Re: John Laws

["David & Sharon" <d.ready@chello.nl>]

I refuse to remain silent for anybody especially at the suggestion of
somebody like you who would probably never be able to earn even 10% of what
John Laws earns in a year.

All John Laws decided to do was present the bank's side of the story.... for
a fee. I don't see anything wrong with that.  It is up to the listening
public to decide if they are getting a biased point of view and then switch
off. It is a free world and a free economy. And don't tell me to remain
silent. Asswipe.

Did you listen to any broadcast by John Laws as he was presenting the bank's
side of the story? I would say not.


Rob Kearey <r.kearey@mailbox.uq.edu.au> wrote in message
379D51AA.B2941889@mailbox.uq.edu.au">news:379D51AA.B2941889@mailbox.uq.edu.au...
> David & Sharon wrote:
>
> > Nobody has to listen to John Laws. It is a free broadcasting service.
The
> > question has to be asked why so many people listen to him. ... [ &c ]
>
> Please feel free to look up the words "demagogue", "graft" and "payola",
> and then remain silent as you sullenly realise you've been speaking sans
> clue.
>
> > David
>
> --
> Robert Kearey           Network Services
> ITS                     University of Queensland
> Sentence fragment I don't speak for my employer