>Many, many hours were spent by a number of people to research what we
>could on MF for all of you last year.  The on-line addresses are with
>all or almost all of the articles I sent to all of you on the FML.
 
Lisette, are you ever going to identify the "we" with whom you work to do
the "research"?  The on-line addresses from last year ALL referred back to
one source and only one source -- the so-called "newspaper" article that
was in actuality a PeTA article that deliberately presented misinformation.
 
It is not good enough to present unverifiable allegations and then refuse
to name your sources, name the mysterious "we" who is supposed to have
worked so diligently with you to uncover the information.
 
>Just write down those addresses, read the articles from various sources,
>and decide for yourself.
 
It was proved last year that every one of the "various sources" referred
to one and only one source of information -- the fake "newspaper" article
that was produced by PeTA.  There are no various sources and you know it.
To claim otherwise is an outright lie.
 
>There is no sense in me responding to the same old, same old.  Believe no
>one.  Find out for yourself.
 
No, you aren't going to wriggle off the hook -- you made the allegations
and presented them as fact.  It is up to you to identify the source of
the information.  Identify the unnamed "we" to whom you refer all the
time, identify the unnamed vet you claim to have interviewed as a source
for your allegations.  You made the charges, now the burden is on you to
prove the truth of those charges.
 
If the charges you made are true and honest, there would be no reason for
you not to identify the source, identify the mysterious "we", and the
unnamed vet to whom you always refer.
 
Scott
[Posted in FML issue 3447]