Re: Discussion?
Your question threw me for a moment, till I reviewed the thread. Yep, point taken: Not much discussion, much dismissal.
That said, I have to confess I wasn't much impressed by Griffin's theory. It struck me as a classic (as in "very good") conspiracy theory, very strong on logic, very weak on evidence. Like most conspiracy theories, it relies heavily on guilt-by-association: "Z knew Y, Y knew X, X knew W...all the way back to Evil A--therefore Z is a minion (perhaps unwitting) of Evil A". Tastes great, less filling. I enjoy a good conspiracy theory now and then. Thanks!
--Robert