Johnny Gosch update

by **FourthBase** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 6:18 am

Et, that's what I figured too. It's way too faint to be a fresh branding. Yet, what if it were a "light" branding? Is there a way to brand without the effects you described? Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=fourthbase>FourthBase</A> at: 9/2/06 4:36 am

by **Et in Arcadia ego** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 7:04 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Yet, what if it were a "light" branding? Is there a way to brand without the effects you described?<hr></blockquote> Possible, but not likely. The brand may have been applied light enough not to sear the cutaneous down to the level of fat cells, but that would still leave heavy redness locally and would have required some very serious precision work, and branding's a messy business that deifies precision completely. I've seen highly experienced individuals that more often than not went too deep rather than not deep enough. The branding scene is an open one where people freely share info in the hopes of improving the technique. Back when this picture was taken, if we're looking at a real brand it was probably done with a metal coat hanger, and it would have been applied at least 4-6 months before this picture was taken. If there's other pictures I'd be willing to look at them. ____________________ Some are born to sweet delight, some are born to endless night.

by **Quentin Quire** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 10:24 am

There's some mainstream blogging on www.crimeblog.us about Gosch, denying the 'conspiracy theories' as usual, but with some photos. Also check the comments where we find this little gem -- <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Roy Harrold wrote: My friend Robin Gaison has some very strong feelings about the exploitation of missing children by conspiracy theorists, and has been stirring things up mightily on the Rigorous Intuition site. <hr></blockquote> That's right, it's the conspiracy theorists exploiting missing children ...

by **Dreams End** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 11:06 am

Who is Robin Graison and where are things being stirred up? Haven't checked comments section this morning. Blanc: <blockquote>Quote:<hr> DE - if anyone is seen taking photos of children, they should be challenged. <hr></blockquote> The reports were by the kids themselves. Police were called and flyers circulated but I don't think any adults have seen the guy or we'd at least have a license number. I'd have more than that......

by **Dreams End** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 11:11 am

nevermind...robin is "son of Gaia". Yeah, Bonnaci traveled from his home in Nebraska to Iowa with his young teen friends and they pulled off the whole thing. I loved your evidene that Owens was involved because she had charges of bad checks in her past. You aren't "stirring things up", you are simply sounding ignorant.

by **sunny** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 11:23 am

Yeah, son of gaia has placed himself above a federal judge, who believed Paul Bonacci. What makes a person willingly present themselves as the protector and defender of monstrous destroyers of children?

by **Avalon** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 11:45 am

If you just publish it on the web it's going to go nowhere, it would probably be labeled as yet another wacko conspiracy site.  There's zero chance a hardcopy book is going to necessarily get more respect than a website just because of its format. Not regarding this subject matter. I'm just looking at it as a publishing issue in this context. I don't have a link to hand on the Bonnaci disappearance, and I'm going to be out for much of the day possibly, but I do recall the question coming up both here and at DU at some point, very likely at the time of Hunter Thompson's death. Tey a search encompassing Bonnaci and Thompson. As I recall the person who said she was nearest the yearbook in question was still a fair distance from the town where it was. She seemed levelheaded and responsible from her postings, but without a known definitive source, there will naturally be some questions about the bona fides of that information. At any rate, many teachers from that period may have retired, and others may be mindful of confidentiality clauses regarding release of student information. While they might talk to legitimate members of the press, they might be hesitant to talk to some stranger showing up calling themselves an internet researcher (I mean really, wouldn't you?)

by **Avalon** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 11:49 am

The town where the yearbook was has a population of 708, and is way the hell up in the NW corner of PA. So unless you are in the Buffalo/ northeastern Ohio area, it's way out of your way. Actually, Jeff may be closer to it in Toronto than anyone else here. <a href="http://www.city-data.com/city/Conneaut-Lake-Pennsylvania.html">www.city-data.com/city/Co...vania.html</a>

by **sunny** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 11:57 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>but I do recall the question coming up both here and at DU at some point, very likely at the time of Hunter Thompson's death. Tey a search encompassing Bonnaci and Thompson.<hr></blockquote> There was in fact a very long thread dealing with HST's death, but it disappeared during the infamous ez-board suicide.

by **sunny** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 12:13 pm

<a href="http://www.thelawparty.org/FranklinCoverup/FranklinBookGrove.htm">www.thelawparty.org/Frank...kGrove.htm</a> <a href="http://educate-yourself.org/cn/goschgannohuntertrublingtale05apr05.shtml">educate-yourself.org/cn/g...pr05.shtml</a>

by **chiggerbit** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 1:27 pm

Yeah, son of gaia has placed himself above a federal judge, who believed Paul Bonacci. Did Bonacci really win because the judge beleieved Bonacci's version more than he believed King's version? Or did Bonacci win mainly through default, King himself or an attorney representing him not having shown up. I THINK there was only one side of the story presented. Something funny about that hearing: Bonacci identified one of the perpetrators as Barney Frank, and he said that he had the names of all sorts of other perpetrators, but the judge never asked that more evidence on these facts or names be presented. Why?

by **sunny** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 1:38 pm

Judge: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>The defendant King's default has made those allegations true against him.<hr></blockquote> He could have called the allegations unbelievable. chiggerbit: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Something funny about that hearing: Bonacci identified one of the perpetrators as Barney Frank, and he said that he had the names of all sorts of other perpetrators, but the judge never asked that more evidence on these facts or names be presented. Why?<hr></blockquote> Since King defaulted, the only issue at hand was what the damages should be. I am very curious about the Frank allegations-I know he was embroiled in a scandal during the '80's concerning an underage congressional page. You'll have to ask the people of Mass. why this didn't hurt his career as a politician,

by **chiggerbit** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 1:55 pm

I think it's odd that ony Frank's name, from among all the supposedly important people he could have chosen, was put in the record by Bonacci. Frank, openly gay and Democrat. Weren't there supposed to be all sorts of very important people that Bonacci could name, bad people all of them, people who were engaging in sex with children, and many (most?) of them Republican? But only an openly gay Dem was bad enough to have made it into the record. What was it about Barney? Also, was Frank invited by the judge to defend his name? DE, if you ever find the court transcript for that one, post the link, will you?

by **Et in Arcadia ego** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 1:55 pm

A few individuals in this thread have pointed out that the recent re-emergence of these high weirdness stories are attempts to distract the populace. I don't know if that's the case, but certainly it's easy to predict the actions of a group, especially if it's a tightly targeted demographic. Like us. I don't mean us as in RI only, but the noisy, irritated, and most importantly, busy-bodied online conspiracy community in general. I find that to be an acceptable theory. In the spirit of obliging to manipulation, I'd like to play Ball for a minute. One question I have that could possibly be of importance: These pictures that were dropped off..Were they copies, or are they the by-now weathered originals or first generation copies. I think someone needs to ask this woman to VERY SPECIFICALLY describe these photos front and back. edit: I just now finally read Jeff's blog post(I've had a 102 fever of and on the last 3 days after quitting a really lousy job, so I'm really out of touch). I don't think these are meant as distractions. Go Team..Get these bastards and tear them down. ____________________ Some are born to sweet delight, some are born to endless night.Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=etinarcadiaego@rigorousintuition>et in Arcadia ego</A> <IMG HEIGHT=10 WIDTH=10 SRC="http://www.sickle666.com/images/Arcadia.jpg" BORDER=0> at: 9/2/06 12:04 pm

by **nashvillebrook** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:52 pm

et arcadia (sorry to hear about the illness and jobloss -- but godd riddance to crappy jobs... life's too short)... lets not be so egotistic to think that every possible psyop is directed at "us." who are "we" anyway? we have NO POWER. also, this particular story won't garner the blanket coverage the jon benet ramsey story did -- so it's a lousy distraction, if indeed it is one... BUT IF there's a psyop component to this, THEN my guess is it's aimed at "power people." my "rigorous intuition" is that both these stories hit home to people involved in these dealings. so... lets put our thinking caps on. WHO lately has been charged with political prostitution? WHO is in a position to squeal? WHO "need" to be put back in their "cage" so to speak? (i know you know... )

Johnny Gosch update

the mark on arm

Re: the mark on arm

RE

Re: RE

Re: RE

Re: RE

Re: What do this of this

Re: What do this of this

Re: What do this of this

Reminders

Re: Reminders

Re: Reminders

Re: Reminders

Re: Reminders

on distractions and psyops messaging

Who is online