Edgar Steele

[Alex Linder]

Originally Posted by April

Hey I am going to Whitefish tonight to mock the stupid antifa art and eat free cheese and crackers ( no pun intended).

http://missoulanews.bigskypress.com/...readerComments



If I get into a fatal car accident, please dont just dismiss it on the idea that A. I am just another crazy woman driver or B. I advocate the use of medicinal marijuana so I must have been high as a kite or C. that I have some sort of death wish......okay Mona.

Stay alert for vampires. They forced a woman off the road the other day in Colorado, and could well have fled northward.

[Donald E. Pauly]

Originally Posted by Alex Linder

Stay alert for vampires. They forced a woman off the road the other day in Colorado, and could well have fled northward.

April raises garlic in her garden. That will scare them off.

[Fred Streed]

Originally Posted by McKinley

Hawhaha

I thought you said high as a Kike at first.

That would be low as a kike.

Pot makes you high as a KITE.

[Donald E. Pauly]

There are over 1 million lawyers in this country and presumably all are members of the National Bar Association. A search of www.martindale.com for last name "Montgomery" yields 363 hits. There is no "Mona Montgomery". Over 90% of the Montgomery's are obviously male. Searching all eight pages gives these UNLIKELY hits. There is a Negress in the woodpile here.

Nikki Monique Montgomery Seattle Washington

Monique B. Montgomery West Point Mississippi

Shella Monique Montgomery Columbus Mississippi

[Lurker]

Originally Posted by Tintin

Yes, in the TV world it is very easy. And in some ways more easy in the real world. But it will be hard to explain after the bodies of WN start piling up. May look more believable and if WN nationalist just all happened to be bad people who shoot themselves in the foot.

People die all the the time. There was a Spanish soccer player who was 25 years old and on the Spanish national team in amazing shape and seemed totally healthy who just dropped one day of a heart condition. This was about a year ago. Shit happens and most of the time no one is suspicious. Certainly Edgar Steele and over 60 in bad health would not arouse suspicion.

Again, I ask you, can you tell us what would be involved with disconnecting the wires of a life support system? What are the potential risks?

There are lots of different things you could do. Pose as a doctor. These places are generally not very secure. You wouldn't even need to unplug anything. There are chemicals you could put in the IV tube that would look exactly like a heart attack. It would not be hard at all if you have access to these chemicals.

Originally Posted by Tintin

Why should WN be "very careful"? Is there something that NW need to worry about that nigger who supported O.J. did not not? Or how about the jews that supported the Rosenbergs or Pollard? Or the jews that supported these people after then were found guilty? And in the case of the Rosenbergs after they were executed?

This was before my time but based on what you said it didn't really work for the Jews right? The Rosenbergs still got executed and Jews lost credibility. But I guess they survived it. WN aren't exactly swimming in credibility as is.

Originally Posted by Tintin

Tell us, could you think of any possible safer and more likely to succeed ways for Steele to kill his wife then the scenario the government is presenting?

1. Killing a stranger and getting away with it is easy. Killing your wife and getting away with it is hard. You would need to hire someone and you would need an alibi for when it happened.

2. It would have looked like he was targeted for an assassination by ZOG. This would have made him a hero and martyr which based on his last two writings is what he wanted. Heck - this is already the longest thread about Ed Steele ever. Imagine if his wife was really killed in a car bomb. This thread would be a thousand pages long.

[OTPTT]

Originally Posted by Donald E. Pauly

There is no "Mona Montgomery".

You're lack of attention to detail is about as bad as Mona's.

Mona Montgomery Mona Montgomery, Attorney at law
330 No. Jackson Street, Ste. 314 Glendale, CA 91206-3636 (818) 243-9676 www.monamontgomery.net General practice with an emphasis on elder law, probate and adoptions.

Link

[Lurker]

Originally Posted by Alex Linder

It would be more useful to the antiWhites to discredit Steele than to kill him. The danger he poses to them lies in the respect ordinary Americans accord to those who are well spoken and possess professional credentials. Those are the ones jews particularly seek to defame and, to use their favorite verb, discredit.

Why would you need to discredit someone who 99.9% of Americans have never heard of? If they killed him 99.9% of Americans still wouldn't have heard of him.

Even after this has been in the news if I went down to the DMV and I asked 100 people if they have heard of Ed Steele I would be shocked if 1 could identify him.

This actually pisses me off. I have been reading these sites for a LONG time. I remember the early days of the internet and having our own media were so exciting. I've given up on a lot of it. The internet has been around for over 15 years. Are there more WN now than there were then?

[OTPTT]

Additionally ...

http://monamontgomery.com/

('What has been seen cannot be unseen.')



Slideshow

[Donald E. Pauly]

Originally Posted by OTPTT

You're lack of attention to detail is about as bad as Mona's.


Link

I stand corrected. Martindale Hubble is no good. Edgar Steele is not listed but a lawyer that I know is. Richard Barrett is not listed either but good lawyers may be quickly removed from the list.

[Scipio Americanus]

Originally Posted by Hadding

I don't think it's required to wait for the legal process to sort things out in order to have an opinion.

Opinions are like noses kid -- everybody has one. However, a wise man will resist sounding off his opinion until he has ascertained the facts for which it must be rationally based. Even if Sir William Blackstone himself were to come back to us from the grave and offer an opinion on this matter would it be valid and worthy of consideration devoid of any reference to the essential facts of the case?

Please explain to me how you are able to formulate a valid opinion regarding the man's alleged guilt without knowing the facts of the case, facts that have been vetted according to the Federal Rules of Procedure via a litigation process consisting of pretrial DISCOVERY followed by TRIAL where a formal presentation of the FACTS & the LAW are presented pursuant to the Federal Rules of Evidence.

What I have just briefly outlined constitutes the heart and soul of a concept known to all Americans as DUE PROCESS, a feature that is uniquely American in the true sense of the word. When you pontificate on the guilt of this defendant without according him his right to Due Process, you are mocking the very essence of our common law heritage that our Anglo-Saxon ancestors fought, bled and died for on many a battlefield.

In addition, to mindlessly speculate about this man's alleged guilt on a White Nationalist discussion board is simply unspeakable, especially given the fact that some of its members are personally acquainted with him.

Of course, you cannot form a valid opinion without the facts of the case, can you? Indeed, no one can. If we could, then what would be the point of having a trial? What you are really saying is that facts do not matter; feeling is all that counts. God help us should that uterine standard become the absolute governing paradigm of our legal system!

Some of you people have total faith in Steele's innocence, and you will assume whatever you must assume to defend that faith, including the "Mission Impossible" scenario. I think that's less reasonable than the assumption that the FBI probably did not falsify a recording and that Steele therefore probably did plot his wife's murder, since Steele admitted (implicitly) in the conversation with his wife that the recording makes the case.

Why do you include me with the "Mission Impossible" crowd? I've already stated that I will wait until the facts of the case have been presented and witnesses cross-examined at trial before I come to a conclusion.

I would love to see Steele prove that the FBI set him up! I don't think it's very likely, though.

You have it half-ass backwards my dear boy. The onus [burden] of proof is on the government to prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, not on Steele to prove his innocence.

Even if he is found innocent, people will be entitled to the opinion that he did it, if that's what they still believe, just as people were still entitled to the opinion that O.J. did it even after a criminal process found him innocent.

The jury in a criminal trial will either find the defendant 'guilty' or 'not guilty.' Defendants are never found 'innocent' -- only in newspaper headlines written by ignorant reporters, the kind of nitwits that you rely on to substantiate and rationalize your opinion about the man's alleged guilt.

Likewise, you will be entitled to continue opining that Steele is innocent even if no fault is found with the evidence against him and he is found guilty. I expect that somebody will do that, but that person will look like a damned fool.

Kid, you have been flapping your gums via the keyboard throughout this entire thread on matters you know nothing about while forming conclusions based on not even a modicum of factual evidence. Likewise, you have been speculating about my own thoughts on the matter when I have clearly stated, without circumlocution, that I have no opinion regarding the guilt of the man until the facts and evidence have been presented at trial.

HADDING, you are shinning example of the cesspool-side of the internet discussion board environment where comments are either distorted or entirely transformed into something that has absolutely no bearing on the original meaning of that which was actually communicated. In this case, you seize upon my advocacy of a simple legal maxim -- innocent until proven guilty -- and distort it into something that was not even implied let alone explicitly stated. In short, you are nothing more than a pseudo-intellectual charlatan and a brazen liar of the lowest order who apparently enjoys stirring the pot for kicks.

Scipio Americanus

[Russ]

In light of so many arrests of patriots who speak out against our
corrupt government,
this book seems appropriate. Think of Ed Steele as the last in a long
line of people
arrested in the last year and a half. It seemed to really get hot right
before Obama took office
and has continued. Isn't this exactly what Steele often said in his
letters? (Individual freedom and the rule of law is gone in America) I
found out also that there is no rule of law or justice. They just make
up whatever they want and bleed you dry in defending yourself or you rot
in prison. America is not what most Americans think it is. I wrote about
it 7 years ago and suggested then that America is run like a mafia. It
is and the cops, FED, CIA are the henchmen. You'll know what I mean when
they come for you and set you up on some phony charge. Some of you
already know, I understand.

Russ



Suggested Reading

Three Felonies A Day:
How The Feds Target The Innocent by Harvey A. Silverglate
This is a timely book about the breakdown of the rule of law in the
United States.

Individual freedom and the rule of law is gone in America. Oh, they
haven’t come for you yet? You haven’t broken the law? Well, Harvey
Silverglate proves in Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the
Innocent that the Feds (U.S. prosecuting attorneys) target the innocent.
He says the, “federal prosecutors are abusing their power by using the
criminal law to prosecute law abiding citizens…” They are seizing
illegal power by twisting marginal and highly questionable
interpretations of criminal law.

Silverglate believes that we are in danger of becoming a society in
which prosecutors alone become judges, juries and executioners because
the threat of high sentences make it too costly for even innocent people
to resist the prosecutorial pressure.

Read this review and discover that “there is a crime for all of us.”

July 1, 2010 | 2 Comments | 683 views | Click Here for Full Article »
Filed Under: Bob Livingston, Suggested Reading

http://www.personalliberty.com/suggested-reading/


Who is Bob Livingston?


Bob is an ultra-conservative American who has been writing a newsletter
for 41 years. Bob has devoted much of his life to research and the quest
for truth on a variety of subjects. Bob specializes in health issues
such as nutritional supplements and alternatives to drugs as well as
issues of privacy (both personal & financial), asset protection and the
preservation of freedom.

Your Health: Between age thirty-eight and age forty, Bob had four heart
attacks. He decided that taking double handfuls of prescription drugs
was far worse than heart disease. He was sure that he did not have a
drug deficiency. This led Bob to a serious search for health. His
suspicions of government and politics carried over into so-called
orthodox medicine. He has concluded that today, organized medicine is
literally a killing machine.

Well, Bob never had the surgery his doctors strongly advised 36 years
ago. All three surgeons who said he would die without the surgery have
since died. Bob, however, is healthier than he has ever been!

Thirty-nine years of research study in health and nutrition qualifies
Bob as a nutritional expert. He literally has volumes of information to
share with his readers. Bob believes that the credibility of the medical
establishment is eroding quickly and will soon collapse. As this
transition evolves, natural alternatives for health and nutrition will
be vital for your survival!

Bob is convinced that most health problems are simple and usually
directly related to nutritional deficiencies. Bob will tell you the
problems and will always suggest solutions

[Eric Wright]

Originally Posted by Lurker

This actually pisses me off. I have been reading these sites for a LONG time. I remember the early days of the internet and having our own media were so exciting. I've given up on a lot of it. The internet has been around for over 15 years. Are there more WN now than there were then?

Its a double edged sword with the internet.
Firstly, it is the only outlet for people who do not hold a mainstream media view of politics, values, morals, etc. Public access television just dont cut it, doesn't reach enough and usually the "extreme views" shows air at odd hours. So the internet is the only viable source to establish propaganda outside of your local area.
On the flip side, the internet lulls people into inactivity, it becomes a bunch of individuals miles away, venting, and justifying themselves through internet activity.

As far as "Are there more WN now than 15 years ago?"
I dont know, and wouldn't think it would matter much; WN's are not know for their ability to recruit, most dont even make effort to recruit, as you can see anytime a "outsider" asks a question, you will see stand-offish responses and hostility; there is no flooding of myspace, facebook, twitter, craigs list, etc; using the internet social markets as the "left" and "truthers" do.
In fact "WN" is itself a vague term. There is no one party, no one political platform, no unity; just sects of different values, politics, and philosophy under a common racial understanding. (So once you "wake them up", where do you take them?)
Every now and then you will see some beer belly "racist" kwans for some "group" or another screaming about Mexicans somewhere, and that repulsiveness will be applauded as positive action among the disenfranchised web "lurkers".

Why would you need to discredit someone who 99.9% of Americans have never heard of? If they killed him 99.9% of Americans still wouldn't have heard of him.

Im "agnostic" on the question of innocence or guilt in as far as what he has been accused of; and I do agree, he was not a "threat" to "them" (anyone remember the Donny Deutsch interview?) But, with that said, and i also have Matt Hale in mind when I say this, it sends a underlying message, that you cannot have a position of wealth, and influence in this society if you openly speak on Jews and are pro-White.
Sending that message would be the motivate I would suspect to be behind the "maybe so/maybe no" accusations.

[Scipio Americanus]

Originally Posted by Alex Linder

You are now banned for lying, as I said you would be.

Please accept a wholehearted 'thank you' for banning that POS. Hadding is one of the most intellectually dishonest posters I've ever come across. No doubt he'll make a "splash" over at The Phora where he belongs.

Scipio Americanus

[America First]

YouTube- Sibelius: Andante festivo

YouTube- Sibelius: Andante festivo

There should have been deletions every morning over the years of NKVD accounts IMO.

[Scipio Americanus]

Originally Posted by OTPTT

How can we help Edgar Steele and his family?

For starters, you might want to forward to Steele's defense attorney the website that I posted earlier in this thread. It's filled with a ton of useful information, including case law, concerning the admissibility of tape/sound recordings as evidence in criminal trials.

http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.p...85#post1149785

The author, Steve Cain, is one of less than 10 Board Certified and Court Qualified Experts in Audio and Videotape Analysis and has over 25 years experience in examining audio and video tapes for a myriad of government agencies as well as over a thousand law firms.

Author's website: http://expertpages.com/public/frame/...apeexpert.com/

Compare the information in the article and the rest of his website with the useless chatter and idle speculation on this thread regarding authentication and you'll know why I posted it. To quote the conclusion of the article:

IN ORDER TO SUBMIT SOUND RECORDINGS AS EVIDENCE IN court, a prosecutor or other attorney must establish that the tape is an authentic representation of the conversation it is said to record. The traditional method of establishing authenticity involves maintaining a chain of custody which logs all persons, times and locations concerned in the creation of the tape. Then, the tape must be officially sealed and stored to complete a proper chain of custody. However, even if this procedure is strictly observed, there may still be challenges to the tape's authenticity.

The recording may contain inconsistencies suggestive of tampering. In such cases, a prosecutor may consult a qualified forensic examiner to inspect the tape. The examiner would initially listen critically for signs such as gaps, transients fades, equipment sounds or extraneous voices which indicate tampering. Then she would utilize other methods like physical inspection, magnetic development, spectrum analysis and waveform analysis to discover anomalies.

It is relatively easy to change the content of a recording by deleting words or sections, by obscuring meaning with over-recorded sounds, or by transforming context through rearrangement of selected phrases or by adding additional words through synthesis. Nevertheless, falsifications normally leave detectable magnetic and waveform acoustic signatures which can lead to forensic individualization of the evidential recorders and tapes.

Assuming that an audio recording exists, I think it is safe to say that it will be a key piece of evidence introduced by the prosecution and one that will have to be successfully challenged by Steele's defense team.

Scipio Americanus

[Tintin]

Originally Posted by Lurker

People die all the the time. ...

You are a master of the obvious and banal. Thanks for you insight.

[Tintin]

Originally Posted by Lurker

Why would you need to discredit someone who 99.9% of Americans have never heard of? If they killed him 99.9% of Americans still wouldn't have heard of him.

In 1923 99.9% of Germany never heard of an an obscure Austrian who two year later published book detailing the nature of the jew and their impact on Germany. A few years later 100% of Germany knew who he was. A little later 100% Europe knew who he was. And then 100% of the non-stone age world knew who he was. And today, 100% of the world knows who he was.

Historical events unfolded in a way that allowed for Hitler's meteoric rise to popularity. In the age Internet historical events could allow a man to rise to world wife fame instantaneously.

The jew likes to say "never again". Many think the jew is referring to the "holocaust". What the jew is really referring to is "never again" let the White people have a leader.

[Scipio Americanus]

Forensic Tape Analysis, Inc.
Steve Cain MFS 6242 Jones Rd
President/C.E.O. C/O Steve Cain
Forensic Scientist Burlington WI 53105

TASK DESCRIPTION VOICEPRINT IDENTIFICATION

Voiceprint identification can be defined as a combination of both aural (listening) and spectrographic (instrumental) comparison of one or more known voices with an unknown voice for the purpose of identification or elimination. From 1967 until the present, more than 7,000 voice identification cases have been processed by certified voiceprint examiners. Voice identification is part of a larger forensic role known as acoustic analyses, which involves tape filtering and enhancement, tape authentication, gunshot acoustics, reconstruction of conversations, and the analysis of any other questioned acoustic events.

THEORY

The fundamental theory for voice identification rests on the premise that every voice is individually characteristic enough to distinguish it through voiceprint analysis. The first factor in determining voice uniqueness lies in the sizes of the vocal cavities, such as the throat, nasal and oral cavities, and the shape, length and tension of the individual’s vocal cords located in the larynx. The likelihood that two people would have all their vocal cavities the same size and configuration and coupled identically appears very remote.

RELIABILITY STUDIES

Several studies have been published evidencing the ability to reliably identify voices under certain conditions, and a Federal Bureau of Investigation survey of its own performance in the examination of 2,000 forensic cases revealed an error rate of 0.31 percent for false identifications, and 0.53 percent for false elimination’s. (See Koenig, B.E., 1986, Spectrographic Voice Identification: “A Forensic Survey”, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 79:2088-2092).

PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES:

To facilitate the visual comparisons of voices, a sound spectrograph is used to analyze the complex speech waveform into a pictorial display on what is referred to as a spectrogram. The spectrogram displays the speech signal with time along the horizontal axis, frequency on the vertical axis, and relative amplitude indicated by the degree of gray shading on the display. The spectrograms serve as a permanent record of the words spoken and facilitate the visual comparison of similar words spoken between and unknown and known speakers’ voices. If a suspect refuses to cooperate with the investigator, a court order may be acquired compelling the suspect to produce voice recordings for the purpose of comparison. Courts have repeatedly held that requiring the accused to submit voice exemplars for the purpose of comparison for identification or elimination does not violate the suspect’s Fifth Amendment rights. The investigator is wise to request that the court order specify, in detail, that the suspect give a sample of his or her voice, repeating the phrases of the questioned call in a natural conversational voice (or in a similar disguise, if that is the case) and that such samples shall be given at least three times and to the reasonable satisfaction of the investigator. Voice speech samples obtained should contain exactly the same words and phrases as those in the questioned sample because only like speech sounds are used for comparisons. Because the voice, like handwriting, is dynamic and variant, several samples of the verbatim spoken phrases are desired for analysis. The evidence should be shipped in a secure container that will prevent the evidence from damage. It is important to provide the examiner with information regarding the recording method used, the number of calls involved and any other information that may assist the examiner in the examination of the evidence.

Visual comparison of spectrograms involves the examination of spectrograph features of like sounds in terms of time, frequency and amplitude parameters. Special aural comparison tapes are prepared facilitating comparison of psycholinguistic features via short-term memory. Aural cues compared include resonance quality, pitch, temporal factors, inflection, dialect, articulation, syllable grouping, breath pattern, disguise, pathologies and other peculiar speech characteristics. Several state appellate and supreme courts have admitted the evidence, as have four of five federal apppellate courts.

The United States Supreme Court has refused to review and decide the three cases brought before it. While the admission of aural-spectrographic voice evidence continues to be decided in various courts, the method continues to be a very important tool in the forensic arsenal, and in the adjudication of criminal and civil cases

http://expertpages.com/public/frame/...apeexpert.com/

[Scipio Americanus]

Originally Posted by Fred Streed

As for Hadding, I know him and he is not some kind of a plant sent in to stir shit. He has spent quite a bit of time working for the cause for little or no money. You may disagree with him, as I do in this case, but he isn't a jew or fed stooge.

HADDING is squalid piece of humanoid excrement whose days of brazen lying coupled with arrogant condescension has thankfully come to an end here at VNNF. Frankly, his ilk represents the worst elements to be found on these so-called discussion boards because he is simply incapable of honest discourse. It is bad enough when people, often times unknowingly as a result of a piss-poor education, employ logical fallacies but to knowingly twist, contort, and lie in such an obvious fashion as he was doing earlier in this thread is simply beyond the pale.

Scipio Americanus

[Igor Alexander]

Originally Posted by Lurker

Why would you need to discredit someone who 99.9% of Americans have never heard of?

Because it's easier to eliminate someone when he's a potential problem than when he becomes an actual one.

You may as well be asking why governments bother to put people like Ernst Zuendel or the Heretical Two (Simon Sheppard and Stephen Whittle) in prison, since 99% of the population doesn't know who they are.

Whether Ed is innocent or not, there's no doubt in my mind that the government would be willing and able to frame someone in such a manner. I can't definitely say whether he was framed or not, but it's certainly plausible that he was.