What's This About?

[Anonymous]

Question: What court order is Anon referring to in this post?  

YOU LIE
Posted: 2003-10-14 23:29:00  
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
She registered that domain within the week that the court order said she can't do anything privately on the internet.
The domain was then transfered un-private to Sue. Then within 24 hrs. into your name.

Wes Fager will tell you Sue owns it. He told me when I emailed him. Why is your name on it?

Sue was also given credit for owning the domain on this forum.

Your credibility has been compromised here - Tell the story straight. Quit your bullshit lies.

Honesty is not a huge request.

p.s. not Carey here.

Source: http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=3238&forum=9

[Antigen]

In fairness to Lee, since I pretty well busted him out in another thread, I feel obliged to do the same here.

Here's the anon post under discussion.
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... um=9#18574

The quoted author of 2003-10-14 23 doesn't post often 10 times as Anonymous since Aug, 31th, once as wwasprebuttal.

What kind of humanism expresses its reluctance to sacrifice military casualties by devastating the civilian economy of its adversary for decades to come?  
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0684855674/circlofmiamithem' target='_new'> Henry Kissinger

[Antigen]

I believe the lawsuit you're refering to here is WWASP v PURE, et al.

My understanding that there was an injunction prohibiting Sue from speaking publicy about WWASP. But then Donna Hedrick died. She had been the, what?, editor? of http://www.intrepidnetreporter.com. When she died, no one thought to pay the bill, so WWASP took it over.  

Then, apparently, Sue snagged http://www.intrepidnetreporters.com/ and Donna's content. Because of a court order arising from WvP, she probably should not have done that. So Lee found out and took it over. It's worth reading. This content was under developed before PURE ever existed, far less WvP. Of course, Donna didn't have the legal and investigative recourses of a mainstream publication. And I don't think she ever represented that she did. It couldn't hurt to look into the claims made in the original text.

If you're interested, talk to the people who wrote the content, not just the people who have a vested interest in your adopting their view of things.

What is ominous is the ease with which some people go from saying that
they don't like something to saying that the government should forbid it. When you go down that road, don't expect freedom to survive very long.
--Thomas Sowell

_________________
Ginger Warbis ~ Antigen
American drug war P.O.W.
   10/80 - 10/82
Straight South (Sarasota, FL)
Anonymity Anonymous

for clarity,

[ This Message was edited by: Antigen on 2004-01-01 22:06 ]

[Therion]

Send all anon IP adresses to me... :rofl:  :rofl:  :rofl:  :rofl: