[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Gary Burnore vs. Earth (Was: Value of Annon. Remailers)
> From: Anonymous <[email protected]>
>
> Information Security <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Let us know when you have an original thought.
>
> Ad hominem often comes in handy...
You are too touchy to be on the Internet, leave now! ;-)
> > > From: Missouri FreeNet Administration <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > Obviously, as defenders of this man's right to post material offensive
> > > to Burnore, we too came under attack.
> >
> > One man's attack is another's defense.
>
> I'll have to remember that one. Some defense lawyers in Wyoming
> might want to use it in their clients' trial for their "defense"
> against that gay student.
You are equating speech to physical violence.
Not a good way to defend anonymizers.
> Now about Gary Burnore's "defense" against the underaged daughter of
> his girlfriend...
Like, why should cypherpunks care? You said it's not causing
you a connectivity problem.
You are boring everyone for no known reason.
> > > The point here is that what little survives about this lunatic child
> > > molester (he has even successfully had his North Carolina Sex Offender record
> > > removed!),...
> >
> > Gee, why don't you ask North Carolina why, in writing?
>
> Irrelevant. The North Carolina website of registered sex offenders
> was only the vehicle by which the truth about Gary Burnore's
> existing conviction in California became known. Depublishing it in
> NC on some technicality...
What technicality?
> which sentenced him to probation and required him to register
> as a sex offender.
I wonder if Pee Wee Herman had to register.
> Perhaps the original whistleblower's e-mailed warnings led
> or contributed to Burnore's arrest, and to the resulting
> psychiatric treatment which may have protected future
> potential victims.
Just a bunch of nutters flaming each other endlessly.
---guy