Apollo One, the FBI, and Scott Grissom

On 4 Jun 2004 06:39:13 -0700, (LaDonna Wyss)
wrote:

"Charleston" wrote in message news:cgVvc.16062$lL1.6844@fed1read03...
"OM" OneMaggot@hourly_by mouth until_Mary_of_the_hole in the brain
gang_tosses you into the NASA_research_facility.org wrote:

...And no, there ain't no wimmen's wards in Killfile Hell. They all
get equal sodomy down there with the Maxsons!

Some things never change. Saint JerOMe strikes again.

LOL! Incidently, some of you folks have WAY too much time on your
hands (inventing interesting Internet addresses.) :-)

....I'd tell these two to get a room, but I'm afraid they'll breed.

OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

On 4 Jun 2004 05:44:09 -0700, (LaDonna Wyss)
wrote:

What "simple questions?" My motive is simple: I care. If that is "a
tad wacko", then obviously you have never stopped and really thought
about those people who have given their lives so you can have the
right to come to this message board and say whatever you like.

That's it. I've had enough. This worthless excuse for human life must
go. It's this last statement that was the final straw.

....Most of us were around here when Columbia was lost. Quite a number
of us were on usenet when Challenger was lost. Some of us even recall
when Soyuz 11 *and* 1 were lost, and even remember the breaking news
when Gus, Roger and Ed died. We've seen our share of tragedy in the
efforts to get off this rock we live on and go out to the stars where
our destiny lies. We understand that there *will* be deaths and
accidents along the way, just as there are in any attempt at
exploration and/or colonization. That's the way life and death work.
Period.

....To accuse *any* of us of not showing respect and admiration for
those who were lost in the exploration of space is the basest, most
inflammatory, and ultimately defamating and derogatory accusation
you've made so far. If you had a ****ing clue, you'd realize that
*all* of the regulars here, and probably quite a few lurkers too, had
nothing but admiration and respect for those who've made the attempt
to reach for those stars. That's why we're here, you ignorant twit!
This isn't sci.space.history.sucks or sci.space.NASA.sucks or
sci.space.kill.all.NASA.funding. It's sci.space.HISTORY. We're here to
discuss the history behind space exploration, and make sure that the
truth is made clear. Quite a number of us are professionals in the
fields related to space exploration, and we know *far* more about the
issues relating to the topics at hand than you've demonstrated.
Including what happened on the evening of 1/27/67.

....And that, my dear, worthless excuse for a menstrual cramp, explains
why we have no qualms whatsoever taking your regurgitation of scott
grissom's lies, false accusations, fractured logic and other piles of
steaming hot excrement, and ramming them back down your toothless
swear hole as hard and vehement and painful as we can. Not only as a
lesson to you, but to other trolls, conspiracy theorists, psychotics
and other so-called "truthseekers" that the cost of making bull****
claims is far more than the laughs are worth.

Bottom Line: Go to Hell. Do not pass "go". Do not collect $200. And
take scott & Betty Grissom with you.

OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

"Paul Blay" wrote:.
"LaDonna Wyss" wrote ...
OM om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org
wrote stuff:

OM

Forgive me for asking a personal question, but HOW old are you?

My guess is,

Old enough to know better.
Old in years, if not in wisdom.

He's intelligent and knowledgable, but unfortunately often to chooses to
display
all the charm and politeness of a rabid pit bull while online.

No need to insult rabid pit bulls here. At least they have a legitimate
excuse for their behavior.

--

Daniel
http://www.challengerdisaster.info
Mount Charleston, not Charleston, SC

On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 11:49:44 GMT, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote:

You know, this is an interesting turn of events when it's Daniel presenting
the facts and shooting down a conspiracy theory.

....Which is an advanced troll tactic designed to falsify credibility.
You create a hoze account, troll with it, and then post using your
real account slamming the troll and making yourself look "good" in the
process.

"But gee Bullwinkle, that trick *never* works!"


OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 07:39:11 -0400, "Scott Hedrick"
wrote:


"LaDonna Wyss" wrote in message
. com...
One of the
many entities I have brought THAT evidence to is Congress, and my
Congressman is currently looking into the matter.

Who would that be?

....I concur. Who *is* this Congressman you speak of? I'd like to ask
this person whether he's been approached by you or not.

Note: Refusal to disclose this politician's identity will be automatic
proof that you've been lying through your gapped teeth.

OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 07:30:43 -0400, "Scott Hedrick"
wrote:


"LaDonna Wyss" wrote in message
. com...
but I DO know Scott is not married. :-)

You two should be happy together, then.

....And hopefully their parents listened to Bob Barker and had them
spayed *and* neutered.

OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

On 2004-06-04, LaDonna Wyss wrote:
Andrew Gray wrote in message ...
On 2004-06-03, Jim Davis wrote:
LaDonna Wyss wrote:

The legal standard is beyond a REASONABLE doubt, and
yes it has.

The legal standard also tends to believe in the concept of a judicial
system (at least in most every system I've looked at, and English-style
systems are moderately good... second-class, but good) Have you used
these channels to apply your "legal standard"?

(...)

You claim to have evidence of murder and sabotage. I asked Scott on a
number of occasions why he doesn't present his evidence to the
relevant US or Florida law enforcement authorities. He answered with
evasions or abuse so I'll ask you. Have you presented your evidence
to the relevant US or Florida law enforcement authorities? If so,
what was their reaction? If not, why not?

I don't believe anyone here is qualified to practice law in Florida -
though you can never be sure, .us lawyers do seem to have a few states
under their belt as often as not - but, speaking as non-experts, is it a
crime in that jurisdiction to knowingly withhold evidence or knowledge
of the comission of a crime from the relevant authorities?

[and, if so, in what way is that moderated by the fact that a) it is
possibly a capital crime and b) statutes of limitations may have kicked
in; it would seem conceptually silly to be charged for witholding if the
original crime was dead and buried]

Please see my last reply for the answer to most of your posts. As for
statute of limitations, I'm sure you know there is no statute of
limitations on murder,

For a variety of reasons, I have had little cause to study American
murder law; I *do* know that if varies from place to place in the
specifics, one of which is quite likely things like statues of
limitations.

and while I'm not an expert in military law, I
presume war crimes have no statute either (given our Cold War at the
time, it likely would fall under a war crime.)

This I have great reason to doubt, for a whole host of reasons. (Hint:
even if what you allege is murder of a serving emmber of the forces,
that's a crime but not a war crime unless under highly specific
circumstances...)

(You might, just *might*, be able to make a contrived case for it
falling under the UCMJ - if certain circumstances I don't think you've
alleged were in place. But that wouldn't make it a war crime, and if you
are going to make that allegation I hope you have brought it, and the
name of the believed serving perpetrator, to the attention of the
revelant branch of the armed forces.

And, in all honesty, I doubt you have. I know enough fundamental law to
notice that this seems a bit handwavy, and a quick glance at my trusty
Manual of Military Law says it seems to agree in concept.

--
-Andrew Gray

"LaDonna Wyss" wrote:

snip

First, forgive me but I've been a little busy so I'm not up on
all the Internet jargo. SSM and SSH?

Sci.space is a newsgroup with several supgroups. Scott Grissom posted on
sci.space.history, (SSH) sci.space.moderated (SSM), and sci.space.shuttle
(SSS). He may have unintentionally posted on others.

And, it's very early and the
coffee has not kicked in yet, so while it rings a bell, the Hill
Report?

Scott requested and was granted access to the Apollo 1 command module and
its contents some time ago. Scott found a small piece of mysterious metal
in a plastic bag along with some parts including switch 11 from the Main
Display Console (MDC) 8. He concluded that the metal piece was part of a
sabotage effort involving the Reaction Control System. Following Scott's
inital foray into the public forum via an article in the "Star", IIRC, he
contacted Congressman Sensenbrenner (R) Minnesota. Sensenbrenner then
requested that NASA investigate Scott's allegations regarding the piece of
metal that Scott found. Bill Hill led that investigation and the report is
available in its entirety at my website. Unfortunately Scott did not tell
us about the contents of the Hill report. The Hill report certainly appears
to be legitimate. It is not without minor errors but it conclusively
demonstrates that the piece of metal that Scott alleges was part of some
sabotage effort was actually cut from a small structual support bracket
underneath MDC 8 as part of the original investigation. I have reviewed all
of the MDC 8 info in the original Congressional report except for Test
Project Sheet number 68 (TPS). It is not included in the appendices and I
have been unable to get it from NASA via the FOIA. I live out west, but
next time I am in DC, I intend to look for TPS 68 at the College Park
Maryland National Archives office. It will hopefully answer a couple of
questions that I have about that piece of metal and its examination in 1967.

Finally, I AGREE with you Scott is less-than-forthcoming. At the risk
of sounding like an "apologist" (which I've already been accused of
here), have you ever met Scott or Betty?

No, I have not met either one of them. I have corresponded by e-mail with
Scott on two or three occasions. His e-mails were excellent and
demonstrated an excellent attention to detail, a clear analytical mind, and
genuine concern.

If not, it's really
difficult to explain how they view things.

I have viewed his public comments, the Hill report, news articles, his
website, etc.. I even listened to the audio at his website which includes
some commentary from his mother. I did so objectively. I went to the
trouble of obtaining the Hill report via the FOIA on my own. I draw my
conclusions based on what I have learned in that process. I certainly have
sympathy for both of them.

They are extremely
cynical, understandably so. That family has really been through it
over the years. Ironically, if you ask Scott (and I have on multiple
occasions), he will tell you he is not cynical in the least. It's so
deeply buried he does not even recognize it. He is a study in
contrast; on the one hand he does repeated interviews on this subject,
on the other, he plays his cards very close to the vest. I'd have to
have one of my teammates come on here and explain the psychology
behind this, but he HAS explained it to me on numerous occasions and
given Scott's life history his behavior is completely understandable.
Please try to bear that in mind when/if he returns to this message
board and continues his dialogue. He (and his mother) does not know
who to trust, and they never put more of about a millimeter of
themselves out there at a time because they are always waiting to be
"shot at."

To me it is quite simple. Either Scott "plays his cards" in the court of
public opinion, or he plays a game of whodunnit in which he is the sole
arbiter of the facts. I am not interested in a one-side game--just the
scientific facts that either corroborate or discredit his theory. Until he
is willing to lay his cards on the table, there is nothing further to
discuss. Not that his life history is unimportant, but it does nothing to
help us understand his allegations. I would actually be willing to review
anything that would shed new light on his understanding of what happened.

Frankly, that is why I am on the scene. I've had this same dialogue
with the Inspector General's office. They were confused as to why I
contacted them rather than the Grissom's. The answer is: They are
damaged goods. Perhaps this will help you to understand: Imagine
being a teenager and losing your father not only under terrible
circumstances but under the relentless scrutiny of the world.

I can imagine that.

Add to
that NASA never providing counselling for the families, and add to
THAT the fact that the boys were back in school the day after the
funeral.

It was a different time and there was no grief counselling back then.
People were expected to bury their grief with the dead. A difficult task
indeed when your family member is the victim of a preventable national
tragedy.

If you remember your school days, you can imagine the crap
they were exposed to. Additionally, these boys were raised to be
"tough"; they had no outlet for their emotions whatsoever, not even at
home because (bless her heart) Betty is an extremely tough lady. So,
swallow all of that rage and pain for 37 1/2 years, and you might
start to understand Scott Grissom.
I'm NOT his apologist; it is extremely frustrating to watch him
sometimes. But I have come to understand some of what I see. I hope
this helps you.

Mary Zornio was similarly affected by her encounters with Scott. He
withheld the Hill report from her too. She was deeply hurt to learn of its
existence as it was a real unexpected zinger for her as I recall. If you
have not read the Hill report, I urge you to do so at my little website
listed below.

--

Daniel
http://www.challengerdisaster.info
Mount Charleston, not Charleston, SC

"LaDonna Wyss" wrote:
OM om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org
wrote:

...Wrong monster, Pat. This "LaDonna" bimbo is more along the lines of
one of those worthless little Japanese businessmen that get fried by
Godzilla for standing too close to the windows as he passed by. Read:
Too stupid to live.

Hmmmm. Not only is OM confused about my name, but having never met me
he's decided I am a bimbo. OM, has anyone ever given you the
definition of "ASS u me?"

OM, aka Bob Mosley III, is a self appointed Sergeant at Arms for this little
newsgroup. Ignore the man behind the curtain he is not the Wizard of Oz, he
is a somewhat obsessive compulsive psychotic person mentally trapped in his
mid-teens. I call him Saint JerOMe.

--

Daniel
http://www.challengerdisaster.info
Mount Charleston, not Charleston, SC

"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...
"Charleston" wrote:

Some things never change. Saint JerOMe strikes again.

Dan; Stick to the facts and the discussion. Baiting OM only lowers
you to his level.

I'll try harder.

--

Daniel
http://www.challengerdisaster.info
Mount Charleston, not Charleston, SC