Fred Bauder wrote:
Alec Conroy
wrote:
If I understand rightly, [[Robert Black (professor)]] is a respected
Scottish law prof who is from Lockerbie, who has taken a great interest
in the Lockerbie case, and was involved in setting up the Lockerbie
trials of the Libyan agents.
In response to recent activity in the case, in early July he set up a
blog to discuss it. We briefly mentioned the blog and added a link to
it. That link stayed in place until a few days ago, when he gave a
one-sentence mention of the allegations that SV "systematically altered"
the Wikipedia Lockerbie articles, mentioning what some claim is her
true name. He doesn't claim that they are true, just that they are
interesting.
Here's some more garbage from the page the respected professor linked to:
<snip>
But the issue is not the link that the professor linked to, but rather a
link to the professor's own site (and not even to the specific blog
entry but rather to the front page of the site as a whole). If BADSITES
becomes transitive so that we can no longer link to sites that link to
sites that have "forbidden" information we're going to have to start
culling out a tremendous number of otherwise innocuous URLs. Where does
the BADSITE taint end?
Anyway, here's what he _actually_ wrote:
<http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2007/10/wikipedia-and-lockerbie.html>
The professor posted just a single paragraph there and it contains none
of the speculations you describe. I note that all the text you pasted
here is actually present on the page now, though, because you yourself
pasted it into the comments section there. This strikes me as somewhat
hypocritical.