On Monday, November 12, 2001, at 03:27 PM, Faustine wrote:

So why are you publicizing it after the fact? Is it really worth the risk you're taking by mentioning it just to respond to a taunt by some ignorant smugster behind a remailer? If questioning your commitment is all it takes to push your buttons, I'd say that's less than optimal.

You, thank Baal, have no knowledge of what "pushes my buttons." You also have almost no list experience here (though this has never stopped you from lecturing us on things you've read about in books). I write about what I desire to write about. Now that the training camp is over, there is no threat to the security of the operation. They lack time machines.

I'm sure anyone who bears ill-will to the group is finding this whole thread quite instructive--undoubtedly the point of the original post in the first place. Good show. How sickening to think that now you have to worry about getting anti-paramilitary training statutes dumped on you (on top of anything else) just because a few people couldn't resist showing up a stupid troll.

And which "anti-paramilitary traning statutes" would these be? Tell us what your college professors told you...but check it against reality before passing it on.

Even worse,in true "have you stopped beating your wife" fashion, it makes it appear that everyone who posts here and is passionate about encryption is doing something rightfully covered by the sedtion laws, which couldn't be further from the truth. I resent this profoundly, but I'll talk about what and why I do what I do (or don't do) on my own time, not as a response to someone baiting me.

What you "resent profoundly" does not matter. And what is done by other memmbers of a list does not establish guilt by association, except in your fevered mind. For example, the discussion I contributed to on hacking the air traffic control system for political purposes makes you guilty of which crime and in which way?

Here's hoping your temper doesn't get the better of you.

You are ignorant of my mental state of mind. Twit. --Tim May "They played all kinds of games, kept the House in session all night, and it was a very complicated bill. Maybe a handful of staffers actually read it, but the bill definitely was not available to members before the vote." --Rep. Ron Paul, TX, on how few Congresscritters saw the USA-PATRIOT Bill before voting overwhelmingly to imposed a police state

On Monday, November 12, 2001, at 03:27 PM, Faustine wrote:

Tim wrote:

...

Several of us were in the Sierras this past weekend for a training session on weapons use, explosives, terrorism measures, and methods for monkey wrenching the U.S. government so as to paralyze its police state moves. For security reasons, the location was not publicized.

So why are you publicizing it after the fact? Is it really worth the risk you're taking by mentioning it just to respond to a taunt by some ignorant smugster behind a remailer? If questioning your commitment is all it takes to push your buttons, I'd say that's less than optimal.

No need to be on such a hair trigger: the archives speak for

<...> themselves.

For you to keep tossing out all this sucker-bait-for-feds in the name of furthering your one-man strategic deterrence campaign is a bit excessive. Once you've established your credibility there's no real reason to keep raising the stakes. Especially not in response to someone blowing virtual spitwads at you from behind a remailer.

Mr. May is our lightening rod. When he goes away, it's time. Time to fight, time to run, time to shut up and get with the program, whatever, but it'll be time for it. -- "Remember, half-measures can be very effective if all you deal with are half-wits."--Chris Klein