Just another government fuckover: New crypto regulations

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

        books are and have been protected prior to the US Constitution. 
    one can presume books with crypto source code would be protected 
    accordingly; one Federal judge (Patel in SF) has ruled source code 
    is protected under freedom of speech and therefore can be published; 
    yet another judge in the Washington area has ruled it is not.  There 
    is no question the feds will appeal Patel's ruling in the Ninth 
    Circuit (known to be pro rights in general, but difficult to 
    predict).  eventually it will go to the US Supreme Court.

        my personal opinion is the Supreme Court will rule against it 
    using a rationale that the actual source code sections of a book can 
    be classified as can any other intellectual property under the 
    National Security Act. Secondly, they will not consider that form of 
    speech an inalienable right. 

        I had my rounds with the bastards years ago, no fucking humour 
    whatsoever, and prone to use the IRS to enforce what the courts 
    could not afford to enforce due to the requirements of disclosure in 
    the courtroom at the time (which have since been plugged); and if 
    that does not work, set you up for financial fraud, fraud by wire, 
    or dope.  Today dope is the perfect charge; it has been whipped into 
    a frenzy by the feds and their CIA infiltrated media.  let me assure 
    any doubters the real extent of terror which the spooks can apply.

        the US Government has not been a legal government for years; it 
    is a private club which can be bought, and its services sold to the 
    highest bidder.  It is a collection of whores who are part of a 
    cabal of the very rich and powerful; it is totally unaccountable 
    to the public it represents.  Waco, Ruby Ridge, and the bombing of 
    their own federal building in Oklahoma City in order to scare Joe 
    Couch Potato into giving up personal freedoms for security are 
    perfect examples of a government drunk on it owns powers.  Just like 
    Oswald, they have a perfect patsy with the defendants in OKC.

        P.J. O'Rourke states it correctly:

            "And the Clinton administration launched an attack
                on people in Texas because those people were
                religious nuts with guns.
            Hell, this country was founded by religious nuts with guns."
           
        O'Rourke also said:

             "Giving money and power to the government is like
                giving whiskey and car keys to teenaged boys"

    and there is no better example than the cocaine stoned, reckless 
    mentality of Bill Clinton.

        an important fact to keep in mind in US judicial review: few of 
    the judges can be relied on 1) to resist pressure from the Feds and 
    2) to take the rights of the people seriously and as 'inalienable 
    rights.'  this may sound pessimistic and cynical, but the courts 
    have been sliding, in some cases rather quickly, to a position that 
    echoes the UN Bill of Rights:

        the UN's "International Covenant on Civil and Political
        Rights" (ICCR): Article 18 states that "everyone shall 
        have	the right to freedom of thought, conscience and
	    religion" but specifies that "freedom to manifest one's 
        religions or beliefs may be subject only to such 
        limitations as are prescribed by law and necessary..."

        in other words, I do not think we will see the feds permit the 
    use of books to export cryptography.  this almost becomes irrelevant 
    outside the academic world in the provisions of the regs which 
    effectively block hardware or software products and in effect seem 
    to cut off the loophole of US companies funding overseas operations 
    and importing the results, etc.  the new regs basically ban it all 
    ways.  and the new regs are not the supposedly improved and friendly
    versions promised --they are draconian.

        books are an intellectual 'solution' to the problem. the real 
    problem is the hardware. in order to negate governments and their 
    virtually stated intentions of blocking our inalienable freedoms, 
    particularly freedom of speach, we must be able to distribute 
    universal crypto worldwide, and be able to improve it as the shadow 
    governments of the various spook shows improve their ability to 
    break our code.

        this last round on the ITARs blew out distribution.  asking 
    visitors to your web sites if they are U.S. citizens is not going to 
    be sufficient for Bubba's goons: Janet Reno and Jamie Gorlich.

        the only real solution is guerilla warfare; anonymous 
    distribution; overseas' establishment of clearing houses for updates 
    and source code. 

        freedom of information is just that simple; there are no 
    compromises.  Patrick Henry said: 

        "Give me Liberty or Give me Death."

        publish, publish, and civil disobedience. Patrick Henry used 
    handbills. 

        knowledge is knowledge --get it in the public domain, and 
    in the public's hands even if you must go door to door like a 
    fuller brush salesman...  but your product is free and it is for 
    their freedom.

        don't waste your time getting out the vote; get out there and 
    fight.  contribute.

        if you do not have the balls to do it, you are not for freedom.

        the only natural cure for corrupt government is bright sunshine.
    and a rope.
 
  ==
    Tyranny Insurance by Colt Manufacturing Co.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: latin1
Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later.

iQCVAwUBMsd+nb04kQrCC2kFAQGxVQP5AUM06j8anB3MLUzMUe8WjOqhVwPjSd7d
RhaGyrRwAdSpU1CPSYNX9+zsTnaJtgsN0rQYLrbKQD1eKDPKAQlnz5vJ6SAVhRwi
nNF2e4Pj/wD7SVBwHFmjsaOpWmNx9+ON++/EZNbs3c3nH/2n7tiC7eJJcte+apNE
G3lwdSSxXhU=
=MD+E
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

"Attila T. Hun" <attila@primenet.com> writes:

>         books are and have been protected prior to the US Constitution.

"Protected" in what sense? Copyright in a fairly recent invention.

>         the US Government has not been a legal government for years; it
>     is a private club which can be bought, and its services sold to the
>     highest bidder.  It is a collection of whores who are part of a
>     cabal of the very rich and powerful; it is totally unaccountable
>     to the public it represents.  Waco, Ruby Ridge, and the bombing of
>     their own federal building in Oklahoma City in order to scare Joe
>     Couch Potato into giving up personal freedoms for security are
>     perfect examples of a government drunk on it owns powers.  Just like
>     Oswald, they have a perfect patsy with the defendants in OKC.

Like I said the other day, the similarities with the USSR under the last
few years of Brezhnev's life are striking.

>         books are an intellectual 'solution' to the problem. the real
>     problem is the hardware. in order to negate governments and their
>     virtually stated intentions of blocking our inalienable freedoms,
>     particularly freedom of speach, we must be able to distribute
>     universal crypto worldwide, and be able to improve it as the shadow
>     governments of the various spook shows improve their ability to
>     break our code.

Yes, but the impotent "cypher punks" can't write or distribute code.
They can only flame and rant and pull plugs.

>         if you do not have the balls to do it, you are not for freedom.

If you are a "cypher punk", you are not for freedom.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

From: Attila T. Hun <attila@primenet.com>
X-Return: attila <attila@hun.org>
X-Originator: attila <attila@hun12.hun.org>
X-SecurityType: None
X-SecurityCode: None
X-KeyID: 1024/C20B6905
X-KeyNo: 23 D0 FA 7F 6A 8F 60 66  BC AF AE 56 98 C0 D7 B0
X-PGPKey: strip spaces and colon from key
    ; -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
    ; Version: 2.6
    ;
    ; mQCNAy5vBesAAAEEAN8cl6vHXrKZ9lFfZDgfyJRr3HidW77Uio7F25QF6QXca5z/
    ; AS3ZrWsa0CjF2nwrqmyb1E5no7dFB+70ZfK8233r7ykVkWRojT+0K71lnUZO4cjG
    ; +d19/ehXkDpkH3iHU7Uyo4ZdXLiI6uoFDS7ilzx8PCKcgvfq7b04kQrCC2kFAAUX
    ; tAZhdHRpbGE=
    ; =cpDk
    ; -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
X-Comments: writer is solely irresponsible for his loose tongue
    ; Free Cyberspace is our Democracy. Fuck your CDA. 
    ; Free Information is our Freedom.  Fuck your WIPO, too.  
Errors-To: null@primenet.com
Priority: Normal
Owner: Attila T. Hun <attila@primenet.com>
Sender: Attila T. Hun <attila@primenet.com>
Sent-By: Attila T. Hun <attila@primenet.com>
Return-receipt-to: Attila T. Hun <attila@primenet.com>
Reply-to: Attila T. Hun <attila@primenet.com>
Organization: Home for retired unrepented, degenerate hackers
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 96 19:52:02 +0000
To: cypherpunks <cypherpunks@toad.com>
Cc: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Subject: Re: Just another government fuckover: New crypto regulations
In-Reply-To: <9m4qZD23w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
Bcc: furballs <ppenrod@earthlink.net>

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

In <9m4qZD23w165w@bwalk.dm.com>, on 12/30/96 
   at 08:07 AM, dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) said:

::"Attila T. Hun" <attila@primenet.com> writes:

::>     books are and have been protected prior to the US Constitution.

::"Protected" in what sense? Copyright in a fairly recent invention.

        free speech, which is what we are talking about. supposedly 
    absolute freedom of speech in America was in the Articles of 
    Confederation and was a major point of the Declaration of 
    Independence.  free speach was an "intention" of the Magna Carta.

::>     the US Government has not been a legal government for years; it     
::>is a private club which can be bought, and its services sold to the     
::>highest bidder. It is a collection of whores who are part of a cabal
::>of the very rich and powerful; it is totally unaccountable to the
::>public it represents.  Waco, Ruby Ridge, and the bombing of their 
::>own federal building in Oklahoma City in order to scare Joe Couch 
::>Potato into giving up personal freedoms for security are perfect 
::>examples of a government drunk on it owns powers. Just like Oswald, 
::>they have a perfect patsy with the defendants in OKC.

::Like I said the other day, the similarities with the USSR under the 
::last few years of Brezhnev's life are striking.

        just a little bit too close, is it not?  The Kremlin then, and
    the Kremlin of Yeltsin also suffer the same malady: the personal
    expression of power. Gorbi will be remembered in history as not a
    great statesmen as he was initially hailed in the West, but as the
    'great concessionaire,' giving Russia's "imperial" power away. 
    Russia never had a communist government, it was a dictatorship
    somewhat tempered by the power of the apparati (which under Stalin
    was a joke); it just so happened they practiced the art of the
    commune in collective farming --except they stole the bulk of the
    communes' production.  Any concept of the commune ownership was
    fantasy. 

        but the bottom line with Brezhnev was the "drunk with power" of
    each of the petty fiefdoms.  Old Joe and Beria is a perfect example,
    except Joe took care of his problem promptly to prove the rule that
    'thou shall not covet thy boss...'<g>. 

        compare today in Russia: Lebed is a prime example. Even under
    Brezhnev he would have walked the one way tunnel. Fact is, it
    appears Lebed has been closer to the mark than the rest of the
    pompous fools; but that certainly has not helped if one considers
    Lebed would need to assume absolute power in order to clear the
    errant course of the Russian ship of state --absolute power corrupts
    absolutely. 

        the US has two or three power factors depending on your point of
    view. The visible US government with a totally corrupt and
    depiscable asshole at the helm --a sublimely and malignantly corrupt
    man installed as a puppet gone drunk on his cocaine power pack;  he
    thinks he has shaken his masters and his battle is to control the
    CIA and the rest of the hidden spook show.  Even his loyal puppy,
    John Deutsch, was unable to control the CIA, let alone the rest of
    the apparati.  The lame duck cabinet is more impotent than the last,
    who almost to a man jumped as rats from a sinking ship.  His thrust
    for power is masked in rhetoric of "for the good of the country" or
    "to protect the country from the evils of private speech which might
    be criminal or subversive" that we may all be free.  Is it
    coincidence free speech is the cornerstone of democracy? 

        So who does control the real apparati?  check behind the silent
    curtains of the dark drawing rooms; check behind the facade of US
    Department of State postings since WWII, and compare names with
    events and the social register and the rolls of Harvard, Yale, and
    Princeton; check the bunkers at Fort Meade and other places; check
    the shadows and the denials; particularly check the denials. 

        don't wast your time with the myriad of 'culprits' starting with
    the Bilderbergers, the CFR, the TLA, the Bavarian Illuminati, etc. 
    they are just drinking clubs of the power hungry united only by a
    common greed.  greed and absolute power as America careens into
    history and disenfranchisement. 

        is there then still a third force?  speculation?  fact! 
    avengers?  too little, too late?  hunted to the status of endangered
    species or even to extinction?  sacrificial lambs or goats for the
    alter of the temples of the doomed?  or saviours?

::>     books are an intellectual 'solution' to the problem. the real    
::>problem is the hardware. in order to negate governments and their    
::>virtually stated intentions of blocking our inalienable freedoms,    
::>particularly freedom of speach, we must be able to distribute     
::>universal crypto worldwide, and be able to improve it as the shadow      
::>governments of the various spook shows improve their ability to
::>break our code.

::Yes, but the impotent "cypher punks" can't write or distribute code. 
::They can only flame and rant and pull plugs.

        Ah, dimitri, my quasi-friend, my quasi-enemy, that is the
    question, is it not?  Can cypherpunks write code?  Some like to
    argue, and still can and do write code.  Others only pontificate; 
    and others lurk for the false rush of the ephemeral or fantastical
    power.
 
        dimitri, you've never been a lurker in your life; then why do
    you participate in cypherpunks if they are, to a [wo]man, nothing
    but wankers? (I guess that works for the gentle sex, too. no? <g>). 

        Ah, dimitri, you're secret is out. you are here to harangue!
 
::>     if you do not have the balls to do it, you are not for freedom.

::If you are a "cypher punk", you are not for freedom.

        No, no, no, dimitri.  Cypherpunks are absolute in their demands
    for freedom.  Most are making the choice to demand freedom while
    they play in the band and the Titanic sinks.  Shall their last song
    be "God Bless America" or "Nearer my Lord to Thee" --it's all the
    same is it not?  They, and the rest of the complacent Americans,
    will go down with the ship (as will the fighters without support). 

        Talk is cheap, dimitri.  Let's see a little action. 

  ==
   Lord grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change.
     The courage to change the things I can.
       And the wisdom to hide the bodies of the people 
         I had to kill because they pissed me off.
            --attila

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: latin1
Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later.

iQCVAwUBMsi5Kb04kQrCC2kFAQHTTgQAuoUu6efW5029X6N3LdvoBwQf3VAXQnLr
hW8cR0HxFBJTCx59RjwxgkPxYFFEth83MR1dGL4jNOYTcjMAZt4IEKMPMa5mcjD4
nvw3oKYmBIbqmhC15Wem9kRd2XIutt3wQdYdTyhLRnj4Qrcl4wk0ioThvy14lMSa
T0hYUePgUWM=
=jiJa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Attila T. Hun wrote:
> 
>     Russia never had a communist government, it was a dictatorship
>     somewhat tempered by the power of the apparati (which under Stalin
>     was a joke); it just so happened they practiced the art of the
>     commune in collective farming --except they stole the bulk of the
>     communes' production.  Any concept of the commune ownership was
>     fantasy.

  In Canada, farmers purportedly own their own land, but are required by
law to sell their grain only through the (collective) Canadian Wheat
Board.
  Right now, farmers are fighting this policy, and being jailed for 
attempting to sell their grain themselves, on the open market. 
  
  Why is it that governments always seem to be so self-congratulatory
about allowing the citizens to be 'free' to do those things that the
government 'allows' them to do?
  It is so comforting to know that I am 'free' to decide what color of
sand they put in the Vaseline. (I prefer black, myself)

Toto

Attila T. Hun wrote:

> ::If you are a "cypher punk", you are not for freedom.
> 
>         No, no, no, dimitri.  Cypherpunks are absolute in their demands
>     for freedom.  Most are making the choice to demand freedom while
>     they play in the band and the Titanic sinks.

   One also needs to keep in mind that, contrary to the great gun-packing
debate going on in the conference, not everyone is so quick to vocalize
whether or not they are 'packing'.
   It's similar to asking your opponent in a poker-game what he's 'holding'
when it's showdown time. Would you really trust his or her answer, no 
matter what it was?
  To me, the only real answer, in either situation, is a 'shrug'.
You've got to pay to play.

  I don't know if fuck@yourself.up had any problems as a result of his
escapade, but if he did, I would suspect there is a good chance that
they were caused by one of the more soft-spoken people on the forum.
  I've bounced a lot of wild-frontier bars in my time, and it has
been my experience that it is a truism that,
  "The quiet ones are the guys you don't want to mess with."

Toto

Toto <toto@sk.sympatico.ca> writes:

>   I don't know if fuck@yourself.up had any problems as a result of his
> escapade, but if he did, I would suspect there is a good chance that
> they were caused by one of the more soft-spoken people on the forum.

I doubt it. "Cypher punks" are 100% impotent.

Did you hear the one about the woman who complained that her husband
was 300% impotent?  He used to be 100% impotent, then he broke his
finger and bit his tongue.

>   I've bounced a lot of wild-frontier bars in my time, and it has
> been my experience that it is a truism that,
>   "The quiet ones are the guys you don't want to mess with."

Homos played an important role in Hitler's rise to power. Here too,
the head cocksucker John Gilmore is pretty quiet - he just pulls the
plugs while his brown shirts (Ray Arachelian &co) do all the yelling
and screaming and lying. No wonder Armenians were Hitler's most
eager supporters.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

"Attila T. Hun" <attila@primenet.com> writes:
> ::Yes, but the impotent "cypher punks" can't write or distribute code.
> ::They can only flame and rant and pull plugs.
>
>         Ah, dimitri, my quasi-friend, my quasi-enemy, that is the

Here you mindlessly repeat Ray Arachelian's lies. Have you no mind of your own?
Why am I your "enemy"? Why do you think you're important enough for me to give
a fuck?

>     question, is it not?  Can cypherpunks write code?  Some like to
>     argue, and still can and do write code.  Others only pontificate;
>     and others lurk for the false rush of the ephemeral or fantastical
>     power.

"Cypher punks" write stupid racist flames and postmaster complaints, not code.

>         dimitri, you've never been a lurker in your life; then why do
>     you participate in cypherpunks if they are, to a [wo]man, nothing
>     but wankers? (I guess that works for the gentle sex, too. no? <g>).
>
>         Ah, dimitri, you're secret is out. you are here to harangue!

I am not "here" - I've been unsubscribed by the head censor, cocksucker
John Gilmore at the request of Ray Arachelian and Timmy May. They're
"here" to harrass and to flame and they don't want followups from the
victims of their harrassment.

> ::>     if you do not have the balls to do it, you are not for freedom.
>
> ::If you are a "cypher punk", you are not for freedom.
>
>         No, no, no, dimitri.  Cypherpunks are absolute in their demands
>     for freedom.  Most are making the choice to demand freedom while

Freedom for whom, or from whom? I have no great despect for Abraham
"I freed who?" Lincoln, but I like the quote from him: "Those who deny
freedom to others deserve it not for themselves."

>     they play in the band and the Titanic sinks.  Shall their last song
>     be "God Bless America" or "Nearer my Lord to Thee" --it's all the

Some folks on this mailing list remind me of hardcore communists that
believe that orthodix marxism works, and everyone who tried and failed
to implement it, was perverting marx's ideas. U.S.constitution was an
instrument of class warfare.

>     same is it not?  They, and the rest of the complacent Americans,
>     will go down with the ship (as will the fighters without support).
>
>         Talk is cheap, dimitri.  Let's see a little action.

Yes, let's see some more "dissidents" unsubscribed! Let's see some more
mailbombs and postmaster complaints! Let's see punitive action in response
to speech! That's all "cypher punks" are good for.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

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

In <9m4qZD23w165w@bwalk.dm.com>, on 12/30/96 
   at 08:07 AM, dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) said:

::"Attila T. Hun" <attila@primenet.com> writes:

::>     books are and have been protected prior to the US Constitution.

::"Protected" in what sense? Copyright in a fairly recent invention.

        free speech, which is what we are talking about. supposedly 
    absolute freedom of speech in America was in the Articles of 
    Confederation and was a major point of the Declaration of 
    Independence.  free speach was an "intention" of the Magna Carta.

::>     the US Government has not been a legal government for years; it     
::>is a private club which can be bought, and its services sold to the     
::>highest bidder. It is a collection of whores who are part of a cabal
::>of the very rich and powerful; it is totally unaccountable to the
::>public it represents.  Waco, Ruby Ridge, and the bombing of their own
::>federal building in Oklahoma City in order to scare Joe Couch Potato
::>into giving up personal freedoms for security are perfect examples of
::>a government drunk on it owns powers. Just like Oswald, they have a
::>perfect patsy with the defendants in OKC.

::Like I said the other day, the similarities with the USSR under the 
::last few years of Brezhnev's life are striking.

        just a little bit too close, is it not?  The Kremlin then, and
    the Kremlin of Yeltsin also suffer the same malady: the personal
    expression of power. Gorbi will be remembered in history as not a
    great statesmen as he was initially hailed in the West, but as the
    'great concessionaire,' giving Russia's "imperial" power away. 
    Russia never had a communist government, it was a dictatorship
    somewhat tempered by the power of the apparati (which under Stalin
    was a joke); it just so happened they practiced the art of the
    commune in collective farming --except they stole the bulk of the
    communes' production.  Any concept of the commune ownership was
    fantasy. 

        but the bottom line with Brezhnev was the "drunk with power" of
    each of the petty fiefdoms.  Old Joe and Beria is a perfect example,
    except Joe took care of his problem promptly to prove the rule that
    'thou shall not covet thy boss...'<g>. 

        compare today in Russia: Lebed is a prime example. Even under
    Brezhnev he would have walked the one way tunnel. Fact is, it
    appears Lebed has been closer to the mark than the rest of the
    pompous fools; but that certainly has not helped if one considers
    Lebed would need to assume absolute power in order to clear the
    errant course of the Russian ship of state --absolute power corrupts
    absolutely. 

        the US has two or three power factors depending on your point of
    view. The visible US government with a totally corrupt and
    depiscable asshole at the helm --a sublimely and malignantly corrupt
    man installed as a puppet gone drunk on his cocaine power pack;  he
    thinks he has shaken his masters and his battle is to control the
    CIA and the rest of the hidden spook show.  Even his loyal puppy,
    John Deutsch, was unable to control the CIA, let alone the rest of
    the apparati.  The lame duck cabinet is more impotent than the last,
    who almost to a man jumped as rats from a sinking ship.  His thrust
    for power is masked in rhetoric of "for the good of the country" or
    "to protect the country from the evils of private speech which might
    be criminal or subversive" that we may all be free.  Is it
    coincidence free speech is the cornerstone of democracy? 

        So who does control the real apparati?  check behind the silent
    curtains of the dark drawing rooms; check behind the facade of US
    Department of State postings since WWII, and compare names with
    events and the social register and the rolls of Harvard, Yale, and
    Princeton; check the bunkers at Fort Meade and other places; check
    the shadows and the denials; particularly check the denials. 

        don't wast your time with the myriad of 'culprits' starting with
    the Bilderbergers, the CFR, the TLA, the Bavarian Illuminati, etc. 
    they are just drinking clubs of the power hungry united only by a
    common greed.  greed and absolute power as America careens into
    history and disenfranchisement. 

        is there then still a third force?  speculation?  fact! 
    avengers?  too little, too late?  hunted to the status of endangered
    species or even to extinction?  sacrificial lambs or goats for the
    alter of the temples of the doomed?  or saviours?

::>     books are an intellectual 'solution' to the problem. the real    
::>problem is the hardware. in order to negate governments and their    
::>virtually stated intentions of blocking our inalienable freedoms,    
::>particularly freedom of speach, we must be able to distribute     
::>universal crypto worldwide, and be able to improve it as the shadow      
::>governments of the various spook shows improve their ability to
::>break our code.

::Yes, but the impotent "cypher punks" can't write or distribute code. 
::They can only flame and rant and pull plugs.

        Ah, dimitri, my quasi-friend, my quasi-enemy, that is the
    question, is it not?  Can cypherpunks write code?  Some like to
    argue, and still can and do write code.  Others only pontificate; 
    and others lurk for the false rush of the ephemeral or fantastical
    power.
 
        dimitri, you've never been a lurker in your life; then why do
    you participate in cypherpunks if they are, to a [wo]man, nothing
    but wankers? (I guess that works for the gentle sex, too. no? <g>). 

        Ah, dimitri, you're secret is out. you are here to harangue!
 
::>     if you do not have the balls to do it, you are not for freedom.

::If you are a "cypher punk", you are not for freedom.

        No, no, no, dimitri.  Cypherpunks are absolute in their demands
    for freedom.  Most are making the choice to demand freedom while
    they play in the band and the Titanic sinks.  Shall their last song
    be "God Bless America" or "Nearer my Lord to Thee" --it's all the
    same is it not?  They, and the rest of the complacent Americans,
    will go down with the ship (as will the fighters without support). 

        Talk is cheap, dimitri.  Let's see a little action. 


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: latin1
Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later.

iQCVAwUBMubRA704kQrCC2kFAQEfKAQAxf1bR0+nyqDzvLLBms7+h6dqNaitk2KB
8xGPwVeW6KqOy667AnNnbjpxh+sYQBaWIeIPASr4jx2Z3y3J2uMkmOpysSN5k8CM
QK1D5JbIj1x0EteFHciLijlBHbqX7Hc+mg378LElsvC9StU8ZC0+aOLyt5qHnM+k
Achoxz4J7xE=
=GmbG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Attila T. Hun wrote:
 
>         free speech, which is what we are talking about. supposedly
>     absolute freedom of speech in America was in the Articles of
>     Confederation and was a major point of the Declaration of
>     Independence.  free speach was an "intention" of the Magna Carta.

> ::>     books are an intellectual 'solution' to the problem. the real
> ::>problem is the hardware. in order to negate governments and their
> ::>virtually stated intentions of blocking our inalienable freedoms,
> ::>particularly freedom of speach, we must be able to distribute
> ::>universal crypto worldwide, and be able to improve it as the shadow
> ::>governments of the various spook shows improve their ability to
> ::>break our code.

Dear Mr. Hun,
  I see that your post was expunged from the cypherpunks-politically-
correct-outgoing list.
  I am assuming that it was as a result of linking crypto to free
speech.
Perhaps you need to fall more into line with the New List Order.

Toto

Attila T. Hun wrote:
>         books are and have been protected prior to the US Constitution.
>     one can presume books with crypto source code would be protected
>     accordingly; one Federal judge (Patel in SF) has ruled source code
>     is protected under freedom of speech and therefore can be published;
>     yet another judge in the Washington area has ruled it is not.  There
>     is no question the feds will appeal Patel's ruling in the Ninth
>     Circuit (known to be pro rights in general, but difficult to
>     predict).  eventually it will go to the US Supreme Court.

[snip]

In the late 1970's (I think), Victor Marchetti (formerly of CIA) wrote
The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence (title approx.), and the CIA was
allowed by the courts to censor portions of the book.

As I remember, those portions were released later in a new edition,
primarily because the blacked-out parts were not in fact big-time
secrets, but simply embarrassments for the agency.

Is this a representative case?

Dale Thorn sez:
> 
> In the late 1970's (I think), Victor Marchetti (formerly of CIA) wrote
> The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence (title approx.), and the CIA was
> allowed by the courts to censor portions of the book.
> 
> As I remember, those portions were released later in a new edition,
> primarily because the blacked-out parts were not in fact big-time
> secrets, but simply embarrassments for the agency.
> 
> Is this a representative case?

I doubt it. When first granted access to classified, you must sign a
civil contract not to publish anything without clearing same. That
restricts your actions. 

But if you are writing a book, and the New York Times learns details
by other than you telling them [To use a favorite of this group; one
I scoff at as it's made to "look easy" -- let's say the NYT used
Tempest techniques..], then can the USG go after the NYT and engage
prior restraint? No, in my understanding.

I hedge cuz this came about as a result of Phillip Agee [sp] but I
do not recall exactly when.



-- 
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433