Re: VMs: VMS provenance

["Jeff" <jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rene Zandbergen" <r_zandbergen@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 12 July 2004 07:01


> --- Jeff <jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > I now have enough circumstantial evidence to say one
> > of two things.
> >
> > 1. Gordon Rugg is right in EVERY respect or
> >
> > 2. The VMS is an important historical document.
> >
>
> I favour option 2. But what is important for some,
> is not necessarily important for all, so how can one
> exclude:
>
> 3. None of the above
>
> Cheers, Rene
>

It could definately be none of the above! However the finds I am making at
the moment seem to indicate not. The annoying thing is that John Dee is
right there in the frame at the crucial moment. Can't get rid of the damn
man! That is why it could still be a hoax. It all hinges in what I find out
with the contacts I am about to make and whether they are forthcoming. Also
it is vital to pinpoint our arch scoundrel Kelly. I can't tell you what a
surprise it was to see things coming together in such a neat way. I'm only
hoping that I'm right. I'd hate to have spent all this effort for another
dead end. So much fits neatly into place that I am pretty confident it will
come right. Otherwise you are all invited to throw pizza AT me!

Jeff


______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list