Re: the Mall analogy

[Keithjmoon70@xxxxxxx]

In a message dated 5/12/2003 12:36:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
seahawkman2001@yahoo.com writes:

> On the demand end, paying the
> keepers of the Mall is also inciting the distribution
> of child abuse images... and in turn inciting the
> further abuse of children.

True.  That is why Pete admitted an "offense."  He never denied that he did 
it.

The thing that clearly separates Pete from Thomas and Janice Reedy -by the 
span of an entire universe, give or take a galaxy or two- is the *reason* for 
doing what they did.

That is why I am a firm supporter of Pete in this and why I agree that he has 
every right to be pissed.  I don't need an apology from someone who has 
outdone all of us  put together with regard to the plight of suffering 
victims.  

Jon in Mi.