On Apr 24, 2:29 pm, Mike Murray wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:19:07 -0700 (PDT),
"
wrote:

On Apr 24, 12:02 pm, "Chess One" wrote:
I think perhaps you accept that not everything
was or is yet quite in the open here, but your attention to what is and what
is not so apparent is possibly now incremented by materials not previously
known to yourself.
Yes. It is interesting, needs some serious evaluation, and suggests a
direction of inquiry I had no inkling of.

The Mottershead Report came out some eight months ago, and its
implications have been semi-paralyzing the USCF EB ever since. The
idea that there's a whole layer of alternative explanation for the FSS
identity, an explanation relatively plausible, not publicly discussed,
but disclosed by e-mail to selected private parties -- this is strange
stuff. Its strangeness is compounded by the plethora of half-baked
explanations put forth by PT/SP supporters, and vigorously debunked in
this and other forums.

Jeremy, your postings reveal general level-headedness and goodwill,
and I'll respect your judgment that there's secret stuff out there
that needs "some serious evaluation", but the PT/SP strategy of
keeping it semi-secret for the better part of a year leaves me
baffled. Usually, the desire to keep things safely under wraps is not
a major flag of innocence. I'm at a loss to understand how this could
be good either for the USCF or for PT/SP.

I'm sorry, but this appears to be more of the typical Trollgar/Innes/
Mitchell claque and dagger stuff. I don't see any reason to buy it
this time.