It's not a good as sex, but it does make me shudder.
Posted on 05/03/2006 8:24:41 AM PDT by Mike Bates
You may have missed it-on page 14 of the March 28 New York Times, there was a six-paragraph story about former government scientist Steven Hatfill being allowed by the U.S. Supreme Court to proceed with his defamation suit. His target is the Times and its columnist Nicholas Kristof.
There have been several recent problems for the paper, including the inaccurate designation of the masked man in the Abu Ghraib prisoner-abuse scandal, but the Hatfill suit holds the potential of forcing the paper to pay millions of dollars in damages. The Times should have to pay.
The Times tried to play down the result. A story posted by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press had attorney David Schultz quoted as saying, "It's not unexpected. Now it's back to the trenches. We're confident that at the end of the day that the case lacks merit." David Schulz is with the New York law firm of Levine Sullivan Koch & Schulz.
As we noted in a 2002 column, "New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof is one of those behind the FBI's campaign against Dr. Steven Hatfill in the anthrax case. Without contacting Hatfill or his representatives, Kristof wrote five columns and thousands of words urging more FBI scrutiny of the scientist. He portrayed Hatfill as a despicable character with an unsavory past. But Hatfill's attorney has been unable to get his side of the story in the paper. The Times now says it will run a Hatfill column on the matter, but only if it does not criticize Kristof by name. How's that for fairness?"
(Excerpt) Read more at aim.org ...
If the Times is against him, he's probably innocent. Just a general rule of thumb.
Someone really should consider class-action status for the many people the NYT has destroyed.
And of course much of the MSM is still fixated on all the innocent lives supposedly "destroyed" by Senator Joe McCarthy.
They are just another roll of toilet paper without the roll.
If innocent I'd like to see Hatfill exercise every opportunity to vindicate himself and receive redress... inpublic of course. If the NY Slimes can be made to suffer financially, that's just icing on the cake.
I watched Hatfill's press conferences. If he was lying during those conferences, he's the greatest actor in history.
There was a woman who started the witch hunt against Hatfill, but I don't recall her name...Kristof then managed to give it a lot of publicity. There was nothing at all to suggest that Hatfill was guilty...it was just a matter of wild conjectures by some lefties who decided he was a bad person because he had spent some time in either South Africa or Zimbabwe while it was still under white-minority rule.
I would think Mr. Hatfill will be owning a very large chunk of the NY Slimes in the near future. Take it to court and give them a taste of what he has gone through these past few years and I hope he wins...really big too!
I watched them too. I was left with strong feelings that he was innocent. He seemed very sincere. I remember reading about the allegations against him and they seemed totally absurd. Nothing about the allegations made sense. IT does indeed seem there was a witch hunt against him. I pray that the truth comes out and if Hatfill is innocent I hope the NYT pays dearly and ALL those in the FBI that pursued him are fired and charged with defamation. If Hatfill is innocent, then the FBI knowingly put this guy through hell and therefore those involved should pay dearly for their evil acts.
It's not a good as sex, but it does make me shudder.
We're confident that at the end of the day that the case lacks merit." David Schulz is with the New York law firm of Levine Sullivan Koch & Schulz.
Sounds like their story lacked merit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.