[UseNet and DejaNews headers trimmed]

From: Yale Edeiken
Subject: Another Chance for L'il Tommy to Run & Hide
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Date: April 17, 1996

[Tom Moran had posted a long list of subjects he had initiated. Daniel Mittleman responded with the following comment.]

"Boy, Tommy, I hadn't realized you had started so many garbage threads. So many words... so little reason."

[Mr. Moran replied with an invitation.]

"Prove it."

[Mr. Edeiken responded by repeating his conditions.]

I will, L'il Tommy. Same conditions as before. You know, the ones you have been ducking ever since you made your last challenge. For those who don't remember L'il Tommy challenges me to prove he was an anti-Semite. I agreed to do so under the following conditions:

1. An impartial alternate conflict resolution body (I suggested the American Arbitration Association) would make the decision.

2. The Federal Rules of Evidence were to be used.

3. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as to discovery and Rule 52 and 54 to apply.

4. The loser pays all arbitration fees and any stenographic or videotape fees.

At that time the issue was "Using a standard definition of the word, Tom Moran is an anti-Semite." This time the issue would be "Tom Moran's posts can be described as 'so many words . . . . so little reason."

The last time, Moran did not even respond (although he did lie about the substance of the acceptance of his challenge).

Will he show the same lack of intestinal fortitude this time?

The original plaintext version of this file is available via ftp.

[ Index ]

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor