On 2006-05-02 06:07:00, odie wrote:
"
Buried deep in the new law is Sec. 113, an innocuously titled bit called "Preventing Cyberstalking." It rewrites existing telephone harassment law to prohibit anyone from using the Internet "without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy."
I wondered why a certain somebody been quiet here recently. :scared: the war on drugs is but one manifestation, albeit a very dramatic one, of the great moral contests of our age -- the struggle between two diametrically opposed images of man: between man as responsible moral agent, 'condemned' to freedom, benefiting and suffering from the consequences of his actions; and man as irresponsible child, unfit for freedom, 'protected' from its risks by agents of the omnicompetent state.
--Thomas Szasz
"
If you're referring to me, I've just been really busy and doing a lot of travelling.
I've stated my position on this issue before. If any of these dopes thinks that they have a case, they can feel free to file. When it's all said and done they'll be paying my attorney fees and the court costs too.
File it and see what happens. Otherwise these are the same vague, impotent threats that these people use to try to shut down dialogue. I have been personally threatened at least a dozen times
(several by an unemployed attorney named - you guessed it - Karen) all of which were just attempts to shut me up that failed, just like this last one will.
This is the tactic of losers who can't put together a rational argument so they call names, hurl insults and threaten to sue. I've seen it countless times and it has never worked even once, but it seems to be a compulsion of these bully-types. They think that because they can threaten and dominate their children that they can do the same to me. Have at it.
