the Putnam Whine.... Re: [at-l] Cost to remove a blowdown

[Snodrog5@aol.com (Snodrog5@aol.com)]

R&R falsely claims:
"I suppose the general, existing disinterest in this apology for AT 
conservationism has caused a memory failure over how this exactly arose. The 
letter in question came to being because many confident detractors of a 
well-known AT site owner were insisting that they KNEW beyond any doubt that 
he was a charlatan and he lied about his AT protection campaigns"
and
"Remember, I introduced this letter to the site after several posters said 
Wingfoot was lying about having any involvement at all in Putnam Mine. Nobody 

answered my post btw...
    The worst poison is the one by which we blind ourselves with hate when 
the truth is plain to see in front of us. The way I was raised, no group, 
animosity, or personal dislike for a controversial person or tone was enough 
reason to keep me from admitting when I was wrong..."

As usual, R&R is intentionally not being truthful.
What really happened is that R&R took some words of mine out of context, 
and sent them to WF in an effort to cause trouble. R&R has intentionally been 
false about the entire topic ever since.
If you care to read the next three emails I'll send to the list, (titled 1, 
2, and 3) you'll become informed.
TJ


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---