Andre Jute: Liar and Criminal (was: The extraordinary insensitivity...)
 

Elsewhere, Andre Jute wrote:
I insist on my right, which I freely grant everyone else, to be innocent until
proven guilty. [People] either have to prove I'm a liar as they claimed...
or apologize.

Very well. Let us put to the test your principle of presumed innocence and
proof. On January 11, 2006, you wrote:

Pasternack sent graphic homosexual pornography in my name to two
little girls, the daughters of an Italian engineer he'd never met, who
had never even corresponded with him... This... was admitted in passing
on the Joenet by Pasternack's associate in the Magnequest Mob, Robert
Chernofsky... It is also the accusation of the two little girls' father, who
traced the graphic homosexual pornography to Pasternack's server...
[A]n offense of child molestation is beyond the pale.

Now, this is a very serious charge you have made, Andre. It's also false.
That makes you a guilty of criminal libel.

I don't really see what grounds for complaint you have since, first, by your
own admission, you are a liar, second, you are a criminal, and, third, you
do not grant to others the same right you demand for yourself.

-Henry

Andre Jute: Liar and Criminal (was: The extraordinary insensitivity...)
 

"Henry Pasternack" wrote in message
...
Elsewhere, Andre Jute wrote:
I insist on my right, which I freely grant everyone else, to be innocent
until
proven guilty. [People] either have to prove I'm a liar as they
claimed...
or apologize.

Very well. Let us put to the test your principle of presumed innocence
and
proof. On January 11, 2006, you wrote:

Pasternack sent graphic homosexual pornography in my name to two
little girls, the daughters of an Italian engineer he'd never met, who
had never even corresponded with him... This... was admitted in passing
on the Joenet by Pasternack's associate in the Magnequest Mob, Robert
Chernofsky... It is also the accusation of the two little girls' father,
who
traced the graphic homosexual pornography to Pasternack's server...
[A]n offense of child molestation is beyond the pale.

Now, this is a very serious charge you have made, Andre. It's also false.
That makes you a guilty of criminal libel.

I don't really see what grounds for complaint you have since, first, by
your
own admission, you are a liar, second, you are a criminal, and, third, you
do not grant to others the same right you demand for yourself.

-Henry


Too much crossposting - *Binned and removed*...

Crossposted RAT/RAO crap.
 

Who TF needs it? Who hasn't seen the *exact same* crap go round and round
and round?

I don't expect anybody to care, but I have now started *binning* RAO/RAT
crossposters and those who cannot resist the temptation to reply to them. I
don't want to keep seeing the same boring crap and simply 'marking the
conversation as read' time after time after time isn't working....

Andre Jute: Liar and Criminal (was: The extraordinary insensitivity...)
 

Keith G wrote:
"Henry Pasternack" wrote in message
...
Elsewhere, Andre Jute wrote:
I insist on my right, which I freely grant everyone else, to be innocent
until
proven guilty. [People] either have to prove I'm a liar as they
claimed...
or apologize.

Very well. Let us put to the test your principle of presumed innocence
and
proof. On January 11, 2006, you wrote:

Pasternack sent graphic homosexual pornography in my name to two
little girls, the daughters of an Italian engineer he'd never met, who
had never even corresponded with him... This... was admitted in passing
on the Joenet by Pasternack's associate in the Magnequest Mob, Robert
Chernofsky... It is also the accusation of the two little girls' father,
who
traced the graphic homosexual pornography to Pasternack's server...
[A]n offense of child molestation is beyond the pale.

Now, this is a very serious charge you have made, Andre. It's also false.
That makes you a guilty of criminal libel.

I don't really see what grounds for complaint you have since, first, by
your
own admission, you are a liar, second, you are a criminal, and, third, you
do not grant to others the same right you demand for yourself.

-Henry


Too much crossposting - *Binned and removed*..

The judge and jury are supposed to be the uninterested
readers
of R. AUDIO.Op.
Uninterested ? I spoke too soon. One moron already crawled out of
the woodwork to applaud the sentence.
Ludovic Mirabel.

Andre Jute: Liar and Criminal (was: The extraordinary insensitivity...)
 

wrote in message
oups.com...

Keith G wrote:
"Henry Pasternack" wrote in message
...
Elsewhere, Andre Jute wrote:
I insist on my right, which I freely grant everyone else, to be
innocent
until
proven guilty. [People] either have to prove I'm a liar as they
claimed...
or apologize.

Very well. Let us put to the test your principle of presumed innocence
and
proof. On January 11, 2006, you wrote:

Pasternack sent graphic homosexual pornography in my name to two
little girls, the daughters of an Italian engineer he'd never met, who
had never even corresponded with him... This... was admitted in
passing
on the Joenet by Pasternack's associate in the Magnequest Mob, Robert
Chernofsky... It is also the accusation of the two little girls'
father,
who
traced the graphic homosexual pornography to Pasternack's server...
[A]n offense of child molestation is beyond the pale.

Now, this is a very serious charge you have made, Andre. It's also
false.
That makes you a guilty of criminal libel.

I don't really see what grounds for complaint you have since, first, by
your
own admission, you are a liar, second, you are a criminal, and, third,
you
do not grant to others the same right you demand for yourself.

-Henry


Too much crossposting - *Binned and removed*..

The judge and jury are supposed to be the uninterested
readers
of R. AUDIO.Op.
Uninterested ? I spoke too soon. One moron already crawled out of
the woodwork to applaud the sentence.
Ludovic Mirabel.



Too much crossposting - *Binned and removed*...

Crossposted RAT/RAO crap.
 

On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 22:25:56 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


Who TF needs it? Who hasn't seen the *exact same* crap go round and round
and round?

I don't expect anybody to care, but I have now started *binning* RAO/RAT
crossposters and those who cannot resist the temptation to reply to them. I
don't want to keep seeing the same boring crap and simply 'marking the
conversation as read' time after time after time isn't working....





You should 've crossposted this to rat.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Crossposted RAT/RAO crap.
 

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 22:25:56 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


Who TF needs it? Who hasn't seen the *exact same* crap go round and round
and round?

I don't expect anybody to care, but I have now started *binning* RAO/RAT
crossposters and those who cannot resist the temptation to reply to them.
I
don't want to keep seeing the same boring crap and simply 'marking the
conversation as read' time after time after time isn't working....





You should 've crossposted this to rat.



Noop, I don't care about the RAO/RAT crossposters/responders.....

Andre Jute: Liar and Criminal (was: The extraordinary insensitivity...)
 

In article , "Henry Pasternack"
wrote:

Elsewhere, Andre Jute wrote:
I insist on my right, which I freely grant everyone else, to be
innocent until
proven guilty. [People] either have to prove I'm a liar as they claimed...
or apologize.

Very well. Let us put to the test your principle of presumed innocence and
proof. On January 11, 2006, you wrote:

Pasternack sent graphic homosexual pornography in my name to two
little girls, the daughters of an Italian engineer he'd never met, who
had never even corresponded with him... This... was admitted in passing
on the Joenet by Pasternack's associate in the Magnequest Mob, Robert
Chernofsky... It is also the accusation of the two little girls' father, who
traced the graphic homosexual pornography to Pasternack's server...
[A]n offense of child molestation is beyond the pale.

Now, this is a very serious charge you have made, Andre. It's also false.
That makes you a guilty of criminal libel.

Henry,

I don't think it's that Andre is lying, so much as it is that he is
confused about who was actually involved in the "graphic homosexual
pornography" incident. According to Mike of Magnequest the "homosexual
pornography" incident actually happened. He told me about the incident
during a phone conversation when I commented that a certain individual was
no longer posting to rec.audio.tubes, and I wondered why. Mike said this
individual, who was not an Italian engineer, or his daughters, Andre got
that part wrong, had received "homosexual pornography" that had been sent
in Andre's name. He said that Andre was the primary target of this
scheme, the idea being to discredit him and provide reasons for his ISP to
terminate his service. The recipient, who I will refrain from naming, was
a secondary target, who while he never posted comments on Magnequest, was
preaching a gospel that was at odds with the Magnequest teachings. In
those days Magnequest pretty much ruled the news group, and posts that
were at odds with the truth as revealed by Magnequest were frowned upon,
even if they didn't actually mention Magnequast, so it would be a bonus if
this individual could be disposed of at the same time as Andre. While the
scheme didn't get rid of Andre, although for all I know it may have
contributed to Andre's ISP dropping him, the scheme was successful in
driving the, recipient of the "homosexual pornography", the secondary
target, from the group.

While Mike was willing to discuss the two targets of the "homosexual
pornography" scheme, he was unwilling to say who was actually responsible
for sending the "homosexual pornography" even though he claimed to know
who did it, who I am sure had proudly told Mike of the "good deed" he had
done for the cause. All Mike would do was to strongly imply that the
"homosexual pornography" was sent in Andre's name by a member of what I
called the "gang", which would probably include you, although I only
considered you as a "want to be" member of the gang. In any case I think
Andre has it wrong and I don't believe that you were the one Mike was
referring to as the sender of the "homosexual pornography".


Regards,

John Byrns


Surf my web pages at, http://users.rcn.com/jbyrns/

Andre Jute: Liar and Criminal (was: The extraordinary insensitivity...)
 

John:

A nit for you to pick.

The problem is that Mr. McCoy made the statements as fact. Not as
speculation, not as his perception, not as a guess, not even as a
suggestion, but as fact.

Statements made as Fact-without-Proof having to do with an individual's
character and potentially criminal activities are actionable. At the
very least, Mr. McCoy owes all-and-sundry on the chain an apology for
making such statements. We both know it won't happen. So, whyinhell
should any reasonable human being bother to respond to his puling
demands for 'fair treatment' when he is the first and most adept at
baseless attacks and character assasinations? Let him hew to the
standards that he demands of others. We both know that won't happen
either.

Hell, I will write it again, in slightly different words:

If Mr. McCoy states categorically, without reservation and for the
record:

a) he is not a liar and has told no lies herein.
b) that he is exactly as he represents himself.
c) that the attacks made on him are without merit, basis or supporting
facts.
d) that the attacks he has made on others are fully and independently
verifiable from original, reliable sources (other than Mr. McCoy or the
party attacked, of course).
e) that his work is exactly as he has presented it, and in the same
sequence.
f) that the work he presents as his own original work is, in fact, his
own and not rehashed designs by others.

This may be done without proof, but must be, again, without reservation
or qualification.

I will be the first to apologize. I will even call him Mr. Jute.

But one thing you should know. It really does belittle you to run
interference for Mr. McCoy. He may be a very sad figure more deserving
of pity than censure, but he needs no apologists. And you also know
that if you were to cross him, he would turn on you like the cur that
he is in a hummingbird heartbeat.

In any case, it is up to him now.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

Magnequest Mob use of pornography for intimidation
 

John Byrns wrote:
In article , "Henry Pasternack"
wrote:

Elsewhere, Andre Jute wrote:
I insist on my right, which I freely grant everyone else, to be
innocent until
proven guilty. [People] either have to prove I'm a liar as they claimed...
or apologize.

Very well. Let us put to the test your principle of presumed innocence and
proof. On January 11, 2006, you wrote:

Pasternack sent graphic homosexual pornography in my name to two
little girls, the daughters of an Italian engineer he'd never met, who
had never even corresponded with him... This... was admitted in passing
on the Joenet by Pasternack's associate in the Magnequest Mob, Robert
Chernofsky... It is also the accusation of the two little girls' father, who
traced the graphic homosexual pornography to Pasternack's server...
[A]n offense of child molestation is beyond the pale.

Now, this is a very serious charge you have made, Andre. It's also false.
That makes you a guilty of criminal libel.

Henry,

I don't think it's that Andre is lying, so much as it is that he is
confused about who was actually involved in the "graphic homosexual
pornography" incident. According to Mike of Magnequest the "homosexual
pornography" incident actually happened. He told me about the incident
during a phone conversation when I commented that a certain individual was
no longer posting to rec.audio.tubes, and I wondered why. Mike said this
individual, who was not an Italian engineer, or his daughters, Andre got
that part wrong, had received "homosexual pornography" that had been sent
in Andre's name. He said that Andre was the primary target of this
scheme, the idea being to discredit him and provide reasons for his ISP to
terminate his service. The recipient, who I will refrain from naming, was
a secondary target, who while he never posted comments on Magnequest, was
preaching a gospel that was at odds with the Magnequest teachings. In
those days Magnequest pretty much ruled the news group, and posts that
were at odds with the truth as revealed by Magnequest were frowned upon,
even if they didn't actually mention Magnequast, so it would be a bonus if
this individual could be disposed of at the same time as Andre. While the
scheme didn't get rid of Andre, although for all I know it may have
contributed to Andre's ISP dropping him, the scheme was successful in
driving the, recipient of the "homosexual pornography", the secondary
target, from the group.

While Mike was willing to discuss the two targets of the "homosexual
pornography" scheme, he was unwilling to say who was actually responsible
for sending the "homosexual pornography" even though he claimed to know
who did it, who I am sure had proudly told Mike of the "good deed" he had
done for the cause. All Mike would do was to strongly imply that the
"homosexual pornography" was sent in Andre's name by a member of what I
called the "gang", which would probably include you, although I only
considered you as a "want to be" member of the gang. In any case I think
Andre has it wrong and I don't believe that you were the one Mike was
referring to as the sender of the "homosexual pornography".


Regards,

John Byrns

Fascinating. A few comments:

I. I am not confused about the Magnequest Mob's use of pornography.
Mike LeFevre was, as usual, lying to you, trying to minimize his
crimes. There wasn't only one incident in which that scum sent graphic
male homosexual pornography in someone else's name, there were many.
Everyone knew they did it. When they did it on the Single Driver list,
Jeremy Epstein, an insider, quipped to Pasternack, "Bearbaiting,
Henry?" Michael LeFevre told me specifically on the phone that if I
would toe the line the pornography would no longer flow. To list just
those *series* of offences I remember without blinking again.
a) The gross incident to the daughters of the Italian academic
Ferenghetti who probably didn't even know what Magnequest was (reprised
below since Pasternack asked for the evidence)
b) Weeks of many vicious images posted daily in my name to the Single
Driver Conference.
c) Months of viciously images posted weekly in my name to my publishers
and any associate the Magnequest Scum could find, to journalists who
gave me a good review, to the editors of journals I wrote for, to the
revenue inspectors, etc.
We are not talking about a momentary lapse of good taste here, we are
talking about a deliberate, concentrated, consistent campaign of filth
carried on year-in, year-out as routine assault on the "enemies" of
Magnequest. With so much of it, Pasternack's claim to be ignorant
would, even without the Ferenghetti incident, be laughable. There is no
doubt in my mind that Pasternack is guilty of all their crimes.

2. I am not confused about the specific incident of the two little
Ferenghetti girls to whom Henry Pasternack stands accused by their
father and BobC of sending graphic male homosexual pornography. Here,
presenting the evidence in rather gory detail, is my reply to
Pasternack's deceitful letter, in full.

********
********
Henry Pasternack wrote:
Elsewhere, Andre Jute wrote:
I insist on my right, which I freely grant everyone else, to be innocent until
proven guilty. [People] either have to prove I'm a liar as they claimed...
or apologize.

Very well. Let us put to the test your principle of presumed innocence and
proof. On January 11, 2006, you wrote:

Pasternack sent graphic homosexual pornography in my name to two
little girls, the daughters of an Italian engineer he'd never met, who
had never even corresponded with him... This... was admitted in passing
on the Joenet by Pasternack's associate in the Magnequest Mob, Robert
Chernofsky... It is also the accusation of the two little girls' father, who
traced the graphic homosexual pornography to Pasternack's server...
[A]n offense of child molestation is beyond the pale.

Now, this is a very serious charge you have made, Andre. It's also false.
That makes you a guilty of criminal libel.

I don't really see what grounds for complaint you have since, first, by your
own admission, you are a liar, second, you are a criminal, and, third, you
do not grant to others the same right you demand for yourself.

-Henry

Normally I don't even open Pasternack's meretricious posts. But in this
instance I read John's account of Michael LeFevre's confession of the
Magnequest Mob (of which Pasternack was a leading member) being
involved in sending graphic male homosexual pornography in the names of
others, then read in that light what Pasternack says above. John's
recounting of the LeFevre confession is he
http://groups.google.ie/group/rec.au...1d3ba88021a22f

Pasternack lies that I accused him of child molestation. I didn't. I
merely reported what was said elsewhere. As expected, Pasternack makes
his lie work only by snipping out the key thing I said on 11 January
2006: "This is not an accusation I made."

If Pasternack claims he's innocent of these accusations, he should
address those who brought the accusations, Raphael Antonio Ferenghetti
and Pasternack's own friend and associate in many crimes, Robert
Chernofsky, the execrable BobC. There's no point in applying to me: I
have no power to absolve Pasternack of his crimes. Anyway, I haven't
believed a word Pasternack said since February 1998.

*******

The evidence below is quoted from the Sound Digest Archive v02.n433 at
Harvard:
http://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/~rees...les_v02_f.html

*******

Here on 11 April 2001 is the first notification of the crime by the
father of the two little girls, R A Ferenghetti:

*******

Yesterday my post box was spammed with many many
pornography. We all know which
transformer maker and his friends on Joenet
do it. My children also use the same mailbox.

Nothing remains to be said.

Rafael Antonio Ferenghetti

*******

Here's Robert Chernofsky (BobC), Pasternack's longtime associate in
internet harassment of the "enemies" of Magnequest, trying to confuse
things (an old Magnequest Mob tactic) and in the process making an
awful admission:

*******

this is pure fiction posted by (Henry A. Pasternack) = (RAF) who just wants to cause
trouble here because he is lonely.

*******

That bizarre message was followed by a letter from the father of the
two little girls, R A Ferenghetti, containing specific confirmation of
the source of the graphic homosexual pornography, pinpointing it to a
server operated by the employers of a particular party already fingered
in these exchanges by his own longtime associate in internet
harassments.

R A Ferenghetti wrote:

*********
Here is additional information sent
by the pornography makers about who requested
that pornography be sent to me:

on 11:25:27 2001 PST

somebody is pretending to be you. Use the
following information to identify the person. They
connected from IP: 129.37.197.63 They used this
browser: Mozilla/4.75 [en] (Win98; U)

IP: 129.37.197.63 is registered to

IBM Corporation
RT 100
Somers, NY 10589
US

Hundreds of people saw the same homosexual filth
posted to the Single Driver Conference. This was at the
time that those who stalk Andre disrupted
that list also with other posts from Henry
Pasternack, Michael LaFevre and
Bob Chernofsky.

That was bad, but pornography to children is very
very sick.

People who defend and tolerate such scum are also
trash.

(snip)

I'm too sick and angry to discuss this any more.

Raf

Greetings from

Rafael Antonio Ferenghetti

*******

The evidence above is quoted from the Sound Digest Archive v02.n433 at
Harvard:
http://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/~rees...les_v02_f.html

*******

There you are. Pasternack. You asked for the evidence and I posted it.
I express no opinion and I make no allegation. Please don't again be so
dumb as to lie that I did.

If you do not agree with the evidence, take it up with Dottore
Ferenghetti and your friend Mr Robert Chernofsky (BobC).

I don't want to correspond with you, Pasternack. I feel soiled every
time you mention my name. I feel soiled to discover you on my hobby
newsgroup. If I ran into you, I would refuse to shake your hand. You'd
be well advised not to approach me.

Unsigned out of contempt.
*******
*******