December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: THE JEWS (ALL of them!) Try to kick Ernst Zundel off Usenet!!
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:46 PM 2/3/96 -0500, ErnstZundl(a)aol.com wrote: >If you are a *true* Patriot, and a *true* Aryan, then you *MUST* >make the journey to Antarctica and into the volcano!! We owe it to >the world, we owe it to the great Adolph Hitler, and we owe it to >the White Race. "But what about Hitler's Brain?" | Remember: Life is not always champagne. Sometimes it is REAL pain. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ | alano(a)teleport.com |

1 0

Re: Futplex makes the news!
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:01 PM 2/3/96 -0800, Timothy C. May wrote: >presence by Lewis. (From what I've seen at California universities, the >folks with the long knives will still be trying to "get him." >Unfortunately, with search tools like Alta Vista they can keep tabs on him >semi-automatically and report any further evidence of his racist, >mysogynistic, and anti-democratic views to the Dean of Students.) > >(I could add a smiley here, but it's really not very funny.) But it's a state school. All you have to do is sue. Since academics are gutless, they aren't that hard to face down. So far, no one's really wanted to face my mouth so they've left me alone once I made it clear that I was a libertarian anarchist nut. I feel sorry for Lewis though and wouldn't want him to do anything he wasn't comfortable with. DCF "Then there was the time that my RA (Resident Assistant) in my dorm in a small (private) liberal arts college in the Northwest found out I had a gun in my room..."

1 0

Nuke em if ya got em "TCMay"
by paralax＠alpha.c2.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Date: Sat, 03 Feb 1996 22:20:52 -0800 James A. Donald Wrote: At 03:39 PM 2/3/96 -0800, paralax(a)alpha.c2.org wrote: P> Mr. Hayes MAY have used a condescending tone but you have exposed your P> racist roots again. First you embarrass yourself with you lack of knowledge, JAD> Paralax does not know shit from beans. He presumably imagines that Tim is JAD> "embarrassed" because Tim's knowledge of the historical facts differs from JAD> those facts dreamed up by the usual crew of apologists for totalitarian terror. JAD> James A. Donald Historical facts and or personal interpretations thereof were never called in to question by me. I took umbrage with Mr. May's insulting, insensitive and racist comments about Jews and the Japanese. Whether Mr. May's is personally embarrassed by his public display of ignorance and bigotry matters not. He did indeed embarrass himself on an 'International Stage'. I may not know shit from beans (actually I do) but I do know cultural insensitivity, racism, bigotry and ignorance when I see it displayed so blatantly. I encouraged Mr. May to return to topics 'cipher' before further embarrassment ensues. I urge you to do likewise. A. Paralax View

2 1

Re: THE JEWS (ALL of them!) Try to kick Ernst Zundel off Usenet!!
by ErnstZundl＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>> if he's out there convincing Neo-Nazis and Holocaust deniers >> to go freeze to death at the South pole, as that really >> anti-semitic? DUH!! Nobody is going to freeze to death if they dress warmly. That is just a myth about Antarctica. It is really a tropical paradise, but THE JEWS don't want you to know that. Besides, we will all be going *inside* a VOLCANO! Even if somehow Antarctica were freezing cold, we will be plenty warm inside the volcano which leads to the Aryan Nazi UFO Base at the center of the Earth. I am not asking Nazis and Holocaust deniers to freeze to death! I am inviting them to jump into a volcano, you fool!

3 2

Re: THE JEWS (ALL of them!) Try to kick Ernst Zundel off Usenet!!
by ErnstZundl＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>> Surley you can't expect us to belive people wrote that? Who do you propose wrote it then? Aryan Space Nazis?

1 0

RE: Don't type your yes/fraud response into your computer
by A. Padgett Peterson, P.E. Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Nice try - but the virtual machine model used by intel supports interception >of I/O operations. (something educating prior generations how to apply a near vacuum to shelled embryos). Sure it does - why it is essential for protective activity to begin while the system is still in REAL mode following boot. Might also need to write a .VXD (horrors) >I still think the basic 'if the machine is not secure all bets are off' >premis stands. Oh I agree, just believe that software can make a machine secure (or at least detect when security cannot be assured which is almost as good). Might I suggest you take a look at the "safe PC" discussions on Virus-L c.a 1989-1990. We were talking about virus protection then but is the same thing. Believe it or not, we even had real and protected mode discussions back in those days while we were waiting for Noah (only guy who ever took out a cattle boat and wound up half-way up a mountain...). Warmly, Padgett

1 0

Aegis PGP Shell
by paralax＠alpha.c2.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Gordon Campbell wrote: GRC> After doing a total reinstall of my system (don't ask) I discovered that I GRC> don't have a copy of the Aegis PGP Shell distribution archive anywhere. I GRC> attempted to grab it from http://iquest.com/~aegisrc as listed in the docs, GRC> but the site doesn't exist. GRC> Doesn anybody know what gives and where I can get a new copy of the archive? GRC> I really like this shell and haven't figured out how to otherwise integrate GRC> PGP with EudoraPro. GRC> Gordon R. Campbell, Owner - Mowat Woods Graphics >From alt.security.pgp another reader writes: > It seems that iquest.com has dropped off the net today so the > normal url: http://iquest.com/~aegisrc/beta2.htm is > unavailable. With the weather around here right now, I doubt > it will be up any time soon. > I've created a very quick mirror site at: > http://fly.hiwaay.net/~lyman/pgpwsbeta.htm > Please use it only if you cannot connect to the first url. A. Paralax View

1 0

Re: [noise] Re: Charter of PDX Cpunk meetings
by bernardo＠alpha.c2.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

jim bell wrote: >> I think an explanation for this is due. Jim is going to move his complaints >> here instead of dealing with them with me no matter what I do... > > Alan Olsen is correct, here. This is childish and pointless. Please shut up or take it to email. > But he (the anonymous poster): > 1. FLamed me on this national list, similarly to the way Alan Olsen later did. FWIW, this is an _international_ list with a lot of people who are just not interested in your petty bickering. If you want to argue about this, please do it in private. If Alan posts responses to the list, that's his problem. You don't _have_ to answer in public. > 2. Failed to be willing to sustain the debate in a more appropriate list, > even under a stable nym. You have something against anonymity? In this case, perhaps this list is not the best place to be. > that I had been flamed by that anonymous poster. The fact that he was > anonymous says it all. The fact that he has not returned says it all. The The fact that he was anonymous says nothing whatsoever. So what if you received some email agreeing that you'd been flamed? > the fact that I am relatively new here. I have no intention of inflicting > an unwelcome discussion of "Assassination Politics" on the list, and Actually, and Perry may disagree here, but I'd have no objection to a discussion of "Assassination Politics", or any other nutty political theories, as long as we can stick to reasonably mature discussion and not flames and petty ego boosting. > suffered any longterm loss of reputation of his own. I, on the other hand, > use my REAL NAME. Whoopie! A True Name! Big deal. I care not one jot whether or not you use your REAL NAME. I have no way of knowing if it is, in fact, your real name. Should it make a difference? No one is going to "suffer any longterm loss of reputation" by disagreeing with you, or anyone else, whether or not they use a nym (or anonymity). > Only a fool would have taken an anonymous flamer seriously under those > circumstances. An anonymous post is no less valid for being anonymous. The only advantage of a stable nym, whether or not it's a True Name, is the ability to gain (or lose) reputation through the content of its posts. Perhaps a nym with some reputation is taken more seriously than an anonymous poster, but so is an unknown nym. Neither you nor Alan has any reputation to speak of (to me, at least), so an anonymous post has no less. >> Jim ignored that request and I removed him from the list. > > Read: "Alan Olsen exercised his authority in his own personal fiefdom, the > "PDX Cypherpunks list." Are you saying he doesn't have that right? If it's his list, he can do whatever the hell he likes with it. > On the contrary, I have no interest in dealing with this sleazy character in > email. He was the one who chose a national list to do his flaming and > baiting, and I think he deserves full "credit." In other words, you are not interested in resolving any problem you have with Alan, you just to make a lot of noise in public in an attempt to "embarrass" him. Go play on some other list where this kind of thing is appreciated. >> The following is the last I will say publically on the matter. > > You're going to take your bat and ball and "go thwait home!" You hear your > mommy calling, Alan. This list periodically devolves into this childishness. I'm glad Alan is not going to say any more. I award Alan 20 Reputation Points for being mature enough to walk away (delayed long enough to see whether he does)

1 0

Encryption Programs
by avatar＠mindspring.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

OBVIOUSLY the spokesman of the group. I ask for help and this is what I get? One more time, I'm well aware of the capabilities of PGP. What I'm looking for is a program that does a better job of binary encryption than just Radix 64 ASCII armoring. >Return-Path: remailer(a)utopia.hacktic.nl >Date: Sun, 4 Feb 1996 10:40:07 +0100 >To: avatar(a)mindspring.com >From: anon-remailer(a)utopia.hacktic.nl (Name Withheld by Request) >Organization: Hack-Tic International, Inc. >XComm: This message was automaticly Remailed by an Anonymous Remailer. >XComm: Report inappropriate use to <postmaster(a)utopia.hacktic.nl> >Subject: Encryption Programs >From: House.of.the.Rising.Sun(a)utopia.hacktic.nl > > > wow, a fresh newbie with his first toy! your lights work, too? > cypherpunks is not for you if you need to ask for encryption.... > > there's only one encryption program which is both simple and > effective: PGP. if you don't know where to find it, use DEC's Alta > Vista web search engine in advanced mode for "mit NEAR pgp" > > you can get a DOS image. there are some windows interfaces I > have been told, but fuck Bill Gates and horse he rode in on. > > maybe some day, you'll find enlightenment on choice of operating > systems... instead of following the herd to Gate's bank of mindless. > > >>From avatar(a)mindspring.comSun Feb 4 09:06:32 1996 >Date: Sat, 03 Feb 1996 23:17:09 -0600 >From: avatar(a)mindspring.com >To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com >Subject: Searching for the best > >Hi, Folks > > I am looking for the best file encryption program and the best file >wiping program. >PC compatible, perferably Win 95 compatible. > Thanx >Charles Donald Smith Jr. >582 Clifton Rd. N.E. >Atlanta, Ga. 30307-1787 >(404)-378-7282 > >REPUBLICAN; smaller government, less taxes, richer people, and proud children!! > > Charles Donald Smith Jr. 582 Clifton Rd. N.E. Atlanta, Ga. 30307-1787 (404)-378-7282 REPUBLICAN; smaller government, less taxes, richer people, and proud children!!

2 1

Re: Alien factoring breakthroughs
by Andrew.Spring＠ping.be 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>The Grays have renegged on their abduction quota agreement, and are >abducting many more people than before. Most of these are returned, after >being implanted with a device which allows the grays to have total control >over their thoughts and actions. Approximately 40% of Americans now carry >one of these devices, which are impossible to remove without killing the >host. > The mark of a good conspiracy theory is its untestability. Your theory fails here, because you could perform autopsies on those hosts who have died of natural causes to recover the mind control devices. Suggest you amend the last sentence to read "...one of these devices, which dissolve immediately upon death, and which are impossible to remove..." etc, etc.

2 1

RE: Don't type your yes/fraud response into your computer
by A. Padgett Peterson, P.E. Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> At base, the moral to the story is that a compromised user machine >permits essentially any and all activities to be suborned. Only a smart >card mechanism stands a chance of standing up to this, but that, in effect, >makes the smart card the 'user machine'. True and has been one reason the smartcards/tokens/etc have been available for years. The other side of the coin is expense - for a smart card and reader you are looking at over $100. For a token alone (you enter the one-time response) $30-$60. In a mass-market environment, this is not supportable. OTOH, keyboard sniffing software is easy to detect because it must go resident and it must intercept the keystrokes. The fact that no software has bothered to do this does not mean that it cannot be done. The easiest way for such software to act would be to ignore the machine software and when sensitive material is to be passed, to do so via direct port (hardware) access - been a while since I looked at it but AFAIR is around port 60h. (PC type machines) This would take care of anything sitting on Int 09 or Int 16 since it would be bypassed. Often a problem that looks difficult when viewed as a whole becomes simple once you disassemble it. Rather than try to find a workaround for a machine you do not trust, why not develop a means to trust it ? Can do with software alone and that is cheap. Warmly, Padgett ps Dave, what is this thingie on the 21st ? May be in the area (opportunity for plug here 8*). pps Before y'all get too wrapped up in free-speech vs libel in the US I would suggest studying the difference between criminal law and civil.

1 0

Re: [NOISE] Futplex makes the news!
by A. Padgett Peterson, P.E. Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>James Donald may characterize me as gutless. I think he would probably be >correct to some extent. "Freedom is just another word for nothing more to lose." - Janis P.fla

1 0

"Nations see Internet as threat to security"
by Mike Ang 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Nations see Internet as threat to security" made the front page of the Saturday _Globe and Mail_. There are some really nice lines in the article, which basically states that electronic freedoms through the Internet are a direct challenge to the power of nation states. They mention all of the more recent examples in China, Germany, France, and the States. Here are some of the more interesting paragraphs: But as China, Germany,

1 0

"Nations see Internet.." continued
by Mike Ang 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sorry about that -- here's the whole thing again "Nations see Internet as threat to security" made the front page of the Saturday _Globe and Mail_. There are some really nice lines in the article, which basically states that electronic freedoms through the Internet are a direct challenge to the power of nation states. They mention all of the more recent examples in China, Germany, France, and the States. The author obviously wasn't afraid of making large claims. Most of them were acceptable, but some seemed completely unsubstantiated (see below). Here are some of the more interesting paragraphs: But as China, Germany, the United States and now France have discovered recently, data sent electronically over the Internet can be every bit as threatening to a country's laws or its culture as armies of yesteryear. But its elusive nature makes it difficult to track down and impossible to eradicate. And there is growing concern that the very existence of the Internet is a threat to the nation-state. [..] "We think of states as unitary bodies, but what they really are is a bundle of sovereignties -- economic sovereignty, military sovereignty, cultural and social sovereignty." That bundle is now coming undone, or as Mr. Saffo put it, "Digital technology is the solvent leaching the glue out of the state as we know it." .. It's not just cultural or social sovereignty that governments worry about. The power to tax is also being eroded by the increase in economic transactions that take place over the Internet, some encrypted so that prying eyes at the tax department could not read them even if a tax inspector was fortunate enough to stumble upon them. Drug dealers and terrorists are resorting increasingly to this means of moving funds. .. However, advocates of unregulated cyberspace says [sic] this just means that the only people using encryption programs at the moment are those doing it illegally. It's a similar argument to the one often made in Canada against gun control -- the bad guys already have weapons. .. Yay, more FUD. The article does a good job of raising some of the important issues. But I _highly_ doubt that "drug dealers and terrorists" are using digital cash to transfer funds. They also characterize strong encryption as something evil. The author implies that main reason for encrypting financial transactions is to evade the tax department - if I'm sending my credit card # across the net, _of course_ I'm going to encrypt it, and when using digital cash, encryption is generally part of authentication. Comparing crypto to guns works in the sense that the "bad guys" will always be able to have access to them. However, I for one support gun control but do not support mandatory limits on crypto. Where I live, there are no theats that justify allowing everyone to carry guns - the threat to privacy and freedom of speech justifies allowing everyone to use strong crypto. You can use a gun to deprive another person of their life - what harm can you do another with PGP? Perhaps you can harm them by being able to spread hate propaganda, but I don't think that that is a strong enough argument. - Mike. If you've got to flame me, do it by email.

2 1

Need a "warning" graphic of some kind for CDA
by Robert A. Hayden 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Now that we all have web pages that are naughty and might be seen by little children, I'd like to hve some kind of a graphic that can universally be seen as a "Warning: The following material is unsuitable for children and close-minded twits". (or words to that effect). Anybody with much more graphic design ability than I wanna take a crack at something that can be spread all over the net? It shoudl poke as much fun as possible at the inaness of the CDA, while still being a legitimate effort to warn people that the material is offensive (just in case people start getting yanked off the street on CDA violations). -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: PGP Signed with PineSign 2.2 iQCVAwUBMRTStjokqlyVGmCFAQGA3QQA0HOMcmxT+y8NbNtI/ak9Jc1kcmjK5v2l pO17j14IGiz3I+EwXkYMHkCPMup2CyxBZ3YTNkQ4wc8bbtUrYGy/fBSs/yA8Gfy+ TxmGb5uzdLqdhhkJHwgG1CpOkYocX9EN/LUDQ1lB7jDpW5PjNTG1EMkGq1/L3nG5 O3vI3hLrltw= =D/1b -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ____ Robert A. Hayden <=> hayden(a)krypton.mankato.msus.edu \ /__ Finger for Geek Code Info <=> Finger for PGP Public Key \/ / -=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=- \/ http://krypton.mankato.msus.edu/~hayden/Welcome.html -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GED/J d-- s:++>: a-- C++(++++)$ ULUO++ P+>+++ L++ !E---- W+(---) N+++ o+ K+++ w+(---) O- M+$>++ V-- PS++(+++)>$ PE++(+)>$ Y++ PGP++ t- 5+++ X++ R+++>$ tv+ b+ DI+++ D+++ G+++++>$ e++$>++++ h r-- y+** ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

2 1

Re: Need a "warning" graphic of some kind for CDA
by Dave Farber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Posted-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 21:09:19 -0500 X-Sender: farber(a)linc.cis.upenn.edu Date: Fri, 02 Feb 1996 21:09:19 -0500 From: Dave Farber <farber(a)central.cis.upenn.edu> Subject: IP: Blue Ribbon Campaign invite [ with a endorsement from me djf] To: interesting-people(a)eff.org (interesting-people mailing list) X-Proccessed-By: mail2list From: Dan Brown <brown(a)eff.org> Greetings from the Electronic Frontier! As you likely already know, on Feb. 1 1996 the United States House and Senate voted on and overwhelmingly passed the Telecommunications Act almost immediately after being reported out of committee, before the public was able to read, much less comment upon this bill. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), decries the forfeiture of free speech prescribed by the sweeping censorship provisions of the telecommunications "reform" legislation EFF is launching a campaign using a blue ribbon as a symbol to visually communicate support for free speech in the electronic world. As a provider of content on the Internet we invite you to join in this awareness campaign by displaying a link to our "Blue Ribbon" page where we will update what is happening in the effort to preserve free speech. Pictures, HTML anchors and information on the progress of the campaign are all available from http://www.eff.org/blueribbon.html. Don't wait in silence. Please join the fight against Internet Censorship!! ------------------------------------------------------ Dan Brown | System admin for the Electronic Frontier Foundation | brown(a)eff.org +1 415 436 9EFF Voice || +1 415 436 9993 Fax || +1 415 605 1481 Pager (Please leave area code _and_ phone number if you page me!)

2 1

Re: Need a "warning" graphic of some kind for CDA
by David K. Merriman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 11:37 AM 02/4/96 -0600, Robert A. Hayden wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >Now that we all have web pages that are naughty and might be seen by >little children, I'd like to hve some kind of a graphic that can >universally be seen as a "Warning: The following material is unsuitable >for children and close-minded twits". (or words to that effect). > >Anybody with much more graphic design ability than I wanna take a crack >at something that can be spread all over the net? It shoudl poke as much >fun as possible at the inaness of the CDA, while still being a legitimate >effort to warn people that the material is offensive (just in case people >start getting yanked off the street on CDA violations). > Hmmmmm. Maybe a doll with an international 'no' sign superimposed? Dave Merriman -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMRQyXcVrTvyYOzAZAQHXhQP/dnOLwoE5iTf5sNBwPaBl/1+7tXftWIc2 KyxSqqEhgLOcBssTo56Yt7r5TMFVukbWDirNuJW4xFRqFJovw2fG2XdpxMUJlVHF McjIgXbddYWuyjZ+G04uiKcaoMRYFMFajOipIDkTYSNHBMkfDkxbLNrT3YMNpeCx nDyvzpX+tGM= =iqHi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------- "It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the Government from falling into error." Robert H. Jackson (1892-1954), U.S. Judge <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> My web page: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1148

2 1

RE: Don't type your yes/fraud response into your computer
by John Pettitt 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:14 AM 2/4/96 -0500, A. Padgett Peterson, P.E. Information Security wrote: >OTOH, keyboard sniffing software is easy to detect because it must go >resident and it must intercept the keystrokes. The fact that no software >has bothered to do this does not mean that it cannot be done. The >easiest way for such software to act would be to ignore the machine software >and when sensitive material is to be passed, to do so via direct port >(hardware) access - been a while since I looked at it but AFAIR is around >port 60h. (PC type machines) > >This would take care of anything sitting on Int 09 or Int 16 since it would >be bypassed. Often a problem that looks difficult when viewed as a whole >becomes simple once you disassemble it. Nice try - but the virtual machine model used by intel supports interception of I/O operations. Now one could get into timing how long the I/O takes to detect interception by the memory manager but it would be a royal pain since the keyboard I/O controller latency is rather machine specific. I still think the basic 'if the machine is not secure all bets are off' premis stands. -- John Pettitt email: jpettitt(a)well.sf.ca.us (home) jpp(a)software.net (work)

1 0

Re: Sometines ya just gotta nuke em-and nuke em again
by tallpaul＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Neither the atomic bombing nor the entry of the Soviet Union into the war forced Japan's surrender. She was defeated before either of these events took place." General of the Army Douglas MacArthur "It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material success in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons. ... My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages." Admiral William Leahy, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff "The Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing... I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon." General of the Army Dwight D. Eisenhower These statements by the Allied military commanders were not deeply buried in graduate school libraries or military archives. They were widely printed and discussed in the media during last year's discussion over the Enola Gay exhibit at the Smithsonian Museum. Now the mere fact that the Allied military commanders all agreed that the nuclear bombings were unnecessary does not automatically mean that the commanders were correct. Theoretically, J.A. Donald and T.C. May might have a greater understanding. But both Donald and May must justify this hypothesis with evidence and logic, not mere assertion. Thus, J.A. Donald was perfectly free to write in Message-Id: <199602040622.WAA07274(a)shell1.best.com> on Feb. 03 22:20 that: "Paralax does not know shit from beans. He presumably imagines that Tim is 'embarrassed' because Tim's knowledge of the historical facts differs from those facts dreamed up by the usual crew of apologists for totalitarian terror." In what way and to what extent did General of the Army MacArthur, the senior Allied commander in the Pacific Theater not "know shit from beans?" In what way and to what extent was MacArthur one of the "usual crew of apologists for totalitarian terror?" In what way and to what extent did Chief of Staff Leahy not know "shit from beans?" In what way and to what extent was Leahy one of the "usual crew of apologist for totalitarian terror?" In what way did General Eisenhower especially not know "shit from beans" about this issue, given his access to all available information when he was President? In what way and to what extent was President Eisenhower one of the "usual crew of apologists for totalitarian terror?" J.A. Donald seems particularly taken with the originality and accuracy of the phrase "shit for beans" to reflect certain states of philosophical and historical knowledge for he repeated it in his next message Message-Id: <199602040611.WAA18584(a)blob.best.net> on Feb. 3, 22:09 where he wrote: "SCHOLARLY RESEARCH!!!! "You do not know shit from beans: Alperovitz is no more a scholar than Zundel is: He is a historical revisionist who lies even more crudely than the holocaust revisionists. "It is clear that in the opinion of the high command, the decision to surrender after they were nuked was a dramatic and radical change of position. Alperovitz says otherwise, thus he is either grotesquely ignorant or, more likely simply dishonest." In what way was General MacArthur an "historical revisionist" and in what way did he "lie even more crudely than the holocaust revisionists?" In what way was he "grotesquely ignorant or, more likely simply dishonest?" In what way of Chief of Staff Leahy? or President Eisenhower? One does not normally find J.A. Donald's phrases in civilized or cultured discourse over political and historical issues. His language is that of the demagogue, not the scientist. But he is entitled to use the language he wishes, just as other people have a similar right to examine his behavior and motivation in terms of identical language. We know, for example, that the pickpocket when caught may point to an innocent person and loudly cry "stop thief" in an effort to mislead the public by denouncing an innocent person for the very behavior for which the pickpocket is guilty. J.A. Donald voluntarily choose to present the dispute in terms of people who "don't know shit for beans," who are "apologists for totalitarian terror," who are "historical revisionists," who are "grotesquely ignorant or, more likely simply dishonest." Given the respective lineup of sources, what information and analysis would J.A. Donald present to us to lead us to conclude that his characterizations accurately reflect General MacArthur, Chief of Staff Leahy, and General Eisenhower rather than, like the pickpocket, J.A. Donald himself? T.C. May, while arguing essentially the same historic view as J.A. Donald (or rather vice versa) approaches the issue in a fundamentally different manner. T.C. May uses logic where J.A. Donald uses demagogic rhetoric. (I do not here refer to T.C. May's characterization of other racial/ethnic/national groups about which others on the list have posted.) When I read the first post by T.C. May on the mass nuclear bombings of civilians I thought his post was: a) off-topic for the cypherpunks list and; b) wrong. At that time I dismissed the idea of a public reply, thinking that he may have had a bad day, misunderstood the issue, or any of a thousand other reasons that have led me and indeed all of us to behave in a similar fashion at one time or another. But he re-posted on the thread in Message-Id: <ad392186040210048141(a)[205.199.118.202]> on Feb 3, 15:54 where he wrote: "(I've also received several long articles from people who seemed outraged that I was belittling the dropping of the bomb. I wasn't belittling it. Far from it. The Japs surrendered after the second bomb, so it was obviously not a trivial matter to them.)" I think his logic is at fault here in several ways. First, I think his logic is invalid because it is a "non sequitur." That is the statement that the Japanese did not take the bombing as trivial is true but not related to the argument. "2 + 2 = 4" is similarly true but unrelated; and I know of no group of people who, whatever their politics, consider mass nuclear bombings of civilians to be a "trivial matter." Second, I think his logic is invalid because it commits the "post hoc ergo propter hoc" fallacy that goes, in essence "after this, therefore because of this." "The Japanese surrender came after the bomb, therefore it came because of the bomb" is the invalid argument. One could, to use a "reductio ad absurdum" counter argument, saying with equal (in)validity that John Smith ate a bowl of beans, took a shit, and the next day the Japanese surrendered, therefore the surrender occurred because of the beans and the shit." Indeed the Japanese surrendered, but the evidence by three top (THE three top?) Allied commanders show that the surrender was not produced by either bombs, shit, or beans.

1 0

Re: Sometines ya just gotta nuke em-and nuke em again
by Jordan Hayes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From tallpaul(a)pipeline.com Sun Feb 4 11:47:09 1996 When I read the first post by T.C. May on the mass nuclear bombings of civilians I thought his post was: a) off-topic for the cypherpunks list and; b) wrong. By the way, the certainly *is* a crypto-relevance to this thread, since much of what we knew at the time about the Japanese high command and their motivations and actions was learned through MAGIC intercepts. It also has quite a lot to do with how these intercepts (and related documents) were released over time; the intentionality of what was released, when, and how shows a good deal about how this subject was managed by our government. Since I practically started it (by calling into question Tim's recitation of the story invented about the 500,000 Americans "saved" by dropping the bomb), I'd like to call on those who are interested in it to do some more searching, reading, analyzing and talking. But not here. Thanks, /jordan

1 0

Re: Futplex makes the news!
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Duncan Frissell <frissell(a)panix.com> wrote in "Re: Futplex makes the news!": [..] "Then there was the time that my RA (Resident Assistant) in my dorm in a small (private) liberal arts college in the Northwest found out I had a gun in my room..." Ah. The only semester I lived on campus, the RA was our roommate, who just finished doing a round of bong hits with us, then walked around the hall and busted everyone else who was smoking dope. It's sad when a noneteen year old kid tries to act like your mother or father.

1 0

Concerning Jim Bell
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- It has been brought to my attention that I did not make this as clear as it should be. I consider Mr. Bell to be a crank and a loon. He has no interest in any sort of honest discussion. He wishes to draw in others in the hope of "punishing me". - From now on, I am ignoring all of his posts and "killfiling" him. You may now go back to your scheduled and unscheduled lives. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMRUhaeQCP3v30CeZAQGCpAf9FvV2sIHX9q5qajkgXWJsG7EG1JgMOvdH XeRhc0qCrFJPcYfDBFvP6+Ck1dnsYNVzY+wDhMRDpHqky0KegRNENOFiU6NBhy+U mbSCxlFU4FTa+xwRAm7BF8a0G1HGXkFzUOP6O7zf/WONE3+3EZr+aPlr0cm5maja Xz5bRzi1SKlDQsxNK/msvYKXYyU5CLX2lVCGf7/qro2QezLNMz5skf9GJ9Tq7S5P 1gOiVjzNzYnmJj+76Uz+72zlvOHjIYrxf5FxsDsqqda2dBRyX9vmPmpWUMLBcoPi kgZ4GtHryVgjKy5dkxk3U24hJIRYZiLwWl8gDiFuJDnC0PZwR3w7aQ== =Lfox -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Alan Olsen -- alano(a)teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction `finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ Is the operating system half NT or half full?

2 1

Re: free speech and the government
by Stephan Mohr 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 16:02 03.02.1996 -0800, you wrote: >Stephan Mohr writes: >> >> Well, I feel that I agree with the people on the right of free speech for >> i.e. the neo-nazi stuff or other political, ideological and/or religious >> ideas. But there is still something that leaves me uneasy: imagine there >> would be a way to easily make a powerful poison, easily applicated to >> your town's water-reservoir, or a very easy way to build some strong >> explosive device. etc. Actually, I think that stuff like this does exist >> already. >> >> But the idea that one day I just put 'easy made deadly poison for millions' >> into my webcrawler and whoop there it is on my screen or on the screen of any >> other fool, doesn't sound to right to me. I would like things like this >> to be better put aside and locked up. > >You can't put the genie back into the bottle. >Once something is invented or described, the knowledge >is out there. Someone who wants to use that knowledge >for "wrong" purposes can find it. > >Maybe a lot of people around the world could agree that >the knowledge to make something really dangerous (say Sarin nerve gas) >should be suppressed. But where do we draw the line? If >we, or rather our government acting obstensibly in our interest, decides >to supress the information on how to make Sarin, not too many people >will complain. But the tendency of governments is to regulate and >restrict and tax more. What happens when governments suppress >knowledge on how to make gunpowder? Or printing presses? Or >encryption? > Actually, I am glad that the whole story started over some neo-nazi stuff and not a recipe to easily make a very potent poison. I wonder if there would have been as many 'poison-sites' as there are zundel-sites. And what 'poison-site'-maintainers would think after some fool would have used the poison to kill a bunch of kindergarten-kids by putting it into their food. And how some governments would react and what type of restriction on the net would not only be accepted, but even demanded by the people. Yeah, I know, the guy could have gotten the idea elsewhere as well, but you know how people think and how governments like to link unrelated stuff to gain power. And it is nice to see how much publicity you can give to something by prohibiting it. >Many people argue (rightly IHMO) that once started on the slippery slope >of suppressing knowledge there's no stopping until we're all >under the boot heel of the police state. > >[..] I think that you are right in saying that you can't put the genie back into the bottle. But I think it makes a big difference if you make it widely available to everyone and maybe even to people who do not want to have it. It would be nice to have some type of obstacle in the way to this type of information. It is like putting drugs, alcohol and other dangerous stuff out of the reach of children. Or putting a fence at some dangerous cliff to prevent people from falling over. The dangerous stuff will still be there and you just can't flatten every hill. But there is a responsibility that comes with information as well as with any other thing. So I do not want to outlaw some type of information, I agree that this is not feasible (I hope) nor desirable. But I think that there should be some possibility of control on a public medium. Not to control the content but to control the access. The idea is to give control to those in need of control without interfering with the free exchange of information of others. This could be done, for example, by giving them a choice of providers or browser software (jewish, catholic, anarchist, terrorist, gay, straight ... flavoured provider/browser). So you can say whatever you want, but everyone can decide whether he or she wants to listen to you or not (in a more sophisticated way, of course). And it is not just 'don't click on my page than'. Here encryption may play an important role: not only to protect your privacy, but also to protect others from having to read your stuff. Most or the governments will not accept the idea of free speech like this. And I am afraid, but I guess they could still tear down the whole net if they want to. So, wouldn't it be better that, if there should be some type of control technology, that it is conceived by the netizen and not by, say the german, chinese, or french government. Stephan

1 0

Re: Imminent Death of Usenet Predicted
by Alan Pugh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>What if looking at a JPEG were like buying beer? The default is >that a 12 year old isn't going to fool the guy at 7-11, but if >their parents buy a beer and give it to 'em, what the heck? >Consuming alcohol is not regulated; *purchasing* it is. > >Don't forget: the fact that "porno on the net" (for instance) is >an issue *at all* is a *failure* of technology. It would be a >non-issue if USENET wasn't essentially a technology vacuum. indeed. and Who is doing the most to make sure that the technology necessary (strong widespread crypto) to make porno on the net a non-issue? if the governments of the world weren't such a bunch of collective paranoid pricks, i believe we'd be in the process of implementing global encryption on the internet and private networks as well. the public needs to be informed that thus 'failure of technology' is completely unnecessary. one of the things that _really_ pisses me off is that the very same people who are restricting the access of crypto technology are the ones who are screaming that they need to restrict other fundamental freedoms because of the their own stupid policies. writing this, it is obvious that their policy is entirely reasonable and in fact necessary if it is your fundamental goal to restrict freedom. i believe this to be the case when considering governments in general, and the u.s. govt. in particular. amp

1 0

enquiry
by Sean Gabb 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Is anyone out there able to give me the e-mail address of Smith Micro Software, Inc 51 Columbia Aliso Veijo California 92656 I need to ask about some software written by them. Any help would leave me very grateful. Sean Gabb.

1 0