December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

If it protects just a single child...
by CypherPunks Press 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

* John E. Herndon, at his May sentencing (he got 20 years) in Little Rock, Ark., for using two teenage girls in pornographic photos after giving them alcoholic beverages: "They were my muffins and my flowers," he told the judge. "They were earth angels. I renew my promises to the girls as a born-again Christian that I will always love them and protect them." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Send a message to notw-request(a)nine.org with the Subject line of Subscribe. To read these News of the Weird newspaper columns from the past six months, go to http://www.nine.org/notw/notw.html (That site contains no graphics, no photos, no video clips, no audio. Just text. Deal with it.)

1 0

Reason behind ASCII art drought...
by CypherPunks Press 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

* New York City special-effects artist Matt McMullen, 28, has been offering his lifesize, authentically detailed, steel-skeletoned, silicone dolls, under the name "Real Dolls," for several months on the Internet, for around $4,000 each plus options. So far, Stacy, Natasha, Nina, and Leah are available, with choice of hair color, skin color, and height (either "supermodel" or short and voluptuous). His original doll was intended as sculpture until lonely men bombarded him with price inquiries. Said McMullen, "There is no way this can compete with the real thing, but it can fill a deep void in someone's life." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Send a message to notw-request(a)nine.org with the Subject line of Subscribe. To read these News of the Weird newspaper columns from the past six months, go to http://www.nine.org/notw/notw.html (That site contains no graphics, no photos, no video clips, no audio. Just text. Deal with it.)

1 0

But you can get them free, from the government...
by CypherPunks Press 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

* The Times of London reported in August that the California firm Interval Research has developed a prototype for a new wristwatch that would be worn not on the wrist but in the wrist. A liquid crystal display, microchip, and battery would be implanted under the skin, close enough to the surface so that the time would be readable. Battery-recharging and time-zone changes would be done by remote control. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Send a message to notw-request(a)nine.org with the Subject line of Subscribe. To read these News of the Weird newspaper columns from the past six months, go to http://www.nine.org/notw/notw.html (That site contains no graphics, no photos, no video clips, no audio. Just text. Deal with it.)

1 0

Ma May
by CypherPunks Press 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

* In August in Leesburg, Fla., a 28-year-old woman, in the midst of a domestic quarrel with her husband, 29, ordered the couple's two kids, ages 6 and 8, to shoot their father with their BB guns. The kids complied, resulting in five chest wounds, one arm wound, and one cheek wound. The woman is a dispatcher for the Leesburg Police Department.

1 0

Ma Bell
by CypherPunks Press 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

* In April, the National Olympic Committee of the Caribbean island nation of St. Vincent and the Grenadines suspended its Olympic coach Orde Ballantyne for four years after his mother ratted him out. She was head of the country's delegation at the Summer Games in 1996 and reported him for violating protocol by refusing to stand for the U. S. national anthem. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Send a message to notw-request(a)nine.org with the Subject line of Subscribe. To read these News of the Weird newspaper columns from the past six months, go to http://www.nine.org/notw/notw.html (That site contains no graphics, no photos, no video clips, no audio. Just text. Deal with it.)

1 0

Chicken!
by TruthMonger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>>>WHY DID THE CHICKEN CROSS THE ROAD? >>> >>> >>> From the Human Resources/Training Perspective: >>> The chicken had a vision. The chicken was proficient in the core >>> competencies necessary to implement the plan and make the vision >>> reality. >>> >>> Pat Buchanan: >>> To steal a job from a decent, hard-working American. >>> >>> Machiavelli: >>> The point is that the chicken crossed the road. Who cares why? The >>> ends of crossing the road justify whatever motive there was. >>> >>> Thomas de Torquemada: >>> Give me ten minutes with the chicken and I'll find out. >>> >>> Timothy Leary: >>> Because that's the only kind of trip the Establishment would let >>> it take. >>> >>> Carl Jung: >>> The confluence of events in the cultural gestalt necessitated that >>> individual chickens cross roads at this historical juncture, and, >>> therefore, synchronicitously brought such occurrences into being. >>> >>> John Locke: >>> Because he was exercising his natural right to liberty. >>> >>> Albert Camus: >>> It doesn't matter; the chicken's actions have no meaning except to >>> him. >>> >>> Fox Mulder: >>> It was a government conspiracy. >>> >>> Darwin: >>> Chickens, over great periods of time, have been naturally selected >>> in such a way that they are now genetically dispositioned to cross >>> roads. >>> >>> Darwin #2: >>> It was the logical next step after coming down from the trees. >>> >>> Richard M. Nixon: >>> The chicken did not cross the road. I repeat, the chicken did not >>> cross the road. >>> >>> Oliver Stone: >>> The question is not "Why did the chicken cross the road?" but is >>> rather "Who was crossing the road at the same time whom we >>> overlooked in our haste to observe the chicken crossing?" >>> >>> Jerry Seinfeld: >>> Why does anyone cross a road? I mean, why doesn't anyone ever >>> think to ask, "What the heck was this chicken doing walking around >>> all over the place anyway?" >>> >>> The Pope: >>> That is only for God to know. >>> >>> Louis Farrakhan: >>> The road, you will see, represents the black man. The chicken >>> crossed the "black man" in order to trample him and keep him down. >>> >>> Martin Luther King, Jr.: >>> I envision a world where all chickens will be free to cross roads >>> without having their motives called into question. >>> >>> Immanuel Kant: >>> The chicken, being an autonomous being, chose to cross the road of >>> his own free will. >>> >>> Grandpa: >>> In my day, we didn't ask why the chicken crossed the road. Someone >>> told us that the chicken had crossed the road, and that was good >>> enough for us. >>> >>> Dirk Gently (Holistic Detective): >>> I'm not exactly sure why, but right now I've got a horse in my >>> bathroom. >>> >>> Bill Gates: >>> I have just released the new Chicken 2000, which will both cross >>> roads AND balance your checkbook, though when it divides 3 by 2 it >>> gets 1.4999999999. >>> >>> M.C.Escher: >>> That depends on which plane of reality the chicken was on at the >>>time. >>> >>> George Orwell: >>> Because the government had fooled him into thinking that he was >>> crossing the road of his own free will, when he was really only >>> serving their interests. >>> >>> Plato: >>> For the greater good. >>> >>> Aristotle: >>> To actualize its potential. >>> >>> Karl Marx: >>> It was a historical inevitability. >>> >>> Nietzsche: >>> Because if you gaze too long across the Road, the Road gazes also >>> across you. >>> >>> B.F. Skinner: >>> Because the external influences, which had pervaded its sensorium >>> from birth, had caused it to develop in such a fashion that it >>> would tend to cross roads, even while believing these actions to >>> be of its own freewill. >>> >>> Jean-Paul Sartre: >>> In order to act in good faith and be true to itself, the chicken >>> found it necessary to cross the road. >>> >>> Albert Einstein: >>> Whether the chicken crossed the road or the road crossed the >>> chicken depends upon your frame of reference. >>> >>> Pyrrho the Skeptic: >>> What road? >>> >>> The Sphinx: >>> You tell me. >>> >>> Buddha: >>> If you ask this question, you deny your own chicken nature. >>> >>> Emily Dickenson: >>> Because it could not stop for death. >>> >>> Ralph Waldo Emerson: >>> It didn't cross the road; it transcended it. >>> >>> Ernest Hemingway: >>> To die. In the rain. >>> >>> Saddam Hussein: >>> This was an unprovoked act of rebellion and we were quite >>> justified in dropping 50 tons of nerve gas on it. >>> >>> Saddam Hussein #2: >>> It is the Mother of all Chickens. >>> >>> Joseph Stalin: >>> I don't care. Catch it. I need its eggs to make my omelette. >>> >>> Dr. Seuss: >>> Did the chicken cross the road? >>> Did he cross it with a toad? >>> Yes the chicken crossed the road, >>> but why it crossed it, I've not been told! >>> >>> Colonel Sanders: >>> I missed one?

1 0

Mailing list program
by Kayra Otaner 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I am looking for a program that runs under Windows 95 and works like a mailing list. I want to handle approximately 150 or 200 mail accounts and deliver a message from sender to the others. Does any one suggest me such a program? -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6 mQByAzNQynwAAAEDIwXbyxWEggWIqhh9Y6LqDOnI4WTFf1F26ZIBbOAkFTdvbOr1 1qf+Vld1IFWdPeHWrTT9X542Nej6qi3soVJRgLesINLBG2O6ADCd9MkoJDYrqxdk fZrO0Lu1Bthm7/rCSRp523PxAAURtBZrYXlyYSA8a2F5cmFAdHVyay5uZXQ+ =nRRP -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

1 0

Junger v. Daley - USA Brief
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thanks to Peter Junger we offer the USA's second cross-motion for summary judgment of November 18: http://jya.com/pdj5.htm (112K)

1 0

Newsflash
by Theodor.SCHLICKMANN＠BXL.DG13.cec.be 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The European Commission today adopted a proposal for an Action Plan on promoting safe use of the Internet. This takes the form of a Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions with a proposal for a Council decision adopting a Multiannual Community Action Plan on promoting safe use of the Internet. The Action Plan is the follow up of earlier initiatives by the European Union, and refers directly to the 16 October 1996 Communication on Illegal and Harmful Content on the Internet and Green Paper on Protection of Minors and Human Dignity in Audiovisual and Information Services , and the Parliament resolutions of 24 April 1997 and 24 October 1997. The Action Plan is closely linked with the Commission Communication and proposal for a Recommendation of 18 November 1997, which outlines political measures on protection of minors and human dignity in the audiovisual services (http://europa.eu.int/en/comm/dg10/avpolicy/new_srv/comlv-en.htm) The Action Plan contains action lines on creating a safe environment through establishing a European network of hot-lines and industry self-regulation, developing filtering and rating systems and awareness action. The text in English is available online at http://www2.echo.lu/legal/en/internet/actplan.html. Other language versions will be available shortly.

2 1

Re: Further costs of war (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Subject: Re: Further costs of war (fwd) > From: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) > Date: Wed, 26 Nov 97 23:55:33 EST > This has no crypto relevance. Actualy it does, it's just that the reason for this discussion has escaped your blipvert mentality. The reason this is relevant was the claim made by others that had the US *not* entered WWII then the situation would be significantly different than now. In particular it would be a more positive results. I draw exception to this and am willing to debate the point. > The japs didn't join the axis out fo the blue. The US was picking on the Japs > back at the Washington conference in 1921/2, It's interesting that as a direct results of this conference the Japanese took the time to put down their plans to secure (ie take over) the western Pacific. It relied on their typical "Great All-out Battle" strategy. An important point in this strategy was luring the US fleet into Japanese waters and defeating it. > he bulding up the navy, building new bases on Hawaii, Guam, Midway, Samoa, > etc, (in violation of the Washington conference), grabbing small pacific > islands that no one claimed before (jervis, Howland, Phoebe, Palmira). Actualy most of these islands were originaly Dutch, German, or Spanish. For example, the Philipines were Spanish. [data deleted] Vulis, this hasn't dawned on you yet but none the less, you are actualy agreeing with my position that it isn't possible for the US to have kept out of the war. The other participants simply didn't have the resources or the system to organize them with otherwise. > > period. Can't say that I've ever seen this issue in anything I've read. > > According to my books, the US stopped all Jap immigration into US and its > possession (i.e. Hawaii, Philippines, ec) as of May 1, 1925. Which books Vulis, books you have access to or books that you wrote? I made a request for more specificity. Which books in particular are you refering to? Further, for this to be relevant you must show that it was a change of state that mitigated the Japanese actions in some way. That last proviso is the bear... ____________________________________________________________________ | | | | | We built your fort. We will not have it used against us. | | | | John Wayne - Allegheny Uprising | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

3 2

Re: Further costs of war (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Subject: Re: Further costs of war (fwd) > From: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) > Date: Wed, 26 Nov 97 22:40:54 EST > This has little crypto relevance (unless someone drags in the fact that > some of the important ww2 naval battles were won by the us because they > broke jap codes). WARNING: blipvert mentality > In 1904/5 (what's a couple of years between punks) the japs beat the shit out > of the tzar, not Stalin, because of the tzarist army's supreme incompetence, > and also because of severe internal unrest in Russia (general strikes and > uprisings everywhere). It was still Russia. The claims of incompetence and internal unrest apply to both regimes. Is there some point you wish to review regarding this point? > Prior to that, the japs effectively beat Russia in 1875(?). Actualy, the Russians never beat the Japanese prior to Khalkal Gol. [deleted material, relevance unclear] > At lake Khasan (near the short Soviet-Korean border) the Japs demanded > (July/August, 1938) that the Soviets turn over some strategic hills, which > would have made a future attack on Vladivostok easier. Then the japs > just sent some troops to occupy the hills; it took the Soviets almost 2 > weeks to re-take them, which can be explained both by their incompetence > and by Blyukher working for the japs. Jap casualties were 650 dead and > 2500 woulnded. This was the battle of Chankufeng Hill (1938). My sources indicate the casualties were approx. 10,000 on each side. > Jap casualties were much higher at Khalkhin Gol. Strategically, the Japs were > trying to occupy a chunk of Mongolia that would allow them to cut off the > only railroad linking the Soviet far east with the rest of Siberia (which > passes right next to the Chinese border). The japs were bombarding the > disputed area of Mongolia in January-April 1939; invaded in May, and were > kicked out by the Soviet troops, led by Zhukov (note the correct spelling) > in late August. Their casualties were 55K, 25K of which were killed. But(!), the relevant point of this conflict is one simple point. The Russians didn't re-inforce *or* launch their counter-attack until *after* Sorge had assured the Russians that the Japanese would *not* re-inforce themselves (which they didn't). Further, it is important to note that Zhukov employed a massively superior force, including weapons, the likes of which had never been employeed by the Russians before. In addition, Zhukov is notable not for his strategic sense but his tenacity, he didn't care about casualties and did not withdraw once forces were committed. Even though it was clear that the Japanese would have withdrawn because of lack of reinforcements. It was a show battle from the military perspective. [deleted material, relevance unclear] > They recognized that they could have occupied Vladivostok in 1938 if > they had really tried; but eventually Russian reinforcements would > come and there would be hell to pay. Stalin demonstrated that unlike the > tzars he was willing to put up a fight over this relatively worthless > real estate. Only after he was shure that the Japanese wouldn't contest it. > Technically speaking, Moscow did fall. :-) Militarily speaking Moscow didn't fall. :-) There was no battle. The course taken by the Tzars in dealing with Moscow was a political move that would actualy provide them with more return than an actual battle. Remember, Moscow was the fort (ala Kremli), the capital was St. Petersburg. This strategy was discussed and discarded by Stalin as being politicaly unworkable. > By Oct 16, 1941, everyone and > everything were evacuated from Moscow, down to Lenin's mummy, and the Germans > could have walked in if they wanted to. Actualy they did walk in. Napolean spent six weeks at the Kremli before realizing the folly of his misunderstanding. He was waiting on the Tzarist forces fro St. Petersburg. By that time 3/4 of Moscow had been burned to the ground. > The Germans chose not to march in > because they feared mines and booby traps they encountered earlier in Kiev > (probably correct, too). While they waffled, Russian reinforcements arrived > from Siberia and drove them off. The Cossacks didn't arrive until shortly *after* the French began moving their van out of Moscow. > Mussolini's bloody invasion of Ethiopia was mostly a revenge for the > previous invasion by Italy which ended in a humiliating defeat. But it's irrelevant to this discussion. > I'd venture to say that other Hitler allies (Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria) > viewed him as a lesser eveil and didn't like him at all. Irrelevant to this discussion as well. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | | | We built your fort. We will not have it used against us. | | | | John Wayne - Allegheny Uprising | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

2 1

Protecting America's Infrastructures
by TruthMonger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> 25 November 1997 > Source: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aces140.html > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > [Federal Register: November 25, 1997 (Volume 62, Number 227)] > ======================================================================= > Critical Foundations: Protecting America's Infrastructures > AGENCY: Department of Commerce. > ACTION: Notice of availability and request for comments. > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > A Statement of the Problem > > Certain national infrastructures are so vital that their incapacity > or destruction would have a debilitating impact on the defense or > economic security of the United States. What are the names of the public officials and employees who are stepping forward to accept responsibility for allowing the defense of the United States' physical and economic security to become vulnerable to destruction and debilitation? Will there be mass resignations, as a result of those in authority allowing this problem to develop? > These critical infrastructures > include telecommunications, electrical power systems, gas and oil > storage and transportation, banking and finance, transportation, water > supply systems, emergency services (including medical, police, fire, > and rescue), and continuity of government services. It sounds like fascist elements within the government have defined the problem in a manner which will justify oppressive government and corporate control of everything that its citizens need in order to survive. > Threats to these > critical infrastructures fall into two categories: physical threats to > tangible property (``physical threats''), and threats of electronic, > radio-frequency, or computer-based attacks on the information or > communications > components that control critical infrastructures (``cyber threats''). There are many more threats which seem to be self-servingly going unmentioned. Compromise of strong security by government interference. Government mandating of a 'single point of failure' in electronic techno-systems, in the rush to legislate and regulate the power of the government to monitor and control all human communications and interactions on the face of the earth. Government promotion of funneling everybody's electronic future into the same sticky web as the government's future, with the aim of forced march to Electronic Battan. (i.e. - putting Electronic day-care centers in government Electronic buildings.) > Because many of these critical infrastructures are owned and operated > by the private sector, it is essential that the government and private > sector work together to develop a strategy for protecting them and > assuring their continued operation. No it is not! It is not particularly essential unless the goal is to work toward a fascist wedding of corporate and government interests. Does this "strategy for protecting them" involve corporations being armed similarly to government armed forces, or are the plans already in place designed to increase the armed government presence within corporations? > Mission > > ... recommend a comprehensive national policy and > implementation strategy for protecting critical infrastructures and > assuring their continued operation; and propose any statutory or > regulatory changes necessary to effect its recommendations. So the basic plan was to develop critical infrastructures which would be accessible to teeNintendoage hackers and adults who enjoy sex, and then criminalize their behavior as a national threat? Did nobody notice if the rocket scientists promoting this scheme of Electronic Reality were all wearing Swastikas? > Overview of the Report's Findings > > 1. New Thinking is Required in Cyberspace. It is not surprising > that infrastructures have always been attractive targets for those who > would do us harm. In the past we have been protected from hostile > attacks on the infrastructures by broad oceans and friendly neighbors. > Today, the evolution of cyber threats has changed the situation > dramatically. In cyberspace, national borders are no longer relevant. Is this why the government is so desperate in its headlong rush to *make* its citizens physical and financial security dependent on government control of cyberspace? > Formulas that carefully divide responsibility between foreign > defense and domestic law enforcement no longer apply as clearly as they > used to and, in some instances, you may have to solve the crime before > you can decide who has the authority to investigate it. Or to shoot the Electronic goat-herding children. > 2. We Should Act Now to Protect our Future. The Commission has not > discovered an imminent attack or a credible threat sufficient to > warrant a sense of immediate national crisis. However, the Commission > found that our vulnerabilities are increasing steadily while the costs > associated with an effective attack continue to drop. The investments > required to improve the situation are still relatively modest, but will > rise if we procrastinate. Is the Commission naming the names of government officials and the government employees who are responsible for the defense of the United States falling into such a dismal state of vulnerability? Is the solution to replace all of the government officials, employees and regulators who allowed this situation to develop? > 3. Infrastructure Assurance is a Shared Responsibility. National > security requires much more than military strength. While no nation > state is likely to invade our territory or attack our armed forces, we > are inevitably the target of ill will and hostility from some quarters. > Disruption of the services on which our economy and well-being depend > could have significant effects, and if repeated frequently, could > seriously harm public confidence. This sounds like it makes a good case for the formation of an Electronic security version of our armed forces to monitor and control all of CyberSpace. > Because our military and private > infrastructures are becoming less and less separate, because it is > getting harder to differentiate threats from local criminals from those > from foreign powers, and because the techniques of protection, > mitigation, and restoration are largely the same, we conclude that > responsibility for infrastructure protection and assurance can no > longer be delegated on the basis of who the attacker is or where the > attack originates. Rather, the responsibility should be shared > cooperatively among all of the players. This sounds like a good case for treating all criminals, local and global, with the same iron hand of the military that we would use to counter threats from foreign powers. Does this mean that Jim Bell and Kevin Mitnick will be hung for treason? Will this 'sharing of responsibility' among "all of the players" involve restructuring governments and societies into a...how shall I put this...NEW WORLD ORDER? > Overview of the Report's Recommendations > > 1. A Broad Program of Education and Awareness. Spread Fear/Uncertainty/Disinformation? Send me a job application! > 2. Infrastructure Protection through Industry Cooperation and > Information Sharing. Sector-by-sector cooperation and information > sharing would take place in the context of partnerships between owners > and operators and government. Send Mussolini a job application! > These partnerships would identify and > share best practices. The National Institute of Standards and > Technology, the National Security Agency, and the Department of > Energy's National Laboratories would provide technical skills and > expertise required to identify and evaluate vulnerabilities in the > associated information networks and control systems. These are the fucking idiots who were supposed to already be doing these things, and they are the ones who got the nation into this current state which you are claiming is so dismal and dangerous. If these dweebs haven't been able to access the ClueServer up to now, it is unlikely they will be able to do so in the future. > 3. Reconsideration of Laws Related to Infrastructure Protection. > Some laws capable of promoting infrastructure assurance efforts are not > as clear or effective as they could be. Others operate in ways that may > be unfriendly to security concerns. Sorting them all out will be a > lengthy and complex undertaking, involving efforts at local, state, > federal, and international levels. The report identifies specific > existing laws that could be modified to support infrastructure > protection. The mountains of laws that have criminalized the majority of our citizens have not been effective in preventing our society from becoming a dangerous place, but additional laws, criminalizing even more citizens and their activities will? Right... How many more laws will be required to compensate for the bad and useless laws? > 4. A Revised Program of Research and Development. More government. > 5. A National Organization Structure MORE GOVERNMENT! > Office of National Infrastructure Assurance MORE GOVERNMENT! > Infrastructure Assurance Support Office MORE GOVERNMENT! > Information Sharing and Analysis Center MORE GOVERNMENT! > National Infrastructure Assurance Council MORE GOVERNMENT! > Lead Agencies MORE GOVERNMENT! > Sector Coordinators MORE GOVERNMENT! > Warning Center MORE GOVERNMENT! > William Reinsch, > Under Secretary of Commerce, Bureau of Export Administration. \ Reinsch...that's 'German', isn't it? {;>)========< / Why don't you all save a lot of trees and electricity and just declare martial law right now, instead of wasting everybody's time and energy attempting to justify a fascist future? You've got all the guns. You've got the press in your pocket. You can't even be bothered with telling *good* lies, anymore. What the fuck is the point of some lame game of InfoWar designed to provide some imaginary justification for turning the whole world into one large prison complex? Why don't the world leaders all get together and count up their weapons and then just distribute the citizens according to the results? Your spin-doctors can promote it as an act of mercy toward the citizens who will no longer have to die defending their imaginary freedom. The Truth? "We the people" already know that our predestined future is to serve in slavery under a fascist New World Order run by our government and corporate rulers. We're just pretending we don't know where society is headed, in order to trick you into moving more slowly. Pretty ironic, eh? But what the hell... If it saves the life of that single child everyone seems to be so worried about... (Personally, I think we should just 'whack' the little fucker.) TruthMonger ~~~~~~~~~~~ "The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre" http://bureau42.base.org/public/xenix "WebWorld & the Mythical Circle of Eunuchs" http://bureau42.base.org/public/webworld "InfoWar" http://bureau42.base.org/public/infowar3 "The Final Frontier" http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/carljohn "The CypherPunks Secret Conspiracy to Overthrow All World Governments" http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/carljohn/AP1-6.htm http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/carljohn/AP7-10.htm

1 0

For whom the Bell is sentenced...
by Toto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I have come to believe that "assassination politics" is a political Rorschach (ink-blot) test: What you think of it is strongly related to your political philosophy. ~ Jim Bell, "Assassination Politics" It's a shame that Bell wasn't prosecuted and judged by people with a clearer conscience and more a more democratic political philosophy. Why are people invariably under the impression that it is someone other than themself that is putting them on The List (TM)?

1 0

Unique Wedding Mementos: Advertisement
by Steve Nelson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

To remove yourself from this list respond with the word REMOVE in the "subject" line. We appologize if you received this letter in error. Hello: Please consider Dandybars as your wedding memento. Dandybars are Hershey's Milk Chocolate Bars with colorful wrappers (using your wedding colors). The Front of the bar includes the Bride's & Groom's Names and the Date of the Wedding. The back of the bar includes the names of the entire "Wedding Party" as INGREDIENTS. Please check them out by double clicking on: http://www.dandybars.com Thank you for your time and consideration. Steve Nelson salesinfo(a)dandybars.com

1 0

"Kids summit" -- CNNfn interview with SurfWatch president
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[I'd still like to hear more on the inner workings of next week's "kids on the Net" summit from our friends at CDT who are sponsoring it. The lineup of speakers includes Janet Reno, Al Gore, and the secretaries of commerce and education. All joining together to Protect the Children! --Declan] ---- CNNFN SHOW: DIGITAL JAM 19:30 pm ET November 26, 1997; Wednesday 7:51 pm Eastern Time TYPE: INTERVIEW SECTION: Business LENGTH: 913 words HEADLINE: Kids & Cyberspace GUESTS: Michael Sears BYLINE: John Defterios BODY: JOHN DEFTERIOS, CNNfn ANCHOR, DIGITAL JAM: Next week family advocates, educators and industry leaders are coming together to discuss ways to keep children safe in cyberspace. One of the sponsors of the Internet Online Summit is Surfwatch a company that makes blocking software to help parents and teachers filter out objectionable content. Joining me now from Stanford, California to discuss the goals of the summit is Michael Sears. He is the president of Surfwatch. Michael it's great to have you on DIGITAL JAM. Welcome to you. MICHAEL SEARS, PRESIDENT, SURFWATCH: Thank you, a pleasure to be here. DEFTERIOS: First of all, let's discuss how this summit came about. Was it a building movement that finally crescendo. SEARS: I think it is. It's actually the outgrowth of what we did last June with President Clinton and Vice President Gore. In fact June and July time frame the CDA was overturned. The White House decided to take the initiative and asked the industry to get together to see what we can do to actually empower kids and enable kids Online. DEFTERIOS OK. What is the happy medium here, Michael because that's what everybody is really looking for because the Communications Decency Act did stumble and we had people on both side of the debate wanting to stake out their territory. What is , in your view, is the center ground? SEARS: Well, the debate will continue, but the center ground really is that it's all about kids. What we're talking about doing here is bringing together industry and law enforcement and public policy people and talking about to empower kids Online and give them effective tools. Effective tools that are also very easy to use. The idea behind that is how can kids actually get on the net, learn, research, discover, play and do it in a really enriching environment. But also we realize that there are a lot of safety concerns Online. That's probably what we're going to talk about primarily. DEFTERIOS: How about the ACLU, they were raising concerns about being blocked out here or filtration or censorship on the extreme. How do you deal with that side of - the people on that side of the debate? SEARS: It's a slippery slope. The idea here is do we block, companies like Surfwatch, do we block content Online. The idea once again is we target your typical 12 year old in the US. If that 12 year old should see a site or if that 12 years old needs to discover something we try to make sure that we have all of our technology, all of our processes in place to insure that information comes forward. Such as, we don't block the idea of breast, for instance, because breast could be talking about a chicken recipe. It could be talk about breast cancer. However, it it's a sexually explicit depiction or expression of that word that's where you come in and use filtering software to block. DEFTERIOS: There's another side to this, of course, that kids are often much more computer savvy than their parents. How do you over that hurtle? SEARS: That's a major hurdle. In fact we're talking about empowering kids with effective tools, but those tools have to be very easy to use and the ease of use isn't really for the kids because the kids know how to do this stuff. They know what's Online. They know what's out there and they know how to get there. What we really provide are the easy to use tools for mom and dad. So mom and dad pointing and clicking and turning switches on and off very easily can really control the family's environment. DEFTERIOS: As you know, this is a political hot potato for President Clinton because he didn't want to seem extreme on both side and he would like industry to work it out. When it is all said and done, Michael, what is the solution here? SEARS: Well, the solution that this market is all about is called parental control. Surfwatch started the market about three years ago and the word parental control itself was important not only because it's the software in the technology, but it because of those first two words, parental control. Mom and dad have to be involved. Mom and dad have to engage not only to help the kids Online, but also make sure that in chat rooms or with e-mail or with explicit pictures they can really sit down and talk to the kids and moderate what their kids are doing. We're just a tool. DEFTERIOS: This is not a government. Not to interrupt you, but we're almost out of time here. But this is, you're saying, not government intervention then. SEARS: Absolutely. DEFTERIOS: The technology is out there to let the families tackle this on their own. SEARS: That on and off switch should be in the hands of moms and dads not the government. DEFTERIOS: OK, great. How about your market share before we let you go tonight? How are you faring against your competition? SEARS: I think we're doing very well. All the buzz that's been happening over the last couple of months has helped our shares as well as our competitors. We've shipped millions of copies, 7.2 last July. We haven't done the survey lately, but we're clearly in the tens of millions right now. DEFTERIOS: OK. It's great to have you. SEARS: Great to be here. Thanks very much. DEFTERIOS: And have a nice Thanksgiving holiday. SEARS: Same to you. Take care. DEFTERIOS: My pleasure. Michael Sears, president of Surfwatch, joining us from Stanford, California.

1 0

Re: Further costs of war (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Subject: Re: Further costs of war (fwd) > From: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) > Date: Thu, 27 Nov 97 11:22:32 EST > My point was that Russia might have negotiated a better peace at Portmouth, NH, > if it wasn't forced to stop fighting by the general strike. And just exactly what does that have to do with contributing to the US becoming involved in WWII? > Actually, the Russians forced the japs out of port arthur in 1895 and took > it for themselves. But most times their strategy was to avoid conflict and > to let the japs take whatever japs wanted, such as Hokkaido. The point to this is that at the same time the US was taking the Hawaii's, Guam, and conquered the Philippines (costing 20,000 Filipinos & 4,000 Americans). The US itself was making grabs into that same pie. > > This was the battle of Chankufeng Hill (1938). My sources indicate the > > casualties were approx. 10,000 on each side. > > Sigh. My (Russian) sources refer to the incident as lake Khasan, and to the > hills by their Russian names: (vysoty) Zaozernaya and Bezymyannaya. Your > attempts to refer to Russian hills by their Korean names are a sure sign > russophobia and racism. Actualy it stems from my being an American and the names that are chosen for whatever reason. Pretty weak ad hominim. [deleted material - weapons count - relevancy unclear] > As for the innovative use of tanks by Zhukov, Huh? Who said anything about Zhukov being innovative? His main claim to fame is his disregard for casualties. > Ahem. I was talking about Hitler in 1941, not Napoleon in 1812. (Both fucked > up the psyops and alienated the popuilation which could have viewed them as > their liberators, but that's a different thread altogether.) > > Militarily speaking, by oct 16 Moscow was evacuated and useless to the > Soviets. The issue in both cases wasn't military. In Napoleon's case the capital wasn't Moscow, it was St. Petersburg. Moscow was an outpost the French over estimated the worth of. By not fighting for it the peoples sacrifice created a great political environment and also further depleted the French who weren't prepared for the weather. In the WWII case, Stalin couldn't afford to be seen backing down. > Learn to read. I was talking about Hitler's troops in October 1941. The road > to Moscow was clear, but the Germans didn't walk in. The Germans only got to the outskirts. And the records that I have indicate that it wasn't a cake walk. To quote a report that Bock made to Brauchitsch just after arriving from viewing Moscow from a front-line bunker: "I have last night relieved a divisional commander who reported that the Russians had repulsed his men with hammers and shovels." > I'm talking about 1941! Stalin decided to assume that the japs wreen't going > to attack, so he brought in fresh troops from Siberia. There was no assumption. Stalin had Sorge to tell him what was up. > By the way I feel that > from the game theortic point of view, if he knew nothing about jap intentions > (i.e., no Richard Sorge), they the right strategy would have been to assume > that the japs were not going to attack; for if they did, he would have been > fucked anyway. With the assumptions that the japs wouldn't attack, he was able > to beat off the germans. Assuming he had no intelligence, send out scouts. I would probably look at some form of contested withdrawal (the hardest kind of operation technicaly) to a set of stop-lines. I would use those stop lines for re-supply & re-organization. This would allow me to remove troops from the front lines and compensate with improved logistics over my opponent, whose supply lines only get longer and longer. I would in addition increase my intelligence resources (eg traffic monitoring & analysis) on that front. I would furher increase my air forces ability to bomb in close support to about 100 miles behind the front lines. The lines would be about 30-60 miles apart depending on terrain. Never under-estimate your enemy (that 'no intelligence' will bite you in the ass *every* time) and have a clear goal. I would attempt to pull some troops from the eastern front because the Japanese supply lines would be long and external, while mine get shorter and are internal. This would allow me an edge on the typical 3:1 ratio. I would further recognize that while I had lots of natural resources in that area but few urban areas physical control for a short period while resolving the western front is acceptable. If something like the US entering were to occur I would then put a light covering screen and pull troops out because the Japanese don't have the resources to fight on that many fronts. > Possibly. I was responding to your (outright silly) claim that Mussolini > invaded Ethiopia to "impress" Hitler. No, I claim that *one* of the issues involved was to be able to appear at the bargaining table as Hitlers equal. Material refering to these motives are in Ciano's diary. Mussolini was wanting the entire episode to be seen as a grand adventure. He wanted Italy to be seen as an adventersome country with the cutting edge in political systems successfuly fulfilling its rightful place in history. In short, he wanted to be seen as the 'good guy'. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | | | We built your fort. We will not have it used against us. | | | | John Wayne - Allegheny Uprising | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Request for Jim Bell Update
by cvhd＠indyweb.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Anyone have a pointer to a Jim Bell update page or source? Thanks

2 1

Re: Request for Jim Bell Update
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Anyone have a pointer to a Jim Bell update page or source? Here's recent Jim Bell material: http://jya.com/jimbell6.htm (news stories on Bell's sentencing) http://jya.com/next-wave.htm (US News on CB terrorism, stars JB) http://jya.com/jibell-dock4.htm (latest court dockets for USA v. Bell) For earlier info access backwards in each series: ../jimbell5, etc.; ../jimbell-dock3.htm, etc. Not aware of a source for the classified version but the public version of "Assassination Politics" is at: http://jya.com/ap.htm

1 0

Advertisement: Web Site Hosting
by info＠infowatch.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ If you wish to be excluded from any future mailings, type "remove" in subject header and hit reply. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.infowatch.net InfoWatch would like to introduce our complete Hosting and Promotional service. FOR ONLY $29.95 PER MONTH ! * 30 MB (megabytes) of disk space * 1000 MB = 1 GB (gigabyte) of data transfer per month * 8 E-mail accounts * INTERNATIONAL Hosting * Access to your account anytime via the Web Control Panel * MS Front Page * Unlimited FTP updates * Personal CGI directory for your own scripts (or use ours) * Advanced web statistics analyzer program * E-mail forwarding, auto responders, and vacation reply * Domain name registration (www.yourname.com) * Register your domain with over 250 search engines - FREE! * Friendly customer support * Inquire about our $24.95/month plan If for any reason you are not satisfied with InfoWatch's service after 30 days, we will transfer you back to your original host and pay any transfer fees. http://www.infowatch.net info(a)infowatch.net

1 0

Is Tim May guilty of illegally advocating revolution?
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

So I've been reading "Freedom and the Court" by Henry Abraham, and a passage in it made me think of Tim May and the cypherpunks list: "//Actual, overt// incitement of the overthrow of the government of the United States by force and violence, accompanied by the language of direct and imminent incitement, is not freedom of expression but a violation of Court-upheld legislative proscriptions; yet the //theoretical// advocacy of such overthrow, on the other hand, has been a judicially recognized protected freedom since 1957." [See Yates v. United States, 354 U.S. 298 (1957), particularly Mr. Justice Harlan's opinion for the 6:1 court.] (Emphasis in the original. --DM) Some civil liberties lawyers, incidentally, have told me that Internet messages almost by definition are probably not "direct and imminent incitement." Some excerpts from Yates v. United States: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=US&vol=354&p… 9 The essential distinction [354 U.S. 298, 325] is that those to whom the advocacy is addressed must be urged to do something, now or in the future, rather than merely to believe in something. [...] Instances of speech that could be considered to amount to "advocacy of action" are so few and far between as to be almost completely overshadowed by the hundreds of instances in the record in which overthrow, if mentioned at all, occurs in the course of doctrinal disputation so remote from action as to be almost wholly lacking in probative value. Vague references to "revolutionary" or "militant" action of an unspecified character, which are found in the evidence, might in addition be given too great weight by the jury in the absence of more precise instructions. Particularly in light of this record, we must regard the trial court's charge in this respect as furnishing wholly inadequate guidance to the jury on this central point in the case. We cannot allow a conviction to stand on such "an equivocal direction to the jury on a basic issue." -Declan

4 3

Algorithms
by emmanuel coutris 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I search to program an encoder and decoder. I know the RSA encryption method but I don't know how to apply it to a file (I have programmed it only with numbers). Can you send me the way I can apply this algorithm to files (binary and text). Manu

1 0

Free Online Marketing Course!
by mentor＠mail.bip.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

=================================== ARE YOU READY TO MAKE HISTORY? =================================== ~~~~~~~~~~~~ Who Are We? ~~~~~~~~~~~~ We are a group of professionals who have researched business trends and market practices in search of an intelligent, practical way for the average person to earn income in today's market place. By utilizing the latest technology and time proven marketing techniques we have developed a system that allows an individual to compete in the fast pace business world of tomorrow. You are about to be exposed to one of the most explosive and innovated opportunities to ever hit the business world. This opportunity is utilizing the two most powerful mediums in the history of mankind. Those two mediums are Network Marketing and the Internet. NOTE: With a market of over100 million people on the Internet and projected to double by the end of this year, we know that we are about to make History! With the Latest in Technology we are able to offer to the average individual something that before was beyond the average persons abilities. We are building an intranet of people that is as powerful as a runaway locomotive. As you well know Network Marketing is nothing more than a numbers game as like any other business. Utilizing the power of the internet, we can reach people by the masses for little or no cost. When you go through the numbers your chance of success is much greater. How would it feel if you could have an opportunity that only multi - million dollar companies could have. Well here is your chance, you can receive a self replicating web site that is *commerce enabled for FREE just by getting involved with us. A site that is able to both qualify and sponsor new distributors into your business or allow customers to just buy products with out the hassle of an inventory in your home, its all done online. (* the average commerced enable Web Site cost $ 1.2 million) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ What Have We Done So Far? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ We already have hundreds of distributors joining us and we haven't even begun yet. Our marketing group has shattered all previous records in the company we are teamed up with. Who would of thought. For Example: 1st level of accomplishment in our vendor company is called Platinum Executive. The fastest that level was achieved in the companys 14 year history was 9 days. We achieved this in just one hour of announcing this opportunity to just a few people. The next major level of achievement is 4 Star Platinum. The previous record was six months. Our group achieved this in only two weeks. Through out the development stage of this campaign we have over 20 Platinums, twelve 2 Star Platinums and two 4 Star Platinums. This a true and solid home based business opportunity. And the timing couldnŽt be better for you. You are definetely at the right place at the right time. And we are here 24 hours/day for Your success! We are still in prelaunch! So now itŽs up to you! <<<<<< MAKE A DESCISION TODAY >>>>>>> Do You want to watch or play? Get started today! Just to show You how commited we are to Your success we offer You to participate in a FREE online marketing course, whether You decide to join us or not. ============================================== Get more info about us and the online marketing course immediately. Just send an email to the following address: mailto:mentor@mail.bip.net Please put the word info in the subject line. ==============================================

1 0

How to overcome the apparent media boycott of Pauline Hanson's new biography
by Global Web Builders 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear One Nation supporter in NSW, It has come to our attention that the newly released authorised biography of "Pauline, the Hanson Phenonenon" is apparently not being stocked by major book sellers in most Australian states. The big exception to the rule is Queensland where publicity and coverage was given to the book launch and resulting sales in this state have been excellent. This media coverage has simply not occured in the other states. Media monitor show that only "The West Australian" and "The Canberra Times" covered the book launch or any subsequent publicity of any note. Reading between the lines News Limited, who dominate the print press, have totally ignored the book. We would ask you to contact your local major book seller to make a copy of the book available in their store, book details as follows: "Pauline, The Hanson Phenomenon" by Helen Dodd, publishers Boolarong Press, Queensland ISBN #0646332171. This action will result in the book being ordered by your local book store who have the details on how to make orders for the book. If they say they do not wish to order or stock the book please contact GWB with the details of the bookstore. It is important to note that the book store does not pay for the book as it is on consignment and anything that they do not sell is returned to the publisher so their is no financial cost to the book store. We are confident that the book will be sold, based on extraordinary sales in Queensland, but without the publicity the general public will not be aware that the book is available. It appears that the mainstream media are attempting to prevent the book reaching its potential audience Australia wide. Your assistance in overcoming this apparent act of censorship would be greatly appreciated. GWB Scott Balson.

1 0

National Poetry Contest
by ultramax＠206.105.237.162 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

SUBJECT: Poetry Contest, Win $3000.00 TEXT OF MESSAGE: -N A T I O N A L P O E T R Y F O R U M- You are invited to submit a poem to the National Poetry Forum. All works will be read by our staff of award winning poets and writers, and you will receive a "Critical Analysis Report" with detailed professional comments and thoughts on your poetry. The top 25 poems received, as determined by our judges, will be awarded cash prizes including a $3,000.00 Grand Award. The National Poetry Forum, based in New York, looks for fresh new talent in writers and poets like you. We employ award winning professional poets to analyze all poetry as well as judge them for award eligibility on the basis of creativity and literary content. With the writers permission, the 25 award winning poems will be "displayed" on our web site. -RULES AND GUIDELINES- -Send us ONE poem, any style and on any subject, no more than 25 lines typed and single spaced on an 8x11 sheet of paper. -In the upper left corner should be: -Title of Poem -Your Name -Your Street Address -City, State, Zip -Your E-Mail Address -Send poem along with a $10.00 fee (this fee is both for the Critical Analysis Report and for entry into Award Eligibility). Make checks payable to "National Poetry Forum" -All poems must be received by January 15, 1998. -CRITICAL ANALYSIS REPORT: You will receive a personal Critical Analysis Report regardless of award status. This report will contain comments on your poetry and professional insight into the use of the poetic styles and techniques found in your work. You will receive report by March 15. -AWARDS: Money awards will be given for the top 25 poems, as determined by our judges. The Grand Award is $3,000.00. If your poetry is aming the top 25, you will receive your award along with the Critical Analysis Report. -DEADLINE: January 15. Send poem along with a $10.00 non-refundable fee to: National Poetry Forum PO Box 381 New York, NY 10040 **Make checks payable to "National Poetry Forum" -QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? Feel free to E-Mail us at NatPoeFor(a)aol.com Visit our web site at http://members.aol.com/NatPoeFor/poetry.html Please note: The National Poetry Forum does not retain the rights to any poetry or literary works received. All poems are the sole property of the writer.

1 0

Re: [RePol] BCC IN REMAILERS
by TruthMonger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jay Stotzky wrote: > On 28 Nov 97 at 0:19, Denizen wrote: > <text snipped> > Whatever. Hope what you're doing doesn't backfire on any remailer > operators, Rich. That'd be a real shame. What I love most about self-righteous jackasses is that I can usually count on picking up a little extra beer money by betting that their last post to a thread where they have had their ass kicked, they will crawl out on their bellies with some lame, moralistic equivalent of, "Yeah, but when that single child (TM) dies, _you_ will be the one who is responsible for their death. (Pictures at 11!)" OR "Sure, light bulb jokes are funny...until someone burns a retina." Hay, Jay...why don't you shoot twenty 'innocent' citizens at random every time someone 'abuses' a remailer? Then you can point out how many needless deaths could be prevented by ratting out one's friends to the remailer Gestapo. (And be sure to make everyone aware that use of the letter, 'n', is 'abuse', in *your* definintion.) BIG FUCKING NEWS FLASH, JACK!!! In the universal scheme of things, there _is_no_ abuse! If you read the chapter on rights in "How I Found Freedom In An Unfree World" and thought Harry Browne was being 'cute' with his one-liner, "People have a right to do to you whatever you can't stop them from doing." then you might try reading it again without your hand down the front of your pants. HOW TO KNOW WHEN YOU'RE A FASCIST NAZI--TIP #7: "The only people who should use the word 'we' are kings, priests and people with tapeworms." Heigh, Jay...I may be a liar, an asshole and a forger, but at least I lead with my balls. When I take it upon myself to speak for all cypherpunks on the face of the earth, I try to do it as the "Chief CypherPunks SpokesPerson," and not by trying to slip the "Royal WE" up everyone's butt through the back door (redundant?). There ain't no 'we' when the Feds knock on a remailer's door, any more than there is a 'we' in Jim Bell's WorldWide Conspiracy. Someone posts a simple question to a remailer list asking which remailers support a certain function, and your reply is to try to shake them down to find out the 'purity' of their 'motives' in asking a technical question? Of course, you're not a Nazi, are you? "WE just want to ask you a few questions..." before revealing 'source code', in order to make certain that no one is going to make 'improper' use of any remailers, or encryption packages, or graphic images of fully clothed children, or... Becoming a remailer operator is one of the quickest ways I've found to ferret out 'Big Brother Inside' (TMTCM). I regard most remailer operators as everyday heros, but I have to laugh (or puke) when I see someone painting themselves, or remailer operators as a whole, as some kind of Hero/Savior/Saint. This is invariably followed by viewing themselves as part of some Holy Crusade to 'save' remailer recipients from spam, or one of the other Horsemen of the Remailer Apocalypse. Any technical limitations one imposes on the use of their remailer that is not due purely to considerations in regard to survival, is nothing more than using it as an ego-tool to play God/BigBrother. Even the process of trying to survive as a remailer operator leads to one needing to reevaluate their character, beliefs and values. e.g. - You may be able to survive by allowing Christian spamming, but not Satanist spamming. Do you allow one, but not the other, in order to keep from getting shut down? e.g. - You may be able to survive by allowing anonymous email to any .gov site except whitehouse.gov. Do you allow one, but not the other? Hey, Jay...I recognize your 'right' to answer technical questions about remailer use only after having the person asking the question fill out a 10-page form asking questions such as, "Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist Party?" I also recognize your right to be laughed at as a lame, Nazi fuck. TruthMonger#1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Business Security 5.8 Comment: "I Broke PGP!" iQEVAwUANH7LJj0zUlXoOfx5AQEFWggAiIZbdYSw4N9CCrlHl0nJt9yLnfB/xFb9 RrUEMPocsOdC2rRAMkyRpx8R6bPN0AHHUT0Bum9qc1YCJ63OGuMm6UNh51dBmzXl i3syr7UBCPg3aYTSAooIRUoFzHsuqvm0Y2Dk2xYRlZ+SKoMzWmG9Kkiaed2ryqbC tqZJKp6sHD7p+Dt3/IbEahJQqNNXVrOn85pM+xd4T71fPdH1HA0Iptef8kflCg2U gkXSuPIJHZOLDi5kPurJcd9ho2dr1ZYyh3GOpEkyfDyLUquOtJUQKsfrTSZlwUML Et7BKHLk6z+hXJpo/HOU7y2tlL5R620O03FmmNaEePjbm0+M5x67Mw== =JE3f -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Naked Stealth
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The 26 November Guardian reports on the bungled case of the UK hacker who allegedly threatened US national security by hacking the Rome AFB system (and scaring the bejesus out of the North Koreans to boot) while searching for Area 51 info on aliens. The case was thrown out by the court as way overblown and unproveable, though the USG got a lot of mileage from it for "terrorist threats." It hoots at the USAF's crack cyber-security team in San Antonio who over-mobilized to trace the terrifying teenager by most sophisticated means, not knowing that the kid had already been nabbed by Scotland Yard thanks to a traditional-means informant. Now the officer who led the AF hunt is working the cyber-scare circuit peddling the top gun technology -- top secret of course, can't even be revealed by court order. http://jya.com/naked-gun.htm

2 1

NSA
by bill payne 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The battle continues. Friday 11/28/97 6:27 AM John Young Morales and I could not find the word surreply in the dictionary. Microsoft Word spelling checker didnt recognize surreply either. Speculation is that if I showed up at the NM district federal court clerks office this morning with a surreply, the clerk would not file it for the reason that we did not have the leave of court. But, of course, we are not filing a surreply. We like the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure better than New Mexico local rules.. Had a great time at my former Ph.D. student Sobolewski's home last night. Voytek visited this summer from Poland. I met him Voytek brought Sobolewski some Chopin Polish vodka. And several other bottles of Polish vodka. One had grass in the bottle. Sobolewski was born in Cracow in 1939. Sobolewski even recalls as a youth seeing the freight trains going east. Loaded with people. Arbeit macht frei. Lets hope some people see the merits in prompt settlement before this matter gets worse. And get the American eagle flying right. Especially the legal eagle. Later bill UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO William H. Payne ) Arthur R. Morales ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v ) CIV NO 97 0266 ) SC/DJS ) Lieutenant General Kenneth A. Minihan, USAF ) Director, National Security Agency ) National Security Agency ) ) Defendant ) PLAINTIFFS' ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S CROSS-CLAIM REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL DISMISSAL AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 1 COMES NOW plaintiffs Payne [Payne] and Morales [Morales] [Plaintiffs], pro se litigants to exercise their rights guaranteed under the Local Civil Rules to respond to DEFENDANT'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL DISMISSAL AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [REPLY] filed 97 NOV 14 by assistant US attorney Jan Mitchell. 2 Local Civil Rule 7.6 Timing of and Restrictions on Responses and Replies, (b) Surreply states The filing of a surreply requires leave of the Court. But this filing is NOT A SURREPLY. Rule 7 of the Federal Rules for Civil Procedure states (a) Pleadings. There shall be a complaint and an answer; a reply to a counterclaim denominated as such; an answer to a cross-claim, if the answer contains a cross-claim; a third-party complaint, if a person who was not an original party is summoned under the provision of Rule 14; and a third-party answer, if a third-party complaint is served. No other pleading shall be allowed, except that the court may order a reply to an answer or a third party answer. Mitchell makes a claim in her REPLY. Mitchell writes, It continues to be Defendant's position that Plaintiffs' Complaint for Injunctive Relief ("Complaint") filed February 28, 1997 must be dismissed. This ANSWER contains a cross-claim answer. Namely, give the public the documents legally requested under the FOIA. 3 Mitchell writes, Plaintiffs make the sweeping assertion that the "29 cases in Mitchell's MEMORANDUM ... do NOT APPLY to the facts in this case. However, they cite to absolutely no case law to support their position. No citations to case law are required for the reason that Plaintiffs EXHAUSTED THEIR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES, as stated by NSA deputy director William P. Crowell. Plaintiffs support their position by FACTS in this matter. Mitchell attempts to force Plaintiffs to support the FACTS in this lawsuit with case law. Mitchell cited case law that applies ONLY when those seeking documents under the FOIA did NOT exhaust administrative remedies. Mitchell's case law DOES NOT APPLY to this lawsuit for the reason that Plaintiffs DID EXHAUST ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES. Lawyer Mitchell appears to attempt to apply the Nazi strategy If you tell a big enough lie often enough, people will begin to believe it. The lie Mitchell is attempting to convince readers of these documents of is that Plaintiffs DID NOT exhaust administrative remedies. Plaintiffs DID EXHAUST ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES. NSA deputy director and NSA FOIA/PA Appeals Authority William P. Crowell writes 31 December 1996 Because the process of your request has not progressed to a point where there have been any initial, substantive Agency determination of the release or withholding of responsive records, I can offer you no administrative remedy. 4 Mitchell writes, The legal authority relied upon I the Memorandum in Support of Defendant's Motion for Partial Dismissal and Motion for Summary Judgment (hereinafter referred to the "Memorandum"), provides clear legal basis for the Court to either dismiss Plaintiff's [sic] Complaint, or granting summary judgment to Defendant as a matter of law. Plaintiffs disagree. Mitchell cites no case law to support the above paragraph. Rather Plaintiffs lawfully requested documents, mostly of KNOWN EXISTENCE AND LOCATION, and, as the Court may be aware When an administrative appeal is denied, a requester has the right to appeal the denial in court. A FOIA appeal lawsuit can be filed in the U.S. District Court in the district where the requester lives. The requester can also file suit in the district where the documents are located or in the District of Columbia. When a requester goes to court, the burden of justifying the withholding of documents is on the government. This is a distinct advantage for the requester. Mitchell wrongly seeks to have Defendant withhold the requested documents for the reason that she CLAIMS Plaintiffs have failed to exhaust administrative remedies. Bur Plaintiffs HAVE EXHAUSTED ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES as NSA former deputy director Crowell told Payne IN WRITING. 5 Mitchell writes, In Paragraphs 1-6 of Plaintiffs' Response, Plaintiffs appear to be claiming the Defendant has misrepresented this facts concerning Plaintiff Payne's Freedom of Information Act/ Privacy Act("FOIA/PA") requests. It is true that Plaintiff Payne did file two FOIA request with the National Security Agency ('NSA/Agency") and that NSA did not respond with the statutory time limit. It is also true that Plaintiff Payne appealed with NSA the nonresponse to both requests and subsequently received a letter dated 31 December 1997, from William P. Crowell, the Freedom on Information AC/Privacy Act appeals Authority. Mr. Crowell stated, among other things that no administrative remedy could be offered at that time. Lawyer Mitchell's "at that time" appears to be an argument that Plaintiffs should wait indefinitely for NSA to produce requested documents. Plaintiffs exercise their rights and proceed to court as the law allows when administrative remedies have been exhausted. Mitchell UNSUCCESSFULLY ATTEMPTS to make a valid argument that Plaintiffs had to wait even longer AFTER ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES WERE EXHAUSTED before filing a FOIA lawsuit. 6 Mitchell writes, Attachment 4 to Exhibit A, the Winch Declaration attached to Defendant's Memorandum. NSA employee GARY W. WINCH [Winch], Director of Policy, made a false statement under oath in an unsuccessful attempt to reverse NSA deputy director Crowell's letter informing Payne that administrative remedies were exhausted. Winch's violation of the False Statement Act earned Winch a criminal complaint affidavit file with selected magistrate judge Antonin Scalia. 6 Mitchell writes, Despite the fact that Mr. Payne was clearly informed that he could treat the letter from William P. Crowell as a denial of his appeal and he could proceed under 5 U.S.C. section 552 to seek judicial review of the determination, Mr. Payne did not proceed to exercise his right to file a civil lawsuit in the United States at that time. Mitchell unsuccessfully attempts to make a valid argument that IMMEDIATELY UPON receiving Crowell's letter that Plaintiffs were REQUIRED to file a lawsuit. Mitchell cites no law to support her argument. The reason Mitchell cites no law is that the law does not specify WHEN a plaintiff must file a lawsuit. As the court may know 5 USC 552 states (B) On complaint, the district court of the United States in the district in which the complainant resides, or has his principal place of business, or in which the agency records are situated, or in the District of Columbia, has jurisdiction to enjoin the agency from withholding agency records and to order the production of any agency records improperly withheld from the complainant. In such a case the court shall determine the matter de novo, and may examine the contents of such agency records in camera to determine whether such records or any part thereof shall be withheld under any of the exemptions set forth in subsection (b) of this section, and the burden is on the agency to sustain its action. In addition to any other matters to which a court accords substantial weight, a court shall accord substantial weight to an affidavit of an agency concerning the agency's determination as to technical feasibility under paragraph (2)(C) and subsection (b) and reproducibility under paragraph (3)(B). (C) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the defendant shall serve an answer or otherwise plead to any complaint made under this subsection within thirty days after service upon the defendant of the pleading in which such complaint is made, unless the court otherwise directs for good cause shown. So Mitchell's argument that Plaintiffs were required to file this lawsuit within a specific time after receiving Crowell's letter must be dismissed as not supported by law. 7 Mitchell writes, In a letter dated 6 January 1997, Plaintiff Payne was advised that his request for a waiver of fees had been denied and informed him of the estimate of the cost to search for the records concerning the algorithms. NSA was clearly attempting to deny furnishing the requested documents by asking Payne for money for SEARCHING for the documents. Payne worked with NSA implementing NSA crypto algorithms for about ten years. Payne KNOWS WHO has documents and about WHERE the documents are located. NO SEARCH IS REQUIRED. Asking for fees to SEARCH is clearly a unintelligent ruse to deny furnishing the legally requested documents. 8 Mitchell writes Attachment 5 to Exhibit A, the Winch Declaration attached to Defendant's Memorandum. Once that letter was received, Mr. Payne was clearly on notice that NSA was continuing to process his FOIA request, and he was specifically notified that if he did not agree with the fee determination, he could appeal in writing with 60 days to the NSA/CSS Freedom of Information Act Appeals Authority. He chose not to appeal the denial of the fee waiver nor did he pay the estimated costs. Exhibit A, Winch Declaration, at 5, section 14. Payne is not required to appeal fee determination denial if Plaintiffs are NOT SUING OVER A FEE WAIVER DENIAL. Mitchell cites no law to show that Payne is required to appeal a FOIA fee denial before filing suit for legally requested documents. Winch wrote, The search cost estimate was $1,317.50, as computed in accordance with DOD regulations. Mr. Payne was informed that 2 hours of search would be conducted at no cost to him as required by the FOIA In accordance with its regulations, NSA requires advance payment of cost exceeding $250 prior to initiating a search. Mr. Payne was so informed in the Agency's 6 January letter and was requested to pay the $1,267.50 (the remainder of the estimated search costs) within 30 days. Winch CLEARLY attempts to scam Payne by asking for $1,317.50 for a SEARCH. No search is required. Filing a lawsuit permits Discovery WITHOUT LEAVE OF THE COURT. Discovery is used to located documents. Rule 26 (b)(1) Parties may obtain discovery regarding any mater, not privileged, which is relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action, whether it relates to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of any other party, including the existence, description, nature, custody, condition, and LOCATION of any books documents, or other tangible thing and the identity and location of persons have knowledge of any discoverable matter. Economics of clearly wasting $1,317.50 or paying $125 for this public internationally Internet-viewed lawsuit clearly favored the latter approach to get the lawfully requested documents. 9 Mitchell writes Despite Plaintiffs unsupported protestation to the contrary, the law is absolutely clear that when a requester elects not to go to court immediately -in this case, immediately after receiving the letter dated 31 December 1996 and before receiving the letter dated 06 January 1997 - he must exhaust all administrative remedies within the agency. Mr. Payne must have administratively exhausted the decision on the fee waiver decision. Oglesby v. Department of the Army, 920 F2.d 57, 61 (D.D.Cir. 1990); McDonnell v. United States of America, 4 F.3d 1227, 1240 (3d Cir. 1993). He is not do so. Mitchell cites no law to support her statement that Plaintiffs are REQUIRED "to go to court immediately." In fact, appearance is that Mitchell has made another false statement under oath. The fee $1,317.50 Winch requested for a search for documents of known location, or whose location could be established with Discovery, did not have to be appealed to exhaust administrative remedies. Payne could have appealed the denial of waiver of fees but chose not to because this was clearly a ploy on Winch's part to cost Payne money. And Mitchell cannot, because their is no requirement, cite law to show that Payne is required to appeal a fee waiver denial if Plaintiffs are not using about fee waiver denial. If Plaintiff's WISHED, which they did not, to sue for fee waiver, then Payne would have had to appeal the denial of FEE WAIVER to exhaust administrative remedies. 5 USC 552 4(A) states about a fee waiver denial lawsuit (vii) In any action by a requester regarding the waiver of fees under this section, the court shall determine the matter de novo: Provided, That the court's review of the matter shall be limited to the record before the agency. But this lawsuit IS NOT ABOUT WAIVER OF FEES, it is about obtaining the lawfully requested documents. Mitchell again attempts, unsuccessfully, to distort the law by citing Oglesby and McDonnell where administrative remedies were NOT exhausted. This lawsuit is about obtaining documents. Plaintiffs DID NOT sue for fee waiver denial. Therefore, no appeal of FEE WAIVER DENIAL was required. 10 Mitchell writes Plaintiffs not attempt to excuse Plaintiff Payne's failure to exhaust the administrative appeal process, by claiming that the request for payment is a "ploy" to avoid providing the documents. Plaintiff Payne asserts that he knows where the records are located with NSA because of his association with the Agency during his employment with Sandia National Laboratory [sic] and, therefore, he maintains that no search is required. Plaintiffs' Response, at 4 section 9. Plaintiff Payne also asserts that even if he had paid the estimated costs, the Agency would not have produced the documents. Within the specified guiltiness, the FOIA allows an agency to assess fees for processing requests made under the Act and to require advance payment of estimated fees if it is determined that the fees will exceed $250. 5 U.S.C section 552(a)(4)(A)(i), (v). The obligation is to conduct a search, the scope of which is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of responsive records. Under the law, there is no requirement that records actually be discovered in a search for which a requester pays. OMB Fee Guidelines, 52 Fed. Reg. 10,011, 10,018 (1987). Even if Mr. Payne did know the location of the records, (and Defendant certainly does not agree that he does), The Agency would still have an obligation under the law to conduct an adequate search. Further, even if the records are found, they may still be withheld under various FOIA exemptions. In fact, the letter from James P. Cavanaugh dated 06 January 1997, specifically informed Mr. Payne that if any responsive records were found, they would still have to be reviewed for releasibility and that the records of this type most likely would be classified or otherwise exempt from disclosure. Attachment F to Exhibit A to Defendant's Memorandum. Plaintiffs make an unsupported argument that because NSA did not respond to the FOIA requests within the allotted time, and because NSA failed to return the green return receipt cards, (Plaintiffs' Response, at 2 section 4),"[t]he law allows at requester to consider that his or her request has been denied . . . [t]his permits the requester to file an administrative appeal." Even if this statement were true, it has not bearing on the facts before the Court. Plaintiff Payne did not timely file in Federal court prior to receiving the January 1997 letter from NSA informing him of the fee determination. He may not pursue his action in Federal court because he has not exhausted administrative remedies. Mitchell again is incorrect. Two issues can come before the court. 1 Demand for documents illegally withheld under the FOIA. 2 Demand for fee waiver. Text of both laws are reproduced in this ANSWER. The lawsuit is about 1. NOT 2. Administrative remedies were exhausted as Crowell stated. And Plaintiffs proceeded to court as permitted by law. Mitchell, as an officer of the court, has again violated the False Statement Act again by presenting to the Court and argument not relying on the facts of this case. Plaintiffs did, in fact, EXHAUST ALL ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES as required to proceed to court. 11 Michell states, The remainder of Plaintiffs Response, [Paragraphs 7-14] is filled with unrelated pieces of information from various sources, suppositions, assumptions, and accusations, all apparently designed to challenge the Agency's decision that to admit or deny the existence of the Iranian and Libyan messages and translations would reveal classified information. As discussed in some depth in Defendant's Memorandum, the Agency is accorded great deference in the area, and nothing Plaintiffs have presented rises to level of evidence to show "bad faith" by the Agency in it decision-making process. Halperin v. CIA, 629 F.2d 144, 148 (D.C. Cir. 1980). In addition, Plaintiffs appear to be claiming that information concerning records of Iranian message traffic and translations has been put into the public domain by both former President Reagan and various authors or books and newspapers. Plaintiffs bear the burden of "pointing to specific information in the public domain that appears to duplicate the information withheld." Afshar v. Department of State, 702 F2.d 1125, 1130 (D.D.C. 1989). With regard to classified material pertaining to national security concerns, court have held that unofficial leaks and public surmise can often be ignored by foreign governments that might perceive themselves to be harmed by disclosure; but official acknowledgment may for a government to retaliate. Afshar, 702 F.2d at 1131. Defendant submit that, in this case, all Plaintiffs have done is identify a mishmash of information from various public sources, including the Internet, and then claim that if it is published in some manner, it must be true. Such a conglomeration of information does nothing to satisfy Plaintiff's burden in this regard. Plaintiffs cannot point to any source which published the documentation which Plaintiffs asserts exists: NSA intercepted the Libyan message and translations between January 21, 1980 and June 19, 1996. In addition, generalized allegations that classified information has been leaked to the media or otherwise made available to the public will not defeat an Exemption 1 claim under the FOIA. Executive Order 12958 section 1.2 (c); Public Citizen v. Department of State, 11 F.3d 198, 201 (D.C. Cir. 1993). Michell's statement, Plaintiffs cannot point to any source which published the documentation which Plaintiffs asserts exists: NSA intercepted the Libyan message and translations between January 21, 1980 and June 19, 1996. is clearly false as the following Internet news story attests. NSA, Crypto AG, and the Iraq-Iran Conflict by J. Orlin Grabbe One of the dirty little secrets of the 1980s is that the U.S. regularly provided Iraq's Saddam Hussein with top-secret communication intercepts by the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). Consider the evidence. When in 1991 the government of Kuwait paid the public relations firm of Hill & Knowlton ten million dollars to drum up American war fever against the evil dictator Hussein, it brought about the end of a long legacy of cooperation between the U.S. and Iraq. Hill & Knowlton resurrected the World War I propaganda story about German soldiers roasting Belgian babies on bayonets, updated in the form of a confidential witness (actually the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the U.S.) who told Congress a tearful story of Iraqi soldiers taking Kuwaiti babies out of incubators and leaving them on the cold floor to die. President George Bush then repeated this fabricated tale in speeches ten times over the next three days. What is remarkable about this staged turn of events is that, until then, Hussein had operated largely with U.S. approval. This cooperation had spanned three successive administrations, starting with Jimmy Carter. As noted by John R. MacArthur, "From 1980 to 1988, Hussein had shouldered the burdenof killing about 150,000 Iranians, in addition to at least thirteen thousand of his own citizens, including several thousand unarmed Kurdish civilians, and in the process won the admiration and support of elements of three successive U.S. Administrations" [1]. Hussein's artful slaughter of Iranians was aided by good military intelligence. The role of NSA in the conflict is an open secret in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. Only in this country has there been a relative news blackout, despite the fact that it was the U.S. administration that let the crypto cat out of the bag. First, U.S. President Ronald Reagan informed the world on national television that the United States was reading Libyan communications. This admission was part of a speech justifying the retaliatory bombing of Libya for its alleged involvement in the La Belle discotheque bombing in Berlin's Schoeneberg district, where two U.S. soldiers and a Turkish woman were killed, and 200 others injured. Reagan wasn't talking about American monitoring of Libyan news broadcasts. Rather, his "direct, precise, and undeniable proof" referred to secret (encrypted) diplomatic communication between Tripoli and the Libyan embassy in East Berlin. Next, this leak was compound by the U.S. demonstration that it was also reading secret Iranian communications. As reported in Switzerland's Neue Zurcher Zeitung, the U.S. provided the contents of encrypted Iranian messages to France to assist in the conviction of Ali Vakili Rad and Massoud Hendi for the stabbing death in the Paris suburb of Suresnes of the former Iranian prime minister Shahpour Bakhtiar and his personal secretary Katibeh Fallouch. [2] What these two countries had in common was they had both purchased cryptographic communication equipment from the Swiss firm Crypto AG. Crypto AG was founded in 1952 by the (Russian-born) Swedish cryptographer Boris Hagelin who located his company in Zug. Boris had created the "Hagelin-machine", a encryption device similar to the German "Enigma". The Hagelin machine was used on the side of the Allies in World War II. Crypto AG was an old and venerable firm, and Switzerland was a neutral country. So Crypto AG's enciphering devices for voice communication and digital data networks were popular, and customers came from 130 countries. These included the Vatican, as well the governments of Iraq, Iran, and Libya. Such countries were naturally skeptical of cryptographic devices sold in many NATO countries, so turned to relatively neutral Switzerland for communication security. Iran demonstrated its suspicion about the source of the leaks, when it arrested Hans Buehler, a top salesman for Crypto AG, in Teheran on March 18, 1992. During his nine and a half months of solitary confinement in Evin prison in Teheran, Buehler was questioned again and again whether he had leaked Teheran's codes or Libya's keys to Western powers. Luckily Buehler didn't know anything. He in fact believed in his own sales pitch that Crypto AG was a neutral company and its equipment was the best. They were Swiss, after all. [3] Crypto AG eventually paid one million dollars for Buehler's release in January 1993, then promptly fired him once they had reassured themselves that he hadn't revealed anything important under interrogation, and because Buehler had begun to ask some embarrassing questions. Then reports appeared on Swiss television, Swiss Radio International, all the major Swiss papers, and in German magazines like Der Spiegel. Had Crypto AG's equipment been spiked by Western intelligence services? the media wanted to know. The answer was Yes [4]. Swiss television traced the ownership of Crypto AG to a company in Liechtenstein, and from there back to a trust company in Munich. A witness appearing on Swiss television explained the real owner was the German government--the Federal Estates Administration. [5] According to Der Spiegel, all but 6 of the 6000 shares of Crypto AG were at one time owned by Eugen Freiberger, who resided in Munich and was head of the Crypto AG managing board in 1982. Another German, Josef Bauer, an authorized tax agent of the Muenchner Treuhandgesellschaft KPMG, and who was elected to the managing board in 1970, stated that his mandate had come from the German company Siemens. Other members of Crypto AG's management had also worked at Siemens. Was the German secret service, the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), hiding behind the Siemens' connection? So it would seem. Der Spiegel reported that in October 1970, a secret meeting of the BND had discussed how the Swiss company Graettner could be guided into closer cooperation with Crypto AG, or could even merged with it. The BND additionally considered how "the Swedish company Ericsson could be influenced through Siemens to terminate its own cryptographic business." [6] A former employee of Crypto AG reported that he had to coordinate his developments with "people from Bad Godesberg". This was the location of the "central office for encryption affairs" of the BND, and the service instructed Crypto AG what algorithms to use to create the codes. The employee also remembers an American "watcher", who strongly demanded the use of certain encryption methods. Representatives from NSA visited Crypto AG often. A memorandum of a secret workshop at Crypto AG in August 1975, where a new prototype of an encryption device was demonstrated, mentions the participation of Nora L. Mackebee, an NSA cryptographer. Motorola engineer Bob Newman says that Mackebee was introduced to him as a "consultant". Motorola cooperated with Crypto AG in the seventies in developing a new generation of electronic encryption machines. The Americans "knew Zug very well and gave travel tips to the Motorola people for the visit at Crypto AG," Newman told Der Spiegel. Knowledgeable sources indicate that the Crypto AG enciphering process, developed in cooperation with the NSA and the German company Siemans, involved secretly embedding the decryption key in the cipher text. Those who knew where to look could monitor the encrypted communication, then extract the decryption key that was also part of the transmission, and recover the plain text message. Decryption of a message by a knowledgeable third party was not any more difficult than it was for the intended receiver. (More than one method was used. Sometimes the algorithm was simply deficient, with built-in exploitable weaknesses.) Crypto AG denies all this, of course, saying such reports are "pure invention". What information was provided to Saddam Hussein exactly? Answers to this question are currently being sought in a lawsuit against NSA in New Mexico, which has asked to see "all Iranian messages and translations between January 1, 1980 and June 10, 1996". [7] The passage of top-secret communications intelligence to someone like Saddam Hussein brings up other questions. Which dictator is the U.S. passing top secret messages to currently? Jiang Zemin? Boris Yeltsin? Will Saddam Hussein again become a recipient of NSA largess if he returns to the mass slaughter of Iranians? What exactly is the purpose of NSA anyway? One more question: Who is reading the Pope's communications? Bibliography [1] John R. MacArthur, Second Front: Censorship and Propaganda in the Gulf War, Hill and Wang, New York, 1992. [2] Some of the background of this assassination can be found in "The Tehran Connection," Time Magazine, March 21, 1994. [3] The Buehler case is detailed in Res Strehle, Verschleusselt: der Fall Hans Beuhler, Werd Verlag, Zurich, 1994. [4] "For years, NSA secretly rigged Crypto AG machines so that U.S. eavesdroppers could easily break their codes, according to former company employees whose story is supported by company documents," "No Such Agency, Part 4: Rigging the Game," The Baltimore Sun, December 4, 1995. [5] Reported in programs about the Buehler case that were broadcast on Swiss Radio International on May 15, 1994 and July 18, 1994. [6] "Wer ist der befugte Vierte?": Geheimdienste unterwandern den Schutz von Verschlusselungsgeraten," Der Spiegel 36, 1996. [7] U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico, William H. Payne, Arthur R. Morales, Plaintiffs, v. Lieutenant General Kenneth A. Minihan, USAF, Director of National Security Agency, National Security Agency, Defendant, CIV NO 97 0266 SC/DJS. November 2, 1997 Web Page: http://www.aci.net/kalliste/ Michell attempts to make a valid argument that withholding of intercepted message is proper because they are classified. Mitchell references EO 12958 1.2, c) Classified information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information. Plaintiffs continue to believe, classification abuse aside, that NSA should come clean about it bungled spy sting on Iran and settle with its victims. And US courts should not help NSA hide. Clearly NSA getting caught in, according the Baltimore Sun, the most "audacious" spy sting in its history, spiking crypto units so that the crypto key is transmitted with cipher text falls under EO 12958, Sec. 1.8. Classification Prohibitions and Limitations. (a) In no case shall information be classified in order to: (1) conceal violations of law, inefficiency, or administrative error; (2) prevent embarrassment to a person, organization, or agency; (3) restrain competition; or (4) prevent or delay the release of information that does not require protection in the interest of national security. ... Not section 1.2. Clearly, NSA getting caught is one of the greatest blunders in intelligence history fall under 1.8 (1) and (2). And also may account for the greatest number of dead victims. But this is one part of this of this lawsuit. To get a help get a count of the dead and maimed. 12 Mitchell writes Plaintiffs' allegation in the Response at Paragraph 9, at 4, that sanctions under the discovery rules might finally cause the Agency to produce some of the requested records is fallacious. This is a FOIA action; the purpose is to determine whether or not the Plaintiffs are properly in Federal Court, and whether or not the documents requested have been properly withheld under FOIA law. It is not appropriate to use the discovery rules contained in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to bypass the requirements of the FOIA. Mitchell is incorrect in her statement, " This is a FOIA action ..." This is a LAWSUIT which WILL BE conducted under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Even in New Mexico. Mitchell attempts to inject the rules of the FOIA into the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiffs will continue to object. The Plaintiffs have EXHAUSTED ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES and are in court to obtain documents illegally withheld. Plaintiffs will use the tools available, including Discovery, under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to locate and get the documents. Plaintiffs ARE NOT in court to sue about waiver of fees. 13 Mitchell concludes Plaintiffs' Response contains no legal support for their contention that they are entitled to the requested information. Contrary to their assertion, the legal citations contained Defendant's Memorandum ARE most certainly relevant, because they contain the legal basis on which this Court must base it decision. Plaintiffs' Complaint must be dismissed, or in the alternative, summary judgment must be granted to defendant. Mitchell cites no legal support for her arguments. Rather Mitchell has UNSUCCESSFULLY ATTEMPTED to make Plaintiffs' lawsuit into a fee waiver denial lawsuit. This is not a fee waiver lawsuit. This is a lawsuit to obtain lawfully requested documents. CONCLUSIONS 1 Replace judges Svet and Campos because these judges have demonstrated, IN WRITING, they do not follow the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 2 Remove lawyer Mitchell from the lawsuit for criminal violation of the False Statement Act. And violation of the lawyers Rules of Professional Conduct. Specifically Mitchell's violated in her REPLY In all professional functions a lawyer should be competent, prompt, and diligent. A lawyer should use the law's procedures only for legitimate purposes and not to harass or intimidate other. [i]t is also a lawyer's duty to uphold the legal process. Failure to comply with an obligation or prohibition imposed by rule is a basis for invoking the disciplinary process. A lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert and issue therein, unless there is a basis for doing so that is not frivolous, which includes a good faith argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing law. A lawyer shall not knowingly: (1) make a false statement of material fact of law to a tribunal. (4) offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. A. make a false statement of material fact or law to a third person; ... 16-804. Misconduct C. engage in conduct involving dishonest, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; B. commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects. 3 Have replacement judges ORDER Defendant to immediately produce documents in machine-readable format for publication on Internet. In preparation for settlement of this unfortunate bungled spy sting. And analysis of 'deficient' NSA cryptographic algorithm work designed to get the US government out of the cryptography business. Respectfully submitted, _________________________ William H. Payne 13015 Calle de Sandias NE Albuquerque, NM 87111 Telephone approval Morales in New Orleans _________________________ Arthur R. Morales 1024 Los Arboles NW Albuquerque, NM 87107 Pro se litigants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing memorandum was mailed to Lieutenant General Kenneth A. Minihan, USAF, Director, National Security Agency, National Security Agency, 9800 Savage Road, Fort George G. Meade, MD 20755-6000 and hand delivered to Jan E Mitchell, Assistant US Attorney, 525 Silver SW, ABQ, NM 87102 this Friday November 28, 1997. 18

1 0

Re: [RePol] Denizen
by TruthMonger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ralph Hotmail wrote: > > In a moment of boredom, I took the opportunity to check into "Denizen". > I also read his posts under a number of names to the critical mass > mailing list and their replies. > In saner moments, Beckjord runs the UFO and Bigfoot Museum. > > This is the person who wants to use BCC from an anonymous remailer to > get his opinion to the subscribers of the Critical Mass list. The > message is simple - if you help him out,you can kiss your remailer > goodbye. Perhaps Ralph could help the anonymous remailer 'cause' by providing remailer operators with a list of the 'bad' people who should not be allowed to use remailers to promote their 'wrong' views. Maybe Mr. Hotmail could also provide a list of 'bad' words and 'bad' subjects that should be blocked, as well. I suggest blocking Ralphie 'Kiss Your Remailer Goodbye' Hotmail. Of course, I'm a Nazi fuck... NaziFuckMonger

4 9

Hat3 gr0ups
by goddesshera＠juno.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

could any kind soul please repost the message on hate groups and how mentioning the founding fathers constitutes a hateg roup. thanks This message was automatically remailed. The sender is unknown, unlogged, and nonreplyable. Send complaints and blocking requests to <goddesshera(a)juno.com>.

1 0

Re: PGP 5.0 ConsensuS?? -- is it usable?
by nobody＠nsm.htp.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 17:06 97/11/28 GMT, Lutz Donnerhacke wrote: > * Anonymous Remailer wrote: > >Do you think that it is a good idea to migrate from pgp 2.6.3 to > >pgp 5.0 now? > > No. Yes.

1 0

Re: How to spot a hate group [was Re: Update On Jim Bell]
by Jonathan Wienke 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

- -----Original Message----- From: Brad Dolan <bdolan(a)usit.net> [snip] >Professor Joyce Malcolm of Bentley College in Massachusetts >was the chair of the panel on which I sat. She showed me >something quite disturbing from another presentation that >she had attended. The paper attempted to determine if the >Montana Militia could be considered a "hate group" or >not. Among the methods by which they determined this was >examination of the phrases and concerned in Montana Militia >literature. Among the phrases or subjects that would >classify a group as a "hate group" were: > >1. Discussion of the Bill of Rights, especially the >Second Amendment. > >2. Discussion of military oppression, in the U.S. or >elsewhere. > >3. Discussion of the Framers of our government. > >She showed me a copy of the criteria used by the criminologists >in question, and these were among the criteria. I guess >the ACLU and Amnesty International are hate groups also. >Very disturbing. No wonder the EPA and every other bureaucrat is stocking up on weaponry of all kinds...Almost everyone in America is an anti-government extremist hate group member. Here is some "hate speech" from a Dead White Guy to ponder: "They tell us we are weak-unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies have bound us hand and foot? We are not weak if we make a proper use of the means which the God of nature has placed in our power. Millions of people armed in the hold cause of Liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible. Besides, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Many cry 'Peace, peace'-but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! Why stand we here idle? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me Liberty or give me death!" -- Patrick Henry Jonathan Wienke PGP Key Fingerprints: 7484 2FB7 7588 ACD1 3A8F 778A 7407 2928 3312 6597 8258 9A9E D9FA 4878 C245 D245 EAA7 0DCC "If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." -- Samuel Adams "Stupidity is the one arena of human achievement where most people fulfill their potential." -- Jonathan Wienke Never sign a contract that contains the phrase "first-born child." Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't. RSA export-o-matic: print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`

1 0

--- STRONG ADULT CONTENT ---
by Jugs 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello From Monique, If you are under 18 don't go any further..... You are receiving this email because your name has been submitted to a adult maillist..If you would like to be removed please follow the instructions below. http://www.DoMeLive.com LIVE LIVE LIVE....Florida Beach Babes perform for you live right in your browser. That's right live horny teenage girls, who will do ANYTHING you want. Our girls are all under 20 and are ready to please you in any way you want. You tell them what to do and they do it. Our new technology allows you to see our girls live and interact with them right in your NETSCAPE 2.2+, INTERNET EXPLORER 3.02, and AOL FOR WINDOWS 95 BROWSERS...... Your not going to believe your eyes, our picture is so large and so clear you'll be able to count the hairs on our pussies...that's if we had any hair down there.... For a limited time only, 7 minutes FREE to each new customer Don't cyber blind when you can DO ME LIVE..We'll do anything to keep you coming back.... http://www.DoMeLive.com

4 4

--- STRONG ADULT CONTENT ---
by Jugs 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello From Monique, If you are under 18 don't go any further..... You are receiving this email because your name has been submitted to a adult maillist..If you would like to be removed please follow the instructions below. http://www.DoMeLive.com LIVE LIVE LIVE....Florida Beach Babes perform for you live right in your browser. That's right live horny teenage girls, who will do ANYTHING you want. Our girls are all under 20 and are ready to please you in any way you want. You tell them what to do and they do it. Our new technology allows you to see our girls live and interact with them right in your NETSCAPE 2.2+, INTERNET EXPLORER 3.02, and AOL FOR WINDOWS 95 BROWSERS...... Your not going to believe your eyes, our picture is so large and so clear you'll be able to count the hairs on our pussies...that's if we had any hair down there.... For a limited time only, 7 minutes FREE to each new customer Don't cyber blind when you can DO ME LIVE..We'll do anything to keep you coming back.... http://www.DoMeLive.com

1 0

Continuing coverage of Internet gaming
by Steve Schear 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Will Roulette Wheel Land on 'Ban' or 'Tax'? http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/8479.html Net Gaming Operator Wins Court Round http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/8807.html

1 0

BXA Meet in DC
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Should anyone attend the BXA meeting in DC referenced below, we'd be grateful for a report, handouts and minutes, especially on encryption regulation and implementation of the Wassenaar Arrangement -- whose issuance is now overdue. A "Wassenaar Plenary" is scheduled for sometime in December as well, with a "Wassenaar list review" in May 1998, according to minutes of the October 21 meeting of the Information Systems Technical Advisory Committee: http://jya.com/istac102197.htm ---------- Bureau of Export Administration Regulations and Procedures Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Partially Closed Meeting A meeting of the Regulations and Procedures Technical Advisory Committee will be held December 9, 1997, 9:00 a.m., in the Herbert C. Hoover Building, Room 3884, 14th Street between Constitution and Pennsylvania Avenues, N.W., Washington, D.C. The Committee advises the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration on implementation of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and provides for continuing review to update the EAR as needed. Agenda Open Session 1. Opening remarks by the Chairperson. 2. Presentation of papers or comments by the public. 3. Update on the encryption regulation. 4. Update on the Wassenaar Arrangement implementation regulation. 5. Discussion on the ``deemed export'' issue. 6. Discussion on the Enhanced Proliferation Control Initiative and continued publication of Entities of Concern. 7. Update on the Automated Export System. 8. Discussion on efforts to conform the Foreign Trade Statistics Regulations and the Export Administration Regulations on export clearance requirements. Closed Session 9. Discussion of matters properly classified under Executive Order 12958, dealing with the U.S. export control program and strategic criteria related thereto. The General Session of the meeting will be open to the public and a limited number of seats will be available. To the extent that time permits, members of the public may present oral statements to the Committee. Written statements may be submitted at any time before or after the meeting. However, to facilitate the distribution of public presentation materials to the Committee members, the Committee suggests that presenters forward the public presentation materials two weeks prior to the meeting date to the following address: Ms. Lee Ann Carpenter, OAS/EA/BXA MS: 3886C, 14th & Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. 20230. The Assistant Secretary for Administration, with the concurrence of the delegate of the General Counsel, formally determined on December 16, 1996, pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, that the series of meetings or portions of meetings of the Committee and of any Subcommittees thereof, dealing with the classified materials listed in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1) shall be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in section 10(a)(1) and (a)(3), of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The remaining series of meetings or portions thereof will be open to the public. A copy of the Notice of Determination to close meetings or portions of meetings of the Committee is available for public inspection and copying in the Central Reference and Records Inspection Facility, Room 6020, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. For further information, call Lee Ann Carpenter at (202) 482-2583. Dated: November 3, 1997. Lee Ann Carpenter, Director, Technical Advisory Committee Unit. [FR Doc. 97-29404 Filed 11-6-97; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DT-M

1 0

Re: Censor Intel
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

More intel, from the other side. The journalist and civil liberties groups that have joined the Internet Free Expressional Alliance (compare and contrast to the sponsors of the summit at http://www.netparents.org/summit_part.html) American Civil Liberties Union American Society of Newspaper Editors Bolt Reporter Boston Coalition for Freedom of Expression Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility Electronic Frontier Foundation Electronic Privacy Information Center Feminists for Free Expression First Amendment Project Institute for Global Communications International Periodical Distributors Association Journalism Education Association National Association of Artists Organizations National Campaign for Freedom of Expression National Coalition Against Censorship National Writers Union NetAction Peacefire Publishers Marketing Association Society of Professional Journalists z publishing The IFEA press conference at 12:30 pm Monday will be carried by CSPAN for you outside-the-Bway-folks. One or two libertarian thinktanks may make available some material critical of the push towards mandatory voluntary ratings. The IFEA folks will also, I'm told, have someone at the Censorware Summit hotel itself, on Tuesday, in Meeting Room #6 on the lower level. -Declan

1 0

your request
by tiacaa41＠anion.epita.fr 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

NEW IMPROVED with FREE software, FREE bulk e mail system, FREE web site to do what you wish, ongoing support (optional), and a lot more! all included. ...........this is a one time mailing............... \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\$\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ you are about to make at least $50,000 In less than 90 days Read the enclosed program...then read it again... //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Dear friend, 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 incurred 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. I truly believe it was wrong for me to be in debt like this. AT THAT MOMENT something significant happened in my life and I am writing to share my experience in hopes that this will change your life FOREVER....FINANCIALLY!!! In mid-December, I received this program via email. Six months 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 worked or not. One claimed I'd 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 '92 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 in debt. After I got a pencil and paper and figured it out, I would at least get my money back. After determining that the program is LEGAL and NOT A CHAIN LETTER, I decided "WHY NOT". Initially I sent out 10,000 emails. It only cost me about $15.00 for my time on-line. The great thing about email is that I didn'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 13th, I had received 26 orders for REPORT #1. When you read the GUARANTEE in the program, you will see that "YOU MUST RECEIVE 15 TO 20 ORDERS FOR REPORT #1 WITHIN TWO WEEKS. IF YOU DON'T, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO!" My first step in making $50,000 in 20 to 90 days was done. By January 30th, I had received 196 orders for REPORT #2. If you go back to the GUARANTEE, "YOU MUST RECEIVE 100 OR MORE ORDERS FOR REPORT #2 WITHIN TWO 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 19th, of my emailing 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 attached program, IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER! Remember, it wont 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 doesn't work, you'll lose out on a lot of money! REPORT #2 explains this. Always follow the guarantee, 15 to 20 orders for REPORT #1, and 100 or more orders for REPORT #2 and you will make $50,000 or more in 20 to 90 days. I AM LIVING PROOF THAT IT WORKS !!! If you choose not to participate in this program, I'm 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 you are in financial trouble like I was, or you want to start your own business, consider this a sign. I DID! Sincerely, Christopher Erickson PS Do you have any idea what 11,700 $5 bills ($58,000) look like piled up on a kitchen table? IT'S AWESOME! "THREW IT AWAY" "I had received this program before. I threw it away, but later wondered if I shouldn't have given it a try. Of course, I had no idea who to contact to get a copy, so I had to wait until I was emailed another copy of the program. Eleven months passed, then it came. I DIDN'T throw this one away. I made $41,000 on the first try." Dawn W., Evansville, IN "NO FREE LUNCH" "My late father always told me, 'remember, Alan, there is no free lunch in life. You get out of life what you put into it.' Through trial and error and a somewhat slow frustrating start, I finally figured it out. The program works very well, I just had to find the right target group of people to email it to. So far this year, I have made over $63,000 using this program. I know my dad would have been very proud of me." Alan B., Philadelphia, PA A PERSONAL NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM By the time you have read the enclosed information and looked over 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 ten years. Then in 1979 my business began falling off. I was doing the same things that were previously successful 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 happened 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 your money, nor anyone else who has provided a testimonial for this program. I have already made over FOUR MILLION DOLLARS! I have retired from the program after sending out over 16,000 programs. Now I have several offices which market this and several other programs here in the US and overseas. 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 email a copy of this exciting program to everyone that you can think of. One of the people you send this to may send out 50,000...and your name will be on every one 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! 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 2,000 programs each. Let's also assume that the mailing receives a .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 .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 .5%, 100 people respond and order REPORT #2. Those 100 mail out 2,000 programs each for a total of 200,000. The .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 .5% response to that is 10,000 orders for REPORT #4. That's 10,000 five dollar bills for you. CASH!!!! Your total income in this example is $50 + $500 + $5000 + $50,000 for a total of $55,550!!!! REMEMBER FRIEND, THIS IS ASSUMING 1,990 OUT OF 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 ONLY 2,000. Believe me, many people will do that and more! By the way, your cost to participate in this is practically nothing. You obviously already have an internet connection and email is FREE!!! REPORT#3 will show you the best methods for bulk emailing and purchasing email lists. THIS IS A LEGITIMATE, LEGAL, MONEY MAKING OPPORTUNITY. It does not require you to come in 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 email order marketing program works perfectly...100% EVERY TIME. Email 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 email. 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 throughout 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 US, 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. INSTRUCTIONS We at Erris Mail Order Marketing Business, have a method of raising capital that REALLY WORKS 100% EVERY TIME. I am sure that you could use $50,000 to $125,000 in the next 20 to 90 days. Before you say "Bull", please read the program carefully. This is not a chain letter, but a perfectly legal money making opportunity. Basically, this is what we 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. Dothis 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 $2 extra for postage. It is essential that you specify the NAME and NUMBER of the report requested to the person you are ordering 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 yours, 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 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 required changes in the NAME list, save it as a text (.txt) file in it's own directory to be used with whatever email program you like. Again, REPORT #3 will tell you the best methods of bulk emailing and acquiring email lists. Step (4) Email 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, email to anyone and everyone! Use your imagination! You can get email addresses from companies on the internet who specialize in email mailing lists. These are very cheap, 100,000 addresses for around $35.00. 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 USD CASH FOR EACH ORDER REQUESTING THE SPECIFIC REPORT BY NAME AND NUMBER (International orders should also include $2 USD extra for postage) Add you e amil address when sending in for your report this is for updated information and continueing support (optional) that will be handed down by you sponcers. ______________________________________________________ REPORT #1 "HOW TO MAKE $250,000 THROUGH MULTI-LEVEL SALES" ORDER REPORT #1 FROM: A. Siegmund #57 Trakehnenstr. 13 53332 Bornheim, Germany ______________________________________________________ REPORT #2 "MAJOR CORPORATIONS AND MULTI-LEVEL SALES" J. Maz 15774 S. Lagrange Rd Suite #312 Orland Pk, IL 60462 USA ________________________________________________________ REPORT#3 "SOURCES FOR THE BEST MAILING LISTS" ORDER REPORT #3 FROM: B. Thompson 13504 Greencaslte ridge Tr. 404 Burtonsville MD. 20866 USA ______________________________________________________ REPORT #4 "EVALUATING MULTI-LEVEL SALES PLANS" ORDER REPORT #4 FROM: MUW #2 PO BOX 71442 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84171-0442 USA ______________________________________________________ CONCLUSION .I am enjoying my fortune that I made by sending out this program. You too, will be making money in 20 to 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.

1 0

Message
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"On the Internet nobody knows I'm a dog unless I want them to," to rephrase a well known cartoon. Anonymous wrote: >Cypherpunk technologies will be a major force to eliminate racism. >With privacy protected transactions, the color of a person's skin, his >religion and his ethnicity are no longer apparent. >Cypherpunks need to build bridges to minority communities, to show them >how these technologies can advance their cause. Why not set up a website where minority websurfers could go to read about privacy issues and how pseudonymity is to their (and everyone's) benefit. After all, how can another person discriminate against you when that person knows practically nothing about you (e.g., name, age, race, religion, geographic location, etc)? This would be an excellent way to expand cypherpunk technologies, don't you think?

1 0

Re: "Good job NANAE. You really fucked up royally." -- DataBasix
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

gburnore+spam(a)netcom.com (Gary L. Burnore) wrote: ^^^^^ Netcom is now requiring "truth in labelling", eh? > : Cat got his tongue? > > I was busy. Surely now you'll try to figure out what I was doing. I'm sure we'll find out soon enough, since you seem to be so intent on taunting your readers with your latest mischief. If you're dying to tell us, then feel free to do so. Otherwise, drop it. Your call. > : Really? Then why are you hiding your own post from being archived by a neutral > : third party? Trying to maintain "plausible deniability" if you post something > : you later regret saying and want to claim it was "forged"? > > What does DejaNews have to be with this? You can save all of her/my posts on > your own if you want to. *No doubt, you've already done that* so why > complain? So you can claim that anything you posted that later proves to be too embarassing was "forged", right? That's a lot easier to do if you don't sign them with the PGP key which you keep advertising in your bloated .sig, and you make sure they aren't archived by any NEUTRAL third party. (Remember when you called someone else [who shall remain nameless at his request] a "coward" for hiding HIS posts behind an "X-No-Archive" header?) Many readers will remember that you were whining pitifully a few months ago about how remailers were allegedly being used to "forge" posts in your name. You were given several suggestions, one of which was to install PGP, generate a key, and use it to sign *ALL* of your genuine posts. Your huge .sig now contains the fingerprint of a PGP public key that YOU ARE STILL NOT USING. Still trying to maintain "plausible deniability" for your posts? And then a few weeks ago you butted into technical question posted to alt.privacy.anon-server about Private Idaho with the implication that the person asking the question wanted to know the answer so that he/she could commit "forgery". If you're so concerned about forgery, why have you not bothered to try what was already suggested the last time you launched into your "remailer users are abusive assholes" tirade? > : Posing as a > : "lawyer" for DataBasix, you demanded that Jeff Burchell turn over all of his > : user logs to you and Gary, just as the so-called "Church" of $cientology > : did with the anon.penet.fi remailer in Finland last year. > > She never posed as a lawyer. Yet another of your lies. Then why did you demand that Jeff violate the privacy of all of his users by turning over his user logs to you and Belinda Bryan <eridani(a)ix.netcom.com>? And when he said that the only condition he'd release them was in response to a letter FROM YOUR LAWYER, Belinda Bryan sent such a letter? Perhaps the remailer users would like to know what purpose you had in mind for demanding the e-mail addresses of EVERYONE who either SENT or RECEIVED anonymous mail through Jeff's remailer. > : The end > : result was the same in both cases, too. Both remailers shut down to avoid > : the continued harassment from people like you, Gary, and Helena. I hope > : you're proud of yourselves. > > Even the remailer operator proved you wrong. Nice try liar. It's not going > to work anymore. It's your abuse that's not going to work anymore. You've cried wolf once too often about "abuse", "forgery", and other imagined offenses. The remailer operator did not "prove me wrong". Reread his post when you're sober: http://infinity.nus.sg/cypherpunks/dir.archive-97.11.13-97.11.19/0432.html Just to refresh your memory, you were asked whether you had asked Jeff Burchell to censor any anonymous posts that mentioned your name. You stonewalled the question, flippantly suggesting that he/she ask the operator. Someone did just that, and Jeff's post is the result of that. Looks like you gambled and lost that time! You can call remailer users "liars" and "anonymous assholes" to your heart's content, but your censorious actions and those of your associates at DataBasix speak for themselves. --

1 0

Cyberzine Issue on Privacy & Security
by Blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Just discovered an online magazine at http://www.pretext.com. The Nov/Dec issue is on "Privacy & Security". They feature articles on . The End of Privacy - are secrets safe in cyberspace? . From Cowrie Shells to Computer Bytes - the history & future of currency . Breaking the Codes - why National Encryption matters to you . Herman Cohen, PI - on the trail with a virtual gumshoe and an interview with Phil Zimmerman, plus a conversation with Lance Cottrell on The Anonymizer. .. Blanc

1 0

Re: Sadaam Burnore Strikes Again (was: Re: Keman the Klueless Strikes Again)
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

rfg(a)monkeys.com (Ronald F. Guilmette) wrote: > >Your looney maroon conspiracy theories that Ron Guilmette has been "stalking" > >you and is responsible for every bad thing that has ever happened to you > >are simply more evidence of your paranoid mental state. > > I realize that you think that you are trying to do some good, but I'm > going to ask you nicely to please stop all of this baiting of Burnore. > Sure, he's basically kind of a dickhead, but what's the point? > > I want to be really really clear about this... What you are doing is > just making things worse. You aren't helping. In fact you are making > things worse by feeding his paranoia. (And it isn't entirely clear from > where I sit that he is entirely stable, so this is rather a dangerous > thing for you to do... not for you of course... posting anonymously... > but for me. It isn't you that's going to be signing hospital consent > forms when you finally push this guy over the edge and make him go postal. > I'd like you to consider that.) If you have evidence to support that conclusion, then do us all a favor and give it to the authorities so that Gary Burnore can receive the help he needs. I can apreciate your motivation to appease him. In the past, he's displayed a tendency to shift his abuse and attacks to someone else (like Scott Dentice) when you've done that. But shifting the focus of his attacks doesn't end them. I doubt that you're even the PRIMARY focus of his tirades anymore, even though that seems to be the impression he's trying to give. Gary Burnore, Belinda Bryan, and the rest of the DataBasix wrecking crew seem to be on a power trip these days. The fact that he attempted to CONTROL you by posting embarassing information to the net and threatening to post more unless you stopped criticizing him gave us a glimpse of his real agenda. I doubt that discrediting Ron Guilmette forms more than a tiny fraction of his and Belinda's overall agenda. IMO, you and the fanciful charges he's made against you are only his excuse for doing what he's been doing. > P.P.S. If you have some beef about something that Burnore has done to > _you_ then alright. Talk about that and only that. If I have a beef > with Burnore please allow me the dignity of persuing that myself. I > don't need your help, and I don't need you to defend me. I can take > care of myself, thank you very much. Exactly. You've got to do what you've got to do, and I must do likewise. Perhaps I don't know the entire background of what's going on here, and if you'd care to enlighten us all, then by all means feel free to do so. My involvement in this controversy started when my account at Mailmasher suddenly stopped working and I learned that one of Gary Burnore's buddies, Billy McClatchie (who calls himself "Wotan"), was behind the attack that shut it down. I might never have connected that attack to Gary until he and Belinda Bryan tried something similar against another remailer also operated by Jeff Burchell and Jeff chose to go public with an expose (post-mortem, unfortunately) of the abusive tactics that DataBasix had employed (see URL at the bottom), including a situation where Belinda Bryan attempted to impersonate an attorney in demanding that Jeff turn over all of his user logs to DataBasix. As it turns out, Mr. Burchell wisely kept no such logs, but what use do you suppose Gary might found for the e-mail addresses contained in those logs, had he succeeded in obtaining them? When Gary uses you as an excuse to try and violate my privacy and that of other remailer users, then it becomes my business. > Am I making myself clear? Butt out. When I need you, I'll let you know. > In the meantime, fight your own fights. That's exactly what I'm doing. And I'd suggest that you do likewise. If you have reasonable cause to believe that Gary Burnore would resort to violence against you, then take any and all necessary steps to protect yourself. But don't expect everyone else to shut up in an attempt to appease Burnore. If and when he chooses another pretext to attack the right to speak freely on the net, then I'll challenge him on that. Don't flatter yourself in thinking that this is primarily about you. Gary is a CONTROL FREAK. He has some underlying need to control what's said on the net. When he can't refute the MESSAGE, he attempts to punish the MESSENGER. While you certainly saw that happen in your case, you're far from unique. And when the MESSENGER is beyond his reach (posting anonymously or whatever), he attacks the CHANNELS of communication instead. When one such attack affected me, then it became my business. (A later search in DejaNews confirmed that I was not the first anonymous poster to draw file from Gary Burnore.) Involving you in this is Gary's choice, not mine. When he makes claims such as "Ron Guilmette used an anonymous remailer to forge my name", or "rfg sent anonymous letters to harass a teenage girl with a web page at DataBasix" in order to attack remailers, then you've just become unwittingly involved in the debate. Ignoring Gary and his provocations doesn't work, because he goes out of his way to pick fights with other remailer users. For example, he recently butted into a thread over on alt.privacy.anon-server with an anti-remailer tirade. Someone merely posted a technical question about how to do something with a remailer interface software package and was treated to a "reply" about how remailers were being used by you to "spam bait" him. In fact, he did this with two different threads. If you haven't been following that saga, I'd invite you to read Jeff Burchell's account of Gary Burnore, Belinda Bryan, and Billy McClatchie's attacks on his remailers at: http://infinity.nus.sg/cypherpunks/dir.archive-97.11.13-97.11.19/0432.html If you come up with a way to prevent similar future attacks by Gary Burnore, then please share it.

1 0

Re: "Good job NANAE. You really fucked up royally." -- DataBasix
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

gburnore+spam(a)netcom.com (Gary L. Burnore) wrote: ^^^^^ Netcom is now requiring "truth in labelling", eh? > : Cat got his tongue? > > I was busy. Surely now you'll try to figure out what I was doing. I'm sure we'll find out soon enough, since you seem to be so intent on taunting your readers with your latest mischief. If you're dying to tell us, then feel free to do so. Otherwise, drop it. Your call. > : Really? Then why are you hiding your own post from being archived by a neutral > : third party? Trying to maintain "plausible deniability" if you post something > : you later regret saying and want to claim it was "forged"? > > What does DejaNews have to be with this? You can save all of her/my posts on > your own if you want to. *No doubt, you've already done that* so why > complain? So you can claim that anything you posted that later proves to be too embarassing was "forged", right? That's a lot easier to do if you don't sign them with the PGP key which you keep advertising in your bloated .sig, and you make sure they aren't archived by any NEUTRAL third party. (Remember when you called someone else [who shall remain nameless at his request] a "coward" for hiding HIS posts behind an "X-No-Archive" header?) Many readers will remember that you were whining pitifully a few months ago about how remailers were allegedly being used to "forge" posts in your name. You were given several suggestions, one of which was to install PGP, generate a key, and use it to sign *ALL* of your genuine posts. Your huge .sig now contains the fingerprint of a PGP public key that YOU ARE STILL NOT USING. Still trying to maintain "plausible deniability" for your posts? And then a few weeks ago you butted into technical question posted to alt.privacy.anon-server about Private Idaho with the implication that the person asking the question wanted to know the answer so that he/she could commit "forgery". If you're so concerned about forgery, why have you not bothered to try what was already suggested the last time you launched into your "remailer users are abusive assholes" tirade? > : Posing as a > : "lawyer" for DataBasix, you demanded that Jeff Burchell turn over all of his > : user logs to you and Gary, just as the so-called "Church" of $cientology > : did with the anon.penet.fi remailer in Finland last year. > > She never posed as a lawyer. Yet another of your lies. Then why did you demand that Jeff violate the privacy of all of his users by turning over his user logs to you and Belinda Bryan <eridani(a)ix.netcom.com>? And when he said that the only condition he'd release them was in response to a letter FROM YOUR LAWYER, Belinda Bryan sent such a letter? Perhaps the remailer users would like to know what purpose you had in mind for demanding the e-mail addresses of EVERYONE who either SENT or RECEIVED anonymous mail through Jeff's remailer. > : The end > : result was the same in both cases, too. Both remailers shut down to avoid > : the continued harassment from people like you, Gary, and Helena. I hope > : you're proud of yourselves. > > Even the remailer operator proved you wrong. Nice try liar. It's not going > to work anymore. It's your abuse that's not going to work anymore. You've cried wolf once too often about "abuse", "forgery", and other imagined offenses. The remailer operator did not "prove me wrong". Reread his post when you're sober: http://infinity.nus.sg/cypherpunks/dir.archive-97.11.13-97.11.19/0432.html Just to refresh your memory, you were asked whether you had asked Jeff Burchell to censor any anonymous posts that mentioned your name. You stonewalled the question, flippantly suggesting that he/she ask the operator. Someone did just that, and Jeff's post is the result of that. Looks like you gambled and lost that time! You can call remailer users "liars" and "anonymous assholes" to your heart's content, but your censorious actions and those of your associates at DataBasix speak for themselves. --

1 0

Re: Non Logging News Servers? Try #2
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

lcs Remailer Administrator <mix-admin(a)nym.alias.net> wrote: > The unfortunate reality is that almost all news servers log, and there > is no way to tell if you don't actually have an account on the server. > There may be privacy conscious ISPs that actually promote the fact > that they don't log, but I don't know of any to recommend. > > The point of putting that in the help file was also to make people > realize there is a trade-off. Posting to news groups might not > actually be the safest solution. Basically, if you are more worried > about the remailer operators, alt.anonymous messages is probably the > best place to send messages. However, if you are more worried about > your employer/ISP than about the remailer operators, then it probably > makes more sense just to have an ordinary e-mail reply block. One solution to this problem is to run your own personal news server like "souper" that gathers ALL new news article in a certain NG and stores them locally for off-line reading. If you're consistently pulling news messages for the alt.anonymous.messages NG off of a certain server, it could be reasonably inferred that you are the intended recipient of at least SOME of those messages. But if you use a client that invariably grabs all the new messages each time, it would be rather difficult to determine which messages you are interested in. To avoid traffic analysis, use a software program to pull the messages for you. If you do it manually, even if you try to pull them all, you will undoubtedly read and save them in a certain order, or spend more time reading certain ones that will betray your interest in certain messages. As for employers, any of them that are sophistocated enough to be monitoring NNTP connections and creating a profile of your reading habits probably also have their own firewall and news server. IOW, if they run their own news server and carry a certain NG, then they'd have a hard time objecting to your reading it. It would probably be wise to assume a worst-case scenario and only deviate from it when you're sure it's safe to do so. For example, suppose you used a pseudonym to publish an article that was critical of the current Ayatollah in Iran, or perhaps deemed offensive to Islam in general, and you were sentenced to death in absentia ... if they can find and identify you. (Sort of an anonymous Salmon Rushdie.) Start out assuming you need that level of security and go from there. But if someone has gone to the trouble of setting up a 'nym, then he probably perceives a need for more than just a casual level of security. --

1 0

Without Laws, There Are No Rights
by damaged justice 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[1]SIDEBAR [2][LINK] No End In Sight To Thai Internet Regulation ****No End In Sight To Thai Internet Regulation 11/28/97 BANGKOK, THAILAND, 1997 NOV 28 (NB) -- By Sasiwimon Boonruang, Bangkok Post. Finding a consensus on how the Internet should be regulated in Thailand is proving to be a difficult task, experts say. Attorney General Office Prosecutor Shinnawat Thongpakdee said the law defines and protects human rights and duties and inevitably involves itself with human behavior. As the Internet is a phenomenon related with human behavior as well, it would "unavoidably" be involved with the law as well. There are several "rights" involved with Internet information: the right to control access to information, right of information use, right of copying information, and the right to publicize information. These rights cannot be separated, he said. The rights come from several laws - "without laws, there are no rights," the prosecutor said. [And a BIG, HEARTY RASPBERRY to this CLUELESS MORON!] In the Internet world, the producers of information own the copyright to their work, and consequently, any law regarding the Internet should also go hand in hand with copyright laws. There is no solution at the moment as to whether there should be compulsory laws regarding the Internet because it's difficult to use legal means to enforce such laws, and they would also vary greatly from one country to the next. One practical approach would be drawing up of a worldwide conventional agreement regarding Internet regulation, allowing each country to sign off of their own choosing. At the very least, he said, we should accumulate information concerning the Internet in order to consider what should be allowed or prohibited - this information would be useful in the future. Mr Shinnawat added that Internet technology is very new for the legal sector and other societies, and it was difficult to make any conclusions in legal term about the Internet at the moment. He said the Internet provided the opportunity for all - rich and poor alike - to access and make use of information, even though the reality would be that the gap between rich and poor would grow even wider. According to Internet Thailand Service Center (ITSC) President Trin Tantsetthi, infringement on the Internet has increased greatly during the last year, and laws regarding the Internet would be very hard to enforce. For example, there were already 30,000 documents on the Internet in Thailand already. Copyright infringements on the works of others was wrong in both moral and legal terms, he said, but using legal means to deal with it would prove difficult. Social pressures might be an alternative. Wanchai Kanti, of Thammasat University, said people should have freedom of speech and freedom to express opinions, and that the flow of information "should not be closed", especially to academic institutes. There should not be laws to control Internet content, although opinions expressed should be done in a responsible manner. Reported By Newsbytes News Network: [3]http://www.newsbytes.com (19971128) [4]Copyright ©Newsbytes News Network. All rightsreserved. For more Newsbytes see http://www.newsbytes.com. [5]Home | [6]Daily | [7]Weekly | [8]Publishers | [9]Search References 1. http://www.newsbytes.com/menus/navbar.map 2. http://ad.preferences.com/click.ng;spacedesc=CliqTech_Newsbytes_468x60_CTGe… 3. http://www.newsbytes.com/ 4. http://www.nbnn.com/copyrght.html 5. http://www.nbnn.com/home.html 6. http://www.nbnn.com/news/s_daily.html 7. http://www.nbnn.com/news/s_week.html 8. http://www.nbnn.com/publishers/publi_1.html 9. http://www.nbnn.com/html_p/search.html

1 0

Microsoft Rides Again
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Micro$oft fucked me up the ass. Please help. I'm bleeding to death.

1 0

GAK
by Secret Squirrel 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Timothy C. Mayonnaise is not only as queer as >a three dollar bill, but he is also into >having sex with children. > > ___ > <*,*> Timothy C. Mayonnaise > [`-'] > ' - ' This is a bad thing? In the Land of the Freeh "children" are defined as "anybody under 18 years of age." A 16 year old is a "child" according to the government but obviously isn't such. The "before 18 they're too immature" argument doesn't fly too well. At 18 they don't suddenly become "mature." If they aren't "mature" by about 14, think of it as evolution in action. As for homosexuality and/or uniqueness, this is supposed to be protected. Of course it won't be if Klintonkov gets his way.

1 0

PGP / Outlook Express Plugin Problem
by Jonathan Wienke 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I just received a CD from Microsoft with a subscription to MSN and the install for Internet Explorer 4.0 and Outlook Express. I installed Explorer and Outlook but have not been able to get Outlook to recognize the PGP plugin. (I reinstalled PGP after installing Outlook) Does anyone have any suggestions? I have encrypt and sign buttons, but they are for Outlook's bozo built-in encryption and require a "digital ID" from VeriSign, which I have no desire to buy. Jonathan Wienke

1 0

it ain't BLUE anymore!
by brownlist＠goplay.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

mailbombers? start your engines ... http://www.webpost.net/brownlist

2 1

Re: "Good job NANAE. You really fucked up royally." -- sez DataBasix
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

gburnore(a)netcom.com (Gary L. Burnore) wrote: > No, otherwise it'd say 'theanonassholeislosing@ ^^^^^^^^^^^ Keep up your bigoted remarks towards those of us who'd rather not contribute our e-mail addresses to spammers and abusers. Your true colors are showing ever more clearly with each passing day. > Changing your tune a bit? hahaha You're losing. If believing that makes you happy, go right ahead. > I remember that you have no clue what you're talking about anymore. You > complain that I don't sign my posts yet you miss one thing. I'm not posting > from databasix.com. That's where the accusations are leveled towards. Those > were the posts that were forged. When I post from DataBasix, I'll pgp sign > them. You were posting from Netcom, not DataBasix, when you accused the poster of a technical question to alt.privacy.anon-server of wanting the the information so that he could permit "forgery". > You're an abusive asshole and you're posting anonymously. There are > legitimate reasons for using a remailer. None of your posts have fit that > criteria. If you're campaigning for "privacy czar", this isn't going to win you any votes. Once again, when you take the time and effort to set up your own remailer, then you have the privilege of determining "legitimate reasons for using it". Have you, Belinda Bryan <eridani(a)ix.netcom.com>, or your other flunkies at DataBasix EVER had ANYTHING civil to say publicly about anonymous posters? Care to cite an example? > : Then why did you demand that Jeff violate the privacy of all of his > : users by turning over his user logs to you and Belinda Bryan > : <eridani(a)ix.netcom.com>? > : And when he said that the only condition > : he'd release them was in response to a letter FROM YOUR LAWYER, > : Belinda Bryan sent such a letter? > > One doesn't need to be a lawyer to send a letter. You didn't answer the question. You demanded ALL of the user logs for Jeff's Huge Cajones remailer. Why? What would have happened to all of the e-mail addresses of his users if Jeff had given in to that demand? > : Perhaps the remailer users would like to know what purpose you had > : in mind for demanding the e-mail addresses of EVERYONE who either > : SENT or RECEIVED anonymous mail through Jeff's remailer. > > Perhaps readers would be interested in knowing the real reason you're so > attracted to me. Maybe someday you'll post your demands. Just leave remailers and their users the he** alone, Gary! > Blah Blah Blah. You're such a lousy liar. You've still never posted one shred > of evidence that I ever abused anything or tried to shut a remailer down or > had one shut down or whatever you like to think. It's more likely it's YOU > who want remailers shut down. Many are now complaining about tactics such as > yours. Posting lies from behind a remailer is one good way to try to get them > shut down. Why do you want remailers shut down so badly? You call me a liar, then you proceed with your typical "big lie" technique of accusing me without evidence. "Posting lies from behind a remailer"? Do you fancy yourself to be the "truth squad" or "Thought Police", Gary? Have you got a Perl script in your back pocket that will filter posts for "truth" and "lies" that you'd care to donate to the remailer net, or should remailer operators just block all posts that even mention your name just to be on the "safe" side? It's interesting that you'd claim "Posting lies from behind a remailer is one good way to try to get them shut down". Is that your goal? Have you tried that tactic before, perhaps as a pretext to get a remailer shut down? Your unproven accusations are a bit mis-targeted. I'm the one who's USING a remailer, you're the one who's consistently CRITICIZED them. Have you even USED a remailer (that you'll admit to)? Have you ever contributed money or technical expertise to setting up or operating one? Back when you were lecturing people on how a remailer ought to be run, you were politely invited to set up your own and SHOW us all how a remailer should be run. That invitation is still open. > : Just to refresh your memory, you were asked whether you had asked > : Jeff Burchell to censor any anonymous posts that mentioned your > : name. You stonewalled the question, flippantly suggesting that > : he/she ask the operator. Someone did just that, and Jeff's post is > : the result of that. Looks like you gambled and lost that time! > > I said (and I told him) I wanted any post with my email address in the From > line or To line dropped. > > Looks like your creativity is running out. Looks like you gambled > and lost. You were harassing Jeff in June and yet you weren't able to produce any evidence of "forged" posts any more recent than February, and even those appeared to have been forged to LOOK like they had originated from a remailer. The problem is, the person who posted that manufactured "evidence" was not very knowledgeable about remailers, and attempted to implicate a server, Mailmasher, that didn't even support header pasting. (It was a 'nym server, not a remailer.) Nevertheless, your associate at DataBasix, William J. McClatchie, used this bogus "evidence" as part of his campaign to get Mailmasher shut down. (Still wanna claim that DataBasix is not anti-remailer?) According to Jeff, you also demanded that he block what you called "inflammatory posts". He also indicated that he was blocking posts that contained your e-mail address in the *BODY* of the post (which most replies to your posts would contain) because YOU DEMANDED IT. Once again you've been caught in a lie, Gary. "Forged" From: lines were already a non-problem -- it was the CONTENT that you sought to censor. I might add that while remailers have long ago removed the capability of "forging" From: lines to usenet posts, your own ISP, Netcom, has not. Maybe you ought to be whining to them and accusing your fellow Netcommies of being "abusers". There certainly seem to be a lot more abuse complaints about Netcom users than there are about remailer users. Could it be that spammers and UCErs find Netcom more tolerant of their net abuse than do the remailers you continually attack? > You've lost. It's not working anymore. Your unfounded and unproven > accusations have proved you the liar. You've yet to explain why you've go t > such a 'thing' for me. Bet I got your account closed for spamming or UCE. You weren't able to send any spam or UCE to my account because I've never given the address to you. That, apparently, is what's bugging you about the fact that I'm anonymous. We all know about how you and Belinda Bryan like to Netcop anyone who dares to disagree with you, but I was not among your victims. Sorry to disappoint you. The existence of people like you on the net is one of the best selling points for posting anonymously and not indiscriminately broadcasting one's name and e-mail address worldwide with every post. It's sort of hard to blackmail someone by posting confidential information, like old tax liens, if you don't know his name, isn't it? Is that what's bugging you about not knowing my name? It's interesting that in a recent post, your fellow DataBasix-er Belinda Bryan expressed concern about her UNLISTED phone number or her street address being revealed on the net. So why is it OK to "hide behind the skirts of" an unlisted phone number, but using an "unlisted" e-mail address somehow makes one a "dickless coward with no balls" (to use her own words)? --

1 0

Robinson CypherPunk
by TruthMonger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> ====================================================== > Q. How long did the real Robinson Crusoe live on that > desert island? > A. Alexander Selkirk? Nine years. In 1703, the old pirate > got mad at his ship's master, one Capt. William Dampier, > and jumped overboard. Slept that night on the beach. Next > morning he hailed the ship, but the captain just laughed > at him and set sail. It was the same Capt. Dampier who > saw Selkirk's campfire smoke nine years later and sent a > boat ashore. Selkirk was still mad. Madder. Took two days > to talk him into going aboard. > ============================================== > LMBoyd Web Site / U. S. Newspapers / Start Email / Stop Email > http://www.LMBoyd.com/postscript.htm

1 0