🚀 go-pugleaf

Bob Bain <+...@tpg.com.au> wrote:

> You have made false accusations against me in a
> public forum.

Produce one and document that it is false. You
merely _reinterpret_ my statements into strawmen,
and then claim that those strawmen are false, which
is nothing close to finding the original statements
as written to be false. You are, in this behavior,
simply acting demented.

> You have also misinterpreted (grossly) statements
> I may have made in private email.

Really? In what _provable_ way are my
interpretations incorrect? If you _read_ my words,
rather than warping them into some entirely other
words in your mind before ingesting them, you'll
find I have been Caeser's wife indeed in sticking
strictly to matters to which you have already made
public and private confession. You've already had to
retract many of your claims in this regard, and I
fail to see any remaining substance you haven't
already confessed to be true.

> At least you haven't attempted to intimidate me
> with threats to declare to Centrelink "earnings
> from illegal activity" made in the name of Tony
> Smith while my mother lay on her death bed - nor
> have you suggested directly that one day the
> police may knock on my door and beat me to a pulp
> on account of the fact I discuss censorship,
> ethics and legality in Usenet.

This is merely an example of your pathologically
insane semantic freighting; none of this has the
least relationship to your claims that I have made
false accusations against you, this is simply you
being entirely intellectually dishonest by trying to
associate my claims with matters repugnant to you
and to your audience.

> At that time I issued a complaint to Yahoo which
> some seem to have regarded as "fun".

This is a non sequitur, you dragging in material
that has no relationship to the discussion, again an
example of your intellectual dishonesty.

You rambling on interminably about all the injuries
the entirely world has putatively ever done to you
has precisely no merit is supporting your false
accusatin that I have libeled you. You seem unable
not only to support that accusation, but even to
stay focused on it for the length of a News article.

> I am not at this point  in time guilty of any
> criminal activity

What is that supposed to mean? You have already
publicly in this very thread confessed to being
tried, convicted, and fined for your behavior.
That isn't something done to those innocent of
criminal behavior.

> and as noted am entitled to protection built into
> the Statutes of New South Wales.

That is a meaningless noise. All that protection was
already given to you in a court of law, and you were
_still_ convicted.

> It is libellous to suggest that I have ever been
> convicted of an offence involving Australia's
> "less than liberal" censorship laws,

But you have confessed in this thread to that very
fact.

> which by implication can be taken to mean that I
> have been convicted of being in possession of
> child pornography

No it cannot, that is a strawman repeatedly dragged
into these discussions by you because you are
entirely unable to cope with reality. You were found
to have attempted to import an unclassified video
tape when doing so was A VIOLATION OF THE LAW OF
AUSTRALIA. Full stop. No child porn in any way
involved.

Quite trying to drag kiddie porn into the discussion
_in your defense_, a despicable example of your
incredibly intellectual dishonesty and attempts at
misdirection in these discussions.

> something that is not and has never been true and
> never will be true.

No one said it was, except you trying to misdirect
the discussion.

> I have at no time attempted to harrass you.

Sending me threats to quit libeling you when I have
never done any such thing was harrassment, full
stop.

I took the trouble to copy that to your ISP, as I
don't at all intend to be bullied by you or any
other pissant intellectual munchkin unable to keep
his thinking straight for the five consecutive
minutes it takes to type a News posting.

> I simply posted two opinion pieces from the net -
> items which are being discussed in blogs and open
> forums at the present time.

That is a non sequitur, your harrassment was in the
private email my response to which you dishonestly
posted without permission, discussion, or necessity.

Since doing so convicts you of intellectual
dishonesty from your own keyboard, you've just made
yourself a laughingstock.

Not that you weren't one already, so this merely
reinforces your reputation as a whiner and cheat.

> I am not under suspicion in respect of illegal
> activity.

No, you are ALREADY tried, convicted, and punished
by a fine for illegal activity.

This statement by you trying to rewrite that history
all of which you have confessed in public, by
misdirection now, is merely yet another example of
your intellectual dishonesty at work.

Double jeopardy being presumably as unacceptable to
the law of Oz as it is to the law of the USA, you
would have to commit new illegal activity to again
be under suspicion of having done so, unless your
authorities just habitually grab suspicions out of
the passing breeze and apply them at random to
Ozites.

> I have however pointed out that certain items in
> my possession (and sent to me by those entrusted
> with enforcing the law) have caused me much misery
> and grief to the point where legal action may be
> an appropriate remedy.

Bull. Your "misery and grief" are entirely
self-inflicted, entirely created in self-interest by
you in your attempts to rewrite your personal
history, i.e., the represent flat out insanity, and
are not the business of the constituted authorities
to ameliorate. If the material offended you so
greatly, a rubbish tip was a much better target for
it than a law enforcement office.

> I can only repeat I am awaiting a reply from the
> Prime Minister of Australia (Kevin Rudd) in
> respect to an email sent to him on 12th.
> September 2007 regarding the grief these items and
> the accusations have caused me.

Um, seem my previous note that inaction is what
bureaucrats do.

If you are waiting to get your life out of the
gutter into which you have discarded it until some
bureaucrat takes the time to sort out your
personality problems as directed at video tapes and
the delusion that conservative Australia's freedom
of access to video taped material should match in
all respects the most liberal treatment you can find
applied anywhere elsewhere on planet Earth, you are
in line for an _immense_ wait.

Sorting out constituants' mental health issues is in
no way part of the charter a bureaucrat takes on by
being elected. They have enough problems dealing
with constituants' _sane_ requests.

> If necessary I can produce letters to people
> entrusted with the enforcement of law in this
> country and inparticular a letter to the former
> Attorney General of Australia - Philip Ruddock in
> respect of those matters.

What is necessary is for you to find the sanity to
stop annoying the constituted authorities with your
mental health issues, not to keep flogging them in
ever greater detail on Usenet as if that were going
to make the world match the demented map you have of
it in your head.

> You may note that copies of this Usenet posting
> are being sent to those whom you appear to
> believe should sever my Internet connection -
> simply because I dispute the wrongful allegations
> you have made.

Well, to do that, you'd first have to list such
wrongful allegations, without dragging in your many,
many strawman misstatements of what I've written,
and then you'd have to show how what I've written,
with great care by me not to go beyond exactly what
you've already confessed, is in any way different
from the things to which you _have_ confessed.

Instead, you have limited yourself to whining,
misdirection, erection of strawmen, generalities
behind which are no specifics, and a whole litany of
intellectually dishonest behaviors to try to warp
those true things I've written to be some entirely
other things which I have NOT written, because the
true things I've said about you distress your
inablity to honestly confront your own misdeeds once
and for all and then proceed with your life leaving
them behind you as lessons learned.

You most profoundly are REJECTING learning the
needed life lessons from your offense, trial, and
conviction, in your ongoing flood of boring trivia
about the very mild censorship laws of Australia.

>  Bob Bain

xanthian, not withdrawing a damned word.