Questions to stir debate

I assume we all know the basics of the crime. The information we can rely upon is or should be published on Other important informational sites are listed in The Crime links and other link pages distributed throughout the site. Many of the terms used below are defined on the site. Use it. Improve it.

The following is a list of questions and my responses. The questions are those that help to explain why so many theories may not be valid. I hope the investigators can offer their answers/comments.

Question 1. What COINTELPRO is and what it isn’t: Who was responsible for it on the Northcoast in 1980-90? Is it related to the Bari bombing? Why or why not?

The standard narrative sees all bad things as connected. Since there was a COINTELPRO-type program at work on the Northcoast it is regarded as a build up to the bomb. The Wise Use movement and the PRCIA ran the COINTELPRO, not the FBI. The narrative says the threats were death threats. In a case involving AoG, cited below, Angel Dillard who published a similar threat to another victim, not Bari, was acquitted of publishing a death threat. Her letter insinuated someone might bomb the threat victim’s car. The limits of free speech were not crossed by issuing this type of threat, like it or not.

COINTELPRO and its privately produced equivalents are not outside the law. Bombings are outside the law unless the bombing secures the state against its enemies including terrorists. Several investigators believe that the so-called Executive Action exists and is the generator of such bombings among other assassinations. In this analyses the perpetrator would be held faultless, if identified.

Question 2. FoFo: did it take a bombing for the industry to win?

Relying on an early poll taken in the spring of ’90, people who supported FoFo and Big Green saw an easy win ahead. As we know now, what we didn’t consider then was the effect of targeted mailings, a specialty of Gottlieb. The polls showed that no single negative campaign would defeat FoFo. The problem was that the sum of several of the negatives would be enough. Anti-terrorism was not one of those constituencies.

The biggest factor was the industry’s initiative on the same ballot launched to counter FoFo. This is an old and valued trick to defeat a popular initiative. The combination of the counter initiative and the targeted mailings defeated both initiatives.

What killed Measure A, the Humboldt County anti-chlorine measure, was the terrorist accusations and thus the bombing. 

Question 3. Assume the letter is misdirection towards Mendocino County. But from where was our attention directed?

The assumed misdirection from the letter forced investigators to focus on Mendocino County, as some say. I agree, if I made the assumption it was misdirection, it did misdirect many. For the moment, assume there is misdirection in the letter.

The letter mentioned a Ukiah demo in 1988 and the placement of two bombs in Cloverdale and Willits. It mentioned the location the bomb was placed in the car and yet the bomb did not explode as designed at the anticipated time. The bomb exploded in Oakland.

The believers said the misdirection was to force attention from Oakland to save the FBI from suspicion. At the same tme it is said that the bombng was meant to be in Oakland to increase negative coverage. Since there is no fact cited to allege misdirection, the interpretation of the assumption is itself a matter of speculation. The widely-held belief was the misdirection was to force the focus north. What if the opposite was true? The focus may just as factually have shifted south from Humboldt County and with more reason. To claim to bomb in Mendocino and to bomb in Oakland both direct attention south.

Nick may be right that Bari was chosen but for a different reason than he hypothesizes. The truth may have less to do with Hill and Knowlton and forestry and more to do with Clorox and Ketchum and pulp mills.

Ex-CIA Herbert Gordon and Clorox may have brought CIA’s Vincent Cannistraro in during his last months as a federal employee. He was the US’s prime death squad organizer in Central America and a Dominionist, subjects which McLaughlin discusses. He is also a publicly sworn enemy of environmentalists who he describes as a threat to all humanity. The June election in Humboldt County had a ballot measure against the toxic emissions generated by the pulp and paper mills near Eureka. After the November election Cannistraro retired from CIA and Gordon from Ketchum. Did they join forces in a new contractor firm?

Ex-CIA DCI and death squad supporter GHW Bush was president in 1990. He lived in the Houstonian with Ex-Texas Governor and Maxxam Director John B Connally and across the hall from Maxxam’s controlling shareholder Charles Hurwitz whose wholly owned subsidiary UFG’s savings association USAT owned the building. If this means to you what it means to me, there is every reason to consider the role of the CIA in assassinations and specifically Bari because of the multiple coincidences.

But the timing worked better against the Humboldt Country measure limiting Chlorine than the forestry initiatives.

Question 4. The Contras expanded: How does the CIA have a role?

To suggest Bari was targeted for a political reason is an accusation of terrorism. If the state does not condemn the terrorism, then it is, de facto, an act of state terrorism. If it is an act of state terrorism, then all other actors are absolved. This is what we saw in the Federal court in Houston when the prosecutor apologized to a defendant that he was sorry to have to drag him into court for stealing $1.8 Billion. It pays to have colluded in state terrorism as the defendant may have, not the bombing but the theft of public property to support the wars in Central America. The state will always forgive those who help.

If we go with Ketchum to Gordon, we might go anywhere afterwards. Cannistraro would do and so would unidentified agents associated with GOC who were based in Eureka. Or a ‘contractor’ working hard to pad his bank account.

When Cannistraro left the CIA he was involved in teaching the Russians, no longer communists, what capitalism was. No notes of those meetings exist. Safe to assume Capitalism includes ‘contractors’ working hard for the PRCIA to protect Corporations.

Question 5. The letter: The biggest question is not why the bomb but why the letter and how the demo was imported into the letter and why the religion, dominionism, was chosen? Why would anyone of the suspects send this particular, peculiar letter?

Call it misdirection and note the letter pointed directly towards the industry and its wise use movement, one is to conclude that it could not have come from the industry, including their contractors and the PRCIA with or without the GOC.

Likewise, it pointed to the demo and the anti-choice people so it could not have come from them.

The FBI had a blame Bari momentum from the first bomb which pointed to EF!, more or less. The letter confused their certainty of her guilt so it was not from the FBI.

The details of the letter make misdirection less likely. As Nick Wilson says why would anyone try to kill her for attending one demo? Unless they were vengeful as the Lord’s Avenger letter implies.

She attended, she insulted them. They remembered. She rose in the public eye, they were newly offended. They grew angry. Then they either built the bombs or found someone who could such as a friend of Angel Dillard. She is quoted as saying to a doctor, “[They know] your habits and routines. They know where you shop, who your friends are, what you drive, where you live. You will be checking under your car every day—because maybe today is the day someone places an explosive under it.” See

Question 6: What if there had been no letter what would people have thought?

Whatever the FBI and news media told them to think, just as it turned out.

The letter has a Dominionist’s ideology of misogyny, ‘pro-life’ fundamentalism, wise use politics. Therefore, the letter points to those who support Dominionism, which include the CIA, GOC, FBI, FBI-OPD, Wise Use. The Wise Use politics points towards the Industry, Wise Use and the PRCIA. The fundamentalism and misogyny points to the AoG among others.

Taken as 100% misdirection it points towards no one. The voices are fake, the message a lie. So why write it? Why write it that way?

Question 7: Was the timing of the letter a matter of waiting nearby to perhaps be the first one to hear she had died?

Somewhere in our files or fleshy memories is a key association made in the letter. The letter was completed and mailed after the public was told she would live. I do not know that date nor the way the announcement was made. I assume it was made from the steps of the hospital or other vigil site because it was news everyone near her wanted to hear.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *