NJ is going to keep on arousing me

Quoted w/o comment…

Every crime commited [sic] it [sic] a hate crime becuase [sic] no one [sic] commits [sic] crimes against other [sic] out of [sic] love.

The puppeteer should consider the case of mercy killings – ‘crimes’ committed exactly as a consequence of love.

and speaking from a certain amount of so-called exertise by being an “activist” with certain demographics (such as prison reform, anti-capital punishment, and helping families deal with long term incarceration or the loss of a loved one while in prison or CP)I beg you not to take any lawyer at their word while inquiring about their services: please try to do some research yourself or perhaps get an opinion from a trusted colleague and/or call your state bar. lawyers are often the foxes guarding the henhouses, they’ll say/do anything to secure your status as their client, then the BS starts. I do not think that many judges will worry about anything except “Confidential” and the cease and disist- also, the fraudulent/libelous document only further muddies the waters, there’s no telling how this may end up for you

it was said somewhere in all that mess that “the wheels of justice go very slow, but they grind exceedingly fine” and they’re correct in that assessment.

I wish you the best with this and I’ll be sure to check back on this and even check out all of the data/facts/info and/or implications/consequences and whatever else that you have to offer in both science and global warming. I’m still out on GW so I look forward to the information you provide.

and regardless of the authenticity of the said documents, you may have to answer in court, not on your blog.

do what you may, but please read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaratory_judgment

I think HI will end up suing a whole bunch of mofos and actually make money doing it. I don’t think that the muddied legalities surrounding the authenticity of any documents will be the focus, what’s important is the notice of confidentiality.

Every crime commited it a hate crime becuase no one commits crimes against other out of love.

Rubbish.

That is the fallacy of excluding the middle: in other words, absence of love does not imply hate. (And yes, there are crimes committed out of love: “crimes of passion” arise out of extremely strong feelings which may include love.)

That alone demonstrates that all crime does not arise out of hate and thus your claim is false.

But your argument is worse than that. You seek to redefine a specific term with your own definition, thereby removing that specific meaning from the conversation.

Hate crimes must meet certain specific criteria. (“Absence of motivation by love” is decidedly not one of them.)

The reason why “hate crimes” are legally defined is that they target a whole class of people – they are a form of terrorism, if you like – by selecting the targeted individuals on the basis of class membership. Hate crimes are used to intimidate and “send a message to” entire subsets of a population, so their impact is far broader than just the specific individual victims.

You don’t know much, do you?

If there hadn’t been people in those buildings, it wouldn’t have been terrorism. Just like if you shoot a gun in an empty field and don’t hit somebody, it isn’t murder.

Exactly what kind of crime is NOT a hate crime?

All the crimes that don’t fit the legal definition of “hate crime”. Go look up the definition before you make yourself look any more silly.

How would you know where Markus was sitting and what time of day it was when he sent his death threats?

No need to try and ask serious questions. It’s clear that “High noon drifter” and probably “The Cartoonist” are further sockpuppets of Rob Hood the undertreated mentally ill troll who haunts SB and especially this blog.

A quick search on his name will show where I’ve outed him multiple times and from there you can read a bit and find out about his obsessions with “flouride” and HAARRP, vaccines and YEC, and of course, Canada, which he seems to have concluded is my country of origin/home.

How would you know where Markus was sitting and what time of day it was when he sent his death threats? If he logged into his personal email account at a work terminal or during normal business hours while he was expected to be doing his job, in order to send a terrorist death threat, he’s as good as fired already. If he was at home and not on the clock – honestly, it’s easy enough to use evidence of terrorist / felony activity to humiliate most companies into firing people under that circumstance as well, i.e. “you wouldn’t want someone like that working for you, would you?” It’s less open-and-shut, but still worth a try and I still encourage it.

Occupy Wall Street is terrorism too. Taking up space and destroying city property

*FACEPALM*

Vandalism isn’t terrorism – you can’t be a terrorist against an inanimate object. They were also jaywalking – does that make them super-duper terrorists?

To be a terrorist you have to KILL CIVILIANS outside of a combat zone – or TRY to, or THREATEN to – in order to extort a behavioral change and achieve a political outcome; in this case, threatening to kill Greg unless he stopped blogging about global warming. That is the DEFINITION OF THE WORD. Only lazy hacks try to use it as a stand-in for whatever they don’t like.