On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 2:27 PM, <WJhonson(a)aol.com> wrote:
In a message dated 10/2/2008 6:31:56 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
charles.r.matthews(a)ntlworld.com writes:
The flattering picture of media power in the hands of WP (we didn't run
Byrne's line on short selling, so it was ignored by the Wall Street Journal and
New York Times?) deserves a short response. As in: "Come on!" We're the
unique
reliable source, now?>>
----------
Doesn't it seem like there's a bit of a distinction between
"we didn't run his line" compared to
"he was called a raving lunatic, a psychopathic hoodlum, and driven from WP
on a rail by a group we now know were equally partial and acting in bad faith"
Just a small difference from what you stated, to what actually occurred.
We now know no such thing, William. That's high slander and a gross
misinterpretation of the actual facts on the ground.
Even the most severe opponents did not seriously claim that the admins
who "drove him away" (indef blocked him and his employees repeatedly)
were involved in the deception or conflict of interest issue with
Weiss.
--
-george william herbert
george.herbert(a)gmail.com