That would certainly neatly take US Track and Field management out of the complicity loop wouldn't it?
How about Attila the Hun? Maybe we should canonize him, too, while we're in a forgiving mood.
Give me a break!
Tony Craddock
___________________
08:38 PM 9/4/00 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 9/4/0 8:26:46 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
<<If there is reason to doubt the validity of something historical, then
there is certainly reason to discuss it. How about a show of hands -- who
is of the "let her rest in peace" mindset *and* feels she was on drugs?
And who of those that choose to discuss it feel she was not on drugs? In
other words, is the common sentiment that we should not discuss it just
another defense mechanism against acknowledging the possibility?
Dan>>
How about a show of hands by those who feel that the Flo-Jo "issue" has been
discussed enough on this list. Both sides have made their arguments many
times over, and I'm sure very few people have been persuaded to change their
minds based on the information presented here. There are some who will always
believe she was "dirty" and others who think otherwise. If anyone has
something new (factual, not anecdotal) to add to the mix, then let's hear it.
Otherwise, let it go.
Walt Murphy
