The FBI killed William Colby. Addendum 13
- From: deko_dekov@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: 6 Jun 2006 07:53:04 -0700
The FBI killed William Colby. Addendum 13
The text below is an addendum to the Google postings: Deko Dekov, "The
FBI killed Colby", 2001-2006.
Copyright © 2000-2006 Deko Videv Dekov
All rights reserved. No part of this text may be used or reproduced or
transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical,
including photocopying and recording or stored in any information
storage or retrieval system, without prior written contract with the
author.
Deko Dekov, Ph.D.
Home address:
Zahari Knjazeski 81
6000 Stara Zagora
Bulgaria
http://ddekov.tripod.com
=========================
ADDENDUM 13
June 6, 2006
In 1996, the Attorney General of Maryland accepted a theory concerning
the death of William Colby, a former CIA Director. Here I will
calculate the probability that the theory is true.
On April 28, 1996, Colby was reported missing by neighbors. Neighbors
became suspicious of Colby's whereabouts after noticing his car still
in the driveway late Sunday. Investigators suggest that on April 27,
1996, at midnight Colby left his dinner (clams and white wine) on the
table, left the computer and radio on, left the light on, left the door
unlocked, and went out in his canoe on a rough and windy river without
a lifejacket. Then he had a heart attack, slipped into the water and
drowned. According to his family and friends, William Colby was an
extremely orderly man (a meticulous man). Colby does not go canoeing at
night. He does not go canoeing on a rough and windy river. He always
uses his lifejacket. He does not leave the plates on the table before
to leave the home. He always turns off the radio, computer and the
light before to leave his home. He always locks the door. On April 28,
1996, Colby's canoe was found conveniently waterlogged near the
waterfront part of his home. Colby's body was found on May 6, 1996. It
was found 20 yards from the canoe, after the area had been thoroughly
searched multiple times, including by using scuba divers and
sophisticated radar. The autopsy suggested he drowned as a result of a
heart attack or stroke. But the coroner found no evidence of either. No
blood clots were found.
What is not good in the above theory?
First, in such a story the press reports are maybe the main. The real
picture is not important, it is important what the society will hear.
The text below is from an article by Mr. Christopher Ruddy, NewMax.com,
a Web based newspaper. The quote is long since the topic is important:
"The suspicions began as soon as the initial press reports came out. As
expected, the Associated Press ran the first wire story. Colby "was
missing and presumed drowned" the AP reported. The wire story said he
died as the result of "an apparent boating accident."
Quoting a source close to Mrs. Colby, who was in Texas at the time her
husband disappeared, the AP stated Colby had spoke via phone with his
wife on the day he disappeared. He told her he was not feeling well,
"but was going canoeing anyway."
This would be an important clue pointing to an accidental death, had it
been true. But someone fabricated this story out of whole cloth. A week
later, Colby's wife rebutted the AP report, telling the Washington
Times her husband was well, and made no mention of canoeing.
This initial, false report that relieved obvious suspicion was, for me,
a red flag of a cover-up."
The above text is clear. I would like to add the following. At the time
of the first AP report the known facts are as follows: "On April 28,
1996, Colby was reported missing by neighbors. Neighbors became
suspicious of Colby's whereabouts after noticing his car still in the
driveway late Sunday." But in its first report AP says that Colby
died as the result of "an apparent boating accident." AP reported that
Colby died before the investigation to begin. AP directed the attention
of the society to the canoe. Moreover, in the first report AP presented
to the society the final version. The role of the first report is as
follows. The society must be prepared and must be ready for the final
version. By this way, the society will expect the final version and
will accept it as natural. I would like to note that this is an
excellent example how the media manipulate the society. These arguments
repeat in one-to-one correspondence my arguments and suggestions how
the media should present the "accident" during my talks in the New
Orleans office of the FBI in 1991-1992. Today I am a witness, so that
the Colby's death is unusual in the sense that there is a witness. I
would like to note that the media, CNN and others, reported the case as
follows: "On April 27, 1996, former CIA director William Colby died
from drowning and hypothermia after apparently collapsing from a heart
attack or stroke and falling out of his canoe." (CNN). CNN and all
other media reported that Colby died "falling out of his canoe" as
a fact. The facts are different. Colby disappeared April 27, 1996. His
body was found on May 6, 1996. Hence, the date of Colby's death is
somewhere between these two dates. CNN says that Colby died on April
27, but this is an assumption, there is no evidence confirming this
statement. CNN says Colby died after falling out of his canoe, but this
is an assumption, there is no evidence confirming this statement. No
one saw the "accident". No one saw that Colby went canoeing. There
is no evidence that Colby used his canoe.
In order to calculate the probability that the theory accepted by the
Attorney General of Maryland is true, first we define:
The probability that Colby will go canoeing at midnight. This
probability should be defined to be zero. We define
P(Colby went canoeing at midnight) = 0.1.
The probability that Colby will go canoeing without a lifejacket. We
define
P(Colby went canoeing without a lifejacket) = 0.1.
The probability that Colby will leave plates on the table. We define
P(Colby went canoeing and left plates on the table) = 0.1.
The probability that Colby will leave radio, computer and light on. We
define
P(Colby went canoeing and left radio, computer and light on) = 0.1.
The probability that Colby will leave the door unlocked. We define
P(Colby went canoeing and left the door unlocked) = 0.1.
Hence, the probability that Colby went canoeing = (0.1) (0.1) (0.1)
(0.1) (0.1)=0.00001.
In order to find the desired probability, we define
The probability that AP will give a false initial report. (AP misquoted
the Colby's wife). We define
P(AP gives initial false report) = 0.1.
The probability that Colby's body will be found at a place where it
cannot be found. We define
P(Colby's body was found at a place where it cannot be found) = 0.1.
The probability that Colby collapsed from a heart attack or stroke, but
the coroner found no evidence of either. We define
P(Colby collapsed from a heart attack or stroke, but the coroner found
no evidence of either)=0.1.
Hence, the probability that the theory accepted by the Attorney General
of Maryland is true = 0.00000001.
That is, the probability that the theory accepted by the Attorney
General of Maryland is true, is equal to one over one hundred millions.
Consider now the following picture. On April 27, 1996, at midnight, a
few persons used the bell to arrange Colby to open the door. Then they
carried him off. They did not go inside the home because of obvious
reasons. (The investigator's tests, and so on.). Hence, all in the
home stays untouched. Why in the midnight? Obviously because the
probability someone to see them is smaller. There is no contradiction
in this picture. The picture corresponds to the known facts. The same
persons put the Coby's canoe near his home. A few days later these
persons put the Colby's body near the home at a place where the body
could be easy found. Again, no contradiction - the body was not at this
place earlier, but now it is.
The natural question is: Who are these persons? In order to answer this
question, first we must answer the question: Who can do this? Who has
the resource to do this? Who can arrange the AP to publish a false
report? Who can arrange the Attorney General of Maryland to accept the
"accident" story as true? Who can arrange the investigators to
consider only one version - an accident, and to close immediately the
investigation? Who can arrange Colby to be carried off? Who can give
back his body, in a few days? The answer: The FBI. The FBI is the only
office which has the resource to do this. In 1996, the FBI means Louis
Freeh, the Director of the FBI.
I would like to say why Colby's body was found eight days later.
First, because according to the plan the body has to be found seven to
ten days later. Why not earlier? Because the FBI, according to the
plan, needed a few days to inquire Colby. Why no later on? In a real
accident most probably the body will not be found and if it is found,
most probably it will not be near the home. But if the body is not
found, the society will begin to ask questions. Hence, the body must be
found on time. In order the body to be found it must be put at a place
where it could be easy found, without delay. This is the explanation
why the canoe and the body were found near the Colby's home. (By the
way, Mr. Christopher Ruddy was right to say, NewMax.com: "The canoe
was found conveniently waterlogged near the waterfront part of his
home. How did it become lodged and waterlogged on the riverbank? Had
Colby been stricken by a heart attack and fallen off, as has been
speculated, the canoe should have completely capsized or safely righted
itself, not become waterlogged and moved by the current to the Colby
waterfront.") These arguments repeat in one-to-one correspondence my
arguments and suggestions during my talks in the New Orleans office of
the FBI in 1991-1992. I recommended the body to be found seven to ten
days later. In 1991-1992, the FBI accepted these arguments. Today I am
a witness. Today I would like to explain the Colby's autopsy.
According to the plan, the FBI has to use injections to force Colby to
say the truth. In such a case, the autopsy will discover that Colby did
not die because of a drowning, but it will not discover evidences for a
heart attack. The solution of the problem is as follows: The FBI has to
arrange the appropriate autopsy. According to the plan, the autopsy had
to say that Colby died because of a drowning and had not say anything
about a heart attack. A heart attack means injections, and injections
means the FBI, since the FBI is the only office which can do this.
Obviously, Mr.Louis Freeh could not arrange completely the autopsy. I
would like to note that according to the plan, the FBI agents had to
carry Colby off during the day, preferably at noon, or between 0 and 3
PM. Mr.Louis Freeh could not arrange this. Obviously, the reason is
that neighbors could see something during the day. According to the
plan the FBI agents had to carry Colby off when he walks outside his
home, preferably near his home. Mr.Louis Freeh could not arrange this.
Clearly, the FBI agents could not go into the Colby's home. Today
there are methods which allow any person who visits the home to be
identified, and the FBI agents know this very well. Concerning the AP
false report, I can only say that I expect that the false report is a
personal contribution of Mr.Louis Freeh.
Clearly, Mr.Louis Freeh did one more mistake. He left a witness. Why
the FBI used exactly this plan and why the FBI left a witness? This is
a long story, maybe later I will explain the story. Now I will say that
it is not a surprise that the witness today is outside the USA. Witness
inside the USA is something difficult. Who will protect him/her? The
FBI?
Today it is clear why the FBI and the CIA presented a false story about
Aldrich Ames. The Ames story and the Colby story are closely related.
In fact, they are the same story. If the society knows the Ames story,
the Colby story will follow. In 1991-1992 the FBI agents in the New
Orleans office of the FBI told me that Colby arranged Ames to take the
position of Chairman of the Russian department of the CIA, and that
Colby gave instructions to Ames how to pass the polygraph test. So that
I recommended the FBI to arrange the accident in order to protect the
reputation of the CIA. Clearly, if the CIA Director contributed to the
Russians, as the FBI stated, a public trial could destroy the
reputation of the CIA. Mr.Louis Freeh could say more.
The story is in moving. The main parts of the story are in the future -
e.g., in the future is the moment in which the American society will
accept the story.
.
- Prev by Date: The FBI killed William Colby. Addendum 13
- Next by Date: Re: Arctic 74 degrees: Oops, already happened!
- Previous by thread: The FBI killed William Colby. Addendum 13
- Next by thread: Re: Somali Muslims use liberal anti-war rhetoric
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
