June 2009 - cypherpunks-legacy

Interview with Pirate Party Leader: "These are Crucial Freedoms"
by Eugen Leitl 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/print.php/12068_3825206_2/Interview-w… Interview with Pirate Party Leader: "These are Crucial Freedoms" By Bruce Byfield June 16, 2009 On June 7, 2009, Swedish voters elected a member of the PiratPartiet (Pirate Party) to the European Parliament. A second parliamentary seat will go to the Pirate Party this fall if the Lisbon Treaty is ratified and Sweden gains an additional two seats. These are small but solid results for a party founded three years ago that runs grass root campaigns. So what happened and why does it matter outside Sweden? For Rickard Falkvinge, founder and leader of the Pirate Party, the explanation is simple: The Pirates made the copyright and patent concerns of the free software community part of public discourse for the first time anywhere, and did so using social media techniques that caught their opponents completely unaware. Falkvinge expanded on this bit of history in a keynote address at the recent Open Web Vancouver, and in a brief interview with me the next day. Falkvinge, an entrepreneur from his teens, has been following IT all his adult life, including free software. "I've been involved with various types of open source," he says, but quickly adds, "I haven't worked on a specific project that you would have heard of. I'm one of those folks that somehow managed to get into projects that never go anywhere -- except this one, of course." As with many, the turning point for Falkvinge was the struggle against efforts to impose more restrictive copyrights throughout the European Union in 2005. According to Falkvinge, the issues were widely covered and discussed in Sweden by everyone -- except the politicians. "So I sat down and asked myself, 'What does it take to get the politicians' attention?' I realized that you probably couldn't get their attention without making it personal. So the only recourse basically was to bypass the politicians entirely, and head straight for the voting citizens at the polls -- essentially make it so personal that they can't ignore it any more." While to North Americans, the party's name may seem deliberately provocative, Falkvinge explains that it was an inevitable one given the political background. In 2001, a copyright lobbying group called the Anti-Pirate Bureau was founded, so when a counter think-tank was established in 2003, it naturally called itself the Pirate Bureau. According to Falkvinge, the result was that "pirate politics became very well-known and established. Everyone knew what pirate politics were, so it wasn't a matter of founding a party and thinking about the name. It was a matter of founding the Pirate Party" -- which he did on January 1, 2006. >From the start, Falkvinge rejected the idea of relying on old media -- TV, radio, print. "They wouldn't pick up on what they considered a fringe movement. They wouldn't write about us enough to spread the ideas -- partly because our ideas don't fit into their frame of reference, so how do they explain something that they can't really grasp? b We knew we had to build an activist network. We knew we had to do politics in a way that people hadn't seen before, but was perfectly consistent with open source. So we essentially by-passed all of old media. We didn't wait for old media to pick up something; we just published everywhere we could." The result was a success that blind-sided other political parties. Within a few days of posting the party's first website on January 1, 2006, Falkvinge learned that it had received several million hits. Although the Pirate Bay raid and the Swedish national election later that year helped promote the party, most of its growth occurred online in blogs and other forms of social media. Today it is the third largest Swedish party, and boasts by far the largest youth group of any Swedish political party. "It's not just the largest party online," Falkvinge says. "It's the only party being discussed online." Meanwhile, traditional analysts could not believe that the Pirate Party was consistently receiving 7-9% support in polls. "I read a political analyst who was entirely surprised," Falkvinge says. "She said, 'How could they possibly poll that much? They're entirely invisible.' She was, of course, referring to her own frame of reference. Whereas most blog comments were saying, 'Has this woman been living under a rock?'" The Pirate Party Platform For Falkvinge, the current efforts to protect and expand copyright and patents are a repeat of history. He begins his discussion of copyright by noting that the Catholic Church's response to the printing press and its ability to spread alternative viewpoints was to have the technology banned in France in 1535. Even more significantly, in England, the response was a commercial monopoly on printing. Although England did enjoy a copyright-free period following the deposition of James II in 1688, it was restored in 1709 by the Statute of Anne. A major influence on the restoration of copyright were arguments by the monopolists that copyright would benefit writers. In fact, Falkvinge says, "Copyright has always been for the benefit of publishers. Never, ever, for creators. Creators have been used as an excuse for copyright laws -- and it's still like that, 300 years later. Politicians still buy the rhetoric that was used in 1709 -- that's three hundred bloody years ago." Today, Falkvinge describes copyright as "a limitation of property rights" that has serious consequences for civil liberties. For Falkvinge, the efforts by groups such as movie and music distributors to enforce and expand copyright threatens what he calls "the postal secret" -- the ability to have private communications via public or commercial services. Furthermore, the worldwide efforts to make Internet service providers responsible for the contents they carry undermines "messenger immunity." "That's like prosecuting the postal services because we know they happen to be the nation's largest distributors of narcotics," Falkvinge explains by way of analogy. Still another issue is freedom of the press, both for journalists and whistle blowers. "If you can't tell a scandal to the press without knowing that private interest groups and law enforcement are going to read it on the way to the press, then what are you going to write about? Well, nothing will be able to be uncovered, because no one will come forward. Then what are you going to use freedom of the press for? Writing press releases?" In Falkvinge's view, copyright should be reserved for commercial distribution only, and severely restricted; five years would be a reasonable amount of time, he suggests. "Copyright needs to get out of honest people's bedrooms. Copyright is actually clad in police uniforms and making dog raids on honest people. That's unacceptable." He also believes that private copying is a social benefit, arguing that "We know that society advances when culture and knowledge spread among citizens. So we want to encourage all non-commercial copying." In the same way, the Pirate Party opposes patents -- especially in software, but also in other areas. "All patents, at their base, are innovation inhibitors," he maintains. "Patents delayed the industrial revolution by thirty years. They delayed the advent of the North American avionics industry by another thirty years, until the first world war broke out, and the US government confiscated the patents. It delayed radio for five years." Today, he suggests, advances in electric cars and eco-friendly infrastructure are similarly blocked by patents. "We're seeing the Catholic Church reaction all over again," Falkvinge says. "When there's a disruptive and equalizing technology, the establishment doesn't attack the people who are trying to become equal. They attack the technology that enables that. This happens all over the world. The establishment is attacking the Internet. b The excuses vary. In China, it's control. In Southeast Asia, it's public morals. In other places, it's law and order. In Egypt, I believe, the reason is keeping true to the faith -- Islam, in their case. In the US, there are three major excuses: copyright, terrorism, and pedophiles. These excuses are being used to crack down on the greatest equalizer of people ever invented. "This is what is at stake in the debate. It's vital civil liberties that need to be eroded or abolished in order to maintain a crumbling monopoly for obsolete industries. It's understandable that an obsolescent industry is fighting for its life, but it's up to the politicians to say that, no, we're not going to dismantle civil liberties, just so you don't have to change. Get out, and adopt or die." Itbs in this situation, Falkvinge argues, that the Pirate Party's perspective becomes so important. The Pirate Party is "taking a stance on civil liberties that politicians don't understand. They're listening to lobbies and attacking civil rights at an alarming rate." The pro-copyright lobby's efforts may be ultimately futile -- Falkvinge likens their position to taking a stance against organic carbon compounds, for all the good they will do -- but he also warns that the lobby could do considerable damage before they are overtaken by inevitability. Courting the Pirates The next time that the European Parliament sits, its members will include Christian Engstrom, an entrepreneur turned activist who has been an anti-patent lobbyist for the past five years. If the Pirates receive a second seat, Engstrom will be joined by Amelia Andersdotter, whom Falkvinge describes as "one of the brightest minds we have in the Pirate Party." She will also be the youngest member ever elected to the European Parliament if she sits. Meanwhile, after being frequently criticized as "having a too narrow platform" -- much like the Labour and Green parties when they first appeared -- the Pirate Party finds itself newly sought after. Since the results of the European election were announced, all seven of the party groups or coalitions in the parliament have extended invitations to the Pirate Party to join them. What makes an alliance with the Pirate Party suddenly desirable may be partly an awareness that its members are discussing issues that everyone else is hardly aware of. However, the party's desirability may be due just as much to the fact that it was the most popular party among voters under thirty -- a group that other parties have long had difficulties attracting. Moreover, with multiple parties, the Pirate Party's seven percent of the vote is a significant bloc of votes under any circumstances. "These seven [party groups] are basically bending over backwards to get our credibility into their own group,b Falkvinge says. b We've got such enormous street credibility that these parties are fighting over us." Speaking a few days after the election results, Falkvinge was visibly triumphant. However, he is already looking forward to the next Swedish national elections, where he hopes that the Pirate Party will hold the balance of power in a minority government. The price of an alliance with the Pirates, of course, will be the adoption of their policies. "The European election gave us legitimacy," Falkvinge says. "The next national election will let us rewrite the laws." If that happens, then the European Union and the rest of the world might feel the effect. Already, Pirate Parties are springing up in imitation of the Swedish one, and, as its ability to attract the youth vote demonstrates, there are thousands for whom the Pirates are the only political group speaking about issues they care about. "There are two important things to remember," Falkvinge says. "First of all, we're part of the next generation civil liberties movement. This is a civil liberties movement. These are crucial freedoms and crucial rights that are being jeopardized by people wanting to close down the Net, and we want to safeguard those rights. We basically want the fundamental rights and freedoms to apply online as well as off-line. "The second thing I want to emphasize is that we've grown only by people talking to one another. We've grown almost a quarter million votes, 50,000 members, 17,000 activists, by one person talking to another, one conversation at a time, one colleague, kin or class mate at a time over a three year period. b This, if nothing else, shows that you can do that. You are not dependent on old media any more. If you have a strong message and it concerns people, then you can drive that yourself."

1 0

March of the killer robots
by Eugen Leitl 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/science/sciencenews/5543603… March of the killer robots The development of mechanical soldiers and remote-controlled tanks and planes is changing war for ever - but the moral consequences have often been overlooked. By Noel Sharkey Published: 6:45PM BST 15 Jun 2009 Killing machine: one of America's unmanned Reaper hunter-killer aircraft Photo: PHILIP COBURN It's the most realistic shoot-'em-up game ever. The player has a choice of two planes: a Predator with two Hellfire missiles, or a Reaper with 14. The action takes place in the Middle East, where you can attack villages and kill the inhabitants with impunity. But don't bother looking for it in the shops: to play this deadly game, you'll have to travel to Creech Air Force base in the Nevada desert. That's because the planes are real, and so are the casualties. The first time a Predator made a kill was in Yemen, in 2002, when the CIA used it to destroy a vehicle carrying an al-Qaeda leader and five of his associates. The fleet now stands at around 200 craft, which have flown more than 400,000 combat hours. The company that makes them, General Atomics, can't keep up with the demand. The bigger, badder version b the Reaper hunter-killer b is also flying off the shelves. There are now around 30 in active service, with the first kill taking place in the mountains of Afghanistan in October 2007. In every field of warfare, mechanical soldiers are fighting alongside b or instead of b human beings. Apart from unmanned combat air vehicles such as Predators, the skies above Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan are filled with drones carrying out surveillance operations. On the ground are between 6,000 and 12,000 robots, up from a mere 150 in 2004. Their role is mostly to protect our soldiers by disrupting improvised explosive devices, or to carry out surveillance of dangerous places such as caves and buildings. Our image of such robots owes a great deal to films b most notably The Terminator or Transformers, both of which have sequels out this month. But the actual models being used are more like miniature tanks, similar to the contraptions seen on the television series Robot Wars. The most popular is the PackBot made by the US company iRobot, which is normally used for bomb disposal. As the company started out making robotic vacuum cleaners known as Roombas, the 18kg PackBot is sometimes jokingly referred to as the "Roomba of doom" or "Doomba" b much to the displeasure of the firm's management, who would clearly hope to keep the two brands separate. Recently, iRobot joined forces with Taser International to mount the allegedly non-lethal weapons on the "bots". But that pales in comparison with the ordnance that comes with the Talon, a larger device made by Foster-Miller, a US subsidiary of the British firm QinetiQ. It comes with chemical, gas, temperature and radiation sensors and can be mounted with a choice of grenade launcher, machine gun, incendiary weapon or 50-calibre rifle. Its bigger brother, the MAARS robot, ups the stakes with a tanklike turret. Despite planned cutbacks in spending on conventional weapons, the Obama administration is increasing its budget for robotics: in 2010, the US Air Force will be given $2.13 billion for unmanned technology, including $489.24 million to procure 24 heavily armed Reapers. The US Army plans to spend $2.13 billion on unmanned vehicle technology, including 36 more Predators, while the Navy and Marine Corps will spend $1.05 billion, part of which will go on armed MQ-8B helicopters. Of course, when the military describes such systems as "unmanned", it is stretching the truth very slightly. At the moment, all the armed robots in the Middle East are remote-controlled by humans b there is a "man in the loop" to control them and to decide when and whether to apply lethal force. But that makes very little difference to villagers in Waziristan, where there have been repeated Predator strikes since 2006, many of them controlled from Creech Air Force Base, thousands of miles away. According to reports coming out of Pakistan, these have killed 14 al-Qaeda leaders and more than 600 civilians. Such widespread collateral damage suggests that the human remote-controllers are not doing a very good job of restraining their robotic servants. In fact, the role of the "man in the loop" is becoming vanishingly small, and will disappear. "Our decision power [as controllers] is really only to give a veto," argues Peter Singer, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington DC. "And, if we are honest with ourselves, it is a veto power we are often unable or unwilling to exercise because we only have a half-second to react." As Dyke Weatherington, deputy director of the Pentagon's Unmanned Aerial Systems Task Force, points out: "There's really no way that a system that is remotely controlled can effectively operate in an offensive or defensive air combat environment. The requirement of that is a fully autonomous system." Sure enough, plans are well under way to develop robots that can locate and destroy targets without human intervention. There are already a number of autonomous ground vehicles, such as the seven-ton "Crusher" developed by DARPA, the US military's research agency. BAE Systems, a British defence contractor, recently reported that it had "completed a flying trial which, for the first time, demonstrated the co-ordinated control of multiple Unmanned Aerial Vehicles autonomously completing a series of tasks". The Israelis are already fielding autonomous radar-killer drones known as Harpy and Harop, and the South Koreans use lethal autonomous systems to defend their border with the North. Many in the military are enthusiastic about such developments. "They don't get hungry. They're not afraid. They don't forget their orders," says Dr Gordon Johnson, of the Pentagon's Joint Forces Command. "Will they do a better job than humans? Yes." Dr Johnson insists that "there are no legal prohibitions against robots making life-and-death decisions", adding: "The US military will have these kinds of robots. It's not a question of if, it's a question of when." The problem, however, is that no autonomous robots or artificial intelligence systems have the necessary capabilities to discriminate between combatants and innocents. Compared with the robots in the Terminator films, they suffer from artificial stupidity. Allowing them to make decisions about who to kill falls foul of the fundamental ethical precepts of the laws of war set up to protect civilians, the sick and wounded, the mentally ill and captives. We are already overreaching the technology and stretching the laws of war. "Unless we end war, end capitalism and end science, the use of robots will only grow," says Peter Singer. "We are building and using machines with more and more autonomy because they are viewed by militaries as useful for war, and viewed by companies as profitable business." Spending on Unmanned Aerial Vehicles is expected to exceed tens of billions of dollars over the next 10 years, and more than 40 countries b including Russia and China b now have their own programmes. Amid this robotic arms race, there is a sliver of hope. Professor Ron Arkin, of the Georgia Institute of Technology, believes that humans do not have the time to make rational ethical decisions in the modern battlefield. "There appears to be little alternative," he says, "to the use of more dispassionate autonomous decision-making machinery." He has funding from the US Army for research on how to programme ethical rules into robots to stop them causing excessive collateral damage. But this does not get around the problem of how to discriminate between innocents and combatants b and Arkin admits that the technology to fully support his system may not be available for 25 years. The problem is that it is not just a matter of developing adequate sensors. In complex wars, complex human reasoning is often needed to decide when it is appropriate to kill. Robots do not feel anger or seek revenge b but they also don't have sympathy, empathy, remorse or shame. Nor can they be held accountable for their actions. In subcontracting our wars to our robotic creations, we are abdicating moral responsibility, too. Noel Sharkey is Professor of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics at the University of Sheffield

1 0

Inside the Pentagon's New Plan for Drones That Don't Piss Off Pakistan
by Eugen Leitl 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

http://www.esquire.com/the-side/feature/new-air-force-drones-in-pakistan-06… June 17, 2009, 11:43 AM Inside the Pentagon's New Plan for Drones That Don't Piss Off Pakistan Esquire.com gets an advanced look at the Air Force roadmap to better robots b flying multi-missile hitmen, floating multi-target guidance systems, flapping suicide bombers b and how they can zero in on Al Qaeda without costing Hillary her job. By Erik Sofge niper system (top) can lock in on four targets in urban environment, potentially to deliver the precision power of the new Suburban Warrior UAV (left). The backup plan? Flocks of sparrow-sized bombers (right). As hitmen go, robots are clumsy killers. The proof is in Pakistan, where local authorities claim that drone strikes on Al Qaeda and affiliate targets have killed at least 687 civilians. Whether or not that figure is inflated, the real or imagined death toll continues to fuel anti-American sentiment around the world. And that's to say nothing of the anti-administration fervor inside Washington circles as to whether President Obama and newly promoted general Stanley McChrystal, in continuing Bush-era policies with Bush-era technologies (even if they're offering Pakistan surveillance data), should continue air strikes near the Afghan border at all. Now, the Air Force is planning to build a more selective breed of military drones, with swarms of bird-size bots shadowing targets and new unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) capable of launching mini-missiles at multiple targets at once. The mechanized assassin, it seems, is about to become a lot more professional. Details of this new UAV development are limited b the Air Force Research Laboratory released a 78-page briefing last month, sketching out individual plans for a number of drone-related systems. The briefing, first obtained by Air Force Times but reviewed this morning for Esquire.com, offers the first detailed glimpse at an American military strategy that has adapted to conflicts in Pakistan and Afghanistan and "incorporates a vision and strategy... that focus on delivery of warfighting capability" with new robots. Perhaps the most significant concept in the briefing is a UAV called Suburb Warrior, which would carry a new kind of smaller, precision-guided missile. Another project, called Sniper, is a targeting system that can lock on to multiple targets, allowing a single drone pilot to coordinate the attacks of a squadron of robots b or a single UAV to hit a group of enemies. Picking through the dozens of systems in this briefing, many of which will be flight-tested within five years, there's a clear set of goals: build smaller, even microscopic drones with smaller weapons that can hunt in swarms and engage targets in the close quarters of urban battlefields. And hunt as soon as possible. To understand the significance of this new plan b how it could affect U.S. diplomacy in the region, reduce potential troop counts there, and, you know, better hunt Al Qaeda b one need only look at the current state of unmanned assassination. The least powerful weapons deployed by Predators b and their new big brother, the Reaper b are Hellfire missiles. These antitank weapons have incredibly literal names; they're designed to penetrate armored vehicles with a jet of molten metal. So if a U.S. target were sitting in a pickup truck, or even a second-floor window, a Hellfire is more than overkill. It's a collateral damage factory, turning a city street into hell on earth, and potentially flattening buildings. To paraphrase the NRA, robots don't kill civilians; missiles do. Theoretically, the smaller missiles launched by Suburb Warrior would wreak less havoc in crowded battlefields. In asking for proposals for a "Miniature Weapon Demonstration," the Air Force described the new weapon as an "air-launched, precision miniature munition capability," which would provide a "mobile target kill capability against a broad set of targets in a suburban environment." In the new briefing, the system is described as "for application in a dense, all environment urban battlespace." That's Pentagon speak for Obama-approved missiles that are ready for anything short of Mogadishu, that cover the Pentagon's ass in smaller cities while they're at it. Notional drawings of Suburb Warrior show the drone loaded with four or more mini-missiles b far fewer munitions than a Reaper carries b but make clear that it's much smaller than even the Predator. The Sniper multiple-targeting system (that Goodyear-blimp-meets-Star-Wars-X-wing craft pictured above) isn't tied to a specific UAV, but it could be a perfect fit for delivering the Suburb Warrior. Instead of dropping Hellfires or a 500-pound bomb on an insurgent hideout, one or more Suburb Warriors could fire a volley of mini-missiles at confirmed targets, without vaporizing the wedding reception next door. The drone is slated for flight tests by 2014, and Sniper is scheduled to begin tests in cruise missiles and UAVs within two years. The Air Force is reviewing white papers for miniature munitions now, and a contract could be awarded as early as September. The problem, of course, is that even if the robotic upgrade continues on this fast track, five years is an eternity for America's diplomatic arm to wait for its military one. Who knows if Hillary Clinton will still have her job by then? If she does, what if the new robots still aren't precise enough? So if a squadron of low-flying drones and their micro-munitions don't provide a clean kill in those packed communities, the Air Force Research Laboratory has a more point-blank Plan B: tiny, biologically-inspired micro air vehicles (MAVs) that can flap through alleys and inside buildings. Like most UAVs, these robots would most likely be used for surveillance and reconnaissance. But in an animated clip released by the Air Force late last year, a MAV lands on an enemy sniper, and, without so much as a prayer to its machine god, detonates itself. The new Air Force briefing doesn't elaborate on this miniature suicide-bomber concept, but it does include plans to have flocks of sparrow-size MAVs airborne by 2015, and even smaller, dragonfly-size robots by 2030. And with the recent news that Israel is developing an explosives-laden snakebot, the writing is on the wall: You can run from tomorrow's robotic hitmen, and you can hide, and they'll flap or squirm or glide into position and kill you anyway. Erik Sofge is a freelance science, technology, and culture writer, covering the latest in everything from fake robots and rayguns to real ones for Popular Mechanics, Slate, and MSN. He lives in Boston with his wife and possibly animatronic unborn child.

1 0

gulchnet ramp up
by Eugen Leitl 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

(very long thread, see the site) http://thementalmilitia.com/forums/index.php?PHPSESSID=682c1e7f53b789fdb860… Topic: Gulchnet ramp up (Read 2175 times) kbarrett Sr. Member **** Offline Offline Member #57 Posts: 1144 Gulchnet ramp up + on: June 03, 2004, 03:48:52 PM ; OK .... I've got a server set up with freeswan on a permanent IP address. Not sure how to run it, but the software is loaded. I'm not using KLIPS, as I don't want non-members to be able to enter. Who else has freeswan ( or strongswan or superswan ) set up? We could either use fixed IP addresses, or pass out x509 certs to folks with DHCP floating IPs ( use "roadwarrior" laptop protocols ). I'd like to get some kind of server backbone set up first, and then maybe put Debra or Claire in charge of certification .... someone needs to vet people before they get in. Also ... do we want to buy a domain name for this mess, or just use bare IP addresses?

1 0

Just 2 pills to add 2 inches
by Ellis Simon 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

Fi�allyy - for a ver� limit�d time ��Iy - Dr.MaxMan is now available absolutely and compl�etely FREE! The revolutionary hardcore formula for male enhancement, proovenn by m�ltipl� st�dies worIdwidee to be 15 X more effective for gaining inches, thickn�ss and girth for men. http://trialherb.com/ G�in triple yo�ur size in lesss tha� a moonth completely free. http://trialsherbal.com/ Get Your Free Trial Now - Dont Wait!

1 0

Lessons Learned From the Battlefield
by Eugen Leitl 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

http://www.lewrockwell.com/gaddy/gaddy61.1.html Lessons Learned From the Battlefield by Michael Gaddy Recently by Michael Gaddy: Preparation I continue to receive a large number of emails questioning what would be the best instrument for communication in the event of a national emergency, economic chaos or civil unrest on a massive scale. I believe the answer can be found in what has worked, and not worked, for the Iraqi resistance. (I refuse to call anyone fighting for their homes and families an insurgent) In a great number of instances, communications has been the Achilles Heel of the resistance in Iraq. They have learned to constantly change their modes and methods of communication in order to keep their opponents off balance. The cell phone is the easiest and most preferred method of communication in use by the modern day 4th Generation Warfare (4GW) participant; it is also the easiest to exploit. First, remember SIM cards are exploitable and can and will be used against you. It is possible to exploit a SIM card in 30 seconds without the holder even knowing it, once your opponent has your phone number. All that is needed to pinpoint location with a cell phone is 2 towers for those who do not have a phone with GPS. There are also technologies that allow the government to create false towers that seek out your phones specific signal and will allow them to troll around an area until they get a hit, and then it will lead them right to your location. These techniques have been developed, tested, and used effectively in Iraq and Afghanistan. All the opponent needs is your number, which gives them the specific signal to your phone. Counter measures are simple; never ever keep the phone on, or the battery in. Never store numbers in the phone, always use throwaway cell phones and change them often. Set up prearranged talk times, and always talk on the move. Never talk in your home, or while you are stationary. Never ever send text messages, and always talk in code on the phone. Hard line to hard line is the best way to call if you can still find a pay phone. Radios of any kind are the same as cell phones, but will get you located quicker. The opponents expect them to be used, and almost always have their ears on. Todaybs military units have the ability to listen and pinpoint the point of broadcast of any type communication device and jam it. Unless you hardwire your area of operations (AO) with WWI field phones, keep your messages short, sweet, and move quickly after you broadcast. I warned here of new members to your group who advocate violence or offer to provide weapons and/or explosives. Also be extremely cautious of any members of your group who are gone for any period of time or those you know have been contacted by the authorities. Even the most loyal can be coerced with threats to family, etc. Read and study 4GW tactics and strategies; these tactics have yet to be defeated in modern military history. I highly recommend the series of books written by Colonel John Poole on the subject. The Colonelbs works reveal a detailed history of 4GW and a wealth of information that could prove invaluable. Author, Patriot, and LRC reader, Matthew Bracken, has written a trilogy of novels on probable scenarios concerning civil unrest and its complications. There is a wealth of information that can be gleaned from his works, as well as some disturbing possibilities. Matt has laced his writing with interesting characters that makes for an informative, entertaining, though sometimes alarming read. Those who prepare, educate and equip for the coming chaos will be those most apt to protect themselves and their families. Remember, those who fail to plan, plan to fail. June 18, 2009 Michael Gaddy [send him mail], an Army veteran of Vietnam, Grenada, and Beirut, lives in the Four Corners area of the American Southwest.

1 0

Re: [Pigdog] Nation sees 50% rise in unfathomable headlines.
by Eugen Leitl 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

----- Forwarded message from xtrakt <xtrakt(a)gmail.com> -----

1 0

porsche design is your style;
by Deloris Kearney 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

Amazing watches and such huge choice http://odjjqdea.cn

1 0

Do you want enlargr your penis up to 4 inches? rj
by Carissa Morris 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

Dear rsw(a)jfet.org http://lawnroad.com A breakthrough in herbal Science has created a pill that has been designed specifically for penis enlargement. The tests that took place over a 6 month period showed that out of the 50,000 Males from around the world who participated, the average gain after 5 months of taking our pills pills was 3.72 Inches! Amazing, PERMANENT RESULTS that will last. ť Gain 3+ Inches In Length. ť Increase Your Penis Width (Girth) By upto 20%. ť Help Stop Premature Ejaculation! ť Produce Stronger, Rock Hard Erections. ť 100% Safe To Take, With NO Side Effects. ť Fast Shipping WorldWide. ť Doctor Approved And Recommended. ť No Pumps! No Surgery! No Exercises! ť Very discrete shipping and billing ť 100% Money Back Guarantee. ť *3 FREE Bottles !! ť Highly secure 128bit order processing http://lawnroad.com Thanks Mary Anniston rsw(a)jfet.org wrote: > IS bigger better or not? ygzejg1egs- out me now http://lawnroad.com/w.php

1 0

Greatness is measured by the size of your manhood
by Susanne Peacock 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

Fin�lly - for a very l�mited time only - Dr.MaxMan is now avaiilable abs�olut�ly and completely FREE! The revo|utionary hardcoore formula for male enhancement, prov�n by multip|e studies worldwide to be 15 X mor� effective for gaining inches, thickness and girthh for men. http://extralenght.com/ Gain tripl� your size in less than a month completeIy free. http://trialsherb.com/ Get Your Freee Triall Now - D�nt Wait!

1 0