Postby jwocky » Wed Apr 27, 2016 5:13 pm
Well, to claim "wrongly accused", I would need to ignore his own actions first, his relentless attempts to harass people till they say something, he can use as "justification", his abuse of his post deletion powers to make later claims, something was or was not said in those emails (nobody can prove it because he deleted them). Those actions and especially since they are repeated, are sufficient prove for intent. And since I consider banning of people for political reasons as bad, yes, we can speak here of evil intent. See, the difference between us is, you argue on the base of assumptions, I argue on the bqase of his actual actions. So, you can try to argue what he did and still does, but his own actions prove you wrong and all of this constructed insanity-defence goes down the gutter. A repeating pattern of logically connected singular actions aiming at one goal is even in court sufficient prove that a defendant was at the time of this actions able to recognize what he was doing.
Free speech can never be achieved by dictatorial measures!
