Rabbi Hier Testimony

People might want to take a look at Rabbi Hier (the founder of the
Weisental Center)'s statements on "hate groups" and the Internet. While he
(unlike Biden) does recognize that outlawing bomb-making information would be
unconstitutional, he doesn't appear to approve of anonymnity on the Internet
(nor, depending on how one interprets his statements, of encrypted
communications without GAK). The first is to his (and the Weisenthal Center's)
credit; the second is not. The URL is:

http://www.wiesenthal.com/itn/hiertest.htm

	I came across it while looking for information re: militias and
racism. As my previous information had caused me to believe, some militias are
racist (or anti-Semitic), some are racial separatist, and some are neither.
	-Allen

On Tue, 23 Apr 1996, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote:

>         People might want to take a look at Rabbi Hier (the founder of the
> Weisental Center)'s statements on "hate groups" and the Internet.

Why should they? They've already made up their minds.

> While he (unlike Biden) does recognize that outlawing bomb-making
> information would be unconstitutional, he doesn't appear to approve of
> anonymnity on the Internet

Where? He says:

"We need to keep in mind that the obscene or threatening phone caller has
neither his privacy nor his speech protected when he threatens a member of
the community via phone - why are those protections afforded if he
launches the same attack via the Internet?" 

I think Rabbi Heir is aware of the legal definitions of "obscene" and
"threatening." Assuming we agree on those definitions, I agree with the
above language. For example, I've received quite a lot of anonymous email
and phone calls that are threatening by the colloquial definition, but
which do not meet the legal definition of threatening or obscene attacks. 
I am personally interested in tracking these folks down, but I know better
than to try to make it a legal issue, and if I do succeed in tracking them
down, all that will be used against them is speech. 

On the other hand, if someone makes a clear and specific bomb threat
through an anonymous remailer, then I would hope that attempts would be
made to track him down. I would also hope that tracking him down would be
extremely difficult and resource-intensive, and that the remailer
operators would not actively help the trackers, because I strongly support
the anonymity option when it is used nonviolently -- even and especially
by people with whom I disagree. I feel I can have a much better
conversation with an enemy if he knows that his talking to me doesn't make
it easier for me to put a gun to his head. Openness is good.

> (nor, depending on how one interprets his statements, of encrypted
> communications without GAK). 

In such cases, I usually find it helpful to ask. Bcc'd to a couple of
affiliates in the hopes that they'll clarify. I seriously doubt that they
have any clue what Government Access to Keys means, though. 

> The first is to his (and the Weisenthal Center's) credit; the second is
> not. The URL is: 
> 
> http://www.wiesenthal.com/itn/hiertest.htm

My take is that Rabbie Hier is around the center of the SWC leadership.
Rabbi Cooper is more likely to support censorship; Eaton is much less;
Mark Weitzman is also in the center (of the SWC, not of the mainstream
Jewish/anti-"revisionist" community, which is very supportive of free
speech). On January 29th, the SF Chronicle (and probably other papers)
carried this piece from Weitzman:

 http://www.wiesenthal.com/itn/oped10.htm

In light of the fact that Michael Loomis's Zundelmirror continues to make
the charge that the Simon Wiesenthal Center was in favor of censoring
Zundel, a charge that not even Zundel has made, it's worth highlighting
this:

 "The recent decision made by the German government to block certain
 providers was made without any participation by the Center. We have never
 requested either the German government or Deutsche Telekom to take such
 drastic steps. To assume that we have the power to control the German
 government is to renew the myth of International Jewry pulling the
 strings of various governments. The reality is that the German
 government, as a legally constituted government of a recognized
 democracy, has every right to create its own laws. As long as those laws,
 and their method of adoption, fall into the generally accepted range
 associated with democracies, then any attempt by foreigners to alter
 those laws is an intrusion and smacks of cultural imperialism.... To
 disagree with the German government (as the Center does on the arbitrary
 nature of the actions by Deutsche Telekom and Compuserve - we believe
 that laws should be applied only to those breaking the law, not to entire
 systems) and to inform the German government of such disagreement, as we
 have done, is quite different from attempts to break the law by aiding
 Nazi propagandists under the banner of free speech." 

Of course, I disagree. I think it's vitally important to help Nazi
propagandists under the banner of free speech. As long as that's what
you're doing.

-rich

Excerpts from internet.cypherpunks: 23-Apr-96 Re: Rabbi Hier Testimony
by Declan McCullagh@CMU.EDU 
> The EF Canada web pages also detail how the SWC has been trying to get
> the Canadian equivalent of the FCC to regulate the Internet. The ACLU
> reports at the URL above how the SWC has tried the same trick here in
> the U.S.


While I'm at it, I should offer my prediction that the Southern Poverty
Law Center likely will become active in attempts to regulate and control
the Net.

To the SPLC, bomb-building and other, um, incendiary information should
be restricted. In today's Washinton Post, Morris Dees, the Center's
co-founder, indicates that a book Timothy McVeigh read influenced him to
bomb the Oklahoma City building.

-Declan

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Wed, 24 Apr 1996, Declan B. McCullagh wrote:

> Excerpts from internet.cypherpunks: 23-Apr-96 Re: Rabbi Hier Testimony
> by Declan McCullagh@CMU.EDU
> > The EF Canada web pages also detail how the SWC has been trying to get
> > the Canadian equivalent of the FCC to regulate the Internet. The ACLU
> > reports at the URL above how the SWC has tried the same trick here in
> > the U.S.

The majority of what you said in that message was misleading at best, but
I haven't said anything because that's off topic, and who listens to a
FUCKING STATIST anyway. I know you don't have time to correct any
acknowledged errors on you web pages, so why should I waste my time
pointing them out?

Since we all agree that the SWC is in the wrong, we need something to talk
about. Let's just agree up front that the size of your dick is
proportional to the fervor of your denunciation of the Simon Wiesenthal
Center, facts notwithstanding. So far, I believe Tim wins because he
called them "Jew Nazis," but keep working at it. Maybe if you're lucky,
you'll earn the George Orwell Free Speech Award: 

 http://www.almanac.bc.ca/cgi-bin/ftp.pl?people/b/botting.gary

> While I'm at it, I should offer my prediction that the Southern Poverty
> Law Center likely will become active in attempts to regulate and control
> the Net.

Sure, why not. It's probably true that they'll try. Being a bunch of
idealogues, I don't imagine that they'll realize, as Sameer points out,
that *they* are considered an anti-government group. 

> In today's Washinton Post, Morris Dees, the Center's co-founder, 
> indicates that a book Timothy McVeigh read influenced him to bomb the
> Oklahoma City building. 

Morris Dees is certainly not the only person to speak of this influence.
Try Terry Nichols and McVeigh's sister.

Said book being The Turner Diaries, which, like the Goebbels book that
your web page says is "banned," is being published without censorship. It
tells the story of The Order, a white supremacist group that overthrows
the US government through random acts of terror and violence against
political, cultural, and economic targets. There happens to have been a
real terrorist organization that called itself The Order, led by a bunch
of National Alliance members. You may have heard of Bob Mathews.  Now The
Order has resurfaced in Spokane Valley; some bombings and bank robberies
went down in early April, to some applause on the Neo-Nazi lists. 

The Turner Diaries has always been available through the National Alliance
Neo-Nazi criminal organization, whose leader wrote it.  If you want to
read this book, I will personally send you a copy of the National Alliance
edition. 

The Turner Diaries is now going to be published by the more mainstream
Barricade Books as well. Good for them. I really don't like the idea of
sending the National Alliance any more money.

There was a flurry of controversy about the new edition, to which the
publisher, Lyle Stewart, responded in, of all places, Liz Smith's widely
syndicated "Grapevine" column, thusly: 

  "I couldn't help recall a similar controversy that raged when a major
American publishing house issued Adolf Hitler's 'Mein Kampf.' Should such
a book be published? To me the answer was self-evident. Of course, it
should have been. People should be able to read and understand what
Hitler was about.
  "By the same reasoning, I believe most people think militias and related
groups like the Freemen are fun-loving, beer-drinking gun fanatics who
like to shoot rabbits and deer. Not so. They hate democracy. They hate our
government and all officials who represent it. They practice racism and
terrorism. Is this something that only the Drug Enforcement Agency and the
FBI and CIA should know, or do you have a right to know and understand it,
too?"

So yes, Morris Dees is a fool, and so are you.

- -rich
 http://www.c2.org/~rich/Not_By_Me_Not_My_Views/rebuttal.html

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMX6y0I3DXUbM57SdAQFtdgP/WtwaNLaStTpVazuNLNUBbswGcvrRf8s2
ybwLMyMYxZamLwvjv45Zz+tT8AiSaZj3R1ACPDppR7s4UDC9/JrecIUeufVOGara
fVK8q8j1qwiyvLNqT+nffa2SqCPHIZMIvagv+yFu8I9zBrNwu2h9aKNYRr8OXS88
ifiTEzJDmNA=
=UAMc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

I was waiting for Rich to whine about my message criticizing the Simon
Wiesenthal Center. He was good enough to oblige, being the FUCKING
STATIST that he is:

> The majority of what you said in that message was misleading at best, but
> I haven't said anything because that's off topic, and who listens to a
> FUCKING STATIST anyway. I know you don't have time to correct any
> acknowledged errors on you web pages, so why should I waste my time
> pointing them out?

Funny, that. The links I provided were primarily to reports from the
ACLU, CDT, wire dispatches, and firsthand reports by respected
journalists.

They must be part of the FUCKING STATIST conspiracy to oppress the poor,
beleaguered -- and sadly misunderstood -- free speech advocates at the
Simon Wiesenthal Center! 
 
> So yes, Morris Dees is a fool, and so are you.

A stinging blow! I can hardly wait for the next.

-Declan

On Wed, 24 Apr 1996, Declan B. McCullagh wrote:

> I was waiting for Rich to whine about my message criticizing the Simon
> Wiesenthal Center. He was good enough to oblige, being the FUCKING
> STATIST that he is:

No, I refused to reply to your obvious troll the first time, or to the
various Nazi tracts that have been posted anonymously recently. You had to
repeat the off-topic smears twice before I decided to humor you. 

> Funny, that. The links I provided were primarily to reports from the
> ACLU, CDT, wire dispatches, and firsthand reports by respected
> journalists.

All presenting one point of view, stated less strongly than your link
text. There have been all sorts of opposing points of view, letters to the
editor, clarifications, and retractions since then. 

If you want to know what I think, look it up in DejaNews. This was all
covered in early February.

As I told you on February 9th, I am win-announce@metrics.com.

-rich

Excerpts from internet.cypherpunks: 23-Apr-96 Rabbi Hier Testimony by
"E. ALLEN SMITH"@ocelot. 
>         People might want to take a look at Rabbi Hier (the founder of the
> Weisental Center)'s statements on "hate groups" and the Internet. While he
> (unlike Biden) does recognize that outlawing bomb-making information would be
> unconstitutional, he doesn't appear to approve of anonymnity on the Internet
> (nor, depending on how one interprets his statements, of encrypted
> communications without GAK). The first is to his (and the Weisenthal
Center's)


The Simon Wiesenthal Center and the ADL would love to outlaw anonymity
on the Net. Here's some info on their attempts to restrict online speech:

CDT report on Hier's testimony at Senate hearing last May:
  http://www.cdt.org/publications/pp130512.html
ACLU's *detailed* reporting on SWC's longtime net-censorship attempts:
   http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=618
ADL decries "web of hate":
  http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=1509
ADL research analyst's personal position on Internet hate speech:
  http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=1600
ADL claims information is seductive, needs to be censored: 
  http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=1727
IHR (biased) reporting on SWC/ADL net-censorship attempts:
   http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=628
How ADL tries to recruit hackers to sabotage enemies' computers:
   http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=856
SWC tries to muzzle critics in Argentina, Canada:   
   http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=618
SWC exaggerates "hate speech" threat for funding and self-perpetuation:
   http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=1311
   http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/dl?num=582
      
The EF Canada web pages also detail how the SWC has been trying to get
the Canadian equivalent of the FCC to regulate the Internet. The ACLU
reports at the URL above how the SWC has tried the same trick here in
the U.S.

-Declan