> >>What's your evidence? Newspapers have lost big libel suits on this
>issue, and the Chistian Science Monitor had to retract<<
>
>Newspapers have lost big libel suits in Britain, where the libel
>laws are probably too accomodating to public figures. As to
>evidence. What's my evidence that Judith Miller is dirty? I don't
>have any. She's dirty. Do you believe no enemies on the left? Gotta
>be some, Doug.
Nope, don't believe in no enemies on the left. Though I've mostly retired from the food-fighting game.
But Miller is a creep because of what we know about her WMD reporting and her Zionist political affiliations. As for Galloway, you think he's sleazy without having any evidence except some that has been rejected in the British courts and by the editors of the Christian Science Monitor. Sure Brit libel law is a nightmare, but it's pretty weak to rely on such tainted evidence to make such heavy charges. And I've met the guy and spent an hour talking with him. He doesn't seem like a sleaze. And my pals at the New Press have spent a lot more than an hour with him, and think very highly of him. So you'll have to do better than a feeling.
Doug