Wednesday, August 29, 2007

The Contemptible Nifong, I

Tomorrow in Durham, Mike Nifong faces a criminal contempt hearing before Judge Osmond Smith. (I am heading down to Durham later today and will be live-blogging the event.) At issue, did he lie to the court on September 22, 2006?

Here’s Nifong on September 22, 2006:

Judge Smith: So his report [Meehan’s May 12 report] encompasses it all?

Mr. Nifong: His report encompasses ever -- because we didn’t -- they apparently think that everybody I speak to about, I talk about the facts of the case. And that’s just, that would be counterproductive. It did not happen here.

Judge Smith: So you represent there are no other statements from Dr. Meehan?

Mr. Nifong: No other statements. No other statements made to me.

Mr. Bannon: Just so I’m clear, Mr. Nifong is representing that the facts of the case weren’t discussed in those meetings.

Mr. Nifong: That is correct. The facts of the case, other than the fact that we were seeking a, the male fraction DNA.

Here’s Nifong in an impromptu press conference, after the December 15, 2006 court session, saying that he did know about the unidentified male DNA, but consented to its non-reporting for privacy concerns:

And we were trying to, just as Dr. Meehan said, trying to avoid dragging any names through the mud but at the same time his report made it clear that all the information was available if they wanted it and they have every word of it.

And here’s Nifong in his deposition before the Bar, conceding that—at some point—Meehan told him about the multiple unidentified male DNA, but that “I was not thinking of that in terms of having much relevance to the night in question . . . I really wasn’t thinking of that as having a whole lot of relevance.”

Bar attorney Doug Brocker pressed on this point, asking the obvious question:

Mr. Brocker: At the time did it occur to you odd or unusual that they were able to recover DNA on some of these rape kit items from a single cell, but there was no DNA remaining from an alleged gang rape that had happened that same night?

Mr. Nifong: Not specifically, because as I said, the SBI lab had said that there was no ejaculation from that . . . I was aware that the victim [sic] that night had been in—she came in one car. She left in a separate car. She was in a police car. She was at the access center. She was at Duke Hospital. There were a lot of places where a fractional amount of DNA could be picked up from something that she was sitting on. But I really, as I indicated, wasn’t thinking very strongly about the possibility of that particular—those particular results having anything at all to do with the assault. And, you know, certainly in retrospect I believe that I probably should have paid more attention to that. I didn’t at the time, and I think that led to some of the issues that resulted from, you know, my not having made notes and having paid more attention to it.

In addition to proving Nifong lied to the court in September, this statement represents a bizarre analysis of DNA evidence. Did Nifong really believe that Mangum could have picked up DNA from unidentified males by sitting in a police car?

70 comments:

Anonymous said...

Well, perhaps in a Durham police car.

Anonymous said...

Did Nifong really believe that Mangum could have picked up DNA from unidentified males by sitting in a police car?

Can the dude "wing it" or what ? If this whole thing wasn't so tragic, it would be comic. But in the end, at least, I believe the bad guy will get his due (or close to it).

Anonymous said...

And only if he was familiar with the type of women who routinely sit in the back of police cars while not wearing any underwear.

A bizarre DNA defense indeed.

Anonymous said...

And only if you are familiar with women who sit in police cars without underwear.....

Anonymous said...

JLS says...,

1. Of course Mangum could have picked up fractional DNA from sitting in a police car, just as she could have picked up fractional DNA from rolling around on the floor at the at the party. I believe that was a serious concern early on in this case. I do not believe we know why types of fractional DNA this could have been but it might have been from skin cells. [And yes I know where some of them were found, but consider how much Mangum was wearing if you dare.]

2. That said, none of this matters for Nifong's contempt hearing. What matters is he was untruthful. It was not his call what to disclose. He lied to the court.

Anonymous said...

After listening to the answers provided by Nifong and Meehan during Mikey's bar hearing it's clear those two believe anything is possible. They would have you believe Crystal Mangum might have slipped on a banana peel resulting the DNA of 4 men being found in her vagina.

Florida Gator said...

KC said "...for readers in the Pittsburgh area, I’ll be on 93.7/The Zone with John Steigerwald, at 9.20am." For those not in this area you might be able to listen live or later download a podcast here:

Anonymous said...

"Did Nifong really believe that Mangum could have picked up DNA from unidentified males by sitting in a police car?"

Perhaps thats why the foreign DNA has never been run against DNA data banks -- they might just get some hits on DPD?

Cells from the cars she rode in, chairs she sat in....but no cells from a brutal 3 person rape? Could Nifong possibly have believed what he heard himself saying?

Try him the old fashioned way -- somebody get a rope! Just kidding of course.

Anonymous said...

I regret and condemn the malicious impersonation incident which Scott Kaufmann if experiencing.

Impersonation of any kind is on the other side of a clear bright line and is totally unacceptable.

It is not my idea of good clean fun.

Anonymous said...

Who the heck is Scott Kaufmann?

Ralph Phelan said...

"Did Nifong really believe that Mangum could have picked up DNA from unidentified males by sitting in a police car?"

The DPD must have some seriously nasty police cars.

bill anderson said...

No doubt, Mike Nifong also believes that one can pick up AIDS from a toilet seat. Contemptible is a correct assessment of this guy.

Anonymous said...

12:49 AM

. . . a bananaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, I guess so . . . that is possible . . . maybe . . . yep, in a police car . . . a Durham police car . . . yep . . . yep . . . ugh. Somethings you just don't need to know . . . like who the DNA blonged to . . . someone might find out who their daddy is . . . or perhaps the Durham police "knew" this person in the Biblical sense of things . . . but maybe she was attacked with a banana . . . ugh. It's a DukeGroup88 thing . . . you got to believe . . . .

AF said...

Cells from the cars she rode in, chairs she sat in....but no cells from a brutal 3 person rape? Could Nifong possibly have believed what he heard himself saying?

He was probably so accustomed to pulling the wool over the eyes of the jurors in Durham that he figured everyone, including the judges and AG, would be dumb enough to believe his fabrications. Anyone who was ever prosecuted in Durham should run, not walk, for an appeal. With this kind of incompetence, there should be no doubt that a basis for appeal exists.

And to think that the Gov is thinking about replacing Mikey with someone who worked in that same department. If these people were complicitous enough to work with Mikey without exposing him for what he was, why would they be considered competent to man the DA's office? Only a DA would believe that (and I don't mean District Attorney either).

Anonymous said...

My, what a strong rebuke of your followers, KC. And you wonder why there is so much contempt not only for those who harrass people who disagree with you but for you yourself.

no justice, no peace said...

I find it most interesting that the defender/abettors attempt shift the conversation away from the Klan of 88 frauds, Nifong abettors, and the deplorable actions of those involved to:

1. Harassing emails,

2. Stalking,

3. Silencing voices,

4. etc.

In short "we are victims, I told you so, I wasn't kidding."

The notion that any would want to silence their voices is insane. It runs contrary to common sense.

Who in their right mind would ask that the tap of plenty be shut off?

It is great entertainment to see these frauds open their mouths and expose themselves.

Who in the hell would want to get in the way of that kind of fun?

So, maybe these are additional manufactured meta-narratives?

mac said...

Remember the old Chiffon margarine commercials?

"It's not nice to fool mother nature!"

I can imagine Judge Smith being in somewhat of the same mood as Mother Nature.

teach1975 said...

IICR there are transcripts of the closed hearing between the Judge and Nifong (they discussed this at the bar hearing) have these been released?

scott said...

Nifong undoubtedly still believes that old locker room tale that you can pick up an STD from a toilet seat as well.

Real simple test -- if his lips were moving, Nifong was lying.

He did the crime, now he should do the time.

Anonymous said...

Is Nifong a Communist?

gak said...

If Mike gets any more then a slap on the hand, I'll be surprised. I think the judge will guage the locals and how they feel and if he can, he will let Nifong go.

Anonymous said...

From a comment on Kaufmann's blog:


With regard to the hatred being directed at academia, I shudder to think that the posters over at DiW are somehow representative of the general population. I seriously doubt this to be the case.

The fact of the matter is that people are still sending their kids to Duke. Students are still applying in large numbers, and matriculating in the same. This is something of an inconvenient truth for the posters at DiW.

no justice, no peace said...

I just read where Mack Brown, the head football coach at The University of Texas at Austin just received a two year extension to his contract with an annual raise to $2,800,000 for this season.

Any who have recently attended a game will see that he is paying for himself through the sale of suites, increased tickets, merchandise, post season revenue, etc.

There were a couple of items that caught my attention. First the contract and extensions are performance based. He has no tenure. If he fails, not only does he lose his job, but so does his staff.

Had he not had prior success, he would not have been considered, much less hired. It is after all an elite program.

Most interesting is the bonus incentive structure. Among other incentives, such as winning the Big 12 or national championship, are tiers bound to graduation rates.

Consider this; Brown will make $150,000 if his team achieves a 75% graduation rate.

In other words, he will likely make more from that bonus alone by encouraging his students to take bull shit classes like those offered by the race/gender/class warfare frauds than the professors who teach the pap. The incentive structure abets the dumbing-down of our culture.

Ironically the life-lessons learned from the hard work and competition will likely serve most of his athletes than the course work.

I’m beginning to think Capitalism and irony are better than sex and single malt scotch.

Anonymous said...

I wonder if the person/s who were impersonating Scott Kaufmann will come clean and apologize? No? Oh. I guess apologies are only needed in some cases...

Anonymous said...

So Nifong the Liar wanted a jury trial.

Perhaps he thought he could get some fellow liars, like members of the Duke faculty G88 with perpetually (and most likely, nonexistent) "forthcoming" publications listed on their c.v., as members of his jury.

He could count on these people to turn a blind eye to evidence, and to the truth, in favor of deciding reliably on tribal and idealogical identity.

Or perhaps... that "fellow traveler", Dick Brodhead, could have saved his man, Nifong.

inman said...

I'd like to echo some thoughts concerning impersonation and dishonesty.

Personal or political agenda should not provide cover for dishonest acts. I think everyone needs to remember that there is no substitute for truth and the HOAX will bear witness to that fact forever!

Anonymous said...

DNA from the squad car.

don't ever forget the Kindergarten teacher analogy that Dr. Meehan gave us.

inman said...

njnp @ 8:17

I’m beginning to think Capitalism and irony are better than sex and single malt scotch.

Wait a sec. Let's not go overboard. Capitalism and irony aren't even close to single malts ... and they're only neck-and-neck with sex.

Oh. And thanks for your kind note!

Michael said...

re: 8:42

We should be above the fray over here. That said, how much is an unsigned apology worth from Anonymous?

Ralph Phelan said...

"I wonder if the person/s who were impersonating Scott Kaufmann will come clean and apologize? No? Oh. 8:42 am.

I guess apologies are only needed in some cases..."

That anonymous spamming internet troll is as shameful a human being as those 87 members of the Duke faculty, and should apologise just as they should. As a practical matter, it's kind of hard to hound him for an apology as he's anonymous, now isn't it?

Of course, the corrolary is that a substantial fraction of Duke's faculty are as low as spammers and internet trolls.

Anonymous said...

"I shudder to think that the posters over at DiW are somehow representative of the general population"

A delicate and refined shudder, no doubt, looking for a spine to run up.

Debrah said...

TO Florida Gator @ (12:56AM)--

Thanks so much for the link to KC's interview!

Just got on the computer in time to hear the last half of the show.

It was very good. KC has a kind of upbeat, demonstrative voice and the interviewer John asked some substantive questions.

It ended with the host discussing the books and he said that KC had taken a dry subject and had turned it into a drama.

That's a very good critique....which is why it will be a bestseller.

I am so happy for KC on this. It makes everyone feel so wonderful since we all have witnessed, firsthand, his monumental efforts and the kind of stand-up guy he is.

Great!

Anonymous said...

"how much is an unsigned apology worth from Anonymous"

I hope everyone realizes that behind every anonymous post is a real person with feelings and sensitivities.

Debrah said...

After reading KC's post about Kaufman's latest challenge, I seriously doubt a regular participant from D-I-W would have taken the time for such childish mischief.

Too bad there is no successful way to track such people to find out who they are.

In any case, Kaufman wanted some attention. Looks as though he got it.

miramar said...

After reading Nifong's statements, I can only conclude that he used to be a contestant in the Miss Teen USA pageant from the state of North Carolina. He simply does not talk like a U.S. American.

Anonymous said...

The DNA was also in her mouth. Was she licking the seat as well?

Anonymous said...

To Anon at 10:26 a.m.

eeeewwwwwww!

Ralph Phelan said...

"The DNA was also in her mouth. Was she licking the seat as well?"

Probably looking for any traces of cocaine left behind by the previous occupant.

Of course, sitting on it isn't the only way to acquire DNA in the back seat of a car....

KC Johnson said...

I suspect that discretion is the better approach in speculating on sources of DNA . . .

Steven Horwitz said...

Debrah wrote:

In any case, Kaufman wanted some attention. Looks as though he got it.

You know, it's comments like these that contribute to the lowering of discourse around here.

How would you react to this instead:

In any case, the lacrosse players wanted some attention. Looks as though they got it.

Not so nice, eh?

Scott did nothing wrong and has now been targeted by people who don't like him in a despicable, unethical, and illegal way. (Sound familiar?)

And among your responses?

"Well he asked for it."

Disgusting.

Steven Horwitz said...

Let me clarify my 1039:

It's an analogy not an equivalence. Being subscribed to 70 listservs is really annoying and takes time to undo, but is clearly not the same as facing 30 years in jail. However, the principle is the same.

If "well if they hadn't hired strippers, they wouldn't be in this mess" is wrong, so is "well, if he hadn't criticized KC and the DIW commenters, he wouldn't be in this mess."

Anonymous said...

I was first to condemn malicious impersonation and I was not speaking pro forma, but sincerely.

I don't know if Kaufman "asked for it". That was the opinion expressed by a commenter on this board. I would not have chosen to characterize it as "disgusting"

But I do know that Kaufmann repeatedly smeared Dr Johnson by calling him 'Horowitzian'. Horowitz is a knuckledragging drooler who, in the name of fairness, is trying to establish a censorship regime aimed at the left and is a million miles from the kind of honest writer and commenter Dr Johnson is.

I, of course, still condemn unequivocally the malicious impersonation aimed at Kaufmann.

I consider Kaufmann to be dishonest and willing to smear and he can run to hell.

Debrah said...

To Stevan--

Be careful.

You are showing your desperation again.

Even the most anti-Wonderland commenter will not go the way you just have.

Please don't get me started.

You have just shown what a fever-pitch illogical Lefty can do when he/she does not like someone.

The lacrosse players didn't show up anywhere harassing people.....so even that childish and disgusting lame-grasping-at-straws-for-a-comparison-hack-job will not fly.

Your analogy is beneath even you.

I would like to say more, but KC would not put it through.

Debrah said...

No one said the little creep "asked for it".

Please be honest when you are trying to make a case for an idiot ankle-biter.

Please do yourselves that favor.

Debrah said...

Steven--

Let me add that if you go on your little blogs and engage in this same kind of lie and putting words in my mouth, then you and I will have a problem.

Steven Horwitz said...

In any case, Kaufman wanted some attention. Looks as though he got it.

"He asked for it."
"He got what he asked for."

My 11 year old has sufficient reading comprehension skills to understand that either of those two things are the same as your own words.

And thanks for the threat Debrah. Once again, YOU have lowered the level of discourse. Just goes to show what people will do when faced with the reality of their own words. I have never lied about anything you've said, nor have I have I put words in your mouth. I've quoted your own words and offered an interpretation of them. If you disagree, fine, but don't accuse me of lying or putting words in your mouth.

Imagine someone saying: "Of course illegal impersonation is awful, but you know when you are a little creep and idiot ankle-biter that might put you in a situation where that could result, you have to accept some responsibility for your victimization." Bah. It didn't fly for the Lax players when people called them racist/sexist for hiring strippers and it doesn't fly for Scott. I submit your earlier post is implicitly making the same argument.

And also thanks for calling me a Lefty. That makes my day. Feel free to say more in private - I love collecting hate emails.

Anonymous said...

I was wrong.
"I don't know if Kaufman "asked for it". That was the opinion expressed by a commenter on this board"

That opinion was NOT expressed by a commenter.

I could have checked and sloppily didn't. I was wrong. I'm sorry. And most abjectly contrite.

Specifically, it is profoundly uncool to put words in other people's mouths which they did not say. And that other commenter did NOT say "he asked for it".

Anonymous said...

11:04AM

I'm still not buying your analogy.

Kaufman, by posting on DiW, was arguably looking for attention though not the kind that he found.

I do not condone in any way, the anonymous person/s who signed him up to the conservative listservs. That was wrong.

I'm certain the lacrosse players were not looking for any attention when they held their party.

In Kaufman's case, the attention he received was not unexpected. In the lacrosse case, the attention received was beyond anyone's wildest nightmare.

Anonymous said...

Correction re. name calling:

Sorry for the wrong assumption, I checked www.urbandictionary.com for the definition of ankle biter:

Someone or something that bites your ankles.
To a postman, an ankle biter is often known as a dog.
To an adult, an ankle biter may be a toddler.
To hikers, an ankle biter is sometimes a tick.


BUT, seriously, does DIW need name calling such "creep" and "ankle biter"?

Debrah said...

TOP 12:29PM--

Thank you for correcting your mistake.

And thanks for showing others how a real man behaves.

Anonymous said...

12:25 PM

Dude, you are on to a complete loser.

That other commenter did not say "he aked for it". Those words are your interpretation of what the other commenter said and then you put them in QUOTES. This is felony (or, at least, high misdemeanor) contravention of the punctilio.

Say your sorry and promise not to do it again.

Anonymous said...

Is the Criminal Contempt Hearing going to be broadcast live? I'll stay home to watch just to see Nifong cooking in his own juice..

One Spook said...

Whoooooooaaaaa, folks!

There is NO EXCUSE or justification for anyone to send listservs to anyone without their permission, and there is NEVER any reason to impersonate another.

Nothing should be offerred to mitigate that type of behavior, either. It is wrong, period; no exceptions.

None of us should tolerate that type of behavior among us, period; no excuses. It is dishonorable, regardless of how any of you try to slice it up or minimize it.

One Spook

Anonymous said...

After reading KC's post about Kaufman's latest challenge, I seriously doubt a regular participant from D-I-W would have taken the time for such childish mischief.-Debrah

Rose colored glasses, anyone??

Nicole said...

Is Nifong's Criminal Contempt Hearing going to be broadcast live?

Debrah said...

TO 12:47PM--

We all have different needs.

Which has nothing to do with the point you are trying to make.

I find Kaufman an illogical clown looking for attention with a kind of sick need of his own to taint KC and this blog--for reasons that are clear.

Didn't work.

He and his little janissaries lost their pants.

Debrah said...

And thanks for the threat Debrah.

It's been a while since I've seen someone try to harm another with a multitude of nasty comments which KC has allowed him to spew.....

.....then when his deliberate gross concoction is illuminated and shown for what it is....

.....he plays the victim.


Shades of the Gang of 88 conquering

Debrah said...

To 1:05PM--

We've already said that.

What point are you trying to make?

Debrah said...

Just goes to show what people will do when faced with the reality of their own words.

Yes, what will YOU do with your own words.

Humorous, that.

no justice, no peace said...

This Kaufmann thing grates on me.

This pitiful attempt at moral relevance is predictable.

So now tooling pals by having the Church of Latter Day Saints come visit or referring them to a pesky life insurance agent is like falsely accusing people of rape and sending them to prison for 30 years?

I only do things like that to my very best friends, those with whom I've suffered great trial and tribulation. You know like playing helmeted sports and enduring fraternity pledgeship. How does he know it’s not one of his pals doing it to him?

I call bull shit. People of character don't do things like what he described to people they don’t know.

For he and others to come here and demand some atonement is nonsense. Who’s to say that those enrollments didn't come from someone at Amanda Marcotte's site, the Klan of 88, or one of the abettors in order to discredit KC?

It certainly would NOT be out of character and would be in keeping with the rash, mean behavior shown from others.

It is especially suspect given his efforts to create a wall of silence and bar KC from the other site.

He has not provided evidence anything happened, claimed victimhood, demanded action broadly from those who did not have anything to do with it, and attempts to modify meaning about his effort to silence KC.

Beside why would one want to waste time writing about this when it is much more sporting writing about the Klan of 88, Brodhead, and the abettors? It just does not make sense, does it?

A typical tolerant, open minded, intellectual, progressive...

If it did happen, and even if someone from DIW did it, then he needs to come over here and apologize to the 2,929,665 people who didn't have one damned thing to do with it.

Debrah said...

TO 8:39PM--

My senses tell me it's all a sham because the previous Wonderland rendezvous was less than eventful for the screamers.

And last evening there was a full moon.

Howling from a few hungry baby wolves is to be expected.

This is a diversion. We should all ignore it, if possible.

It takes away from the issues at hand-----like KC's rise in the literary world and the upcoming film!

LOL!

no justice, no peace said...

Oh and another thing...

If you figure out a way to get off lists, be so kind to let me know.

Somehow I'm on a Democratic Party franking list and am continually bombarded with campaign solicitations. Most shocking and difficult to explain to the children are the ones I recieve from Ted "Chappaquiddick" Kennedy.

Sadly I pay for these through my taxes.

I'd suggest you quit whining like a pussy, but then others might not think of me as being gentile.

Anonymous said...

The clique only knows how to call names. I thought they quit the blog.

SEK said...

Before I begin, let me say this: I did not -- nor do I want -- to draw any comparison between what happened to me and what happened in Durham. Consider this matter settled. On to the show:

Anonymous asks:

Who the heck is Scott Kaufmann?

I don't know, but I'll be damned if his name ain't nearly mine.

no justice, no peace wrote:

I find it most interesting that the defender/abettors attempt shift the conversation away from the Klan of 88 frauds, Nifong abettors, and the deplorable actions of those involved to ... [h]arassing emails[.]

I did no such thing. I sent KC and email, and he commendably posted a note about it.

Michael writes:

We should be above the fray over here. That said, how much is an unsigned apology worth from Anonymous?

Actually, an email from the person who did it, from their real address, would be worth a lot. Lest that person think I'd abuse his anonymity, or write some scurrilous about him, I'll link to this item again.

Debrah writes:

After reading KC's post about Kaufman's latest challenge, I seriously doubt a regular participant from D-I-W would have taken the time for such childish mischief.

Which post would that be? His reply on my blog?

Too bad there is no successful way to track such people to find out who they are.

There's always the honor system. Maybe it'll work here. If, that is, the person who did this is honorable.

In any case, Kaufman wanted some attention. Looks as though he got it.

What makes you say that? Because I commented on something which seemed significant to me? That's what bloggers do. They find things which interest them, for whatever reason, and respond to it. And contrary to your (repeated) assertions that I'm only doing this for attention, you should know that I'm satisfied with the regular audience I have. Not many people are privileged enough to have 2,000 people read what they write (or 8,000, when I post at The Valve). I am.

That you think I'd resort to concern-trolling to drive up my readership numbers says more about you than me. I've been linked no less than fifty times from Cliopatria, which may be why KC's familiar with my work and extends me respect. I'm a known quantity in the academic blogosphere. So you can stop with this tired refrain. I'm not an attention hound.

Anonymous writes:

But I do know that Kaufmann repeatedly smeared Dr Johnson by calling him 'Horowitzian'.

Not only was it not a smear, but I wrote a follow-up post specifying what I thought the "Horowitzian" move KC'd made was. His political differences with Horowitz notwithstanding, I believe he's engaged in a critique of academia whose tactics mirror Horowitz's. I say this, as Mr. Phelan will remind you, as a critic of the very same things KC critiques. It's not about content, but method.

no justice, no peace writes ... something I don't entirely understand. I'm not even sure which parts to quote. Something about Mormons, then this:

If it did happen, and even if someone from DIW did it, then he needs to come over here and apologize to the 2,929,665 people who didn't have one damned thing to do with it.

What? Why should I apologize for not calumniating the reputations of the 3,000,000 visistors who didn't sign me up for upwards of eighty conservatives listservs? Who else do I owe an apology to for not slandering? Bill Cosby? Because I love Bill Cosby. TiVO the old episodes every day. I didn't mean not to condemn him, but, well, I guess I owe him an apology anyway ...

Debrah said...

I'm so G/d-damned tired of this guy.

("Enough about me. What about you? What do you think of me?")

Let's revisit the mission of this blog.

Shall we?

Enough already!

inman said...

OK...who is SEK... and who appointed him arbiter of all things controversial?

Since Kc's blog is closing down, I may very well make this persumptuous savant a project, for he certainly needs to learn some manners. Thank God another blog exists where there is intellect, however misdirected.

I frankly look forward to a feeble 'opponent'....verbal volleyball and all that being what it is....

Oh and my preliminary observation, having reviewed various posts at that blog, is that Steven Horwitz is somewhat duplicitous, playing to the crowd who attends, and not the truth as previously expressed.

Steven...I invite your retort...for you have memorialized your views .... on 2 blogs, however contradictory.

Ralph Phelan said...

debrah said:
"Too bad there is no successful way to track such people to find out who they are."

sek replied:
"There's always the honor system. Maybe it'll work here. If, that is, the person who did this is honorable."
And if he's here. Hidden assumption - but not particularly well hidden.

A skillful sophist like Chomsky or Fish fills me with a mixture of loathing and admiration. You merely annoy.

Anonymous said...

Maybe I'm unworthy to be participating on this blogspot, because I simply never heart of Scott Kaufman, despite his city-full of adoring followers.

Who the heck is he? And what does he have to do with Nifong, Durham, Duke, the 88???

Debrah said...

TO 12:56AM__

Can anyone imagine if any of the Wonderland crew had gone over to Acephalous, or any of the others tethered to the Left, to discuss ourselves and our personal accomplishments....

....after having dissed the host of the blog....

.....then make the countless participants and readers of one of their blogs a party to a current challenge in cyberspace--as has Kaufman now for days--does anyone not believe that the little screaming Lefites would have issued an all-out démarche against that person to get them off the blog?

KC and the Wonderland crew have been most hospitable.

No need for further largesse regarding this matter.

Anonymous said...

debrah,

Who the heck are you? The DiW police?