On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 23:14:15 GMT, Dick Morris
<richard.a.morris@boeing.com> wrote:


>> > >
>> > > The Dick Headed Moron has spoken..
>> >
>> >
>> > You need to talk to an attorney about internet libel law.
>>
>> I cannot be accused of libel for telling the truth.
>>
>> Try a dictionary.... cheaper than lawyers and it will tell you the same...
>
>Here are a few of the many relevant articles you can find on the net:
>
>http://www.hawaiilawyer.com/alerts/alert_05_15_02.htm
>
Please explain the similarities between saying someone is an
asshole and someone is a thief and a crook.


>http://www.english.upenn.edu/~afilre...yberspace.html

Please explain the similarities between saying someone is an
asshole and saying that someone molested young boys.

>
>http://www-ec.njit.edu/~walshd/001215CYBERLAW.html

Please explain the similarities between saying someone is an
asshole and saying that they took bribes.

>
>http://www.cyberlibel.com./liabilit.html


>
>They will tell you a lot more about internet libel than you can find in
>any dictionary. I would strongly advise that you read them and then
>talk to an attorney before you say any more.

I've no doubt that US lawyers would dearly love to get some of
the internet pie for themselves by turning it into a legal quagmire,
but the fact is, telling someone that they are an asshole has never
been grounds for legal action. Telling them that they aren't terribly
bright hasn't been either, especially if they aren't terribly bright.
Telling the truth is not grounds for legal action. Attempting to
stifly discussion through such threats, especially in a newsgroup
devoted to discussion is rather reprehensible, however.

David Ball wrote:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 23:14:15 GMT, Dick Morris
> <richard.a.morris@boeing.com> wrote:
>
> >> > >
> >> > > The Dick Headed Moron has spoken..
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > You need to talk to an attorney about internet libel law.
> >>
> >> I cannot be accused of libel for telling the truth.
> >>
> >> Try a dictionary.... cheaper than lawyers and it will tell you the same...
> >
> >Here are a few of the many relevant articles you can find on the net:
> >
> >http://www.hawaiilawyer.com/alerts/alert_05_15_02.htm
> >
> Please explain the similarities between saying someone is an
> asshole and someone is a thief and a crook.
>
> >http://www.english.upenn.edu/~afilre...yberspace.html
>
> Please explain the similarities between saying someone is an
> asshole and saying that someone molested young boys.
>
> >
> >http://www-ec.njit.edu/~walshd/001215CYBERLAW.html
>
> Please explain the similarities between saying someone is an
> asshole and saying that they took bribes.
>
> >
> >http://www.cyberlibel.com./liabilit.html
>
>
> >
> >They will tell you a lot more about internet libel than you can find in
> >any dictionary. I would strongly advise that you read them and then
> >talk to an attorney before you say any more.
>
> I've no doubt that US lawyers would dearly love to get some of
> the internet pie for themselves by turning it into a legal quagmire,
> but the fact is, telling someone that they are an asshole has never
> been grounds for legal action. Telling them that they aren't terribly
> bright hasn't been either, especially if they aren't terribly bright.
> Telling the truth is not grounds for legal action. Attempting to
> stifly discussion through such threats, especially in a newsgroup
> devoted to discussion is rather reprehensible, however.

All of the above qualify as "libel" according to my dictionary: "A
written, printed, or pictorial statement that defames one's character or
reputation or exposes one to public ridicule." That hardly qualifies as
"discussion".

"David Ball" <wraith7@mb.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:q3g6hvkppi2mavtetfof86cbv810vg0vhc@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 23:14:15 GMT, Dick Morris
> <richard.a.morris@boeing.com> wrote:
>
>
> >> > >
> >> > > The Dick Headed Moron has spoken..
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > You need to talk to an attorney about internet libel law.
> >>
> >> I cannot be accused of libel for telling the truth.
> >>
> >> Try a dictionary.... cheaper than lawyers and it will tell you the
same...
> >
> >Here are a few of the many relevant articles you can find on the net:
> >
> >http://www.hawaiilawyer.com/alerts/alert_05_15_02.htm
> >
> Please explain the similarities between saying someone is an
> asshole and someone is a thief and a crook.

Moron, not asshole. Justified by his moronic post. And saying it on usenet
would not be libel. They have different standards applied.

>
>
> >http://www.english.upenn.edu/~afilre...yberspace.html
>
> Please explain the similarities between saying someone is an
> asshole and saying that someone molested young boys.

Again.

>
> >
> >http://www-ec.njit.edu/~walshd/001215CYBERLAW.html
>
> Please explain the similarities between saying someone is an
> asshole and saying that they took bribes.
>

Again.

> >
> >http://www.cyberlibel.com./liabilit.html

Even calling someone a thief or pervert on usenet is not seen as the same as
publishing it in a newspaper for example or any other medium because the
medium is noted for 'heated debate' aka flame wars. When the only ammunition
someone like Dick has is rather moronic logic, it becomes even harder to
take it seriously. The only consequence might be a cancellation of service
from the ISP and that is rare except in clearcut and extreme cases.

>

> >They will tell you a lot more about internet libel than you can find in
> >any dictionary. I would strongly advise that you read them and then
> >talk to an attorney before you say any more.
>
> I've no doubt that US lawyers would dearly love to get some of
> the internet pie for themselves by turning it into a legal quagmire,

Been there. Done that. Used to support Ilena Rosenthal against the corporate
dickhead that was ( and still is) trying to run her out. Dick should learn
about Californial legal statutes before he makes more stupid claims.

http://www.humanticsfoundation.com/defamation.htm
http://www.treatmentchoice.com/bolen72801.html
http://www.corpwatch.org/bulletins/P...?articleid=409
"He ruled that Rosenthal's statements calling Barrett and Polevoy "quacks,"
and Barrett "arrogant" and a "bully" who tried to "extort" her, were not
actionable because "they do not contain provably false assertions of fact,
but rather are expressions of subjective judgment."

I am familiar with legal lawsuits and he makes a claim against me at his own
peril. His intimidation here might work on someone that is unfamiliar with
the law but he has shown that he know much less than he claims and I would
expect to win any lawsuit with attorneys fees.

> but the fact is, telling someone that they are an asshole has never
> been grounds for legal action. Telling them that they aren't terribly
> bright hasn't been either, especially if they aren't terribly bright.

Exactly. Maybe he can try the 'dick headed' part but that was clearly an
insult, not libel. Unless he *is* dick headed and wants to try a
discrimination or promotion of hatred suit? Nah. The U.S. even allows Nazi
Skinheads to run Anti-Semitic and Racist websites. David Duke(KKK) is
prominent in promoting hatred. Not a problem in the U.S. courts.

Nor could he succeed in Canadian courts because dick heads are not protected
by human rights legislation here. We tolerate them but try to fix them when
we find them, mostly clustered in the U.S. newsgroups. They resist all
attempts at becoming normal homo sapiens sapiens though.

Clearly he is blowing wind out of his ass.

> Telling the truth is not grounds for legal action. Attempting to
> stifly discussion through such threats, especially in a newsgroup
> devoted to discussion is rather reprehensible, however.

And a legal basis for a lawsuit under Californias SLAPP laws. But he's safe.
It is too much bother to sue him for stupidity and I can't really say that
he isn't entitled to be stupid. Besides, I expect his posts discredit him
more than anything I could say..

"Dick Morris" <richard.a.morris@boeing.com> wrote in message
news:3F133EFE.F2F747AE@boeing.com...
>
>
> "George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr." wrote:
<snip>
> > Weren't you the guy who called environmentalists terrorists?
> >
> No. Just the opposite, as you will see if you read some of my previous
> posts.

Don't let him pull that crap, George. He clearly stated..

<dick morris>
"Business people are terrified of losing money. Environmental
regulations and conservation measures cost them money. Therefore,
environmentalists and conservationists are terrorists. QED.

By the same moronic logic lawyers are terrorist because you can ( try to )
intimidate people with threats of lawsuits and thus Dick becomes the 'Osama
bin Morris" of terrorism. This is how moronic it was and is.

On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 00:58:22 GMT, Dick Morris
<richard.a.morris@boeing.com> wrote:


>>
>> >
>> >They will tell you a lot more about internet libel than you can find in
>> >any dictionary. I would strongly advise that you read them and then
>> >talk to an attorney before you say any more.
>>
>> I've no doubt that US lawyers would dearly love to get some of
>> the internet pie for themselves by turning it into a legal quagmire,
>> but the fact is, telling someone that they are an asshole has never
>> been grounds for legal action. Telling them that they aren't terribly
>> bright hasn't been either, especially if they aren't terribly bright.
>> Telling the truth is not grounds for legal action. Attempting to
>> stifly discussion through such threats, especially in a newsgroup
>> devoted to discussion is rather reprehensible, however.
>
>All of the above qualify as "libel" according to my dictionary: "A
>written, printed, or pictorial statement that defames one's character or
>reputation or exposes one to public ridicule." That hardly qualifies as
>"discussion".

LOL. So if I call you an asshole, I defaming your character?
What if you are an asshole? I take a dim view of anyone attempting to
limit discussion, which is exactly what this nonsense is intended to
do. I suggest you either find a new place to play or get a thicker
skin. If you can't stand the heat, get the hell out of the kitchen.

"Dick Morris" <richard.a.morris@boeing.com> wrote in message
news:3F13559D.869DD21A@boeing.com...
>
>
> "Ian St. John" wrote:
> >
> > "George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr." <porgy@commiemartyrs.edu> wrote in message
> > news:kaa6hvong3p48o429ho3ctus73ie0b2lgj@4ax.com...
> > > On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 17:53:24 GMT, Dick Morris
> > > <richard.a.morris@boeing.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >"Ian St. John" wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> "Dick Morris" <richard.a.morris@boeing.com> wrote in message
> > > >> news:3F0F11A5.C37A680F@boeing.com...
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > JohnAndrew wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Notice the rhetorical claims in the post below.
> > > >> <snip>
> > > >> > > That's "Terrorism," to you -- no need for midnight attacks on
> > police
> > > >> > > stations, or bombings, or assassinations, or even industrial
> > sabotage
> > > >> > > -- just books and bureaucracies that you don't agree with?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > Business people are terrified of losing money. Environmental
> > > >> > regulations and conservation measures cost them money.
Therefore,
> > > >> > environmentalists and conservationists are terrorists. QED.
> > > >>
> > > >> The Dick Headed Moron has spoken..
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >You need to talk to an attorney about internet libel law.
> > >
> > > Weren't you the guy who called environmentalists terrorists?
> > >
> > > And you are complaining about the libel of someone calling you a Dick
> > > Headed Moron?
> > >
> > > And wouldn't anyone calling environmentalists terrorists - be - in
> > > truth - a moron?
> > >
> > > Such that the "truth is a defense'" rule in the US apply?
> >
> > The truth is that his logic is moronic. "By their actions shall ye know
> > them" so I have a good basis for calling him a moron in truth. However,
in
> > any case the law does not prosecute for 'heated words and insults
exchanged
> > in usenet' as they consider it "the medium of the moron" which is why
Dick
> > can post here. Expecially the unmoderated groups. That he THINKS he can
sue
> > is just another indication that the man has lost any intelligence he
once
> > may have had.
>
> Exactly which examples of "my" logic are you referring to? You wouldn't
> by any chance be referring to my satiric post above where I ridicule the
> apparent "logic" of business people who worship money and are
> "terrified" of losing any would you?

I see. Then you are a clueless newbie and not a moron? This is usenet. Use
emoticons when you are trying to make a joke. I personally use
<sarcasm>text</sarcasm> to indicate when I am being sarcastic. If you look
like a moron by your words, you will be called a moron. Ipso facto and QED.
There ARE plenty of morons on the newsgroups what would make the same post
in all sincerity. Nobody can know what you mean if you do not put it down
clearly.

Ian and Dick, isn't this whole debate pretty much a misunderstanding
among people who are basically on the same side?

Personally, I thought Dick was being ironic and/or sarcastic in his
response to my post, not that he was really calling environmentalists
"terrorists," although I can see how it's possible to misinterpret his
post. Anyway, I think all three of us are agreed that the "terrorist"
label is being falsely applied by business interests (or their
supporters - like Convection) who are worried about threats to
corporate profits. And I think all three of us agree that this
rhetoric is irresponsible and misleading, to say the least.

Peace, maybe?
JohnAndrew
***************


"Ian St. John" <istjohn@spamcop.net> wrote in message news:<HjKQa.1432$ym.372701@news20.bellglobal.com>. ..
> "Dick Morris" <richard.a.morris@boeing.com> wrote in message
> news:3F13559D.869DD21A@boeing.com...
> >
> >
> > "Ian St. John" wrote:
> > >
> > > "George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr." <porgy@commiemartyrs.edu> wrote in message
> > > news:kaa6hvong3p48o429ho3ctus73ie0b2lgj@4ax.com...
> > > > On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 17:53:24 GMT, Dick Morris
> > > > <richard.a.morris@boeing.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >"Ian St. John" wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> "Dick Morris" <richard.a.morris@boeing.com> wrote in message
> > > > >> news:3F0F11A5.C37A680F@boeing.com...
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > JohnAndrew wrote:
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > Notice the rhetorical claims in the post below.
> <snip>
> > > > >> > > That's "Terrorism," to you -- no need for midnight attacks on
> police
> > > > >> > > stations, or bombings, or assassinations, or even industrial
> sabotage
> > > > >> > > -- just books and bureaucracies that you don't agree with?
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > Business people are terrified of losing money. Environmental
> > > > >> > regulations and conservation measures cost them money.
> Therefore,
> > > > >> > environmentalists and conservationists are terrorists. QED.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> The Dick Headed Moron has spoken..
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >You need to talk to an attorney about internet libel law.
> > > >
> > > > Weren't you the guy who called environmentalists terrorists?
> > > >
> > > > And you are complaining about the libel of someone calling you a Dick
> > > > Headed Moron?
> > > >
> > > > And wouldn't anyone calling environmentalists terrorists - be - in
> > > > truth - a moron?
> > > >
> > > > Such that the "truth is a defense'" rule in the US apply?
> > >
> > > The truth is that his logic is moronic. "By their actions shall ye know
> > > them" so I have a good basis for calling him a moron in truth. However,
> in
> > > any case the law does not prosecute for 'heated words and insults
> exchanged
> > > in usenet' as they consider it "the medium of the moron" which is why
> Dick
> > > can post here. Expecially the unmoderated groups. That he THINKS he can
> sue
> > > is just another indication that the man has lost any intelligence he
> once
> > > may have had.
> >
> > Exactly which examples of "my" logic are you referring to? You wouldn't
> > by any chance be referring to my satiric post above where I ridicule the
> > apparent "logic" of business people who worship money and are
> > "terrified" of losing any would you?
>
> I see. Then you are a clueless newbie and not a moron? This is usenet. Use
> emoticons when you are trying to make a joke. I personally use
> <sarcasm>text</sarcasm> to indicate when I am being sarcastic. If you look
> like a moron by your words, you will be called a moron. Ipso facto and QED.
> There ARE plenty of morons on the newsgroups what would make the same post
> in all sincerity. Nobody can know what you mean if you do not put it down
> clearly.

"Dick Morris" <richard.a.morris@boeing.com> wrote in message
news:3F142F82.DBEE7757@boeing.com...
>
>
> David Ball wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 00:58:22 GMT, Dick Morris
> > <richard.a.morris@boeing.com> wrote:
> >
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >> >They will tell you a lot more about internet libel than you can find
in
> > >> >any dictionary. I would strongly advise that you read them and then
> > >> >talk to an attorney before you say any more.
> > >>
> > >> I've no doubt that US lawyers would dearly love to get some
of
> > >> the internet pie for themselves by turning it into a legal quagmire,
> > >> but the fact is, telling someone that they are an asshole has never
> > >> been grounds for legal action. Telling them that they aren't terribly
> > >> bright hasn't been either, especially if they aren't terribly bright.
> > >> Telling the truth is not grounds for legal action. Attempting to
> > >> stifly discussion through such threats, especially in a newsgroup
> > >> devoted to discussion is rather reprehensible, however.
> > >
> > >All of the above qualify as "libel" according to my dictionary: "A
> > >written, printed, or pictorial statement that defames one's character
or
> > >reputation or exposes one to public ridicule." That hardly qualifies
as
> > >"discussion".
> >
> > LOL. So if I call you an asshole, I defaming your character?
> > What if you are an asshole? I take a dim view of anyone attempting to
> > limit discussion, which is exactly what this nonsense is intended to
> > do. I suggest you either find a new place to play or get a thicker
> > skin. If you can't stand the heat, get the hell out of the kitchen.
>
> Sorry, I was referring to the part that you deleted. Calling someone an
> a****** is just an expression of opinion and probably would not be
> actionable.
>
> Ian totally misunderstood what I said

False. I totally understood *what you said*.

> and went off on a hysterical tirade

Hardly hysterical. I just gave it the burial it deserved as stated.

> and I am rather disappointed to see you backing him up. Could I
> trouble you to actually read some of my previous posts on
> "eco-terrorism"?

Could it be that you still do not understand that usenet has no emotional
content so you have to INDICATE when you are joking or sarcastic?