Re: permanent invasion of privacy

[Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net>]

blanc wrote:
> From:   Dale Thorn, who hasn't a clue
> [on why the cpunks of late haven't discussed children's point of view]:
>         Not lately?  And why is that?

> Don't know, Dale.   Would everyone please send a message to Dale,
> explaining why you haven't been discussing this?

If all you want to be is an asshole, why do you bother with me?
Surely you could pick a more "respected" target, yes?
Looks like you:
1. Don't have anything to do, and
2. Feel insecure, and
3. Feel inferior to me (wonder why), and
4. Don't have any real answers.

> [on the possibility that abused children might be helped by the uses of
> encryption]: How is an abused child going to be helped by encryption?

> Why are you on this list, Dale?

To get non-answers from ignorants like yourself, I guess.

> [on why, as I said, "empathy with children is not borne of government, but
> of a normal state of mind"]:
>         That's just rhetoric.  What normal state of mind?

> Takes one to know one, Dale.

I hope you're saying that I'm not on the same wavelength as you and
*certain* other c-punks.  I feel better already.

> [on going out to alt.philosphy.objectivism to evoke detailed discussions of
> pertinence to his interest in benefitting from government programs]:
>         In other words, if it doesn't offer something for me,
>         the selfish adult, I don't wanna hear it.

> I'm not *obliged* to hear, it Dale.

Yeah, but you're obliged to partake one way or the other.
Ya' know, you and a few other people whine a lot about government
intrusion this or that (when you take your head out of the sand
momentarily), but like selfish little children, you cover your ears
when the news is unpleasant, like that's going to make a difference.

Maybe if you got off your ass and did something worthwhile for society,
things would really change for the better.  But I won't hold my breath.