September 2016 - cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Free speech - front lines in Australia - [personal@bernardgaynor.com.au: Update: battle for free speech]
by Nadine Earnshaw 13 Sep '16

13 Sep '16

You should get that myopia fixed Oh so sorry you can't unless you have shed loads of money. Bad Obama care bad Sent from my iPhone > On 13 Sep 2016, at 10:02 AM, juan <juan.g71(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 09:48:19 +1000 > Nadine Earnshaw <nadine(a)iinet.net.au> wrote: > >> No that is America >> >> I'm sorry you are afraid of being free > > What. > > >> >> I have protested against our government in the street and look no >> bullet holes > > Not what I said. Stop paying taxes, refuse to pay fines, ignore > 'regulations' etc etc, see how fast you get killed. > >> >> We do not have capital punishment enshrined in our law > > Yes you do. As I said, it is implicitly used to 'enforce' all > your 'laws'. > >> >> We are still a British colony. > > Indeed you are a vassal state to both the american and british > nazis and complicit in their crimes. Here's just a bit of data > you 'honestly' ignored. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_contribution_to_the_2003_invasion_… > > Perhaps you are quite proud of your government murdering brown > foreign subhumans eh. > > >> And world debt is owned by China. >> >> USA is not the centre of the world it's in its death throws. A very >> sad thing. Not the great world power it once was. > > > And now you are praising the americans? You can't even get > your story straight? =) > > > > > J.

5 5

Re: Free speech - front lines in Australia - [personal@bernardgaynor.com.au: Update: battle for free speech]
by Nadine Earnshaw 13 Sep '16

13 Sep '16

My freedom doesn't require hurting someone else Smoochies Sent from my iPhone > On 13 Sep 2016, at 8:10 AM, juan <juan.g71(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 07:21:45 +1000 > Nadine Earnshaw <nadine(a)iinet.net.au> wrote: > >> Thank you for proving my point xx > > > You don't have a point. You are just another freedom hating > robot. > > >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On 13 Sep 2016, at 6:43 AM, juan <juan.g71(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:13:57 +0800 >>> "Nadine Earnshaw" <nadine(a)iinet.net.au> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> the bottom line is that assholes cant hide behind their vile and >>>> call it free speech and find protection >>> >>> the bottom line is that you are a highly stupid, fascist cunt. >

4 3

Mail, please.
by Liam E. 13 Sep '16

13 Sep '16

What is the most minimal setup for command-line mail on a system like Debian? Open to all approaches and combinations XD Thanks. -- Liam

6 7

an inspiring message, please watch
by Carlos Rodriguez 12 Sep '16

12 Sep '16

an inspiring message, still valid 50 years later, even moreso now. https://youtu.be/y8HTr-F-FVM --Bob Sent from my iPad

2 1

Re: Your obsession with Juan
by Cypher Piggie 12 Sep '16

12 Sep '16

> Fritz Wuehler > Juan. He's an asshole yes he's an asshole. and a troll. and a USA loving US citizen.

4 7

Wells Fargo Has To Fire 5,300 Employees For Scam Billing
by Sean Lynch 12 Sep '16

12 Sep '16

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160908/17582535469/holy-crap-wells-farg… My comments: I was wondering why you wouldn't simply liquidate a bank for something this heinous, but then I realized what was probably already obvious to many on this list: aside from the power of the execs and major shareholders, the regulators know damn well this practice is rampant. If Wells Fargo got anywhere near what it deserved for this massive scandal, the regulators would be risking having to wipe out the entire banking system of the United States when it becomes clear that they all do it. Badly formatted paste follows: *Holy Crap: Wells Fargo Has To Fire 5,300 Employees For * <http://www.google.com/gwt/x?u=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2Fte…> *Scam* <http://www.google.com/gwt/x?u=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2Fte…>* Billing* <http://www.google.com/gwt/x?u=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2Fte…> by Mike Masnick / Sep 9, 2016 This story is crazy. Late yesterday it was revealed that banking giant Wells Fargo had to fire 5,300 employees over a massive <http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/08/investing/wells-fargo-created-phony-account…> scam <http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/08/investing/wells-fargo-created-phony-account…> in which those employees created over 2 million fake accounts to stuff with fees in order to meet their quarterly numbers. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau also fined the company $185 million <http://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/blog/hundreds-thousands-accounts-se…> ($100 million to the CFPB, $35 million to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and another $50 million to Los Angeles). Oh and it needs to pay back around $5 million to the customers it screwed over. The CFPB provides some crazy details: *Opening deposit accounts and transferring funds without authorization:* *According to the bank’s own analysis, employees opened roughly 1.5 million deposit accounts that may not have been authorized by consumers. Employees then transferred funds from consumers’ authorized accounts to temporarily fund the new, unauthorized accounts. This widespread practice gave the employees credit for opening the new accounts, allowing them to earn additional compensation and to meet the bank’s sales goals. Consumers, in turn, were sometimes **harmed** because the bank charged them for **insufficient** funds or overdraft fees because the money was not in their original accounts.* *Applying for credit card accounts without authorization: **According to the bank’s own analysis, Wells Fargo employees applied for roughly 565,000 credit card accounts that may not have been authorized by consumers. On those unauthorized credit cards, many consumers incurred annual fees, as well as associated finance or interest charges and other fees.* *Issuing and activating debit cards without authorization:* *Wells Fargo employees requested and issued debit cards without consumers’ knowledge or consent, going so far as to create PINs without telling consumers.* *Creating phony email addresses to enroll consumers in online-banking services:* *Wells Fargo employees created phony email addresses not belonging to consumers to enroll them in online-banking services without their knowledge or consent.* *The thing is, if 5,300 employees were a part of this, this was not some random **scam**. This was a bank-approved plan to goose their numbers. It seems like among the 5,300 employees, management should be in serious * *trouble** as well. What's really astounding about all of this is that it took this long for the practice to come to light. As the **CFPB** notes, end users were impacted by this, and you'd think that **complaints** would have made it clear that this was a problem much sooner. Or is that people are just so used to getting screwed by their bank that they let it slide? The CNN report notes that Los Angeles had sued Wells Fargo over this practice last year (hence LA being a part of the settlement fines), but having such a widespread **scam** going on is somewhat astounding. * *And, of course, it raises questions about what other banks are doing similar things as well. We've seen this kind of activity in the telco space at times **with**cramming <https://www.techdirt.com/blog/netneutrality/articles/20141019/18370828884/f…>**, but that was generally third party scammers, where the **telcos** just looked the other way. This was full-time Wells Fargo employees doing the * *scam** itself, and the bank apparently either encouraging it or just looking the other way from upper management.*

2 1

WL: USA to elect Walking Dead Puppet Liar Woman as President
by grarpamp 12 Sep '16

12 Sep '16

https://twitter.com/wikileaks https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/17243 https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=pK8Z9Z8nhRI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dY77j6uBHI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHhsy8B8_d8 Here's to wishing dynasties of politcal lies around the world drop fucking dead.

3 5

Re: WL: USA to elect Walking Dead Puppet Liar Woman as President
by John Young 12 Sep '16

12 Sep '16

Assange's determination to seek personal vengeance against Clinton without commensurate assault on Trump is vain imitationism, even idolatrous of "strong man" predatory (sexual) behavior. Yes, Putin plays the same autocratic gaming of the "helpless" people titanism. Although the sustained childish tantrum could wind up helping Clinton in the same way Trump's and Putin's promotion of infantilism in their beseeching crybabies does, aided by backroom martinets flattering insecure putative royalty bred by momism. Big egos of narcissism all too often lead to war when spoiled amoral assholes gain control of armaments, secrets and leaks. This is not to say Clinton is not a spoiled brat too, merely a female corrupted by privilege bestowed by predatory males. Yes, this applies to Queen Elizabeth, actually cosseted queens of all stripes, except, of course, Queen, yodeler of We Are The Champions, led by Mercury traveling the universe, the only legitimate belter. At 12:46 AM 9/12/2016, you wrote: >On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 11:51 PM, Razer <rayzer(a)riseup.net> wrote: > > That leaves Stein, and there's talk of a vandalism > > prosecution for spraypainting on Dakota Access Tarpipe equipment... > > > > MY kind of criminal. > >One of Jill's statements.... >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4LMGVp5KlI > >Young Turks, RT, Democracy Now coverage... >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8ismpXjxUk >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMZBpC3YTwA >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGc9LzOySJs

1 0

Re: Free speech - front lines in Australia - [personal@bernardgaynor.com.au: Update: battle for free speech]
by Zenaan Harkness 12 Sep '16

12 Sep '16

> Now that he [Bernard Gaynor] is a civilian he can say whatever he > likes with no consequences. This assertion is simply not true. Bernard Gaynor is being personal attacked, in his "civilian" capacity, in the NSW civil and administrative tribunal (NCAT), with a huge litany of "section 18c" charges/ cases (and another round quite recently are going into the first steps of "case conference", even AFTER the state of NSW Supreme Court ruled in the previous case (numerous charges, almost identical to the current series) that NCAT does NOT have jurisdiction over a (state of) Queensland resident, and threw out all those previous charges! In other words, NCAT is making a complete ass out of itself.) Section 18c is real (it exists), is really being used by a vexatious litigant in NSW, against Bernard Gaynor a resident of QLD, for expressing his personal ("conservative") views publicly. This is a direct personal and legal attack against Bernard Gaynor's right to express his views publicly, and this attack is only made possible due to Section 18c of the Anti Discrimination Act 1975. So section 18c is an abomination being actively used against the right of free speech in Australia. You may disagree, and you are entitled to your opinion and to express your opinion publicly, but almost without doubt, Australia's penultimate court the High Court, is going to rightly cut this piece of legislation down to size (we can certainly hope this will happen, and this would be a damn fine day for the legal upholding of free speech in Australia, if that's what happens). With full respect to your absolute right to --publicly-- express your emotionally unbalanced and stupid opinion, Zenaan On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 02:20:54PM +0800, Nadine Earnshaw wrote: > what he did wasn't criminal just dumb. He tried to pick a fight with > the military force he was a part of. lol > > http://www.smh.com.au/comment/christian-army-officer-bernie-gaynor-pays-the… > "Gaynor half-won that argument but he over-stepped the army’s mark > by using his private blog to wage a cultural war against what he calls > politically correct policies. Eventually, Major-General A.J. Campbell > requested his resignation, stating: ''In short, army does not share > your views, which are both offensive and divisive and not in the > interests of army or our people.'" > What i meant is that he is free to say what he wants and what was said > was simply his opinion and there is nothing criminal. However if you > criticize your employer in public expect to lose your job. > The whole thing with Bernie and the fighting for freedom of speech is > crap. > Now that he is a civilian he can say whatever he likes with no > consequences. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Zenaan Harkness" > To:"Nadine Earnshaw" > Cc: > Sent:Mon, 12 Sep 2016 16:03:16 +1000 > Subject:Re: Free speech - front lines in Australia - > [personal(a)bernardgaynor.com.au: Update: battle for free speech] > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 08:13:57AM +0800, Nadine Earnshaw wrote: > > the bottom line is that assholes cant hide behind their vile and > call > > it free speech and find protection > > OK, to hear you, the examples by Bernard Gaynor - is the only > "illegal" > thing he said, the quote you gave - i.e. > "I won't have my kids taught by homosexuals, and I'm not afraid to > say > that publicly" > > or is there something else he "said publicly" which you say the > courts > should uphold as illegal "unprotected public speech"? > > Thanks, > Zenaan > > > im fine with finger pointing at the asshat and calling them out on > > being what they are > > i also believe in gun control and legal abortion. > > encypt your conversations and be a dick in private with other > > dicksthis i think you have the right to.importantly that you have > > right to privacy. the right to be free, to talk openly in private > > without being monitored by others. > > this is what I think freedom of speech is.

1 0

Darkwebs
by grarpamp 12 Sep '16

12 Sep '16

http://superkuhbitj6tul.onion/ sdr http://ybtpdkqy7allqlo3.onion/ redroom

1 0