November 2001 - cypherpunks-legacy

ignore
by Anonymous User 14 Nov '01

14 Nov '01

alpha

1 0

re: Sedition
by Faustine 14 Nov '01

14 Nov '01

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Tim wrote: On Monday, November 12, 2001, at 08:42 PM, Faustine wrote: > Why talk about it though? The sheer satisfaction of imagining feds and > sheeple crapping their pants in fearful anticipation? Even if nothing > happened at all, you have to realize unsympathetic people who aren't in on > your peculiar brand of humor are going to take things like this at face value > and hold it against you. You risk getting slapped around with the anti- > paramilitary training statutes whether you're kidding or not. >I'm not kidding. I was there from Friday morning to last night. Fine. I dont know why you seem to be missing my point: being provoked into incriminating yourself by an anonymous troll is an entirely different issue from discussing the substance of whatever it is you happen to be doing. I just happen to have this gut-level common sense belief that if people might be able to use something against any given person, it's counterproductive and potentially dangerous to broadcast it the way you always do. Having moral courage is one thing, playing straight into the hands of people who wish you ill is quite another. It's none of my business what you do, but I'll be damned if I don't have the right to say I think you're making a mistake by talking about it. >As for "getting slapped around," I presume you plan to back this up with >something more than your "intuition"? It's not about intuition, just reading the news and putting two and two together. Everything I've seen about what's happening these days indicates that law enforcement will be looking for any excuse they can find to crack down on people they don't like. If they can keep people off planes for moronic reasons like reading Hayduke and Harry Potter, what else are they going to do with what's already on the books? It's probably just a bad case of pantscrapping paranoia, but I still think it's better to think a few steps ahead. > (gratuitous ad hominem snipped) > - From the "Allegiance to the US" section of the handbook on reasons > for denying > clearance: > Gee, I haven't sought "clearance." If you'll look at the archives, we had this conversation a few months ago. Nothing has changed. (snip) >Unconstitutional nonsense. It sure is. That's why I think (and have always openly said, here and everywhere) we need more pro-freedom policy analysts in Washington. I've never misrepresented myself or what I think here, even when it goes against what passes for the conventional wisdom around here. >So, Agent Faustine, report me. "Agent Faustine?" Are you totally out of your skull on crack? Use your reason: if I were with the FBI I never would have bothered. What a slap in the face. Do you always make false accusations to get out of an argument? >I wish I'd had your report to distribute to the group on Friday night. >Adding your name to the checklist of enemies would have been useful, Unreal. >but at the time I didn't think you were quite as much of an enemy as the >obvious names. Whatever warped interpretation you may have of me, I'm not your enemy. I'll bet whoever started this thread is laughing his head off about now. ~Faustine. *** The right to be let alone is indeed the beginning of all freedoms. - --William O. Douglas, Associate Justice, US Supreme Court -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1 (C) 1997-1999 Network Associates, Inc. and its affiliated companies. (Diffie-Helman/DSS-only version) iQA/AwUBO/FyfPg5Tuca7bfvEQLcAACg4D20Vwa/yT/Lf0Ysv/U5RFCPSs8AoO7y Bj3tB4oekrjekb0ePLw0VGoX =Pkvp -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 3

You've Been Removed!
by Nurse-zine_admin＠allnurses.com 14 Nov '01

14 Nov '01

This message is to confirm the removal of your email address: cypherpunks(a)toad.com from the Nurse-zine mailing list. We're sorry to see you go! If you feel you have received this notice in error, please visit the Nurse-zine Subscribe Me mailing list at our website: http://allnurses.com to add yourself automatically, or click on the link below to automatically re-subscribe yourself: http://www.allnurses.com/subpro/subscribe.pl?add=1&list=5&email=cypherpunks… Thank you, Nurse-zine

1 0

Re: Sedition
by keyser-soze＠hushmail.com 14 Nov '01

14 Nov '01

At 08:34 PM 11/13/2001 -0800, jamesd(a)echeque.com wrote: -- > > Federal law prohibits paramilitary training and the > > manufacture or transport of weapons with the knowledge or > > intent that they will be used to create a civil > > disturbance. (Ref 10) Federal law differs from most state > > laws prohibiting paramilitary training in that it applies > > only to the trainers, not the trainees. Under most state > > laws governing paramilitary training, participation as a > > trainee is also illegal. On 12 Nov 2001, at 21:38, Tim May wrote: > Unconstitutional nonsense. > > So, Agent Faustine, report me. In my observation, obviously unconstitutional laws tend to be selective applied against people that are unsympathetic, and, most importantly, cannot afford lawyers. ------------------------------------------------ Fortunately we can all afford firearms, some of high accuracy, range and penetration. Soon we may all be able to afford tools for individually selective bioagents and WoMD. What these downtrodden need most is a bit of ideological enlightenment and training. Tim, would you care to name your favorite "militia" training web sites? Anyone know if any of the once popular but now out-of-print Palladin books are circulating in e-book form?

1 0

Re: Sedition
by Faustine 14 Nov '01

14 Nov '01

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Monday, November 12, 2001, at 03:27 PM, Faustine wrote: > If questioning your commitment is all it > takes to push your buttons, I'd say that's less than optimal. >>You, thank Baal, have no knowledge of what "pushes my buttons." True, but even the most casual perusal of the archive suggests you've got plenty of them. I bet a person could really learn a lot by spending some quality time with Google, taking careful notes on the differences between posts you ignore, ones you're content to dismiss with frosty condescension, what really seems to bother the hell out of you, ones that should bother the hell out of you but you choose to ignore, etc. etc. It's a wonder someone hasn't pulled a number on you already. Sometimes I wonder about "Agent Farr" though. >You also have almost no list experience here (though this has never stopped >you from lecturing us on things you've read about in books). OR: "damn whippersnapper!" >I write about what I desire to write about. Of course. As long as you aren't getting jerked around, more power to you. >Now that the training camp is over, there is no threat to the security >of the operation. They lack time machines. Why talk about it though? The sheer satisfaction of imagining feds and sheeple crapping their pants in fearful anticipation? Even if nothing happened at all, you have to realize unsympathetic people who aren't in on your peculiar brand of humor are going to take things like this at face value and hold it against you. You risk getting slapped around with the anti-paramilitary training statutes whether you're kidding or not. Odds are you don't care one way or the other, but it seemed unnecessarily reckless, that's all. For your own sake. > I'm sure anyone who bears ill-will to the group is finding this whole > thread quite instructive--undoubtedly the point of the original post in the > first place. Good show. How sickening to think that now you have to worry > about getting anti-paramilitary training statutes dumped on you (on top > of anything else) just because a few people couldn't resist showing up a > stupid troll. >>And which "anti-paramilitary traning statutes" would these be? (gratuitous ad hominem snipped) - From the "Allegiance to the US" section of the handbook on reasons for denying clearance: http://www.dss.mil/training/adr/alleg/allegF.htm Laws Regarding Private Militias Federal law prohibits paramilitary training and the manufacture or transport of weapons with the knowledge or intent that they will be used to create a civil disturbance. (Ref 10) Federal law differs from most state laws prohibiting paramilitary training in that it applies only to the trainers, not the trainees. Under most state laws governing paramilitary training, participation as a trainee is also illegal. Laws are on the books in 41 states to ban either the militias themselves or paramilitary training or both. (Ref 11) The two types of laws operate differently. Anti-paramilitary training laws ban groups whose members know or intend that a civil disorder will result from their activities. Anti-militia laws ban all unauthorized militias, regardless of whether the participants have any specific criminal intent or knowledge. Anti-militia laws generally require evidence that a group of people are associated together in a formal military-type organization. Anti-paramilitary training statutes, by contrast, can be used against groups as small as two or three people. Both types of laws generally exempt organizations like hunting clubs. These laws are seldom enforced, but they are relevant to an adjudicative determination that an individual is engaging in either lawful or unlawful militia activities. The state laws and the legal citations for them are as follows: Alabama. Anti-militia. Ala. Code ' 31-2-125 Arizona. Anti-militia. Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. ' 26-123. Arkansas. Anti-paramilitary training. Ark. Code ' 5-71-301 to -303. California. Anti-paramilitary training. Cal. Penal Code ' 11460. Colorado. Anti-paramilitary training. Colo. Rev. Stat. ' 18-9-120. Connecticut. Anti-paramilitary training. Conn. Gen. Stat. ' 53-206b. Florida. Anti-militia and anti-paramilitary training. Fla. Stat. Ann. ch. 870.06, 790.29. Georgia. Anti-militia and anti-paramilitary training. Ga. Code Ann. '' 38-2-277, 16-11-150 to -152. Idaho. Anti-militia and anti-paramilitary training. Idaho Code '' 46-802, 18-8101 to -8105. Iowa. Anti-militia. Iowa Code ' 29A.31 Illinois. Anti-militia and anti-paramilitary training. Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 1805, para 94-95. Kansas. Anti-militia. Kan. Stat. Ann. ' 48-203. Kentucky. Anti-militia. Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. ' 38.440. Louisiana. Anti-paramilitary training. La. Rev. Stat. Ann. ' 117.1. Maine. Anti-militia. Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 37-B, ' 342.2. Maryland. Anti-militia. Md. Code Ann. art. 65, ' 35. Massachusetts. Anti-militia. Mass. Gen. L. ch. 33 ' 129-132. Michigan. Anti-paramilitary training. Mich. Comp. Laws ' 750.528a. Minnesota. Anti-militia. Minn. Stat. ' 624.61. Mississippi. Anti-militia. Miss. Code Ann. ' 33-1-31. Missouri. Anti-paramilitary training. Mo. Rev. Stat. ' 574.070. Nebraska. Anti-paramilitary training. Neb. Rev. Stat. ' 28-1480 to -1482. Nevada. Anti-militia. Nev. Rev. Stat. ' 203.080. New Hampshire. Anti-militia. N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. ' 111:15. New Jersey. Anti-paramilitary training. N.J. Rev. Stat. ' 2C:39-14. New Mexico. Anti-paramilitary training. N.M. Stat. Ann. ' 30-20A-1 to -4. New York. Anti-militia and anti-paramilitary training. N.Y. Mil. Law ' 240. North Carolina. Anti-militia and anti-paramilitary training. N.C. Gen. Stat. '' 127A-151, 14-288.20. North Dakota. Anti-militia. N.D. Cent. Code ' 37-01-21. Oklahoma. Anti-paramilitary training. Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, ' 1321.10. Oregon. Anti-paramilitary training. Or. Rev. Stat. ' 166.660. Pennsylvania. Anti-paramilitary training. 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. ' 5515. Rhode Island. anti-militia and anti-paramilitary training. R.I. Gen. Laws '' 30-12-7, 11-55-1 to -3. South Carolina. Anti-paramilitary training. S.C. Code Ann. ' 16-8-10 to -30. Tennessee. Anti-paramilitary training. Tenn. Code Ann. ' 39-17-314. Texas. Anti-militia. Tex. Govt. Code; Ann. ' 431.010. Virginia. Anti-paramilitary training. Va. Code Ann. '' 18.2-433.1 to -433.3. Washington. Anti-militia. Wash. Rev. Code ' 38.40.120. West Virginia. Anti-militia. W.Va. Code ' 15-1F-7. Wyoming. Anti-militia. Wyo. Stat. ' 19-1-106. >And what is done by other memmbers of a list does not establish guilt by >association, except in your fevered mind. Oh, but it's not just my fevered mind in particular. See "Association With Certain Extremist Organizations or Groups" as a reason to deny security clearance in the above handbook. The list might not be a group now, but once you get branded as having conducted illegal paramilitary training for whatever reason--joke or not--the sad fact is you certainly will be. >For example, the discussion I contributed to on hacking the air traffic >control system for political purposes makes you guilty of which crime >and in which way? Guilt by association with a thoughtcrime, of course. > Here's hoping your temper doesn't get the better of you. >>You are ignorant of my mental state of mind. Twit. - --Tim May Nevertheless, it's endlessly fascinating, isn't it, grumpy. ~Faustine. *** The right to be let alone is indeed the beginning of all freedoms. - --William O. Douglas, Associate Justice, US Supreme Court -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1 (C) 1997-1999 Network Associates, Inc. and its affiliated companies. (Diffie-Helman/DSS-only version) iQA/AwUBO/Cks/g5Tuca7bfvEQJxggCg0iTwVI3+87YXX4G70LVWebSgXpAAnAkV YxQrozusZkRzoo6ojpfvEu7K =dS2W -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 3

Soldiers celebrate with executions - smh.com.au - World
by Jim Choate 14 Nov '01

14 Nov '01

The last sentence is the one of interest... http://www.smh.com.au/news/0111/14/world/world4.html -- -- ____________________________________________________________________ Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

Cypherpunks Rating System
by Nomen Nescio 14 Nov '01

14 Nov '01

Cypherpunk Rating System The Platform for Internet Content Selection (PICS) is a W3C initiative to provide for labeling content on the internet. Initially designed as an alternative to the Communications Decency Act and similar legislation intended to protect children from objectionable content, PICS allows both self-labeling and third-party labeling of web pages. The most widely used rating system is that provided by the Internet Content Rating Association, www.icra.org, which replaces the older RSACi system (not the crypto RSA, it stood for Recreational Software Association). There is also the hilarious Vancouver rating system at http://vancouver-webpages.com/VWP1.0/VWP1.0.gen.html, which gives points for Multiculturalism ("Active involvement of user in multicultural activity using interactive techniques"), Environmental Awareness, Tolerance, Safety ("Active promotion of safe work and personal behaviour"), and of course, the highly important Canadian Content rating. Clearly these rating systems are either Puritanical or politically correct to an obnoxious degree. Nevertheless the notion of providing additional information about the content of an article is valid within the cypherpunk worldview. Content labels can usefully add to the information present in the Subject and From fields. This information can then be used on an individual basis to filter content. Killfiles are an obvious application of this approach, and in fact certain writers have effectively disappeared from the lists for an ever-increasing number of subscribers. Filtering based on content labels is no more in conflict with cypherpunk goals and ideals than killfiling the likes of Choate. Although PICS was designed for web pages, it can be used for mailing list postings as well. The W3C pages at http://www.w3c.org/PICS provide a simple mechanism for passing PICS ratings in any RFC822 (now RFC2822) environment (that is, email). A new header is defined, PICS-Label, which is followed by the relevant information. The PICS syntax is reasonably compact, however it includes a URL which provides a human readable description of the meaning of the labels. A sample label might be: PICS-Label: (PICS-1.1 "http://www.cypherpunks.to/" l r (topics tpg ap pp)) The header is followed by the URL which defines the rating system. l means labels and r means ratings, and then the ratings themselves are in parentheses, using the rules defined at the URL. This example uses an unordered list of topic keywords which follow the word "topics", which are defined below. More complex ratings systems can be defined allowing numerical evaluation on a variety of scales. Those ideas may be worth pursuing. But to start with, here are some possible topic categories with their associated keywords for the ratings tuple: Topic categories, which follow the word "topics": e Encryption ap Anonymity/pseudonymity tc Technical crypto cob Cypherpunk oriented businesses tpg Threats to privacy by government tpng Threats to privacy by business and NGOs gb guns/bombs bt booby traps pp Political parties pe Political elections Clearly it would be highly ironic for a pro-privacy group like the cypherpunks to adopt PICS technology, which has been widely criticized by free speech groups. Nevertheless it would be instructive to have an example where ratings are used for the opposite of the politically correct purposes for which they were originally intended. Cypherpunks could use PICS to help find information on defeating government surveillance and interfering with the increasing crackdowns on civil liberties. Even if the system is not used much, the act of defining the vocabulary could set a useful precedent. It might even be possible to convince the W3C to link to the cypherpunks rating system, since they were willing to link to Vancouver. Then anyone who researches this topic will be exposed to the cypherpunk view of the world. Suggestions for expanding the rating system are welcome. "I write about what I desire to write about." - Tim May

4 4

Joke of the Day!
by Free4all Jokes 14 Nov '01

14 Nov '01

--------------------------------- --------------------------------- --------------------------------- CLICK HERE FOR THOUSANDS OF JOKES OR TO SUBSCRIBE TO JOKE OF THE DAY --------------------------------- If you do not wish to receive this mail please unsubscribe by sending a blank mail to the unsubscribe address. Your unsubscribe address: jokes-unsubscribe-cypherpunks=toad.com(a)bob.free4all.com --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals.

1 0

ADV:BANKCARD AGENT PROGRAM
by agents＠acceptcardsinstant.com 14 Nov '01

14 Nov '01

******************************************************* To be removed from further mailing please respond with "remove" in the subject line. ******************************************************* Dear Bankcard Agent/Friend, This email is being sent to you regarding a BRAND NEW Bankcard/Merchant Account program that is going to change the Bankcard industry. The bankcard industry has gone through a colossal slow down over the last year. Banks are difficult to work with, getting your merchants merchant numbers is nearing the point of impossibility and the entire process of getting merchant accounts has become entirely too difficult. THE DAYS OF THIS ARE OVER! A NEW PROGRAM PASSED ALL OF THE TESTS and is changing the way you can operate your bankcard business and virtually triple your sales overnight. The: INSTANT APPROVAL AND INSTANT MERCHANT NUMBERS ARE HERE! THE DIGITAL SIGNATURE AND INSTANT MERCHANT ACCOUNT NUMBER has arrived. That's right Brand new bankcard program allows your customers to simply fill out an application online and receive an instant merchant number, NO UNDERWRITING, NO WAITING, an immediate APPROVAL with live processing in about 60 minutes. 99% of all applicants are approved and most HIGH RISK businesses are also accepted! No need to fax a driver�s license, checks, or other information to get your merchant approved. Everything is online with a proprietary software system only available through this program. This program has been tested and has been virtually perfected. A true 99% of all business types and merchants can get accounts through this program INSTANTLY. There are limited agent openings for this program until next year, so act now. Look and see the advantage of this program: THIS TECHNOLOGY IS THE NEWEST AND ULTIMATE TOOL TO HIT THE BANKCARD INDUSTRY SINCE IT'S INCEPTION! Your sales will virtually triple overnight! Complete lifetime residuals and revenue sharing programs including minimum splits! Low, Low buy rates and discount rates. No more waiting for merchant numbers. Instant approvals and numbers are LIVE in 15-60 minutes. Your own online application private labeled with your name and specific rates on it. Use your own gateway, software and hardware. No signature, check or other information needed for your merchant to receive a merchant account! Receive pre-approved leads already with merchant numbers and an approved discount rate. All you have to do is sell or lease the equipment and the residuals are yours! All issuing of merchant numbers are done by the processor. No Middleman! And much much more... The new way to get a merchant account is finally here JUMP ON IT! If you are interested in learning more about this new program please respond to this email with your NAME, PHONE # and best time to call and a representative will contact you to discuss this program with you. mailto:agents@acceptcardsinstant.com

1 0

terrible people
by bill payne 14 Nov '01

14 Nov '01

anita John Young of cryptome http://cryptome.org/ pointed out to me we're into some of the most terrible people in the usa. If not in the world. I'm about 64.5 years. Morales one year younger. So. WE'RE GOING TO FOR IT. DAMNED THE TORPEDOS. Allahu akhbar, cowabunga, 4QU etc. http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/8327/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "anita" <mindgame(a)telus.net> To: "bill payne" <bpayne37(a)home.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 2:31 PM Subject: Re: kennedy grey? > Hi Bill, > > Sorry I've been a bit slow to respond, I'm down with food poisoning, the > timing couldn't be much worse. I don't know Kennedy Grey but the name is > ringing familiar. > > We're waiting for confirmation but we have reason to think that Michael may > have had his surgery today. His lawyer called me today and said he was > moved to a surgical unit but we're waiting for word on his situation. > > Thanks for the pix, > > Anita > > ========== > > > Do you know kennedy grey? > > > > Here's some pixs from abq > > > > http://members.home.net/bpayne37/tram/fuji.html > > > > best > > bill > > http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/8327/ > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: <Motive8(a)aol.com> > > To: <bpayne37(a)home.com> > > Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 10:35 AM > > Subject: Re: weapons here? > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 11/2/01 12:54:10 AM, bpayne37(a)home.com writes: > > > > > > << http://www.rense.com/general15/michaelreconosciuto.htm >> > > > > > > I have a story about Jeff Rense at his site--what a coincidence... > > > > > > Kennedy > > > > > > > >

1 0