To: roses of sharon
So Richardson (like several other hasty folks) shot off his mouth after seeing 14 (fourteen) seconds of mixed-up video and without engaging his brain. He can do that unofficially and get away with it.
Where are all the Janes news articles saying the same thing -- on the record, putting Janes' reputation on the line?
Hmm, not a one, you say? That says volumes...
35 posted on
11/30/2010 3:03:24 PM PST by
TXnMA
(You don't have to be a California Condor expert to recognize a mockingbird when it sings...)
To: TXnMA
You should write and ask them/him why he hasn't retracted his analysis.
I can't argue with you because I could not tell a contrail, from a cloud, or a missile!
36 posted on
11/30/2010 3:20:03 PM PST by
roses of sharon
(I can do all things through Him who strengthens me. Philippians 4:13)
To: TXnMA
On November 16th I sent the following to press.releases@janes.com
and to General Editorial at Jane’s.
“Have you done a detailed analysis of the Nov.8,2010 controversial (contrail?/missile?) occurrence off the coast of LA?
Your first impression is being touted as the final word on the occurrence.
Has there been any additional effort on the part of Jane’s to seriously investigate the occurrence?”
They haven’t gotten back to me.
41 posted on
11/30/2010 4:23:30 PM PST by
kanawa
(Obama - "The only people who don't want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide.")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson