CDR: Re: Jim Bell arrested, documents online

[Greg Newby]

On Fri, Nov 24, 2000 at 02:09:33PM -0600, Jim Choate wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 24 Nov 2000, John Young wrote:
> 
> > Bear surmised:
> > 
> > >The "Needs Killing" verbiage you see here, I think, is mostly from 
> > >people who, correctly or not, tend to think in terms either of there 
> > >not being any governments, or in terms of the government being so 
> > >ineffective that they are effectively in an ungoverned state.
> > 
> > Hold on. "Needs killing" is an epithet, like "fuck your mother"
> > or in earlier theocratic days, "go to hell." It's a residue of a time
> > when killing somebody who profaned your beliefs was done.
> 
> Perhaps for you, for others it is a serious expression of their goals. You
> seriously (intentionlay?) mis-represent the situation with this view.

"de puta madre!" 

But seriously, folks: How would you work with a like-minded
distributed group to murder someone?  Preferably with guaranteed
no risk of discovery or prosecution to the participants.  

- Would we need to assume the someone would be the "hands," e.g.,
your good ole' professional hit-man?  How would s/he be contacted?

- How would the person be paid?  How would the money be collected
from the different people who pay?

- What trust model would work?  Would it be more desirable for
all players to be completely anonymous?  Cells of people who know
each other?  

- Could this all be done legally (without the individuals who
are planning and paying needing to commit any crimes)?


Contrary to the Orient Express, Peter Sellers and other scenarios,
this sounds like a serious applied problem in crypto-anarchy.  I
am not able to come up with a solution that doesn't have serious
risks for the participants, but would love to hear one.

  -- Greg