Motives

[Reese]

At 09:47 AM 8/18/01, georgemw at speakeasy.net wrote:
 >On 18 Aug 2001, at 6:44, Reese wrote:
 >
 >
 >>
 >> You would be well-advised to question motives, here.  What do
 >> I gain by pursuing an address on the legality of posting bomb
 >> recipes?
 >
 >Normally I try to avoid such questions,  I find it
 >much more significant what people do than why
 >they do it, but this one for some
 >reason has me puzzled.  What the hell DO you have to gain?
 >Surely you can't just be hoping to get some cool new recipes that
 >way,  there are easier and better ways to do it.
 >As the amputee porn fan put it,  I'm stumped.

We assume the lamerz posting "h3lp m3 m4k3 b0mZ" queries are LEA's
trolling, but are they?  Is posting bomb recipes a violation of
some applicable law?  If so, what law?  If not, why do we assume
those to be LEA trolls, and not some hopeless wank or kook who
needs to get in touch with HisOrHer inner child and beat it up?

Quite simply, I'm curious and want to know.

 >>What does
 >> she gain by quashing all such posts?  Why?
 >>
 >
 >I'm easily bamboozled by anything allegedly female, but
 >the impression I get is that she's under the impression
 >more bomb recipies leads to more unwanted scrutiny from
 >LEOs.
 >
 >Personally, I think such ideas are largely mistaken.  Nobody
 >ever taught any investigator even vaguely worthy of the name not to
 >look under rocks.

Indeed, in the hidden away places is where the most interesting
things are found.

 >I did consider it pretty funny that the assertion that LEOs don't get
 >to hide behind remailers was made right before they announced
 >a patent on their clone of Freedom,  but then again,  I see humor
 >everywhere.

All things are funny, when viewed in the right light.  ;)

Reese