|
|
Posted by Hammerer on 10/07/82 11:27
"George Hester" <hesterloli@hotmail.com> had a "Whooosh" moment
in message news:OSiZe.2118$7b6.1233@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
>
> "Hammerer" <hammerer@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:4335976f_3@x-privat.org...
> >
> > "George Hester" <hesterloli@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:XmgZe.2104$7b6.1833@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> > >
> > > "Hammerer" <hammerer@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:43358cb6_2@x-privat.org...
> > > >
> > > > "George Hester" <hesterloli@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:z_fZe.2102$7b6.670@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> > > > >
> > > > > As far as I know RIAA "attcked" nothing. Their lawyers put the
> > > > > fear of God into P2P developers. That was all it took. The loss
> > > > > in Network as a direct response to RIAA lawyer threats. That is
it.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yes, George. Otherwise known as an RIAA "attck".
> > > >
> > >
> > > I suppose.
> > >
>
> > Yes, George. Me too. Kind of invalidates your
> > entire post, though, doesn't it?!
> > >
>
> > > But if the P2P developers didn't get cold feet
> > > the RIAA "attack" would have been useless.
> > >
> > But the Frontcode P2P developers *did* get cold feet, George, once
> > they received a no-doubt specifically-tailored direct communication
> > from the RIAA. From the RIAA's (in fact, EVERYONE'S) point of
> > view, it was an "attack", and useful to corporate interests.
> > >
>
> > > Wasn't an "attack" it was a "threat." There is a diference.
> > >
>
> > Not in THIS case, George. You're "stretching". Semantically speaking.
> > >
>
> > > We threatened Iraq and then we attacked them.
> > >
>
> > "We", George?! I had nothing to do with it. Bad example.
> > In more ways than one.
> > >
>
> > > I spz we could have just attacked them but
> > > then people would say it wasn't a "Just" war.
> > > The threat made it Just.
> > >
>
> > Thank you, George. Many fine, intelligent people have tried to argue
> > that the Oil Wars were the result of a failure in diplomacy, and/or the
> > inability of first-world politicians to control multinational
corporations
> > and rich, unelected elites. You've put my mind at rest. It was all Just,
> > because "we" threatened them first. Cheers, mate! You're a pal!
> >
>
> Now you see huh, Hammerer?
>
Sure do, George. No doubt about it - you got me on that one. Yes. When will
I ever learn?!
>
> Clear as Mud?
>
Errr . . . . . . yes.
>
> A threat first then an attack.
>
Yep. But no need to rub it in, George! I try; I really do.
>
> It all ends up in the secure arms of Justice.
> At least that's the way this country views it.
>
You're a real American, George. With guys like you in existence, no wonder
we Brits let our transatlantic colonies slip through our fingers like we
did. George the III . . . . George Washington . . . . George Hester! This is
too much!!!
>
> Gee I think a guy named Hitler tried that too.
>
Yeah. George Hitler. What a fucktard *he* was, eh?!
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|