[CageyMay44]

I lost my XP Pro operating system computer to thieft.
After going to the computer stores in my area, none had a XP Pro system!
(They would sell me a $200 upgrade.) Both computers are of the same brand
and I would like to use the Pro disk that was included with the machine that
was stolen. The manufacturer will not support the new machine with an
operating system that was not originally installed on the machine. Microsoft
says that only the manufacturer can grant a licenses to install XP Pro. I
have paid for every program on my machines and would like to honestly use the
the XP Pro disk that came with the machine that was stolen. What would you
suggest?

[Richard Urban]

What do you want, an approval to do what you know shouldn't be done? I won't
give you that. Also, notice I said shouldn't, not couldn't.

BTW, your insurance coverage should pay to replace all the expensive
software you had installed on the computer. What's the big deal? Just buy a
new operating system with the settlement you got.

--
Regards,

Richard Urban

If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!


"CageyMay44" <CageyMay44@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D90C3086-13A1-4199-B6B7-8CA85C628191@microsoft.com...
>I lost my XP Pro operating system computer to thieft.
> After going to the computer stores in my area, none had a XP Pro system!
> (They would sell me a $200 upgrade.) Both computers are of the same brand
> and I would like to use the Pro disk that was included with the machine
> that
> was stolen. The manufacturer will not support the new machine with an
> operating system that was not originally installed on the machine.
> Microsoft
> says that only the manufacturer can grant a licenses to install XP Pro. I
> have paid for every program on my machines and would like to honestly use
> the
> the XP Pro disk that came with the machine that was stolen. What would
> you
> suggest?

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Few if any manufacturers support an operating system other than originally
installed.
Installing another OS will not void the warranty as some may suggest but it
may be necessary for you to put your computer back to the original OS at
your time and expense before any warranty support.

From your description, the Pro disk with the original computer was OEM.
Normally OEM is permanently tied to the original computer regardless the
condition of the original computer.
This is one of the many reasons you paid less for your OEM license to begin
with.
Read the specific EULA for details.

When the computer was stolen, the OEM OS was also stolen and should be
included as part of the insurance claim..

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"CageyMay44" <CageyMay44@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D90C3086-13A1-4199-B6B7-8CA85C628191@microsoft.com...
>I lost my XP Pro operating system computer to thieft.
> After going to the computer stores in my area, none had a XP Pro system!
> (They would sell me a $200 upgrade.) Both computers are of the same brand
> and I would like to use the Pro disk that was included with the machine
> that
> was stolen. The manufacturer will not support the new machine with an
> operating system that was not originally installed on the machine.
> Microsoft
> says that only the manufacturer can grant a licenses to install XP Pro. I
> have paid for every program on my machines and would like to honestly use
> the
> the XP Pro disk that came with the machine that was stolen. What would
> you
> suggest?

[S Murder]

A license to install Windows XP Pro? If you have the disk just go ahead and
install it your self. You paid for it, it's not illegal.


"CageyMay44" wrote:

> I lost my XP Pro operating system computer to thieft.
> After going to the computer stores in my area, none had a XP Pro system!
> (They would sell me a $200 upgrade.) Both computers are of the same brand
> and I would like to use the Pro disk that was included with the machine that
> was stolen. The manufacturer will not support the new machine with an
> operating system that was not originally installed on the machine. Microsoft
> says that only the manufacturer can grant a licenses to install XP Pro. I
> have paid for every program on my machines and would like to honestly use the
> the XP Pro disk that came with the machine that was stolen. What would you
> suggest?

[Carey Frisch [MVP]]

Sorry, but you lost your Windows XP license along with
the stolen computer. Contact your insurance company.

I.E. Banks do not replace money you lost or was stolen from
you either.

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP - Shell/User
Microsoft Newsgroups

Get Windows XP Service Pack 2 with Advanced Security Technologies:
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/windowsxp/choose.mspx

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"CageyMay44" wrote:

| I lost my XP Pro operating system computer to thieft.
| After going to the computer stores in my area, none had a XP Pro system!
| (They would sell me a $200 upgrade.) Both computers are of the same brand
| and I would like to use the Pro disk that was included with the machine that
| was stolen. The manufacturer will not support the new machine with an
| operating system that was not originally installed on the machine. Microsoft
| says that only the manufacturer can grant a licenses to install XP Pro. I
| have paid for every program on my machines and would like to honestly use the
| the XP Pro disk that came with the machine that was stolen. What would you
| suggest?

[S Murder]

What if he doesn't have insurance?

[Richard Urban]

Oh! If he doesn't have any insurance it is then permissible to steal! NOT!

--
Regards,

Richard Urban

If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!


"S Murder" <SMurder@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D5EB29B0-88D3-4163-A89E-8721FCA242D6@microsoft.com...
> What if he doesn't have insurance?

[Jim Macklin]

Dell www.dell.com generally lists a cost of $70 to upgrade
to Pro. Most retail stores carry only medium width shoes in
sizes from 8 to 11, computer stores carry in stock what is
least expensive. Order a computer with the hardware and
software you want.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm



"CageyMay44" <CageyMay44@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
news:D90C3086-13A1-4199-B6B7-8CA85C628191@microsoft.com...
|I lost my XP Pro operating system computer to thieft.
| After going to the computer stores in my area, none had a
XP Pro system!
| (They would sell me a $200 upgrade.) Both computers are
of the same brand
| and I would like to use the Pro disk that was included
with the machine that
| was stolen. The manufacturer will not support the new
machine with an
| operating system that was not originally installed on the
machine. Microsoft
| says that only the manufacturer can grant a licenses to
install XP Pro. I
| have paid for every program on my machines and would like
to honestly use the
| the XP Pro disk that came with the machine that was
stolen. What would you
| suggest?

[Carey Frisch [MVP]]

He absorbs the lost...period. There is no free lunch!

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP - Shell/User
Microsoft Newsgroups

Get Windows XP Service Pack 2 with Advanced Security Technologies:
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/windowsxp/choose.mspx

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"S Murder" wrote:

| What if he doesn't have insurance?

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Whether someone has insurance or not does not change the relevant facts.
People lose all the time because they chose not to ensure, have inadequate
insurance or have the deductible high.
People also are regularly saved because they have insurance that meets their
needs.
Whichever a person chooses, it is necessary for them to live with that
choice.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"S Murder" <SMurder@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D5EB29B0-88D3-4163-A89E-8721FCA242D6@microsoft.com...
> What if he doesn't have insurance?

[S Murder]

It's not free. He paid for it.


"Carey Frisch [MVP]" wrote:

> He absorbs the lost...period. There is no free lunch!
>
> --
> Carey Frisch
> Microsoft MVP
> Windows XP - Shell/User
> Microsoft Newsgroups
>
> Get Windows XP Service Pack 2 with Advanced Security Technologies:
> http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/windowsxp/choose.mspx
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "S Murder" wrote:
>
> | What if he doesn't have insurance?
>

[Jim Macklin]

Then he is too stupid to use a computer, car or live in a
house/apartment.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm



"S Murder" <SMurder@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
news:D5EB29B0-88D3-4163-A89E-8721FCA242D6@microsoft.com...
| What if he doesn't have insurance?

[Richard Urban]

And I paid for the money that was in my wallet when I lost it - by working
40 hard hours. Does that mean that I can go out and steal the same amount of
money?

--
Regards,

Richard Urban

If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!


"S Murder" <SMurder@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5BEE98F8-71D5-4772-B9A8-409A615743A2@microsoft.com...
> It's not free. He paid for it.
>
>
> "Carey Frisch [MVP]" wrote:
>
>> He absorbs the lost...period. There is no free lunch!
>>
>> --
>> Carey Frisch
>> Microsoft MVP
>> Windows XP - Shell/User
>> Microsoft Newsgroups
>>
>> Get Windows XP Service Pack 2 with Advanced Security Technologies:
>> http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/windowsxp/choose.mspx
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> "S Murder" wrote:
>>
>> | What if he doesn't have insurance?
>>

[Jim Macklin]

He paid for the OEM version license which is valid only with
the hardware.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm



"S Murder" <SMurder@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message
news:5BEE98F8-71D5-4772-B9A8-409A615743A2@microsoft.com...
| It's not free. He paid for it.
|
|
| "Carey Frisch [MVP]" wrote:
|
| > He absorbs the lost...period. There is no free lunch!
| >
| > --
| > Carey Frisch
| > Microsoft MVP
| > Windows XP - Shell/User
| > Microsoft Newsgroups
| >
| > Get Windows XP Service Pack 2 with Advanced Security
Technologies:
| >
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/windowsxp/choose.mspx
| >
|
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| >
| > "S Murder" wrote:
| >
| > | What if he doesn't have insurance?
| >

[Alan Smith]

"CageyMay44" <CageyMay44@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D90C3086-13A1-4199-B6B7-8CA85C628191@microsoft.com...
>I lost my XP Pro operating system computer to thieft.
> After going to the computer stores in my area, none had a XP Pro system!
> (They would sell me a $200 upgrade.) Both computers are of the same brand
> and I would like to use the Pro disk that was included with the machine
> that
> was stolen. The manufacturer will not support the new machine with an
> operating system that was not originally installed on the machine.
> Microsoft
> says that only the manufacturer can grant a licenses to install XP Pro. I
> have paid for every program on my machines and would like to honestly use
> the
> the XP Pro disk that came with the machine that was stolen. What would
> you
> suggest?

Do what the law says.

If you are insured you should get replacements for what has been stolen-
prove it to your insurance company and ask for it to be replcaed and explain
why. Show them the receipt you got when you legitimately bought it. -IF you
were properly insured they should do this.

[kurttrail]

Richard Urban wrote:
> What do you want, an approval to do what you know shouldn't be done?
> I won't give you that. Also, notice I said shouldn't, not couldn't.
>
> BTW, your insurance coverage should pay to replace all the expensive
> software you had installed on the computer. What's the big deal? Just
> buy a new operating system with the settlement you got.

LOL! Deductible!

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

[S Murder]

His copy of Xp wasn't stolen, his computer was. If someone steals your
wallet, does that mean you can't use the credit cards you decided to leave at
home?


"Richard Urban" wrote:

> And I paid for the money that was in my wallet when I lost it - by working
> 40 hard hours. Does that mean that I can go out and steal the same amount of
> money?
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Richard Urban
>
> If you knew as much as you think you know,
> You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!
>
>
> "S Murder" <SMurder@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5BEE98F8-71D5-4772-B9A8-409A615743A2@microsoft.com...
> > It's not free. He paid for it.
> >
> >
> > "Carey Frisch [MVP]" wrote:
> >
> >> He absorbs the lost...period. There is no free lunch!
> >>
> >> --
> >> Carey Frisch
> >> Microsoft MVP
> >> Windows XP - Shell/User
> >> Microsoft Newsgroups
> >>
> >> Get Windows XP Service Pack 2 with Advanced Security Technologies:
> >> http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/windowsxp/choose.mspx
> >>
> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> "S Murder" wrote:
> >>
> >> | What if he doesn't have insurance?
> >>
>
>
>

[kurttrail]

Richard Urban wrote:
> And I paid for the money that was in my wallet when I lost it - by
> working 40 hard hours. Does that mean that I can go out and steal the
> same amount of money?

It is not stealing Richard, and you should understand that by now. It
is at most copyright infringement, and/or a contract dispute. Both are
civil offenses. Stealing is a criminal offense.

It is really very disingenuous to keep comparing these civil types of
offenses with a criminal one. Now if the guy went out a stole a CD with
Windows XP on it, to replace his stolen XP CD, then that would be a
theft.

Do you understand the difference, or are you going to continue to make a
fool out of yourself by calling an apple, an orange and a criminal
orange at that?!

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

[Richard Urban]

Yes! My ex lady friend was!

--
Regards,

Richard Urban

If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!


"kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:%23c40uzVcFHA.4028@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Richard Urban wrote:
>> What do you want, an approval to do what you know shouldn't be done?
>> I won't give you that. Also, notice I said shouldn't, not couldn't.
>>
>> BTW, your insurance coverage should pay to replace all the expensive
>> software you had installed on the computer. What's the big deal? Just
>> buy a new operating system with the settlement you got.
>
> LOL! Deductible!
>
> --
> Peace!
> Kurt
> Self-anointed Moderator
> microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
> http://microscum.com/mscommunity
> "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
> "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
>

[bumtracks]

Would think if you still have the official Product Key glued in place with
the original cd package, you still own the program. You guys say otherwise
.... but then what happens if you become aware that someone has stolen a copy
of your CD and your activation key, are you then supposed to run out and buy
a $200 replacement ?

"CageyMay44" <CageyMay44@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D90C3086-13A1-4199-B6B7-8CA85C628191@microsoft.com...
>I lost my XP Pro operating system computer to thieft.
> After going to the computer stores in my area, none had a XP Pro system!
> (They would sell me a $200 upgrade.) Both computers are of the same brand
> and I would like to use the Pro disk that was included with the machine
> that
> was stolen. The manufacturer will not support the new machine with an
> operating system that was not originally installed on the machine.
> Microsoft
> says that only the manufacturer can grant a licenses to install XP Pro. I
> have paid for every program on my machines and would like to honestly use
> the
> the XP Pro disk that came with the machine that was stolen. What would
> you
> suggest?

[kurttrail]

bumtracks wrote:
> Would think if you still have the official Product Key glued in place
> with the original cd package, you still own the program. You guys
> say otherwise ... but then what happens if you become aware that
> someone has stolen a copy of your CD and your activation key, are you
> then supposed to run out and buy a $200 replacement ?
>

Yes. For MS, crime does pay!

And now MS is a anti-democratic censor for the Chinese now too!

I bet if Michael Jackson still had enough money, MS would help promote
pedophilia!

MS's new slogan:

"How Can We Part You From Your Money Today? We're Willing To Do Just
About Anything!"

http://www.kurttrail.com/kblog/kblogarch/00000030.php

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

[Jim Macklin]

Nope, buy replacement media from the OEM.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm



"bumtracks" <lost@disney.lan> wrote in message
news:QiVre.11974$tY4.88@trnddc06...
| Would think if you still have the official Product Key
glued in place with
| the original cd package, you still own the program. You
guys say otherwise
| ... but then what happens if you become aware that someone
has stolen a copy
| of your CD and your activation key, are you then supposed
to run out and buy
| a $200 replacement ?
|
| "CageyMay44" <CageyMay44@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote
in message
| news:D90C3086-13A1-4199-B6B7-8CA85C628191@microsoft.com...
| >I lost my XP Pro operating system computer to thieft.
| > After going to the computer stores in my area, none had
a XP Pro system!
| > (They would sell me a $200 upgrade.) Both computers are
of the same brand
| > and I would like to use the Pro disk that was included
with the machine
| > that
| > was stolen. The manufacturer will not support the new
machine with an
| > operating system that was not originally installed on
the machine.
| > Microsoft
| > says that only the manufacturer can grant a licenses to
install XP Pro. I
| > have paid for every program on my machines and would
like to honestly use
| > the
| > the XP Pro disk that came with the machine that was
stolen. What would
| > you
| > suggest?
|
|

[Richard Urban]

At least we agree on the fact that Michael Jackson is a pedophile - or at
the least a very sick soul! (-:

--
Regards,

Richard Urban

If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!


"kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:exD35macFHA.1384@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> bumtracks wrote:
>> Would think if you still have the official Product Key glued in place
>> with the original cd package, you still own the program. You guys
>> say otherwise ... but then what happens if you become aware that
>> someone has stolen a copy of your CD and your activation key, are you
>> then supposed to run out and buy a $200 replacement ?
>>
>
> Yes. For MS, crime does pay!
>
> And now MS is a anti-democratic censor for the Chinese now too!
>
> I bet if Michael Jackson still had enough money, MS would help promote
> pedophilia!
>
> MS's new slogan:
>
> "How Can We Part You From Your Money Today? We're Willing To Do Just
> About Anything!"
>
> http://www.kurttrail.com/kblog/kblogarch/00000030.php
>
> --
> Peace!
> Kurt
> Self-anointed Moderator
> microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
> http://microscum.com/mscommunity
> "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
> "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
>

[Alias]

Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical evidence. Yet,
you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you know. You don't know squat.

Alias

"Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS@hotmail.com> wrote

> At least we agree on the fact that Michael Jackson is a pedophile - or at
> the least a very sick soul! (-:
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Richard Urban
>
> If you knew as much as you think you know,
> You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!
>
>
> "kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in message
> news:exD35macFHA.1384@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> bumtracks wrote:
>>> Would think if you still have the official Product Key glued in place
>>> with the original cd package, you still own the program. You guys
>>> say otherwise ... but then what happens if you become aware that
>>> someone has stolen a copy of your CD and your activation key, are you
>>> then supposed to run out and buy a $200 replacement ?
>>>
>>
>> Yes. For MS, crime does pay!
>>
>> And now MS is a anti-democratic censor for the Chinese now too!
>>
>> I bet if Michael Jackson still had enough money, MS would help promote
>> pedophilia!
>>
>> MS's new slogan:
>>
>> "How Can We Part You From Your Money Today? We're Willing To Do Just
>> About Anything!"
>>
>> http://www.kurttrail.com/kblog/kblogarch/00000030.php
>>
>> --
>> Peace!
>> Kurt
>> Self-anointed Moderator
>> microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
>> http://microscum.com/mscommunity
>> "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
>> "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
>>
>
>

[kurttrail]

Alias wrote:
> Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical evidence.
> Yet, you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you know. You don't
> know squat.

A guy in his mid-40's should not be sleeping with boys.

If I had been on the Jury, I'd have convicted the him just for that
admission.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

[Bob I]

You say you "would like to "honestly use" the the XP Pro disk that came
with the machine that was stolen." Since you imply that it was OEM then
recovery of the stolen computer is the only way you may use that
license. If, on the other hand you purchased a RETAIL license at the
time the computer was purchased, you should still have the key to
install. I don't see an issue either way.

CageyMay44 wrote:

> I lost my XP Pro operating system computer to thieft.
> After going to the computer stores in my area, none had a XP Pro system!
> (They would sell me a $200 upgrade.) Both computers are of the same brand
> and I would like to use the Pro disk that was included with the machine that
> was stolen. The manufacturer will not support the new machine with an
> operating system that was not originally installed on the machine. Microsoft
> says that only the manufacturer can grant a licenses to install XP Pro. I
> have paid for every program on my machines and would like to honestly use the
> the XP Pro disk that came with the machine that was stolen. What would you
> suggest?

[Richard Urban]

I would convict for being a sick soul and an affront to humanity!

--
Regards,

Richard Urban

If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!


"Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
news:ux%23VpbbcFHA.1040@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical evidence. Yet,
> you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you know. You don't know
> squat.
>
> Alias
>
> "Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS@hotmail.com> wrote
>
>> At least we agree on the fact that Michael Jackson is a pedophile - or at
>> the least a very sick soul! (-:
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>>
>> Richard Urban
>>
>> If you knew as much as you think you know,
>> You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!
>>
>>
>> "kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in message
>> news:exD35macFHA.1384@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>> bumtracks wrote:
>>>> Would think if you still have the official Product Key glued in place
>>>> with the original cd package, you still own the program. You guys
>>>> say otherwise ... but then what happens if you become aware that
>>>> someone has stolen a copy of your CD and your activation key, are you
>>>> then supposed to run out and buy a $200 replacement ?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes. For MS, crime does pay!
>>>
>>> And now MS is a anti-democratic censor for the Chinese now too!
>>>
>>> I bet if Michael Jackson still had enough money, MS would help promote
>>> pedophilia!
>>>
>>> MS's new slogan:
>>>
>>> "How Can We Part You From Your Money Today? We're Willing To Do Just
>>> About Anything!"
>>>
>>> http://www.kurttrail.com/kblog/kblogarch/00000030.php
>>>
>>> --
>>> Peace!
>>> Kurt
>>> Self-anointed Moderator
>>> microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
>>> http://microscum.com/mscommunity
>>> "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
>>> "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

[Alias]

"kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote

> Alias wrote:
>> Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical evidence.
>> Yet, you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you know. You don't
>> know squat.
>
> A guy in his mid-40's should not be sleeping with boys.

Your opinion but it isn't a crime.

> If I had been on the Jury, I'd have convicted the him just for that
> admission.
>
> --
> Peace!
> Kurt

Convicted him of what? Sleeping in the same bed with someone, regardless of
the age and sex, is not illegal, even in JesusLand.

Alias

[Alias]

"Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS@hotmail.com> wrote

>I would convict for being a sick soul and an affront to humanity!
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Richard Urban

That's not what he was charged with, now was it? Your opinion of the man is
one thing. Whether he comitted a crime, another.

Alias
>
> If you knew as much as you think you know,
> You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!
>
>
> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
> news:ux%23VpbbcFHA.1040@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical evidence. Yet,
>> you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you know. You don't know
>> squat.
>>
>> Alias
>>
>> "Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS@hotmail.com> wrote
>>
>>> At least we agree on the fact that Michael Jackson is a pedophile - or
>>> at the least a very sick soul! (-:
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Richard Urban
>>>
>>> If you knew as much as you think you know,
>>> You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!
>>>
>>>
>>> "kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in message
>>> news:exD35macFHA.1384@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>>> bumtracks wrote:
>>>>> Would think if you still have the official Product Key glued in place
>>>>> with the original cd package, you still own the program. You guys
>>>>> say otherwise ... but then what happens if you become aware that
>>>>> someone has stolen a copy of your CD and your activation key, are you
>>>>> then supposed to run out and buy a $200 replacement ?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes. For MS, crime does pay!
>>>>
>>>> And now MS is a anti-democratic censor for the Chinese now too!
>>>>
>>>> I bet if Michael Jackson still had enough money, MS would help promote
>>>> pedophilia!
>>>>
>>>> MS's new slogan:
>>>>
>>>> "How Can We Part You From Your Money Today? We're Willing To Do Just
>>>> About Anything!"
>>>>
>>>> http://www.kurttrail.com/kblog/kblogarch/00000030.php
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Peace!
>>>> Kurt
>>>> Self-anointed Moderator
>>>> microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
>>>> http://microscum.com/mscommunity
>>>> "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
>>>> "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

[HeyBub]

Richard Urban wrote:
>> I bet if Michael Jackson still had enough money, MS would help
>> promote pedophilia!

Michael Jackson is living proof of the greatness of America. Where else
could a poor colored boy grow up to be a rich white man and marry Elvis
Presley's daughter? Is this a great country or what?

[HeyBub]

bumtracks wrote:
> Would think if you still have the official Product Key glued in place
> with the original cd package, you still own the program. You guys
> say otherwise ... but then what happens if you become aware that
> someone has stolen a copy of your CD and your activation key, are you
> then supposed to run out and buy a $200 replacement ?

Well, if the new owner of your stolen CD activated same before you, sure.

Your beef is with the thief, not Microsoft.

Suppose you buy a "Live 8" (or whatever the name for the dope-fest is)
ticket. You haven't used it yet. Should the concert promoters let you in
without a ticket?

[Peter A. Stavrakoglou]

"Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
news:ux%23VpbbcFHA.1040@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical evidence. Yet,
> you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you know. You don't know
> squat.

He was ot found innocent, he was found not-guilty. There's a huge
difference.

[Peter A. Stavrakoglou]

"Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23mVN1rbcFHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>I would convict for being a sick soul and an affront to humanity!

If that was the criteria then he'd have to share a cell with Michael Moore.

[Alias]

"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:OkeWQ8bcFHA.3244@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> "Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23mVN1rbcFHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>I would convict for being a sick soul and an affront to humanity!
>
> If that was the criteria then he'd have to share a cell with Michael
> Moore.

No, he would have to share a cell with you.

Alias
>
>

[Alias]

"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote
> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote

>> Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical evidence. Yet,
>> you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you know. You don't know
>> squat.
>
> He was ot found innocent, he was found not-guilty. There's a huge
> difference.

Really? Please elaborate and try to do it without your usual clichés.

Alias

[Peter A. Stavrakoglou]

"Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
news:%23Pc5C$bcFHA.2960@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
> "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote
>> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote
>
>>> Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical evidence.
>>> Yet, you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you know. You don't
>>> know squat.
>>
>> He was ot found innocent, he was found not-guilty. There's a huge
>> difference.
>
> Really? Please elaborate and try to do it without your usual clichés.

I suggest you get yourself a decent education so you'd know what the
difference is. I'll explain it but I don't have much faith that someone
like you could understand.

"Not guilty" only means there was not enough evidence to convict, that's all
it means. It does not mean that that the accussed is innocent. This is not
a civil case in which only a preponderance (that's a big word for you, get
your dictionary) of evidence is needed in order to find one guilty, but it
is rather a criminal case which requires enough evidence "beyind a
reasonable doubt" in order to convict. It certainly does not mean the
accussed is innocent, only that it cannot be proven. Get it now?

[Alias]

"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:uXC2pQccFHA.4040@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
> news:%23Pc5C$bcFHA.2960@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>
>> "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote
>>> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote
>>
>>>> Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical evidence.
>>>> Yet, you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you know. You don't
>>>> know squat.
>>>
>>> He was ot found innocent, he was found not-guilty. There's a huge
>>> difference.
>>
>> Really? Please elaborate and try to do it without your usual clichés.
>
> I suggest you get yourself a decent education so you'd know what the
> difference is. I'll explain it but I don't have much faith that someone
> like you could understand.

How supercilious of you.
>
> "Not guilty" only means there was not enough evidence to convict, that's
> all it means.

It also means he's innocent of the charges. The opposite of guilty is
innocent, your moron.

> It does not mean that that the accussed [sic] is innocent. This is not a
> civil case in which only a preponderance (that's a big word for you, get
> your dictionary) of evidence is needed in order to find one guilty, but it
> is rather a criminal case which requires enough evidence "beyind a
> reasonable doubt" in order to convict. It certainly does not mean the
> accussed is innocent, only that it cannot be proven. Get it now?

If it can't be proven, for all practical purposes, he's innocent. What you
believe is irrevelant.

Alias

[Peter A. Stavrakoglou]

"Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
news:%23WIcVeccFHA.3912@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>
> "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote in message
> news:uXC2pQccFHA.4040@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
>> news:%23Pc5C$bcFHA.2960@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>> "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote
>>>> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote
>>>
>>>>> Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical evidence.
>>>>> Yet, you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you know. You don't
>>>>> know squat.
>>>>
>>>> He was ot found innocent, he was found not-guilty. There's a huge
>>>> difference.
>>>
>>> Really? Please elaborate and try to do it without your usual clichés.
>>
>> I suggest you get yourself a decent education so you'd know what the
>> difference is. I'll explain it but I don't have much faith that someone
>> like you could understand.
>
> How supercilious of you.
>>
>> "Not guilty" only means there was not enough evidence to convict, that's
>> all it means.
>
> It also means he's innocent of the charges. The opposite of guilty is
> innocent, your moron.
>
>> It does not mean that that the accussed [sic] is innocent. This is not
>> a civil case in which only a preponderance (that's a big word for you,
>> get your dictionary) of evidence is needed in order to find one guilty,
>> but it is rather a criminal case which requires enough evidence "beyind a
>> reasonable doubt" in order to convict. It certainly does not mean the
>> accussed is innocent, only that it cannot be proven. Get it now?
>
> If it can't be proven, for all practical purposes, he's innocent. What you
> believe is irrevelant.

You have very little understanding of the rule of law, I'm not surprised.

[Bob I]

Alias only used improper terminology. The man is innocent UNTIL proven
guilty. He is therefor still innocent. No need to be "found innocent".

Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:

> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
> news:ux%23VpbbcFHA.1040@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
>>Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical evidence. Yet,
>>you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you know. You don't know
>>squat.
>
>
> He was ot found innocent, he was found not-guilty. There's a huge
> difference.
>
>

[Alias]

"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:OlVqPjccFHA.3492@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
> news:%23WIcVeccFHA.3912@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>>
>> "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote in message
>> news:uXC2pQccFHA.4040@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
>>> news:%23Pc5C$bcFHA.2960@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>>>
>>>> "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote
>>>>> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote
>>>>
>>>>>> Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical evidence.
>>>>>> Yet, you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you know. You don't
>>>>>> know squat.
>>>>>
>>>>> He was ot found innocent, he was found not-guilty. There's a huge
>>>>> difference.
>>>>
>>>> Really? Please elaborate and try to do it without your usual clichés.
>>>
>>> I suggest you get yourself a decent education so you'd know what the
>>> difference is. I'll explain it but I don't have much faith that someone
>>> like you could understand.
>>
>> How supercilious of you.
>>>
>>> "Not guilty" only means there was not enough evidence to convict, that's
>>> all it means.
>>
>> It also means he's innocent of the charges. The opposite of guilty is
>> innocent, your moron.
>>
>>> It does not mean that that the accussed [sic] is innocent. This is not
>>> a civil case in which only a preponderance (that's a big word for you,
>>> get your dictionary) of evidence is needed in order to find one guilty,
>>> but it is rather a criminal case which requires enough evidence "beyind
>>> a reasonable doubt" in order to convict. It certainly does not mean the
>>> accussed is innocent, only that it cannot be proven. Get it now?
>>
>> If it can't be proven, for all practical purposes, he's innocent. What
>> you believe is irrevelant.
>
> You have very little understanding of the rule of law, I'm not surprised.

My, my, an ad hominem attack. Can't you do better than that?

Alias

[Alias]

Thank you. Excellent point!

Alias

"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote

> Alias only used improper terminology. The man is innocent UNTIL proven
> guilty. He is therefor still innocent. No need to be "found innocent".
>
> Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:
>
>> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
>> news:ux%23VpbbcFHA.1040@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>
>>>Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical evidence. Yet,
>>>you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you know. You don't know
>>>squat.
>>
>>
>> He was ot found innocent, he was found not-guilty. There's a huge
>> difference.
>

[Peter A. Stavrakoglou]

"Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
news:uQxLpmccFHA.228@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
> "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote in message
> news:OlVqPjccFHA.3492@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
>> news:%23WIcVeccFHA.3912@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>> "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote in message
>>> news:uXC2pQccFHA.4040@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>>> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
>>>> news:%23Pc5C$bcFHA.2960@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote
>>>>>> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical evidence.
>>>>>>> Yet, you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you know. You don't
>>>>>>> know squat.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He was ot found innocent, he was found not-guilty. There's a huge
>>>>>> difference.
>>>>>
>>>>> Really? Please elaborate and try to do it without your usual clichés.
>>>>
>>>> I suggest you get yourself a decent education so you'd know what the
>>>> difference is. I'll explain it but I don't have much faith that
>>>> someone like you could understand.
>>>
>>> How supercilious of you.
>>>>
>>>> "Not guilty" only means there was not enough evidence to convict,
>>>> that's all it means.
>>>
>>> It also means he's innocent of the charges. The opposite of guilty is
>>> innocent, your moron.
>>>
>>>> It does not mean that that the accussed [sic] is innocent. This is
>>>> not a civil case in which only a preponderance (that's a big word for
>>>> you, get your dictionary) of evidence is needed in order to find one
>>>> guilty, but it is rather a criminal case which requires enough evidence
>>>> "beyind a reasonable doubt" in order to convict. It certainly does not
>>>> mean the accussed is innocent, only that it cannot be proven. Get it
>>>> now?
>>>
>>> If it can't be proven, for all practical purposes, he's innocent. What
>>> you believe is irrevelant.
>>
>> You have very little understanding of the rule of law, I'm not surprised.
>
> My, my, an ad hominem attack. Can't you do better than that?

I can do much better but you're not worth it.

[Peter A. Stavrakoglou]

"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e37BskccFHA.3120@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Alias only used improper terminology. The man is innocent UNTIL proven
> guilty. He is therefor still innocent. No need to be "found innocent".

I disagree, he didn't use improper terminolgy (see the inline quote of his
post below). He said that he was found innocent. That is incorrect under
the law, he was found "not guilty". The jury did not pronounce him
"innocent", there is a difference as I've stated.
>>
>>>Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical evidence. Yet,
>>>you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you know. You don't know
>>>squat.
>>
>>
>> He was ot found innocent, he was found not-guilty. There's a huge
>> difference.
>

[kurttrail]

Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:
> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
> news:uQxLpmccFHA.228@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>
>> "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote in message
>> news:OlVqPjccFHA.3492@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
>>> news:%23WIcVeccFHA.3912@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>>>>
>>>> "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:uXC2pQccFHA.4040@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>>>> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
>>>>> news:%23Pc5C$bcFHA.2960@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote
>>>>>>> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical
>>>>>>>> evidence. Yet, you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you
>>>>>>>> know. You don't know squat.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He was ot found innocent, he was found not-guilty. There's a
>>>>>>> huge difference.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Really? Please elaborate and try to do it without your usual
>>>>>> clichés.
>>>>>
>>>>> I suggest you get yourself a decent education so you'd know what
>>>>> the difference is. I'll explain it but I don't have much faith
>>>>> that someone like you could understand.
>>>>
>>>> How supercilious of you.
>>>>>
>>>>> "Not guilty" only means there was not enough evidence to convict,
>>>>> that's all it means.
>>>>
>>>> It also means he's innocent of the charges. The opposite of guilty
>>>> is innocent, your moron.
>>>>
>>>>> It does not mean that that the accussed [sic] is innocent. This
>>>>> is not a civil case in which only a preponderance (that's a big
>>>>> word for you, get your dictionary) of evidence is needed in order
>>>>> to find one guilty, but it is rather a criminal case which
>>>>> requires enough evidence "beyind a reasonable doubt" in order to
>>>>> convict. It certainly does not mean the accussed is innocent,
>>>>> only that it cannot be proven. Get it now?
>>>>
>>>> If it can't be proven, for all practical purposes, he's innocent.
>>>> What you believe is irrevelant.
>>>
>>> You have very little understanding of the rule of law, I'm not
>>> surprised.
>>
>> My, my, an ad hominem attack. Can't you do better than that?
>
> I can do much better but you're not worth it.

I doubt that you could do much better.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

[Don Schmidt]

You think that's bad, look what the media did to Adolph Hitler and Lee
Harvey Oswald, destroyed these men's reputations. This is applying the ol bs
you are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Which BTW doesn't
prove guilt or innocence, just if you got away with something or was blamed
for something.

BTW he wasn't found innocent, he was found not guilty.
--
Don
Vancouver, USA


"Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
news:ux%23VpbbcFHA.1040@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical evidence. Yet,
> you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you know. You don't know
> squat.
>
> Alias
>
> "Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS@hotmail.com> wrote
>
>> At least we agree on the fact that Michael Jackson is a pedophile - or at
>> the least a very sick soul! (-:
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>>
>> Richard Urban
>>
>> If you knew as much as you think you know,
>> You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!
>>
>>
>> "kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in message
>> news:exD35macFHA.1384@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>> bumtracks wrote:
>>>> Would think if you still have the official Product Key glued in place
>>>> with the original cd package, you still own the program. You guys
>>>> say otherwise ... but then what happens if you become aware that
>>>> someone has stolen a copy of your CD and your activation key, are you
>>>> then supposed to run out and buy a $200 replacement ?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes. For MS, crime does pay!
>>>
>>> And now MS is a anti-democratic censor for the Chinese now too!
>>>
>>> I bet if Michael Jackson still had enough money, MS would help promote
>>> pedophilia!
>>>
>>> MS's new slogan:
>>>
>>> "How Can We Part You From Your Money Today? We're Willing To Do Just
>>> About Anything!"
>>>
>>> http://www.kurttrail.com/kblog/kblogarch/00000030.php
>>>
>>> --
>>> Peace!
>>> Kurt
>>> Self-anointed Moderator
>>> microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
>>> http://microscum.com/mscommunity
>>> "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
>>> "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

[Peter A. Stavrakoglou]

"kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:uYJ$K0ccFHA.3404@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:
>> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
>> news:uQxLpmccFHA.228@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>> "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote in message
>>> news:OlVqPjccFHA.3492@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>>> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
>>>> news:%23WIcVeccFHA.3912@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:uXC2pQccFHA.4040@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:%23Pc5C$bcFHA.2960@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote
>>>>>>>> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical
>>>>>>>>> evidence. Yet, you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you
>>>>>>>>> know. You don't know squat.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> He was ot found innocent, he was found not-guilty. There's a
>>>>>>>> huge difference.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Really? Please elaborate and try to do it without your usual
>>>>>>> clichés.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I suggest you get yourself a decent education so you'd know what
>>>>>> the difference is. I'll explain it but I don't have much faith
>>>>>> that someone like you could understand.
>>>>>
>>>>> How supercilious of you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Not guilty" only means there was not enough evidence to convict,
>>>>>> that's all it means.
>>>>>
>>>>> It also means he's innocent of the charges. The opposite of guilty
>>>>> is innocent, your moron.
>>>>>
>>>>>> It does not mean that that the accussed [sic] is innocent. This
>>>>>> is not a civil case in which only a preponderance (that's a big
>>>>>> word for you, get your dictionary) of evidence is needed in order
>>>>>> to find one guilty, but it is rather a criminal case which
>>>>>> requires enough evidence "beyind a reasonable doubt" in order to
>>>>>> convict. It certainly does not mean the accussed is innocent,
>>>>>> only that it cannot be proven. Get it now?
>>>>>
>>>>> If it can't be proven, for all practical purposes, he's innocent.
>>>>> What you believe is irrevelant.
>>>>
>>>> You have very little understanding of the rule of law, I'm not
>>>> surprised.
>>>
>>> My, my, an ad hominem attack. Can't you do better than that?
>>
>> I can do much better but you're not worth it.
>
> I doubt that you could do much better.

I certainly can but neither you or Alias are worth anymore trouble. Have a
happy malcontented life.

[S Murder]

He's either a pedophile or the stupidest person on the planet to continue
spending so much time with children after so many accusations of pedophilia.
I think it's more likely that he's a pedophile though.
Since when does being found guilty or not guilty have any thing to do with a
person's actual guilt or innocence? OJ was found not guilty in criminal court
and guilty in civil. What's up with that?

[kurttrail]

Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:
> "kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in
> message news:uYJ$K0ccFHA.3404@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:
>>> I can do much better but you're not worth it.
>>
>> I doubt that you could do much better.
>
> I certainly can

I hear an avoidance of a but coming on!

> but

There it is. How predictable you are!

> neither you or Alias are worth anymore trouble.

Trouble is my middle name! ;-)

> Have a happy malcontented life.

In comparison to your miserable existence, my life is very far from
malcontented! My life is very gay! :-p

--
Kisses!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

[S Murder]

Normally the opposite of guilt is innocence, but in our legal system the term
not guilty does mena there wasn't anough evidence to be found guilty. There
actually is a seperate judging of innocent if there is enough evidence to
show there is no way someone could have done the crime. I don't think it's
very common, since if there's that kind of evidence that case probably
wouldn't even involve an arrest of the person in question, much less going to
court.

[Bob I]

Simple. Different charges, different criteria, different outcome.

S Murder wrote:

> He's either a pedophile or the stupidest person on the planet to continue
> spending so much time with children after so many accusations of pedophilia.
> I think it's more likely that he's a pedophile though.
> Since when does being found guilty or not guilty have any thing to do with a
> person's actual guilt or innocence? OJ was found not guilty in criminal court
> and guilty in civil. What's up with that?

[Gord Dibben]

Peter

What is "squat"?


Gord

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:27:50 +0200, "Alias"
<aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote:

>>>>> Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical evidence.
>>>>> Yet, you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you know. You don't
>>>>> know squat.

[Leythos]

In article <D90C3086-13A1-4199-B6B7-8CA85C628191@microsoft.com>,
CageyMay44@discussions.microsoft.com says...
> I lost my XP Pro operating system computer to thieft.
> After going to the computer stores in my area, none had a XP Pro system!
> (They would sell me a $200 upgrade.) Both computers are of the same brand
> and I would like to use the Pro disk that was included with the machine that
> was stolen. The manufacturer will not support the new machine with an
> operating system that was not originally installed on the machine. Microsoft
> says that only the manufacturer can grant a licenses to install XP Pro. I
> have paid for every program on my machines and would like to honestly use the
> the XP Pro disk that came with the machine that was stolen. What would you
> suggest?

Anything that was licensed to the computer is no longer licensed to
anything that you have possession of - meaning your licenses went with
the stolen computer.

If you have insurance, renters or home owners, it covers these things.

--
--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me

[Bob I]

http://www.phrases.org.uk/bulletin_board/10/messages/948.html

Gord Dibben wrote:

> Peter
>
> What is "squat"?
>
>
> Gord
>
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:27:50 +0200, "Alias"
> <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote:
>
>
>>>>>>Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical evidence.
>>>>>>Yet, you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you know. You don't
>>>>>>know squat.
>
>

[Jone Doe]

see? Proof you DON'T know. Thanks for the laugh.

"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:%23rRWO6ncFHA.1384@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> http://www.phrases.org.uk/bulletin_board/10/messages/948.html
>
> Gord Dibben wrote:
>
>> Peter
>>
>> What is "squat"?
>>
>>
>> Gord
>>
>> On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:27:50 +0200, "Alias"
>> <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>>>Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical evidence.
>>>>>>>Yet, you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you know. You don't
>>>>>>>know squat.
>>
>>
>

[Bob I]

?? Who might you be replying to?

Jone Doe wrote:

> see? Proof you DON'T know. Thanks for the laugh.
>
> "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:%23rRWO6ncFHA.1384@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
>>http://www.phrases.org.uk/bulletin_board/10/messages/948.html
>>
>>Gord Dibben wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Peter
>>>
>>>What is "squat"?
>>>
>>>
>>>Gord
>>>
>>>On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:27:50 +0200, "Alias"
>>><aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>Amazing. The man was found innocent. There was no physical evidence.
>>>>>>>>Yet, you armchair judge/juror/executioners think you know. You don't
>>>>>>>>know squat.
>>>
>>>
>
>