I'm not sure how many of the facts in this article are fictional, or not, but it presents a very interesting read nonetheless.

Krystal Cole (neurosoup) gives a 7 page interview about the infamous Pickard missile silo, her psychotic boyfriend Todd Skinner, their involvement with the feds, and other things that go on in bizarro-land.



http://www.viceland.com/...-a-cosmic-giggle-803.php




page3 is pretty interesting, as far as the novel tryptamines go, check out the references at the bottom.

I would really like to try that 5-MeO aMT analogue

Ugh...really? :evil:

Why would you want to read the interview of an incredibly pretentious, pseudo-intellectual, psychedelic-groupie snitch? Any information she gives is tainted de facto by her record, making such reading pointless to my mind.

Her word cannot be trusted. period. Imo, she should be taken out and shot for her actions both in relation to Pickard & Aperson as well as her shenanigans with her boyfriend prior to the silo bust.

She gets enough unwarranted attention as neurosoup (have you seen her site??? It's horrible), so continue to indulge her? No thank you.

shes a nark. Dont support neurosoup.

Oh, no, I don't condone her or any of her actions! I even included a disclaimer for lack of truth... I agree, noone should support her, but this is an article through viceland.com, so it's not technically supporting her other then reading her interview.

I just thought it was an interesting read, is all.

She did have a rockin body back then (bikini photo in article)


Just looking for the silver lining.

She is in no way responsible for Pickard's arrest. I find it extremely depressing that people in such a (supposedly) open-minded community will blindly repeat that she is a narc over and over again like unthinking sheep. There are numerous resources available to research the case, hey you don't even need to get up and go to the library (god forbid!) you can do it all right now from the very same computer you are using to spew thoughtless hate. First read a Rolling Stone article called "The Acid King" then read this Vice article posted by the OP, then read all of the legal documents (which are posted online for free) and then consider reading Lysergic, also free on google books. If you have not already done these things then you are simply embarrassing yourself calling her a narc.

If I'm not mistaken, I believe she admitted to cooperating with law enforcement, which saved her from receiving jail time.

Yup...and how do you defend her role in the kidnap of a teenager back in 2003? At the absolute LEAST she was silently complicit in the act. Guess what? Most atrocities are able to be committed because someone with the power to intervene does not...the kidnap was a perfect example. Whether or not she was directly responsible for Pickard's arrest is immaterial, that is not what I commented on. While that incident was most probably directly attributable to Skinner's work, they were in cahoots and she was well-aware of what he was up to. She also contradicts herself and the public record record in various locations, most notably on her self-published defense statement on her site.

Also, read through the article and her pathetically shallow site, it's more than apparent the type of person she is - hence my labeling of her with less than favorable titles (if you want me to quote selections from the article or her site to support it, I'd be glad to). I've looked into this enough for my satisfaction; I don't need to go to the library, it's all online. Cooperating with the cops to any degree, regardless of personal ass-saving qualifies as narcing, it's that simple. She cooperated with LEO, she supported her boyfriend who cooperated with LEO, how can you possibly say that this doesn't qualify her as a narc?

Hamhurricane, your "argument" provides no salient information whatsoever but is peppered with fallacious ad hominem attacks. If you want to refute our points/opinions, then cite evidence, don't tell us how much better than us you are or how much more research you've done.

You're absolutely right, after she was beaten, drugged, raped, and---most importantly--after Skinner had already turned in Pickard and the LSD operation had been over for three years.



In logic this is called petitio principii. You have assumed a false premise in your question, which is that she kidnapped her boyfriend. She did not. They both were willfully spending time with Skinner, in fact her boyfriend Brandon Green was collaborating with Skinner on a harbor dredging venture the details of which are discussed in this legal document. I think kidnapping is actually the wrong word to describe what happened, it sounds more like he was held hostage after willingly meeting with Skinner. Krystle did everything she could to save "Brad" and we have no reason not to believe her, why would she want to have her boyfriend's penis destroyed? Last time I checked most girls enjoy the penises of their boyfriends.



If you don't like her personally that is another matter, but just because you think she is shallow it does not mean she is a narc or a kidnapper.



That is exactly what I said in my previous post but that fact that you were confused by such a simple statement does not speak well for your reading comprehension.



It is sad that you think a rape victim does not have the right to seek legal defense against somebody who truly is a narc. Your hate is quite simply misdirected and I strongly encourage you to read the relevant literature before passing ignorant judgement on others.

Legal defense for a rape is clearly different than the legal issues at hand with regards to whatever you choose to call the detention of her boyfriend...so reading comprehension is probably not something you want to bang your drum about either

No matter how you choose to define it, she was engaged in nefarious activities involving the detention of an individual against his will. I didn't assume a false premise, I merely said she had a role in his kidnap (or detention or whatever you choose to term it)...being present for it makes her complicit to the act, maybe not legally, but as far as her responsibility as a human being. This is no different than the complicity of any American who did nothing about slavery while being alive at the time or any European who was aware of the Nazi trains/death camps yet refused to act. Imo, non-action counts as involvement, regardless of what the law may say.

The document you provide does a rather shoddy job of making your point...it states that many of the facts of what actually occurred, and why, and who was involved for what reasons are still unclear...so......

Cole was involved with Skinner and could have taken more steps than she did with regards to his actions...it's that simple to my mind. Was she scared for her life? Most likely. Have others partaken in even more potentially risky actions when their lives were jeopardized? Without a doubt.

"Kidnapping" aside, no matter how you choose to cut it or defend her, she is not guilt free and her actions are significantly less than admirable. She willfully engaged in a relationship with a narc and supported him/his actions...call it conspiracy to narc, if it makes you happy. This would be the minimum to qualify her as a narc, imo. The fact that she likes to brag about her drug knowledge and supposed above-average intelligence, yet fails to identify any of the substances in her defense page on her site (while giving more info on psychedelic compounds on the main part of her site) sets off all kinds of alarm bells in my head. Imo, the evidence points to her being less than honest and unquestionably involved in morally and ethically detestable actions, including police-related activities. I'm willing to bet we're just not going to see eye to eye on this.

I said "held hostage" is that unusual terminology...or is English your second language?

EDIT: I am done arguing with you because you are an idiot (ad hom). I hope, for your sake, that you are young. I think if you read the document I linked it is patently clear that Todd was keeping everybody in the hotel hostage and ordering them about with various threats. He was a sociopath, it is a rare person that wants to watch their lovers tortured.

My point is you are splitting semantic hairs...obfuscating the point at hand and getting hung up on minutia. Whatever you choose to term the act does not change her involvement in it.

EDIT: As stated already, you can justify it any way you want, you can call me an idiot, you can do the hokey pokey, it makes no difference to me. She had the power to act and did not, she willfully engaged with and supported a narc, 'nuff said.

Look, let's settle this here and now. Krystle Cole is a narc, plain and simple. Now, I don't hold the incident involving Brandon Green against her. It's clear that they were both being held by Skinner under extreme duress. That part of the story is understandable.

What I take issue with is the following (in her own words from a sworn affidavit):



Most damning is #5: "I attempted to report Skinner's [drug manufacturing] activities to DEA agents..." It doesn't get much more clear than that. She didn't report him for any incidence of domestic abuse, of which there were many. No, she reported him for drug manufacturing... which she herself had been entirely complicit in and had happily enjoyed the lucrative fruits of that lifestyle! Of course, Skinner was a sleazebag who had narc'ed on multiple people in the past, so maybe you would say he had it coming. Be that as it may, it's not the whole story.

I also take extreme exception to her being entirely complicit in setting up Pickard as well, as indicated in #6 and #7 above. She was fully aware that Skinner was setting Pickard up to turn into the feds. She was aware that he was doctoring evidence ("arrang[ing] photographs and other documents") to make this happen. Yet she did not take substantial action to prevent this from happening. And no one but an anti-drug zealot could claim that Pickard had it coming.

Bottom line: In her own words, she was complicit in Pickard being set up to turn in to the feds on drug manufacturing charges, and she herself actively tried to turn Skinner in to the feds on drug manufacturing charges, even though she was complicit in the drug manufacturing and her objection was to physical and emotional abuse she suffered at his hands. That makes her a narc. End of story.

I really don't like this woman. For all of the points Entropymancer stated and also, I HATE her youtube clips. She spouts so much bullshit. "If you cut money out of the equation, then entheogens are OK, but as soon as you pay for them, they become evil." So asinine. Her descriptions of many of her experiences are shallow and her little 'this is for your own safety, I'm not encouraging anything here' disclaimers are annoying.

She's obviously living with a lot of guilt over various things and tries to explain it away with little platitudes that really do nothing. She's stupid and shallow and I highly dislike her.

Now that I've gotten that out, </rage>

I agree wholeheartedly, the worst thing about this girl is her smug sense of self satisfaction when she is obviously of below average intelligence.

That. Nuff said, won't even click the link.

Entropymancer you are clearly intelligent and I am a big fan of your posts, so it is unfortunate to see you indulging in this sort of sophistry.

The affidavit you quoted (out of context) was drafted by William Leonard Pickard's defense attorney and signed by Krystle Cole at Pickard's behest for the prosecution of Skinner. The purpose of her signing the affidavit was to demonstrate to the court that Skinner was largely responsible for the laboratory and not Pickard. She was a teenager when all of this took place and to blame her for not having gone to the DEA preemptively to turn in Skinner for him (preparing) to turn in Pickard is totally unrealistic given the circumstances. If you think she is "shallow" (a meaningless word I have not heard since I was in middle school) that's your own business, don't watch her videos.

It's amusing to see the things you claim as irrelevant or "sophist" despite providing no real evidence to the contrary (and confirming she worked with the DEA).

You admit in your post that Cole engaged the DEA...that's it...she's a narc. Whether she was a teenager or a twenty-something or middle-aged is irrelevant (as are her motives), she snitched.

I know you think I'm an idiot...so feel free to disregard my words. Honestly my words are superfluous; the evidence speaks for itself.

Sounds like hes serving life because she got to the feds first. Just like Todd going to the feds before Leonard.