Where is MAURA MURRAY

Suzanne wrote:

<quoted text>
I did post above re the sterling work of NH LE on the Zantop (2 Dartmouth professors) case and the Pam Smart case.

Don't mean to split hairs but..........

Troop F did not had nothing to do with the investigation of the Pamela Smart Case. That case was out of Rockingham County, NH.

oops meant to write Troop F had nothing to do with the investigation of the Pamela Smart case.

There are people here who are going to REALLY dislike this post. It might be interesting to ask oneself, if one does, why - what I am asking is that on;y facts be stated as facts, hello.

I have long been criticized, here and elsewhere, for being cantankerous and eager to badger a topic to bits - especially when I see stuff being stated as "fact" which is not. I have said MANY times, here and in Maura's previous, now-closed forum, that things are said as theory or musings, and then accepted as ongoing fact without being challenged.
Now, over the last few days, I have a perfect example of this.
People have been insisting for days that "now you need a passport to get into Canada...people aren't checking passports to/from Canada, what an egregious flouting of Homeland Security...etc"

Bunk.
Check the US government websites. This is quite easy to do. DHS says that you are NOT required to have a passport, and how anyone ever got the idea that Canadian customs require, or should require, US citizens to show a passport is beyond me.
A fact is something that can be objectively proven. If something can't be objectively proven, it is not a fact - please don't state it as such. And if you don't know whether it's a fact or not, check it AND say "I don't know if this is a fact."
Thank you.

elsewherebriefly wrote:

oops meant to write Troop F had nothing to do with the investigation of the Pamela Smart case.

Just saying - NH LE in general have been commented on in a less than laudatory manner.

Sophie Bean, When we travel to CA, we have never had a problem and although we also carry birth certicates, we have never been requested to show them.

sophie bean wrote:

<quoted text>
Lady Gray, this is one case where I will go out on a limb more than in other cases and say that I do not at all believe that these were "accidental deaths" - how much do you need to know about hiking to know that you don't go to sleep with a heater burning inside the tent?
No doubt, someone will say "oh ya, I know someone who does this..."
Nonsense. It's beyond stupidity, practically guaranteeing death by fire or asphyxiation or both. Bad enough, dumb enough, if one were alone - but to do it with a friend in the tent? I don't believe that for a second.
This is a clear case of there being no logical explanation. You don't "forget" that the heater is on and fall asleep, period.

The temperatures in that area that evening would not have warranted the use of a propane heater, especially inside a tent. This is what I found most curious. Any person with adequate equipment would not need such. The elder in this situation was NOT a novice to outdoor camping. By family accounts, he was more of an expert camper.

sophie bean wrote:

<quoted text>
Lady Gray, this is one case where I will go out on a limb more than in other cases and say that I do not at all believe that these were "accidental deaths" - how much do you need to know about hiking to know that you don't go to sleep with a heater burning inside the tent?
No doubt, someone will say "oh ya, I know someone who does this..."
Nonsense. It's beyond stupidity, practically guaranteeing death by fire or asphyxiation or both. Bad enough, dumb enough, if one were alone - but to do it with a friend in the tent? I don't believe that for a second.
This is a clear case of there being no logical explanation. You don't "forget" that the heater is on and fall asleep, period.

Sophi Bean, I agree. I believed they had a certain knowledge someone/others wanted badly and did kill for it.

Mason stated:The person who related this story may have been Givemeabreak, but I'm not certain about that either.

Sorry Mason, not me. But I do remember the story.

Professors at

Smith College

and the Massachusetts Agricultural College


(UMass Amherst)

assisted Leon Whitney's secret 1928 Shutesbury Eugenics Study. The study was managed from New Haven and conducted ninety miles west of Boston. Fieldworkers used census data to assist in the task of combing the landscape with door-to-door investigations. Fieldworkers recorded age, height, eye color, temperament, habits, and apparent "defects." They contacted local informants who could comment upon the characters of their fellow neighbors, including financial and sexual activities. They collected a history settlement, industry, and agriculture. They covertly assembled residents' test scores, church attendance, tax records, medical files, school records, school intelligence tests, and family histories. They compiled pedigree charts designed to expose networks of inferior genetic stock.

Leon Whitney himself was a dog breeder who praised German scientists for their “courageous” and “admirable” sterilization policies. Using the Shutesbury Eugenics Study, he wrote The Case for Sterilization (1934). "Cut off the useless classes by preventing their reproduction, and increase the better," he urged, admonishing "careful consideration of the kind of people we want to have forming the race of the future." Shutesbury itself was identified by Whitney as an example of a "Cellar Hole." Adolph Hitler studied the eugenics campaign in Massachusetts and wrote a personal letter to Whitney praising him for his book. Earlier Hitler had also sent a letter to eugenicist Madison Grant, indicating that Grant's The Passing of the Great Race (1916) "is my Bible." Hitler implemented similar ideas in Germany, building upon eugenics efforts in Germany and Europe that had been funded by the Rockefeller Foundation during the 1920's.

Massachusetts legislators authorized surreptitious, indefinite imprisonment of individuals considered to be "defective delinquents." Many simply disappeared off the streets and vanished from public consciousness. People were sterilized, often without consent. Many sterilized women were told they had undergone appendectomies. As Massachusetts techniques spread, 40,000 Americans in thirty states were sterilized, and at least 100,000 people were forcibly sterilized by eugenicists around the world.

above from: http://www.quaqua.org/eugenics.htm

**********

Maybe her disappearance is related to eugenics?

Other supporters of eugenics included Harvard anthropologist Earnest Hooton, Robert DeCourcey Ward of Harvard, Prescott Hall of Harvard, New York lawyer and Yale University graduate Madison Grant, Boston University president Daniel Marsh, faculty at

Smith College, faculty at

Massachusetts Agricultural College (UMass Amherst),

the Rockefeller family, the Rockefeller Foundation, and

Amherst College president George Olds.

above from: http://www.quaqua.org/eugenics.htm

Maybe Maura Murray's disappearance is related to a plan to create a master race?

Maybe the Vasi hit has another angle?

State v. Hoyt, 146 A. 170 (N.H. 1929)
State v. Daniels (separate case consolidated with Hoyt)
Supreme Court of New Hampshire.
May 7, 1929.

above from: http://www.quaqua.org/hoyt.htm

Physical and sexual abuse was rampant. Many attendants were sadistic or disturbed. Children were routinely stripped naked in front of other children and beaten with tree branches to accomplish ritualistic forms of humiliation. Children who rebelled or attempted escape were stripped naked and put into solitary confinement.

Children were also used in scientific experiments. Some children were forced to take the cadaver brains of other Fernald children who had died and slice the brain tissues into samples for further study. Other children were fed radioactive oatmeal to facilitate an experiment conducted by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Quaker Oats (some of the oatmeal victims each won $60,000 in compensation from MIT, Quaker Oats, and government entities in a class-action legal demand filed decades later).

above from: http://www.quaqua.org/eugenics.htm

Remember Waltham Watch?

Like clocks?


As in clock towers, maybe?

The Fernald Center, originally called the Massachusetts School for Idiotic Children, was founded by reformer Samuel Gridley Howe in 1848 with a $2,500 appropriation from the Massachusetts State Legislature. The school eventually comprised 72 buildings total, located on 186 acres (0.75 km2). At its peak, some 2,500 people were confined there, most of them "feeble-minded" boys.

Under its first resident superintendent, Walter E. Fernald (1859–1924), an advocate of eugenics, the school was viewed as a model educational facility in the field of mental retardation. It was renamed in his honor in 1925, following his death the previous year.

The institution did serve a large population of mentally retarded children, but the The Boston Globe estimates that upwards of half of the inmates tested with IQs in the normal range. In the 20th century, living conditions were spartan or worse; approximately 36 children slept in each dormitory room.

Despite widespread reports of physical and sexual abuse, the Fernald School is best known as the site of the 1946–53 joint experiments by Harvard University and MIT that exposed young male children to repeated doses of radiation. Documents declassified in 1994 by the United States Department of Energy revealed the following details:

* The experiment was sponsored in part by the Quaker Oats Company.
* MIT Professor of Nutrition Robert S. Harris led the experiment, which studied the absorption of calcium and iron.
* The boys were encouraged to join a "Science Club", which offered larger portions of food, parties, and trips to Boston Red Sox baseball games.
* The club "members" ate iron-enriched cereals and calcium-enriched milk for breakfast. In order to track absorption, several radioisotope tracers were mixed into the meal.
* Radiation levels in stool and blood samples would serve as dependent variables.
* 17 select "members" received iron supplement shots containing more radioisotopes.
* Neither the children nor their parents ever consented to participation in a scientific study.

above from wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Walter_E._Fernald_State_School

I wonder whether the Roman Catholic Church or a significant number of Catholic parishioners believe that embryonic stem cell research represents a new form of eugenics.

Towns with W

Mason wrote:

<quoted text>
I remember someone said they encountered a person who looked like Maura. Not sure if this was in a store or walking down the street. The person said she saw the Maura lookalike enter a building and a few minutes later, she saw the Maura lookalike staring back at her from a second floor window.
I think she described the building as a two-story gray building, but I'm not certain.
The person who related this story may have been Givemeabreak, but I'm not certain about that either.
I'm pretty sure no photograph was mentioned.
I recall recommending the person find out the address of the apartment or office corresponding to the location of the window and check with the manager to find out who was leasing it.
I don't recall reading a message regarding whether the witness did that.
I think this message exchange happened in mid December before Advocator set-up the new site. If this is what you're thinking about, you don't have to look at messages before November 29th, because that's when I posted my first message on Topix.
Fred

I remember reading that somewhere as well.

Wasn't the sighting in Lincoln, NH?

yankee wrote:

<quoted text>
I remember reading that somewhere as well.
Wasn't the sighting in Lincoln, NH?

I believe you're right.

sophie bean wrote:

There are people here who are going to REALLY dislike this post. It might be interesting to ask oneself, if one does, why - what I am asking is that on;y facts be stated as facts, hello.
I have long been criticized, here and elsewhere, for being cantankerous and eager to badger a topic to bits - especially when I see stuff being stated as "fact" which is not. I have said MANY times, here and in Maura's previous, now-closed forum, that things are said as theory or musings, and then accepted as ongoing fact without being challenged.
Now, over the last few days, I have a perfect example of this.
People have been insisting for days that "now you need a passport to get into Canada...people aren't checking passports to/from Canada, what an egregious flouting of Homeland Security...etc"
Bunk.
Check the US government websites. This is quite easy to do. DHS says that you are NOT required to have a passport, and how anyone ever got the idea that Canadian customs require, or should require, US citizens to show a passport is beyond me.
A fact is something that can be objectively proven. If something can't be objectively proven, it is not a fact - please don't state it as such. And if you don't know whether it's a fact or not, check it AND say "I don't know if this is a fact."
Thank you.

There was talk at one time (years back) of requiring a passport but I believe it wasn't put in place because it would limit the number of Canadian's coming to the US to shop. Now that the dollar is about equal between the two countries, the the Canadian's are heading south for vacations, purchases etc