Re: Gary Burnore vs. Earth (Was: Value of Annon. Remailers)

[Anonymous <nobody@replay.com>]

Information Security <guy@panix.com> wrote:

>    >   From: Missouri FreeNet Administration <sysadmin@mfn.org>
>    >
>    >   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.

Now about Gary Burnore's "defense" against the underaged daughter of
his girlfriend...

>    >    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 doesn't alter the fact of the original
offense for which Gary Burnore pled guilty in a Santa Clara, CA
court, which sentenced him to probation and required him to register
as a sex offender.

And given Burnore's pattern of harassment ... er, "defense" ... of
those who criticize him, the ability of someone with knowledge of
the facts to freely speak without fear of retaliation enabled the
public to learn the truth.  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.

> Let us know when you have an original thought.

Ad hominem often comes in handy...