The GCHQ Cryptome slide could be a mockup/disinfo

[Cari Machet]

Ok i read it all see no fucking ask of this community for help on the matter

I am not interested in purity coffins for cryptome or anyone but i am
interested in respect of community as others have stated here

There are issues then there are deeper concerns re structural mindset ...
base shit people love to ignore so they can fuck with shit on accounta

Coming to the list with a question is not what occured here - coming to the
list with an ask is not what occured

This space is not cut throat dont pretend
On Oct 10, 2015 8:50 AM, "grarpamp" <grarpamp at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 9:00 AM, Steve Kinney <admin at pilobilus.net> wrote:
> >  That amounts to less than an ant fart in a tornado, in context?
>
> I am having difficulty quantifying this ratio.
> Can you supply some peer reviewed research data?
> Preferably as compared to "needle in a haystack"
> or "flatter than Kansas".
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 1297 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20151010/1f571371/attachment-0002.txt>