Re: IRS sending warning notes, violating ECPA?

Paul Bradley wrote:
> 
> > It certainly appears that the IRS has sent "warnings" out to all of us
> > active in the debate. 
> The way I see it there are two possible ways the motherfuckers got the
> addresses, either they found the lists Jim subscribed to and did "who
> cypherpunks" etc. to the servers, to get the list of participants, or
> they used any adresses off the mail jim has recieved in the past, I got a
> copy of it and I have privately emailed Jim several times so I can`t
> really say which is more likely.
> 
> If it is the second I am hereby giving Jim a public dresssing down for
> not encrypting the filesystem ;-)....

Paul,
  I spoke to the judge in the case and he has agreed that your
"dressing down" of Jim is a far more severe sentence than anything
he could impose, so he is turning Jim loose this afternoon.

  Seriously...
  Your comments reminded me why I read the PRZ's PGP manual/intro
every now and again to refresh my memory/paranoia about security
issues.
  Perhaps the hardest part of maintaining secure communications and
personal privacy is remembering that, no matter how tight you run your
own ship, you are, to a certain extent, "married" to the people with
whom you communicate. And, to use an AIDS analogy, you are also
"married" to everyone they have slept with.
  Perhaps you would trust "mom" with your life. However, what if the
ever-present "they" threatened to kill all of her other children 
unless she ratted you out? The answer to this question doesn't matter
if you have used cryptography and/or anonymity in a manner that doesn't
leave you vulnerable to anyone else.

  Even if mom would never 'rat you out' under any circumstances, does
she have the knowledge and discipline needed to keep "them" from being
able to access your communications with her?
  The bottom line is that one should "err" on the side of safety. Being
_too_ paranoid is less costly than not being paranoid enough.
  Tim May's rants are not done in ignorance. He understands the legal
differences between saying "The criminals in D.C. _should_ be nuked.",
and saying, "I _am_going_to_ nuke the criminals in D.C., someday."
(Friday, at 4 o'clock.)
  I am certain that Tim is well aware that, even if he is right about
his statements being Constitutionally protected free speech, there is 
always the chance that he could suffer grief or imprisonment for them(
quite simply because "the criminals" are getting more profecient at
subverting and destroying the rights protected by the Constitution).
  I am just as certain that Tim has made a conscious decision as to
what level of risk he is willing to take to speak his mind and perhaps
make a difference in the events of his time, without merely being
egoistical, stupid, and suicidal.

  Kent Crispin, when he's not being just plain ignorant, sometimes
manages to raise valid issues that serve as a counter-point to Tim's
views, but the bottom line is that, in the presence of two other
world-leaders who are privy to the mountains of information that is
kept hidden from the public by their governments, Jean Chretien,
the Prime Minister of Canada, openly stated that the politicians
in the U.S. would be imprisoned as criminals in most countries.
  It's true. Currently, Saskatchewan politicians are being
prosecuted for what would be considered "nickle and dime" matters
in the U.S. (e.g. <$1,000 wrongful use of expense accounts). In the
U.S., the S&L scandal involved _billions_ of dollars in fraud and
thievery and only a few of the really stupid bit-players got thrown
to the wolves.

  In short, when you communicate with anyone, it is your own
responsibility to limit the level of your future vulnerability.
If you think that it's OK to post a message to the list saying,
"I'm going to nuke D.C. on Friday, at 4 p.m. Shhh! Don't tell
anybody.", then go for it. (But keep in mind that some people
just can't keep a secret.)

TruthMonger

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

At 01:09 AM 7/23/97 -0700, Kent Crispin wrote:
>Actually, nothing whatsoever separates Tim from sheeple.  
>
>As anon clearly points out, Tim toes the line with his speech,
>carefully avoiding saying anything that escapes constitutional
>protection.  In fact he frequently sprinkles his posts with comments
>pointing out that some outrageous thing he just said is
>constitutionally protected. 

Some of the people killed, busted, sued, or harassed by the government for 
constitutionally protected speech in the last 50 years:
(in no particular order)

Wilhelm Reich (Died in Federal Prison)
Jake Baker
Christopher Lowe (Financial Newsletters) (LOWE v. SEC, 472 U.S. 181 (1985))
Paul Robert Cohen ("Fuck the Draft" button) (COHEN v. CALIFORNIA, 403 U.S. 15 
(1971))
Al Holmquist (Ordered silenced by Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission) 
(MADISON SCH. DIST. v. WISCONSIN EMP. REL. COMM'N, 429 U.S. 167 (1976))
Junius Irving Scales (Smith Act Commie)(SCALES v. UNITED STATES, 367 U.S. 203 
(1961)) 

There are thousands more.  Making constitutionally protected statements can 
get you loads of trouble.

Additionally, we don't actually know whether or not Tim has committed any 
criminal acts.  We just know he's not dumb enough to mention any such to 
others.

DCF



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM9aT04VO4r4sgSPhAQG+sgQAlb7r5G9vPLpmXYvFawmr2nvlmu4aHupc
uVI0miTciyVhbSqOsMg7b/fYP7LBXldAyOh1/79/556iyyMTAtUB0x+4ieG2X88z
UmNRogh8bOVJucu4vy8bukqyn6LsByjdndPxjgSvfeprlYe0IuS3VZ3mfjpi92jc
Td6jATVF+kU=
=Khq1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

At 10:46 PM -0700 7/22/97, Anonymous wrote:

>  Perhaps the hardest part of maintaining secure communications and
>personal privacy is remembering that, no matter how tight you run your
>own ship, you are, to a certain extent, "married" to the people with
>whom you communicate. And, to use an AIDS analogy, you are also
>"married" to everyone they have slept with.

I really can't agree with this viewpoint. Insofar as _crypto_ goes, the
beauty of public key systems is that one shares _nothing_ with others. They
don't have your secret keys, and you don't have theirs.

It is true that their communications with you, or yours with them, may be
used against you. Maybe by them, maybe if their computers are stolen or
seized. But this is unavoidable with any communication system. Contact
tracking is often possible.

And crypto even allows for fully pseudonymous communication. Thus, if the
IRS and FBI seized Bell's computer and found communications through
remailers with "Pr0duct Cypher," his or her True Name, meatspace personna
would be safe.

>  The bottom line is that one should "err" on the side of safety. Being
>_too_ paranoid is less costly than not being paranoid enough.
>  Tim May's rants are not done in ignorance. He understands the legal
>differences between saying "The criminals in D.C. _should_ be nuked.",
>and saying, "I _am_going_to_ nuke the criminals in D.C., someday."
>(Friday, at 4 o'clock.)
>  I am certain that Tim is well aware that, even if he is right about
>his statements being Constitutionally protected free speech, there is
>always the chance that he could suffer grief or imprisonment for them(
>quite simply because "the criminals" are getting more profecient at
>subverting and destroying the rights protected by the Constitution).
>  I am just as certain that Tim has made a conscious decision as to
>what level of risk he is willing to take to speak his mind and perhaps
>make a difference in the events of his time, without merely being
>egoistical, stupid, and suicidal.

If I wanted to be "safe" and "secure," I'd just stay silent like a good
little sheeple. I'd get off this list, I'd cluck appropriately at those
darned cypher-terrorists, and I'd volunteer some time at the local
Demopublican Party machine.

All of us on this list, except the plants and shills, are risking a certain
amount. (Several corporate types have sent me e-mail saying that now that
they are in positions of respectability within their corporations, they can
no longer say what's on their mind, for fear of repercussions of various
sorts, however mild.)

Speaking out is what separates us from sheeple.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

On Tue, Jul 22, 1997 at 11:54:39PM -0700, Tim May wrote:
> At 10:46 PM -0700 7/22/97, Anonymous wrote:
[...]
> >  Tim May's rants are not done in ignorance. He understands the legal
> >differences between saying "The criminals in D.C. _should_ be nuked.",
> >and saying, "I _am_going_to_ nuke the criminals in D.C., someday."
> >(Friday, at 4 o'clock.)
[...]
> >  I am just as certain that Tim has made a conscious decision as to
> >what level of risk he is willing to take to speak his mind and perhaps
> >make a difference in the events of his time, without merely being
> >egoistical, stupid, and suicidal.
> 
> If I wanted to be "safe" and "secure," I'd just stay silent like a good
> little sheeple. I'd get off this list, I'd cluck appropriately at those
> darned cypher-terrorists, and I'd volunteer some time at the local
> Demopublican Party machine.
> 
> All of us on this list, except the plants and shills, are risking a certain
> amount. (Several corporate types have sent me e-mail saying that now that
> they are in positions of respectability within their corporations, they can
> no longer say what's on their mind, for fear of repercussions of various
> sorts, however mild.)
> 
> Speaking out is what separates us from sheeple.

Actually, nothing whatsoever separates Tim from sheeple.  

As anon clearly points out, Tim toes the line with his speech,
carefully avoiding saying anything that escapes constitutional
protection.  In fact he frequently sprinkles his posts with comments
pointing out that some outrageous thing he just said is
constitutionally protected. 

And Tim doesn't have to worry about an employer, unlike the "corporate
types" he mentions, but he (as he noted in a recent post) pays his
taxes like everyone else.  He said, as I recall, that he of course
didn't like paying, but essentially that it was too much trouble to
avoid it.  Tim sees the Man, and Tim knows who's boss.

Yes, Tim talks a brave talk.  But, though the parameters of his 
slavery are different than most of ours, he is part of the flock, 
nonetheless. 

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent@songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html

At 07:29 PM 7/23/97 -0400, frissell@panix.com wrote:
>Additionally, we don't actually know whether or not Tim has committed any 
>criminal acts.  We just know he's not dumb enough to mention any such to 
>others.

Sure we do.  I've seen Tim use Bad Language on this list
between the time the CDA was passed and the time it was
booted out.  He's a felon, and he admits it.
He's also committed less specific crimes such as
claiming to own scary weapons, and calling for 
"Death to Tyrants", which is clearly a threat to 
most of Washington and some chunk of Sacramento.
He nearly had his Ontologist's License yanked a year or so ago...

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts@ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)

>On Wed, Jul 23, 1997 at 08:47:18AM -0400, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>In <19970723010939.51681@bywater.songbird.com>, on 07/23/97 
>   at 01:09 AM, Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com> said:
>
>>Yes, Tim talks a brave talk.  But, though the parameters of his  slavery
>>are different than most of ours, he is part of the flock,  nonetheless. 
>
>Well Kent I think that there are distinct differences between someone like
>Tim who dislikes his slavery and is actively working to remove his bonds
>and others like yourself who not only like the "security" of being
>inslaved but wish more chains to be put on us all.
>
>Tim may be part of the "flock" but only because their is a gun to his head
>while youself would be a sheeple even if the slavemasters were gone.

It's a sad commentary on human nature that so many people need an
enemy they can despise, isn't it?

You and Tim and the rest of the narrow minded bigots that fancies
themselves as the "cryptoanarchy elite" -- you go on and on: "Yes, those
goddamn SHEEPLE, those braindead subhuman parasites of true humanity,
that suck the blood of right-thinking productive individuals.  Yes,
the SHEEPLE, that mass of unthinking blind vermin that might as well
be removed from the face of the earth.  They aren't HUMAN.  We're sure
glad we're not like them! Where's that nuclear disinfectant when you
need it?".  All the time congratulating yourselves on your
independence of mind, how you've managed to free yourselves from the
"rat race choir"... 

Welcome to the cryptoanarchy choir!

I was pointing out that fundamentally, Tim's example of the "corporate
types" is vacuous and hypocritical -- he modulates his self-expression
just as much as they do -- but hell, we *all* modulate our
self-expression to preserve our livelihood, at some level or another
-- even Tim McVeigh lets his lawyer do his talking... 

As far as Tim (or you) knows every single one of those "corporate
types" dislikes their slavery just as much as he does, and is working
just as hard as he is to remove their bonds.  Everybody works within
their constraints. 

Tim says in another message that apparently I am dissing him as a
hypocrite because he isn't out blowing up buildings.  No.  He's a
hypocrite because he roars criticism at the sheeple without applying
those same standards to himself.  It's more than the lazy habit of
scapegoating -- it's an active and contemptible use of we-vs-them
demagoguery.

I honor and respect integrity, William.  Even more, I honor and
respect those who keep their strongest criticisms for themselves.  To
paraphrase Nietzsche, in this regard the self-defined "cryptoanarchy
elite" are "not even shallow". 


-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent@songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html

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

In <19970723010939.51681@bywater.songbird.com>, on 07/23/97 
   at 01:09 AM, Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com> said:

>Yes, Tim talks a brave talk.  But, though the parameters of his  slavery
>are different than most of ours, he is part of the flock,  nonetheless. 

Well Kent I think that there are distinct differences between someone like
Tim who dislikes his slavery and is actively working to remove his bonds
and others like yourself who not only like the "security" of being
inslaved but wish more chains to be put on us all.

Tim may be part of the "flock" but only because their is a gun to his head
while youself would be a sheeple even if the slavemasters were gone.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM9X+Ko9Co1n+aLhhAQGz1QP+KqQHY2VbgfgwdpPs6OPmmtYCMEjfzZeS
Rx5VEvOgihZQF7kJA5O4tGgSi/VNbtiqoGLk/dQes1/b5Sxmyysa2UbGehg5tGjD
R0u5eYttRK7ZGAEx4GOoYKYRTchank+9w2QKH2AKy0Pkq9LwQ5R2Dlx/mnClWCyT
QD6Rm4O5AFI=
=T+vn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Wed, 23 Jul 1997, Kent Crispin wrote:

> Actually, nothing whatsoever separates Tim from sheeple.  
> 
> As anon clearly points out, Tim toes the line with his speech,
> carefully avoiding saying anything that escapes constitutional
> protection.  In fact he frequently sprinkles his posts with comments
> pointing out that some outrageous thing he just said is
> constitutionally protected. 
> 
> And Tim doesn't have to worry about an employer, unlike the "corporate
> types" he mentions, but he (as he noted in a recent post) pays his
> taxes like everyone else.  He said, as I recall, that he of course
> didn't like paying, but essentially that it was too much trouble to
> avoid it.  Tim sees the Man, and Tim knows who's boss.
> 
> Yes, Tim talks a brave talk.  But, though the parameters of his 
> slavery are different than most of ours, he is part of the flock, 
> nonetheless. 

I don't see you doing anything "braver" by your definition.  Let's see you
do something to fight the system.  I do however hear you spread the Big
Brother party line, I do see you lick the shit off your lips and say
"Hmmmm, Hmmmm, NSA's butthole tastes real mighty good, yessir, I reckon."

What Tim does is Tim's business, I neither defend or refute. However, I do
see you running at the mouth with these grand "Tim's Chicken" lines while
you're not even doing shit.  All we have ever heard from you is pro-GAK
party line.

What's your agenda, trying to get us to actually break the law and wind up
in the slammer?  Wouldn't that be your dream come true, get all the
cypherpunks in jail, problem solved. I wonder how much the NSA is willing
to pay you if you accomplish that task for them.  Care to share the
numbers with us?   Asswipe! Get back under your government paid rock. 

=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos==============
.+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "If you wanna touch the sky, you must  |./|\.
..\|/..|sunder@sundernet.com| be prepared to die.  And I hate cough  |/\|/\
<--*-->| ------------------ | syrup, don't you?"                     |\/|\/
../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================