Iranian.Com
NUR
defenders on USENET, Mr Paul Hammond, who turns out to be a convicted
pedophile:
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-174894130.html
Community order for internet pervert.
Biggleswade Chronicle (Biggleswade, England) | February 15, 2008
Former Gravenhurst man used the name Betty to access child porn.
An internet paedophile with a history of sex offences going back to
1969 has been given a three-year community order.
Paul Hammond, 57, had used the name "Betty" and "Betty Boop" while
collecting images from a smart group used by people distributing child
pornography.
Luton Crown Court heard that, as part of an operation started in 2005,
police obtained "Betty's" IP address and traced it to Hammond's then
home in Barton Road, Gravenhurst.
Prosecutor Simon Ash said officers raided the home in November ...
-
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-175132217.html
from Luton Crown Court
An internet paedophile with a history of sex offences going back to
1969 has been given a three-year community order.
Paul Hammond, 57, had used the name 'Betty' and 'Betty Boop' while
collecting images from a smart group used by people distributing child
pornography.
Luton Crown Court heard on Friday that, as part of an operation
started in 2005, police obtained 'Betty's' IP address and traced it to
Hammond's then home in Barton Road, Gravenhurst.
Prosecutor Simon Ash said officers raided the home in November 2006
and seized a laptop, ...
-
They also example another complete lunatic, who ever since his
identity was exposed, hasn't been seen or heard from since. Then they
complain about me being spiteful? I am not spiteful against you Haifan
Baha'is: I am on an outright WAR-PATH with you FASCIST cultists, and
here are the reasons, which to date you have no response for:
BAHAI CULT FAQ
http://bahaicultfaq.blogspot.com/
As far as JJ is concerned: the issue of his (former) Bahai wife was
first broached by the webmaster of Iran-Politics-Club who goes by the
name of Ahriman. But the fact of the matter, which we are quite happy
to eventually demonstrate in court, is that there is a inordinate pro-
Bahai bias on this whole site and a system (or pattern) that punishes
anyone and everyone who dares to criticize the Bahai bias on this
site. For example, Sophia posted a message last night my time where
she responded to your stupidities and set the record straight. But
that message has now been erased. Does it not occur to you people that
all of these messages, including the ones your BAHAI INTERNET AGENCY
are now handing to you, are also archived in full by us, and that once
the whole trajectory of the discussion is interrogated by a judge and
jury, it is you people who are going to emerge as the total creeps,
and not us? But since you want to play it like that, go ahead. Here
above is an incriminating piece of information about your pedophile
USENET archdefender Paul Hammond.
Some people you guys surround yourselves with to defend you, i.e.
liars, pedophiles, lunatics and hate-criminals!
NUR
heavy bias operative here with certain things allowed and certain
things not allowed for discussion. There is a dominant clique here who
fawns and drools like sycophants over the editor and his every policy
and action, which in turn is set by the various financial interests
which perpetuate this place. The tone and atmosphere is thoroughly
mollycuddled and controlled. In other words, it is a business with its
own set of primary corporate interests and agendas, and one which
follows very much North American corporate-management models. No
questions are ever asked over the selective, lopsided implementation
of policy or that the dominant clique led by its Supreme Editor JJ
will stoop to just about every and any tactic in the book (some of
which are about to land this site in hot legal water) with those they
label/libel or otherwise don't like. In some ways, you are dealing
with a situation not unlike highschool with popular or unpopular
crowds.
My mercurial take on the situation is that there is also an IRI angle
to things here because nothing could discredit the opposition and
prolong the existence of the Islamic republic's life better than a
site such as this, especially the dominant clique who represent the
worst cultural and political excesses of the Iranian diaspora and
would turn off most of the folks back home to any potential or actual
cooperation/wide coalition. Morever, nothing better than a site such
as this could function as a surveillance front for the regime. But,
then again, JJ and the interests behind this site are far too
opportunistic to be answerable to only one exclusive master, and that
is where the whole hezbollahi theory falls apart.
That said, everything that is wrong with the Iranian diaspora (esp. in
North America) is fully on display and active in this place. And the
question as to why the Islamic Republic has survived as long as it has
is fully answered, for me anyway, by spending some amount of time here
and gauging things. I look at my own presence here, and the dozens of
times I have been banned from it, as field-work for a long-term
writing project.
BTW, as an aside, the ultimate responsibility for the fall of the
Shah, in my book, falls squarely on the doorstep of the Anglo-American
big media/corporate/financial estate(s), and no one else.
[Crossposted to USENET]
NUR
where the Supreme Editor himself contributes and actively promotes the
proverbial crossing of the legal line into outright libel and
defamation, whether by himself or other contributors -- which this
site and its editor have in fact crossed. Second, allowing this site
to function as a sort of soap-box and bully-pulpit for certain
sectarian agendas and interests while systematically and deliberately
marginalizing others doesn't help JJ's case either. In a theoretical
hearing situation, a court will want to learn, for example, why there
has been so much (almost exclusive) Bahai related human rights items
whereas hardly anything on other minority groups; or, whenever there
has been anything on other groups, it has been more along the lines of
a token nod for appearances sake rather (and only after certain people
like myself have pressed the matter and put our foot down over a
period of time) than a sincere longterm, sustained effort to feature
the plight of these other minority groups.
In short, where the minority question is concerned, the Baha'is have
been given pride of place, the lion's share, and as such dominated
this space and deliberately rammed an exclusive narrative, making
themselves appear as the sole and exclusive persecuted minority. And
it's not just Baha'is in the generic we're talkig about, either; but
specifically the HAIFAN Bahai organization, and not any other of the
Bahai sects -- who have actually consistently been given the cold
shoulder here and, again, marginalized. Call this Baha'i-basing all
you want, where I come from this is called truth in adversting and the
level hand, which does not exist here even with the best face put on
it!
Moreover it has taken JJ almost three years to come out and tell one
of the Bahais here to quit with the single quote blogs, which in fact
has been nothing more than outright prosletyzing (tabligh). I wonder
if anyone had come here and blogged single quotes over and over again
from the Qur'an or hadith, or any other scripture, how long they
would last here? Not very long. So who is kidding who?
One should also state the following: since none of you here are
professional mental health specialists, and even if you were you have
no clinical diagnoses at your disposal to articulate a professional
opinion, the incessant commentary about people's sanity or lack
thereof is nothing more than a group-think weapon used by the dominant
clique hereabouts to censor, marginalize and silence people they
happen to dislike. And His Supreme Editorial Holiness (faraj'ullah
maq'adahu) has rubber-stamped this state of affairs with His Most
Wholly fiat deletion button again and again and again! Such tactics
are the usual strategy of fascists and totalitarians such as the
Islamic republic you all claim to dislike. Yet on this site the pitch-
forked in-group mob carries on as if this place were a Hezbollah rally
in Iran of the 1980s. In that vein Iranian.Com very much looks and
feels like the Islamic Republic or the worst excesses of the Pahlavi
years, just the names and labels are different. And I am not the first
person who has pointed this out nor will I be the last.
Q: what exactly do want me to blog, again? If you want me to write
something about how Iranian.Com represents and typifies the deep
cultural dysfunction of the Iranian diaspora in the West, and how
this dysfunctional culture is poles separated from the mindset and
mentality of average folks back home, I can write you a book!
NUR
Exchange Commission regulatory code where a self-identified online
social network site is allowed the kind of unregulated structure with
shareholders and for profit operation that this site apparently
claims?
If you wish to be cited any further legislative, regulatory or case
law material, I suggest you have the attorneys representing this site
contact us, as we have previously asked, and we're happy to cite them
a whole plethora of material.
I thank you for addressing me by my proper last name.
NUR
Exchange Commission regulatory code where a self-identified online
social network site is allowed the kind of unregulated structure with
shareholders and for profit operation that this site apparently
material you have filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission,
exactly what is the proper nature and structure of Iranian.com? Who
are the shareholders here? Silent partners??
BTW the US Code of Federal Regulations governs the branches of the US
government, usually between the various executive and legislative
levels, and has no relevence to anything this site may or may not have
violated. Different areas of law are involved. CFR is part of public
administrative law, or didn't they teach you that in the law school
you went to?
If you wish to be cited any further legislative, regulatory or case
law material, I suggest you have the attorneys representing this site
contact us, as we have previously asked, and we're happy to cite them
a whole plethora of material until we're both black and blue in the
face.
Finally, I thank you for addressing me by my proper last name unlike
the other members of the dominant clique on this board.
[Crossposted to USENET]
NUR
by Nur-i-Azal on Wed Dec 02, 2009 10:52 PM PST
And before you go, do you mind citing the appropriate Securities and
Exchange Commission regulatory code where a self-identified online
social network site is allowed the kind of unregulated structure with
shareholders and for profit operation that this site apparently
claims? Let me ask you the question another way, according to the
material you have filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission,
exactly what is the proper nature and structure of Iranian.com? Who
are the shareholders here? Silent partners??
BTW the US Code of Federal Regulations governs the branches of the US
government, usually between the various executive and legislative
levels/depts, etc., and has no relevence to anything this site may or
may not have violated. Different areas of law are involved. CFR is
part of public administrative law, or didn't they teach you that in
the law school you went to? Unless, that is, you wish to suggest
Iranian.Com is a branch or agency of the US Federal government?
If you wish to be cited any further legislative, regulatory or case
law material, I suggest you have the attorneys representing this site
contact us, as we have previously asked, and we're happy to cite them
NUR
the conduct of administrative agency and the implementation of laws,
Exactly, which is precisely what I said. The code governs the area of
Public Administrative Law between executive/legislative agencies/
depts. of the US Federal government. It refers to the public sector.
FCC regulations or licensing that governs issues related to the
operation of sites and business such as this are not immediately
referrable to CFR. Have a lawyer explain this to you because you
obviously do not know what you're talking about, and, while you're at
it, have any attorneys representing this site contact us. M'kay?
NUR
it, have any attorneys representing this site contact us. M'kay?
BTW your proper first name isn't by any chance, Javaneh, is it?
NUR
by Nur-i-Azal on Thu Dec 03, 2009 04:17 PM PST
[Crossposted to USENET]
NUR
by Nur-i-Azal on Fri Dec 04, 2009 05:24 PM PST
agencies use the CFR to enforce their rules.
Yes. But that is not an issue here unless you are insinuating that
this site is a government agency. And only when there are apparent
conflicts in such enforcement does the CFR become a critical point of
the legal discussion. When the enforcement is not at issue, which is
not an issue here at all (at least yet), other areas of law apply. And
this is what you don't seem to understand about the nature of public
administrative law and the CFR specifically. You are also citing the
wrong statute. If any Federal legislation applies directly here
besides FCC regulatory elements, it isn't the CFR, genius, it the
Federal Communications and Decency Act.
DUH!