Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Florida Man Sues WikiLeaks For Scaring Him

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the don't-watch-the-news dept.

The Courts 340

Stoobalou writes "WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been accused of 'treason' by a Florida man seeking damages for distress caused by the site's revelations about the US government. From the article: 'David Pitchford, a Florida trailer park resident, names Assange and WikiLeaks as defendants in a personal injury suit filed with the Florida Southern District Court in Miami. In the complaint filed on 6th January, Pitchford alleges that Assange's negligence has caused "hypertension," "depression" and "living in fear of being stricken by another heart attack and/or stroke" as a result of living "in fear of being on the brink of another nuclear [sic] WAR."' Just for good measure, it also alleges that Assange and WikiLeaks are guilty of 'terorism [sic], espionage and treason.'"

cancel ×

340 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

What's next? (4, Funny)

XxtraLarGe (551297) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862758)

It will be hard for anything else to beat this for the dumbest thing I've seen on the internet today.

Re:What's next? (3, Funny)

ehrichweiss (706417) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862862)

The kicker is when they describe the plaintiff: "a Florida trailer park resident"

Who didn't see that one coming?

Re:What's next? (-1)

morari (1080535) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863234)

That's about all there is in Florida. Trailer parks and retirement communities... sometimes they're even one in the same!

Re:What's next? (0)

eyenot (102141) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863402)

What are you saying about Florida's trailer parks? There are some really, really, really nice trailer parks down there. Briny Breezes, for example. They got an offer for the whole thing at roughly $1mil per trailer. It's beautiful. Just north of there in Palm Beach there are two really gorgeous trailer parks that are practically gated communities. But I think I see what you're saying: south Florida is really damn sharkish and I would totally expect some loon in a trailer park down there to not only have the wherewithal, the money and the time to spend with a lawsuit such as this, ultimately I think you're right -- just where I'd expect it to come from.

Re:What's next? (3, Informative)

datapharmer (1099455) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863750)

Being a Florida resident I think you are mixing up the words "trailer" and "manufactured home". They are completely different.Trailers have wheels, and (at least at one point) could be moved from one location to another on them. Modular/manufactured homes can be as bad as a trailer or as nice as a mansion. They are often trucked in in prefab sections that are assembled together on-site. If you have any doubts which is which just drive past after a hurricane. If there is an empty lot with some aluminum debris it was most likely a trailer.

Re:What's next? (1)

I8TheWorm (645702) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863484)

Sadly, some trailer homes cost more than the average house (property value not included in either).

Re:What's next? (3, Funny)

spamking (967666) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863982)

Are you telling me there's not one condo available in all of Del Boca Vista?

Re:What's next? (2, Informative)

onkelonkel (560274) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862866)

I suppose so, since it was yesterday that Sarah Palin claimed she was being accused of murdering Christian babies to use their blood in unholy rituals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_libel [wikipedia.org]

Re:What's next? (1)

jimicus (737525) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863046)

Wouldn't be the first time someone's used a phrase thinking it was appropriate without first making sure they knew what it meant. FWIW, I think it makes perfect sense to describe what people were saying about Palin, and if I hadn't seen all the furore about the proper meaning of the phrase, I would probably have thought it quite a good description.

Re:What's next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34863050)

I wouldn't admit to knowing only one context of a word.

Re:What's next? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34863164)

Wow. Just wow. I'm no Palin fan, but if I had any respect left, it was blown away by this one. She's as dumb and arrogant as the day is long... yet there seem to be an endless supply of cross-eyed hill people and butt-clenching mormon housewives that are willing to vote for her. I fear for the republic.

Re:What's next? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34863310)

*Really* asswipe?

Funny how Alan Dershowitz, no less, said Palin's use of the phrase was perfectly acceptable.

Re:What's next? (4, Funny)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863490)

She's as dumb and arrogant as the day is long

      And you say this in January, right after the winter solstice when in Alaska the days are short as hell...

Re:What's next? (5, Funny)

cortex3299 (1008009) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863648)

Isn't the day 24 hours long in Alaska ?

Re:What's next? (0)

Stargoat (658863) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863724)

Above comment FTW

Re:What's next? (1)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863838)

I fear for the republic.

You should sue Ms. Palin, then, under the same grounds this guy is suing WikiLeaks. ;)

Ditto (1)

Suki I (1546431) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862880)

It will be hard for anything else to beat this for the dumbest thing I've seen on the internet today.

This one will be hard to beat. I am no Assange fan, but this is just stupid.

Re:What's next? (1)

Nialin (570647) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862944)

What I find ridiculous is the following:

living in fear of being stricken by another heart attack and/or stroke

Did he have a previous heart attack/stroke from the information provided by Wikileaks, or is he just some old fart?

Re:What's next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34863212)

Also, living in fear? If there was a nuclear war, he might be grateful of the heart attack/stroke. It would be a quick death compared to fighting giant radioactive scorpions in the desert for a share of dog corpse for dinner.

Re:What's next? (4, Insightful)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862986)

yeah. but not surprising. Yey trailer parks, the bring out the best of this wonderful country...

Seriously, how the hell can it be treason if he isn't a US citizen (or otherwise legal resident)?

Re:What's next? (4, Funny)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863090)

Everybody owes fealty to the United States; because we are the best nation in the world. Some people just don't realize it yet, which is why we have to spend so much on our armed forces and prisons...

Re:What's next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34863314)

If fascism and ignorance makes the best nation on the world you are right! :)

Re:What's next? (4, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863458)

Are "fascism" and "ignorance" some kind of degenerate foreign-speak for "national unity" and "moral certainty" respectively?

Re:What's next? (2)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863956)

Fascism? That's a bit of a strech. Ignorance less, so, but then again, every country is full of ignorance. Need proof for yours? Look in a mirror.

Re:What's next? (1)

Somewhat Delirious (938752) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863376)

I think the sad thing is that when you look at American polls this seems to be a pretty accurate description of a major percentage of public opinion regarding Wikileaks in the US.

Re:What's next? (1)

Zen-Mind (699854) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863462)

I think Wikileak should plead guilty and be willing to provide the man with proper equipment [wikia.com] to make sure he can live peacefully from now on.

Re:What's next? (1)

zoomshorts (137587) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863532)

A trailer park resident??? Woot.

Re:What's next? (5, Funny)

X3J11 (791922) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863758)

It will be hard for anything else to beat this for the dumbest thing I've seen on the internet today.

A CHALLENGER APPEARS!

Canada bans Dire Straits' "Money for Nothing" [thespec.com]

Re:What's next? (2)

surfed (1973676) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863832)

We need a National Dire Straits Money for Nothing Day where we play nothing else on our Stereos, best to coincide with Pride day?

Re:What's next? (1)

KeymasterX (850621) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863862)

True. People like this just waste other people time for nothing.

Re:What's next? (1)

nospam007 (722110) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863968)

If he wins, I'll sue Stephen King's ass off.

Suing the wrong person (5, Insightful)

gman003 (1693318) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862770)

Wouldn't it make more sense to sue the government for doing those things, instead of suing Wikileaks for talking about them?

Re:Suing the wrong person (5, Insightful)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862816)

no. "shoot the messenger" is a time honored tradition in society. why stop now?

Re:Suing the wrong person (1)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863018)

No, because before h was operating on the "what I don't know can't hurt me" principle, which, as we all know, really works...

Re:Suing the wrong person (3, Insightful)

Saishuuheiki (1657565) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863118)

He should be suing Fox. I'm sure it was Fox News that inspired this fear of Wikileaks within him. Plus, they did all this after they convince him that if he steps outside of his trailer animals are going to attack him from all directions.

Re:Suing the wrong person (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863428)

He should be suing his parents for coddling him and not raising him as a flesh eating abomination who kills and devours without any fear or remorse.

An explanation. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34863502)

Um ....

...a Florida trailer park resident...

Doesn't that explain things? He'll probably sue for damages because of lack of companionship with his dog, the demand that "Free Bird" become the new national anthem, and the Confederate Flag become the new flag of the Yee-Ew niiiighted staaates of Amerikah!

Jeff Foxworthy for Prezidant!

My captcha is "porches" I guess I have to mention that the dog lives under the porch...

Don't blame me! Slashdot made me do it!

Predictable (5, Funny)

paiute (550198) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862772)

I knew this would happen when I heard that Walmart was putting in self-serve legal departments.

@Walmart putting in self-serve legal departments (2)

MindKata (957167) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863100)

Thankfully nature finds its balance, as now millions of people can sue David Pitchford for choking whilst laughing and coffee all over their keyboards.

I'm scared of... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34862796)

I'm scared of the things google does every day. Therefor I'm going to sue /. for telling me about it.

Nuclear war (4, Funny)

Sonny Yatsen (603655) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862806)

Luckily, nuclear war is a cure for depression, hypertension, heart attack and stroke.

Re:Nuclear war (3, Interesting)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863160)

Probably not if you live in a Florida trailer park: Nuclear weapons and delivery systems are too pricey to waste on low value targets....

It's one of the perks of living in a high-density area with a lot of strategic stuff nearby. Should the shit hit the fan, I'll go from "sipping a nice gin and tonic" to "gas and/or plasma phase" with such rapidity that my neural net will be destroyed faster than impulses can travel along the nerves. I will, quite literally, be dead before I know it.

Out in the sticks, people will have to contend with violently expelling their gastrointestinal systems from both ends and fighting off the roving bands of supermutants.

Re:Nuclear war (1)

NetNed (955141) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863366)

He is in a trailer park, so a tornado could accomplish that just as easily with out all the collateral damage.

Citizen (5, Insightful)

DarkArctic (894260) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862812)

Don't you have to be a citizen in order to be charged with treason?

Re:Citizen (0)

gstrickler (920733) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863054)

He might want to read the US Constitution (Article 3, Section 3), it gives a very specific and much narrower definition of treason than the common definition.

Re:Citizen (3, Interesting)

SlippyToad (240532) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863264)

Well, living in a trailer park in bumfuck FL he probably doesn't realize who Assange actually is, or where he is, or what he actually does.

It sounds to me like someone put Pitchford up to this. And has the court thrown this complaint out with gales of derisive laughter yet? If not, may I volunteer to provide the laughter?

Re:Citizen (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34863354)

Don't you have to be a citizen in order to be charged with treason?

Not according to the American concept of Manifest Destiny, with its emphasis on American Exceptionalism, Nationalism, and "divine destiny" to help promote the virtues of Freedom and Democracy as interpreted by the leaders of the Republic.

Re:Citizen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34863560)

Well, US citizenship can be given to him :D

Summary fail... (5, Informative)

Westley (99238) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862818)

From the summary: "in fear of being on the brink of another nuclear [sic] WAR."'

From the article: "in fear of being on the brink of another nucliar [sic] WAR".

It would help if posters didn't correct spelling for words which are followed by [sic].

Re:Summary fail... (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862848)

Not to mention the title says he sues wikileaks, and the summary says he sues Assange. What a piece of shit.

Re:Summary fail... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34863094)

The apparent shock was that he spelled 'nuclear' correctly.

Re:Summary fail... (1)

shurikt (734896) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863242)

I had assumed that the sic tag was used because of the word "another." I can't remember any of the previous nuclear wars, although I may not have been paying attention at the time.

Re:Summary fail... (2, Interesting)

NitroWolf (72977) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863438)

I had assumed that the sic tag was used because of the word "another." I can't remember any of the previous nuclear wars, although I may not have been paying attention at the time.

You may have missed WWII or the Cold War... both were nuclear. One used a couple of atomic bombs, the other used the threat of them.

Re:Summary fail... (1)

guruevi (827432) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863830)

Everybody knows it's nucular, our last president said so. And he was white so he must have gone to school.

(this is a joke, don't take offense)

No one cares (2)

cozzbp (1845636) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862834)

About this stupid dumbass.

Re:No one cares (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34863218)

/b/ might. They care about these sorts of people enough to soothingly troll them.

why does where he lives matter? (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862850)

"David Pitchford, a Florida trailer park resident..."

this really gets me mad. why does living in Florida matter? why does living in a trailer park matter? that's wrong with people, this sort of prejudice...

come to think of it, yeah, carry on. this is a good prejudice

Re:why does where he lives matter? (2)

O('_')O_Bush (1162487) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863014)

Because people that live in the Panhandle of Florida (which has some of the poorest areas) are notorious for insurance/government program fraud. I used to live there and can tell you all sorts of stories about how the locals have been trying to screw people over for money. There's a documentary of a town about a half hour away from where I used to live where people were maiming themselves (cutting off limbs and such) to collect insurance on such a wide scale that insurance investigations into fraud were conducted on just about everyone in the town.

The stereotype implied isn't just him living in Florida, or being a trailer park resident, but a combination of the two as there is an existing stereotype for that group.

Doesn't make the stereotype right, but it does exist.

Re:why does where he lives matter? (3, Funny)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863188)

Prejudice is just the drunk, mean, cousin of pattern recognition, which is just the folksy-handyman version of the scientific method....

Re:why does where he lives matter? (2)

udoschuermann (158146) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863524)

I'm not in the least surprised that this fine example of human rational superiority lives in Florida. I read Fark, after all, and have seen no shortage of this kind of mind-boggling idiocy. More to the point, I think the this guy's anxiety is more likely caused by the fact that trailer parks attract tornadoes.

Sue the trailer park while you're at it... (1)

digitaldc (879047) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862878)

...because we all know that trailer parks are liable to cause depression, anxiety, and feelings of desperate isolation.

I'm suing Slashdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34862902)

For posting worthless stories and becoming yet another crappy politics site.

Obviously a scam (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34862924)

Obviously this guy decided that he might be able to make a buck by inventing this crap.

Re:Obviously a scam (1)

madfilipino (557839) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863010)

Its possible that he's working for the US government to get Assange to the US where he (Assange) can be promptly arrested and per^H^H^Hprosecuted for some crime that hasn't been committed.

Re:Obviously a scam (2)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863322)

Oh the crime has been committed, don't you worry about that. They've just not invented a name for the crime and the requisite paperwork to go along with it yet, but most certainly the crime was committed.

Re:Obviously a scam (1)

anyGould (1295481) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863732)

Its possible that he's working for the US government to get Assange to the US where he (Assange) can be promptly arrested and per^H^H^Hprosecuted for some crime that hasn't been committed.

Not going to judge, but if this guy is the best the government can come up with, y'all are in a lot more trouble than I thought - I'm going to bet that the judge dismisses the whole thing at the first hearing (for lack of jurisdiction, if nothing else). Pretty positive that WikiLeaks will politely ignore the whole thing.

(Although come to think of it, the best "Republican female" apparently is Sarah Palin, so you never know...)

(Seriously - Sarah Palin is the best the Republicans can come up with as an answer to Clinton? Does this not scare people?)

Is the end (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34862938)

Can anyone tell me how people can be so stupid?

Just in case he reads slashdot (1)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862978)

Just in case he reads slashdot:


**** BOOH ****


There's another court case for you.

While you're there... (1)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 3 years ago | (#34862994)

And while he's at the courthouse, David can change his name to David Pitchfork and complete the trailer-trash facade.

An obvious kook... (5, Interesting)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863004)

But this guy is merely a risibly hyperbolic instance of a much broader, more common, and (in alarmingly many circles) respected position: Namely, that the person who reveals wrongdoing is somehow guiltier of that wrongdoing than the person who commits it.

I can't figure out if this view is a cancerous outgrowth of the morally monstrous "My country right or wrong" brigade(who are certainly louder and more numerous than there more honorable "May my country always be right and, when wrong, be set right" counterparts) or if it is a symptom of an even deeper flavor of cognitive limitation and/or ethical infantalism.

Below a certain age, and in some lower animals, "object permanence" is not well established. If they see an object enter a bag, they still lose track of it once it leaves their vision, and do not conclude that it must be residing in the bag, and can be found there. Above a certain age, and in smarter animals, this conclusion sticks. One is inclined to wonder if there is some moral variant of this, where some people, for who knows what reason, cannot apply "ethical action permanence" and conclude that, if Wikileaks took it out of the bag, and the government is the one who puts stuff in the bag, even though Wikileaks is holding the unethical object, it is merely the entity that took the object out of the bag where it had earlier been placed, not the entity that created the object.

In a way, I actually find the straight-up belligerent "USA! USA! Nuke ALL RAGHEADS!!!!" crowd to be more respectable. They are atavistic, barbarous scum, but they are refreshingly honest and straightforward about their bloodlust. The mealy-mouthed "respectable" apologists, on the other hand, are ethically no better; but spend their time dripping honeyed words and "nuance" to cover for the policies that they don't have the guts to endorse public-ally. It's like Fred Phelps: He is an awful human being, and merely by existing makes one wish there were a hell for him to inhabit; but he is all honesty. No equivocation, no focusing only on soft targets(anybody can picket an abortion clinic without much in the way of controversy, hitting military funerals takes serious guts...), no "Oh, we just stand for commonsense family values" circumlocution.

Re:An obvious kook... (1)

Ephemeriis (315124) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863788)

But this guy is merely a risibly hyperbolic instance of a much broader, more common, and (in alarmingly many circles) respected position: Namely, that the person who reveals wrongdoing is somehow guiltier of that wrongdoing than the person who commits it.

Yup. This is the bit that confuses me...

Granted, some of that stuff probably shouldn't have been leaked. And I'm sure various people broke various laws by leaking it. And there may very well be court cases and punishments and whatever else...

But the scary stuff that this guy is stressing about? Wikileaks didn't do that stuff. The US Government did that stuff. Wikileaks just let you know about the scary stuff.

Re:An obvious kook... (1)

multiplexo (27356) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863940)

That's a really brilliant idea, ethical actional permanence. I'm going to pimp that all over the web because it's a perfect explanation for the behavior of many of the commentators on this case and for a lot of conservatives.

If this works... (2)

Primitive Pete (1703346) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863012)

...I'm suing Fox, NY Times, Washington Post, etc. They've got REAL money.

Re:If this works... (1)

socz (1057222) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863238)

count me in! Can we say class action? Oh yeah!

Re:If this works... (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863826)

count me in! Can we say class action? Oh yeah!

The centers of Class Action suits are: Cleveland, OH, Beaumont,TX, and Orlando, FL.

When he gets there he should look for the law firm of Uriah Ketchum and Isaac Cheatham, who have been defending gatored communities for years.

Editors: Finally (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34863040)

Finally! It's about time the editors [sic] started fixing (or at least acknowledging [sic]) all the stupid typos and grammatical [sic] errors that emanate [sic] from this site.

yes yes !! (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863200)

i had just come home, and i had noticed people jumping with joy in the streets, running naked, flapping their arms like wings in ecstasy. i wasnt able to make anything out of it. but now i have come and read this article, and discovered that the editors in slashdot finally started paying attention to grammar, the biggest problem that society faces, i am able to understand why those people were running about in joy in the streets.

I'm a bit confused about the treason part.... (5, Interesting)

tinkerghost (944862) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863098)

how exactly does one commit treason against a country you have no affiliation with? Given that Assange is Australian, it'd be a pretty bizarre contortion of the law to conclude that he's committed treason against the US government. Espionage perhaps, but by definition: only Australia can charge him with treason.

Re:I'm a bit confused about the treason part.... (1)

Bergs007 (1797486) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863474)

Perhaps they plan on forcing citizenship upon him?

Can i sue this guy for being a right wing nutjob ? (0)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863148)

actually i can. and it shows the measure of stupidity of legal system. moreover, if i have enough cash, i can even win too ! further indicators to the stupidity of legal system.

Re:Can i sue this guy for being a right wing nutjo (1)

H0p313ss (811249) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863890)

A micus curiae brief would be fun.

In Soviet Russia (0)

Diesel Dave (95048) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863194)

The truth sues YOU!

Class Action (1)

ArhcAngel (247594) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863256)

Well I think he should start a Class Action lawsuit against his government because Assange only posted facts. It was his government that scared him.

Nuclear [sic] ? (3)

karlandtanya (601084) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863270)

As opposed to what? The correct spelling, which is nukular?

Re:Nuclear [sic] ? (3, Informative)

flimflammer (956759) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863746)

The submitter doesn't know how to properly use [sic]. The article spells it "nucliar". Submitter corrected it for some reason and added [sic] anyway.

Re:Nuclear [sic] ? (1)

LambdaWolf (1561517) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863776)

I think the "sic" referred to the phrase "another nuclear" war, as no first nuclear war has ever occurred. (Unless you want to count World War II, but I generally understand the phrase as referring to a war in which both sides use nukes, and as the main means of combat.)

By this logic I can sue Pitchford. (1)

seeker_1us (1203072) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863280)

After all, Pitchford's negligence has caused me "hypertension," "depression" and "living in fear of being stricken by another heart attack and/or stroke" as a result of living "in fear of being exposed to extreme stupidity."

As a Florida resident (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34863288)

I am, yet again, embarrassed.

Loser (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34863332)

This is yet another great reason why the US should have a loser pays legal system when it comes to law suits.

His lawyer, if any, should be disbarred (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34863370)

Any lawyer who took up this guy's case should be immediately disbarred, and possibly be committed in a mental institution. If he's acting as his own lawyer, the latter goes doubly so.

Nobody sees what this really is? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34863384)

A way to get him into the United States so they can grab him and shut him up?

Who's the bigger idiot? (1)

Mr.Fork (633378) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863406)

What is even more scary was some dipsheit professional lawyer actually took the case on for this moron. Talk about who's the biggest idiot - the lawyer or the trailer park resident?

Re:Who's the bigger idiot? (1)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863702)

What is even more scary was some dipsheit professional lawyer actually took the case on for this moron. Talk about who's the biggest idiot - the lawyer or the trailer park resident?

Not necessarily - he could have filed the papers all by himself. It makes for a funny headline on a slow news day, but won't see the light of day in court.

Oprah (0)

NetNed (955141) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863472)

Can I sue oprah for unleashing irritating people like Dr. Phil with his questionable advise and Dr. Oz with his fecal fetish. Both of them cause me pain anytime I have to suffer through a broadcast someone else is watching.

"Oh the humanity!" [sic]

Can I sue this guy for causing me discomfort? (1)

phonewebcam (446772) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863498)

His antics made me laugh so much my stomach hurt. So cough up, sunshine.

A startling truth is revealed (1)

Itesh (1901146) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863740)

Some people just can't handle the truth about what their government is really up to. I am sure there are many people that want to continue living with their head buried in the sand so they don't have to deal with the stark realities of what our government really does. The sad part is that there are many more people like him that want to go on living like sheep as long as you don't take away their television and alcohol.

someone should lock up the florida guy in prison (1)

Dan667 (564390) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863770)

then he would be perfectly safe and would not even have to think for himself, they would tell him when and what he could do.

Can I sue... (1)

mariox19 (632969) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863780)

...for the distress idiots like this cause me to suffer?

I personally nominate this guy for... (1)

DrPeper (249585) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863874)

The biggest DOUCHEBAG in the Universe award.

So what do we accuse spies of? (1)

thefixer(tm) (1906774) | more than 3 years ago | (#34863948)

When a foreign national uncovers secrets and we catch them, what are they accused of? What's the equivalent of treason when done by someone from another country?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?