Re: Afghans Demand End to Bombing
I read several articles and had not seen those... All I asked for was a reference... Thanks for POINTING out that you can find it... Just WANTED THE PERSON saying it to also GIVE HIS REFERENCES when he makes he satements... Jon Beets - Original Message - From: Tim May [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 28, 2001 11:42 PM Subject: Re: Afghans Demand End to Bombing On Friday, December 28, 2001, at 09:16 PM, Jon Beets wrote: - Original Message - From: Anonymous [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 28, 2001 8:00 PM Subject: Afghans Demand End to Bombing Heard on the news tonight that the interim Afghan government was demanding an end to the bombing in 3 days, and that all troops leave in 6 months. Can you show a reference to this? Everything I read today said tribal leaders from the Paktia province were wanting the bombing to stop... I read nothing about the interim government stating it... It took me less than a minute to retrieve several articles with quotes from members of the interim government. Here's just one of them: http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20011228/ts/attack_dc_1192.html If you challenge someone to show a reference to this you should have at least spent a minute looking. Again I still hav'nt seen a reference where Bush stated our troops will be there for a long time.. He did say the war on terrorism will last a long time but where did he explicitly say they would be in Afghanistan for along time? You haven't seen a reference? Then you haven't looked, have you? It took me another 30 seconds to find this (though I remembered it from seeing Bush's comments today in Crawford): With operational commander Gen. Tommy Franks at his side at his Crawford, Texas, ranch, Bush said he expected U.S. forces to remain in Afghanistan ``for quite a long period of time.'' http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20011228/ts/attack_dc_1196.html --Tim May, Citizen-unit of of the once free United States The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots tyrants. --Thomas Jefferson, 1787
Re: Afghans Demand End to Bombing
- Original Message - From: Anonymous [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 28, 2001 8:00 PM Subject: Afghans Demand End to Bombing Heard on the news tonight that the interim Afghan government was demanding an end to the bombing in 3 days, and that all troops leave in 6 months. Can you show a reference to this? Everything I read today said tribal leaders from the Paktia province were wanting the bombing to stop... I read nothing about the interim government stating it... Some US general asshole then announced from Dubbya's ranch in Texass that we will decide when we'll stop bombing, and nobody else and Dubbya says the troops will be there for a long time. That general asshole has been the one running the compaign in afghanistan. And yes he is correct that we will be the ones to decide when the bombing stops.. After all are'nt we the ones who decided when it would start... duhh Again I still hav'nt seen a reference where Bush stated our troops will be there for a long time.. He did say the war on terrorism will last a long time but where did he explicitly say they would be in Afghanistan for along time? I love it -- won't it be fun when the Afghans all start killing Yanks? Anybody want to bet on how long it will be before the first Americans are killed by non-Taliban Afghans? No it won't... But then again doubt it would go that far... There might be the individual psychopath such as yourself.. But on a whole I would say it wont happen... Jon Beets Get the latest scoop on CoS http://www.lisatrust.net http://www.xenutv.com http://www.xenu.net http://www.holysmoke.org Or try these mirrors http://lisatrust.pacer.com http://xenutv.pacer.com http://holysmoke.pacer.com
Re: SBC says appointing Gore-for-pres chief as president signals the importance of governmental matters to our company's ability to grow revenues
Oh great.. I wonder if this will improve relations or just make things worse for those of us trying to compete with SBC on DSL? Probably the latter... Jon Beets Pacer Communications - Original Message - From: Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 9:24 AM Subject: SBC says appointing Gore-for-pres chief as president signals the importance of governmental matters to our company's ability to grow revenues 11/19. SBC named William Daley its new President. Daley will report directly to SBC's Chairman and CEO Edward Whitacre. SBC is the incumbent local exchange carrier in California, Nevada, Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Arkansas, Missouri, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Indiana. SBC also holds a majority equity interest in Cingular Wireless. Daley was former President Bill Clinton's Secretary of Commerce from January 1997 to June 2000. He resigned in June 2000 to become Chairman of former Vice President Al Gore's presidential campaign. Whitacre stated in a release that His appointment as president of SBC signals the importance of governmental matters to our company's ability to grow revenues ... release: http://www.sbc.com/News_Center/1,3950,31,00.html?query=2009-1
Re: Gloat on the Phone - Go to Jail
Does anyone have a link to this article.. I cannot find it anywhere.. Jon Beets - Original Message - From: Eric Cordian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2001 1:28 PM Subject: Gloat on the Phone - Go to Jail Here's an intersting Reuters blurb on arrests made because people failed to grieve properly on their phone lines. It doesn't say how many of these intercepts were with warrants, how many were secret court/national security intercepts, how many were illegal, and how many were routed offshore to be sniffed by our allies. Interesting times. - NEW YORK (Reuters) -- Among almost 1,000 people being held in the United States in connection with the hijacked-airliner attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon are people who made congratulatory telephone calls minutes later, The New York Times reported in Sunday editions. Although transcripts of the phone calls have not been made available, the Times reports that officials have said some of the calls were congratulatory, even gloating. These suspected associates of Saudi-born militant Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda organization are among 977 people held on various charges related to the September 11 attacks, which killed almost 5,000 people in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. The paper said it had been unable to determine whether those who made the jubilant calls were participants in the hijack plot or merely rejoicing over the attacks. FBI agents intercepted telephone calls, moved in and made arrests, holding the bulk of those arrested on immigration or criminal violations and a smaller group on material witness warrants, the newspaper reported. Their identities and those of most of the people being held have not been released by the Justice Department. The newspaper said officials would not say how many people were detained through the telephone intercepts, nor would they discuss evidence that any of them proved to be members of the group organized by bin Laden, Washington's prime suspect in the attacks. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law
Re: Gloat on the Phone - Go to Jail
Finally found it.. Thanks anyway.. Jon Beets
Re: FBI considers torture as suspects stay silent
The military's rules of engagement are very explicit... Anyone giving an order to break those rules are themselves committing a crime.. The integrity to stand up and say its wrong is what has been taught in the military over the past few years as Moral Courage... I am not saying the rules don't get broken but if even one person speaks up about what happened then your looking at a very long time of making big rock into little rocks. At the same time would we risk torturing prisoners when we have preached for years for other countries to stop this exact same thing... My bets are on the Al Qaeda personnel who want to tell all.. The ones who are so proud of what they have done they will let you know whatever you want... Jon Beets - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 2:33 PM Subject: Re: FBI considers torture as suspects stay silent Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote : On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 08:50:01PM -0700, Tim May wrote: Yes, but this is one of those manufactured, utterly implausible situations. I cannot think of a single instance where a suspect had this kind of knowledge, with this kind of stakes, and with this kind of next three hours timetable. Even relaxing each item by a factor of 10...I can't think of any such examples. Neither can I. My intention was not to suggest that it's acceptable to rip out the accused's toenails, slowly, but to suggest that this is the kind of scenario that we may hear politicians talking about in short order. -Declan I wonder what orders our raiders have in regards prisoners? While we're debating what may or may not happen here my guess is that the decision about what to do with captured al Quaeda or Taliban higher-ups on the battlefield was decided long ago. The interrogators and their bags of tricks are ready for subjects. We have to know what they know. Mike
Re: Cypherpunks idiot list
Well at least you got the UNDERPAID part right... Jon Beets - Original Message - From: Nomen Nescio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 3:21 PM Subject: Re: Cypherpunks idiot list Of course I know how to use a killfile! I killfiled all you idiots long ago, but your names and trivial ideas keep getting quoted by all the important people, AND I JUST CAN'T STAND IT ANYMORE!. Have you no shame, how can you dare to even show your face on a list like this, you stupid, underpaid little twits? We divided everyone up like this and published the names in my highschool, and it worked very well. Everyone knew where they stood, and just who was really WHO!
Re: FBI considers torture as suspects stay silent
This appears total BS to me... While I don't doubt some agents do at times conduct their own idea of interrogation I sincerely doubt that the FBI as a whole would be considering this... Jon Beets - Original Message - From: Incognito Innominatus [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 10:02 PM Subject: FBI considers torture as suspects stay silent FBI considers torture as suspects stay silent http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,2001350021-2001364909,00.html AMERICAN investigators are considering resorting to harsher interrogation techniques, including torture, after facing a wall of silence from jailed suspected members of Osama bin Ladens al-Qaeda network, according to a report yesterday. More than 150 people who were picked up after September 11 remain in custody, with four men the focus of particularly intense scrutiny. But investigators have found the usual methods have failed to persuade any of them to talk. Options being weighed include truth drugs, pressure tactics and extraditing the suspects to countries whose security services are more used to employing a heavy-handed approach during interrogations. Were into this thing for 35 days and nobody is talking. Frustration has begun to appear, a senior FBI official told The Washington Post. Under US law, evidence extracted using physical pressure or torture is inadmissible in court and interrogators could also face criminal charges for employing such methods. However, investigators suggested that the time might soon come when a truth serum, such as sodium pentothal, would be deemed an acceptable tool for interrogators. The public pressure for results in the war on terrorism might also persuade the FBI to encourage the countries of suspects to seek their extradition, in the knowledge that they could be given a much rougher reception in jails back home. One of the four key suspects is Zacarias Moussaoui, a French Moroccan, suspected of being a twentieth hijacker who failed to make it on board the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania. Moussaoui was detained after he acted suspiciously at a Minnesota flying school, requesting lessons in how to steer a plane but not how to take off or land. Both Morocco and France are regarded as having harsher interrogation methods than the United States. The investigators have been disappointed that the usual incentives to break suspects, such as promises of shorter sentences, money, jobs and new lives in the witness protection programme, have failed to break the silence. We are known for humanitarian treatment, so basically we are stuck. Usually there is some incentive, some angle to play, what you can do for them. But it could get to that spot where we could go to pressure . . . where we dont have a choice, and we are probably getting there, an FBI agent involved in the investigation told the paper. The other key suspects being held in New York are Mohammed Jaweed Azmath and Ayub Ali Khan, Indians who were caught the day after the attacks travelling with false passports, craft knives such as those used in the hijackings and hair dye. Nabil Almarabh, a Boston taxi driver alleged to have links to al-Qaeda, is also being held. Some legal experts believe that the US Supreme Court, which has a conservative tilt, might be prepared to support curtailing the civil liberties of prisoners in terrorism cases. However, a warning that torture should be avoided came from Robert Blitzer, a former head of the FBIs counter-terrorism section. He said that the practice goes against every grain in my body. Chances are you are going to get the wrong person and risk damage or killing them. In all, about 800 people have been rounded up since the attacks, most of whom are expected to be found to be innocent. Investigators believe there could be hundreds of people linked to al-Qaeda living in the US, and the Bush Administration has issued a warning that more attacks are probably being planned. Newsweek magazine reports today that Mohammed Atta, the suspected ringleader who died in the first plane to hit the World Trade Centre, had been looking into hitting an aircraft carrier. Investigators retracing his movements found that he visited the huge US Navy base at Norfolk, Virginia, in February and April this year.
Re: Read a book and get banned from an airline....
Sorry I was gone and the mail server dropped some of my email.. Jon Beets - Original Message - From: Tim May [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2001 11:29 PM Subject: Re: Read a book and get banned from an airline On Saturday, October 20, 2001, at 08:40 PM, Jon Beets wrote: http://www.citypaper.net/articles/101801/news.godfrey.shtml Try to keep up, will you. We discussed this exact article and event in a dozen posts a few days ago. --Tim May How we burned in the prison camps later thinking: What would things have been like if every security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive? --Alexander Solzhenitzyn, Gulag Archipelago
Re: Retribution Time
Ooookay.. The really sad part is you either think your really cool typing this crap or you lack any real social skills... Probably both Jon Beets - Original Message - From: Nomen Nescio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 9:30 PM Subject: Retribution Time De time be almost here, good peoples. Time to get yours. You know what I and I be talkin about -- no more fuckin around about it. All dem pigs and feds jes be sooo busy wid dem bin Ladens, dey got no time for us simple folks. Time be for I and I to git what we bin waitin for. Git dem muthafuckas dat bin fuckin wid us all dis time. Git dem pigs, git dem judges, git dem bill collectors, git dem banks and take all dat money. Git em all, let God sort dem out. Fuck shit up, any way you ken think of. Git dem assholes what done you wrong, git dem assholes doin everbody wrong. But above all, git you some money! I and I be talkin somemore bout dis shit pretty soon, hey! Bo Strange
Read a book and get banned from an airline....
http://www.citypaper.net/articles/101801/news.godfrey.shtml Jon Beets
Re: Expert Warns Coded Pictures Indicate Al Qaeda Planning Major Biological Attack
I disagree on a few of his interpretations.. I actually see 3 smoking towers when he claims only two and that they represent the WTC towers.. He then also claims one of the images represents the pentagon but I don't see anything there that does.. However I do see bldgs that represent other government facilties. The man on the horse does not really resemble a pilot at all to me nor do I believe that the painter meant it to be.. I do believe the painting depicts america and the smoke stacks representing either industry or just maybe even our image as the great polluter. These items, among others in his article, gives me great doubt that the entire piece has any real merit at all.. Jon Beets Get the latest scoop on CoS http://www.lisatrust.net http://www.xenutv.com http://www.xenu.net http://www.holysmoke.org Or try these mirrors http://lisatrust.pacer.com http://xenutv.pacer.com http://holysmoke.pacer.com - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 2:40 PM Subject: Expert Warns Coded Pictures Indicate Al Qaeda Planning Major Biological Attack -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- http://ebird.dtic.mil/Oct2001/s20011018expertwarns.htm DefenseWatch (SFTT.org) October 17, 2001 Expert Warns Al Qaeda Planning Major Biological Attack By Ed Offley It is becoming clearer by the day that a month after the Sept. 11 aircraft hijackings, a biological warfare attack is being launched against the United States by as-yet unknown terrorists. The discovery of anthrax in letters mailed to the office of Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, NBC and ABC, following an initial exposure at American Media International in Florida, betrays a cunning and carefully organized intent-- particularly with the discovery that the anthrax mailed to Daschles office has been found to be weapons grade material that could indeed kill hundreds if not thousands of people if released in a significant airborne plume. Is this new phase terrorism merely a crude and ineffective ploy, or the harbinger of even more serious danger to the nation? Nuclear physicist Robert Koontz, who has researched and tracked the al Qaeda terrorist network for several years, is warning that he has discovered evidence on the Internet that Osama bin Laden may be planning a much larger biological warfare campaign-- using more than one form of germ agent-- and is using coded illustrations to signal and direct additional sleeper agents purportedly already armed with biological weapons. Dr. Koontz has posted the coded paintings and other evidence at the following website: http://www.bringmenews.com/Messages/National_Security/Alerts/Alert_003.htm Dr. Koontz revealed this disturbing information in an interview with DefenseWatch, on Tuesday after what he described as a frustrating inability to persuade federal officials to take the information seriously. The interview transcript is reproduced in full below. Interview with Dr. Robert Koontz DefenseWatch: How did you first become aware of the art? Let me begin by saying that I was following cyber-tracks of Ahmed Alghamdi, one of the lesser known terrorists aboard flight No. 175 that crashed into the South Tower of the World Trade Center. In doing this detective work, I came across Alghamdis name posted on a fan club that was started by a Bahraini pilot. So, I found the name Ahmed Alghamdi, I found an e-mail address for Alghamdi, and I found the names and web sites of numerous other people, many of whom had names of Middle Eastern origin. But that in itself was not surprising given that the web site is a fan club for a Middle Eastern singer. Nevertheless, my initial (intuitive) reaction was that I might have come across an al Qaeda communications node, and I now know that to be at least partly true. Having decided that I might have come across an al Qaeda communications node, I began looking at the web sites of all those who had posted their URLs on the fan club web site. After carefully looking at a few of the posted web sites, I noted that a man by the name of Muzaffar Wandawi identified himself as an Iraqi living in Amsterdam. The fact that he stated that he is an Iraqi drew my immediate attention, for it is well known that there is possible Iraqi involvement in the terrorist attack of Sept. 11. But that was not taken to be anything more than circumstantial. DefenseWatch: Please describe how you became suspicious that the images themselves might be the messages/instructions. When examining this mans art, I found it to be disturbing, but I did not at first think that it was suspicious--until I came upon the picture labeled Downfall. In that picture, Wandawi clearly showed two towers burning, and there appeared to be a picture of the smoking Pentagon just to the right of that image. Then there was a man riding on what appeared to be an Arabian horse, and the man appeared to be dressed like
No More Secrecy Bills
Found this article on an Air Force web site... Jon BeetsPacer Communications http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/opinion/A54690-2001Aug23.html Washington PostAugust 24, 2001Pg. 26No More Secrecy Bills LAST YEAR President Clinton properly vetoed an intelligence authorization bill that would have criminalized virtually all leaks of classified information. Unfortunately, this year the idea has resurfaced and is due to be considered by the Senate intelligence committee in September. The leaks bill is still a bad idea and should again be rejected. We don't pretend to be neutral on this subject. Newspapers publish leaked material; our reporters solicit leaks. And some of the leaked material we publish is classified. But it is a mistake to imagine that all leaks of classified information are bad. Some expose wrongdoing or allow the public to debate relatively nonsensitive matters that government would prefer to handle without scrutiny. The government massively overclassifies information, so a law banning all leaks of supposedly sensitive material would inevitably criminalize conversations between officials and citizens about subjects that are not genuinely sensitive and chill in dangerous ways the ability of officials and former officials to speak out on important policy questions. Traditionally, the law has respected this fact and has made criminal only leaks of specific types of classified information -- the names of intelligence agents, for example, or material related to encoding systems used in intelligence work. Certain disclosures of defense information, if done with intent to harm national security, can be prosecuted under espionage laws. And no one is suggesting that every government employee should be free to decide what remains secret and what does not. Generally speaking, leaks are handled under administrative personnel rules; if you get caught, you can lose your job. One trouble with creating a blanket criminalization of classified leaks is that it gives the executive branch almost unchecked authority to remove information from public discussion. Classification rules are generally not made under statutes but by executive orders, meaning that the president would have the authority both to decide what information is classified and to prosecute people for leaking it. Such unchecked power would be dangerous even if overclassification weren't rampant. But there is hardly an area where government is more capricious than in its determination of what secrets it needs to keep. Several years ago, to cite one example, the Federation of American Scientists sought historical and contemporary data on the aggregate intelligence budget under the Freedom of Information Act. After some litigation, the government released the figure for fiscal year 1997 and then, voluntarily, for 1998. It has refused, however, to release data for subsequent years and claims that releasing the figures for the years 1947-1970 could compromise "the interest of national defense or foreign policy" and "intelligence sources and methods." There have been times when the disclosure of irrationally or unjustifiably classified information has served the public. Certainly, in a system that depends on an informed and skeptical electorate, the government should not be moving in the direction of criminalizing public debate.
SirCam
I got my first SirCam hit today.. WOoohooo Jon BeetsPacer Communications
Re: A question of self-defence - Fire extinguishers self defence
- Original Message - From: Jim Choate [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 6:58 PM Subject: RE: A question of self-defence - Fire extinguishers self defence On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Sandy Sandfort wrote: Oh really? Try that experiment on your own car. Actually I've seen windows break (and broken my fair share) on cars multiple times. Some from wrecks, some from gunshot (a .38 will bounce off a windshield for example) some from other things. I even once had a D based rocket fired directly into the windshield of a 68 Cougar, it was much larger and going a hell of a lot faster than a fire exstinguisher. It didn't go through the window. Didn't even break it. There are two types of windows on most American cars... The first is the front windshield.. It has a film in it that keeps it generally in one piece unless enough force is put through it. As a firefighter we like this windshield since it is easily removed with a sharp knife around the seal (its gotta be removed before you can remove the top of the car). The side windows are another matter, they are made to shatter so that there are no large shards that may seriously injure someone... A model rocket does not really count as a good test on the strength of the window since most model rockets do not have the weight needed to damage much anything even with a D engine.. A .38 will bounce off water if shot at the right angle.. However it will not bounce off a windows, at any fair distance, if shot perpendicular to the winshield... All that aside you are assuming that the Italian vehicles have the same type glass we do in our American cars.. Side windows shatter into a thousand pieces at the touch of a center punch. A fire extinguisher is decidedly overkill for the job. A center puch (which focuses the force into a small area) isn't a fire extstinguisher. And windows are DESIGNED to break into a thousand little pieces, it absorbs the force of the impact. That way you don't get the sorts of car accident results that were so common in the country up through the 60's when the safety() glass was put in all cars (admittedly Genoa isn't in the US). Things like no heads, amputated arms, chopped off noses and ears, etc. No that was not why safety glass was put in cars.. It was put in cars stop flying glass http://www.howstuffworks.com/question508.htm You should dig up some of the old safety crash films from that time and compare them to what happens today. I have probably seen all of the most popular ones.. I also have some videos of emeregencies that I actually responded too. In any event, the test--at least in the US--for the use of deadly force includes the concepts of reasonable fear of death OR GREAT BODILY INJURY. A fire extinguisher stuck in a window does none of the above. Believe it or not, being blinded by a swarm of glass shards is considered great bodily injury. I doubt seriously anyone would be blinded (and I'm blind in one eye from being struck with a 2x4 so I can speak from 1st person, yes it's great bodily injury. It's not justification for lethal force). How did the police really know it was a fire extinguisher.. It could have been a bomb for all they knew.. However I can tell you this.. If someone was coming at me with a 15lb metal object with the intent to hurl it at my head and I had a gun in my hand I would not hesitate to shoot with intent to kill... These people went from being protestors to being criminals by their own actions. Jon Beets Pacer Communications
Feds must fess up about Carnivore
Good article http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-6649680.html?tag=mn_hd Jon BeetsPacer Communications
Re: Adobe, EFF Call for Dmitry Release
This reminds me of complaints filed in the Air Force. If anyone files a complaint either by the one that was wronged or somone who saw a person being wronged the gears are then in motion... These complaints can range from sexual harrassment to sexual or racial discrimination, etc.. Essentially anything that is not of a criminal act. All criminal; acts are handled by the security police and AFOSI (Air Force Office of Special Investiagtions). Even if the complaintee wants to withdraw the complaint its too late and the investigation must go forward. The basis for this is 1) To stop people from using it as a threatening tool to get what they want since most likely the investigation will show the truth if they made a false statement 2) To ensure the complaintee hasn't been pressured to drop the complaint by their superiors or peers. The investigation is always performed by someone who does not have ties to the squadron of the people he is investigating. This is done to try to take out any partiallity.. Criminal acts are investigated the same way except the investigator is a law enforcement official. I like the idea of continuing the investigation no matter what.. While I think the DMCA sucks I think that the only way the feds can stay professional and look impartial in this incident is to continue to investigate, otherwise it comes down to pick and choose what they will enforce and when.. Jon Beets Pacer Communications - Original Message - From: Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Petro [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 9:20 AM Subject: Re: Adobe, EFF Call for Dmitry Release Really? Dmitri gets to go home? Tell that to the USAtty's office, which indicated to me yesterday they weren't inclined to drop charges. While you're at it, learn a little about criminal law. -Declan On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 12:59:01AM -0700, Petro wrote: Not really. It's a victory for Dimitri, because he gets to go home, but the DMCA is still in effect, and until there are rulings from the courts, there will still be people harassed and arrested.
Re: A question of self-defence - Fire extinguishers self defence
Yes I saw that pic too... Again we can't assume anything other than what we see in the pics But even below head level it can be thrown fairly hard like a medicine ball Or it could have been lifted over his head after the picture was taken... Or someone could even argue they thought it might be rigged explode... Etc... I still stand by my belief that the Police felt threatened and were justified. Again basing all this on the little info we all have Jon Beets Pacer Communications - Original Message - From: Andrew Woods [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jon Beets [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 3:14 AM Subject: Re: A question of self-defence - Fire extinguishers self defence If you look at the Reuters image of Carlo holding the fire extinguisher, he's holding it below head-level. In my opinion, that leaves three options: Carlo was going to chuck the extinguisher underhand (and sideways to the vehicle, so it would've bounced off) at a low velocity, or Carlo was holding the fire extinguisher out in front of him as DEFENSE, or he was merely holding a fire extinguisher. It's not clear how much time elapsed between the picture of Carlo alive, and the next image, which is him lying on the ground with his brains all over the ground. However, the gun is can be seen and it's pointed at his head, so I assume it wasn't very long. There's an image of Carlo under the land rover, with the cop who shot him covering or wiping his face. Neither man in the jeep were wearing gas masks with face shields, but every other carabinieri member seen in the series is wearing them. The other thing that may not have been mentioned is that there were Carabinieri within 30 feet of the land rover, and that Carlo was in the Green Zone, supposedly the safe area for protests. There are pictures of about 10 fellow members of law enforcement a short distance away, including one with both hands on his forehead area. He appears anguished. There's an image of Carlo under the land rover, with the cop who shot him covering or wiping his face. there's a PDF on indymedia.org with the pictures i'm talking about at http://italia.indymedia.org/local/webcast/uploads/carlo-photofile.pdf. Most of this analysis is paraphrased from the pdf, but it seems reasonable. this may be a repeat of the powerpoint presentation post, but it's more cross-platform. At 05:35 PM Monday 07/23/2001, you wrote: Uhhh yes it will go through the safety glass.. Look at the pics.. One person had already put piece of lumber through it.. That was about a 15lb extinguisher... From what I can tell from the photos the protester DID intend harm to the police. Of course none of us were there so its really hard to know the truth.. Jon Beets Pacer Communications - Original Message - From: Jim Choate [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 6:18 PM Subject: A question of self-defence - Fire extinguishers self defence Does throwing a fire extenguisher at a auto window constitution probable cause for lethal force in self-defence? No. Because the fire extenguisher won't go through the safety glass. -- Nature and Nature's laws lay hid in night: God said, Let Tesla be, and all was light. B.A. Behrend The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- - Andrew Woods Pokerspot.com Customer Support
Re: Adobe, EFF Call for Dmitry Release
Sounds to me like Adobe doesn't really like the bad press. When will these companies understand that all this is going to do is cause the programmers to write even more adobe cracking programs and make them available all over the net. They cannot stop it Jon Beets Pacer Communications - Original Message - From: John Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 9:44 PM Subject: Adobe, EFF Call for Dmitry Release From a press release today: --- Adobe Systems Incorporated and the Electronic Frontier Foundation today jointly recommend the release of Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov from federal custody. Adobe is also withdrawing its support for the criminal complaint against Dmitry Sklyarov. We strongly support the DMCA and the enforcement of copyright protection of digital content, said Colleen Pouliot, Senior Vice President and General Counsel for Adobe. However, the prosecution of this individual in this particular case is not conducive to the best interests of any of the parties involved or the industry. ElcomSoft's Advanced eBook Processor software is no longer available in the United States, and from that perspective the DMCA worked. Adobe will continue to protect its copyright interests and those of its customers. --
Re: A question of self-defence - Fire extinguishers self defence
- Original Message - From: Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jim Choate [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 10:39 PM Subject: Re: A question of self-defence - Fire extinguishers self defence On Mon, Jul 23, 2001 at 09:21:59PM -0500, Jim Choate wrote: NATO says it takes a transfer of approx. 85 Joules to kill. 1. It all depends on where and how it's applied. Give me a scalpel and I suspect I can kill you with far less than 85 Joules. 2. Even if we dismiss point #1 above and assume for the same of argument death was impossible, serious injury, blinding, etc. was possible. And use of deadly force seems appropriate in cases where you have a reasonable belief that you're about to be seriously injured, even crippled. Although Choate does make one point, and that's the guy getting run over once or twice. Once I can understand -- the police vehicle seems like it's up against a wall in the front. Twice seems unusual and worth an explanation. -Declan Absolutely.. People make mistakes... People also do things on purpose.. I am just not the kind of person that automatically assumes someone does anything on purpose... I have been in alot of intense situations in my career as a firefighter in the Air Force and I can honestly say people will do the most stupid things you would have ever imagined in intense situations. I would be interested to find out what the investigation turns up after this.. Jon Beets Pacer Communications
