On Dec 10, 12:24 pm, Mike Murray wrote:
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 05:08:06 -0800 (PST), The Historian

wrote:
On Dec 10, 6:58 am, "Chess One" wrote:

Snip typical Innes defense of his self-esteem meal-ticket.
Can
Mottershead not be the whistle blower, but the perp?
Mike, I think Philsy came up with a new one for the List of the Blind
Monkey!

Somehow, I suspected one of the flacks would go this route. It's
amazing after all P. Innes' self-righteous prattle about evidence that
he'd blithely toss out such garbage.

These desperate attempts to divert attention and muddy the waters have
been duplicated over in the monitored world of the USCF forums, but,
AFAIK, nobody has been dumb enough over there to claim Mottershead
might be the Fake Sam Sloan. Over there, as expert opinion more and
more supports the report and its underlying methodology, the
nay-sayers have tended to claim (1) it invaded other members' privacy
and (2) it wasn't authorized.

Mike,

I find it interesting that the claim is made that it invaded members
privacy. Bill Hall gave the Cherry
Hill, NJ private information about me calling me a terrorist. I am
going to put hall in his place,
and offerer a reward to stop the criminal activity that goes on with
his approval. In any event, my privacy
is not respected, and nobody seems to care about the truth.

If Hall can call me a terrorist, then I call him a childmolester.

Why not, Hall did not respect my privacy. He told the cops I was a
terrorist, and gave out private infomraiton about me.

Marcus Roberts