On Oct 12, 8:37 am, Mike Murray wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 06:20:36 -0700, Rob wrote:
c'mon Rob. This level of high minded disinterest is not appropriate
to the hog-wallow in which we are playing. Anyway, we're not the
jury. Feel free to convince us and prejudice us. We like it.
If you can't cite some reasons for saying "the material from
Mottershead, as posted on his website, is suspect", this is little
more than name-calling. We don't do that here. Oh....well, I guess
we do..... and that's OK too... but sometimes, we actually debate. Why
not give it a shot and be explicit about your reasons for writing
that?
Mike,
If I comment further it will cause some to simply want to attack what
I said just because it came frm me. Look at the information, closely.
Then we can discuss it.
Rob

Rob, I downloaded it. I looked at it. It's five and a half million
bytes long. It's like reading the phone book and Donald Trump's tax
return all mixed into one..

Gimme some specifics will ya?

Start at 2005 look at the "name" in the header and the fake from email
address. Look at the topics and who they attack. Now think back to
that time and what the relationships are between the parties.