Posted on 10/24/2003 10:14:40 AM PDT by Chancellor Palpatine
Edited on 10/24/2003 12:02:17 PM PDT by Lead Moderator. [history]
What allies? Does this have anything to do with that Devil's Triagle and weird theories that CP was talking about?
Is it too much to ask that you not engage in libelous speech in this case? Are you utterly incapable of being very mildly continent (i.e., not asserting specific motive to Michael Schiavo without solid proof of the allegation) on the keyboard in front of you, being careful to not let your passion run beyond your reason?
Anything other that a "yes" or "no" will be counted as a "no".
Thanks in advance.
I'm sure that any number of people a lot more powerful than Mr. Schiavo wouldn't mind FR being shut down, I just don't understand why you think he has more power to do so than anyone else. If the Clinton Administration couldn't do it, then why can he? And not all the people who were mentioned on this site with regards to the Clinton scandals were public officials. Clinton never even got Matt Drudge. As much as I would like to think otherwise, I still don't believe the ``ALLIES'' that you refer to are that bent on FR's destruction.
The American Civil Liberties Union.
You're putting on a great act.
Pretty assinine, eh?
Because there are some idiots on this board that have been handing him that power with their tendency to rant beyond the point of fact.
If the Clinton Administration couldn't do it, then why can he?
Because while FR broke no federal laws, some posters in this case have gone beyond the bounds of legal speech and into libel.
Keep up the act.
Clinton never even got Matt Drudge.
Because Drudge executed an immediate retraction.
Just keep up the act.
Technically, yes. But the 'living constitution' is becoming a Federal common law very quickly.
You're going to have to give me the quotes again, give me the post number or link to them because I don't know what you're talking about with this post without the quotes for reference.
Are you in a position with the ACLU that you can guarantee that?
Do you understand that?
I understand your words.
However, I find your words to be a frail reed to bet the existence of this website on.
VA Court Dismisses Libel Lawsuit Against Anonymous Website Author(ACLU)
Its one thing to come up with principled opposition and to advocate that strongly, it is another to make direct allegations and present that as truth, when you have no actual knowledge of it and haven't bothered checking.
I'm confused.
Is this like your perpetually alleging LaBelleDameSansMerci and I were one and the same?
Or is it more like passing around electronic hearsay such as this:
Without naming names or being too specific, here is the story - PLEASE keep it under wraps for now. It is fresh, but doesn't need to go to the alternate site yet, as several people are now in the process of wrecking their real lives over this right now.
[... need I go on? ...] And it is really ugly.....
What sort of instructions for disseminating this damaging hearsay electronically would you suppose the author of the e-mail is giving here, Counselor?
Do you really expect any of us to believe you care at all about the effect of libel and slander on "the real lives" of others?
Any chance you can vacate the glass house you habit before you go throwing stones?
These are all hypothetical questions, of course ... I have no intention of returning to this Timesink wherein you're wasting the "real lives" of folks. I've read enough.
P.S. Should be "it's one thing". You'll be wanting to dot the i's and cross the t's from here on out, I suspect, lest you be hoisted on your own petard.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.