"-=jd=-" wrote in message
...
On Thu 17 Jun 2004 03:19:14p, "MnMikew" wrote in
message :


"-=jd=-" wrote in message
...
On Thu 17 Jun 2004 02:26:21p, "MnMikew" wrote in
message :


"m II" wrote in message
news:Q7jAc.48510$Ds.9055@clgrps12...
-=jd=- wrote:

I see absolutely nothing wrong with it at all. In fact, I think it
serves
as an *excellent* demonstration that "Free Speech" works both ways
-AND- that those who proclaim it the loudest seems to be the last
to realize that fact!

Cry me a river...

The email was sent in an expectation of privacy and was a request
NOT to bother his employers. A public disclosure of it is about the
same as a wire tap on an unknowing person. It stinks.

How would you feel if someone close to you lost a job because of
some unimportant newsgroup BS?

Yup, ratting to someones employer about some Usenet BS would warrant
an ass kicking. Beware people, what comes around goes around.



You might want to get someone to help you extract that hook from your
jaw...

You may want to extract your head from your butt. Whether its true or
not what happened to Bryant, ratting to an employer is as low as you can
go.




You said, "Whether it is true or not..."

You appear ready, able and more than willing to bitch, moan and complain
and *pass judgement* - even if it is *untrue*? Is that what you are
saying?

Pardon me while I release some stifled "guffaws" at your expense?

Do you not agree that getting someone in trouble with their employer is very
low behavior? Should be any easy question.