December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Crescendo News - Version 3.0 now available
by LiveUpdate News 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

You're receiving this email because you downloaded Crescendo in the past, and we want to keep you posted on the latest developments here at LiveUpdate. We hope you are enjoying Crescendo! In case you haven't already heard, Crescendo version 3.0 has been released. This new version includes cool new features like auto-detach, playlist support, encryption, Java and JavaScript programmability and more. Download a copy today from http://www.liveupdate.com/dl.html. As an added bonus at this time of release, and to ensure an enjoyable listening experience, we can now offer you, for a limited time, the Roland Virtual Sound Canvas Music Pack (VSC-550W). This is Roland's software wavetable Sound Canvas and includes a complete set of software tools that will help you create and edit MIDI files for many uses. Included in the VSC-550W Music Pack: * The Roland GS software synthesizer, * Cakewalk Express music sequencing software and * DoReMiX unique music creation software all on one CD-ROM. The Roland Virtual Sound Canvas Music Pack sells regularly for $57. Add Crescendo PLUS for Netscape and Internet Explorer, and the entire package is worth almost $100. By special arrangement with Edirol Corporation (distributors of the Roland Sound Canvas in North America), when you purchase the Crescendo Plus Roland Edition today, you will receive all the above software listed for a special value price of only $65 (including Shipping & Handling!) Note: This offer is only available to addresses in North America. Simply go to http://www.liveupdate.com/soundcanvas.html and we'll send it right out to you! If you wish to be removed from this list, please send a message to newsletter(a)liveupdate.com. Warmest holiday wishes, Your friends at LiveUpdate

1 0

Re: message dependent hashcash => no double
by mark＠unicorn.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Steve Schear (schear(a)lvdi.net) wrote: >We all know we must affix postage to our snailmail. >Its time to embrace the postal system's paradigm and educate the reminder >of the Net. That's an extremely bad analogy; we're not paying for the Net to carry our mail, because we've already paid our ISP for that. We're paying for remailers to process our mail or for humans to read it. A better analogy would be for snail-junkmail to include a five dollar bill to encourage people to open it rather than junk it unopened. (Of course this really only applies to real digital cash, but that's what hashcash is a substitute for.) Mark

1 0

Re: Hate speech in America
by Aryan 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Robert A. Costner" <pooh(a)efga.org> >>I am a German patriot who wants to >>publish my ideas without of fear of the German goverment. >>But my concern is >>that the U. S. ISP I use can hand over my subscriber infoation and logs to >the >>German goverment. >>Does anyone know a U. S. ISP who does not censor hate speech >>and who has a _known_ strong privacy policy? >>By the way, is hate speech >>protected in United States? > >Hate speech is constitutionally protected in the US. That doesn't mean you >can do it from any particular ISP or in someone's living room. You seem to >have found protected email, you should therefore know who to post to >usenet. There are dozens of places you can get free web sites from, though >I don't know about their hate speech policies. I know Geocities, Tripod, Angelfire and few others who provide free web hosting. All these ISPs have policies prohibiting political and sexually explicitly speech on the ground of its content. That's obviously not a First Amendment issue involved. >I'd be curious to know of Geocities, Tripod, et all - where they have >kicked people off or not for hate speech. Yes. They have done so. Geocities is very censorious even regarding politically correct speech such as gay advoccy and Tripod has kickeda homosexual site of for violation of a clause in the agreement concerning "adult" content. I am searching for a commercial ISP who will not censor political speech and who will respect one's privacy. I am not a nazi sympathizer, but I don't believe in the holocaust and want to say it loud. In Germany and in other countries where the Jews have succeeded in creating "hate laws" you can get four years in jail for refusing to believe in the holocaust. I would like to set up a homepage with some "illegal" [within Germany only] content that would not be shut down by the German goverment. I am working on a book exposing the holocaust story that would *surely* be banned in my own "democratic" country. The unfortunate not-so-well-known fact about Germany is that we do not have freedom of speech. I often wonder why Amnesty International did not protest the imprisonment of Gary Lauck who was denied basic due process and human rights, including freedom of speech and association, by a kangoro court. [This message is cross-posted to de.soc.zensur and de.soc.politik to upset my dictatorial goverment].

2 1

Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 19:08:31 -0700 > From: Tim May <tcmay(a)got.net> > Subject: Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment > This is part of why the First Amendment is being eroded constantly. It is > seen as a _political_ issue. > > Suppose RealBig Corporation fired Umbehr for his views. Would a First > Amendment issue have arisen? But Tim, governmental systems are *not* businesses, and should not simply as a matter of course be operated as such either. There is more involved than a simple bottem line. Perhaps you should talk to Horatio... ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

CNET Dispatch: gadgets; stop spam; IE 4.0 feedback (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 17:50:32 -0800 > From: CNET Digital Dispatch <dispatch(a)CNET.com> > Subject: CNET Dispatch: gadgets; stop spam; IE 4.0 feedback > To: DISPATCH(a)DISPATCH.CNET.COM > > CNET Digital Dispatch: gadgets; stop spam; IE 4.0 feedback > December 18, 1997 > > ******************************************* > Good things come in the mail...like cool portable computers, > mega speaker systems, and little digital cameras. Want more? > See our lead story this week, the "Geek's guide to gadgets" > (item 1). > > Unfortunately, bad things can come in the mail, too, such as > pointless junk mail and chain letters. Fortunately, you can > take control. This week's feature on stopping spam (item 2) > has our top tips. > > Rafe Needleman > Editor, CNET.COM > rafe_needleman(a)cnet.com ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Oh Boy! I just read Sheiner's Applied Cryptography, and I am ready to *do some code*!!! > > I would like to participate in the Coderpunks list. Can someone send me > information about the list. I am particularly interested in the current > discussion on Crypto Kong. > > Thanks, > -- > Matthew Cromer > > matthew_cromer(a)iname.com > > --

1 0

Can't Find Your Web Site
by up＠uplinkpro.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Can't find your web site? Uplink will post your site to 50 search engines for $89. We guarantee your satisfaction, or you pay nothing! Millions of people every day use search engines to find web sites. Uplink makes your site easier to find by posting it to the top 50 search engines. Here's how it works: 1. Fill out the form below, and return it to us. 2. We'll post your site to the top 50 search engines within two business days and send you a full promotion report. 3. Pay nothing now. We'll send you a bill for $89 with the promotion report. If you're not completely happy, simply write "cancel" on the bill, and you'll owe nothing. THE SEARCH ENGINES Here's the list of top search engines to which we'll post your site: Alta Vista, Excite, Galaxy, HotBot, Infoseek, Lycos, Magellan, Open Text Web Index, Web Crawler, BizWeb, New Riders WWW Yellow Pages, LinkMonster, True North, Northern Light, YelloWWWeb, The Weekly Bookmark, The Galactic Galaxy, TurnPike, Unlock:The Information Exchange, Your WebScout, Manufacturers Information Network, Net Happenings, Net Mall, Web World Internet Directory, WebVenture Hotlist, What's New, WhatUSeek, JumpLink, Linkcentre Directory, InfoSpace, Jayde Online Directory, BC Internet, BizCardz Business Directory, Net-Announce, New Page ListOne World Plaza, PageHost A-Z, PeekABoo, Project Cool, Scrub The Web, Seven Wonders, Sserv, Starting Point, Web 100, Web Walker, Where2Go, World Wide Business Yellow Pages, Wow! Web Wonders!, WWW Worm, JumpCity. ORDER FORM Hit the REPLY button on your e-mail program and fill out the following information. (This information will be posted to the search engines/indexes): URL: http:// Site Title: Description (250 characters): Key words (250 characters, in descending order of importance): Your name: Company Name: Address: City: State/Prov: Zip/Postal Code: Telephone: Fax: Email address: Contact e-mail address (in case we have questions about this order): If billing a different address, please complete the following: Addressee: Company Name: Address: City: State/Prov: Zip/Postal Code: Telephone: Fax: Email address: TERMS Terms are net 15 days from date of invoice. ______________________________________________________________________ Uplink, Inc. 39B Mill Plain Road Danbury, CT 06811 Phone: (203) 791-7351 Fax: (203) 790-6407 E-mail: up(a)uplinkpro.com

1 0

Is Unix dying--or even dead?
by S. M. Halloran 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From Edupage, 18 December 1997: <----------> TACTICAL SHIFT BY WORKSTATION COMPANIES Silicon Graphics Inc.'s plan to allow SGI graphics software to run on Microsoft's Windows NT operating system provides new evidence that a growing number of companies are giving up on Unix and instead standardizing on Windows NT. SGI hopes to be able to use its experience in developing high-end graphics software without having to spend a great deal of time building the underlying technology represented by an operating system. (Washington Post 17 Dec 97) <---------->

3 2

XXX ADULT!!!
by soapoa1＠mxc.meshnet.or.jp 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The LARGEST selection of Hot Beautiful XXX Live Girls from the U.S.A. & Europe!!! Voted as the 1998 best Adult Site! *LIVE GIRL SEX SHOWS!!! * 4 FREE Live Video Feeds & Chatrooms!!! *FREE Erotic Stories!! *Free Pictures of XXX Porn Stars!! *Confessions!!! *Free Pictures of Teens & Men!!! And Lots More to do for FREE!!! *REAL LIVE SEX!!! MUST SEE TO BELIEVE THIS SHOW!! Never seen before on the internet! You must be 21 or older. http://host3597.homecom.com <A HREF ="http://host3597.homecom.com">AOL Click Here!</A> If you take offense to this email & wish to be taken off our list, or would like to know how you can win free time on our sex shows or cash prizes monthly simply e-mail us at: mwa234(a)hotmail.com We are sorry for any inconvience.

1 0

Fwd: Re: Is Unix dying--or even dead?
by mj＠creative.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> >> >>>>From Edupage, 18 December 1997: >>> >>><----------> >>>TACTICAL SHIFT BY WORKSTATION COMPANIES >>>Silicon Graphics Inc.'s plan to allow SGI graphics software to run on >>>Microsoft's Windows NT operating system provides new evidence that a >>>growing number of companies are giving up on Unix and instead >>>standardizing on Windows NT. SGI hopes to be able to use its >>>experience in developing high-end graphics software without having to >>>spend a great deal of time building the underlying technology >>>represented by an operating system. (Washington Post 17 Dec 97) >>><----------> > >Fools. This will trap them into trying to compete with MS on its own >platform, which is what's killing everyone else. What they should do is >port to Linux, which should be much easier anyway, and give much better >results, since they can customize the OS to their needs. Does anyone have >any connections at SGI? I'm preparing a pro-Linux case based on my OOSI >paper that I want to promote around Silicon Valley. >> >> >

1 0

White House admits censoring Chinese dissident
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

=========== South China Morning Post December 19, 1997 Storm over block on Wei TV broadcast; White House red-faced after censorship admission By Simon Beck The Clinton administration was in the middle of a firestorm yesterday after officials admitted blocking a global broadcast of a Wei Jingsheng interview for fear of annoying China. After winning praise for receiving Mr Wei in the White House last week, President Bill Clinton's officials were embarrassed to have to admit blocking the broadcast on the state-owned global network Worldnet. Officials tried in vain to stop the government radio station, Voice of America (VOA), from broadcasting the interview, but succeeded in blocking it from Worldnet. Both broadcasting arms are run by the official US Information Agency (USIA). The revelations have not only embarrassed the White House, but cast new light on the conditions with which Beijing asked Washington to comply in return for Mr Wei's release last month. The interference came after the US Ambassador to China, James Sasser, learned of the planned VOA interview and called the US National Security Council to express his concern. Mr Sasser feared the broadcast would break promises supposed to have been made to China that the US would not make political capital out of Mr Wei's release. He also warned it could damage US efforts to win other dissidents' release. USIA director Joseph Duffey confirmed Mr Sasser's intervention, and said: "After I learned it was going to be broadcast, I delayed the Worldnet telecast and I asked VOA not to telecast it, but they did anyway. "With Wei there was an implied commitment that our purpose was not political exploitation. That's a commitment also in the negotiations, which frankly now may be in the can." White House spokesman Mike McCurry said National Security Adviser Sandy Berger warned VOA director Evelyn Lieberman. "We would not make any effort to violate what is a very important principle - the editorial independence of VOA," he said. "At the same time, it is perfectly appropriate for VOA to understand what the consequences of some of its broadcasts might be from our perspective." Human Rights Watch Asia's Washington director Mike Jendrzejczyk was shocked at the "about-face". "We can only assume from this that not offending Beijing is more important to the administration than exerting pressure on China to release more dissidents and improve its human rights record," he said.

2 1

SUCESS TICKET!!!!
by 38483580＠juno.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello! My name is Karen Liddell; I'm a 35-year-old mom, wife, and part-time accountant. As a rule, I delete all unsolicited "junk" e-mail and use my account primarily for business. I received what I assumed was this same e-mail countless times and deleted it each time. About two months ago I received it again and, because of the catchy subject line, I finally read it. Afterwards, I thought , "OK, I give in, I'm going to try this. I can certainly afford to invest $20 and, on the other hand, there's nothing wrong with creating a little excess cash." I promptly mailed four $5 bills and, after receiving the reports, paid a friend of mine a small fee to send out some e-mail advertisements for me. After reading the reports, I also learned how easy it is to bulk e-mail for free! I was not prepared for the results. Every day for the last six weeks, my P.O. box has been overflowing with $5 bills; many days the excess fills up an extra mail bin and I've had to upgrade to the corporate-size box! I am stunned by all the money that keeps rolling in! My husband and I have been saving for several years to make a substantial downpayment on a house. Now, not only are we purchasing a house with 40% down, we're going to Venice, Italy to celebrate! I promise you, if you follow the directions in this e-mail and be prepared to eventually set aside about an hour each day to follow up (and count your money!), you will make at least as much money as we did. If you can open an envelope, remove the money, and send an e-mail message, then you're on your way to the bank. Take the time to read this so you'll understand how easy it is. If I can do this, so can you! ===================================================== ===================================================== *** Print This Now For Future Reference *** The following income opportunity is one you may be interested in taking a look at. It can be started with VERY LITTLE investmentand the income return is TREMENDOUS!!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ You are about to make at least $50,000 in less than 90 days! Please read the enclosed program...THEN READ IT AGAIN!!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ THIS IS A LEGITIMATE, LEGAL, MONEY MAKING OPPORTUNITY. It does not require you to come into contact with people, do any hard work, and best of all, you never have to leave the house except to get the mail. If you believe that someday you'll get that big break that you've been waiting for, THIS IS IT! Simply follow the instructions, and your dream will come true. This multi-level e-mail order marketing program works perfectly...100% EVERY TIME. E-mail is the sales tool of the future. Take advantage of this non-commercialized method of advertising NOW!!! The longer you wait, the more people will be doing business using e-mail. Get your piece of this action!!! MULTI-LEVEL MARKETING (MLM) has finally gained respectability. It is being taught in the Harvard Business School, and both Stanford Research and the Wall Street Journal have stated that between 50% and 65% of all goods and services will be sold through multi-level methods by the mid to late 1990's. This is a Multi-Billion Dollar industry and of the 500,000 millionaires in the U.S., 20% (100,000) made their fortune in the last several years in MLM. Moreover, statistics show 45 people become millionaires everyday through Multi-Level Marketing. The enclosed information is something I almost let slip through my fingers. Fortunately, sometime later I re-read everything and gave some thought and study to it. My name is Christopher Erickson. Two years ago, the corporation I worked at for the past twelve years down-sized and my position was eliminated. After unproductive job interviews, I decided to open my own business. Over the past year, I incured many unforeseen financial problems. I owed my family, friends and creditors over $35,000. The economy was taking a toll on my business and I just couldn't seem to make ends meet. I had to refinance and borrow against my home to support my family and struggling business. AT THAT MOMENT something significant happend in my life and I am writing to share the experience in hopes that this will change your life FOREVER FINANCIALLY!!! In mid December, I received this program via e-mail. Six month's prior to receiving this program I had been sending away for information on various business opportunities. All of the programs I received, in my opinion, were not cost effective. They were either too difficult for me to comprehend or the initial investment was too much for me to risk to see if they would work or not. One claimed that I would make a million dollars in one year...it didn't tell me I'd have to write a book to make it! But like I was saying, in December of 1995 I received this program. I didn't send for it, or ask for it, they just got my name off a mailing list. THANK GOODNESS FOR THAT!!! After reading it several times, to make sure I was reading it correctly, I couldn't believe my eyes. Here was a MONEY MAKING PHENOMENON. I could invest as much as I wanted to start, without putting me further into debt. After I got a pencil and paper and figured it out, I would at least get my money back. After determining the program was LEGAL and NOT A CHAIN LETTER, I decided "WHY NOT." Initially I sent out 10,000 e-mails. It cost me about $15.00 for my time on-line. The great thing about e-mail is that I don't need any money for printing to send out the program, only the cost to fulfill my orders. I am telling you like it is, I hope it doesn't turn you off, but I promised myself that I would not "rip-off" anyone, no matter how much money it cost me! In less than one week, I was starting to receive orders for REPORT #1. By January 13, I had received 26 orders for REPORT #1. When you read the GUARANTEE in the program, you will see that "YOU MUST RECEIVE 15-20 ORDERS FOR REPORT #1 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. IF YOU DON'T, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO!" My first step in making $50,000 in 20-90 days was done. By January 30, I had received 196 orders for REPORT #2. If you go back to the GUARANTEE, "YOU MUST RECEIVE 100+ ORDERS FOR REPORT #2 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. IF NOT, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO. ONCE YOU HAVE 100 ORDERS, THE REST IS EASY, RELAX, YOU WILL MAKE YOUR $50,000 GOAL" Well, I had 196 orders for REPORT #2, 96 more than I needed. So I sat back and relaxed. By March 19, of my e-mailing of 10,000, I received $58,000 with more coming in every day. I paid off ALL my debts and bought a much needed new car. Please take time to read the attatched program, IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER!!! Remember, it won't work if you don't try it. This program does work, but you must follow it EXACTLY! Especially the rules of not trying to place your name in a different place. It won't work, you'll lose out on a lot of money! REPORT #2 explains this. Always follow the guarantee, 15-20 orders for REPORT #1, and 100+ orders for REPORT #2 and you will make $50,000 or more in 20-90 days. I AM LIVING PROOF THAT IT WORKS!!! If you choose not to participate in this program, I am sorry. It really is a great opportunity with little cost or risk to you. If you choose to participate, follow the program and you will be on your way to financial security. If you are a fellow business owner and are if financial trouble like I was, or you want to start your own business, consider this a sign. I DID! Sincerely, Christopher Erickson P.S. Do you have any idea what 11,700 $5 bills ($58,000) look like piled up on a kitchen table? IT'S AWESOME! A PERSONAL NOTE FROM THE ORGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM: By the time you have read the enclosed program and reports, you should have concluded that such a program, and one that is legal, could not have been created by an amateur. Let me tell you a little about myself. I had a profitable business for 10 years. Then in 1979 my business began falling off. I was doing the same things that were previously successfull for me, but it wasn't working. Finally, I figured it out. It wasn't me, it was the economy. Inflation and recession had replaced the stable economy that had been with us since 1945. I don't have to tell you what happend to the unemployment rate... because many of you know from first hand experience. There were more failures and bankruptcies than ever before. The middle class was vanishing. Those who knew what they were doing invested wisely and moved up. Those who did not, including those who never had anything to save or invest, were moving down into the ranks of the poor. As the saying goes, "THE RICH GET RICHER AND THE POOR GET POORER." The traditional methods of making money will never allow you to "move up" or "get rich", inflation will see to that. You have just received information that can give you financial freedom for the rest of your life, with "NO RISK" and "JUST A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT." You can make more money in the next few months than you have ever imagined. I should also point out that I will not see a penny of this money, nor anyone else who has provided a testimonial for this program. I have already made over 4 MILLION DOLLARS! I have retired from the program after sending out over 16,000 programs. Now I have several offices that make this and several other programs here and over seas. By the spring we wish to market the "internet" by a partnership with AMERICA ON LINE. Follow the program EXACTLY AS INSTRUCTED. Do not change it in any way. It works exceedingly well as it is now. Remember to e-mail a copy of this exciting report to everyone you can think of. One of the people you send this to may send out 50,000...and your name will be on everyone of them! Remember though, the more you send out the more potential customers you will reach. So my friend, I have given you the ideas, information, materials and opportunity to become financially independent, IT IS UP TO YOU NOW! "THINK ABOUT IT" Before you delete this program from your mailbox, as I almost did, take a little time to read it and REALLY THINK ABOUT IT. Get a pencil and figure out what could happen when YOU participate. Figure out the worst possible response and no matter how you calculate it, you will still make a lot of money! You will definitely get back what you invested. Any doubts you have will vanish when your first orders come in. IT WORKS! Paul Johnson, Raleigh, NC HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PROGRAM WILL MAKE YOU $$$$$ Let's say that you decide to start small, just to see how it goes, and we'll assume you and all those involved send out only 2,000 programs each. Let's also assume that the mailing receives a 0.5% response. Using a good list the response could be much better. Also many people will send out hundreds of thousands of programs instead of 2,000. But continuing with this example, you send out only 2,000 programs. With a 0.5% response, that is only 10 orders for REPORT #1. Those 10 people respond by sending out 2,000 programs each for a total of 20,000. Out of those 0.5%, 100 people respond and order REPORT #2. Those 100 mail out 2,000 programs each for a total of 200,000. The 0.5% response to that is 1,000 orders for REPORT #3. Those 1,000 send out 2,000 programs each for a 2,000,000 total. The 0.5% response to that is 10,000 orders for REPORT #4. That's 10,000 $5 bills for you. CASH!!! Your total income in this example is $50 + $500 + $5,000 + $50,000 for a total of $55,550!!! REMEMBER FRIEND, THIS IS ASSUMING 1,990 OUT OF THE 2,000 PEOPLE YOU MAIL TO WILL DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AND TRASH THIS PROGRAM! DARE TO THINK FOR A MOMENT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF EVERYONE, OR HALF SENT OUT 100,000 PROGRAMS INSTEAD OF 2,000. Believe me, many people will do just that, and more! By the way, your cost to participate in this is practically nothing. You obviously already have an internet connection and e-mail is FREE!!! REPORT #3 will show you the best methods for bulk e-mailing and obtaining e-mail lists. INSTRUCTIONS: We at Erris Mail Order Marketing Businesses, have a method of raising capital that REALLY WORKS 100% EVERYTIME. I am sure that you could use $50,000 to $125,000 in the next 20-90 days. Before you say "BULL... ", please read this program carefully. This is not a chain letter, but a perfectly legal money making opportunity. Basically, this is what you do: As with all multi-level business, we build our business by recruiting new partners and selling our products. Every state in the USA allows you to recruit new multi-level business partners, and we offer a product for EVERY dollar sent. YOUR ORDERS COME AND ARE FILLED THROUGH THE MAIL, so you are not involved in personal selling. You do it privately in your own home, store or office. This is the GREATEST Multi-Level Mail Order Marketing anywhere: Step (1) Order all four (4) REPORTS listed by NAME AND NUMBER. Do this by ordering the REPORT from each of the four (4) names listed on the next page. For each REPORT, send $5 CASH and a SELF-ADDRESSED STAMPED envelope (BUSINESS SIZE #10) to the person listed for the SPECIFIC REPORT. International orders should also include $1 extra for postage. It is essential that you specify the NAME and NUMBER of the REPORT requested to the person you are ordering it from. You will need ALL FOUR (4) REPORTS because you will be REPRINTING and RESELLING them. DO NOT alter the names or sequence other than what the instructions say. IMPORTANT: Always provide same-day service on all orders. Step (2) Replace the name and address under REPORT #1 with your's, moving the one that was there down to REPORT #2. Drop the name and address under REPORT #2 TO REPORT #3, moving the one that was there to REPORT #4. The name and the address that was under REPORT #4 is dropped from the list and this party is no doubt on the way to the bank. When doing this, make certain you type the names and addresses ACCURATELY!!! DO NOT MIX UP MOVING PRODUCT/REPORT POSITIONS!!! Step (3) Having made the requested changes in the NAME list, save it as text (.txt) file in it's own directory to be used with whatever e-mail program you like. Again, REPORT #3 will tell you the best methods of bulk e-mailing and acquiring e-mail lists. Step (4) E-mail a copy of the entire program (all of this is very important) to everyone whose address you can get your hands on. Start with friends and relatives since you can encourage them to take advantage of this fabulous money-making opportunity. That's what I did. And they love me now, more than ever. Then, e-mail to anyone and everyone! Use your imagination! You can get e-mail addresses from companies on the internet who specialize in e-mail mailing lists. These are very cheap, 100,000 addresses for around $35. IMPORTANT: You won't get a good response if you use an old list, so always request a FRESH, NEW list. You will find out where to purchase these lists when you order the four (4) REPORTS. ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON ALL ORDERS!!! REQUIRED REPORTS: ***Order each REPORT by NUMBER and NAME*** ALWAYS SEND A SELF-ADDRESSED, STAMPED ENVELOPE AND $5 CASH FOR EACH ORDER REQUESTING THE SPECIFIC REPORT BY NAME AND NUMBER. ____________________________________________________ REPORT #1 "HOW TO MAKE $250,000 THROUGH MULTI-LEVEL SALES" ORDER REPORT #1 FROM: CONSUMER MARKETING 10223-B Univ. City Blvd. #197 Charlotte, NC 28213 ____________________________________________________ REPORT #2 "MAJOR CORPORATIONS AND MULTI-LEVEL SALES" ORDER REPORT #2 FROM: Kathy Smith 5312 S. E. 30 Ave. Ocala, FL 34480-7524 ____________________________________________________ REPORT #3 "SOURCES FOR THE BEST MAILING LISTS" ORDER REPORT #3 FROM: Liberty Publishing Inc. 2107 W. Commonwealth Ave. Dept. 264 Alhambra, Ca 91803 ____________________________________________________ REPORT #4 "EVALUATING MULTI-LEVEL SALES PLANS" ORDER REPORT #4 FROM: SOM CO.. 2168 S. Atlantic Blvd #101 Monterey Park, CA 91754 ____________________________________________________ CONCLUSION: I am enjoying my fortune that I made by sending out this program. You too, will be making money in 20-90 days, if you follow the SIMPLE STEPS outlined in this mailing. To be financially independent is to be FREE. Free to make financial decisions as never before. Go into business, get into investments, retire or take a vacation. No longer will a lack of money hold you back. However, very few people reach financial independence, because when opportunity knocks, they choose to ignore it. It is much easier to say "NO" than "YES", and this the question that you must answer. Will YOU ignore this amazing opportunity or will you take advantage of it? If you do nothing, you have indeed missed something and nothing will change. Please re-read this material, this is a special opportunity. If you have any questions, please feel free to write to the sender of this information. You will get a prompt and informative reply. My method is simple. I sell thousands of people a product for $5 that cost me pennies to produce and e-mail. I should also point out that this program is LEGAL and everyone who participates WILL make money. This is not a chain letter or a pyramid scam. At times you probably received chain letters, asking you to send money, on faith, but getting NOTHING in return, NO product what-so-ever! Not only are chain lettters illegal, but the risk of someone breaking the chain makes them quite unattractive. You are offering a legitimate product to your people. After they purchase the product from you, they reproduce more and resell them. It's simple free enterprise. As you learned from the enclosed material, the PRODUCT is a series of four (4) FINANCIAL AND BUSINESS REPORTS. The information contained in these REPORTS will not only help you in making your participation in this program more rewarding, but will be useful to you in any other business decisions you make in the years ahead. You are also buying the rights to reprint all of the REPORTS, which will be ordered from you by those to whom you mail this program. The concise one and two page REPORTS you will be buying can easily be reproduced at a local copy center for a cost of about 3 cents a copy. Best wishes with the program and Good Luck!

1 0

Re: White House admits censoring Chinese dissident
by Jim Ray 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 08:42 AM 12/19/97 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: >=========== > > South China Morning Post > > December 19, 1997 > >Storm over block on Wei TV broadcast; White House red-faced after >censorship admission > >By Simon Beck > > > The Clinton administration was in the middle of a firestorm yesterday >after officials admitted blocking a global broadcast of a Wei Jingsheng >interview for fear of annoying China. > > After winning praise for receiving Mr Wei in the White House last week, >President Bill Clinton's officials were embarrassed to have to admit >blocking the broadcast on the state-owned global network Worldnet. > > Officials tried in vain to stop the government radio station, Voice of >America (VOA), from broadcasting the interview, but succeeded in blocking >it from Worldnet. > > Both broadcasting arms are run by the official US Information Agency >(USIA). ...And people still wonder why us "social Darwinists" oppose state ownership of "news" media. <sigh> I wonder if I should say "'your taxes' _or_ 'their contributions' at work." JMR -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Freedom isn't Freeh. iQEPAwUBNJqXdTUhsGSn1j2pAQHeEQfQ4oMBYBxh5Ad5X8ICkDXj/llDBDts4ybD yHlO8bMQ2TMOY3qQ6UizQX0dMntVzoHZUGJ92Lo4bfrtcCwrpHsE7wqGozpTziqj 2BZH+N5pBiyMu8mdn2PayOLuYB5xdOPuasENgBGTk07nGrDivClbPE/YQpFBQ4BJ 9GzxzVC8xSzAwnd8rV59iqbaqpLnf5iaYxhEJzAwnI7JbkOwpTTAF4XtKi1SXfm2 otBQJCzwR49vqyFEfrvCPC3STRmqJfCpyiNn/jDrJKY30/yAd0OuiX7/4cBkcPbd N4d+QqjDUJhEHXHICOTkCjjkNDl9zOS9LcvYSu7ySYMQcw== =7hi3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Timmy C. May will fuck anything that moves, but he'd rather be fucking his own mother's dead body. /''' c-OO Timmy C. May \ -

2 1

free gifts
by joton＠indo-mail.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi We are computer shops that have branch in several countries.We have branch in San Diego, Washington and Alabama. Our Head office is in Taiwan. We will go wide in 1998. Now we also have branch in Europe, and one of our shop just opened in Poland. We sell computer accessories and cd's. Since this is our first time in the net, then we want to offer you very cheap computer accessories. We are working with 11 eleventh service to randomly select you. You can purchase our product or just get free catalog and souvenir from our shop. Now we will offer you computer accessories with very low prices. And our souvenir is worth more than $ 50. Because this is only for trial before we go wide in January 1998, then we sell very cheap computer accessories. It cost you almost nothing. And if you check our Home page, then you will automatically be the participant of our big computer contest. You can get Pentium II computer for free or cash $ 1000. And we give it freely for 25 people around the world. Since we picked you randomly, then you automatically get our 10 % discount and you will be our participant big contest if you go and check out Home page. Just get your souvenir and catalog for free (it costs you nothing, we deliver it for free at your door) Visit us in : http://www.bitsmart.com/joton_compushop Go to our Home page, then you get free souvenir and catalog. !!! Don't miss this chance..!! ---------------------------------------- Joton Compu Shop 1997 ----------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Hate speech and censorship
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I can warmly recommend Cyberpass. Cyberpass does not censor political speech. They provide anonymous accounts to a considerable low price. The connection is telnet with a UNIX shell and SSH support. Cyberpass is a division of Infonex InterNet Services. They have a policy "Go and get a court order" which is very unusual. They already host the OSTARA domain www.ostara.org containing stupid nazi propaganda. Others I could mention are Concentric Network Corporation and Panix - Public Network Corporation and Webcom. http://www.cyberpass.net http://www.cris.com http://www.concentric.net http://www.webcom.com. I am sure there are others who do not censor. But these are those I trust most. Most ISPs are more concerned about pornography than hate speech.

8 15

No Subject
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Much as I agree in principle with counteracting mindless > prejudice such as that directed against Jews, and despite > the fact that I grew up among Jews and studied with my > best friend in grade school when he took his religious > lessons, the ADL has zero credibility with me for a very > good reason: This reason has zero credibility. If you want to add something to the public record, then use your real name, you ninny! Nobody will pay attention to (much less belive) an anonymous message - no credibility! ( Why do you think the Nym list was formed? So they wouldn't have to put up with anonymous traffic, that's why. A new one-of-a-kind web site has been put up that lets you see if you are one of the elite sheeple who are TIME- and LIFE-approved for partaking in public discourse: http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/spoofcentral/muted/ )

1 0

Fwd: Dec. 16 column -- Bill of Rights
by Brian B. Riley 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------------- Begin Forwarded Message ---------------- Date: 12/18 8:38 AM Received: 12/18 11:04 PM From: Vin Suprynowicz)(by way of Hardy Macia, Vin_Suprynowicz(a)lvrj.com Reply-To: Vermont Libertarian, vtlp-list(a)catamount.com To: Multiple recipients of vtlp-list, vtlp-list(a)catamount.com This article comes from Vin Suprynowicz's mailing list. Should we have a celebrat Bill of Rights Day? -- Hardy _______________________ FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED DEC. 16, 1997 THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz Our second national holiday Americans make a big hubbub over the Fourth of July. True, the victory of 1781 was an amazing triumph, and the vision of those gathered in Philadelphia five years before -- that men may rightfully form or disband governments at will, for the higher purpose of protecting our God-given individual rights -- is still worth celebrating. But that confederation of free men ended on June 21, 1788, when New Hampshire became the ninth state to ratify the new United States Constitution, making it the law of the land. At that point, the organization of free peoples created by the Declaration of Independence -- the one we still celebrate each July -- passed away. Our government school teachers tell us this was necessary because the Articles of Confederation "weren't working out." But they are woefully light on specifics. Push them, and most will mutter uncertainly some trivia about seaboard states charging tariffs on goods transshipped to landlocked states. Point out that the first landlocked states -- Vermont and Kentucky -- weren't admitted until 1791 and 1792, and they will usually fall into a puzzled, grumbling silence. Anyway, there it is: The people fell for the siren song of "federalism," accepting solemn promises that the powers of the new central government would be sharply limited to those expressly spelled out -- funding a Navy, granting patents and copyrights, coining metal money. Not much more. Fast forward 210 years. As a recipe for limited government, this Constitution now matches the creature it's supposed to describe about as well as a Chihuahua's carry-on "Pet Kennel" would fit a drooling Irish wolfhound. The prima facie proof of this failure now stares at us from every acre of the former marshland north of the Potomac, a granite necropolis and memorial park to our deceased freedoms at least a hundred times larger in manpower and frenzied ambition to control our lives than Mr. Jefferson could ever have imagined (though one suspects Mr. Hamilton would have smiled.) In the face of this unchained monster, our thin remaining hope against outright tyranny lies in the fact that Rhode Island and North Carolina (bless them) outright refused to ratify that Constitution until a Bill of Rights was added -- while Massachusetts, Maryland, South Carolina, New Hampshire, Virginia And New York all ratified only on the condition that some such set of amendments be quickly appended, as was solemnly promised. And so, on the day we should probably celebrate as our SECOND great national holiday, on Dec. 15, 1791, Virginia became the 11th state to ratify the first 10 proposed amendments -- Mr. Madison's "Bill of Rights" -- though a better name might be the "Bill of Prohibitions" on government conduct. This Dec. 15, as usual, that anniversary passed with the kind of afterthought mention on the daily news and propaganda broadcasts usually reserved for "On this day 70 years ago, Commander Perry reached the North Pole" -- about as much attention as was paid, two days later, to the 224th anniversary of the great event of Dec. 17, 1773 ("The most magnificent movement of all. There is a dignity, a majesty, a sublimity in this last effort of the patriots that I greatly admire," said future president John Adams of the tax-resisting militiamen who that day dumped 342 chests of tea into Boston harbor.) An establishment of religion To their credit, Aaron Zelman and J.E. Simkin of the little Milwaukee-based Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership battled for months this year to get city councils around the country to adopt proclamations honoring Dec. 15 as Bill of Rights Day -- succeeding with a small, proud band which now includes Randolph County, N.C.; Cobb County, Ga.; the City of Asheboro; the town of Rainier, Wash.; and spunky little Valley City, N.D. JPFO has also just brought out the latest in their line of "Gran'pa Jack" comic books, "It's Common Sense to Use Our Bill of Rights ... Or Lose Them!" suitable to explain the Bill of Rights to any kid, aged 6 to 60 ... of which more later. But against Mr. Zelman's admirable efforts, the question remains: Why do the folks now in charge of our national offices -- including the government schools -- so pass over and ignore the historic ratification of those 462 little words which have made us for two centuries the envy of men and women seeking freedom the world around -- this Bill of Rights? Because they fear folks might actually read them? They're in plain English, you know. It was never intended we should need an attorney to tell us what they mean -- let alone that we should tolerate courts telling us they don't mean what we can plainly read there for ourselves. It couldn't be because they're afraid we'd actually go read the First Amendment, could it, which begins, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion ..."? What does it mean for a government to "establish" a religion? Why, clearly, to establish one religion as that enforced by the government, against all others ... like the Church of England. Let us suppose, for instance, that an extremist cult were to arise, which holds it is a mortal sin to plow under any weed, or to destroy any bug or small verminous rodent which we may find on our own property, providing the priests of this extremist cult should decide (based on divine revelation) to list that weed or bug in their own scriptures as "threatened" or "endangered." That would be no problem, so long as the priests of this weird sect had no legal authority to do anything but preach against us from their own, private pulpits. But let us now suppose the government were to erect a headquarters for this sect in Washington at taxpayer expense, and issue them guns and badges, empowering them to enter onto our private property, arresting and jailing us and seizing our land and homes if they should find us killing our own weeds and bugs, to which no one else can demonstrate any legal title? That would be "an establishment of religion," wouldn't it, and thus banned under the First Amendment? Why, such extralegal usurpations might even tempt government agents to eventually storm, burn and massacre harmless citizens in their own churches of a Sunday afternoon, for practicing some religion not approved by Washington, mightn't it? Thank goodness we have a First Amendment to prevent that kind of thing. So (start ital)that(end ital) couldn't be the one they don't want us to read. It couldn't be because they're afraid we'd actually go read the (start ital)Second(end ital) Amendment, could it? The one that says "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"? Shall not be infringed What's that word "free" doing in there? Mr. Madison knew full well that no citizen-militia was necessary to protect the security of the kingdoms of France or Russia. Mercenary, professional, standing armies did just fine to protect their borders -- at the price of their own disarmed populaces being subject to tyranny under the same muskets. Only a "free" country requires that the bulk of the potential armed forces consist of free, private citizens better armed than the men commanded by the central government, just as the unofficial "Fairfax County Militia" of Messrs. Washington and Mason had been better armed than the special militia or "National Guard" available to obey the orders of the crown's "governor of Virginia" in 1776 ... else the Revolution still fresh in Mr. Madison's mind could never even have been launched, let alone won. What the Second Amendment clearly means is that -- as a guarantee against the threat of internal government tyranny -- any law-abiding American adult not obviously insane or severely retarded has a right to own and carry with him -- down to the federal courthouse, to a rally in Washington City, or onto an airplane -- a belt-fed 30-caliber Browning machine gun, or a shoulder-launched heat-seeking missile. (You're not going to argue we could stand up to the FBI, the ATF, or the 87th Airborne with a Ruger 10-22 and a few old muzzle-loaders, I hope?) And when it says that right shall not be "infringed," that means neither the weapon, nor its ammunition, nor the buying or transport of either, may be taxed, regulated, or subjected to any "permitting" process. The government can't even require that the store clerk who sells me my machine gun "check my ID," or write down my name. Certainly, under a Constitution so amended, no congresswomen would ever be allowed to ban the import and private purchase of certain militarily useful firearms because their pistol grips and removable magazines makes them (start ital)too(end ital) useful to freedom-fighters ... would they? Nor would any president be able to remain in office if he ordered surplus government M-1 Garands and Colt 1911s shredded and melted to keep them out of the hands of our own civilian militia ... or banned the re-importation of American-made Garands and M-1 carbines without even submitting a bill to Congress, instead merely signing some royal decree, or so-called "executive order" ... would he? No; that's all clear enough. (start ital)That(end ital) can't be the one they don't want us to read. An impartial jury Could it be they're afraid we might read the (start ital)Sixth(end ital) Article of Amendment, which begins, "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury ..." The high court, of course, now holds this doesn't mean what it appears to mean to us non-lawyers, at all. Rather than see the courts grow too crowded, her eminence Sandra Day O'Connor now informs us no trial is required if the state agrees to jail us for fewer than 180 days ... or even for fewer than 180 days on (start ital)each charge(end ital). But crowded courts are a self-correcting problem, once all defendants are guaranteed a "speedy" trial. The correct answer is to force every case to trial before a jury within one week ... to ban all "plea bargains." (Do we really believe the cops arrest all those people on the wrong charges?) Forced to pick and choose the few cases they really have time to try, prosecutors would be forced (under the existing "speedy trial" provision) to promptly release the 95 percent of federal defendants who have committed no violent felony, but only violated some arbitrary bureaucratic edict. Aw, gee. And by the way, what's that word "impartial" doing in there? The British common-law jury system with which the Founders were familiar made no provision for the judge to ask potential jurors in advance whether they favored the enforcement of the law in question ... which is why the misguided government could never get any convictions in the North in the 1850s on charges of violating the hated Fugitive Slave Act, any more than a government saddled with the same jury system could convict William Penn in London, some years before, on charges of preaching a Quaker sermon. Importantly, it is only the (start ital)defendant(end ital) who is guaranteed an impartial jury -- we find here no guarantee that "the state shall enjoy ..." When the judge asks the jury pool whether anyone would have a problem sending someone to jail for smoking pot, or for owning an ancient collectable World War One machine gun without having previously submitted his fingerprints to the ATF, or for declining to pay a federal income tax on wages -- and when that judge promptly sends home anyone who raises his or her hand -- he is not empaneling an "impartial" jury; he is pre-screening a jury guaranteed to be predisposed to the government's case. He is violating the Sixth Amendment. The original term for a jury trial was a trial "en pays," or "on the country." The jury is supposed to represent a cross-section of our fellow citizens. Unless a law has broad -- 92 percent, actually -- public support, the chances are that a randomly-selected group of 12 citizens will include one member (8.33 percent of the panel) who finds the law a hateful abomination, and who will refuse to convict. Hung jury: Defendant walks. That is the meaning, and the intent, of the Sixth Amendment prohibition on government taking away our life, liberty or property without "a speedy trial ... by an impartial jury." And what about the Tenth Amendment, which specifies, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." This means 90 percent of the laws, agencies, orders and regulators now pouring forth from Washington City like demons breaching the walls of hell are null and void -- deformed, fatherless creatures, apt to melt away like Goblins if ever tested in the harsh daylight of the Bill of Rights. 'Which one? Point to it' It doesn't matter whether you like these rights and prohibitions, consider that they might tempt disorder, or think it's a good idea to "allow" them -- any more than it matters whether you think we should "allow" the sun to rise tomorrow, or the birds to fly. It doesn't work that way. The several sovereign states only ratified the Constitution on our behalf on condition that these protections of our unalienable rights against government "infringement" be made the highest law of the land. Without the first 10 amendments, the whole contract is null and void ... without them, there IS no legitimate federal government, and their tax collectors become nothing but common thieves, subject to being shot on sight if ever caught outside their federal asylum on the Potomac. Any government official who declines to protect and defend these amendments, in their clear meaning, is a traitor, in violation of the sacred oath they all take to protect and defend this Constitution. Such persons should be indicted -- impeached, if they are high officials -- and, only if convicted by either the Senate or an impartial citizen jury, hanged. This includes a whole lot of Congressmen, who have voted for a massive snare of laws which "sounded like a good idea" without doing their sworn duty, which was to open said Constitution to Article I Section 8 (the Powers of Congress), scan through the 431 words found there, and then ask the sponsor, "Which one of these 18 sentences gives you the specific, delegated power to spend FEDERAL tax money to pay the medical bills of barefoot Appalachian widows? Which one? Point to it." The comic book "Gran'pa Jack No. 3: 'Common Sense' " is available at $4 per single copy, $20 for 25, $30 for 50, from Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, 2874 S. Wentworth Ave., Milwaukee, Wisc. 53207. The first Gran'pa Jack comic, " 'Gun Control' Kills Kids," is also still available, at $3 single copy, $14 for 25, $20 for 50 -- Wisconsin residents add 5.6 percent sales tax. Or telephone the JPFO at 414-769-0760. Meantime, go buy a copy of the Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights, and read them to a child. It's our next-to-last last hope. Vin Suprynowicz is the assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Readers may contact him via e-mail at vin(a)lvrj.com. The web site for the Suprynowicz column is at http://www.nguworld.com/vindex/. The column is syndicated in the United States and Canada via Mountain Media Syndications, P.O. Box 4422, Las Vegas Nev. 89127. *** Vin Suprynowicz, vin(a)lvrj.com "If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of se--------------------------------------------------- This message is from the VTLP-list (Vermont Libertarian) mailing list. To send a message to everyone on this list send email to <vtlp-list(a)catamount.com>. To unsubscribe from the list send eamil to <macjordomo(a)catamount.com> with "unsubscribe vtlp-list" in the body of the message. To subscribe to the list send email to <macjordomo(a)catamount.com> with "subscribe vtlp-list your name" in the body of the message. ----------------- End Forwarded Message ----------------- Brian B. Riley --> http://members.macconnect.com/~brianbr For PGP Keys <mailto:brianbr@together.net?subject=Get%20PGP%20Key> "Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path, and leave a trail." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

1 0

Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment
by Bruce Balden 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>The first amendment is about what government can't do to you, not what your >neighbor can or can't do. > > And whether the constitution so narrowly construed limits the action of local councils. It would be extremely convenient if each fo the 50 states adopted by custom each of the federal amendements mutatis mutandis. However, freedom of expression in the US and elsewhere is mostly a limited, but useful fiction. While many have doubts about where strict freedom of speach should exist, evidence is that is exists so long as the EFFECT of abberrent speech isn't too disruptive to the established economic order. So, for instance, using the first amendment to tolerate pornographic works and such is against the putative moral code of most Americans ca. 1950, but tolerating it didn't really threaten any of the power elite. Similarly, when the Civil Rights Act gave aggressive enforcement powers for rights already guaranteed by the consitution, this meant that the power elite was finally moved to act by massive pressure. Although social conditioning may have taught southern white businessmen to look down on negros, they knew that the negro economic power even at the time was very significant. America (and Canada, where this is been written from) are physically large enough to have physically separated and opposed elite from different regions who duke it out in Congress/Parliament. So if you want the right to use strong encryption, or don't want CDA II to ruin your life, appealing to the Constitution is not what I recommend. If people dislike porn enough, they'll **amend the constitution** if that's what it takes. > > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------ > David Honig Orbit Technology > honig(a)otc.net Intaanetto Jigyoubu > > M-16 : Don Quixote :: PGP : Louis Freeh > Let freedom ring (or screech at 28.8) > > > > > > > > > > > >

2 1

getting beyond cyberspace
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

More proof that old Hegelians never die, they just synthesize themselves into nonsense. Or, if you give a Hegelian enough time with no data, he'll synthesize himself a rope and hang himself with. Or something. Then there's the old logic joke: "There are two kinds of people, those who use dichotomies and those who don't." :-). Cheers, Bob Hettinga --- begin forwarded text Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Dec 1997 20:59:45 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: weber.ucsd.edu: procmail set sender to rre-request(a)weber.ucsd.edu using -f X-Authentication-Warning: weber.ucsd.edu: Processed from queue /usr/spool/mqueue/rqueue Date: Fri, 19 Dec 1997 20:50:51 -0800 (PST) From: Phil Agre <pagre(a)weber.ucsd.edu> To: rre(a)weber.ucsd.edu Subject: getting beyond cyberspace Resent-From: rre(a)weber.ucsd.edu Reply-To: rre-maintainers(a)weber.ucsd.edu X-URL: http://communication.ucsd.edu/pagre/rre.html X-Mailing-List: <rre(a)weber.ucsd.edu> archive/latest/1780 X-Loop: rre(a)weber.ucsd.edu Precedence: list Resent-Sender: rre-request(a)weber.ucsd.edu [When important new technologies come along, they create an imaginative vacuum, and that vacuum is often filled with millenarian ideologies such as the one about cyberspace. Once the millennialists start promising world peace, however, we can be sure that their day has passed, and that it is time for a new ideology that is grounded in concrete attempts to integrate the emerging technology with the real institutional world. The enclosed column about the reality check that can be glimpsed beyond the ideology of cyberspace appeared in the November/December 1997 issue of Technology Review. The TR people picked the title. The column was invited as an "audition" for a regular columnist's position in the radically overhauled version of Technology Review that is due in the spring. I didn't pass the audition. Which is how it goes, of course, although I and many others are waiting with some concern to see whether the new magazine retains the integrity of the classic version.] =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= This message was forwarded through the Red Rock Eater News Service (RRE). Send any replies to the original author, listed in the From: field below. You are welcome to send the message along to others but please do not use the "redirect" command. For information on RRE, including instructions for (un)subscribing, send an empty message to rre-help(a)weber.ucsd.edu =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= The Next Internet Hero Phil Agre http://communication.ucsd.edu/pagre/ Copyright 1997 by MIT's Technology Review. You may forward this article to anyone for any noncommercial purpose, provided that you forward it in its entirety, including this copyright notice. Every new technology is accompanied by a grand narrative. The Internet's grand narratives have focused on heroes: people who are leading the transition to a more information-intensive society. The Internet has produced two generations of hero figures. Now it's time for a third. The first hero was the good hacker. The Internet originated in a special setting -- the community funded by the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA). These earliest hackers were establishment revolutionaries. Their guiding narrative was that information technology and human beings are symbiotic elements of a larger system. They owned the biggest computers and they defined the technologies that became the Internet. The next hero was the rebel hacker. The second generation viewed hacking as something that happens outside of established institutions. Electronic mail, for example, symbolized and sometimes aided resistance to hierarchy. Rebel hackers include the "cypherpunks", who resist authority by propagating robust encryption software. But rebel hackers can be found in practically any organization; they were the folks who spent their evenings and weekends creating the first million or so Web pages during the early-to-mid 1990s. More social movement than business practice, these Web projects were rarely integrated into organizational procedures or strategies. The rebel hacker is guided by the notion of cyberspace, a digital ether that transcends the obsolete constraints of the physical world. This is a religious idea, and it inherits a long millenarian tradition. It promises to level hierarchies, erase borders, confound the powers of the earth, and institute a perpetual utopia of peace and plenty for all. A belief in cyberspace is the twentieth century's last revolutionary ideology. The grand narrative of cyberspace, however, no longer tells us what we need to know. The rebel hackers derived their revolutionary edge from the continuing rapid growth in microprocessor power, telecommunications bandwidth, and data storage capacity. Dramatic improvements in information technology, they said, would surely turn society inside out. But this argument is misleading. We can indeed be confident that the basic building blocks of computers and networks will continue to improve. But we cannot predict what will be built from them -- the architecture of the many-layered information infrastructure that is rapidly emerging around the world. The questions are endless: Will online commerce systems support anonymous payment, or will they keep complete records of our transactions? Will our communications systems let users screen out unwanted messages, or will we drown in mass mailings? Will educational systems support new kinds of learning, or merely introduce new forms of rote drill? Will the Internet continue to embody the scientific community's values of open information, or will it converge with the business models of broadcast media? The answers to these questions are not dictated by the basic workings of the machinery. They are matters not for prediction but for choice. The Internet is becoming integrated with institutions, influencing them and being influenced in turn. Society needs institutions, after all, and information technology provides us with a tremendous opportunity to redesign our institutions in ways that express the values of a democratic society. This is not a job for the rebel hacker, who is sworn simply to resist the bad institutions of yore. That's why we need a new kind of Internet hero: the public hacker. Whereas the good hacker and the rebel hacker changed the world by changing technology, the public hacker builds bridges between the esoteric world of technical work and the bigger, messier world in which values are argued and chosen. The public hacker is bilingual, translating between technical issues and legal issues, between the dynamics of systems and the dynamics of communities, between technological visions and social visions. The public hacker still invents technologies when they're necessary, propagates them when they're useful, and defends them when they deserve it. But this new hero's imagination is not entirely driven by the machinery. Some examples: Mitchell Kapor, co-founder of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, helped catalyze a remarkably broad-based public discussion of the social values at stake as we create the information infrastructure. Peter Neumann edits an Internet forum, the Risks Digest, that has sensitized innumerable computer people to the things that go wrong with computer systems in real institutional settings. And Pamela Samuelson brings technical and legal analysis together in the public sphere, helping policymakers tackle the intellectual property issues that arise in digital media. If these people don't seem like traditional heroes, perhaps we need a new conception of heroism. Revolutionary heroes changed the world in a unilateral way. Now we need heroes who can help us imagine our options. end --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ Ask me about FC98 in Anguilla!: <http://www.fc98.ai/>

1 0

Hate speech in America
by aryan＠nym.alias.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I am a German patriot who wants to publish my ideas without of fear of the German goverment. But my concern is that the U. S. ISP I use can hand over my subscriber infoation and logs to the German goverment. Does anyone know a U. S. ISP who does not censor hate speech and who has a _known_ strong privacy policy? By the way, is hate speech protected in United States?

2 1

None
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I think Vulis needs each of us to send a hundred copies of something more creative back to him. >Timmy C. May will fuck anything that moves, >but he'd rather be fucking his own mother's >dead body. > > /''' > c-OO Timmy C. May > \ > -

1 0

Is Anonymous Communication only for "Criminals"? (was: Re: UCENET II and Peter duh Silva)
by Charlie Comsec 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- politas(a)dynamite.com.au (Politas) wrote: > >Why should the operator of the delivery medium be held responsible for the > >contents of a message? > > Not the contents as such, but the ability to continue unacceptable > behaviour. eg, if someone is mailbombing me from a hotmail account, I expect > Hotmail to shut down that account, or at least prevent them from sending to > me. But I'd prefer if they handed over some kind of tracing information to > the police. And if someone makes what you consider an annoying telephone call from a public telephone, should the phone company remove the telephone? Sure, they may be able to trace the telephone used, but not who used it. > > Perhaps the laws are different "down under", but here > >in the USA anyone can deposit coins in a public telephone and make a phone > >call without identifying himself. The person can't be identified, and > >neither can you hold the telephone company responsible for any damages you > >claim resulted from the call. > > Yes, but the anonymous person in this case is paying all costs for the call. Just as the anonymous person is paying for his own access to the internet. The anonymous caller to your telephone is not paying your monthly telephone bill, though, so he's not "paying all costs for the call". So the two situations are fairly analogous -- both the sender and the receiver of the message pay a portion of the costs. > Also, the call can be traced in real time, and a sufficiently organised > system would allow the caller to be found. You have a physical location and > an exact time, enough to catch a person. If the person is foolish enough to stay on the line long enough to be caught, that is. I really doubt that most localities have a police force with enough time on their hands to go chasing after a person who annoys you with a phone call, though. Anything "sufficiently organized" to accomplish what you're suggesting would be indistinguishable from a police state. While it might annoy you if someone were to call you at 2 AM from a pay phone, yell "You're an asshole", and hang up, how much money, time, and effort do you really expect the police to spend trying to find the culprit? As a practical matter, they'd probably suggest that you change your phone number or put a device on your telephone where callers you wished to talk to at 2 AM were required to enter in a code you'd given them before your phone would ring. > >It's the same with the US Postal Service. You can mail a letter from a public > >mail box and as long as the proper postage is attached, it will be delivered > >even if it doesn't have a return address, or if it contains a false return > >address. But if someone mails you a letter bomb, you can't sue the US > >Postal Service. > > No, but at the very least you do at least know which post office the letter > first came through. It's somewhere to start a search from. In the case of an anonymous e-mail, the "post office" is the remailer site. Like a snail mail letter, you don't know what path the sender travelled to get to the post office, though. > You'd be amazed > how often people who send "anonymous" letter bombs get caught. Yes, for both the e-mail and snail mail variety. It's much easier to send an e-mail bomb from a throwaway ISP account than from a remailer, anyway. Most remailers have fairly small size restrictions, for one thing, and if you start sending too many individual e-mails through a remailer, the software WILL take note of that fact and flag that fact for the operator. In many ways, sending a "mail bomb" "anonymously" is an oxymoron. The whole point to avoiding being traced is to make your message virtually indistinguishable from the rest of the anonymous messages until it reaches its destination. Sending a huge message or a huge number of smaller messages sticks out like a sort thumb and calls attention to the sender. The last thing the perpetrator of such a scheme would want to do is go through automated software, such as a remailer uses, that looks for and flags unusual behavious like that. It would actually me much safer to use a throwaway e-mail account, acquired under a phony name, to accomplish that. > >So why institute draconian rules to restrict e-mail which are stricter than > >those for other communications media? > > Because I'd like it to be so. I'm not really calling for anything greater > than we currently have with the phone system. Then you already have that. If you don't want calls from a certain caller, you can arrange to have them blocked. If you don't want "anonymous" calls, you can have incoming calls without caller ID information blocked, just as you can request that the remailers not send you any anonymous e-mail. (None of this really has anything to do with anonymous PUBLIC posts.) > I realise that it's pobably > not a completely popular opinion, but it happens to be mine. I cannot see > any valid purpose for completely anonymous communication, other than to > break laws. "Presumed innocent until proven guilty" is still in force here. I might well say that I can see no purpose for owning a printing press other than to print "subversive" material, yet I still retain that right here in the USA until you can prove that I've used it for illegal purposes. If you can prove that, then you can get a court injunction against me. But you can't take away that right based on what you think I *MIGHT* do. Of course, sometimes "breaking laws" IS the reason for anonymity. If the government were to outlaw the dissemination of certain politically incorrect ideas, then the only way to safely do so might be anonymously. If you feel that strongly about anonymous e-mail, then simply ask the remailer operators to have your address blocked from receiving any. Your (potential) problem is then solved. > >I'll reiterate my opinion that such restrictive rules would cripple the > >usefulness of many currently-available services. I seriously doubt that > >Hotmail would take on the expense of identifying each of its account holders > >as well as assuming liability for any that it misidentified, in order to > >provide a FREE service. > > Oh come now, you make it sound like Hotmail are doing it all out of the > goodness of their hearts. They *are* making money, you know. I'm sure they are, but the extra costs of positively IDing users would have to be paid somehow. > > In fact, it would impact most ISPs. As long as you > >pay your monthly access fees on time, most ISPs take you at your word that > >the name and address you supplied on your application are correct. > > And as long as you don't breach your contract with them in any other way, > they should be able to. On the other hand, if the police turn up to an ISP > trying to find someone, they can get the phone calls traced to catch the > person when they log in. Of course they can. Ultimately, each person is responsible for maintaining his own privacy. There's always a risk. Those who anonymously (and illegally) used fax machines to send uncensored news out of China during the Tianamen Square uprising were obviously taking such a risk. Does it bother you that the technology did not exist to identify and prosecute those who did so? > >I would suggest that the recipient of a piece of e-mail should bear the > >responsibility for authenticating its sender before sending someone money, > >or taking other action that could potentially incur a financial loss. > > Well, of course. On the other hand, recieving unwanted email itself > involves financial loss. Perhaps, but there are more suitable remedies for that than banning anonymous e-mail. > >Transferring that duty to the ISP makes no sense. For one thing, who would > >you hold responsible? Your own ISP? The one listed in the return address? > >Even if it's forged? What if the ISP is located in another jurisdiction? > > The person I want to be able to hold responsible is the person who sent the > message. If someone in the middle is shielding their identity, then they > have to take the responsibility to stop repeated offences. If they cannot > or refuse to pass the blame on to the originator and can't prevent repeated > offences, then, and only then, they *may* be able to be held responsible for > any offences. I would doubt that it would ever go that far. After all, can > you imagine a Telco *refusing* to cooperate with the police to trace a call? No, but that's a different scenario than the telephone company requiring a form of positive identification before using a pay phone. You aren't assuming that these "repeated offenses" involving pay phones all were made using the SAME TELEPHONE each time, are you? Not all harrassing callers would be that stupid, although some might be. In the case of anonymous e-mail, you can trace it back to the remailer utilized just like you can trace a phone call back to the telephone used. But what does thay buy you? You still don't know WHO made the call or sent the e-mail. Actually in the case of anonymous e-mail you have one additional safeguard. You can ask to be blocked from receiving anonymous e-mail. Try telling the telephone company that you want to be blocked from receiving calls from any pay phone! > I'm not saying it has to be easy to trace a message to its originator, but > it should be possible to identify a source. For repeating communications, > it should be possible to identify a person. That's really unnecessary. There's not really much you can do via e-mail that's both illegal and anonymous, when you think about it. I could kidnap a relative of yours, and use anonymous e-mail to make ransom demands, but I'd still have to give you a means of getting the money to me. THAT is where I'd be traceable. The same goes for sending you a fraudulent offer. I can't make any money off of you unless you give you a method for paying me. And if something is merely annoying, then prevention makes more sense than building in the ability to hunt down the sender. Like anonymous e-mail itself, any surefire means of identifying the sender of a message is also prone to abuse. That's why the "Big Brother Inside" concept is a cure that's worse than the disease. - --- Finger <comsec(a)nym.alias.net> for PGP public key (Key ID=19BE8B0D) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBNJrE4gbp0h8ZvosNAQHHfAf+NbwQcznBpJpORXE223owqI44WEVNL6gR XH8ir9vor0oYcENGKbyfETIMfKsdbvf9THK9accbUjh5CXu9Qv6vcZ1S1TzogAS9 QbnrRtaYQmEFp7657X2r2Uof8jdgHAe1XL8BjVZfn6yPZYTo3lAxNOWc5qqtHnVM T1Wrz7ej0n99s6hs8PE+57Y82RrF173Y7Qm2uLJRBHt7ZAFnFaet3N+ZrbgJQCW+ NOBElkLe9qTY8bhHg3zeUx7Ql3mE4quogwLy8W/btuxMles7EnTfoYWozKsifamC EJks7fpr0z70sPVVfvo/ktmA+UkK9UwWrNqCA/kCHieRpEdC5gRhQQ== =RSct -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

world spy system
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

------- Forwarded Message Date: Fri, 19 Dec 1997 10:47:17 To: believer(a)telepath.com From: believer(a)telepath.com Subject: IP: NSA Spy Network confirmed by EU Forwarded from the London Telegraph: - ---------------------------------------------------------- >Daily Telegraph Connected Supplement 16th December 1997 > >A European Commission report warns that the United States has developed an >extensive spying network on European Citizens and we should all be worried, >reports Simon Davies. > >A global electronic spy network that can eavesdrop on every telephone,email >and telex communication around the world will be officially acknowledged >for the first time in a European Commission report to be delivered this >week. > >The report - Assessing the Technologies of Political Control -- was com- >missioned last year by the Civil Liberties Committee of the European >Parliament. It contains details of a network of American-controlled spy >stations on British soil and around the world. that "routinely and >indiscriminately" monitors countless phone, fax and email messages. > >It states: "Within Europe all email telephone and fax communications are >routinely intercepted bv the United States Natiomnal Security Agency >transfering all target information from the European nmainland via the >strategic hub of London then by satellite to Fort Meade in Maryland via >the crucial hub at Menwith Hill" in Yorkshire. > >The report confirms for the first time the existence of a the secretive >Echelon system. > >Until now evidence of such astounding technology has been patchy and >anecdotal. But the report - to be discussed on Thursday by the committee >of the office of Science and Technology Assessment in Luxembourg - confirms >that the citizens of Britain and other European states are subject to an >intensity of surveillance far in excess of that imagined by most parlia- >ments. Its findings arc certain to excite the concern of MEPS. > >"The Echelon system forms part of the UKUSA system but unlike many of the >electronic spy sysfems developed during the Cold War, Echelon is designed >primarily for non- military targets: governments, organizations and >businesses in virtually every country. > >"The Echelon system works by indiscriminately intercepting very large >quantities of communications and then siphoning out what is valuable using >artificial intelligence aids like MEMEX to find key words". > >According to the report, Echelon uses a number of national dictionaries >containing key words of interest to each country. > >For more than a decade, former agents of US, British. Canadian and New >Zealand national security agencies have claimed that the monitoring of >electronic communications has become endemic throughout the world. Rumours >have circulated that new technologies have been developed which have the >capability to search most of the world's telex, fax and enaail networks >for "keywords". Phone calls. they claim. can be automatically analysed for >key words. > >Former signals intelligence operatives have claimed that spy bases control >led by America have the ability to search nearly all data communications >for kev words. They claim that Echelon automatically analyses most email >messaging for "precursor". data which assists intelligence agencies to >determine targets. According to former Canadian Security Establishment >agent Mike Frost. a voice recognition system called Oratory has been used >for some years to intercept diplomatic calls. > >The driving force behind the report is Glyn Ford. Labour MEP for Greater >Manchester East. He believes the report is crucial to the future of civil >liberties in Europe. > >"In the civil liberties committee we spend a great deal of time debating >issues such as free movement, immigration and drugs. Technology always >sits at the centre of these discussions. > >"There are times in history when technology helps democratise, and times >when it helps centralise. This is a time of centralisation. The justice >and home affairs pillar of Europe has become more powerful without a >corresponding strengthening of civil liberties." > >The report recommnends a variety of measure for dealing with the increas- >ing power of the the technologies of surveilance being used at Menwith >Hill and other centres. It bluntlyy advises: "The European Parliament >should reject proposals from the United States for making private messages >via the global communications network Internet) accessible to US intelli- >gence agencies. > >The report also urges a fundamental review of the involvement of the >American NSA (National Security Agency in Europe, suggestng that the >activities be either scaled down, or become more open and accountable. > >Such concerns have been privately expressed by governments and MEPS since >the Cold War, but surveillance has continued to expand. US intelligence >activity in Britain has enjoyed a steady growth throughout the past two >decades. The principal motivation for this rush of development is the US >interest in commercial espionage. In the Fifties. during the development >of the 'special relationship'. between America and Britain, one US insti- >tution was singled out for special attention. > >The NSA, the world's biggest and most powerful signals intelligence organ- >isation. received approval to set up a network of spy stations throughout >Britain. "Their role was to provide military, diplomatic and economic >intelligelince by intercepting communications from throughout the Northern >Hemisphere. > >The NSA is one of the shadowiest of the shadowy US intelligence agencies. >Until a few years ago, it existence was a secret and its charter and any >mention of its duties are still classified. However, it does have a Web >site (www.nsa.gov:8080) in which it describes itself as being responsible >for the signals intelligence and communications security activities of >the US government. > >One of its bases, Menwith Hill, was to become the biggest spy station in >the world. Its ears - known as radomes - are capable of listening in to >vast chunks of the communications spectrum throughout Europe and the old >Soviet Union. > >In its first decade the base sucked data from cables and microwave links >running through a nearby Post Office Tower, but the communications revolu- >tions of the Seventies and Eighties gave the base a capability that even >its architects could scarcely have been able to imagine. With the creation >of Intelsat and digital telecomnunications, Menwith and other stations >developed the capability to eavesdrop on an extensive scale on fax, telex >and voice messages. Then. with the development of the Internet, electronic >mail and electronic commerce, the listening posts were able to increase >their monitoring capability to eavesdrop on an unprecedented spectrum (of >personal and business communications. > >This activitv has been all but ignored by Parliament. When Labour MEPS >raised questions about the activities of the NSA. the Government invoked >secrecy rules. It has been the same for for 40 Years. > >Glyn Ford hopes his report may be the first step in a long road to more >openness. "Some democratically elected body should surely have a right to >know at some level. At the monment that's nowhere. ********************************************** To subscribe or unsubscribe, email: majordomo(a)majordomo.pobox.com with the message: subscribe ignition-point email@address or unsubscribe ignition-point email@address ********************************************** http://www.telepath.com/believer ********************************************** ------- End of Forwarded Message

1 0

clinton slapped by judge
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

a rare challenge to clinton's executive power & lies by the judicial branch. see the book "secret life of bill clinton" by ambrose evans pritchard for more excellent info about the true state of our union. ------- Forwarded Message Date: Fri, 19 Dec 1997 11:40:40 To: believer(a)telepath.com From: believer(a)telepath.com Subject: IP: White House to Pay for Cover-Up >From the Washington Times: White House to pay for health care lies By Paul Bedard THE WASHINGTON TIMES The White House and lawyers defending first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton lied in an effort to keep internal working papers used to develop President Clinton's universal health care plan in 1993 secret, a federal judge said Thursday. Using blunt language in a written order, U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth also accused administration officials at "the highest levels of government" of engaging in a "cover-up" and pressuring the Justice Department to defend its "dishonest" actions. "It is clear that the decisions here were made at the highest levels of government and the government itself is -- and should be --accountable when its officials run amok," Judge Lamberth wrote. "It seems that some government officials never learn that the cover-up can be worse than the underlying conduct," he added, ordering the government to pay legal fees of $285,864 to the doctors trade group that sued the White House in February 1993 to open up the first lady's health care planning meetings to the public. The White House has said taxpayers will pay the bill. "We don't have any comment," White House spokesman Barry Toiv said Thursday. Justice Department spokesman Bert Brandenburg said, "The government has consistently maintained that sanctions are not appropriate. "We disagree with Judge Lamberth's conclusion but we take his opinion seriously. We are reviewing the decision and considering what action is appropriate," Mr. Brandenburg said. "We're pleased at this point to have any reimbursement, but the money was never the issue," said Kathryn Serkes, spokeswoman for the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, the group that brought the initial suit against Mrs. Clinton and her health care task force. "What's important are the conclusions that the judge reached. Without using the president or first lady's name, he points a finger squarely at them," she said. The doctors group filed suit to open up closed meetings of Mrs. Clinton's Health Care Task Force. They maintained the first lady was violating the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which requires that any federal advisory panel that includes a nongovernment worker must always meet in the open. The association said Mrs. Clinton was not an employee of the government, but an appeals court determined that Mrs. Clinton was a de facto federal employee and thus allowed her group to meet privately. The doctors group then tried to open up secret meetings of Mrs. Clinton's larger "working group," which numbered between 600 and 1,000, but Judge Lamberth temporarily blocked that plan when Clinton health care adviser Ira Magaziner said the panel included "only federal government employees." But Mr. Magaziner's March 3, 1993, statement was "actually false," said the judge, who expressed anger that the White House and Justice Department never moved to correct the fabrication. Judge Lamberth relied upon Mr. Magaziner's statement in refusing to open up the working group's meetings as required by the law. In fact, the group included hundreds of nongovernmental members and representatives of special-interest groups who would have profited if the Clintons' universal health care proposal was approved. The proposal never came to a vote in Congress. The legal effort to open the meetings was eventually rendered moot after the White House turned over the working group's internal documents. In addition to revealing the special interests involved in drawing up the Clinton plan, the documents released over time by the White House showed that private-sector members of the group were still trying to complete ethics and conflict-of-interest forms long after their employment had begun. In his decision Thursday, the judge gave the doctors group credit for giving the public a window on the development of the administration's massive health care bill. "All of these working group documents would be safely tucked away in the National Archives had it not been for this litigation. It is only because of this litigation that they are now available for inspection by the public," he wrote. Judge Lamberth subsequently sought a perjury investigation of Mr. Magaziner, but the Justice Department said it wouldn't prosecute the White House aide who oversaw the drafting of the 1,400-page national health bill. He is currently Mr. Clinton's top adviser on policies dealing with the Internet. In Thursday's action, Judge Lamberth said that Mr. Magaziner's misleading statements in March 1993 were part of a cover-up organized by the first lady's attorneys, including Deputy White House Counsel Vincent W. Foster Jr., who died four months later in an apparent suicide, and Associate Attorney General Webster L. Hubbell. In his just-published book, Mr. Hubbell writes that Mr. Foster committed suicide in part because of the pressure Mrs. Clinton put on him to defend her in the case. Mr. Hubbell himself would later resign his post under pressure and plead guilty to stealing from the Little Rock law firm where he, the first lady and Mr. Foster all once worked. "It is clear that Mr. Magaziner relied upon the advice of White House attorneys -- including Vincent Foster ... and Associate Attorney General Webster Hubbell," said the judge. The judge said the "most outrageous conduct by the government" in the case was the administration's failure to correct Mr. Magaziner's misstatement. "That was a determination not made individually by Mr. Magaziner, but by the government through its counsel," he said. "There were no rogue lawyers here misleading this court. ... The executive branch of the government, working in tandem, was dishonest with this court and the government must now face the consequences of its misconduct." He also expressed shock that the Justice Department "succumbed to pressure from White House attorneys" to use false excuses and "strained interpretations" to defend the actions of Mr. Magaziner. "Acting dishonestly, as the government did in this case, is ... acting in bad faith," he said. Copyright © 1997 News World Communications, Inc. ********************************************** To subscribe or unsubscribe, email: majordomo(a)majordomo.pobox.com with the message: subscribe ignition-point email@address or unsubscribe ignition-point email@address ********************************************** http://www.telepath.com/believer ********************************************** ------- End of Forwarded Message

1 0