From: Ted Viens <email@example.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 19:09:56 -0600 Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:15:50 -0500 Subject: Re: Open Letter To Art Bell Apologies for the delay in posting. I am days behind in reading UpDates... >Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 09:21:32 +1100 >From: Barbara Sagan <firstname.lastname@example.org> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <email@example.com> >Subject: Open Letter To Art Bell >[Non-Subscriber Post] >Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 09:17:13 +1100 >From: Barbara Sagan <firstname.lastname@example.org> >To: Art Bell <email@example.com> >Subject: Open Letter To Art Bell >Dear Mr. Bell, >The nation is waiting for your response tonight: >1. When will you have Hoagland-Stephens Debate? >2. If Stephens wins, will he replace Hoagland as permanent guest > on your show? >3. Now that we know that Hoagland is a fraud, what about Dames? >4. Art, you are a genius, your ratings are going up and up > did you plan all that? How corny... I feel trite in reminding the readers that Art Bell is an entertainer. His programs are entertainment. The bottom line for his guest is that they be entertaining. Hoagland is a somewhat pompous orator. His glib, gregarious, self-serving, mildly coercive speaking skills, common to functional psychotics colored by influences of schizophrenia and paranoia, are very entertaining to a wide spectrum of the nighttime audience. Robert A. M. Stephens is basically an uncoordinated, easily diverted whiner. What few perceptive and valid points he might raise drawn in the bulk of the shallow and poorly stated issues he offers. Basically, he's a jerk. Now, which of these men would a responsible host have on his late night entertainment show? Bye... Ted..
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp