Time: Mon Nov 11 14:49:05 1996
To: roc@xmission.com,Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: Thank you Veterans!
Cc: 
Bcc: 

Dear Harry and Friends,

Please forgive me for failing to
leave sufficient attribution below.
I am getting flooded again with
incoming email, and I am going 
as fast as I can just to keep up
with all of it.  I slipped, obviously.
(Excessive snipping?  See sentencing
guidelines for the U.S. District Court:)

/s/ Paul Mitchell




At 10:11 AM 11/11/96 -0800, you wrote:
>On Mon, 11 Nov 1996, Paul Andrew Mitchell wrote:
>
>> Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 09:58:15 -0700 (MST)
>> From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
>> Subject: Thank you Veterans!
>> 
>> <snip>
>> >I now understand that my Government lied to me . I was 19 at the time (1966)
>> >and had no idea that the Government was not "Of the People , By the People
>> >and For the People ".
>> >
>> >The real reason for the war was in part to make some people richer. 
>> >
>> >One side effect was to test a new generation weapons in combat conditions .
>> >At a cost of blood .
>> >
>> >Harry
>> <snip>
>> 
>> 
>> Dear Harry,
>> 
>> When I was a political science intern
>> in Washington, D.C., during the summer
>> of 1969, I was able to spend some time
>> at the Pentagon public library, 
>> investigating Pentagon weapons mistakes
>> since World War II....
>>
>> [***]
>> 
>> /s/ Paul Mitchell
>> 
>> ===========================================================
>> Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.:  pmitch@primenet.com                  
>> ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776, Tucson, Arizona state
>> ===========================================================
>> 
>> 
>
>Point of clarification:  I, "Harry", did NOT make the above statements
>which a reader, lacking any other data, might attribute to me.
>
>The quote is also apparently presented as a ROC posting that is being
>responded to.  The source posting is not in MY ROC log.  Where did it
>come from?
>
>Mr. Mitchell, I presume it was not your intent to be ambiguous, and I
>appreciate you attempt to save bandwidth.  However, please be so kind
>as to leave sufficient attribution so that people can unambiguously
>identify sources.  I use originators to establish the credibility of
>what is being said.  I suspect others do also.
>
>-----
>Harry Barnett <harryb@eskimo.com>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
      

Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail