To: cypherpunks@toad.com From: Digital Revolution TM <dmtr@dev.null> X-Mailer: WinSock Remailer Version ALPHA1.3B X-Comments: - X-Comments: "There are no sounds, only numbers. X-Comments: Turning round and round inside my brain. X-Comments: Turning into words which are stolen from the wind X-Comments: And imprisoned in a digital refrain." X-Comments: "Analog was King when Elvis crooned. X-Comments: Sound had soul and beauty, dissonance and charm. X-Comments: But war has been declared upon the soul (and imperfection) X-Comments: And the Digital Revolution is the newest call to arms. X-Comments: X-Comments: "Digital Revolution" from "The Tables Have Turned (@ 33 rpm)" X-Comments: by Probable Cause X-Comments: (c) 1987 Countie Mountie Productions X-Comments: - X-Comments: This message is NOT from <DigitalRevolution@dev.null>. X-Comments: It was converted from <AnalogRantings@dev.nul> into a X-Comments: digital form suitable for distribution within the confines X-Comments: of the ElectroMagnetic Curtain. X-Comments: X-Comments: Send all complaints about abuse of these digital ciphers X-Comments: to the end of the universe by screaming in Analog at the X-Comments: top of your lungs. X-Comments: - X-Remailer-Setup: Maximum Message Size -- Infinite X-Remailer-Setup: Reordering is SUSPICIOUS X-Remailer-Setup: News Posting SPAM RESISTANT X-Remailer-Setup: Subject Header LUDICROUS X-Remailer-Setup: Logging TO/MAN-IN-THE-MIDDLE/FROM Headers X-Remailer-Setup: KGB and plaintext messages accepted Subject: Re: Nutly interview Donna Two-Names Declan McCullagh wrote:
http://www.pathfinder.com/news/netdecency/rice.html Interview with Donna Rice-Hughes, Enough is Enough The Netly News June 26, 1997
You have a lot of people who have been using the Internet for years for the contructive purposes for which it was designed. Now it's becoming more commercial and you have pedophiles, pornographers and people who are just posting their private collections of pornography and polluting it, exploiting that technology.
Why isn't Donna Rice-Huges telling us the _names_ of all these pedophiles on the internet? Better yet, why isn't she telling law enforcement authorities the names of these pedophiles? If legislators and crusaders are aware of large numbers of pedophiles using the internet or any other medium for promoting child pornography then why aren't they taking steps to enforce the existing laws against this behavior?
A few bad apples are spoiling it for everyone else. If it wasn't for that then we wouldn't be having this problem.
Excuse me? A 52 billion dollar a year (and growing) industry would seem to me to be an indication that a significant number of those included in the "everyone" that Donna Rice-Hughes has taken it upon herself to speak for are willing and active participants and consumers in the growing portion of the internet industry which is fulfilling the needs of people of various sexual proclivities. Not having seen Donna Rice-Hughes naked for quite some time, I cannnot comment as to whether naked pictures of her could be regarded as "pollution" but I would submit that the thousands upon thousands of ordinary men and women who choose to share erotic home photographs of their bodies with others do not regard their physical vessel as a form of "pollution."
Long before any of this it would have been great if the Internet community had said, "Hey, don't pollute this technology," and had imposed their own controls. But that didn't happen and it isn't happening.
This is the "Big Lie" that censoring fascists such as Donna Two-Names would have us believe. The InterNet community imposes the same control that I myself impose--namely, *self-control*. I do not post naked pictures of myself to the cypherpunks list, or to the health lists I particpate in. Nor have I ever posted long discourses on cryptography to alt.sex.picures.Rice-Hughes. I have no plans to become a pedophile because of the CDA being declared unconstitutional. (Likewise, I find it hard to believe that anyone would stop being a pedophile because of the CDA being passed.) Millions of ordinary citizens are imposing the self-control needed to direct their InterNet activities toward forums which are formed to promote and enhance that form of activity. No doubt some children's forum will at some point receive a sexually graphic picture from a sex-spammer (or government agent / religious agent provoacteur). I hardly regard this as a good reason to enact invasive and oppressive laws aimed at people who are engaging in activities they enjoy in forums created for that purpose. The fact is that sex-graphic spamming of children, if it does occur, can be handled by dealing with the person who performs an action such as this, which may be highly inappropriate. The Fascist Censorship Coalition, however, would have us believe that such actions would go "unpunished" unless invasive and oppressive laws are passed which would inhibit and/or criminalize activities which a significant portion of the citizens find to be of value in their lives. Another of the "Big Lies" that the Fascist Censorship Coalition would have us believe is that their main concern is preventing minors from having easy access to what is considered "adult" material. Donna Rice-Hughes makes it plain that she considers activities she wishes to support and engage in "constructive," while activities she does not wish to support and engage in are "pollution." I find this as normal and natural as considering ASCII art spams to the cypherpunks list to be "pollution" of the list (except for the really funny ones). The problem I have with the Fascist Censorship Coalition is not just that they want to embark upon the same censorous path that John Gilmore ill-advisedly trod (though I will forgive him once Tim McVeigh has died for John's sins), but also that they desire to do so with armed force (laws/prison). Those claiming the moral high-ground do not merely want (by way of analogy) to unsubscribe Dr. Vulis from the list because they disagree with his views and attitude, but also want to prevent him from speaking on *any* list, and imprison him if he should do so. "Big Lie #<random number> uses loud proclaimations of pedophilia and bestiality (the four 'dicl-licking' horsemen) lurking on every corner, when their real agenda is to suppress and criminalize activities which they regard as "immoral" regardless of the fact that millions of citizens consider those activities acceptable. For the record, I do not, as a matter of practice, stick crowbars up my ass. Neither do I spend time seeking out pictures of those who do. I also have no particular interest in doing a Yahoo search on "home hardware" only to retrieve a multitude of pointers to websites dedicated to pictures of people sticking a crowbar up their ass. When it happens, ("The YOUNGEST TEENS on the Net--Sticking CROWBARS up their ass!!!") I regard it like I do ASCII art-spams and I ignore/delete them (unless I see indications of "redeeming social value" or a really superlative "cheap shot"). "The answer to noise is more noise." Unfortunately, all the Fascist Censorship Coalition has is a hammer, so everything looks like a nail to them. ("The nail that sticks out gets hammered down.") Donna Rice-Hughes is free to join with others having similar interests in order to _create_ "constructive" noise of her choosing in order to drown out what she considers "pollution." Instead, she sets her sights on the destruction of noise which a significant number of citizens consider to be of value. She and the other members of the Fascist Censorship Coalition choose to be "destroyers" rather than "creators." Saddam Hussein could come to America and claim the moral high-ground, denouncing Donna Rice-Hughes as a harlot for showing her bare arms, or ankles, or whatever his definition of "immorality" encompasses. He could likely parrot every moralistic stance taken by the Fascist Censorship Coalition and make the same claims for the need to enact laws to censor and/or ban much of what the Coalition values. The question is: "*Which* 'scum' needs to be 'cleansed' from our common environment?" The answer, (according to the Fascist Censorhip Coalition) is: "The _free_speech_ scum." The bottom line is that the Fascist Censorship Coalition's goal is to force their moral(~religious) values on the "everyone" that they claim to be speaking for. Not only that, but they also wish to use armed force (laws/prison) to suppress the display and expression of those concepts and activities which fail to meet their own moral(~religious) criteria. They not only don't want themselves and their children to be exposed to certain "bad" materials/speech, but they don't even want the existence of that "bad" material/speech to be acknowledged in their moralistically protected corner of reality. My guess is that the reason Donna Rice-Hughes has a problem with other people putting a crowbar up their ass is because it reminds her of the painful stick that she has up hers. ~~~~~ TruthMonger ~~~~~~ p.s. - singling out the Bible-thumpers, in particular, my personal theory is that when they do a search on the word "christian sex" in order to find religiously oriented sex-education material and then receive 20,000 pointers to URL's with names like "Naked Teenage Christian Sex Slaves," that this is merely divine retribution for all of those "social events" they invited me to that turned out to be prayer meetings at which the "sins" being railed against all seemed to be lifted from my personal diary.