From: "Rich Gauszka" 

Well at least Chris Matthews and other talking heads make a decent living
out of conjecture. We just use up bits on Geo's hard drive.  Are you asking
if I'd exchange bits for bucks? 


"Mark"  wrote in message
news:435d9bae{at}w3.nls.net...
> You're assuming things that are not in evidence.
>
> Why are so many, so willing to conclude things on pure conjecture, what's
> wrong with waiting for Fitzgerald to either act or not?  You don't really
> want to emulate Chris Matthews, do you Rich?  could only stand about 90 seconds on my evening "surf by for laughs"
> remote control button pushsing>
>
>
> "Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
> news:435d98a4$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>> That's what makes this akin to the inane  actions of the Watergate crew.
>> Neither action was necessary. There were better ways to refute portions
>> of Wilson's charges but it appears those involved just settled for a
>> mindless counter-attack.
>>
>>
>> "Mark"  wrote in message
news:435d9659{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>
>>> "Robert G Lewis" 
wrote: ... So far Wilson's
>>> information has been shown to be far more correct than
>>>> the Administration.
>>>
>>> Wilson's information was completely refuted by the Senate Select
>>> Committee way back when. He's been entirely discredited by that and the
>>> Butler report in the UK. This is an old argument, very old.
>>>
>>> I'd go dig for old links (in fact I just dumped a link to the Senate
>>> report a little while back because I, stupidly, never thought it would
>>> be relevant again), but why bother? It'd just be another 6 months, or a
>>> year and the same old claims would resurface as if they'd never been
>>> discredited.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5