Reply #173: Thanks, good answers. [View All]

[Bouvet_Island]

"But your questions are IRRELEVANT."

I respectfully disagree that they are irrelevant.

Answers.

1. I don´t know, this isn´t relevant to the point I was making. You probably are factually wrong, eg. patriot act and there have been internet libel verdicts, but my point wasn´t the legality of the posts it was the bad form of this discussion. It should be less like Fox television. The person accused is specifically not allowed to defend herself, this is not in good democratic spirit IMO. It makes bells ring for me.

2. I disagree it is moot, I got the impression someone is fessing with her ability to "keep in touch", although I am not able to determine yet. This is why I am interested in facts and good discussion.

It seems there is accountability, if she fucks with the IRS it will be her problem. Anyone suspecting fraud can tip them.

It seems any number she posts or not will be used against her. The proof of "no fraud" is a full accounting, with the reciepts of the donations. This she says will be delivered in due time. If she doesn´t do this, she will probably face jail.

Doubts is one thing, accusations are something else. Stating as a fact she is a fraudster is not timely nor helpful to our greater cause if there is no valid proof. Saying "I think something is fishy" is something else.

"The fact that you discuss Bev is not a problem, but for someone not in the same mindset as you, this type of exchange detracts immensely from the credibility of any information acquired here."

I see it is possible to misunderstand that sentence, I will correct it. I meant that the discussion based on facts is good, while posting blank lies, loose rumor as fact or accusing her of serious crimes unfounded. If you state as a fact she is a fraud, you should be so sure as to be willing to report her. If you are not that sure, you are sortof lying, it is not a fact then.

I don´t see how what you wrote at the end of your post regards what I said. We probably agree on some of the valid criticism of Bev Harris, and as a public figure she is open for it. But it doesn´t warrant or defend the behaviour of some people in this thread.