From: Prien@aol.com
Date: 25 Dec 2009
Time: 05:15:07 PM
I thought I had made it very clear that I fully concurred with Jasper's pointed comment that I cited twice about the evidence pointing to Simpson making no sense unless the murders had been committed for the express purpose of framing him. It should also have been clear that my sole reason for commenting on it is that his finally reaching this conclusion might indicate the group had moved to a new level of understanding of the evidence in this case because his conclusion is nothing new to either myself, Robert Miller, Libtoo and even Charlie who had posted here who all agreed ages ago that all the evidence against Simpson was fabricated, and at least Miller agreed with me that the murder must THEREFORE have been committed for the sole purp[ose of framing Simpson for SOCIO-POLITICAL REASONS. That, indeed is what the massive evidence fabrication in the case and the fraudlent prosecution by perjured testimony and all manner of illicit presentatioon that perjury proofed the police witness points to and PROVES beyond questions or dispute....Anyone who followed the Simpson ng would also know, as well as anyeone who really bothered to understand what I posted here repeatedly, would know that I have been advocating the position that the murders were committed for the PURPOSE of framing Simpson since at least 2000. It is because this group never before embraced this position, and in fact either ignored or poopoohed it in the past whenever I broached it that then prompted my comments when Jasper did so. (If anyone doubts how long I have been advocating it, just look through the Simpson ng archives and you will find mumerous posts in which both Miller and I advocated this position -in fact, it was Miller who first raised it, and he and my more thorough review of the evidence that became available to me after I connected to the internet on about 1999 and got access to the transcripts that tonvinced me he was right. I made clear at the outset that was my reason for posting. No hidden agenda, only the straight-up truth....I then made clear the corollaries that necessarily flowed from Jasper's proposition that has been my own for years, as well as conclusions that followed. The most critical of these that I perhaps failed to make clear is that if the murders were committed for the purpose of framing Siompson, then all the evidence that allegedly incriminated him had to be planted, and that in that case, those who did so necessarily had to ensure there was no genuine evidence of the commission of the crime that could be allowed to be found that conflicted with it in any way. That being so, none of the evidencd incriminating Simpson could be genuine and all of it had to be fabricated, and no genuine evidence of the crime could be left anywhere.... The clearest and most obvious waay of accomplishing this was, of course, to commit the murders elsewhere and stage the entire crime scene with fabricated evidence that came from any source other than the victims (their blood could obviously be safely planted anywhere to stage the scene)....It is based on this foundation that I pointed out that it was not who found or manipulaterd evidence to make it point to Simpson that mattered most, but who created the fabricated evidence in the first place. And if Fuhrman is to be deemed the mastermind of even a small conspiracy to fabricate the evidence, then the simplest and most obvious matter to be addressed was how he could have fabricated the Bundy blood drop trail with Simpson's blood which was the single-most important piece of evidcence that convinced many people Simpson did it, and was the centerpiece of Bugliosi's tract that Simpson did it - if the accused's blood was found at the scene, there is nothing left but to puill the switch, drop the gas pellets or put the needle in him). There is no doubt this was brilliantly done to comnvince the multitudes. There were flaws to be sure, but superficially it was fool-proof, which is all the conspirators needed. Bcause they could be sure in advance they had one ally they need most who would be sure to buy into the frame-up - the media who from the start pushed the Simpson guilty mantra by presenting as foolproof all the fabricated evidence the conspirators proeuced that the police and prosecution touted as a fool-proof, smoking gun case....Which then leads me to your question about whether I have proof of teh CIA's involvement. I confess that if you mean direct evidence of orders and plans and individuals from the CIA who participated, the wnswer is no, I don't. Just as even today there is still no such proof they planned and executed the JFK hit. And no such proof will ever be forthcoming until at the least all the CIA files are opened to public inspection, and maybe even not then because the documentary evidence may have been destroyed. So no direct evidence absence confessions will ever be available. What is, however, available are the trace evidence they left behind from fabricating the case against Oswald, their cover up of the deed, and the evidence manipulation that was necessary to hide how the murder was committed and to make it point to Oswald. That is also the trace evidence in the Simpson case that points to the massive evidence fabrication that was required to incriminate Simpson that required the cooperation or at least acquiesenc of numerous technicians in the crime lab as well as the prosecutor's and coroner's offices without which any one of them could have blow tha frame-up apart....The real question that the Jasper's propostion raises is who could have had the necessary political power to ensure that everything required to fabricate and cover up the evidence to incriminate Simpson for a crime he did not commit could be made to happen without anyone willing to rise up and blow the whistle?....The key that points directly to the CIA is that it is they who have had a network of either paid or unpaid supporters among the exeutives, editors and reporters in the whole media who would slant any story as the CIA wanted as exemplified by the ongoing media effort to denoucne and ridiculue anyone questioning the conclusions of th Warrant Commission report as "conspiracy theorists." ....So to so sum it all up, I have no problem including Fuhrman as a cog in the overall effort to frame Simpson. I have a huge problem accepting the notion that he was the mastermind able to effectuate the conspiray necessary to fabricate the evidence and commit two murders for the purpose of falsely incriminating Simpson. That was somethign done on the orders of much higher authority than even Furhman imagined exists....To get a glimpse of it, you needd to read "JFK and the UnthinKABLE." Until you do, you really have no clue what this case is all about. Prien