December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

software
by CHerr58414＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

if u got any freeware for encripting and decodeing that would be great so if you can mail me back some info. Thanks

2 1

Re: U.S. in violation of Geneva convention?
by Anonymous Sender 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Harmon Seaver wrote: > > This isn't a ski mask burglary. We KNOW Saddam ruled Iraq. > > We KNOW what crimes were committed. Simple syllogism. > > No we don't. We only know what the propaganda mills have told us. > Twenty years ago it was a different story. The propaganda mills were working for Saddam, not against him. http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/04/1599076.php "Over the last dozen years I made 13 trips to Baghdad to lobby the government to keep CNN's Baghdad bureau open and to arrange interviews with Iraqi leaders. Each time I visited, I became more distressed by what I saw and heard - awful things that could not be reported because doing so would have jeopardized the lives of Iraqis, particularly those on our Baghdad staff." http://www.techcentralstation.com/041103H.html "It appears there is another, more troubling, reason Jordan decided not to report these hideous crimes until the regime was safely out of the way: CNN didn't want to lose its on-the-ground access to a big story." Human Rights Watch, Amnesty, and countless Iraqi refugees all report similar stories of widespread torture and murder. Is it your position that these are all propagandists? Dismissing as "propaganda" any reports that oppose your argument, while accepting as truth any claim that supports it, is simple intellectual dishonesty.

1 0

U.S. in violation of Geneva convention?
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-- On 16 Dec 2003 at 2:36, Anonymous wrote: > I saw several people commenting the issue of Geneva > convention on CNN during the day. Also I saw an expert on > this field from another country commenting on the issue > stating that it was a clear violation of the convention. In > either of these interviews were there any discussion on > whether it didn't apply to this specific case due to what > clothings he happened to wear or whattever. I got the > impression that it was clear that the U.S. treatment wasn't > fully appropriate. If you were watching the BBC, you would have thought most of the Iraqi population were outraged by his capture. I think you are suffering from New York Times syndrome "If even the New York Times admits that the kulaks are happy and prosperous under Stalin, that shows you how great the Soviet Union really must be when you discount all that capitalist propaganda." --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG Lh9C/c3J2U0bybWlK/P0f5hnnZT1z+2QEe1K9Ev2 4cVVWOLkCVsvYQG/u75vRB5xVrL2GjBeaEl+j6x07

6 6

Re: Sunny Guantanamo (Re: Speaking of the Geneva convention)
by Michael Kalus 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 17-Dec-03, at 5:43 PM, Jim Dixon wrote: > >> According to the US Government though they are not soldiers. They are >> "unlawful enemy combattants". > > I can only interpret this as your saying that the US Government's > judgement in this issue is correct, and they are not POWs. > I only tell you what they are telling us. I do not agree with this assessment personally. >> >> The war in Afghanistan is over. This is were they were caught. Thus >> they >> should be released, no? > > Oh, we are back to their being POWs. Fine. In that case, the answer > to > your question is no. > > The war in question was begun by an attack on the United States, by the > murder of 3000 people in New York City. Is this war over? Not > according > to tapes attributed to al Qaeda. They still profess to be at war with > the United States. > Where the war begun is probably debatable. The US had (and has) their fingerprints over a lot of things that are happening. And all of these you could construe as an act of war. > Is the war in Afghanistan over? Not according to news reports. Osama > bin > Laden remains free. The Taliban remain active. But the regime has been replaced, thus the war is over, no? That was the case in Europe. Germany was defeated, a new government installed (with a lot of people from the old one) and you called it "done deal". Same in Japan. So what's different this time? > >> If they are terrorists and they have proof of >> this they should put them in front of a court (and I guess that should >> be a civil court, not a military tribunal as I don't quite see since >> when the US Army is performing law enforcement duties). > > Please make your mind up. Now they are terrorists again. > I am answering to your statements. We have already established that if they are POWs then they should be released because the war is over (see above). If they are not POWs but held because of terrorist charges, than they should be tried no? > Whose law requires that terrorists be treated in this fashion? > Our "enlightened" western society, led by the USofA who proclaims to know what right and wrong is (and who wants to teach it to all those "primitive" cultures in the middle east). > The US Army's responsibility is not to enforce the law. It is to > defend > the United States. They seem to be doing a good job at the moment. > Sure sure, nobody has flown another plane in a building. Is this because of the US Army and all those nifty security screenings at the airport (just last weekend I flew out of Dallas and saw more than enough ways to get something through security), or because nobody really wanted to do it right now? Guess we'll never know. But of course the Spinmeisters are going to say it's because of the war in Iraq and added security. I wonder who or what they are going to blame the next time someone gets blown up. > In the United States it is the responsibility of the police to enforce > the > law in their jurisdiction. There is no US police force with > responsiblities in Guantanamo. US law does not apply to Cuba. Nifty, isn't it? "Well people, we see your point. But you have to Understanding, even though we control Guantanamo Bay and even though Diego Garcia is a British Island which we just annexed, we can't really do anything to help those poor people. But don't fret, if they would be in an Afghani jail they would be off worse. Remember, we are the good guys, we only do what's in humanities best interrest." If they would be held in New York State they would have more rights. So let's just not even try that, we might actually HAVE to treat them according to the gospel that we preach. >> But they are not POWs by their own account. If they could be charged >> with any of these crimes above, then what takes two years to actually >> convict them? > > By your way of thinking, if I am taken prisoner in a war, I can decide > that I am not a POW and walk free. That's not what I said. What I DID say was that if they are not POWs and are not charged with a crime, they should be set free. > > In what war has this been common practice? See above. >> Some of them ARE US Citizens. Others are citizens of other states. >> International Law means that if I (holding a German passport) have to >> be >> allowed to contact MY government in order to receive any aid that I >> might require. This right has not been given. > > What "International Law" says that unlawful combatants get to contact > their governments in this manner? > The term "unlawful combatants" doesn't exist either. So the question is mute. Let's say "Human being" instead. > What if the government contacted, say Afghan or Pakistani, would prefer > that they not be contacted as you desire, or prefers that you be held > as > a prisoner indefinitely? Than you have a problem with your government. But neither British, nor Canadian nor French authorities were notified / could be contact OR, after they found out, were allowed to talk to their people. > >> Granted, I would not be protected under the rights of the US >> constitution, but I do have other rights and those are clearly >> violated >> as well. > > What's so clear about this? Do you actually have any knowledge at all > of customs and practices in countries in the region? Do you care at > all > about the opinions of local people, about their customary practices? I > think not. It is not only about people from Afghanistan, it is also about other countries, see my text above. >> >> Treason would need to be proofen. Considering that no charges have >> been >> brought forward after almost two years it is pretty clear (or at least >> appears to be) that there is no proof that any of these people did >> anything wrong. > > Do you know for a fact that there are US citizens held at Guantanamo? > If > so, who are they? > There have been several reports. What about John Walker? Whatever happened to him? >>> >> It doesn't. But if that would be the case than the captured Afghans >> should be returned to the Afghan authorities, why is this not >> happening? > > Perhaps the Afghan authorities don't want them back. > > Hello? > Perhaps you just look for the easy way out? Michael -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 8.0.3 iQA/AwUBP+DwTmlCnxcrW2uuEQL6iwCeOK5U56u8xVB9aT1SAqj+yi7OULcAoOd0 bml/UV9L7YtJFFoAq77OCilk =aXZZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: U.S. in violation of Geneva convention?
by Michael Kalus 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 17-Dec-03, at 5:23 PM, Jim Dixon wrote: >>> Damn lucky, to be honest. >>> >> No I did not omit this little bit. This is not the question. > > Oh but it is. > Ah? Why? >> Guilt or not guilt is not (supposely) decided when captured but in a >> court of law. You remember, "Justice" the thing the US supposely is >> standing for? > > Are you saying that the United States has to be a light to the world, > that > it has an extraordinary responsibility to be morally correct, that its > actions should be judged by a different standard from those of other > countries? The US makes these claims on their own. If they are the "good guys" than they should act like it. Not only when it is convenient but also when it is not. Morale is not about the "best bang for the buck" but about integrity. The US Government clearly does not possess a lot of integrity when it comes to morale. > What are you, some kind of pro-American fanatic? Last time I checked I was a human being. > >> Whatever he did before, it does not matter at this point. At this very >> moment the people who have to abide are the victors and that means the >> US Government (and thus the US Military). >> >> Two wrongs still don't make a right. > > What exactly is wrong with inspecting a prisoner's teeth and giving him > a haircut? Televising this for propaganda purposes. > > Why exactly do you say that mass murder, invasion, genocide somehow > are outweighed in the scales of justice by a medical examination? > No, what I am saying is that no matter what he did, the US still has to play by international rules (or should at least). Using those images from Saddam as Propaganda clearly is wrong. Michael -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 8.0.3 iQA/AwUBP+DxBGlCnxcrW2uuEQJqKQCgujw7xjSVAPdzXDcEW9abBkRyaF8AoNOL H+VuSTqSPFSTA834qQS2X36C =ULJm -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: U.S. in violation of Geneva convention?
by Nomen Nescio 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim, sorry it was unclear from my post whom I was referring to. It was "James A. Donald". I did put his message id in a reply-to header. Jim Dixon wrote: > Hitler, you mean? Or did you have Milosevic in mind? No what I meant was what IF somehow Bush or Blaire or some other high ranking coalition politician were captured by Iraq during the war and was treated in the same way. I can only presume you would support Saddam's soldiers checking Bush for lice then. You are also utterly missing the point and you are one pretty good example of how "the mob" are thinking. EVERYONE, including Saddam, Pol Pot or whattever should be treated in accordance with the laws by us who call ourselves the free democratic part of the world. Then they shall stand trial. A fair trial and being represented by lawyers. What would be more satisfying for the critics of U.S. than to see U.S. not being able to get its act together and instead conducting itself in a manner inconsistent with international law during this rather criticl phase of the Iraqi campaign. Mark my words, U.S. will be in regret later. Jim Dixon, you also wrote some half trouths on the subject of Palestinians and the support they received. You should read up on this subject. Saddam also has a history of building up edicational institutions and so on. He recived awards by U.N. earlier on for his wellfare programs and the development Iraq was gaining. Anyone can check this up, just call U.N. in NY and you'll receive a few references I'm sure. What I mean by this is not to defend him in any way but I feel that this rewriting of history and propaganda is serving noone in the long run. If you believe that 100% of the arab world in their harts and minds hate Saddam you're wring. Very wrong. Steve Schear: thanks for your interesting post! Some people need to learn more of that. I also noticed on the news that CIA was conducting the questioning of Saddam. (Did anyone expect anything else?!) I guess this also means that U.S. now will join all dicatators and awful beasts in performing various forms of abuse and torture on him. Iraq formally removed the death penalty just a few weeks ago. Regardless of what you feel about that in general, I think it's embarrasing once again to see U.S. almost "lobbying" against the Iraqis to have them not honouring their own laws to satisfy Bush on this specific issue! Remember there's only one reason for Bush wanting to see Saddam dead and that he does. And that is the fact that "Saddam tried to kill my papa" as Bush put it, I've seen it in interviews myself. Jim Dixon, going through your post again I see yet another half trough, you write > The people on this list are less.. public humiliation and hanging of Americans.. And you seem to forget that U.S. was in bed with Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war era and that there was a friendly tone then. U.S. officials met with Iraqi, I think that Tareq Azis met with Reagan even? Your whole post is based on the feeling that we're gonna do what they did to us. In doing so you have manifested what has been written here about "gasing into the abyss" and so on. You have become what you hunt. Be ware. It is my opinion that we shall distinguish ourselves from these bastards by not committing their deeds ourselves. You seem not to agree on that. And that is a major mistake.

7 12

Re: Don't worry...it's just one of Saddam's doubles
by Tyler Durden 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"If I don't remember incorrectly, they said something about identifying him by DNA testing." Well, of course "Saddam" is going to test positive...he's apparently an actual CLONE. Actually, from what I understand this is the 'original' Saddam (note how much older he seems than the Saddams we've been seeing in the press over the last few years), but he hasn't actually controlled things for a couple of decades. The Saddam we're really looking for is approximately Saddam #3, and he's still at large, and directing the insurgency. -TD >From: Thomas Shaddack <shaddack(a)ns.arachne.cz> >To: Tyler Durden <camera_lumina(a)hotmail.com> >CC: cypherpunks(a)minder.net >Subject: Re: Don't worry...it's just one of Saddam's doubles >Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 03:33:53 +0100 (CET) > > >On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, Tyler Durden wrote: > > > Spread the word. The adminstration got desparate. In a few weeks they'll > > announce this isn't the real Saddam, but that rounding up all of the >clones > > is necessary progress in the fight to get the real Saddam. > >If I don't remember incorrectly, they said something about identifying him >by DNA testing. But it wasn't widely quoted in the mainstream news. So >even if it really is him - they may still claim he isn't the real McCoy if >the insurgency won't stop. > >The timing is definitely weird. Too soon before the Elections. > >But there is still the backup, the Lost TV Star, also known as Ossama; >whether They intend to announce capturing him, or whether he will be >claimed responsible for Something Scary in a psyops attempt to make the >voters more susceptible to the beat of the Homeland Security drums. _________________________________________________________________ Wonder if the latest virus has gotten to your computer? Find out. Run the FREE McAfee online computer scan! http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

3 2

Re: U.S. in violation of Geneva convention?
by Tyler Durden 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"I'd be real happy about millions of bleeding hearts all over the world jerking their knees in unison, ready to cry a fucking ocean over this unbelievably cruel haircut and medical check-up I'm being given. Fucking tools." A thread that started out quasi-interesting has descended into non-Cypherpunk levels of triviality. The original point stands, and is valid. The Islamic world and, in particular, the Arabic part of the Islamic world, are probably going to forget their dislike of Saddam when they see those newreels of the great Dictator being rubbergloved and de-loused. For them it's almost certainly going to resound as a symbol of how we've systematically manipulated and fucked them over all these years. They're not going to respect our "Power", they're not going to care much that WE supported Saddam in the first place. They're just going to get angrier. Look for bin Laden to grow in status until he's just a notch or two below Mohammed. Look then for more bombings and 9/11s here in the US. That Saddam was a cruel, butchering dictator will soon be nearly irrelevant. -Tyler Durden >From: Anatoly Vorobey <mellon(a)pobox.com> >To: cypherpunks(a)lne.com >Subject: Re: U.S. in violation of Geneva convention? >Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 22:54:57 +0200 > >You wrote on Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 03:19:43PM -0500: > > Jim Dixon wrote: > > > > > > > >I have gazed into the abyss and seen a man having his teeth checked and > > >getting a haircut. :-| > > > > > > > > > > And how would you have felt to be the one who got your teeth checked and > > get a haircut with the whole world watching? > >If I had record like Saddam's on me? > >Gee, I'd be real happy I wasn't shot on the spot, or maybe cruelly >tortured and then shot, the way I'd behaved to people I'd captured. >Or maybe torn into pieces by a shrieking mob. > >Instead of doing any of that, they check my teeth and give me a haircut >in front of the cameras? Boo fucking hoo. I'd be real happy about >millions of bleeding hearts all over the world jerking their knees in >unison, ready to cry a fucking ocean over this unbelievably cruel >haircut and medical check-up I'm being given. Fucking tools. > >-- >avva _________________________________________________________________ Working moms: Find helpful tips here on managing kids, home, work and yourself. http://special.msn.com/msnbc/workingmom.armx

2 1

Re: U.S. in violation of Geneva convention?
by Tyler Durden 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Later today, a source close to the interrogation said that Saddam would be subjected to stress and sleep deprivation. Basically, teams of interrogators will ask questions over and over again, and no one will get any rest until answers are provided." At least here in NYC local news, it's common to hear newsmaggots issuing leadins such as, "Will the CIA be able to make Saddam talk?" and so on. I think this implies the "obvious", but it's an obvious that should be stated: The US public basically now generally knows that some forms of extreme measures are being applied to prisoners and detainees, and we're willing to look the other way. After all, 9/11 proves "they" (picture a cluster of darkish-skinned turbanned men wearing fatigues and huddling in caves) are out to take away our freedoms. so why shouldn't we do the same thing to them? >From: Eric Cordian <emc(a)artifact.psychedelic.net> >To: cypherpunks(a)minder.net >Subject: Re: U.S. in violation of Geneva convention? >Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 19:04:43 -0800 (PST) > >Natt writes: > > > You're one-hundred percent correct. I saw that sack of shit Rumsfeld on > > a press conference this afternoon where he answered the specific > > question of does parading Saddam around violate the Geneva convention.? > >Rumsfeld also revealed that the CIA has taken over the Saddam >interrogation, and pundits are speculating that they will use the same >torture techniques that are being used on the "detainees." > >Later today, a source close to the interrogation said that Saddam would be >subjected to stress and sleep deprivation. Basically, teams of >interrogators will ask questions over and over again, and no one will get >any rest until answers are provided. > >Bill Bennett said just a few minutes ago, that Saddam's capture made >America safer, because the world has learned that "If you mess with >America, you wind up in a hole." > >A friend of mine, when asked what he wanted from Santa for Christmas, >replied, "A crater the size of DC." > >Clearly, the world's leaders are looking closely at Saddam's treatment, >and realizing how easily pissing off the Bush family could result in them >being shown on International TV unbathed, unshaven, checked for fleas, and >bent over for a rectal probe. > >Of course, all of this is provoking a new arms race of astronomical >proportions, as the other nations of the world realize international law >means nothing, and that the US and Israel think they can judge everyone >else on the planet, no one can judge them, and they can act with impunity. > >This will, in a few years, result in the usual "force meets force plus >brains" low level format of the arrogant, and after a few hangings, and a >big round of applause, life on the planet will move on. > >-- >Eric Michael Cordian 0+ >O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division >"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law" _________________________________________________________________ Have fun customizing MSN Messenger learn how here! http://www.msnmessenger-download.com/tracking/reach_customize

2 1

Re: U.S. in violation of Geneva convention?
by Freematt357＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In a message dated 12/17/2003 1:00:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, jamesd(a)echeque.com writes: > Firstly, the US army has not violated the Geneva convention: How so? > we will > cheerfully wade knee deep through blood and the body parts of > innocents to destroy those that threaten us, as the crusaders > waded to the holy sepulchre. > I obtained the below quote from your website located at: http://www.jim.com/liberquo.htm "America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own." John Quincy Adams Regards, Matt-

1 0

TSA/FBI No-Fly Nexus
by J.A. Terranson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Terrorism: The New Aviation Threat http://www.c-spanstore.com/172153.html Since I started loading this video stream I am now watching several hours ago, I no longer remember where I saw the link I clicked on that has allowed me to watch this without buying it :-( But the regular purchase link is above. This presentation by an FBI Counterintel agent (Art Cummings) is mostly a standard promo for the bureau, a bunch of rah-rah, we're great, terrorists suck, etc., but he opens with a firm statement that the TSA no-fly list is a direct product of the FBI itself ("we feed the information to TSA"). Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't the FBI stated several times (and in several places) that TSA's list is their own, and that FBI has nothing to do with it? Does this data provide anything for John's suit? -- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin(a)mfn.org "Unbridled nationalism, as distinguished from a sane and legitimate patriotism, must give way to a wider loyalty, to the love of humanity as a whole. Bah'u'llh's statement is: "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." The Promise of World Peace http://www.us.bahai.org/interactive/pdaFiles/pwp.htm

2 2

Re: U.S. in violation of Geneva convention?
by Freematt357＠aol.com 16 Dec '03

16 Dec '03

In a message dated 12/15/2003 9:44:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, timcmay(a)got.net writes: > There are specific clauses which refer to not publically humiliating a > prisoner. I'm surprised the Agitprop Division didn't show video of > Saddam taking his first dump while in custody. > > Saddam is not a good guy. But this went beyond the pale. You're one-hundred percent correct. I saw that sack of shit Rumsfeld on a press conference this afternoon where he answered the specific question of does parading Saddam around violate the Geneva convention. His answer was that some things are more important, that it was necessary to show to the world that Saddam was in custody and he wasn't going to be back in power, etc. He added that Saddam is being treated humanly, and he takes offense to anyone who suggests otherwise. Regards, Matt-

3 2

Saddam drugged says daughter.
by Harmon Seaver 16 Dec '03

16 Dec '03

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3324021.stm And probably they're using drugs to "interview" Saddam, which explains the quick following busts. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com

1 0

[fc-announce] FC'04: Call for Participation
by R. A. Hettinga 16 Dec '03

16 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text

1 0

CarBomb Rips Berkeley, CA
by wguerin＠tulane.edu 16 Dec '03

16 Dec '03

CarBomb Rips Berkeley California A large though prude carbomb rips through the student community of Berkeley, CA at exactly 4:20 am pacific time on friday Dec. 12th. Friday December 12th, 4:20am Pacific, Berkeley California: The device, a 10 element remotely detonated carbomb rips through the dense student populated section of Berkeley, CA less than 4 blocks from the southwest corner of the UCB campus. An audio recording by a student preparing her oral component of a final documents the sequential detonation of a 3-element primary fired by a tap off the vehicles car horn security system, followed by between 5 and 8 secondary charges detonated presumably by burnout. Students in the area have exactly 2 comments on the event: Most living in the adjacent appartments say in a monotonic way: "I'm sorry, I do NOT know what you are talking about." and a limited few others, also from the same areas, say "I am not at liberty to discuss these issues." Students from the surrounding appartment complexes are concerned about the excessive secrecy regarding this explosion that woke over half the people within a quarter mile radius, early friday morning. The explosive elements, after audio analysis, appear to be roughly equivalent to 10 cases of TNT. At least one Berkeley Police Department officer has said that they had a "NO RESPONSE VECTOR" during and prior the time of the explosion. This author has not yet determined the meaning of this phrase. Numerous appartment complexes in the surrounding area have had multiple unexplained fire alarms and other strange activities in the last few days. No mass media coverage or documentation has been available to this author, and most parties researching this event are hesitant to discuss for obvious reasons. -------- (forwarded - WLG)

1 0

cpunk-like meeting report
by Major Variola (ret.) 16 Dec '03

16 Dec '03

I went to a meeting of the Irvine Underground (irvineunderground.org) which reminded me of late-90s SF CP meatings. Although the overall tech level was probably lower and social implications weren't a big topic. Also, at this meeting, there were far more cameras or videocams than were present (at least overtly :-) at the few CP meats I attended. However, nyms were used more than they were (overtly :-) at CP meatings; this may have been due to a "introduce yourself" poll. The IU group seems to be a bit more social, going to movies for instance, than the topic-only CPs were. The meeting was held in a room at an IHOP (pancake restaurant for furriners) The exploit mentioned in http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2003-12-11-microsoft2_x.htm was demonstrated, we were debriefed on the recent LA 802.11b War Flying mission (and the EMI resistance of 1960's era single-engine airplane instruments :-). Toorcon organizers were present. About 30+ people were there, with what appeared to me to be a bimodal distribution of skills, some advanced, some admitted unix newbies, etc. There was even recreational lock picking. A WiFi LAN, net connectivity through someone's cell phone eventually. A video projector. I didn't notice persons with exceptional Euler numbers, though black was definately the color of choice for garments. Ages appeared well distributed from undergrad to hoary. One gent noticed a certain TLA on my cypherpunks T-shirt and admitted that he had once worked in Ft Meade, though he wouldn't say on what :-)

6 12

Remailers and TLAs
by Nomen Nescio 16 Dec '03

16 Dec '03

Even though I agree this issue is important I wouldn't be surprised if NONE were run by TLAs today and NONE has ever been run by TLAs. We will never get any such answer and therefore these speculations will continue. Personally I think it sounds really stupid when I read comments like "you can only trust remailers from pre 9/11" (these kinds of silly/stupid/dumb-paranoid comments are often seen on A.P.A-S). The reason being really that I think they are too stupid and perhaps doesn't really understand what good it would do them to actually operate a few. I may be wrong I guess. When thinking of these things I also remeber having read several comments by remops that actually have been visited by police. Both in U.S. and abroad. The feeling I got from reading their comments is that the police (in case of U.S. I think it was FBI who was inviolved) actually didn't even know what a remailer was. If (and this is a bif "if") that is true in general amongst FBI agents I don't think th ere's a major risk of beeing flooded by TLA operated remailers any time soon. But who knows.

1 0

Re:Textual analysis
by Major Variola (ret) 16 Dec '03

16 Dec '03

At 10:36 AM 12/14/03 -0500, John Kelsey wrote: >It's not obvious to me how you'd change your writing style to defeat these >textual analysis schemes--would it really be as simple as changing the >average length of sentences and getting rid of the big words, or would >there still be ways to determine your identity from that text? Its like steganalysis. Its an arms race between measuring your own signatures vs. what the Adversary can measure. If sentence length is a metric known to you, you can write filters that warn you. Similarly for the Adversary. You end up in an arms race over metrics ---who has the more sensitive ones that the other does not control for?

2 1

Re: Zombie Patriots and other musings
by Anonymous 15 Dec '03

15 Dec '03

Nomen pondered: > Why robbing banks? Aside from allowing the > government to regulate them, what have they > done to deserve being robbed Why not? Revolutionaries need money, and the financial sector has always been asshole buddies with the police, politicians, and other pigs.

6 5

U.S. in violation of Geneva convention?
by Anonymous 15 Dec '03

15 Dec '03

The U.S. official's way of behaving like Texas rednecks are embarrassing. Not only are they cheering "we got him" like a child who can not withhold his enthusiasm. Displaying Saddam the way they did are also possibly a clear violation of the Geneva convention as far as I can tell. What was that quote by Nietsche again? One person who actually did behave in a respectable manner was the President. No lame "we got him" or cowboy hats there. At least not this time.

7 10

Re: U.S. in violation of Geneva convention?
by privacy.at Anonymous Remailer 15 Dec '03

15 Dec '03

>The U.S. official's way of behaving like Texas rednecks are embarrassing. Not Crosspost from nettime: Subject: <nettime> wrong signals If symbols really do matter we might conclude that American administration's PR machine has got it badly wrong. In the carefully orchestrated news management of Saddam's capture, once again, the public opinion which *really* matters in the middle east: Arab public opinion, has been conclusively misread The image of an Arab leader (however terrible) being objectivised by a white gloved American medic like a bug on a lab bench, will not be read in the Arab world as a moment of liberation. It will be seen as a special kind of humiliation, the kind which typifies the depth of ignorance which has inspired this campaign from its outset. Once again the images (chosen with great care one imagines, given the time lapse between Saddam's capture and the John Wayne style triumphalism of the announcement) treats Arab opinion to a further demonstration of the power of the west to objectivize the world under a coolly scientific gaze. In this context no mediaeval torturer could have conceived of a greater humiliation than the medical torch's pencil thin beam illuminating the inside of the tyrant's mouth. A stupidity of almost incomprehensible proportions seems bent on prosecuting a war against terror in which the twenty-four hour news machine is mobilized to disseminate images that do little more than fan the flames of hate.

2 1

Re: Zombie Patriots and other musings
by Anonymous 15 Dec '03

15 Dec '03

A question for the moment might well be how many if any of the remailers are operated by TLAs?

9 10

Re: Idea: Simplified TEMPEST-shielded unit (speculative proposal)
by Anonymous Sender 15 Dec '03

15 Dec '03

While I agree with much of what you say I don't think it's likely that any kind of advanced SIGINT operation was what brought him down. The most important thing to have is intelligence from humans. From insiders. This is partly the problem with the intelligence agencies today. They think too much of the technology and it's possible uses. Good old fashion "spies" will always be the most powerfull way to get information if you can get someone to cooperate. This is also why it is a bit harder in countries with a lot of people willing to kill or be killed for the sake of ideas. Even so it seems that someone sold him for the money in this case. It was bound to happen sooner or later since it's not possible to be on the run without trusting at least one or a few individuals from time to time.

1 0

Hack the Vote: cause a blackout
by Major Variola (ret) 15 Dec '03

15 Dec '03

(This inspired by comments in Scheier's cryptogram) Do all the newly electronic voting places have UPS? I doubt it. Think of the fun you could cause if you downed a few substations or poles. >> And because elections happen all at once, there would be no means of recovery. Imagine if, in the next presidential election, someone hacked the vote in New York. Would we let New York vote again in a week? Would we redo the entire national election? Would we tell New York that their votes didn't count? >>What we need are simple voting systems--paper ballots that can be counted even in a blackout.

1 0

Using PCR to find Hussein via the sewers? [GATTACA]
by Major Variola (ret) 15 Dec '03

15 Dec '03

At 04:50 AM 12/15/03 -0800, John Young wrote: >There's a good possibility that Saddam was traced by Tempest >sensing, airborne or mundane. I wonder if you can trace DNA in sewers back to the source, esp. in an inbred locale? (Peter? PCR with Saddam specific primers?) Or did he just dig a cat-hole instead of using the infrastructure? You can trace industrial contamination up sewer lines back to the source. How about the cells we shed? Just theoretically. Papers fnord says someone used to the good life narced, couldn't handle a jail cell.

1 0