On Fri, 16 Mar 2001 16:52:41 +0900, J.M. Vitoux
<[log in to unmask]> wrote, in reply to Strike:

>I'll follow your advice and won't reply to Bob.

Good.  But if and when you do, stick to discussing SCUBA, or at
least stay away from your personal attack of MY POST about
others that had nothing to do with Jean-Marc!

>
>In essence I take exception to Bob's ( apparently
>succesfull ) attempt at censorship on Lee.

That is where you are TOTALLY wrong because you didn't bother
to read what I had posted on the subject.

There was NO censorship on Lee, not even an "attempt" one.


On the other hand, you Jean-Marc was ATTEMPTING VERY HARD to
CENSOR ME for posting my opinion and warning about the behavior
of others.  Jean-Marc (and a few other unsuccessful posters
in Scuba-L) were ATTEMPTING to censor ME.  That kind of attempt
is DOOMED to failure because I am the strongest OPPONENT to
any form of censorship.  But I'll be damned if I let Lee or
anybody else publicly, repeately, and deliberately LIE about
me, without ME stating what action I am ENTITLED to take (as a
Citizen of the USA in self-defence) if he didn't stop the LYING
part.


Perhaps Jean-Marc is influenced by the Napoleonic Law that a
person (Defendant) is GUILTY if charged by the Plaintiff (Jean-Marc)
unless proven innocent by the Defendant (which is impossible
in this case since Jean-Marc's mind is already made up, and he
refuses to look rationally at the evidence, if he even bothered
to look at the evidence AT ALL).

It doesn't work that way in the USA, Jean-Marc!



Lee is free to post here ANY TIME on ANY SUBJECT (except deliberate
LIES about ME and call me a liar on his own lies!), and that was
clearly stated in my WARNING, and in my ONE, DETAILED explanation
post that ended the episode for everyone else

       EXCEPT for one self-righteous, and self-contradictory
       (attempting to censor me) Jean-Marc Vitoux.



I simply demanded (having repeatedly stated and warned him in the
preceding 6 MONTHS -- yes, since August 2000, when I STOPPED
responding to Lee's posts) that he stop using LIES about me as bait,
while continuing the same LIES by misrepresentation and misquotes
when my QUOTES are clearly in the posts and in the archives.

I warned Lee that if he was going to LIE about ME, and SLANDER
me personally and publicly, THEN he had better do it on his OWN
time, and not on the time for which *I* am a part-payer.


He expressed his counter-THREAT, in HIS attempt to censor ME, by
threatening to have the officials of the US Government prosecute
me to the fullest extent (possibly JAIL me <gasp :-)> )should I
"threaten" him (which he grossly ERRED in his understanding of,
and clearly displaced his ignorance about, the word "threat", in
the applicable U.S. LAW).


His counter-threat is IN FORCE.   So is my WARNING to him, about
his LIES, and LIES about ME ONLY.  He can lie all he wants to,
about Strike, e.g., and he HAS, and MY WARNING to him wouldn't
apply!


It's between the two of us.  It's none of Jean-Marc's damned
business.  PERIOD.   I had already stated in my general post.
I am re-stating it now.


>I came to the conclusion that his behaviour cannot
>be accepted anymore. To the point that I refuse to
>be associated with him in any way other than
>confronting him when justified. There is a limit
>to what is acceptable and what is not. I believe
>that continuing to discuss with him is in effect
>encouraging/legitimizing his chronic misbehaviour.
>
>Jean-Marc

That's your OPINION, Jean-Marc.  You are ENTITLED to come to
whatever INVALID conclusion of yours.  You are ENTITLED to your
OPINION, but you're NOT JUSTIFIED in your "confrontation"
by practicing CENSORSHIP yourself when your notion of
censorship on my part was only ALLEGED by you, without
basis, as I have re-explained here.

This is the FINAL post on the subject between Lee and me.
No one has to agree on either of us.  But I don't have to
put up with any of Jean-Marc's self-righteous acts of
calling ME names without just cause, by you Jean-Marc or
anyone else!


I WILL answer ONLY to the Law Enforcement personnel in the
United States, THREATENED to be mobilized by Lee Bell, because
he said he is an employee of the United States Government.

Now THAT is without question, attempted censorship of me, ON
LEE'S PART.


Unfortunately for Lee, he is as LEGLESS on his threat (on
legal grounds alone, let alone moral and ethical grounds) as
was his lies (on factual grounds).


-- Bob.