December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Vulis again
by Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Date: Mon, 29 Dec 1997 07:18:08 -0500 > Message-ID: <031ce308b9b0af69c83a11320732d575(a)anon.efga.org> > From: Anonymous <anon(a)anon.efga.org> > > Timmy May's reheated, refurbished, and > regurgitated cud is completely > inappropriate for the mailing lists into > which it is cross-ruminated. > > ( )( )________ Timmy May > /00 \ _ > O_\\--mm---mm /_______) I see you are still sending ascii-art decorated sweet little nothings to the people you love... ---guy Medication refill time, Dimitry.

1 0

Successful Subscription
by eureka-help＠eureka.abc-web.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

WELCOME TO EUREKA! ================== Congratulations, your free subscription to the Eureka! newsletter is now set up. We hope you enjoy every copy. As promised, while you wait for your first newsletter here are the links to the FREE videos and FREE photos! FREE hardcore videos ........... http://207.168.184.26/ FREE hardcore photos .... http://209.50.232.36/desires/ - Eureka! *FREE porn in your email!*

1 0

Re: constitution.amendmentxi.html (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > From: "William H. Geiger III" <whgiii(a)invweb.net> > Date: Mon, 29 Dec 97 09:17:55 -0600 > Subject: Re: constitution.amendmentxi.html (fwd) > Well you can only sue the state that has caused some form of direct damage > against you. Really? Where is that in the Constitution? I can't sue a state or the federal government on an issue of process or procedure unless I *personaly* have been effected? Malarky. The simple fact that I am a citizen that *could* be effected is sufficient grounds to file. Especialy considering the detailing of authority in the 10th. If this were so I would not be able to file against a law regulating, for example, a religion unless I happen to be a participant of that religion. This is clearly not constitutional since any law threating a single religion by extension can and does threaten all religious freedom in the country. > If both Texas and Alaska are doing somthing Unconstitutional > but Texas is the only one who has directly caused damage then you should > only be able to sue Texas. Why? If both states are participating in an illegal action - such as complying with unconstitutional federal regulations - then even a single state in which I *don't* reside nor have *ever* been in is a clear threat to my constitutional rights. Remember the feds are *required* to guarantee a constitutional government in *all* states and that all priviliges and immunitites be recognized by those states - irrespective of my current geographic location. Now if we accept the argument that the 14th extends my federal rights to the states then the wrongful action and its application is even more clearly relevant. However, the 14th is not necessary for this to be the case. (thankfuly, since one of my claims is that rights are not equivalent to priviliges or immunities) It is the precedence and not the personal application that is unconstitutional. > I think that in the majority of > cases one will find that a greviance will be limited to a single state (I > think it would be very rare to find a case where all 50 states had > directly caused damage against an individule). - Illegal taxation and the compliance of the states in turning over money illegaly - regulation and prohibition of firearms and the states complicancy in breaking the 2nd. - the provisioning and support of military operations relating to the Army and Air Force (which is unconstitutional unless part of the Army or Navy) for more than 2 year terms. - the failure of the US govt. to train and arm the militia in the several states - the various federal regulations limiting consensual crimes contrary to the letter and spirit of the 9th and 10th. - the abrogation of the states duties as equals to the federal govt. and their duties as a part of the checks and balances of the Constitution. And as a matter of course most other issues resting on Constitutional jurisdiction involving the willing compliance of state government. > An example of this would be back in the 50's with the forced segregation > laws. If you were living in Georga and wished to bring suit against the > state for violating your rights you would be limited to only suing Georga > even though AL,FL,SC,NC,TX,AR, all had the same laws on the books. Nobody that I can find has *ever* even tried to do this so how can it be undoable? It's a pity there wasn't some young turk back then to give it a shot - course there doesn't seem to be any young turks now willing to do it either...;( Now, if I can figure a way around the Supreme Courts 3 year requirement... ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

2 1

Re: Right to sue multiple states... (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > From: "William H. Geiger III" <whgiii(a)invweb.net> > Date: Mon, 29 Dec 97 09:39:29 -0600 > Subject: Re: Right to sue multiple states... > >Clearly my suing say the govenor and legislature of each of the 50 states > >qualifies as a case involving citizens of different states and therefore > >there is clearly a right to sue multiple states at the federal level and > >falls under the responsibility of the Supreme Court. > > Good point execpt are we talking of suing a States' governemnt for damages > or are we talking of suing individules, who happen to be part of a State's > government, for damages? We are talking about suing an individual for their actions in their official capacity. People sign bills not offices. People commit crimes, offices can't. > I think that it is universal that one is > precluded from suing a memeber of government for carying out the duties of > office (ie: you can't sue the Governor of Texas for passing a law you > don't like while you can sue the govenor if hits your car going down the > road). I can find nothing in the Constitution that prohibits this, and since the 10th limits the feds authority by extension it is permissible. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ARTICLE III. Section 1. The judicial Power of the United States, shall be invested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. Section 2. The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; -- to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; In all Cases, affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Clearly the Constitution allows charges against individuals for their actions while in office. Otherwise how would anyone be impeached? The person holding an office is responsible for all actions of that office and are in fact *personaly* responsible for those actions. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Eureka! Tue Dec 30 '97
by eureka＠eureka.abc-web.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Welcome to Tuesday's issue of Eureka! PLAYGAL This is truly a breathtaking site. Well-designed and easy to use with excellent content. The tour alone has hotter porn than many other 'free' sites - go see it now. It's explicit, comprehensive and top quality. There are 2,000 video feeds online, free live fucking with sound, 10,000 erotic stories, 1,000s of top quality pix, adult and arcade games, real ama- teur competitions and much more. Click now and be astounded! Playgal .... http://www.playgal.com/playgal/banner_abc1.html EUREKA! is now available in FOUR languages. So now you can choose from one or more of these following languages! FRANÇAIS ..... http://eureka.abc-web.com/eureka/francais.htm DEUTSCH ....... http://eureka.abc-web.com/eureka/deutsch.htm ESPAÑOL ....... http://eureka.abc-web.com/eureka/espanol.htm THE BABE GALLERY Go down the page about half way to the galleries. From there you have a choice of several different woman, each featuring a decent looking babe in a bunch of poses. Nice pussy shots. The Babe Gallery .......... http://www.the-babe-gallery.com/ MIDNIGHT DESIRES We have a free movie here! You'll need the vivo player. It features a terrific blowjob scene of some hot tramp sucking off her boss, or is it her office boy? Cool clip with sound! Midnight ........ http://www.midnightdesires.com/default.htm SEXTREME Wow, this site is loaded with easy to surf hot and horny pix all free for you! Foreplay, group sex, lesbians, models and a whole lot more. You might want to bookmark this one! Yeah! Sextreme .................. http://199.166.219.149/sextreme/ ABNORMALLY BIG BOOBS Well I guess so! There are some extra large hooters here to say the very least. All of the pix are listed by boob size with great thumbnails. This is a must surf for all tit fans! Abnormally Big ...... http://204.177.222.200/~paul/boobs.htm FREE STREAMING VIDEO Please note that most of these feeds require a Netscape bro- wser in order to successfully view them. Unfortunately Micr- osoft's browser does not have all the features of Netscape's yet. However, many of the feeds use the RealPlayer and will work in most browsers. If you do not have Netscape and want a free copy click here ... http://www.netscape.com/download/ Just 18 ........................ http://204.244.215.7/teens/ CHAT WITH OTHER READERS This chat is growing fast, and already there are a number of regulars you will meet most days. It's good to see Eureka! readers interacting with each other and having a great time! Just surf in and have fun! ...... http://137.39.63.229/chat/ THE BEST PHONE SEX Live Hetero 1-on-1, 2-on-1, group, dateline...1-800-644-8779 FREE Hetero live 1-on-1 (international call)...011-678-77416 FREE Gay live 1-on-1 (international call)......011-678-75629 AMATEUR SITE OF THE DAY EMERALD: Another hot Asian amateur. This young lady is a hoot, she has a wit that almost outshines her perfect body! One of her missions is to destroy the bimbo image and exp- lore her sexuality in an intelligent, funny way. She has quite a following! ......... http://amateurindex.com/eureka/ TODAY'S FREE PIX We decided to start releasing our super duper new picture collection a couple of days early - and we just know you're going to enjoy these ones. There's plenty more variety too! Pic 1 ........................... http://137.39.63.229/?300 Pic 2 ........................... http://137.39.63.229/?301 Pic 3 ........................... http://137.39.63.229/?302 Pic 4 ........................... http://137.39.63.229/?303 Pic 5 ........................... http://137.39.63.229/?304 Pic 6 ........................... http://137.39.63.229/?305 Pic 7 ........................... http://137.39.63.229/?306 Pic 8 ........................... http://137.39.63.229/?307 Pic 9 ........................... http://137.39.63.229/?308 Pic 10 ........................... http://137.39.63.229/?309 PLEASE VISIT THIS FINE EUREKA! MEMBER SITE Amazing Teen Cocksuckers http://pandobox.com Memberships include,40,000 jpg pix,over 300 live hardcore feeds, monthly interactive porn magazine, 1 gig of movies clips, 300 sexy stories and x-rated games to play offline. ------------------------------------------------------------ If you would like to unsubscribe from the Eureka! Newsletter simply select reply and send us a quick reply to this email. ------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

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

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Mon, 29 Dec 1997 17:12:06 +0100 (MET) > Subject: Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment > From: nobody(a)REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) > >Hmmm... > > > >Apologies. In *theory* you have those rights, on *paper*, you have those > >rights, but in *practice*, you're correct, the Government has power that > >it gleefully abuses, forcing others to comply w/ political correctness. > > Well no, on paper you do have those rights, and you don't have those > rights. Laws have been written so that you do not have those rights. > Are those laws consitutional? No. Does the fascist regime, or the > average apathetic American care? No. All it takes is a small group of individuals willing to fight the fight. Constitutional democracy is *not* mob rule. As long as you quit because nobody else will pat you on the shoulder and tell you how right you are then you aren't freedom loving. Freedom is a selfish endeavour. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Wit Capital Update: Virtual Roadshow Service Launched
by news＠witcapital.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Wit Capital Update December 29, 1997 www.witcapital.com Member NASD/SIPC Wit Capital has launched an exciting new service that will help you learn more about the public offerings on our web site. For selected Wit Capital offerings, in connection with your review of the prospectus, you'll find "virtual roadshow" presentations available for viewing right on your PC. A roadshow is the process by which underwriters acquaint investors with the products, people and finances of the company whose stock is to be publicly offered. Traditionally, only institutional investors are invited to see these presentations, but now you can view them at the click of your mouse. To view a virtual roadshow, go to the Look at New Issues section of our web site, find the prospectus that interests you and as part of your review of the prospectus, click the button marked View Roadshow. You'll be asked to download a plug-in called RealPlayer 5.0, for which you'll see easy instructions. We encourage you to read the complete prospectus for any Wit Capital offering.

1 0

Re: Why I Support Microsoft
by Brian B. Riley 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 12/29/97 6:47 AM, Patrick May (pjm(a)spe.com) passed this wisdom: > Okay, so I'm a UNIX-head; I forgot about the Macs (a dangerous >thing to do, given the ferocity of their supporters). If the >government were to adopt my suggestion, two major results would be: > > - The third party market for Linux software would grow rapidly > and enormously. > - The government's software budget would be reduced dramatically. that's OK, we Mac-heads have MacLinkPlus translators, we just get em to write another half dozen or so translators for Linux and Linux file system recognitions to the OS, no big deal ... we have always prided ourselves that MacOS often reads and processes Windoze documents better than WinDoze does ... Brian B. Riley --> http://members.macconnect.com/~brianbr For PGP Keys <mailto:brianbr@together.net?subject=Get%20PGP%20Key> "In effect, to follow, not to force the public inclination; to give a direction, a form, a technical dress, and a specific sanction, to the general sense of the community, is the true end of legislature." -- Edmund Burke

2 1

Sniping & such...
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, To address Tim's question about bolt-actions. As far as I know the Marine sniper still uses the Remington 7.62 bolt-action as his arm of choice. The beauty of the H&K blow-back mechanism is that it is very accurate at long range compared to other gas operated mechanism. However, in the situation we are discussion - taking on an assault team with snipers, aka anti-sniping, this level of accuracy is irrelevant. The goal is to stop the assault. To this end single shot accuracy is irrelevant. The reason is that we are not trying to hit a 16 in.^2 piece of brain pan and *not* hit the hostage in front. What we *are* trying to do is locate and eliminate specific targets and any ancillary hits to personnel on that end are a *good* thing. To that end I still like the H&K's because they have the 3-shot selector. My goal would be to set my IIS to show hot targets as black, with the black threshold about 90F. I would then pop off a 3-shot group into anything that looked the least bit like a person. Think of it as a .308 mini-shotgun at 600 yds. Under those conditions a 6-12 in. spread *is* a good thing. With this in mind, you would want to wear nomex to reduce your heat signature, a gillie suit for reduced visual targeting, and some sort of cool suit (from your local auto performance shop) with a modified and remote dissipator to reduce your heat signature so that *their* scopes don't show you as black. If you're in your house a good place to put the dissipator would be in the bathtub or sink. You might also want to cool-suit the gun as well. If you're in the field the dissipator should go behind and below your level of site, it's probably a good thing to cover it with dirt or debris as well. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Re: constitution.amendmentxi.html (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > From: "William H. Geiger III" <whgiii(a)invweb.net> > Date: Mon, 29 Dec 97 10:32:02 -0600 > Subject: Re: constitution.amendmentxi.html (fwd) > No this flys in the face of 200 yrs of American laws and centuries more of > English law. If your rights have not been infringed then you can't sue. The founding fathers took care of this argument also... THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES ARTICLE VI. This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

2 1