Thursday, January 27, 2011


I am refusing to go with a story because I cannot get independent confirmation. It is the type story which demands verification. Also I know all too well going into an election people will plant false stories. I am being cautious because I know the reality about false stories, and to give Mr. Atkinson a chance to deny the story.

I emailed him yesterday and asked for a comment. I told him I would agree to print any statement he wants to make - subject to not attacking 3rd parties. I do not want to be in a situation wherein I have to endlessly email 3rd parties to verify the claims.

But I know a story is never simple - so let's get the truth and allow Mr. Atkinson to tell the story in his words - assuming there is a story. It may be that someone is simply trying to plant a fake story to impact the election.

Bottom line is, I have no evidence to say one way or the other. I have made the necessary inquiries with no response. There is not a cover-up. The people I have contacted are probably not allowed to answer my questions as a matter of law.

If anyone has hard evidence to support the story let me have it and then I will go with the story. It will be a more balanced story if I can include a statement from Mr. Atkinson.

1 comment:

BobbyWC said...

On this issue I have rejected a ton of comments- there were two types - the post is stupid and I am wasting time - they also went on to state I should be working harder to get Quintanilla indicted.

The other posts were telling me what is the story, but since I cannot confirm it I will not post it.

Look, we are going into an election - I am jaded about these things - I know how people work - even if the story is true is it because of the election cycle?

This is why I would prefer if Atkinson submit a statement denying the story or verifying it with his take on why it is happening

Bobby WC