🚀 go-pugleaf

kirkus vomit wrote:
> "Kent Paul Dolan" <xanthian@well.com> wrote in message 
> news:0e2cdaef-b959-4fa6-a198-134f66defcae@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>> Bob Bain <+...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>> You have made false accusations against me in a
>>> public forum.
> ... <gawp> perish the thought!
> b
> 
>> 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. 
> 
> 
For alll your anonymous browsing needs visit http://www.hide-my-ip.com