Attempting to get this through. About half of the messages I have tried to send to lne.com have failed with this error, the same reported by others. Some of these I have resent, others I have just let sit in my error box. I value lne.com a lot, but the various weirdnesses (e.g., 24 hours without any messages, then a burst of them, and these bounces) may cause me to switch to some other node. On Friday, November 30, 2001, at 10:07 AM, MAILER-DAEMON@got.net wrote:
Hi. This is the qmail-send program at got.net. I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses. This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
<cypherpunks@lne.com>: 209.245.148.2 does not like recipient. Remote host said: 550 <cypherpunks@lne.com>... User unknown Giving up on 209.245.148.2.
--- Below this line is a copy of the message.
Return-Path: <tcmay@got.net> Received: (qmail 19567 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2001 18:01:22 -0000 Received: from 66-81-40-74-modem.o1.com (HELO localhost) (66.81.40.74) by always.got.net with SMTP; 30 Nov 2001 18:01:22 -0000 Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 10:01:01 -0800 Subject: Re: CNN.com - Bush defends tribunals, saying 'we're at war' -November 29, 2001 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v472) From: Tim May <tcmay@got.net> To: cypherpunks@lne.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <20011130120605.A13067@weathership.homeport.org> Message-Id: <36F4438C-E5BC-11D5-9093-0050E439C473@got.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.472)
On Friday, November 30, 2001, at 09:06 AM, Adam Shostack wrote:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2001 at 08:21:32AM -0800, Tim May wrote: | On Friday, November 30, 2001, at 07:55 AM, Harmon Seaver wrote: | | > Dubbya should be impeached, and both he and Asscruft arrested for | > treason. | | Quite interesting the language they keep using: "Terrorists don't have | rights." | | The 1200 persons detained without due process, without habeas corpus, | for close to three months, are presumed to be "terrorists" and thus are | denied the rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
No, they're not. See this article in yesterday's Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/28/national/28LEGA.html?ex=1007614800&en= ec5ced02619720c8& ei=5040&partner=MOREOVER
I see nothing in this article to alter the gist of what I said. The article says 1100 were held at one time. 548 still being held. Yeah, the charges are vague "immigration violations," but we know why they were really detained and are still being held. (BTW, lawyers for a bunch of them, those who have managed to get lawyers that is, have said their clients would like to return to their home countries. Should be SOP to let a "immigration violation" detainee solve the problem by leaving, right?)
An undisclosed number of those detainees are being held incommunicado as "material witnesses." Not as immigration violations, but as "material witnesses." The same vague basis could be used to arrest and detain without charge dozens of folks just like us on our list.
Civil liberties types used to gasp at British plans to arrest suspects without charge and hold them for up to 72 hours on the say-so of a burowcrat...look at the holding of 548-1100 people for a period of weeks-months without any charges being filed in open court.
"Immigration violations" and "material witness" my ass!
What grounds Ashcroft is using to deny them their civil rights is not clear.
Who will rid me of this meddlesome Constitution, indeed.
| The police state measures rushed into law by Congress will be used to | suppress dissidents long after this war is over.
Quite sad. There was an article in IP last night about Canada doing the same thing; defining protesters as terrorists. (There's a history here; the RCMP was quite vicious in its post-arrest treatment of protesters against some Indonesian dictator a few years ago.)
I expect the next Cypherpunk to be arrested will be tried under these new "terrorist" laws.
I won't go so far as to predict that a dozen active list members will be rounded up in pre-dawn raids and held incommunicado and without charges being filed promptly, and with normal bail procedures, but it wouldn't surprise me.
What it will probably take is for some kind of ricin attack on Federal Persecutor offices. A few dozen dead Feds and I'd expect every group that has ever discussed ricin and sarin to be raided.
Terrorists have no rights. First we determine them to be terrorists, then we hold a military tribunal. Amerikan justice is the envy of the world.
--Tim May "How we burned in the prison camps later thinking: What would things have been like if every security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive?" --Alexander Solzhenitzyn, Gulag Archipelago
--Tim May, Corralitos, California Quote of the Month: "It is said that there are no atheists in foxholes; perhaps there are no true libertarians in times of terrorist attacks." --Cathy Young, "Reason Magazine," both enemies of liberty.
On Fri, Nov 30, 2001 at 10:44:09AM -0800, Tim May wrote: | | Attempting to get this through. About half of the messages I have tried (the quoting may be off.) | > On Friday, November 30, 2001, at 09:06 AM, Adam Shostack wrote: | > | >> On Fri, Nov 30, 2001 at 08:21:32AM -0800, Tim May wrote: | >> | On Friday, November 30, 2001, at 07:55 AM, Harmon Seaver wrote: | >> | | >> | > Dubbya should be impeached, and both he and Asscruft arrested | >> for | >> | > treason. | >> | | >> | Quite interesting the language they keep using: "Terrorists don't | >> have | >> | rights." | >> | | >> | The 1200 persons detained without due process, without habeas corpus, | >> | for close to three months, are presumed to be "terrorists" and thus | >> are | >> | denied the rights guaranteed by the Constitution. | >> | >> No, they're not. See this article in yesterday's Times: | >> http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/28/national/28LEGA.html?ex=1007614800&en= | >> ec5ced02619720c8& | >> ei=5040&partner=MOREOVER | >> | > | > I see nothing in this article to alter the gist of what I said. The | > article says 1100 were held at one time. 548 still being held. Yeah, the | > charges are vague "immigration violations," but we know why they were | > really detained and are still being held. (BTW, lawyers for a bunch of | > them, those who have managed to get lawyers that is, have said their | > clients would like to return to their home countries. Should be SOP to | > let a "immigration violation" detainee solve the problem by leaving, | > right?) No, I was really quibbling over the terrorist bit. Even the government can no longer make a straight-faced claim they're terrorists. Now, they need to explain how they're ignoring the civil rights of people, who, as you point out, are being held incommunicado, and, in my non-lawyerly not-really-all-that-humble-opinion, how their action differs from kidnapping. | > An undisclosed number of those detainees are being held incommunicado as | > "material witnesses." Not as immigration violations, but as "material | > witnesses." The same vague basis could be used to arrest and detain | > without charge dozens of folks just like us on our list. | > | > Civil liberties types used to gasp at British plans to arrest suspects | > without charge and hold them for up to 72 hours on the say-so of a | > burowcrat...look at the holding of 548-1100 people for a period of | > weeks-months without any charges being filed in open court. | > | > "Immigration violations" and "material witness" my ass! Quite. | >> What grounds Ashcroft is using to deny them their civil rights is not | >> clear. | >> | >> Who will rid me of this meddlesome Constitution, indeed. | >> | >> | The police state measures rushed into law by Congress will be used to | >> | suppress dissidents long after this war is over. | >> | >> Quite sad. There was an article in IP last night about Canada doing | >> the same thing; defining protesters as terrorists. (There's a history | >> here; the RCMP was quite vicious in its post-arrest treatment of | >> protesters against some Indonesian dictator a few years ago.) | > | > I expect the next Cypherpunk to be arrested will be tried under these | > new "terrorist" laws. | > | > I won't go so far as to predict that a dozen active list members will be | > rounded up in pre-dawn raids and held incommunicado and without charges | > being filed promptly, and with normal bail procedures, but it wouldn't | > surprise me. | > | > What it will probably take is for some kind of ricin attack on Federal | > Persecutor offices. A few dozen dead Feds and I'd expect every group | > that has ever discussed ricin and sarin to be raided. | > | > Terrorists have no rights. First we determine them to be terrorists, | > then we hold a military tribunal. Amerikan justice is the envy of the | > world. Indeed. Amazing how quickly we can lose the value of so many hard-fought precedents. Adam -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume
participants (2)
-
Adam Shostack -
Tim May