JohnAndrew wrote:
>
> 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.
>
You are quite correct.

> 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.

"Ian St. John" wrote:
>
> "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?

The internet is not above the law. This thread will be removed, or
somebody will get sued.

"Dick Morris" <richard.a.morris@boeing.com> wrote in message
news:3F156DC7.1ED78C6E@boeing.com...
> "Ian St. John" wrote:
<snip> >
> > 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?
>
> The internet is not above the law. This thread will be removed, or
> somebody will get sued.

Now you definitely are being an asshole.

"Dick Morris" <richard.a.morris@boeing.com> wrote in message
news:3F156DC7.1ED78C6E@boeing.com...
> "Ian St. John" wrote:
<snip> >
> > 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?
>
> The internet is not above the law. This thread will be removed, or
> somebody will get sued.

Now you definitely are being an asshole. ;-)

"Dick Morris" <richard.a.morris@boeing.com> wrote in message
news:3F156DCF.8EF7F72D@boeing.com...
>
>
> "Ian St. John" wrote:
> >
> > "Dick Morris" <richard.a.morris@boeing.com> wrote in message
> > news:3F1430ED.242CCDF7@boeing.com...
> > >
> > >
> > > "Ian St. John" wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > But, since it is now apparent
> > > that your dafamatory statements are all based on a total
> > > misunderstanding of what I said,
> >
> > I understood what you said just fine. It is you that claims you MEANT to
be
> > sarcastic.
> >
> > > I think you should just try to get this
> > > entire thread deleted, if at all possible, since it makes you look
> > > really foolish.
> >
> > Actually it just points you out as a somewhat arrogant newbie with a lot
to
> > learn.
>
> None of which would be illegal, if true. Libel is illegal, even on the
> internet, and this thread will be removed, or somebody will get sued.

Sure sure. "Bring it on"... If nothing else you will give me a basis for
calling you a moron independent of the post you messed up.

http://implants.clic.net/tony/Corner/B/0052.html
"O'Leary, veiled behind the screen name of "mplnt@aol.com," and Ms. Susan
Schaezler of ETC, harassed, defamed and slandered Ms. Rosenthal, calling her
a "fraud," an "atheist" and claiming she was "ripping off" implanted women,
among other slanderous statements. Rosenthal recently discovered the
identity of the former McGhan President when he forwarded a dirty joke to
her e-mail address, failing to delete his real name from the e-mail.Internet
giant, America On-Line (AOL), is also named in this suit, for failing to
protect Plaintiff from abuse by its subscribers. Athough informed of their
"spam" and derogatory and off-topic postings, the complaint alleges, AOL
made no attempt to curtail the illegal postings ."

The Slapp suite lost. The judge quite rightly decided that usenet 'flame
wars' are not noted as an respected medium and there was no real loss of
'reputation' from the 'hot language'. In a way it is a benefit since it
allows for heated debate. But if you think you can change the laws, try it.
You have nothing but money to lose. Support a lawyer today... they need your
help...