- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: LOSE MONEY FAST!!
by Blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Gosh, this sounds a lot like Detweiler: lots of EXCLAMATIONS and vague, circulating references to unrecognizeable entities, full of recriminating psychological accusations intended to elicit a sense of underlying guilt for some kind of immoral attitude. Think he'd make a good lawyer. .. Blanc

1 0

Bomb Making Info to be Illegal
by Silenced 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Soon, it may be illegal to distribute bomb making instructions. Get your copy while you still can! The Terrorist's Handbook is available at: http://www.meaning.com/library/boom/thb/ The entire handbook, in HTML format, can be downloaded from: ftp://ftp.meaning.com/pub/library/thb.tgz DOWNLOAD A COPY WHILE YOU STILL CAN! -silenced >From WIRED news www.wired.com: Senate Votes to Block Bomb-Making Info by Rebecca Vesely 12:09pm 20.Jun.97.PDT The Senate has voted 94-0 to tack onto a Defense Department spending bill an amendment that would prohibit the distribution of bomb-making instructions in the United States. Although the word "Internet" is not mentioned in the four-page amendment, the legislation would outlaw Web sites, newspapers, zines, and books that publish instructions on how to make a bomb - such as The Anarchist's Cookbook and The Terrorist Handbook. Violators would face fines and prison sentences of up to 20 years. Sponsored by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-California), who has been trying to get the legislation on the books since 1995, the amendment passed Thursday is narrowly written to include only the distribution of material that has an "intent to harm." ...

6 6

For Adults ONLY!
by Gina-Lisa＠logatome.micronet.fr 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Nude Spring Break 1997!! http://www.spring-break97.com/ Naked Teenage Girls Partying on Miami and Ft Lauderdale Beaches!! THOUSANDS OF ALL ORIGINAL PICTURES!! XXX, AMATEUR, TEENS, LESBIANS, AND MORE!!! See These Real Teens NUDE or In Little G- String Bikinis! Fresh New Tender Breasts Barely covered! http://www.spring-break97.com/ Special NEW Section: Nude Runaway Teenagers!!! BONUS!!!!!!!!! Instant Access To Over 1,800 WebSites!! Special Voyeurism pictures, 1,000's of celebs, S and M, teens, amateurs, gay-lesbians, XXX, older women, older guys younger girls, Blowjobs, cumshots, free video sex, much much more!! http://www.spring-break97.com/ WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR???????????? http://www.spring-break97.com/ See ya there!

1 0

Re: Bomb Making Info to be Illegal
by lucifer＠dhp.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Adrogynous Stewart wrote: > In the final form it only > prohibits the teaching of bombmaking for criminal purposes. It's not clear > to me that the bill will restrict such material on the net, unless they > implies criminal use. Has everyone in society lost their fucking mind? Explain to me please, the dire consequences of not having this law. Without this law, are people who teach others to make bombs for criminal purposes not going to go to jail? Bullshit! How much of our tax money is being fucked away to pass a law to establish that the legislation's sponsors aren't in favor of children in a daycare being bombed? People who currently teach bombmaking for criminal purposes are already going to jail. No doubt a new law will result in some poor schmuck who is not too good with the English language going to jail (at our expense) for twenty years for saying "you _should_ use a short fuse" instead of saying "you _could_ use a short fuse" (or somesuch nonsense). Nothing personal, pal, but to even speak about the proposed law without pointing out that Feinstein is an ignorant bitch who is fucking away our tax dollars on a useless law, meant to impress the dim-witted, is nothing less than conceding to the reign of knee-jerk stupidity. Someone please put up a website teaching people how to use bananas to commit a crime. I want some company in prison when I kill 168 people with a banana. BananaMonger

2 1

Re: New Laws in Oregon - "Land of the Legal betatest"
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ryan Anderson wrote: > On Wed, 25 Jun 1997, lucifer Anonymous Remailer wrote: > > > We've got a relatively decent style of government here. > > > Sure, as long as you don't step out of line, like at Kent State > > or Waco, or at the Democratic convention in Chicago. > > Any style of government is "relatively decent" if you don't > > rock the boat. Buy a fucking clue... > > Do I have to spell out everything for you? "Style of government" as in > governmental *DESIGN*, not the current situation. I'm talking about the > layout of Congress, the Executive branch, the Supreme Court, etc. Better you should concentrate on learning to read than on giving spelling lessons. I'll type slowly and SHOUT, shit-for-brains, so you have a slim chance of following me, here: "ANY (<--that's _ANY_) style (DESIGN, STRUCTURE, METHOD...) of government is "realatively decent" if you don't rock the boat." Screw the "layout of Congress, the Executive branch, the Supreme Court, etc." I seriously doubt that the slaves being whipped in the thirteen colonies ignored the pain by concentrating on the beauty of the layout of Congress. I doubt that Indians mourning the slaughter of their families appreciated the structure of the Executive Branch. "Style of government" doesn't much matter a rat's ass. All that really matters is the balance of power between those in society and how those who have power use it. If there are two of us and only one gun, we can draw toothpicks to see which of us has "governership" over the gun for the day to hunt for food, or if you are big and have an attitude you may just seize control of the gun. If you're using the gun only to hunt and share the food equally with me, either way is a "relatively decent" form of "government" of the gun. Of course, if you get off on the "power" of controlling the gun, you are going to get nervous when I start gathering sticks and stones to build a house and start passing "amendments" to our agreement or "style of government" that state I can only possess small sticks and stones, etc, etc. Pretty soon, I'm building a nuclear warhead in my straw hut... > This whole discussion has been, from my point of view at least, mostly > theoretical in a discussion of possible ways to alter the government to > stay away from the situations that we are in now. Simple. Design all future government buildings to match the remains of the Federal Building in OKC and replace the pictures of our beloved President with pictures of Timothy McVeigh. The problem with any government is not the style, but the maintaining of accountability. Putting the nuclear warheads in D.C. and giving the magic button to a barmaid in Denver would likely be as "relatively decent" a "style of government" as any other alternative. You want a "relatively decent style of government?" Make Stalin our dictator and arrange for Mother Teresa to control a mechanical vice that contains his nuts. Pick any "style of government" at random, as far as I'm concerned, but don't forget to put a note on the fridge to remind yourself to pick up some munitions for the coming revolution. McVeigh was just "voting early," as is allowed for by law for those in the military who may be busy serving their country at election time. Change the style of government to any form you please and the pigs at the public trough are going to fight (and kill) to stay there. A change in "style" is not needed as much as a change in "attitude." (e.g. "Hard weapons, soft targets, no compromise.") I don't need to buy a clue. I have a Ryder truck full of clues that I haven't even used yet. ClueMonger

2 1

SF RALLY Against Internet Censorship, Thursday or Friday
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Looks like the CDA decision is going to happen soon... ----- Begin Included Message ----- From: Stanton McCandlish <mech(a)eff.org> Subject: SF RALLY Against Internet Censorship Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 15:02:21 -0700 (PDT) X-URL: http://www.eff.org/~mech To: bayff(a)eff.org (bayff mailing list) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 14:05:16 -0800 From: "--Todd Lappin-->" <telstar(a)wired.com> To: telstar(a)wired.com Subject: SF RALLY Against Internet Censorship Please help spread the word in the Bay Area! --Todd Lappin--> Section Editor WIRED Magazine -- Please forward until June 26, 1997 -- ___________________________________________________________________________ *** RALLY AGAINST INTERNET CENSORSHIP *** ** Supreme Court Decision on CDA Expected Wednesday or Thursday ** AMENDMENT I: "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble." *** RALLY AGAINST INTERNET CENSORSHIP *** ** South Park, San Francisco, California -- 1 PM ** ___________________________________________________________________________ In February 1996, President Clinton made Internet censorship the law of the land by signing the Communications Decency Act. The CDA -- a blatant affront to free speech -- has since become a symbol of the ignorance and contempt the American political establishment reserves for Internet users and their constitutional rights. Now, more than one year later, the United States Supreme Court is poised to decide the fate of free speech for the 21st century. On Wednesday or Thursday of this week, the Supreme Court will issue a decision in the landmark case of ACLU vs. Reno. On the day the decision comes down, The Electronic Frontier Foundation, Wired Ventures, and the Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition invite you to join us for a RALLY to show your support for free speech online. PLEASE JOIN US to discuss the free speech implications of this ruling with plaintiffs and organizers of the legal challenge. ___________________________________________________________________________ WHEN: On the day the Supreme Court issues its decision. EITHER.... Wednesday June 25, 1997 *OR* Thursday June 26, 1997 at 1 PM For up-to-the-minute information on the status of the decision, please visit http://www.ciec.org WHERE: South Park (between 2nd and 3rd, Bryant St. and Brannan St.) San Francisco. SPEAKERS (Tentative List): Bruce Ennis, the lead attorney who argued this case before the Supremes Mike Godwin, Electronic Freedom Foundation Judith Krug, American Library Association Sameer Parekh, C2Net Todd Lappin - Wired Magazine BRING: Attention-grabbing posters, signs, and banners that demonstrate your committment to free speech and expression, and your feelings about Congress. ___________________________________________________________________________ FOR UPDATED INFORMATION ON THIS RALLY: http://www.ciec.org/events/sf FOR BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT THE CDA: http://www.ciec.org http://wwww.hotwired.com/special/indecent/ http://www.eff.org/blueribbon.html ___________________________________________________________________________ (NOTE: We are *actively* seeking participation and support from ALL members of the Bay Area media, online, Internet, new media, and telecommunications communities. Please forward this message to anyone you think should attend, and to all relevant mailing lists and newsgroups.) MEDIA CONTACT: Lessley Anderson, Wired Magazine, 415-276-5162, lessley(a)wired.com -- Stanton McCandlish mech(a)eff.org Electronic Frontier Foundation Program Director http://www.eff.org/~mech +1 415 436 9333 x105 (v), +1 415 436 9333 (f) Are YOU an EFF member? http://www.eff.org/join ----- End Included Message ----- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.)

2 1

More Supreme Court CDA predictions (fwd)
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 21:04:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> To: fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Subject: More Supreme Court CDA predictions [Probably the Supreme Court's last free speech decision before the CDA came down today in Glickman v. Wileman Brothers. I'm still reading through the opinion, but as I understand the case, U.S. Agriculture Department regulations required nectarine and peach growers in California to contribute to generic pro-nectarine/peach advertising. The Ninth Circuit struck down the regs, saying the "First Amendment right of freedom of speech includes a right not to be compelled to render financial support for others' speech." But today the Supreme Court reversed, ruling that "Respondents are not required themselves to speak but are merely required to make contributions for advertising." Souter, Rhenquist, Scalia, and Thomas dissented. This is hardly a decision that bodes well for the First Amendment. --Declan] ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 25 Jun 97 19:15:00 DST From: "Halpert, James - DC" <jhalpert(a)pipermar.com> Declan, One never knows until the opinions are issued, but there is a good deal of objective evidence contradicting Prof. Volokh's hunch. At oral argument, Rhenquist, Scalia and Thomas all asked hostile questions of Bruce Ennis, and Rhenquist and Scalia stepped in to help out Seth Waxman, the Government's oralist, when he was having trouble answering tough questions. I'm not sure that Rhenquist and Thomas have ever voted to strike down an indecency restriction. Although Scalia has been taken somewhat more libertarian stands on speech restrictions than the other two, he said flat out at oral argument that he thought the government should win. As for the dissenting opinion they all joined Denver Consortium decision last term, it may have drawn a clearer line than did the plurality opinion, but would have upheld a requirement that cable subscribers OPT-IN IN WRITING thirty days in advance of being able to receive indecent programming. If you like that, you may well like the CDA .. . . We'll see soon enough.

1 0

Another shoe drops
by Brad Dolan 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Raids Against 'Interim' Autonomist Zine In Berlin On June 12, 1997, more than 500 police in Berlin carried out a series of raids aimed at criminalizing the weekly autonomist publication 'Interim'. State agents searched several houses in the Berlin districts of Friedrichshain, Neukolln, and Kreuzberg. Several individuals were charged with various felonies including "rewarding or supporting illegal actions". Police also raided several printing presses. A successful criminalization of the Interim would, in practical terms, be much more of a blow to the German radical-left than the recent state campaign against the underground publication Radikal, because whereas Radikal has only been sporadically published over the past few years, Interim has appeared *every week* since the late 1980s. Published as a forum for discussion for Berlin's radical-left autonome scene, the magazine has political relevance all across Germany, as it provides an anonymous forum for publishing communiques from militant action groups, mobilizations for demonstrations, and debates on politics and strategy. The following is a translation of a statement issued by Interim following the recent raids. --- "You Can't Ban A Concept" Statement From Interim Magazine - June 12, 1997 Interim has been published weekly for nine years. State surveillance, repression, and investigations have not stopped it from appearing. The 1995 Verfassungsschutzbericht' [annual report from Germany's Office to Protect the Constitution] stated that "a high degree of trust and discipline among the makers of the magazine" have prevented the authorities from being able to close it down. But now the powers that be feel they can do just that. Therefore, we'd like to say the following: 1. There is no permanent Interim editorial group, nor a fixed publishing location. The magazine is continually made and put together by different people. 2. If any papers were found anywhere during the police raids which also appeared in the Interim, that doesn't mean a thing. The Interim has a public mailing address, anyone can send us papers or documents, and as far as we know, it's not a crime to receive mail. 3. The cops dismantled printing presses, confiscated computers and files, filed charges against individuals. It's ridiculous to think that this will stop the Interim. Because the Interim is a communications CONCEPT: uncensored, according to the law, published according to its own rules in the interest of an anonymous exchange about theory and praxis of undogmatic left-radical politics. As long as the ruling powers are bent on destroying society, a radical resistance movement will be necessary, and it's not possible for a discussion of this necessity to take place within the boundaries of the laws of the powers that be. If Schonbohm [former General, now Interior Minister in Berlin] tries to stop our communication exchange by confiscations and arrests, he might just as well try to handcuff a mountain stream. If forced to operate entirely outside of legal boundaries, that's what we'll do, and there will always be people willing to make this communications concept possible and who can run it and diversify it. 4. We view the raids against part of the Interim's structures at this point in time as a flanking maneuver in the war which Schonbohm and Ladowski have declared. At a time when resistance to their cleansing policies is increasing - inner-city actions, university congresses, mobilizations by squatters, the homeless, and immigrants - the state wants to eliminate the forum by which all these forms of resistance can be linked together. Even if we aren't able to continue the discussion about our politics (our politicians??), one thing is clear: Schonbohm has declared war, and we will react. Repression breeds revolts. We promise that the next issue of the Interim will be published on time, with the theme of how we can go on the offensive against those who want to cleanse the city [before it becomes Germany's capital again]. All those who wish to participate in this discussion will find ways of getting their texts to the Interim. Interim - Weekly Berlin Info --- Interim On The Internet In order to do something about the criminalization of the Interim, Trend Online in Berlin has set up a Solidarity Homepage for the publication with news about the recent raids, and we at Arm The Spirit have set up a mirrorsite. This is to be seen as an expansion of the publication, not a substitute for it. Interim is a weekly hardcopy publication and plans to stay that way. Trend Online's Interim Solidarity Page: http://www.berlinet.de/trend/interim/ Arm The Spirit's Interim Mirror Site: http://burn.ucsd.edu/~ats/INTERIM/index.htm ----------------------------------------------------------------- Arm The Spirit is an autonomist/anti-imperialist information collective based in Toronto, Canada. Our focus includes a wide variety of material, including political prisoners, national liberation struggles, armed communist resistance, anti-fascism, the fight against patriarchy, and more. We regularly publish our writings, research, and translation materials on our listserv called ATS-L. For more information, contact: Arm The Spirit P.O. Box 6326, Stn. A Toronto, Ontario M5W 1P7 Canada E-mail: ats(a)etext.org WWW: http://burn.ucsd.edu/~ats ATS-L Archives: http://burn.ucsd.edu/archives/ats-l MRTA Solidarity Page: http://burn.ucsd.edu/~ats/mrta.htm FTP: ftp.etext.org --> /pub/Politics/Arm.The.Spirit

1 0

LaMacchia's Revenge, from The Netly News (fwd)
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 05:47:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> To: fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Subject: LaMacchia's Revenge, from The Netly News http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1107,00.html The Netly News Network June 25, 1997 LaMacchia's Revenge by Declan McCullagh (declan(a)well.com) David LaMacchia's pirate warez site once hummed quietly along on a DECstation 5000 just down the hall from the study lounge on the top floor of MIT's Stratton Student Center. LaMacchia claims its original purpose was to let visiting netizens exchange software. But soon -- either inevitably or intentionally, depending on whom you believe -- more and more copyrighted programs began to appear. This was enough to prompt the federal government to charge the MIT undergraduate in April 1994 with the crime of wire fraud. The indictment argued that his FTP-like site permitted "on an international scale, the illegal copying and distribution of copyrighted software, without payment of software licensing fees." Yet a federal judge dismissed the case that December, ruling that while LaMacchia was wrong -- and could be sued in civil court -- the aspiring computer scientist was not guilty as charged. Judge Richard Stearns said, "It is not clear that making criminals of a large number of consumers of computer software is a result that even the software industry would consider desirable." Guess again. A group of software companies, including Microsoft and Adobe, yesterday requested new laws to eliminate what they termed the "LaMacchia decision" problem. When a warez site operates for free -- as most do -- companies currently must sue for damages in a civil court. In other words, giving that copy of Quake to your dad is not -- yet -- a federal felony. [...]

1 0

Re: IP: U.N. Hate-Radio Jamming Would Send Wrong Signal
by William Reichenbach 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Notice the Double Speak in the LA Times article below? What is taking place in Bosnia is Exactly the same thing (Censorship) as the writer of the article is expressing concern about. It is exactly the same conduct that the two NWO Stooges Metzl and Rep Royce so enthusiastically endorse. It is only a question of whose ox is being gored. William "Indeed, the United States and its allies are conducting a somewhat similar operation in Bosnia. Two months ago, NATO troops seized and effectively shut down a station run by hard-line Bosnian Serb forces after the station broadcast inflammatory attacks on NATO forces trying to keep the peace there. But it's a long step to go from these situations to the creation of a permanent, formal unit run by the United Nations and scouring the world in search of radio broadcasts to jam. " believer(a)telepath.com wrote: > >From the Los Angeles Times: > > Wednesday, December 3, 1997 > > INTERNATIONAL OUTLOOK > U.N. Hate-Radio Jamming Would Send Wrong Signal > By JIM MANN > > WASHINGTON--In foreign policy, sometimes the noblest of intentions > leads to > lousy ideas. > > That's certainly the case with the recent curious proposal for a > special > United Nations "jam squad"--a special U.N. team that could be > hurriedly > dispatched to crisis points around the world carrying equipment to > jam, or > block, harmful radio and TV broadcasts. > > Writing in the current issue of "Foreign Affairs" magazine, Jamie M. > Metzl, > a former United Nations human rights officer, proposes the creation of > what > would officially be called an "independent information intervention > unit" at > the U.N. > > Its goal, he writes, would be "countering dangerous messages that > incite > people to violence." A U.N. unit could monitor local news media to see > where > crises might erupt, air its own messages of peace and, where > necessary, > prevent other radio or TV broadcasts from being heard. > > The idea for the U.N. jam squad originated in the genocidal horrors of > > Rwanda. In 1994, the country's main radio station, the > Radio-Television > Libre des Milles Collines, then controlled by Hutu extremists, began > broadcasting hate messages targeting members of the rival tribe, the > Tutsis, > and moderate Hutus. > > The Rwanda station even broadcast lists of enemies to be hunted down. > "Take > your spears, clubs, guns, swords, stones, everything, sharpen them, > jack > them, those enemies, those cockroaches," the station urged listeners. > The > result was one of the world's worst blood baths, in which more than > 500,000 > unarmed Tutsis and moderate Hutus were slaughtered. > > This was, certainly, as compelling a case for jamming as you can get. > And > Metzl has one cogent argument on behalf of his proposal: When there's > an > ethnic conflict in a place like Rwanda, sending in a United Nations > jamming > team would be considerably easier and less costly than sending in > troops. > > "I think it's a worthy idea," says Rep. Edward R. Royce (R-Fullerton), > > chairman of the House International Relations subcommittee on Africa. > "I'm > sure we would try to go out and jam [in Rwanda] if those circumstances > came > up again." > > Indeed, the United States and its allies are conducting a somewhat > similar > operation in Bosnia. Two months ago, NATO troops seized and > effectively shut > down a station run by hard-line Bosnian Serb forces after the station > broadcast inflammatory attacks on NATO forces trying to keep the peace > there. > > But it's a long step to go from these situations to the creation of a > permanent, formal unit run by the United Nations and scouring the > world in > search of radio broadcasts to jam. > > Who would determine exactly what kinds of radio programs should be > blocked > and which programs could be aired? What would ensure that the jamming > decisions were not motivated by politics? Wouldn't the creation of > such a > United Nations operation strengthen the hand of governments that want > to jam > radio transmissions for much less noble reasons? > > "This opens up a Pandora's box, really," says Richard Richter, the > director > of Radio Free Asia, the federally funded station that broadcasts into > Asian > countries with repressive governments. "You'd have China claiming that > we > [American broadcasts] should be jammed by the United Nations." > > Ultimately, a U.N. jamming squad would give official sanction to > restrictions on the free flow of information. Metzl's article has a > response > to this problem, but it's a weak one. > > "During the Cold War, when the United States faced a Soviet adversary > intent > on jamming the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe . . . , it made > sense > for the United States to promote an absolute standard for the free > flow of > information," he wrote. "Now, a more nuanced view should be possible." > > But that's precisely backward: The free flow of information wasn't > merely a > temporary means to winning the Cold War, but one of the goals of the > endeavor. > > Although the problem of hate-filled radio broadcasts is a serious one, > there > are ways of dealing with it that don't involve creating some huge, > supranational censorship unit. > > One alternative is simply to provide other, competing radio > broadcasts. In > Rwanda, for example, the United Nations set up its own radio stations, > both > in the capital of Kigali and in radio camps. > > Royce's subcommittee has been exploring the possibility of creating a > Radio > Free Africa, similar to Radio Free Europe, Radio Free Asia and Radio > Marti, > which broadcasts to Cuba. > > There are serious questions about whether such a new organization is > necessary, when VOA, the official U.S. government station, already > broadcasts intensively into Africa. But the underlying idea makes > sense: to > transmit better, more accurate information to Africa, rather than > focusing > on jamming or censorship. > > There are other ways of combating hate radio too. Those who directly > incite > violence over the airwaves can be brought to justice. At the moment, a > > war-crimes tribunal, set up under U.N. auspices, is prosecuting those > responsible for the massacres in Rwanda. Among the suspects in custody > are > some of those responsible for the Milles Collines radio broadcasts. > > But a worldwide, U.N.-run jamming team? As a Hollywood script, maybe > the > idea has possibilities. As foreign policy, it's a loser. > > Jim Mann's column appears in this space every Wednesday. > > Copyright Los Angeles Times > > > > ********************************************** > To subscribe or unsubscribe, email: > majordomo(a)majordomo.pobox.com > with the message: > subscribe ignition-point email@address > or > unsubscribe ignition-point email@address > ********************************************** > http://www.telepath.com/believer > **********************************************

1 0