUT......OIL AND HEROIN.....SURLY YOU KNOW THAT AFTER WE INVADED THE

AFGANS, THE WORLDS PRODUCTION OF HEROIN IS AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS IN KNOWN

HISTORY!? IF YOU DIDN'T KNOW THIS, THE AHGANS PRODUCE OVER 80% [

ACCORDING

TO U.N. SOURCES] OF THE WORLDS POPPIES.......BEFORE WE MOVED IN, THE OLD

UGLY TALIBAN, SHUT DOWN ALL POPPY PRODUCTION WHEN THEY FINALLY KICKED OUT

THE RUSSIANS.[iT WAS A RELIGIOUS THING FOR THEM.......BUT NOW THAT GOOD

OLD

CONGRESS THAT YOU HAVE SO MUCH FAITH IN ARE RE-SUPPLYING THE STREETS OF

THE

WORLD WITH HEROIN AND THE GOOD OLD U.S.A. IS THE MAJOR PIMP!!! YOU

AREN'T REALLY SO NAIVE AS TO BELIEVE THE CASUALTY FIGURES YOUR GOVERNMENT

IS GIVING YOU , DO YOU? ARE YOU AWARE THAT WE LOSE 120 VETERANS A WEEK

TO SUICIDE!!???? YOUR CONGRESS KNOWS..........AND DOES NOTHING......YOU

KNOW HOW MANY VETS GET TURNED DOWN FOR V.A. ASSISTANCE AFTER HAVING PUT

THEIR LIFE ON THE LINE FOR THE LIKES OF YOU! ALL THEY WANT ARE THE

BENEFITS PROMISED TO THEM, BUT YOUR CONGRESS DOES NOTHING!!!!!! ARE

YOU AWARE THAT YOUR CONGRESS WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEATH OF

THOUSANDS

OF VETS FROM EXPOSURE TO DEPLETED URANIUM......COMMERCIAL TOXIC LADEN

FOODS[ NO DOUBT MSG IS ALL OVER THE PLACE] ,[PROBABLY STILL GIVING THE

TROOPS " SOFT " DRINKS WITH ASPARTAME IN THEM ] EXTREMELY

QUESTIONABLE

VACCINES AND ONLY GOD KNOWS WHAT ELSE OUR CONGRESS MEN AND WOMAN HAVE

ALLOWED TO BE DONE TO OUR OWN TROOPS, IN YOUR NAME, NOT MINE! YOUR

BEING A REPORTER, SURELY YOU KNOW THAT ONE OF THE THREE LEGS OF

" GULF WAS

SYNDROME " WAS ASPARTAME? ONLY TOOK THE V.A. TEN YEARS TO ACCEPT WHAT

HAD

BEEN SCIENTIFICALLY PUT BEFORE CONGRESS! BY THE ALTERNATIVE FOLKS, YEARS

BEFORE........ONLY MY OPINION BUT I THINK YOU COULD DO YOURSELF AND

OTHERS

A BIG FAVOR IF YOU WOULD READ " THE CREATURE OF JEYKEL ISLAND "

AND THE

CREATION OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE, G. EDWARD GRIFFITH IS THE AUTHER!

KRAIG

Kraig Carroll

Environmental Damage Repair

March 18, 2008

Well Lynn, now we know you are a reporter, you got to open a website. The investigating reporter Lynn Ward.....she kicks ass, she scares the balls of the elite. Just type in your email and you will hear the elites balls shaking.Den 18/03/2008 kl. 16.59 skrev Lynn Ward:At 09:35 AM 3/17/2008, you wrote:First, are you aware that writing in caps connotes yelling? Which means, you have been yelling at me throughout your response. And, I would prefer you didn't. Plus, I find it difficult to read. I find the whole scenario upsetting......Let's get a couple of things straight - I said I WAS a reporter, I'm not one any more, and haven't been one for a number of years. Even so, all reporters don't know about, or follow all the news. People usually have areas they cover, and that's what they know. They may have cursory knowledge of other areas, but certainly not the in depth knowledge they should have in their particular field. Even though you have made this personal towards me, I'm going to try and be as objective as I can in my responses to you. You have made a number of accusations, which I don't particularly appreciate. Accusations based on assumptions, which are, for the most part wrong. The only reason I mentioned I had been a reporter was to show how weak it is when someone says they got information from "leaks" or an "un-named source." It's one of the oldest tricks in the book to try to bolster an argument or opinion. If my having been a reporter makes what I say suspect to you, so be it. It's baseless, but It's certainly your right. I have no idea what you think my agenda could be.Let's get something clear - there are a lot of different types of reporters, just as in any field. You have ones who toe the party line (actually, the paper's party line), and the majority of their stuff reflects either their or there paper's bias through the choice of words and what is included in an article, versus what is not. The bulk of the mainstream media has a liberal bent (if you are really interested, I can show you many examples) and writes or reports (on TV or Radio) with that bias firm in place. There are also conservative reporters, most of whom write or report with that bias. Some "reporters" aren't really reporters - they merely transcribe information from sources such as AP or UPI. Most of those types do little, if any, independent research. You have the reporters who go to meetings and such and just report on the facts of that meeting or event. Sometime they present some background information, but not always. Then, there are your investigative reporters. They find out all they can, from multiple sources and research (some of it very in depth). Depending on where and/or who they write for, their stories are usually the most informative ones and are the most fully flushed out. A reporter is supposed to be objective, and present all sides of the issue. Especially an investigative one. It's not uncommon to begin a story with one thought in mind, but have it change as the facts come to light. That being said, I think it is abundantly clear that many present a lopsided view of the issue - usually because they are unable to separate their POV from the story, and wind up including, or excluding, material that supports their particular POV.When I was a reporter, and did investigative pieces, I always tried to give a balanced view of whatever it was that I was covering. It's not always easy, as one develops a POV. The key is, to try to separate one's POV from the story, and include facts that don't support it, as well as those which do. Although people didn't always like what I wrote, they respected the fact that I did write balanced pieces. I was in a unique position, because the paper I wrote for didn't have too much of a bias one way or another. But, when I did write some things they were concerned about (about the way certain groups might react), they let me because I could show sources, research and other substantiations - AND my stuff had greatly increased the circulation of the paper. People from all groups were anxious to read what I had written. I didn't do Op-Ed pieces and tell my opinion about things.....As far as I'm concerned, pieces like that damage the credibility of a reporter, clearly showing what their bias is - thereby damaging people's view of that reporter as being an objective purveyor of facts or a particular situation.As far as who pulls the strings - well, that depends on who you work for. In my case, it was a local paper, owned by a woman who'd been in the business for 50 years. No one told her what she could or could not have in the paper. Unlike papers such as the New York Times, or the Washington Post etc where reporters are somewhat more limited, because whatever they write has to fit into the editorial bias of that particular paper - if they want to keep their job, that is. Plus, often a reporter will write a story one way, and by the time it's edited, it comes out entirely different.I don't know any of the things you accuse me of....the CIA plots, that only the richest of the rich get served and so on. And, I have to wonder, who would I be a plant for? Even if, by some stretch of the imagination, there was a "plant" or someone who was monitoring this group - to what purpose? It's not as if much original comes out of this group. It's primarily a clearing house for health related information, with some political stuff thrown in here and there. Although, lately, it seems more here than there.As far as me not addressing the "important points" in the email - I choose not to address any but one or two, and then only to show how ridiculous I felt the claim was. My biggest concern was - and usually is - how accurate the "information" and statements made were, and were any of them verifiable. This isn't supposed to be a political group, even though some stuff of that nature comes through. Lately, a lot more. But, I saw no need to try to rationally discuss something that was clearly irrational. There are other forums for that. If you like doing that sort of thing, perhaps you ought to visit AboveTopSecret.com where you can discuss your various conspiracy theories to your heart's content. But, don't get nasty when someone in this group doesn't want to. That's not what this group is supposed to be about.You said you "toed the line for freedom." I'm guessing that means you were in the military? Couple years? Many years? I'm also guessing you're asking me if I was in the military? Is that what you were trying to say? I haven't been. I grew up in a military family, all three of my brothers joined difference branches of the service and I have been married to a Marine for almost 14 years. Among other things, my father was an Admiral in the USN. So, I have a pretty fair knowledge of how the military works. I wouldn't have said what I did if I wouldn't have.My family also has a rich and long history of service to this country - even further back than Jim Bowey, who is kin on my father's side. Oh, and I'm very aware of what's happening to veterans. Not in some hypothetical way, but also on a personal level.I don't know where you've gotten the notion that I have all this faith in congress. Or the senate. I've never even once implied that, and I defy you to find anything I've ever written that says I do. I think all politicians are suspect......and the more I've met, the more I feel that way. I do have to say, that even if some of your points are valid and verifiable, you will never get them across to anyone who might be able to do something about some of them, because of the way you present them. Which, I suspect, may also be the reason why many in the political arena don't listen to what folks like you have to say. Your argument is emotional, scattered and not to the point. It needs to be objective, concise, to the point and backed up by valid research. Even then, the most one can hope for is to educate. If you, or anyone else thinks a rant like yours will change a person's mind - well, you've got a lot to learn. Even if there is something valid buried within. most people will dismiss everything you say because of how you said it.Oh, and I am familiar with G. Edward Griffin (not Griffith) and the Crearture from Jeykll Island. If I wanted to discuss stuff like that, it would be in a different forum - not a Health and Healing group. I think some people are losing sight of what this group is supposed to be about. Not that there aren't a number of health related issues that don't have a political spin. They do. but, frankly, if I wanted to discuss the NWO, government conspiracies, the down-turn of our economy - or any of those things - it wouldn't be here. It would be someplace where I would know the deck isn't stacked. When I discuss or debate issues, I prefer there be a balance of opinion. Both sides of the coin, if you will. But, I don't chose to discuss those issues - there isn't a thing I can do about them. For the most part, I would prefer to focus on things I can do something about - things which have a practical application in my life. And, when I do change my mind about something, it won't be because someone is yelling at me, or has gone off in a rant. That sort of behavior always tends to make me dig my heels in. Even when I may agree, on some level, with what that person said. It will be because they have presented a good argument that is factually based. But, like I said, if I wanted to discuss or debate a lot of the issues you brought up, I'll go to ATS and find a forum there. I hope this finds you in good health,LynnMY FEELING IS YOU SHOULD GET UPSET, BUT NOT WITH ME OR THE KNOWLEDGE..........BUT YOUR HAVING BEEN ONE OF THE WELL INFORMED REPORTERS, MAKES EVERYTHING YOU SAY SUSPECT.......YOUR BUNCH IS WHO BURRY'S THEIR HEAD IN THE SAND ON EVER MAJOR EVENT, YOU CLOWNS ARE THE LAST ONES TO GET IT RIGHT AND YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHO YOU TRULY WORK FOR, WHO PULLS YOUR STRINGS.......THE PRESS HAS BEEN ABOUT IN FRONT OF THINGS AS THE C.I.A. AND THEY ARE NEVER IN FRONT OR PREVENT ANYTHING......AND YES, I KNOW WHY, THE CIA IN ALL IT'S FORMS [ANY GOVERNMENT "INTELLIGENCE" AGENCY" ONLY PURPOSE IS TO SERVE THE RICHEST OF THE RICH.]EXISTS..........BUT YOU BEING A REPORTER, YOU KNOW THIS........ACTUALLY OF ALL THE THINGS YOU MIGHT PICK AT IN THIS PIECE, IN TYPICAL REPORTER FASHION, YOU TOUCHED NOTHING OF SUBSTANCE IN THIS PIECE., MAKES ONE WONDER IF YOU AREN'T A PLANT?.......AND PLEASE DON'T TRY TO TELL ME ANY THING ABOUT THE MILITARY, I'VE TOED THE LINE OF FREEDOM FOR MY COUNTRY AND SO HAS MY FAMILY, TO THE TUNE OF 150 YEARS OF SERVICE, WHAT HAVE YOU DONE! ARE YOU SO BLOODY BLIND THAT YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT IRAQ AND AFGANISTAN ARE ABOUT......OIL AND HEROIN.....SURLY YOU KNOW THAT AFTER WE INVADED THE AFGANS, THE WORLDS PRODUCTION OF HEROIN IS AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS IN KNOWN HISTORY!? IF YOU DIDN'T KNOW THIS, THE AHGANS PRODUCE OVER 80% [ ACCORDING TO U.N. SOURCES] OF THE WORLDS POPPIES.......BEFORE WE MOVED IN, THE OLD UGLY TALIBAN, SHUT DOWN ALL POPPY PRODUCTION WHEN THEY FINALLY KICKED OUT THE RUSSIANS.[iT WAS A RELIGIOUS THING FOR THEM.......BUT NOW THAT GOOD OLD CONGRESS THAT YOU HAVE SO MUCH FAITH IN ARE RE-SUPPLYING THE STREETS OF THE WORLD WITH HEROIN AND THE GOOD OLD U.S.A. IS THE MAJOR PIMP!!! YOUAREN'T REALLY SO NAIVE AS TO BELIEVE THE CASUALTY FIGURES YOUR GOVERNMENT IS GIVING YOU , DO YOU? ARE YOU AWARE THAT WE LOSE 120 VETERANS A WEEK TO SUICIDE!!???? YOUR CONGRESS KNOWS..........AND DOES NOTHING......YOU KNOW HOW MANY VETS GET TURNED DOWN FOR V.A. ASSISTANCE AFTER HAVING PUT THEIR LIFE ON THE LINE FOR THE LIKES OF YOU! ALL THEY WANT ARE THE BENEFITS PROMISED TO THEM, BUT YOUR CONGRESS DOES NOTHING!!!!!! ARE YOU AWARE THAT YOUR CONGRESS WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEATH OF THOUSANDS OF VETS FROM EXPOSURE TO DEPLETED URANIUM......COMMERCIAL TOXIC LADEN FOODS[ NO DOUBT MSG IS ALL OVER THE PLACE] ,[PROBABLY STILL GIVING THE TROOPS "SOFT"DRINKS WITH ASPARTAME IN THEM ] EXTREMELY QUESTIONABLE VACCINES AND ONLY GOD KNOWS WHAT ELSE OUR CONGRESS MEN AND WOMAN HAVE ALLOWED TO BE DONE TO OUR OWN TROOPS, IN YOUR NAME, NOT MINE! YOUR BEING A REPORTER, SURELY YOU KNOW THAT ONE OF THE THREE LEGS OF "GULF WAS SYNDROME" WAS ASPARTAME? ONLY TOOK THE V.A. TEN YEARS TO ACCEPT WHAT HAD BEEN SCIENTIFICALLY PUT BEFORE CONGRESS! BY THE ALTERNATIVE FOLKS, YEARS BEFORE........ONLY MY OPINION BUT I THINK YOU COULD DO YOURSELF AND OTHERS A BIG FAVOR IF YOU WOULD READ"THE CREATURE OF JEYKEL ISLAND" AND THE CREATION OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE, G. EDWARD GRIFFITH IS THE AUTHER! KRAIGKraig CarrollEnvironmental Damage Repair

March 18, 2008

At 12:30 PM 3/18/2008, you wrote:

said I was.............people don't seem to read things very

carefully.....

Well Lynn, now we know you

are a reporter, you got to open a website. The investigating reporter

Lynn Ward.....she kicks ass, she scares the balls of the elite. Just type

in your email and you will hear the elites balls shaking.

Den 18/03/2008 kl. 16.59 skrev Lynn Ward:

At 09:35 AM 3/17/2008, you

wrote: