yes on my radio show i said that lilly saying critics have picked and 
chosen which documents to present is like saying that if there are 100 
pieces of evidence at a crime scene, the prosecutor can't pick the 
evidence that proves the crime because they are not seeing the whole 
picture...

Rafael wrote:
>> Also, someone in the u.k. has been reading the "top secret" docs...
>>
>> http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13129-2560841,00.html
>>
>>   
> 
> and so it spreads...
> 
> http://www.forbes.com/markets/feeds/afx/2007/01/23/afx3351386.html
> 
> http://marketplace.publicradio.org/shows/2007/01/23/AM200701239.html
> 
> Lilly's claims that the documents are incomplete are irrelevant. In 
> another recent 1st Amendment battle U.S. Magistrate Judge James C. 
> Francis IV writes 
> (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CONVENTION_ARRESTS?SITE=NYNYP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT)
>  
> 
> 
> "The mere fact that a given document does not provide the reader with a 
> full picture does not make it unreliable," he wrote. "Additionally, the 
> city gives the general public very little credit when it contends that 
> readers will be unable to grasp that the information contained in these 
> documents might be incomplete or inaccurate."
> 
>> http://collections.plos.org/plosmedicine/diseasemongering-2006.php
>>
>> PLoS is an Open Access journal... free culture meets psych rights once again.
>>
>> - Fletch
> Sweet.
> _______________________________________________
> Zyprexa-discuss mailing list
> Zyprexa-discuss@acm.jhu.edu
> http://lists.acm.jhu.edu/mailman/listinfo/zyprexa-discuss
> 
_______________________________________________
Zyprexa-discuss mailing list
Zyprexa-discuss@acm.jhu.edu
http://lists.acm.jhu.edu/mailman/listinfo/zyprexa-discuss

Reply via email to