rigorousintuition.ca

I have a Hugh-like hunch that Studds's death and the subsequent attention that will be paid to him and his previous scandals is a convenient excuse to deflect the pedophile-homosexual-page-scandal back onto Democrats.<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061014/ap_on_re_us/obit_studds">news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061...bit_studds</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=fourthbase>FourthBase</A> at: 10/14/06 9:00 am<br></i>

Wow, that is some timing.<br><br> <p></p><i></i>

Re-post of mine from the Foley thread. Don't let them forget that there was a Republican one at that time, too, only with one of the female pages. Incredible how brazen Studds was. He was as much of a jerk as Foley was. Maybe more so. Incredible timing with his death.<br><br>From Wkik on 1983 page sex scandal involving Crane and Studds:<br><br>"The 1983 Congressional page sex scandal was a political scandal in the United States involving members of the United States House of Representatives.<br><br>On July 14, 1983 the House Ethics Committee concluded that Rep. Dan Crane (R-Ill.) and Rep. Gerry Studds (D-Mass.) had engaged in sexual relationships with minors, specifically 17-year-old congressional pages. In Crane's case, it was a 1980 relationship with a female page and in Studds's case, it was a 1973 relationship with a male page. Both representatives immediately pleaded guilty to the charges and the committee decided to simply reprimand the two.<br><br>However, Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) demanded their expulsion. On July 20, 1983, the House voted for censure, the first time that censure had been imposed for sexual misconduct. Crane, who subsequently apologized for his transgression, lost his bid for reelection in 1984.<br><br>Studds, however, stood by the facts of the case and refused to apologize for his behavior, and even turned his back and ignored the censure being read to him. He called a press conference with the former page, in which both stated that the young man, who was 17, consented. Studds had taken the adolescent to Morocco to engage in sexual activity, and therefore did not break any U.S. laws in what he called a "private relationship."[1] He continued to be reelected until his retirement in 1996.[2]....."<br><br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=chiggerbit@rigorousintuition>chiggerbit</A> at: 10/14/06 10:13 am<br></i>

Gerry Studds apparently knocked his head down whilst walking his dog four days after the Foley scandal broke big. <br><br>And NY Times' senior Washington reporter, David E. Rosenbaum, was apparently clubbed on the head during a mugging in a safe area of DC, dying days later. <br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em><br>Nothing to see here folks...just move along</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>When Barney Frank threatened to expose his partner and roomate's Republican clients, the leaders backed off of him.<br><br>What was Studds going to blow open? Rosenbaum, though retired, was still contributing stories which exposed the corruption in the Administraton. His alleged killer went to a police station asking why he was pictured on telly as a wanted man.<br><br>Perhaps the messenger that was silenced by the Rosenbaum "random killing" was not Rosenbaum. I wonder if Studds' "accidental death" reads as a message to others too.<br><br> <p></p><i></i>

Can blood clots be induced? <p></p><i></i>

There are anti-coagulant drugs, like warfarin, which was once and is still used as a rat poison. If someone goes off of the drug for a day or two (like in anticipation of a surgery), they can suffer a series of small strokes accompanied by clots throughout the body. This contributes to organ failure and septicaemia. This is clearly what has been happening to General Sharon. Doctors would have let a regular person die shortly afterwards.<br><br>I do not believe that there were drugs involved in felling Studds and Rosenbaum. I do think that both men may have held very privileged information. I also think that the deaths of both men could serve in silencing others from speaking out. <p></p><i></i>