From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 13:59:49 +0800
To: Black Unicorn <unicorn@schloss.li>
Subject: Re: Former CIA Director and *Strategic Investment* Editor
Message-ID: <m0uEN3x-00091PC@pacifier.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 04:46 PM 4/30/96 -0400, Black Unicorn wrote:
>
>> Aren't you making an assumption that Colby is dead?  No body has been found, 
>> last I heard.   Maybe he just decided that he wanted to disappear in a 
>> comparatively non-suspicious fashion?
>
>Having met Colby and being somewhat familiar with his political skills I
>would be surprised if he would ever think a drowning accident was
>"non-suspicious."

Notice that I said "comparatively" non-suspicious.  Can you think of any 
LESS suspicious way to appear to die and still explain no body being found?

>
>William Colby, whatever anyone may think of intelligence,

I think their mis-usage of the word "intelligence" is hilariously presumptuous.

> was quite a man,
>respected in the community, a major in the OSS and a World War II hero
>decorated 5 times.  His like are not common.
>
>I hope he is found alive and well.

He might very well be alive.  But it's almost certain he won't be found...

BTW, the news item I read this morning stated that his neighbors called the 
cops when they noticed that his car was still at the cabin Sunday 
night...after the time he normally left to return home.  While most people 
wouldn't see a problem with this, I do:  How many citizens are so aware of 
the schedules and habits of their neighbors that they would become 
suspicious if their neighbor stayed TOO LONG?  Not days and days too long, 
just a few hours?  Or were Colby's habits so precise and predictable (and 
known to be so!) that his neighbor would call the cops just because he, 
ONCE, stayed a little longer than normal?

What's wrong with this picture?