Subject: Re: Gritz again

From: [email-masked] (Steve Crocker)
Date: 14 Jan 1993 01:29:28 GMT

In a post here Ted Frank quotes me quoting Chip Berlet on Gritz's
"Lunatic conspiracy theories". He omits the videotape transcript
in which Burmese drug lord Khun Sa names Shackley and Armitage et. al.
as drug traffickers. In another loaction Ted has referred apparently
to this tape as a "faked videotape". Why do you say this, Ted? Is it
because the tape is produced by an individual you disaprove of and
presents evidence that you think is unlikely, or do you have something
more solid to go on? Charges of deliberately faking evidence of 
wrongdoing of this magnitude are serious, and should not be made 
lightly. Plus, if this is really fake, seeing how widely it has
been circulated, why haven't Shackley or Armitage sued Gritz? And
as for Perot having Armitage followed, if Armitage is guilty of even
half of what he is accused of he darned well OUGHT to be followed, 
and more, brought to justice.

-Steve