Begin forwarded message:
From: Brian Salter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: December 10, 2004 7:59:56 PM PST
To: Michael Kane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: 911 Truthalliance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "[EMAIL PROTECTED] Riseup. Net" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [911truthalliance] Kane Responds to Thorn's Attack on Ruppert
good work, mike.
a belated FYI about thorn's article: he has done some very clever editing of something that i wrote in my blog about his previous hit piece, apparently to try and make me look like a supporter of his. he didn't provide a link to my original page, which might help keep his readers in the dark about the fact that i was actually very critical of thorn and rejected the bulk of his piece. if anyone is interested, here's the link:
http://www.questionsquestions.net/blog/041019b.html
what thorn left out:
"a great deal of this is a waste of time & effort, being a lot of personal commentary and some "sour grapes" issues... As for the other points that I haven't mentioned, I am either undecided or find Ruppert's side to be convincing. While Thorn may have brought up some legitimate points, there sure are some amateurish cheapshots, such as wasting time questioning Ruppert's journalism training or dredging up purely personal gripes. I think Thorn has muddied things up by issuing a flawed and sloppy attack, which has probably made things more difficult for those who want to criticize Ruppert in a more thoughtful and disciplined way."
my opinion of thorn is even lower now. what a fool.
-brian
