--- In [email protected], "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: <snip> > Of course, in my opinion, when Skolnick writes, as he has > often done, that the suit was dismissed without prejudice > and doesn't mention the settlement, he is intentionally > misleading readers.
Skolnick didn't just not mention the settlement. He swore up and down and backwards that there had *been* no settlement. >From a post of his of July 13, 1999: "The only twisting being done here, Lawson, is yours. You can offer no evidence of any settlement, because there was none. So your play your TM word games for some bizarre purpose I cannot fathom. They are fooling no one. "No agreement settling the case was reached. There was no settlement. The case was not settled. There was no agreement that settled the case. No settlement was reached. There was no formal settlement. There was no informal settlement. The case was never settled. No agreement settling the case was reached. The TM plaintiffs did not get what they demanded. They did not agree to dismiss the case with prejudice. The case was not settled. There was no formal settlement. There was no informal settlement. "I don't know how else to say it. But I'm sure there is no way I can to get Lawson to stop playing his word games. His agenda to defend TM demands that the JAMA's editor, the AMA and I secretly settled the suit. To Lawson, the needs of the TM movement are the ultimate truth." http://tinyurl.com/ypqerb Here's the beginning of that particular thread, for context: http://tinyurl.com/37txdk There are many more posts from Skolnick making the same claims and accusing *TMers* of lying or attempting to obfuscate about there having been a settlement. No TMer on alt.m.t lied or obfuscated anything. We just didn't think we were getting a straight answer from Andrew. And boy, were we right. Andrew Skolnick has actually won awards for his journalism.
