Time: Sun Dec 14 12:31:04 1997
To: <ignition-point@majordomo.pobox.com>
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: The Facts the FBI does not want you to Know 

I did!  I tah!!  

I tot I tah a pooddy tat!!

Didn't I?  I didn't?

Imagine that, then!

At 10:45 AM 12/14/97 -0800, you wrote:
>           NTSB Claims Witnesses Didn't See What They Saw
>                    Copyright c 1997, The WINDS.
>                        ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
>                      http://www.TheWinds.org
>    After an exhaustive examination, officials investigating TWA 
>Flight 800 say they still don't know what caused the crash. The 
>National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and the FBI have spent 
>more than $40 million in the "most extensive examination of an 
>aircraft accident in history", and the best official guess of the 
>cause is the explosion of the center wing fuel tank from a spark of 
>unknown origin, but no final conclusion has been announced.
>    The events, as viewed by independent investigators, are not
>conclusive as to the exact source of the initial explosions that hit 
>the plane, but they are very definite that it was not the center wing 
>fuel tank that initiated the catastrophic explosion that destroyed 
>the aircraft, killing all 230 people aboard.
>    Although the government's investigative agencies say they don't
>know the exact cause, analysts at the Central Intelligence Agency 
>have concluded that a missile was not the cause of the fiery crash of 
>the jetliner. "There is no way a missile brought down the plane,"CIA 
>spokeswoman Carolyn Osborn said. "Based on analysis using 244 
>eyewitness reports, radar data, infrared data, and cockpit recorder 
>information, CIA analysts have determined that the eyewitness 
>sightings thought to be that of a missile actually took place after 
>the first of several explosions on the aircraft.... What these 
>eyewitnesses saw was, in fact, the burning 747 [jet] in various 
>stages of crippled flight, not a missile," Osborn said. (The 
>Press-Enterprise 9-25-97).
>    The facts as revealed by independent investigators, however, show
>an entirely different picture with a massive amount of supporting 
>evidence that runs counter to almost every detail of the official 
>conclusions. The WINDS recently talked with William Donaldson, a 
>retired navy commander, who has done extensive research into the 
>cause of the crash. He is a graduate of Crash Analysis from the 
>NavyPost Graduate School, with a twenty-five year career in the navy.
>    Commander Donaldson's research has led to a congressional
>investigation that is still under way into the circumstances and 
>causes that led to the crash. He said that he has "gotten access to 
>inside information which is disheartening", showing the duplicity of 
>the agencies responsible for the inquiry. "There are several 
>individuals internal to the investigation that don't like the way 
>this has gone", CDR Donaldson said. "I've gotten documents over the 
>months, and one of those documents shows the debris field. When it is 
>graphically displayed, it immediately refutes the entire scenario 
>that the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is pushing with 
>the way [they claim]the aircraft broke up.
>    This former navy crash investigator said normally the debris field
>evidence is a critically important facet in determining the sequence 
>and cause of a crash. He said, "this debris field shows that there 
>wasa tremendous hit made on the left side of the plane. The nose 
>itself was broken into four major groups of pieces." Donaldson went 
>on to describe how the plane was impacted. "Frame 240 which is 
>located approximately twenty feet back from the nose of the aircraft, 
>was dislocated more than 2,000 feet to the right of the extended 
>track of the aircraft in the debris field. In order to do that, you 
>must have a tremendous push operating perpendicular to the flight 
>path of the aircraft."
>    Donaldson said, "even worse than that, when you go a little
>further back along that nose section, frame 840 to 860, forward lower 
>left cargo compartment, the left side and center of that cargo 
>compartmentwas dislocated 3,000 feet to the right of the track of the 
>aircraft. You would expect normal dispersal of heavy parts probably 
>up to several hundred feet left to right of center line if they were 
>just falling off the aircraft. But that's not what happened. You have 
>maybe 200 feet to the left, but you have a 3,000 foot dispersal to 
>the right which means that either a freight train hit that plane up 
>there at 13,000 feet, or a missile, or some high energy object did."
>                     THE HIGH ENERGY OBJECT
>    One of the leading eyewitnesses to the events that led up to the
>explosion and subsequent fiery crash of TWA Flight 800 is Major 
>Fredrick C. Meyer. He and co-pilot Chris Bauer were with the 
>AirNational Guard and were practicing helicopter landings at the time 
>the plane came down.
>    Meyer, an attorney from New York, spoke with The WINDS about his
>observations and his eyewitness account of three separate explosions 
>involved in the crash of the TWA jet. While coming in for a landing 
>"I leaned forward in the seat to look up andlook forward and began to 
>scan the sky more intently than I would normally" because a small 
>plane had also been cleared for landing on the same runway. "At that 
>moment, I saw a streak of light moving to my left. It was very 
>curious because it looked like the streak that you would see from a 
>shooting star at night, except that it was broad daylight and the 
>streak was red-orange in color. It lasted three to five seconds. 
>There was an interval in which I saw nothing and then on the same 
>trajectory, further to the left, I saw a high velocity explosion 
>which to me looked like ordnance, a war-head exploding. Whether it 
>was a naval rifle, or a missile, or even a bomb, I couldn't 
>distinguish. Then a second high velocity explosion took place; it was 
>brilliant white light. The third event was the fuel explosion" [from 
>the jet].
>    What followed, "is a moment in time that I remember. We were
>headed toward the lake of fire in the ocean [the burning aircraft] 
>and I looked up and saw debris still falling out of the sky, and I 
>told my co-pilot to 'slow it down, let the stuff fall' so that we 
>wouldnot fly under the falling debris." They were the first to arrive 
>at the scene, but found no survivors in the water.
>    When asked whether he had formulated any sort of conclusion from
>what he'd seen, Meyer said, "I stay away from it because I really 
>believe that I had a unique view and that it was my responsibility to 
>be as precise and as accurate and to make no assumptions. I really 
>believed that the NTSB would probably do video tapes of an interview 
>and be very interested in having a very accurate, very carefully 
>explained, but not analyzed eyewitness report to help them determine 
>thecause. I was wrong....That is what leads me to suspect, not to 
>know, but to suspect that they knew before they asked the first 
>question, what brought that aircraft down, because they did not seem 
>to be interested in anything they heard [from eyewitness accounts]."
>    As a military pilot, Meyer has twenty-five years experience with
>aircraft and he sees many fatal flaws in the NTSB, FBI and CIA's 
>official scenario. "Let's focus on the aircraft accident and a 
>rational determination as to what caused it", he said, "and the 
>[probabilities of an] explosion of a fuel cell with slosh quantities 
>of Jet A. It is an extraordinarily safe fuel. And all this talk about 
>wires [causing a spark to ignite the fuel tank]--there are no wires 
>in the center fuel tank. The electric [fuel pump] motors and the 
>wires areon the outside of the fuel tank. They are bolted to the 
>outside wall of the tank, the rotating shaft of the pump penetrates a 
>gland seal into the fuel tank, the impeller and the housing are 
>inside, but there are no wires in the fuel tank.
>    "So then, the NTSB comes out and says 'there was an arc in the
>wiring.' We're talking about a 12-volt system here, measured in 
>milliamps, and they say 'an arc between two 12-volt wires'. There are 
>no wires! Tell me that the NTSB doesn't know that?
>    Could an overheated air conditioner be the cause of the aircraft
>explosion? Major Meyer unequivocally says "no". "The circuit breakers 
>are set at 130 degrees Fahrenheit [temperature at JFK airport was in 
>the 70's]. People came to me who fly the 747and said 'if an 
>overheated air conditioner could set off the center fuel tank, I 
>wouldn't be talking to you. Because I've set on the tarmac at Riyad 
>[Saudi Arabia] in 130 degree ambient temperature, popping those 
>circuit breakers back on and keeping those air conditioners running 
>so that I wouldn't fry in the cockpit while I was waiting for 
>take-off clearance, with an empty center fuel tank! I am one of 
>five-hundred pilots who have done that since the 747 came out, and 
>none of them have ever exploded.' It doesn't happen. The [NTSB] 
>stories are scientifically impossible."
>                      HOW SAFE IS THE 747?
>    According to Commander Donaldson, "jet airliners built by 
>the American aerospace industry have logged at least 150 thousand 
>years of flight time. Not oncehas there ever been a spontaneous fuel 
>tank explosion on any fuel tank while airborne." (Letter to NTSB 
>    Consider that until TWA-800's purported midair fuel tank
>explosion, the only Boeing 747's that came out of the air in pieces 
>were blown out. In 1978 an Air India jetliner was downed, in 1983 
>KAL-007, in 1985 another Air India plane, in 1988 Pan Am-103 was 
>blown out of the air. All of these downings were due either to 
>bombings or missile hits.
>    In a letter to NTSB director James Hall, Commander Donaldson said,
>"no aircraft loaded with Jet A-1 [fuel] has ever had an internally 
>ignited fuel tank explosion due to latent fuel vapor in the ullage 
>[tank]. NTSB Safety Recommendations make the point clearly that there 
>has never been a fuel tank explosion in an airborne commercial jet 
>aircraft that was not ignited by an external source (hundreds of 
>millions of flight hours in all types of jet carriers)."
>                          THE EYEWITNESSES
>    The FBI has interviewed 244 eyewitnesses and there are many more
>who were not interviewed, according to investigators. This was not an 
>obscure event. It had high visibility over a wide area by hundreds of 
>individuals, many of whom are very credible.
>     Witnesses were very clear in what they saw. 
>     Those witnessing the events leading up to the explosion were
>     located along eleven nautical miles of shore- line. Some were in
>     aircraft, some in boats, some on the beach, some within their
>     homes. The nearest eyewitness reached the crash site in three
>     minutes by air. The eyewitnesses give similar descriptions of the
>     events they saw. 
>    "Several eyewitness like Mr. Roland Penney and his group of eight
>not only saw a missile-like object rise up from the haze at sea, 
>leaving a thin gray smoke trail. They distinctly describe abright 
>white flash, 'like a flashbulb' when it hit TWA Flight 800." 
>(Donaldson letter 11-14-97).
>    "We know what we saw. We weren't drunk," said [Jim Naples]. "I
>looked up and my immediate response was, I never saw an alert flare 
>like that. It was projecting upward with a stream of smoke behind 
>it." On July 17, 1996, Jim Naples was out on his boat with his wife 
>and two daughters. Hundreds of other coastal people were out on the 
>water too, and scores of them saw what Jim Naples saw in the southern 
>sky: a white jet trail streaking up from near the horizon andarcing 
>through the sky for many seconds and later a fireball." (New York 
>Observer November 24, 1997).
>    "It would be one thing if just three or four or five people saw
>it," said Anita Langdon at her boat motor shop at the Senix Marina. 
>"But fifty or sixty people saw it in Center Moriches, well respected 
>citizens, and they know what they saw." ibid.
>    "A commercial fisherman was out there south of Long Island putting
>along. He sees on his left a missile [like object] rise over the 
>horizon, a reddish-orange flare. He watches it as it goes overhead 
>and he saw it smack into the plane. He didn't see TWA Flight 800 
>until the missile [like object] hit it and then he said, 'my God! It 
>just hit a plane!' And then he watched Flight 800 as all the guts 
>came streaming out of it and down it goes." (James Sanders- Reagan 
>Radio Broadcast, Oct. 16, 1997).
>    Senator Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, chairman of the Judiciary Committee,
>was interviewed by CNN two days after the disaster. His conclusions 
>come after 'various conversations' with government officials.
>    "'I won't go so far as to say it was terrorism, but there was
>sabotage here,' Hatch said. 'We're looking at a criminal act. We're 
>looking at somebody who either put a bomb on it or shot a missile, a 
>surface-to-air missile.'" Hatch said, 'the National Transportation 
>Safety Board should now turn the investigation over to the FBI 
>because the crash was not related to an aviation problem.... It's 
>very --almost 100 percent unlikely that this was a mechanical 
>failure,' Hatch said. 'It looks pretty darn conclusive that it was an 
>explosion caused either internally or externally by a criminal act.' 
>Investigators told CNN that there is no indication that the Boeing 
>747 suffered a catastrophic mechanical failure." (CNN 7-19-96).
>    The public hearing conducted by the NTSB in Baltimore seems to be
>calculated to bring resolution to this major air disaster which still 
>has many unanswered questions. Yet, itseems doomed to failure from 
>the outset. Bringing closure to this tragedy will require honest and 
>candid evaluation of all the evidence, including what the hundreds of 
>eyewitnesses have seen. It will require more than pleadings from 
>James Kallstrom saying, "all I can do is try to impress upon them 
>[the family members] that we're telling the truth."
>    As with any accident, eyewitness testimony is crucial in
>establishing what actually happened and in what sequence. In a court 
>of law eyewitness testimony is essential in achieving accuracy and 
>justice and is indispensable before issuing a verdict. However, in 
>the NTSB's public hearing involving TWA 800, this critical evidence 
>will not be permitted. "Responding to pressure from the FBI on the 
>eve of the first public forum on the explosion of TWA Flight 800, the 
>National Transportation Safety Board has canceled the discussion of 
>eyewitness accounts and explosive residue at the five-day hearing 
>into the cause of thecrash." (Newsday , 12-8-97).
>    Requesting that the NTSB avoid issues touching on the possibility
>that a missile or bomb brought down Flight 800, James Kallstrom said 
>his agency found broad public acceptance after the FBI saidit 
>discovered no evidence of a missile or bomb. He indicated that the 
>agency has concerns that reconsidering the issue could create new 
>controversy. James Hall, NTSB chairman, agreed, stating that 
>"although it would normally be a part of NTSB practice to evaluate 
>eyewitness observations of a particular accident, we have agreed not 
>to do so."
>    Officials conducting the week-long public hearing showed little
>tolerance toward the suggestion of alternative causes of this 
>tragedy. When a reporter from Worker's World called for an 
>independent investigation, he was quickly removed from the hearing 
>while shouting, "we have to know the truth!" He was implicating the 
>navy as a possible source of a missile which downed the plane.
>    According to a November 29 AP report, French families of TWA
>Flight 800's victims said they can no longer trust U.S. 
>investigators. They accuse American officials of "dragging their 
>feet" in investigating the crash.
>    Michel Ney who represents the families said that the FBI and NTSB
>had refused to hand over important documents to a French judge 
>studying the crash. Ney said investigating magistrate Chantal Perdrix 
>had requested copies of autopsy reports of French victims, results of 
>clothing analysis, chemical and metal tests conducted by U.S. 
>authorities, a copy of the cockpit voice recorder,and Boeing and TWA 
>maintenance reports.
>    Ney said, "The judge received practically nothing, just a few
>innocuous documents already made public." He indicated the U.S. 
>Justice Department wanted Judge Perdrix to promise to keep the 
>information confidential...and that she declined. "This is 
>unacceptable. We will do everything possible to find out the truth," 
>Ney said.
>                              THE DARK SIDE
>    A recent airing of TV's Hard Copy discussed the mysterious
>disappearance of Jeremy Crocker, a "renowned engineer" who had become 
>obsessed with the TWA explosion. Crocker, a Palm Springs resident, 
>had become convinced, after much research, that the government was 
>hiding the truth and he was determined to find it.
>    Crocker's son Jonathan said his father was "somewhat of a
>crusader. He wanted people to be accountable and honest and he felt 
>that wasn't happening. He was willing to dig for evidence that might 
>point fingers."
>    Crocker's work had come to the notice of Peter Ford, a Los Angeles
>radio host. Just five days before his disappearance, he had been a 
>guest on Ford's program where the subject was TWA 800. Ford indicated 
>that Jeremy Crocker was "absolutely convinced that there was a lot of 
>foul play involved" in the downing of TWA Flight800.
>    Continuing his research on December 9, 1996, Crocker traveled to
>Los Angeles where he put some of his current findings into an 
>envelope and mailed them to Ford. That was the last anyone has heard 
>from Jeremy Crocker. "The dark side theory would be that hewas taken 
>out. That someone, somewhere felt he was a threat", said Ford. The 
>Crocker family is still searching, but police have never found a 
>trace. They say he simply vanished. (Hard Copy, November 27,1997).
>    James Sanders has been an independent investigator with an
>interest in Flight 800 from the beginning. As a retired California 
>police officer, he began looking into the possibility of a missile 
>being the primary cause of the destruction of the plane. Sanders, 
>like Commander Donaldson, calls attention to the debris field.He says 
>it shows that the center fuel tank did not explode until eight 
>seconds after the break-up of the plane began, indicating the fuel 
>tank could not have been the initiator of the explosion. "Every 
>anomaly they have works with a missile but doesn't work with the 
>center fuel tank being the primary [cause]." (Reagan Radio).
>    Sanders, who chronicled the information in his book,The Downing of
>TWA FLIGHT 800, became the object of a Justice Department probe 
>inquiring into his telephone records. At issue is a small fragment of 
>the plane's seat fabric containing red residue which Sanders says 
>independent analysis proved was missile fuel. The seat fabric 
>originated from the investigative site at Calverton hanger in New 
>    Sanders says the fabric showed up in his mailbox from an
>undisclosed source. In August, however, Janet Reno issued a written 
>subpoena to Atlantic Bell for his telephone records. The FBI, in 
>collusion with the Justice Department, has been investigating how 
>Sanders obtained the fabric since his material was published earlier 
>this year.
>    Sanders and his wife Elizabeth, a longtime TWA flight attendant
>trainer, have now been charged with stealing "parts of a civil 
>aircraft involved in an accident," a felony, according to a criminal 
>complaint filed in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn. Terrell Stacey, a 
>senior 747 pilot who has been with TWA for thirty-one years, is 
>charged with stealing government property, a misdemeanor offense for 
>supplying the scrap of fabric to Sanders.
>    Jeff Schlanger, attorney for Sanders says, "the FBI has spent
>millions creating a videotape and holding a lengthy press conference 
>to make sure their theory got the public's attention. Why are 
>theymoving to arrest a man who holds that up to a little scrutiny?"
>    Sanders' claim that a missile was the primary cause for the
>downing of the plane and that the red residue on certain of the 
>aircraft's seats is consistent with missile fuel, would at least 
>assign a sourcefor the elusive spark which the NTSB has thus far been 
>unable to place.
>    In an interview with CNN, Sanders said he was being "harried by
>the FBI for raising uncomfortable questions about the investigation. 
>Actually, what the feds want to do isget even. They are livid."
>    Supporting Sanders' claim Mr. Kallstrom fumed, "this criminal
>investigation is far from over. These defendants are charged with not 
>only committing a serious crime, they have also increased the pain 
>already inflicted on the victims' families. [Of course, this is not 
>mentioning the many families working for TWA who are made to believe 
>they have some responsibility in the disaster]. This investigation 
>will continue in an effort to identify any other individuals who may 
>have played a role in this scheme." The maximum sentence possible for 
>Sanders is ten years imprisonment.
>    Schlanger said, "every action that he [Sanders] has taken in his
>investigative reporting on the crash of Flight 800 was taken pursuant 
>to moral and journalistic imperatives protected by the First 
>Amendment's guarantee of a free press." (Newsday 12-10-97).
>    In a move that may reveal the true implications of the red
>residue, James Kallstrom contacted the NTSB asking that it not 
>discuss the residue during its public hearings.
>    Outlining his concerns, Commander William Donaldson wrote a series
>of letters to NTSB chairman James Hall expressing his outrage at the 
>way his agency was conducting the investigation. "I have been closely 
>following the NTSB's position, your statements and congressional 
>testimony concerning the TWA Flight 800 mishap with with 
>ever-increasing alarm.
>    "It is apparent to me and other professionals within the aircraft
>manufacturing, airline, and petroleum industries that [regarding] TWA 
>800 your agency has been conducting a campaign in the media to 
>misinform the public and willfully assign the leastprobable cause to 
>this mishap. Your agency has been depicting the volatility of the 
>fuel as if it were nitrobenzene.
>    "Because of your agency's successful permutation of facts
>essential to this investigation, the incredible crash scenario you 
>have tabled apparently designed to subvert eyewitness testimony, and 
>your stonewalling of simple congressional questions, I have received 
>funding to conduct an independent investigation.
>    "Mr. Hall's logic would have us believe that a pedestrian killed
>by a hit-and-run driver in front of thirty eyewitnesses died from 
>unexplained natural causes. He would discount all eyewitnesses simply 
>because the victim's body showed no evidence of tire marks." 
>(Donaldson letter to Hall).
>    Another man with twenty-five years experience flying military
>aircraft is Major Frederick C. Meyer with the Air National Guard. He 
>was an eyewitness to the object streaking across the sky followed by 
>two aerial explosions into Flight 800. Meyer and others have been 
>incensed with the "show" the official investigation has been 
>producing. "Every time I move into a circle of pilots or mechanics or 
>anyonein the circles of private or commercial aviation, they all say 
>the same thing, 'it's such a bloody lie, it's ridiculous; we know 
>they're lying.' Meyer stated further that "I don't believe anything 
>of this magnitude has remained as guarded as it has without direct 
>intervention from the White House."
>    Well over one year after the crash, more evidence was revealed
>that focuses hard questions on the official version of the cause. In 
>September, 1997 it was disclosed that the nose gear doors on the 
>plane were blown inward. The doors are located well forward of the 
>center fuel tank and would not have been impacted by that explosion. 
>It was also determined that they were one of the first things to come 
>off the plane in flight. Exterior doors blown inward are strong 
>evidence of an outside event impacting the plane.
>    One crash investigator told CNN that "the discovery keeps open the
>question of whether the fuel tank explosion was the primary or 
>secondary event in the in-flight breakup of TWA Flight 800."(CNN 
>9-5-97). Officials are said to be "mystified" about the significance 
>of damage to the doors, "but Shelly Hazle, an NTSB spokeswoman, 
>downplayed the significance, emphasizing that investigators will have 
>to see how this newly discovered evidence fits into their theory of 
>how the plane blew up." (ibid.)
>    CDR Donaldson said that "military warheads cause hundreds of P.S.I
>overpressure, blowing in hatch doors, shearing off antenna.... The 
>hinges of the failed nose gear doors were pushed inward and came off 
>the plane very early. This is solid physical evidence, "one of the 
>smoking guns." Why do we hear about this only now, fourteen months 
>after the fact?"
>    When asked by the Press-Enterprise about the eyewitnesses, CIA
>spokeswoman Carolyn Osborn said, "our technical analysis concludes 
>that what these eyewitnesses saw was, in fact, the burning [Boeing] 
>747 in various stages of crippledflight, not a missile."
>    "I know what I saw. I saw an ordnance explosion", declared
>Frederick Meyer, the Air National Guard helicopter pilot. "The 
>explosion of the fuel was not the initiator of the event, it was one 
>of the results." Meyer said he contacted the FBI the second dayafter 
>the crash, but they did not ask any questions. He also spoke with 
>NTSB investigators who "spent about five minutes" with him, he said.
>    "We know what we saw. We weren't drunk", said another group of
>witnesses who saw the the ascending object rise in the sky, then 
>strike the plane.
>    The New York Post reported that "witnesses to the fiery TWA crash
>don't accept the FBI's explanation of the mysterious streaks they saw 
>in the sky that fateful night. The FBI concluded that the witnesses 
>were confused. (NYP 11-19-97).
>    "I'm not satisfied at all," said East End fisherman Roland Penney,
>who insists he saw a "streak of light" racing into the sky just 
>before the plane exploded. "I don't think they're being honest with 
>the people. They're telling us we saw something else than what we 
>    In September, 1997 James Kallstrom said the FBI and CIA were still
>doing "a sophisticated and detailed" analysis of witness accounts. 
>(AP, September 18, 1997). The CIA said that "based on 244 eyewitness 
>reports, analysts have determined that the eyewitness sightings 
>thought to be that of a missile actually took place after the first 
>several explosions on the aircraft." (Press-Enterprise , September 
>25, 1997).
>    "I know what I saw," agreed Barbara Pacholk, a fifty-year old
>housewife from Quogue. "I saw ... fires go across the sky. One hit 
>the plane at the tail and the second hit at the front, just before 
>the wings...I understand that when a plane bursts into flames the 
>flames fall, but this was a fire going up towards the plane."
>    "The investigators' arrogance toward the eyewitnesses angered
>Representative James Traficant Jr., Democrat of Ohio, who earlier 
>this fall...began investigating the possibility that the government 
>is shortchanging the citizens' views. 'Ms. Osborn said they were 
>mistaken in what they saw. That's not very professional, and it's not 
>the way to dispute eyewitness statements,' said Paul Marcone, press 
>secretary for the congressman." (NY Observer , 11-24-97).
>    Perhaps the bottom line was best stated by Philip Weiss of The New
>York Observer . "Now the FBI has reached its conclusion in the 
>matter. Its message to the eyewitnesses: shut up, you didn't see 
>                     Copyright c 1997, The WINDS.
>                         ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
>                       http://www.TheWinds.org

Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail