On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 06:05:20PM -0000, Andrew Bowman wrote: > From: "David Cantrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > If they are allowing someone to use their machine to attack me, then > *they* > > are attacking me. Not securing their own box is a sin of ommission as > > opposed to a sin of commission, so I'll let them off with a sound flaming > > instead of cutting their balls off. Being incapable of securing their own > > box is not an admissible defence. > This'll be a different David Cantrell from the one that was opposing the > American's pursuit of Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan on (void) then...
No. If you were to make the bogus comparison you imply, then you would see that that nice Mr. Bush should in fact have written nasty emails to his Afghan opposite number, instead of ordering the murder of yet more innocents. Sub-thread filtered, respond off-list if you give a shit. -- David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david Blessed are the pessimists, for they test their backups -- anon
