* I try not to "taunt" anybody. I just try to present or analyze photographic evidence. Nor do I consider anyone
my "foe." If people out there don't like the evidence I present, then it is they who feel taunted and who define me as their
* "He"? Where did they get that? I have never stated my gender. Jumping to conclusions.
* I have never said where I live, either. Yes, I take photographs in San Francisco frequently, but that does not
mean I necessarily live there. Again, jumping to conclusions.
* I take my pictures "for fun"? Quite the contrary -- it is hard work, and decidedly unpleasant. I do it because
it is necessary, not because it is fun. Of course, saying that I do what I do "for fun" is nothing more than a heavy-handed
attempt to brand me as an untrained amateur whose opinions are therefore marginalized. In fact, the entire article is nothing
more than that: a petty ad hominem attack to undermine my credibility, as if that somehow would prop up their arguments. This
is a logical fallacy used by debaters who have run out of valid arguments.
in the right hand column, which I received from Zombie this morning does not help much in figuring out who he/she is, but
the link he gives, contains a revealing update on the ongoing interchange of views in mainstream media on this important subject
including remarks by Australian Foreign Minister, Alexander Downer. No doubt Zombie's valuable research will figure in any
ICJ trial which may occur.