CypherPunk Cults / Re: An end to "court appointed attorneys"
Kent Crispin wrote:
On Wed, Aug 20, 1997 at 08:51:09PM -0700, Tim May wrote:
But the ability of a herd to take a vote, real or alleged, will not be sufficient to collect tribute from those who don't want to make the contribution freely.
Note another characteristic of cult thinking -- total separation of the illuminati from the "herd" -- the idea that the "chosen" are irrevocably different from those other unfortunate creatures that accidentally share the same physical form.
I am one of the "chosen." As a matter of fact, I am not only the Grand PoohBaah of the TruthMonger CypherPunk Cult, I am its "sole" member. Black Unicorn is the "soul" member of the Black Unicorn CypherPunk Cult, and its Grand Pooh-Baaa...Baaaa...Baaaa. Blanc Weber is the Grand PoohBroad of the Blanc Weber CypherPunk Cult, even though her cult does not have a "member." I realize that it is difficult for someone who defines themself by their position in the "group" or their membership in the "herd" to truly conceive of perceiving life from the perspective of an individual entity with social capabilities. If the cypherpunks mailing list is attacked in my presence, I may well choose to join in circling the wagons, even if I am capable of outrunning the attack, or I may choose to shout, "It's OK, I'm going for help." as I ride off over the horizon to the nearest bar. And later I may make the same or a different choice if the fight- censorship list is attacked in my presence. The key word is "choice." As in "free." "Free...Choice" Am I missing something here? Does my brain make a connection between these two words because of an electrical malfunction, or am I correct in my assumption that these two concepts are closely related? "Voluntary...Mandatory" Buuzzzzzz!!!!!!!!!!!!! Oops! This combination causes a genuine short circuit, setting off all kinds of bells, buzzers and flashing lights. (BAD COP! NO DONUT!!) To tell the truth, I "chose" myself as sole member and Grand PoohBah of the TruthMonger CypherPunk Cult because I *do* feel that I am "irrevocably different" from "those other unfortunate creatures" that share a physical form similar to mine. Of course all of those other people are fucking idiots! That's why I chose *me* to live my life, and not them. And I'm sure that most of them feel the same. Have you ever sat down at watched the world go by, viewing every passing person from the perspective of, "What if I, in this body, were like them? Thought like them, liked what they liked, hated what they hated, acted as they act." I've done that when I was on top of the world, and I've done that when I was in the gutter, and the answer was always the same. "Fuck those idiots! I'm *me*, not them!" Nothing personal, Kent, but if I had chosen you to live my life, I think it would have been a bad mistake. And vice-versa, I am sure.
As to the billion or so underpeople who are incapable of contributing that which others are willing to freely compensate them for, think of it as evolution in action.
Besides, in about 6.7 years, the world will have replaced them. People are like Doritos...the world will make more.
One wonders if there is a microscope powerful enough to resolve Tim May's heart.
Tim speaks of those who feel it is their duty/right to "collect tribute from those who don't want to make the contribution freely." Do you feel he is "obligated" to pay tribute to the people who show up on his doorstep wanting money to buy child sex-slaves? How about Bibles? Fatty hamburgers? Lean Cuisine? Taxes? Somewhere in the world there is a child dying of hunger who could be fed for a time if you sold your computer and bought food for the child. But the child is *not* dying *because* you didn't sell your computer and buy him/her food. The child is dying for the same reason that you and I are also dying--because it was born. ("No One Gets Out Of Here Alive") Bill Gates is a Cult of One, and a starving child is a Cult of One. Bill Gates is feeding a lot of people. Is he feeding *enough* people? Ask him, I'm sure he'll tell you how *he* feels about it. Perhaps Bill Gates is "bleeding" a few people to survive in the business jungle. Is he bleeding *too*many* people? Ask him, I'm sure he'll tell you how he feels about it. Mother Teresa is a Cult of One. That is how many people she eats for, in order to stay alive. Is she murdering a starving child with every bite she takes? Do you also need a powerful microscope to find *her* heart? Years ago, the Reader's Digest had an ancedote about a small rural town with only one house. When entering the "town" from either side, there was a welcoming sign just like one sees in many cities and towns across the nation. The sign read something like this: "Welcome to Smithville." "Population 1" "Mayor -- Dave Smith." "Fire Marshall -- Dave Smith" "Town Treasurer -- Dave Smith" "Drive Carefully. The life you save could be Dave's." So it was not surprising to find out that Dave Smith is a CypherPunk. (David E. Smith <dave@bureau42.ml.org>) Have you never noticed that it is called the cypherpunks mailing list? ^ Plural, Kent, plural. The name is plural in order to warn newcomers to the list that we are not all "one" and that, despite the wishes of Rodney King, we may not all "get along." The word "we" is for use by Kings, Priests, and people with tapeworms. I'm not adverse to striking a deal where you watch my back and I watch yours, but if you are incapable of watching your own front, then it's really not my problem. If Tim is low on ammo, he would probably find it in his best interest to cover you while you make a break for yours. If he has plenty of ammo he might *choose* to do the same, for his own reasons. I, for one, however, would not want to show up on his doorstep and tell him he was *obligated* to cover me while I attempted to get back the ammo I had given away when the government "required" it of me. It's not because I think he's heartless. It's because I *don't* think he's *brainless*. TruthMonger "Who will help me load my Uzi?" said the Little Red Hen.
At 10:26 AM 8/21/97 +0200, Anonymous wrote:
If Tim is low on ammo, he would probably find it in his best interest to cover you while you make a break for yours. If he has plenty of ammo he might *choose* to do the same, for his own reasons. I, for one, however, would not want to show up on his doorstep and tell him he was *obligated* to cover me while I attempted to get back the ammo I had given away when the government "required" it of me. It's not because I think he's heartless. It's because I *don't* think he's *brainless*.
TruthMonger "Who will help me load my Uzi?" said the Little Red Hen.
I will! Jonathan Wienke Founder and Charter Member, UziPunks Cult of One, a MLM Opportunity for the international arms trafficker in all of us. "We're adding a new dimension to the concept of a 'marketing tool.'"
TruthMonger wrote:
Tim speaks of those who feel it is their duty/right to "collect tribute from those who don't want to make the contribution freely."
You must be referring to the Cult of Redistribution. "A Fatal Tendency of Mankind "Self-preservation and self-development are common aspirations among all people. And if everyone enjoyed the unrestricted use of his faculties and the free disposition of the fruits of his labor, social progress would be ceaseless, uninterrupted, and unfailing. "But there is also another tendency that is common among people. When they can, they wish to live and prosper at the expense of others. This is no rash accusation. Nor does it come from a gloomy and uncharitable spirit. The annals of history bear witness to the truth of it: the incessant wars, mass migrations, religious persecutions, universal slavery, dishonesty in commerce, and monopolies. This fatal desire has its origin in the very nature of man -- in that primitive, universal, and insuppressible instinct that impels him to satisfy his desires with the least possible pain." -- Bastiat, "The Law", June 1850
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 gturk@concentric.net wrote:
TruthMonger wrote:
Tim speaks of those who feel it is their duty/right to "collect tribute from those who don't want to make the contribution freely."
You must be referring to the Cult of Redistribution.
The way I see it is quite simple, if these peaple where not payed off it is most likely that thay will turn to crime. Other then condemming every single impovished person to death, this is one of the better soultions to a difficalt problem. - -- Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep. ex-net.scum and proud You Say To People "Throw Off Your Chains" And They Make New Chains For Themselves? --Terry Pratchett -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM/yKT6QK0ynCmdStAQFtNwP9FFPKoTRi/7bypK69DKXYl8MsfOBMJxnC WwH3rHvudvih+yn+2EQj3rssar5Fui2YwQxV4/hVAWWUJMH2jhh1Y/DgSEbrDpy2 YNvuEe/IQMB+JxSX6AfZNhc1u3obNwYB4UxZNf7bI1KwA7xOTvWbFzY7PjQlBoAv a8kdttfwdlc= =PxBc -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
At 11:34 AM -0700 8/21/97, ? the Platypus {aka David Formosa} wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 gturk@concentric.net wrote:
TruthMonger wrote:
Tim speaks of those who feel it is their duty/right to "collect tribute from those who don't want to make the contribution freely."
You must be referring to the Cult of Redistribution.
The way I see it is quite simple, if these peaple where not payed off it is most likely that thay will turn to crime. Other then condemming every single impovished person to death, this is one of the better soultions to a difficalt problem.
- -- Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header.
Given that the U.S. already has a huge system for redistributing wealth, and a very high crime rate, what is your evidence for your claim? Agraphia or not, this is one of the lamest posts I've seen in years. Wealth is to be taken from those who have worked for it or put their capitcal at risk and given ("redistributed") to those who have done neither, just because we're afraid they'll steal it from us or "turn to crime" if we don't pay them off? What's wrong with chopping the hands off of thieves and executing muderers? A lot of cultures have very little forcible redistribution of wealth, and little crime. The United States has a lot of redistribution of wealth and a lot of crime. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."
Somebody that looked and sounded like Tim C May wrote:
The way I see it is quite simple, if these peaple where not payed off it is most likely that thay will turn to crime. Other then condemming every single impovished person to death, this is one of the better soultions to a difficalt problem.
[..]
Agraphia or not, this is one of the lamest posts I've seen in years. Wealth is to be taken from those who have worked for it or put their capitcal at risk and given ("redistributed") to those who have done neither, just because we're afraid they'll steal it from us or "turn to crime" if we don't pay them off?
It certainly sounds like blackmail to me.
What's wrong with chopping the hands off of thieves and executing muderers?
Surely people on this list are aware of how fallible governments are? Those punishments are a bit too final to be within the power of a legal system so prone to mistakes and corruption. Although current western legal systems constrain citizens, they also constrain the government, which is probably a good thing. The media is very weak on reporting abuses of power by police and the military, but at least they're not always completely covered up. Yes, both individuals and governments can break the law, but it stops them sometimes.
The United States has a lot of redistribution of wealth and a lot of crime.
Other common oversimplifications include: The United States has a large gap between rich and poor and a lot of crime. The United States has a lot of lawyers and a lot of crime. The United States has a lot of guns and a lot of crime. ::Boots "Every problem has a simple solution... and it's wrong" -- Mark Twain
What's wrong with chopping the hands off of thieves and executing muderers? A lot of cultures have very little forcible redistribution of wealth, and little crime.
an idea already tried in repressive states like iraq/ iran. I would expect you of all people to spot the obvious deficiency. a criminal system relies on the word of police and prosectors. a system with penalties like these tends not to have a "due process". that is, countries with policies like this tend to have only sham trials. reasonable trials and nasty sentences like these seem never to be found in combination. probably because they go together in the mind of the public-- reasonable trials, reasonable sentences. also, in any criminal justice system you cannot detect guilt with 100% certainty. some people would sleep better at night knowing that if a mistake has been made, it won't be too severe on an innocent person. that is a tradeoff that politicians never talk about-- about the difference between "criminal" and "suspect" and how our system is guaranteed imperfect in detecting the difference. for interesting ideas on the court system, a new book called "the truth machine" (fiction) has some speculations on a future criminal justice system based on a 100% effective truth detection machine.
On Thu, Aug 21, 1997 at 08:27:30PM -0400, William H. Geiger III wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In <v03102800b022928487f6@[207.167.93.63]>, on 08/21/97 at 05:56 PM, Tim May <tcmay@got.net> said:
The United States has a lot of redistribution of wealth and a lot of crime.
This is one of the problems of socialism.
When you have a group in society that never has to earn what they have they tend to have little respect for the property of others.
More precisely, people only respect other's property when they have property of their own. If you don't own anything, it doesn't matter to you what other people own.
A prime example is the welfair class in America. All their basic needs are provided for by the State (food, housing, medical, education, ...) and yet they have the highest crime rates.
The question is, do they have a realistic opportunity to aquire property of their own? If they do not, then the crime will be there whether or not they get welfare. That is, if the best job available is being a criminal, guess what?
And make no mistake this isn't 18th century England where people are stealing a loaf of bread to survive the majority of these criminal are commiting their crimes to support their entertainments.
True enough. One possible outcome of eliminating welfare would be to change the crimes back to stealing bread to survive. The dream is that if you eliminate welfare the cold glare of reality will force the "welfair class" to become productive citizens or die. There are other possibilities. -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent@songbird.com the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44 61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55 http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <19970821222631.62433@bywater.songbird.com>, on 08/21/97 at 10:26 PM, Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com> said:
The dream is that if you eliminate welfare the cold glare of reality will force the "welfair class" to become productive citizens or die. There are other possibilities.
Not really as those who work for a living will always be able to afford better weapons. :P - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM/0kfI9Co1n+aLhhAQE6SgP9E965wGUKY6XrXfbIppRWwgDOYKcBySJ/ BQLNPEdbkAI9FPWHXSzzckybhEY7xIIijCqjIfWOD4EWw4lIhfInqBng2SpUJLTh 9mk8yo5McaLyt5rJpXu4GJwG0RfvTqoBkGW3DEmKNFb67vzumriUpqC3XhTXIA2Z T9o21z9TEcI= =DNI+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:
Not really as those who work for a living will always be able to afford better weapons. :P
I have always found such arms races pointless and unproductive. Now instead of paying a small amount of money to the goverment you have to pay a massive amount of money for a securaty system. Big thing with video camers, motion sensors and plungomatic securaty gards. - -- Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep. ex-net.scum and proud You Say To People "Throw Off Your Chains" And They Make New Chains For Themselves? --Terry Pratchett -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM/3gNqQK0ynCmdStAQFlEwQArOi1dnRAgmiv8WcARptqMJKdzRTWzahL Wf72nxsYxW6HyvqoMPlUE7J9K4f33pFBWGHQD0AfPyrTCMkA4IsG/GcxC47ul1Em gDm9jHzFnSfHY2dAVtTaqKM3oGYDnFDYaUDciGa/xj853fyiLnckST52eSYltAbv oHUC2z9tPX4= =x584 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <v03102800b022928487f6@[207.167.93.63]>, on 08/21/97 at 05:56 PM, Tim May <tcmay@got.net> said:
The United States has a lot of redistribution of wealth and a lot of crime.
This is one of the problems of socialism. When you have a group in society that never has to earn what they have they tend to have little respect for the property of others. A prime example is the welfair class in America. All their basic needs are provided for by the State (food, housing, medical, education, ...) and yet they have the highest crime rates. And make no mistake this isn't 18th century England where people are stealing a loaf of bread to survive the majority of these criminal are commiting their crimes to support their entertainments. Eliminate the Welfair state and allow people to defend their persons & property without fear of retribution from the state and you will see a dramatic decline in the crime rates in this country. Somthing is seriously wrong when a home owner is more afraid of the consequences of defending his home than his is from the criminals attacking it. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM/zc+Y9Co1n+aLhhAQH2uQP/d2PpyTwFgQSXGZ+ZpnK3KdFofRumf8j6 T1ftpSe3P5uowU2GgPJg8+PyFliu6Hq1y0xwnFR7LqbttUv5FeDQ2h5OURQXPuCe VE7AP7vka1Hx8CDTW4cvgU6yoAgcDeds5AiMFVbOh91xZFb1M3JHqKXXbp982o5g VQEmbc4uYps= =fhCU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
At 5:27 PM -0700 8/21/97, William H. Geiger III wrote:
Somthing is seriously wrong when a home owner is more afraid of the consequences of defending his home than his is from the criminals attacking it.
Or when he is afraid of even expressing his opinion about defending his home! Let me explain. A well-respected expert on self defense, Massad Ayoob, writes for the various gun magazines. He's either a current or former New Jersey cop, obviously of Arabic heritage. A very knowledgeable guy. He often testifies in court cases involving a homeowner or shopkeeper defending himself or his family. Well, in recent years he's been increasingly strident about warning readers not to do certain kinds of things, as these have been shown to affect jury outcomes and have resulted in long prison terms for some of his employers. I don't have a list of his "don'ts," but here's the idea, paraphrasing, from memory: * Don't use hollowpoints or any other politically incorrect ammunition, even though these hollowpoints penetrate through walls less and are hence safer to use in urban areas. Juries have been swayed to find for the plaintiff, usually a perp who survived the self-defense, or his family, now suing for everything the homeowner has. * Don't use a self-loading rifle, and self-loading handguns are probably best avoided, too. A plaintiff's lawyer will hold up a self-loader and refer to it as an "automatic assault rifle," or, in the case of a self-loading pistol, will scare the jury with tales of how "this gun can fire a bullet with every pull of the trigger, spraying bullets." Best to use an old-looking rifle, like an old side-by-side shotgun, or an old Winchester 1894 lever gun, as the jury may be reminded of old Grandma and her shotgun, or of John Wayne and his lever gun. * Don't use any caliber of ammunition that has the word "magnum" in it. Thus, no .357 Magnum, no .44 Magnum, etc. The word "magnum" makes a jury think you were trying to kill the perp, which is bad. (* Oh, it is best to say that you were only trying to "wing" the perp. If he survives, say that this was your intent. If he dies, and his family is pressing the damage claim, say it was an accident that he died. Of course, all reputable self defense expert scoff at the notion of trying to "wing" someone, and say that you shouldn't aim a gun at someone unless you plan to shoot, and you shouldn't shoot unless you are aiming to kill, but don't say anything about this to the jury. The jury wants to believe that shots can be aimed to "wing" perps.) * Don't fire more than one shot, as this may be argued to be "excessive force." (Even though it is only apparent later, often much later, which bullet incapacitated the intruder or robber. Firing just one shot and then waiting to see if the perp stops shooting, or approaching, is rarely a wise thing to do. When you have to shoot, you want to PUT HIM DOWN!! With as many shots as you think it takes.) * Don't publicly express opinions that a plaintiff's attorney could dig up and use to show a "state of mind." No letters to the editor about cracking down on criminals, no posts to the Net or mailing lists. (Ayoob hasn't mentioned DejaNews, but one can imagine his reaction.) * Don't belong to any militias, self-defense organizations, survivalist groups, or even Community Watch programs. These have all been shown to affect the nitwits on juries to find fro the poor innocent kid gunned down in cold blood by the gun-toting right-wing Nazi. * Don't subscribe, or purchase, gun magazines, survivalist literature, etc. (Ayoob writes for gun magazines, ironically.) * Don't use, or even own, a gun which a plaintiff's lawyer can hold up in court and use to scare the jury members. This includes nearly any rifle with a visible scope, visible detachable magazine, or one which is "black." Even if this gun was not used in the action in question, all guns at the residence will be seized by the authorities and made available to the other side for use in their case. * If possible, join left-wing organizations like the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. Jury members will see one is a softhearted liberal, and maybe conclude that the intruder was the one who deserved to be screwed, instead of the other way around. If at all possible, register as a Democrat, as everyone knows Democrats aren't gun-crazy killers like right-wingers are. * Be careful what one writes in letters, in journals, or in other private writings. These may become accessible under the "discovery" rules, and a plaintiff's attorney may be able to find a quote or two which will make the homeowner seem heartless or bloodthirsty. (I'm not sure Ayoob has made all of these points. Some may be my own contributions. But the gist is that civil damage cases are the real threat to someone defending himself. And many homeowners insurance policies are being changed to exclude protection for any situation involving the discharge of a firearm.) Ayoob was not always advocating such lamb-like, deceitful behavior. But apparently he's seen too many cases where the political views and actions of his employers undercut them in court and the perp who broke in or tried to rob a store got multimillion dollar judgments from the person who used "deadly force" to try to defend himself, his family, his employees, or his business. Another reason to use pseudonyms, of course. (It's too late for me. A band of Hispanic home invaders could hit my house, and I'd be the one found liable...all those posts their lawyers could find with DejaNews or with other search engines. Including this one, which the lawyer scum would use to show that I set out to "trick" the jury by appearing to be mild and meek.) --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Tim May wrote: [...]
The way I see it is quite simple, if these peaple where not payed off it is most likely that thay will turn to crime.
[...]
Given that the U.S. already has a huge system for redistributing wealth, and a very high crime rate, what is your evidence for your claim?
The US has one of the lowest rates of wealth redistribution in the civilsed world (Australia, most of europe ect have higher welfare rates). Just because there is a huge burkasy for doing something dosn't mean that it is happening. [...]
What's wrong with chopping the hands off of thieves and executing muderers?
Its wrong for the same reson that sodimising a person with a plunger is.
The United States has a lot of redistribution of wealth and a lot of crime.
The US has very little redistribution and a lot of crime. Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep. Buy easter bilbies. Save the ABC Is $0.08 per day too much to pay? ex-net.scum and proud I'm sorry but I just don't consider 'because its yucky' a convincing argument
On 22 Aug 97 at 4:34, ? the Platypus {aka David For wrote:
The way I see it is quite simple, if these peaple where not payed off it is most likely that thay will turn to crime. Other then condemming every single impovished person to death, this is one of the better soultions to a difficalt problem.
I lately decided, since there is so many interesting things to do in life and also, since minutes are in such a short supply, to make my killfile look prosperous. Ciao jfa
participants (10)
-
? the platypus {aka David Formosa} -
? the Platypus {aka David Formosa}
-
gturk＠concentric.net -
jf_avon＠citenet.net -
Jonathan Wienke -
Kent Crispin -
nobody＠REPLAY.COM -
Tim May -
Vladimir Z. Nuri -
William H. Geiger III