"Rob" wrote in message
...

.....

Please, feel free to try to convince us of
his innocence, but it is absurd to say that those who want to see him
removed must be acting out of some base motive.

Jerry Spinrad

On Feb 4, 10:59 pm, Rob wrote:

Brian,
Why do you have an axe to grind and why are you determined to assume
the ragged garmets of a howling rabble? Where is your dog in this
matter? Where do you seek to gain in this?
Rob

How odd you would seek to answer a question directed at another.
But I know Paul and Susan personally and have found them to be very
honorable.
I have heard accusations , but no evidence. Have you?


The USCF has no conclusive evidence. That is why ther have been a
total of four "experts" As Eisenstein once said if he were wrong it
would have taken only one expert to disprove him.

What an interesting set of interactions! When I asked Jerry Spinrad's own
interest in knowing about the whole thing before asking someone to 'prove
their innocence' -- which is actually quite difficult, no? If you didn't do
it, then you are asked to prove a negative -- Spinrad went away for a week,
thus 'not-noticing' the question entirely, but he's back now, as if nothing
had happened and maybe his McCarthite methodology had been overlooked?

What Jerry Spinrad did not chose to answer was if he himself wanted to
review all the available information which USCF holds, or had he already
made his mind up on the basis of one-sided accusations presented here,
proposed by an the abysmal crowd of abuseniks of the same order of offensive
remarks as the FSS himself?

That one-sided show insists that those who want all to be known are
partisan! - not a very credible piece of logic! In fact, its a measure of
desperation, not excluding the ludicrous remark that the offer to open up is
'insincere', even though the act of opening up belongs to the majority of
the USCF board, and is actually beyond the control of the accused to make it
so or restrict it.

The gallery comments are especially inane about those who comment on the
issue - indeed, they mock them - since those who want all to be known don't
want to resolve the issue in this newsgroup, or even resolve it themselves,
but to let USCF's members make up their own minds. And since USCF members
appear to be the most offended of all constituencies, the absent
recommendation on their part more than conflicts with their own base of
questioning - which is ostensibly to be for the members. In fact it
completely contradicts their stance.

Currently I am interviewing Paul Truong with what are probably the hardest
set of questions ever put to a USCF board member. I am not conscious of
skipping any issue whatever.

No doubt, there will be those who would prefer their own wording applied to
these questions, but I am writing as a journalist to obtain information by
asking real and answerable questions, not as a prosecutor hyperbolizing an
issue with a little rhetorical badinage for the peanut gallery.

Phil Innes