From: ptsc <ptsc AT nym DOT alias DOT net>
Subject: Heber hides, Keith stands tall
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 22:50:53 -0400
Message-ID: <4d39gtk1n1irg4ad9pl8prpgkid3i36gn2@4ax.com>
Heber ducks around desperately trying to avoid appearing.
Keith posts his phone number and address to the global Internet so
that everyone knows where he is.
How many "fugitives" advertise their address and talk to anyone who
wants to, including the authorities?
For those accusing Keith of fleeing in a Heber-like fashion, I'll
point out that if Heber Jentzsch were on trial simply for speaking his
mind, and fled a conviction for *that*, even I would support him.
He's not, though, he's on trial for crimes including framing people
for crimes, swindling people out of every last penny they had, and
obstructing justice.
ptsc
From: "Zorrosblade.........Z" <zorrosblade@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Heber hides, Keith stands tall
Message-ID: <aL6N6.14945$gc1.1265958@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:24:06 GMT
Keith posts his phone number and address to the global Internet so
that everyone knows where he is.
How many "fugitives" advertise their address and talk to anyone who
wants to, including the authorities?
For those accusing Keith of fleeing in a Heber-like fashion, I'll
point out that if Heber Jentzsch were on trial simply for speaking his
mind, and fled a conviction for *that*, even I would support him.
He's not, though, he's on trial for crimes including framing people
for crimes, swindling people out of every last penny they had, and
obstructing justice.
ptsc
To me, very well said ptsc in making the distinction between free speech
for it's own sake (1st amend) and actual objective crime 'acts' as related
to any form of legitimate court-room *empirical* evidence proceedings for
provable objective crimes. Politically correct notions (bogus PC laws)
which help to promote prosecutions in any type of, (" I 'feel' threatened
by what you wrote or said about me/us for it's own sake"), where in fact
that feeling of 'threat' is not backed up by ANY objective evidence as to
the source of what is pretended as the 'threat'), boils down to
prosecuting for words spoken only as a crime. The objective counterpart
'threat' of anything said by the prosecuted not being needed for a guilty
charge of 'hate' crimes. This is Orwellian 'speak-crimes' endorsed at it's
worst. When clam-bots speak of 'hate-crimes' and tag that phrase to most
of their postings content concerning Hensen's so-called real life 'acts'
which in fact were his views expressed, not objective acts as objective
e.g., [ unless anyone can prove the location where Keith built an actual
cement/steel missile silo bunker for use in launching a stolen cruise
missile!], what their really endorsing as a 'pretended-crime' act is
'speak crimes' for their own sake.
Following their line of 'logic' on this point, ALL critics on ARS who post
their views on any scientology related subject which to OSA could be
construed as 'speak-crimes' with NO real connection to an objective crime,
should get the same treatment of 'hate-crimes' for prosecution, in what
appears to be our PC endorsed 'speak-crimes' court rooms that pretend
'hate-crime' actions for speaking. OSA would do it for every critic if
they thought they could get away with it every time in court. I may be
wrong as critics have suggested otherwise, but I sense that this so-called
'case' (Henson) was not an isolated Kangaroo court ruling aberration as
some have suggested related to speak-crime (hate-crime) enforcements in
our over-all 'judicial system' today. I truly hope I'm wrong. The
totalitarian implications are staggering if I'm right.
I use to think that 'Sten-Arnes' rantings about the American legal system
was his personal paranoid delusion of an illuminati type tyrannical force
running US 'jurisprudence', which, I felt was being way over the top
emotionally to what the judicial system in action is despite inherent
flaws and bogus 'legal precedent' uses. After this Orwellian 'politically
correct' think-crime court ruling over Henson, where nothing objective was
proven outside of his words spoken for their own sake, I don't view what
sten says about the U.S. system as necessarily 'rantings' any longer. I
only pray that he's not too right,,,, in fact.
**I'm probably late on the chain here in asking this question, but does
Spain have extradition rights in bringing someone to justice no matter
where they reside? And is there a legal *time frame* in Spanish law
related to other countries for carrying out such extraditions if they can?
(Heber needs to know. I'm sure he already does!!!!!!)
Z-Blade
