Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
The Lovely and Talented Jodi Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You are wrong to protect them without knowing what they're about, Jay. Their motto is, "Sex before eight, or it's too late." I'll never understand the ability of Child Sex Hysterics to look at one thing and see another. "Sex Before Eight" was a slogan of the Rene Guyon Society, named after a deceased French world traveler who thought that American puritanism and prudery could be cured with a healthy dose of the kind of sexual openness found amongst primitive tribes. It has nothing at all to do with NAMBLA. Never has. They are referring to grown men having sex with an under-eight year old little boy. NAMBLA was formed to protest a witch hunt against gay teens. Like most gay organizations of its era, it calls for the repeal of all laws which criminalize sexual activity using age alone as the sole criteria for determining whether someone has been taken advantage of. Other organizations with similar platforms have been pressured by people like Jesse Helms to sell out, without which the current mainstreaming of gay sodomy rights for adults would not have been permitted. This has resulted in the current zoo of "adults only" alleged gay rights organizations, who run screaming in the opposite direction when anyone under 18 makes an appearance. Indeed, it is pretty nearly impossible today to do anything in the area of gay rights without having to pass some Fundie-authored litmus test on support of consent laws, and to be forced to pay lip service to the disempowerment of young people to make any sort of sexual decisions for themselves. Surely you don't mean to suggest that a website promoting intercourse with a little boy should be protected speech, do you? Well, since the alleged intercourse with little boys exists entirely in Jodi Hoffman's brain, and not on the NAMBLA website, I think we should take any and all measures to prevent people from coming in contact with the harmful material in Jodi Hoffman's brain, before more people are turned into idiots. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
- Original Message - From: "!Dr. Joe Baptista" [EMAIL PROTECTED] If I were to tell you that I had personal knowledge of the rape by canadian politicians and senior bureacrats of young boys from fort lauderdale during the 60, 70, 80's - and that these rapes and further investigation of those who abuse these children is being intentionally suppressed by senior police officers and law officers in Canada - how would you react to this? My Deity! This from Joe Baptista? It must be a forged message. Next we will hear that Joe takes lunch with Julian Fantino. Perhaps the Doctor has been granted an opportunity to pay off some debts by working for Project Guardian.
Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
Tim is guilty of statistics abuse, because it never happens to Tim he assumes it can never happen to anyone who is passing the local Nazi encampment. What Tim does not explain is why sending a truck full of thugs off to beat up someone carrying a loaded, recently fired weapon is a reasonable or even a sensible response. Generally speaking, a militant organization, be it the Marine Corps or the Aryan Nation does not put it's best and brightest on security details. They realize that yes, sometimes you *do* need to have that bunker charged, or that hill taken, and you need people who are bright enough to do that, and dumb enough not to think about it. In some cases putting yourself in front of the bullet, or charging the machine gun nest *is* the best thing to do for your cause. I'm not saying that only stupid people join these kinds of groups, but that of the people who join these groups, the stupid ones will wind up in the "bullet stopper" positions. In any case, if she was roughed up, without provocation, then those who roughed her up are solely to blame. Suing AN was merely an example of "deep pockets" and "joint and several liability" doctrines, motivated by PC sentiments. The Southern Law Poverty Center routinely uses this tactic to silence those it doesn't like. The problem with the KKK, AN and other groups of thugs isn't what they say, it is what they do - beat people up. As for being PC, can anyone explain how an organization could be less tollerant of opposing views than the AN? The AN doesn't have the majority of the mainstream media hanging on it's every word, like the Democrats (and to a lesser extent the Republicans) do. They don't pretend to be fair and honest, and then bleed you to death with a thousand little cuts (metaphorically speaking). They are pretty much nasty creatures, but in a way honest. If they don't like you, they make it very plain they don't like you. The AN is no more and no less intolerant than most other political parties. The scope of what they tolerate is smaller, but they are no more vicious and nasty to those outside their lines than most other groups. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural
Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
Jodi evaded: In that case, I'll make you an offer. You or anyone else on this list are welcome to read through our modest collection of over 2,000 books, three four-foot tall file cabinets (all full), various shelves, etc...just like we did. If we are playing that game, I have 5000+ volumes here. All 5000 of them AND my gorilla say that you are full of it. If you have the evidence post it. Explaining how easy it would be for you to post it does nothing for your credibility. Give us a citation that we can look up. Phill
Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
At 09:50 AM 9/18/00 -0400, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: Jodi evaded: In that case, I'll make you an offer. You or anyone else on this list are welcome to read through our modest collection of over 2,000 books, three four-foot tall file cabinets (all full), various shelves, etc...just like we did. If we are playing that game, I have 5000+ volumes here. All 5000 of them AND my gorilla say that you are full of it. That's "Orangutang".
Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
Jay: I've given information which is readily available to anyone who takes the time to investigate it. I've done my homowork (oops...). Now, you do yours and stop being so lazy. After all, I have been led to believe this loop is replete with journalists. I get paid to investigate truths. Don't you? The truth shall set even you free. Jay Holovacs wrote: Ok, you can reword are reiterate your claims. How about backing them up with documentation? (if it's been 'reinforced' every year, it surely is not secret and you must have some links to back up your claims) BTW of your new ones: 1) Would you NOT have them available to all persons regardless of age? Do we really need more teenage pregnancies? (BTW in that year many states restricted access to birth control, my brother's then 17 year old wife could not purchase it it Cal.) 2) why should people be prohibited from participation in child care because they are gay, bisexual or lesbian? Perhaps heterosexuals should be prohibited from child care for the same reasons. 3) Document (not rephrase) this, Jodi 4) Well this country is kind of short on enemies right now since the disappearance of the evil empire... maybe it's time to attack a real enemy. This is, of course similar to the last times, wild claims (probably from some fundie tract) and lots of bluster and no content when challenged to support the claims. Jay Aside to Lizard: I'll be gone for a few days but watching my mail when I get back, try to follow up and make sure we get some documentation. thx At 11:46 AM 9/16/2000 -0400, Jodi Hoffman wrote: In 1972 (the year before the APA unilaterally decided homosexuality was "no longer an illness") the Gay Rights Platform was drawn up at the convention of the National Coalition of Gay Organizers. It was officially set forth at the Gay Pride March on Washington, D.C. on April 25, 1993 and has been reinforced every year since. By the way, a couple more of the demands: 1) Demand that contraceptives and abortion services be made available to all persons, regardless of age (what the hell does that matter to homosexuals???); 2) Full inclusion of lesbians, homosexual men, bisexuals and transgenders in education of children and child care; 3) Legalization of all forms of sexual expression, including pedophilia, changing age of consent laws to allow sex with children; 4) demand that Federal Defense budget funds be diverted to cover AIDS patients' medical expenses... The 1998 Federal Budget included $4.746 *BILLION* for AIDS funding. That was a $465 million increase over the 1997 Budget, which is more funding than all forms of cancer combined. Current Federal Money (your tax dollars and mine) spent per death: AIDS/HIV: $39,172.00 Diabetes: $ 5,449.00 Cancer: $ 3,776.00 Heart Disease: $ 1,056.00 Stroke: $ 765.00 What's wrong with this picture? You don't get cancer by engaging in promiscuous sex. Funding should not be based on sexual behaviors. Jay Holovacs wrote: -- "He who does not bellow the truth when he knows the truth makes himself the accomplice of liars and forgers." - Charles Peguy R.A.M.P.-Restore Americas Moral Pride Jodi Hoffman R.A.M.P. http://www.gocin.com/ramp Victimization of Children/Research Education Council of America 2805 E. OAKLAND PARK BLVD., SUITE 122 FORT LAUDERDALE, FLORIDA 33306 TELEPHONE (954) 567-0698 TeleFax (954) 630-2280
Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
Jay: I've given information which is readily available to anyone who takes the time to investigate it. But you have failled to provide information which should be readily available to you if you are telling the truth. You are the person who is making the claim, the onus is on you to provide the evidence to support it. The fact that the few details you have provided turned out to be untrue hardly lends credibility to your argument. Phill
Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
At 22:13 -0400 9/17/00, Me wrote: - Original Message - From: "Kevin Elliott" [EMAIL PROTECTED] than the rest of NATO combined. HEll, ignoring turkey we have more territory than the rest of NATO combined! Did the U.S. senate finally ratify the Canada Annexation Treaty? My apologies. Ignoring the great northern state, the above holds true. -- Kevin "The Cubbie" Elliott mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ#23758827 ___ "As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air--however slight--lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness." -- Justice William O. Douglas
Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
At 11:46 AM 9/16/00 -0400, Jodi Hoffman wrote: In 1972 (the year before the APA unilaterally decided homosexuality was "no longer an illness") the Gay Rights Platform was drawn up at the convention of the National Coalition of Gay Organizers. It was officially set forth at the Gay Pride March on Washington, D.C. on April 25, 1993 and has been reinforced every year since. By the way, a couple more of the demands: 1) Demand that contraceptives and abortion services be made available to all persons, regardless of age (what the hell does that matter to homosexuals???); i'm opposed to all government-funded health care;but, if we ARE stuck with it, it ought to be for all, and, of course, no PRIVATE company should be forced to discriminate on the basis of age. 2) Full inclusion of lesbians, homosexual men, bisexuals and transgenders in education of children and child care; Seems reasonable to me. Why not? A heterosexual is as likely to be a child molestor as anyone else. 3) Legalization of all forms of sexual expression, including pedophilia, changing age of consent laws to allow sex with children; They're already down to 14 in Bible belt states like Arkansas... 4) demand that Federal Defense budget funds be diverted to cover AIDS patients' medical expenses... The 1998 Federal Budget included $4.746 *BILLION* for AIDS funding. That was a $465 million increase over the 1997 Budget, which is more funding than all forms of cancer combined. Current Federal Money (your tax dollars and mine) spent per death: AIDS/HIV: $39,172.00 Diabetes: $ 5,449.00 Cancer: $ 3,776.00 Heart Disease: $ 1,056.00 Stroke: $ 765.00 What's wrong with this picture? You don't get cancer by engaging in promiscuous sex. Funding should not be based on sexual behaviors. Government shouldn't be funding medical care at all. However, deciding what to fund on the basis of some moral judgement is folly. Cancer, diabetes, and strokes *ARE NOT CONTAGIOUS*;AIDS is. That makes it far more of a 'public' health threat, and thus, by the logic of 'public health care', the most likely target. Besides -- you get strokes from eating hamburgers, cancer from smoking, and adult-onset diabetes from too much chocalte and not enough exercise. All of these are sins (Gluttony, laziness, etc) in the Christian morality as well -- shouldn't we be "punishing" those sinners as well as gay people?
Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
At 11:45 PM 9/16/00 -0400, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: The military is currently cannibalizing everything it can to keep as many units as it possibly can active. If less of the 'defense' budget ended up spent on barracks that serve no military purpose, planes that the Pentagon don't want and gold plated research projects, there would be no problem. Actually, as we drift typically off-topic, I thought the main problem was the curse of a booming economy -- no one needs to join the military just because they're hiring. We no longer have a literal army of the desperate to feed into the military machine.
Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
petro wrote: You are wrong to protect them without knowing what they're about, Jay. Their motto is, "Sex before eight, or it's too late." They are referring to grown men having sex with an under-eight year old little boy. Surely you don't mean to suggest that a website promoting intercourse with a little boy should be protected speech, do you? Prove it. Produce the documentation that makes that claim. Come on. I double dog dare you--and not some stupid joke, or have wit assertion (which is most of what comes out of your mouth). There is this thing called "The internet". It's a wonderful method for spreading (dis-) information. Scan them, compress them, and mail them to me. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural
Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
"Jodi Hoffman" [EMAIL PROTECTED] sez: You are wrong to protect them without knowing what they're about, Jay. Their motto is, "Sex before eight, or it's too late." They are referring to grown men having sex with an under-eight year old little boy. Surely you don't mean to suggest that a website promoting intercourse with a little boy should be protected speech, do you? This is EXACTLY why nobody should try and censor their free speech! There are too many people who would say nobody could be sick , crazy, or despicable enough to advocate grown men having anal sex with an 8 year old boy. Let NAMBLA have their Web site so people can see just how disgusting they are. The purpose of free speech is to make us aware of what people REALLY think and feel. That's always good. What if people had known that butchers like Mao Tse Dung, Joe Stalin, Pol Pot and their ilk, really DID think it was OK to butcher millions? Then maybe a few of those damn fool left leaning dilberts would have thought twice before lining up to follow these butchers. As for Hitler, well it isn't because he didn't have the guts to tell people EXACTLY what he had in mind for various groups of people. So what is the liberal's idea of how to deal with this? Yes, it's to censor Mein Kampf! Then people can't read for themselves Hitler's outspoken plans and beliefs. At least Hitler was destroyed; the three communists I just mentioned are still held in reverence by millions of leftwingers across the globe. They still try to cover up their brutal plans with silly crap about the beloved "masses". Of course we now live in the gutless wimpy age of the politically correct, so what can you expect. Nobody today dare say that cramming your penis up another man's feces filled ass might not be a good health plan during the AIDS epidemic, which they are horrified to admit started as a direct result of such filth covered "fun". Now people fear earning the pervert's wrath. Does anybody with half a brain not realize that is exactly why NAMBLA is taking an activist approach? As soon as Hollywood churns out some "stars" who advocate sex with boys, or babies, well far too many of the public will soon be demanding the right to assault the children. Why, it won't be long before they say it should be the right of the pervert to marry the child. The "gays" are living proof of how Hollywood, liberals, and perverts can convert what were once considered a horrible sickness to an idealized and respected life style. Today, if you kill somebody the liberals want to know why. If it's a fag killing a Nazi, he might get a pass. If it's a Nazi killing a fag, forget the trial and lynch them, whoops, make that sue them! As the great George Orwell once said in Animal Farm, his lampoon of leftist twaddle, "Everybody is equal, but some are more equal than others" [sic?]. I am sorry to say that if allowed to present their beliefs, it is possible that NAMBLA might win win the favor of today's brain dead public. Well, so be it. Nobody with half a brain ever said we shouldn't suffer the consequences of our own idiocy. America used to be about free speech. It was at one time considered one of the great principles that separated us from the other nations. In England, a country we wisely separated ourselves from, you are now forbidden to send an encrypted message to a friend without fearing imprisonment if you fail to provide the government with the "key" to the message. Screw King George. Real freedom of speech means you can scream "fire" in a crowded theater. People should look around for smoke and flames and, if present, then proceed in an orderly fashion for the exit. Instead, the new idea is to deny the fire and burn quietly. Sorry, it's time to go watch Will and Grace. Can't happen here? It already has. Repeat after me "Four legs good, two legs bad!" Tom Roach
Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
At $250.00 an hour. In advance. petro wrote: petro wrote: You are wrong to protect them without knowing what they're about, Jay. Their motto is, "Sex before eight, or it's too late." They are referring to grown men having sex with an under-eight year old little boy. Surely you don't mean to suggest that a website promoting intercourse with a little boy should be protected speech, do you? Prove it. Produce the documentation that makes that claim. Come on. I double dog dare you--and not some stupid joke, or have wit assertion (which is most of what comes out of your mouth). There is this thing called "The internet". It's a wonderful method for spreading (dis-) information. Scan them, compress them, and mail them to me. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural -- "He who does not bellow the truth when he knows the truth makes himself the accomplice of liars and forgers." - Charles Peguy R.A.M.P.-Restore Americas Moral Pride Jodi Hoffman R.A.M.P. http://www.gocin.com/ramp Victimization of Children/Research Education Council of America 2805 E. OAKLAND PARK BLVD., SUITE 122 FORT LAUDERDALE, FLORIDA 33306 TELEPHONE (954) 567-0698 TeleFax (954) 630-2280
Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
T. Bankson Roach wrote: "Jodi Hoffman" [EMAIL PROTECTED] sez: You are wrong to protect them without knowing what they're about, Jay. Their motto is, "Sex before eight, or it's too late." They are referring to grown men having sex with an under-eight year old little boy. Surely you don't mean to suggest that a website promoting intercourse with a little boy should be protected speech, do you? This is EXACTLY why nobody should try and censor their free speech! There are too many people who would say nobody could be sick , crazy, or despicable enough to advocate grown men having anal sex with an 8 year old boy. Let NAMBLA have their Web site so people can see just how disgusting they are. The purpose of free speech is to make us aware of what people REALLY think and feel. That's always good. What if people had known that butchers like Mao Tse Dung, Joe Stalin, Pol Pot and their ilk, really DID think it was OK to butcher millions? Then maybe a few of those damn fool left leaning dilberts would have thought twice before lining up to follow these butchers. As for Hitler, well it isn't because he didn't have the guts to tell people EXACTLY what he had in mind for various groups of people. So what is the liberal's idea of how to deal with this? Yes, it's to censor Mein Kampf! Then people can't read for themselves Hitler's outspoken plans and beliefs. At least Hitler was destroyed; the three communists I just mentioned are still held in reverence by millions of leftwingers across the globe. They still try to cover up their brutal plans with silly crap about the beloved "masses". Of course we now live in the gutless wimpy age of the politically correct, so what can you expect. Nobody today dare say that cramming your penis up another man's feces filled ass might not be a good health plan during the AIDS epidemic, which they are horrified to admit started as a direct result of such filth covered "fun". Now people fear earning the pervert's wrath. Does anybody with half a brain not realize that is exactly why NAMBLA is taking an activist approach? As soon as Hollywood churns out some "stars" who advocate sex with boys, or babies, well far too many of the public will soon be demanding the right to assault the children. Why, it won't be long before they say it should be the right of the pervert to marry the child. The "gays" are living proof of how Hollywood, liberals, and perverts can convert what were once considered a horrible sickness to an idealized and respected life style. Today, if you kill somebody the liberals want to know why. If it's a fag killing a Nazi, he might get a pass. If it's a Nazi killing a fag, forget the trial and lynch them, whoops, make that sue them! As the great George Orwell once said in Animal Farm, his lampoon of leftist twaddle, "Everybody is equal, but some are more equal than others" [sic?]. I am sorry to say that if allowed to present their beliefs, it is possible that NAMBLA might win win the favor of today's brain dead public. Well, so be it. Nobody with half a brain ever said we shouldn't suffer the consequences of our own idiocy. America used to be about free speech. It was at one time considered one of the great principles that separated us from the other nations. In England, a country we wisely separated ourselves from, you are now forbidden to send an encrypted message to a friend without fearing imprisonment if you fail to provide the government with the "key" to the message. Screw King George. Real freedom of speech means you can scream "fire" in a crowded theater. People should look around for smoke and flames and, if present, then proceed in an orderly fashion for the exit. Instead, the new idea is to deny the fire and burn quietly. Sorry, it's time to go watch Will and Grace. Can't happen here? It already has. Repeat after me "Four legs good, two legs bad!" Tom Roach It's already been demanded, Tom. During the Gay Pride March on Washington, the state and federal demands included: 1) Repeal of all age-of-consent laws (for sex with kids); 2) Repeal of ALL marriage laws (3 men, 4 kids, 1 baby...); 3) Repeal of all public sex laws (including with kids); 4) Repeal of all laws against prostitution(even children); 5) Repeal of all sodomy laws (even with kids); 6) Federal funding of all sex-change operations; 7) Federal funding of artificial insemination of lesbians; 8) total access to Boy Scouts by male homosexuals; 9) sex ed taught by homosexuals in all public schools; and more... -- "He who does not bellow the truth when he knows the truth makes himself the accomplice of liars and forgers." - Charles Peguy R.A.M.P.-Restore Americas Moral Pride Jodi Hoffman R.A.M.P. http://www.gocin.com/ramp Victimization of Children/Research Education
Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
Jodi Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You are wrong to protect them without knowing what they're about, Jay. Their motto is, "Sex before eight, or it's too late." They are referring to grown men having sex with an under-eight year old little boy. Surely you don't mean to suggest that a website promoting intercourse with a little boy should be protected speech, do you? Having read over parts of the NAMBLA site months ago when the URL was floating around the office as a joke, I saw nothing of the sort Jodi is claiming. It was a very straightforward and well-written site that had no really racey content. It was quite pedestrian in nature, consisting mostly of discussions of anti-sex legislation, age of consent issues, and social stigmatization of homosexual relations between partners of different generations. It would be well below the pervert radar of most of the United States for sure, since in terms of sexual relations it was much less detailed and evocative than your common Sex Ed textbook. In fact, the raciest comments are those from boys who wrote in about their experiences, all between the age of 13-18, often having been involved in abusive relations prior to meeting what they call a "boy lover". If the words "Sex before eight, or it's too late" appear anywhere, it would certainly not be in the context of their motto, more likely a sarcastic comment, or a quote about what people like Jodi think they are. Jodi is talking out her ass here. I can't fathom the hatred she must have in order to make up something so ridiculous. Of course now Jodi and others going to put me in their dirty pedo file for daring to speak out in defense of NAMBLA. I'm not gay myself, but I remember the pain that several classmates in High School had to deal with when coming to terms with their sexuality and the way that society treated them. Isolated, villified, and often suicidal, is no way for a kid to grow up. Anyways, for those who want to confirm for yourself, check out: http://www.attrition.org/mirror/attrition/2000/04/11/www.nambla.org-1/ For a laugh, check out the hacked version: http://www.attrition.org/mirror/attrition/2000/04/11/www.nambla.org/ It's ironic that a site for archiving hacked websites is the first mirror of the NAMBLA site I find when doing a google search. I suggest that those who wanted to do mirroring of the site grab it from there ASAP.
Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
Secret Squirrel wrote: Jodi Hoffman wrote: If you're serious, send it. We own a law firm. Furthermore, a lot of the cases we handle are pro bono, especially when children are involved. You "own" a law firm, eh? Big surprise there. Why a surprise? -- "He who does not bellow the truth when he knows the truth makes himself the accomplice of liars and forgers." - Charles Peguy R.A.M.P.-Restore Americas Moral Pride Jodi Hoffman R.A.M.P. http://www.gocin.com/ramp Victimization of Children/Research Education Council of America 2805 E. OAKLAND PARK BLVD., SUITE 122 FORT LAUDERDALE, FLORIDA 33306 TELEPHONE (954) 567-0698 TeleFax (954) 630-2280
Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
Jodi Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I knew there was a reason I printed out NAMBLA's website throughout the years. So you can lie about what's in it cleverly enough not to get caught? You *are* the same Jodi Hoffman who claims Sex Education is Satan's Doorway to our Childrens' Innocence, aren't you. The world's most prolific frivilous lawsuit filer and nuisance to public educators everywhere? Maybe you really are a member of NAMBLA. It certainly sounds like it. Right, lady. Everyone who doesn't buy into the Sex Abuse Agenda as presented by their local contingent of Religious Fanatics or Lying Feminists Cunts is a NAMBLA member. You're one of those fine people whose agenda it is to intimidate their opponents into silence, and then lie about what it is they would have said, had they been permitted to speak. I wonder if you would tell the parents to their face how important you think it is to preserve the information put out by the people who helped cause their son to be murdered, rather than doing something to help prevent it from happening again. NAMBLA's rather boring text-only web site, containing comments by noted educators, scientists, humanitarians, and artists on the topic of transgenerational male homosexuality, moral panic, youth rights, and extreme sex laws, is hardly, as the Curley family has alleged, a magical resource which changes heterosexuals into pedophiles, and mild-mannered Milquetoasts into murderers. Any more than your web site changes atheists into God-Soaked anti-Sexual Freaks like yourself. Go beat your "childrens' victimization" drum elsewhere. This is a cryptography and civil liberties list. Start your own Fascistpunks list if you want a forum to spew. As for the credentials of Robert Curley, who is *USING* his own son's murder as a platform to attack causes the religious and political right wing wants to damage, he is the only one of 2,000 city employees to be allowed to "opt out" of four hours of mandatory "diversity training," because it would have forced him to "mouth beliefs he didn't espouse." He also called the course, which attempts to prevent discrimination in the workplace based on gender, sexual orientation, and race, "feel-good crap." Like most death-penalty promoting defenders of the Christian Coalition who try to undermine civil liberties while misdirecting the public with talk of "child protection" and "pedophile activity," Curley sees an opening to present the agenda of himself and his associate whores for Jesus cloaked in words no politician dares oppose without committing political suicide. It would be unwise to let him succeed. That having been said, I don't think freedom of speech is going to sink or swim based on whether the NAMBLA web site is mirrored in numerous locations. Their lawyers may very well have advised them not to put it back up or encourage others to host it pending the resolution of their legal tangles. All perspectives on all varieties of human sexuality are available at a mouse click anyway, in the age of the Internet, and are so widely distributed geographically that censorship is impossible. In that sense, part of NAMBLA's original mission has passed it by, as it is no longer necessary to distribute opposing points of view on anything in brown paper envelopes via snail mail. If NAMBLA wants it mirrored, mirror it. If they don't, print it out and epoxy it to the side of Jodi Hoffman's barn as an example to other censorous cows. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: Jodi wrote (with the help of the GOP): Oh, please! Anal sex with an eight year old child! Is not violent? What about two 8 year olds giving it to each other up the wazoo. Would you consider that violent? Should we send those kids to jail - or maybe execute the parents? Up in my village the kids start young. We had a vibrant community - but all the jobs have gone and what we have left are kids as young as 8 shooting themselves up with heroin. The average age they start is at 10 to 14 and most of them make their money off the sex trade. Their collective goal seems oriented at getting high and staying high. All sex means to them is a means to an end. Even money is of little significance, the main goal is getting and staying high. Now, the one thing that really makes me sick to my stomach is the constant jibberish I hear from people who constantly harp on about saving the pretty little children - meanwhile I have heroin addicts as young as 8 banging each other in the park just down the street. For all the allegator tears I see here and elsewhere - I never see anything of value result from it. Could you save the 8 years olds who are banging each other in my park? I have no idea what they need - i'll be frank with you there - but they need a new life, what they have now is shit. I've noticed people will spend more time trying to silence groups like namble instead of solving the root problem. Kids these days are in serious trouble. People like those in namble are only taking advantage of a preexiting situation. In my town kids are easy to get into bed if you have the right qualifications. And unfortunately those qualifications are not very high. Most of these kids are from families who lost their lively hood when the jobs flew. If you can keep them high - you qualify. A good example is in fact found in our town. I call him the "morphine nipple". He's an old crippled man, dying of cancer, and as drunk as a skunk. You can always find an assortment of boys and girls hanging around his place. And the kids goals are basically - how much morphine can we squeeze out of the morphine nipple. So the boys drop their drawers and expose their dinkys and the girls expose their twinkies and the ol morphine nipple gets milked. Kid's these days are pigs and any fault to be found I suggest is with their parents. Forget the whole concept of childhood - that's a fiction long gone. Based on my experience I think I'm the last person on this planet who actually had a great childhood - and I was innocent too. That's rare these days. And in my opinion an unfortunate observation and my advantage. regards Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ http://www.dot-god.com/ dot.GOD Hostmaster
Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
At 12:57 AM 9/14/00 -0400, Jodi Hoffman wrote: You are wrong to protect them without knowing what they're about, Jay. Their motto is, "Sex before eight, or it's too late." They are referring to grown men having sex with an under-eight year old little boy. Surely you don't mean to suggest that a website promoting intercourse with a little boy should be protected speech, do you? Ohio vs. Brandenburg. Get it through your skull. Advocacy of criminal acts is protected speech. Period. It doesn't matter how vile the concept is. One of the cornerstones of a free society is that the laws reflect the will of the people -- within certain limits -- and that ANYONE, no matter how radical or depraved, is free to try to convince the people of the rightness of his views. Whether these views advocate banning abortions, reinstating slavery, exterminating Jews, or killing baby seals is *irrelevent*. He is free to discuss them and, if anyone should offer violence against him for the content of his ideas, the State is morally obliged to protect him and punish the offender, no matter how much the ideas offend, shock, or disturb. There is no room for compromise on this. None at all. Freedom of speech is for EVERYONE, for EVERY idea, or else it is meaningless. I cannot speak for Jay, but lest there be any doubt of *my* stance, I believe a site advocating the bloody ritual murder of 1 day old infants in disgustingly gruesome fashion, coupled with vile and perverse sexual acts involving corpses, sheep, and watermelons, while giving heroin to 3 year old girls, is protected speech -- so long as the site does not cross from advocacy to incitement. Anyone *committing* such acts deserves a quick trip to "Old Sparky", but that does not limit the right to TALK about such acts at all. Hell, Jodi, I even think YOUR site is protected speech.
Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
Jodi wrote Don't sacrifice my child on the altar of the First Amendment, Liz. OK, I'll bite, which altar do you want your child sacrificing on?
Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial?
(I'm cc'ing this to the cypherpunks list as well) The easy solution to this is to put up a web page with information *about* the NAMBLA site, and instructions on how to request that the site be delivered anonymously--as a gzip, zip, or stuffit archive. If one has access to a web server that allows cgi, this is fairly trivial to do with two way anonymity. Another solution would be to create a newsgroup like alt.websites.censored.binary and post the archive there every two or three days, and just link that from the web site. While I am not willing to take the heat for posting the NAMBLA site on my server (for fear of getting my connectivity yanked) I am willing to assist in working out a system where this information can be made available to those who wish it without having to deal with the public scrutiny. [A veteran free speech activist in Cambridge, Mass. sent me this. Any offers of mirroring should go to the list, where I assume they'll be duly forwarded. I wonder how long the HTML files in question here would last on a Geocities/etc account. --Declan] --- Hi Declan, I know you're aware of the case of Curley v. NAMBLA, which has very serious First Amendment implications. Jeffrey Curley was a 10-year-old who was murdered in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in October of 1997. The parents are alleging that the murderers were driven by NAMBLA literature in general and specifically by the contents of NAMBLA's web site. After the suit was filed in May of this year, the current NAMBLA web site was taken down. Frisoli, the Curley lawyer, has been making very outrageous and false statements about what was on the web site. Because the media has no access to the site, no one can contradict him. A vicious media war is now being waged against the ACLU and other free-expression advocates for defending freedom of expression in this case. Few reporters seem even interested in finding out the contents of NAMBLA literature or the contents of the web site as of 10/97. But even if a fair-minded reporter did have this interest, he or she would be out of luck. Printed material from NAMBLA is difficult to find. Members of NAMBLA will speak to the press only under conditions of strict anonymity because they fear for their lives. And the web site is not accessible. I am not a NAMBLA member, but I believe that the First Amendment applies to them. I have obtained the web files as of 10/97. I don't wish to put them up myself for a variety of reasons. First of all, my ISP might make me take them down. Also, I am involved in another case which I don't want tarred with the NAMBLA brush. There is no court injunction against the publication of the materials. But a site outside the US might be best in any case. Anyway, if you can help me find someone to take the files and put them up, please let me know. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural
