Faustine wrote:
I have a hunch the DoD would like nothing better than to see
leakees go totally
apeshit on leakers as disinformation spreaders. Do their dirty
work, save
them the trouble: sounds perfectly in line with Rumsfeld's doctrinal
emphasis on deterrence by denial to me. Google this
This was a spoof. A few other suspects in my inbox under names here.
~Aimee
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Aimee Farr
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 10:33 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Homeland Deception (was RE: signal
Faustine:
Aimee wrote:
To wit, no two people can safely tell the same lie to the same person.
Bah. I say it depends entirely on what the lie is, who's being
lied to, and how
confident and artistic the confidence artists are.
You're probably right.
Choate:
Actually they can, only
And I thought you were from Texas. ;)
Hold it up to a mirror.
(Well... it does make a point.)
~Aimee
Recursive is just writing backwards.
No it doesn't, it means 'write again'; as in over and over.
--
Faustine wrote:
But what about when the unlucky charmers find they're actually the victims
of a deceivers-deceiving-the-deceivers-deceiving-the-deceivers
kind of thing.
What shows that the snowers know they've slowly been snowed? Bet
it keeps a lot
of people awake at night, that one.
To wit, no two people can safely tell the same lie to the same person.
Choate:
Actually they can, only one (or both, if we allow 3 or more agents, only
one is required to 'know' the lie) of the people must believe it is the
truth.
Well, I doan' kno' nuttin' 'bout no agents. That fact has
A signal sometimes means
1. Wohlstetter's analogy (signals of Pear Harbor attack -- a generalization,
the indicators are themselves messages transmitted by signals)
2. Inference drawn from indicators
3. Indicators, or indicators embedded in messages
4. The means of transmission
5. Messages
I meant to say a stale.
But wait, that's not all
Tim wrote:
Don't hire a single lawyer. As soon as even a single lawyer is hired,
you're lost. Because it means you're thinking in terms of using the
legal system, of striking business deals with those whose products you
napster, and with
As you seek to undermine the security and integrity of the U.S. Government,
perhaps that is a subject worthy of your attention. Where Japan couldn't,
China can.
You insult the sacrifices of the greatest of men -- from both our countries.
This is not to make light of your forces, which are some
The only thing more wicked than the urge to command is the will
to obey.
Should you ever rely on another man for your life, and he relies on you for
the same, perhaps you will know what the urge to command, and the will to
obey is really about.
Men that become mountains refuse no ground or
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61716-2002Feb24.html
...
Gee, think leakers felt their credibility threatened by the Pentagon disinfo
cloud, fearing that they could no longer covertly influence the press and
the American public?
The irony of D.C.
~Aimee
Aimee wrote:
Should you ever rely on another man for your life, and he relies
on you for
the same, perhaps you will know what the urge to command, and
the will to
obey is really about.
If you had ever been in a situation in which another man had your
life in his
hands--and consciously
I knowI know *laughter*
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Aimee Farr
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 11:51 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
unsubscribe
unsubscribe
[offlist comment redacted]
Do you suppose the Pentagon foresaw the inevitable backlash?
*gasp!*
Which gave them an opportunity to state their no-deception policy,
instituting trust in their message?
*gasp!*
Razzle-dazzle. Your chip is to provide more correct and timely outside
information
http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/
this_just_in/documents/02093041.htm
The Boston Phoenix, January 3-10, 2002
How the Journal got Al Qaeda's computers
By Dan Kennedy
This past Monday's Wall Street Journal led with an
astounding story about a personal computer that
had
Sometimes chance and happenstance play an
incredible part in an incredible story, Bussey says.
Bullshit.
~Aimee
Al-Q must have taken a relationship-selling course. (The Psychology of
Relationship Selling : Developing Repeat and Referral Business; Relationship
Selling: The Key to Getting
http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=138963group=webcast
...approximately three percent
of Americans now feel that armed struggle against the state would be
justified.
That may not sound like a lot when viewed on its own but a look at the
historical evidence provides some
Discussing the challenges of perception management by antagonists:
http://call.army.mil/fmso/fmsopubs/issues/manipult.htm
International Conflict Controllers: Manipulators or Manipulated?
Mr. Timothy L. Thomas
Foreign Military Studies Office, Fort Leavenworth, KS.
Great bloodshedding that never
Ken Brown:
Also US forces (in the guise of military advisors to the Chinese,
Flying Tigers and so on) had been involved on a small scale in the war
against Japan for some years.
Yes, but they couldn't get them to fight. Kai-shek was just interested in
fighting Mao, rather than cleaning
Gil Hamilton wrote:
Hmm. They presumably refers to Japan despite the disagreement in
number. Still, I don't recall Japan having walked over France, so
I can't be sure - maybe you mean the Axis powers?.
She could be referring to the Japanese takeover of French Indochina.
Marc de
Choate:
In my opinion it is possible to spend too much time reading others works
and not enough time thinking about them and ones own views. The reality
is that if a single one of these papers had any real application to the
real world problems they'd stand out light a nova in a eclipse.
Choate:
Faustine isn't coy, she's humble.
And you're easily fooled.
Yes, but I can't help but be impressed by even the facade of intellectual
honesty in public discourse, especially one involving a professional cadre
which has diverted their professional energies into political means to the
Faustine:
Aimee wrote:
Then came Kai-shek v. Mao and a war with Japan.
A century of bloodshed caused by outside influence.
Bah. I don't think it's going out on a limb to lay responsibility
for a vastly
enormous amount of bloodshed squarely at the feet of Mao and Madame Mao
Lucky wrote:
What I fail to understand is where the news are in this article. Yes,
the US government, as all governments, is engaging in disinformation,
deception, and lies. It is called PSYOPS. And yes, PSYOPS has been
conducted and will continue to be conducted against both friendly and
Choate:
Continuing the.no wonder they hate us so much thread.
http://slashdot.org/yro/02/02/19/0122238.shtml?tid=153
This is mostly off the top of my head, so I invite others to add
insight/correct mistakes:
Riding the opium and human trade, missionaries and Western influence gave
Choate:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Trei, Peter wrote:
Carl von Clausewitz was a Prussian militarist and intellectual around
1800. He is mainly remembered for his book 'On War' which was the
first Western theoretical treatise on war and warfare.
Re: Jomini
Jomini? Who is talking about
Leitl:
I wrote:
War is an act of force to compel our enemy to do our will. Where a
man's family is concerned, words count.
WTF is this supposed to mean?
See Clausewitz.
I'm fairly certain you just crossed the Rubicon.
You make even less sense than proffr.
See 49 BC Julius Ceasar.
So Ms. Farr will be glad to know, that in order to protect us,
her government will consider you a potential terrorist if someone
you exchanged (encrypted) mail with bought the pellets in the
same week in which you bought teddy bears.
Don't tell me how I think or feel, what a cheap shot.
Ms.
There are MILLIONS of people that stand between that boy and evil of any
sort, and support his Daddy. He might read this someday, and he'll probably
come to the conclusion that his father was a tolerant man, despite
perceptions to the contrary.
Jim Bell was arrested for stalking protected
I think between Thomas Schelling's Strategy of Conflict and
Herman Kahn's
On Thermonuclear War you can find pretty much everything you
need to know.
I'll bet both of you would find a lot to enjoy in them.
They seemed so very cautious and correct, these deadly words. Soft, quiet
voices
Mr. Soze:
This is not a people's war. If anything its a war against
democracy and an attempt to discipline elected officials into
obeying their sworn oaths. You know, the ones they rarely obey
and are almost never called to account.
It would be a people's war, and it would have the
Somebody wrote:
I, in particular (and many other Cpunk Movement members) do not
consider People That Control Armed Men to be us and will not identify
their snitching
capabilities with my well-being.
So Cypherpunks is a political movement, then? You are cohesive, and, as
frequently pointed
Tim May wrote:
Recently arrived here from Choate Prime, Jei the Finn sends us 12 (that
I counted) forwarded news items on Saturday. I guess he thinks we need
Yet Another News Forwarding Service.
The Finn is a foreign principal propagandist. If it continues in
disseminating propaganda, we
It was a joke, James. CAACA? C'mon
~Aimee
When the US introduced legislation against the communist
movement, that movement was for the most part centrally
directed from Moscow, and had as its objective the
destruction of the USA and its conquest and occupation by the
Soviet army.
Seems to me, with full respect for your offline credentials, that
not much of what you offer here is applicable.
OkayOK!
Some of you have probably heard of the acronym RMA, for Revolution in
Military Affairs. The other side of the coin is a rapid succession of RRAs -
Revolutions in
Tim May wrote:
Recently arrived here from Choate Prime, Jei the Finn sends us 12 (that
I counted) forwarded news items on Saturday. I guess he thinks we need
Yet Another News Forwarding Service.
The Finn is a foreign principal propagandist. If it continues in
disseminating
Anonymous wrote:
Agent Farr wrote:
I'm sure you think that's really funny.
This place has turned into a disease vector for anti-intelligence
propaganda. Some of you are carriers.
Governments opposed to the re-invigoration of our intelligence
capabilities
and American spheres of
[1] http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2002/01/15/014.html
The Moscow Times? Now that is funny, since the claim was about
this list being a vector for anti-intelligence propaganda and
Russian threats.
http://www.russianstory.com
Extortion is the polite term, it was just an easy
Tim:
But I must say that we are a pale imitation of our role in 1993-95, when
we published the RC-R cipher, blew the whistle on the NSA's proposal to
have Jim Bidzos run over in his parking lot, provided the Stealth
fighter blueprints, published the home address of notorious killer and
This place has turned into a disease vector for anti-intelligence
propaganda. Some of you are carriers.
Governments opposed to the re-invigoration of our intelligence capabilities
and American spheres of influence are planting some of this crap. The
Russians made some direct threats of relative
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of mattd
I'm being
followed so close my laptop was stolen.
That's not close enough.
~Aimee
When you paint targets on people, other individuals may cause them harm,
seeking some measure of your acceptance. Some here might have actual
followers, not fans or confederates-in-cause. Some individuals here, and
you even as a group don't have to ask for somebody to be hurt, just imply
that it
And your insinuation that we are using mattd, for example, as a cat's
paw for violent political action (?) while obtaining plausible
deniabilty is pernicious.
It wasn't an insinuation, just saying that it happens. I would not like to
see this forum further mischaracterized as being associated
McCullagh; Aimee Farr
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Monkeywrenching
--
On 16 Nov 2001, at 16:50, Aimee Farr wrote:
I meant it in the sense that it sounds like they are
talking about criminal defense lawyers.
(i.e., make numerous references to the US Constitution,
defenders
. I'll send something
Politechwards later on today about it.
-Declan
On Fri, Nov 16, 2001 at 12:00:50PM -0600, Aimee Farr wrote:
A good example of monkeywrenching can be found at the article posted
earlier,
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/angel/articles/consterrorist.htm.
This shows
94th Cong. 1st Sess.
H.R. 1603
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 17, 1975
Mr. Drinan introduced the following bill; which was referred the Committee
on the Judiciary.
A BILL
To amend certain sections (authorizing wiretapping and electronic
surveillance) of title 18 of the United States
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I suggest if you find expression of such logical sentiment
objectionable that you leave the list.
I wrote:
Can't we just object?
I object.
Said objection is now a part of
Faustine wrote:
I bet a person could really learn a lot by spending some quality time
with Google, taking careful notes on the differences between posts you
ignore,
ones you're content to dismiss with frosty condescension, what really
seems to
bother the hell out of you, ones that should
More like corruption...the intimidation and suppression of moderate
viewpoints through public ridicule, an ideological culling based on fears of
association, and then a real or perceived compromise from which there is no
return?
Some would profess American Constitutional ideals, but use methods
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I suggest if you find expression of such logical sentiment
objectionable that you leave the list.
Can't we just object?
I object.
Said objection is now a part of the record.
George:
On 24 Sep 2001, at 17:49, Robert wrote:
It is not a crime for an agency of another country to eavesdrop
on you as
long as they are physically located outside the U.S. Similarly,
it is not
illegal for a US agency to intercept messages in another
country, as long as
they do it
Indeed it may have to be fought through the crosshairs...
Time to show Ellison who the real threats to his personal safety are...
Its time to water the tree...
Only cowards worry about possible punishment. If this be terrorism, make the
most of it!
It seems quite a few have been making
Mr. Keyser-Soze of the hushmail jacket:
Although I'm not into anthropomorphics I'd guess my sign would be
either mongoose (fast and perisistent and loves to kill snakes)
or weasel (agile, sly, cunning and sneaky and loves to kill rats)
Want to catch some REALLY big fish?
Dangle your ego.
Under the California statute, a conversation in which the parties have no
expectation that the discussion would not be disclosed to others is not
confidential. Cal. Penal Code. Sect.632(a). Confidentiality has been
construed in California to mean a reasonable expectation that the content
of the
On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Aimee Farr wrote:
And this, from Choate
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/psychohistory/message/2810
shrug
What ARE you smoking? I did't write that, you did. I just forwarded it
(w/o commentary other than
My introductory post (below) was based on a WMD domestic terrorism scenario,
to predict surveillance end-states.
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:40:22 -0600
From: Aimee Farr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Crypto McCarthyism ...thoughts, gentlemen?
snip
o What do you think about [1-2
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Jim Choate
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 12:27 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Cooksey: Expect racial profiling
Somebody should impeach this asshole...
Citizen Q posted a news clip, which included:
Part of Ashcroft's terrorism package includes a request to allow
the FBI to seek wiretapping orders for a suspect instead of a
telephone.
That would mean law enforcement agents would be able to tap any
phone a suspect uses, instead
From: Baker, Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Declan McCullagh' [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc: Albertazzie, Sally [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Baker, Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Declan,
I ignored the first two points because I don't think they're
that
Pst, C'mere
Let's build a BIIIG terrorist icon on the eve of a possibly long
engagement, and put lots of little people in it.
Don't present targets when civilian lives go in them.
And, you can't fight fires in those things.
~Aimee
Mr. Ziplip wrote:
Tim -
Behavioral psychologists will tell you that the best way to
extinguish an undesirable behavior is to IGNORE it.
If Farr's posturings and baitings are truly to be made
ineffective, the best course of action amongst the cpunks who
care is to killfile the postings
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of citizenQ
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 5:54 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: No Subject
Reading the discussion I see that the amendment calls for
inclusion of 'terrorist activies' into Title
Amateur radio was the first casualty after Pearl Harbor. Some criticize the
action now, of course.
~Aimee
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Declan McCullagh
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 3:59 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Tim May
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 1:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Cypherpunk Threat Analysis
On Thursday, September 13, 2001, at 08:39 AM, Aimee Farr wrote:
For the sick
For the sick people in here that like to call for TNA's (target name and
address) for judicial officials etc.
--
NLECTC Law Enforcement Corrections Technology News Summary
Thursday, September 13, 2001
--
Technological Advances in Assessing Threats to Judicial
Officials
Sheriff (08/01) Vol. 53,
Anonymizer.com Launches 'Operation Safe Investigation' to
Help Law Enforcement and Journalism Professionals Maintain
Anonymity and Safety Online
PRNewswire (09/06/01)
NLECTC Law Enforcement Corrections Technology News Summary
Thursday, September 13, 2001
...
Anonymizer.com just debuted its
[ I wonder if these attacks are over, and what kind of legislation
we're likely
to see in response... --Declan]
Perspective:
How ironic, that this is all happening under the shadow of the Statue of
Liberty. Some of us may not have been born to see Pearl Harbor in 1941, but
I can assure you
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Eric Cordian
Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 6:05 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Moral Crypto isn't wuss-ninnie.
Aimee writes:
I realize Tim's position, and I respect his right to
Are you talking about Gatti?
~Aimee
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Steve Schear
Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 1:33 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Official Anonymizing
At 01:42 PM 9/4/2001 -0700, John Young wrote:
A potential balance between national security and science may lie in an
agreement to include in the peer review process (prior to the start of
research and prior to the publication) the question of potential harm to the
nation I believe it is necessary before significant harm does occur
which
Aimee now thinks that I, Tim, have committed suicide.
Nope.
Sen gene sarho`s musun?! = Are you drunk again?
A strange question from one who rambles incoherently and talks about
going out to talk to the snails.
Doing more searches, I find you also asking leading (and ignorant,
Tim:
On Tuesday, August 28, 2001, at 05:52 PM, Aimee Farr wrote:
Didn't you already sign on? Surely through your careful study of the
archives you know that one of the founding documents for this list is
Tim's Crypto Anarchist Manifesto. It's practically the charter.
See
Bear wrote:
On Tue, 28 Aug 2001, Aimee Farr wrote:
It wasn't serious, Mike!
Yes. It is serious. It is, in fact, dead serious. Starting with the
Sweet spot discussion, and well into the pissing contest that you
and Tim seem to have started over it, we've been seeing nothing
Aimee now thinks that I, Tim, have committed suicide.
Nope.
Sen gene sarho`s musun?! = Are you drunk again?
~Aimee
GH wrote:
Nomen Nescio wrote:
[snip]
The answers it gives depends on the questions you ask. If your questions
are simple enough (untraceability good?) then your chart will answer
them. If your questions are more interesting (what technologies can
be practically implemented and make a
Didn't you already sign on? Surely through your careful study of the
archives you know that one of the founding documents for this list is
Tim's Crypto Anarchist Manifesto. It's practically the charter.
See, for example,
http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Crypto_misc/cryptoanarchist.manifesto
-
Despite frequently urging newcomers to read the archives--or at least
use some search engines!, nitwits like Aimee are only just now figuring
out what was crystal clear in 1992-3.
The EEA wasn't passed until 96. I failed to mention Title 18 United States
Code, Section(s) 794(c).
Agents kick
Tim May:
So I guess my candidate submission for the P.E.T. workshop might not be
well-received: BlackNet; Case History of a Practically Untraceable
System for Buying and Selling Corporate and National Secrets.
No, you want E.E.T. -- Espionage-enhancing Technologies.
Some of you need a
Your role as an agent provocateur here is noted.
Your role as a son-uv-a-bitch to me is noted.
Trying to keep people out of trouble is a provocateur? Gee, sorry to
dampen your conspiracy.
I posted Regan because it was directly relevant to this discussion, and it
makes a couple of points --
Reese wrote:
This is not legal advice. It's an obituary. :)
Owning a vehicle that will exceed the speed limit is not a crime.
Driving a vehicle that will exceed the speed limit is not a crime.
Exceeding the speed limit is a crime and is a ticketable offense,
at the least.
Mechanisms to
I don't always monitor folders, for me a CC is a courtesy.
~Aimee
1. Email sent individually to someone reaches them faster than
when replying to the list. I've often had half-day lag times in
the past with cypherpunks.
2. Email sent individually to someone will reach them when the
list
On Tuesday, August 21, 2001, at 10:45 PM, Aimee Farr wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2001, Aimee Farr wrote:
spotlighted a tree around here, you would think it was Secret Squirrel
mating season. (If you know anything about raccoons and
Crawford, Texas.)
~Aimee
I know raccoons like my
At 06:02 PM 8/20/01 -0700, John Young wrote:
Come to think of it Aimee's reminds of Jeff, and the timing
is pretty good for another raid.
Hark, wipe your disks.
Mors et vita in manibus lingue.
This terroristic defamation isn't funny, considering where I reside. If you
spotlighted a tree
An Metet:
It's also rather interesting that Aimee is objecting to
people cowering behind remailers. On the cypherpunk list?
On the contrary, we should all be using remailers. Someone
seriously does need to start a node which only accepts posts
from remailers. I'm beginning to strongly
Reese: (incited)
Are court records public documents, or not? Why wasn't that info
sealed if there was a problem with releasing it?
There probably wasn't...agents go on the record.
===
Why then, the subterfuge regarding the identities
[BLR has recently been the subject of media attacks and poison pen letters.]
Bombmonger wrote:
Amusing, Aimee -- or is it Amusing Aimee? But the real discussion
was about protected speech, was it not? You previously posted a piece on
842 as if that were an actual statute forbidding the
Reese:
[Some cpunk] wrote:
You are familiar with the terms FUD and Propaganda aren't you,
Aimee? Is there a real case that can be cited properly?
Accusing me of trickery on the tribunal? Himf. See US v. EATON,
No 00-1276 (10th Cir. August 14, 2001).
Skimmed it. So the account
Reese:
You are obviously
willing and able to provide the real citation, so what purpose was
served by changing all the names and obscuring the real cite, if
trickery was not a factor?
No, Reese, I didn't want to expose an agent to Googling.
Are court records public documents,
Anon
Aimee:
quite possibly ...FBI Black Ops Blow-Em-Up teams?
Uh-uhm. If had to
guess, I would bet that explosives take a lot of paperwork.
Bombs are not
efficient investigative tools for law enforcement. They blow up
the evidence
and the criminal. It's hard to run
[Since some remailer-idiots want to talk about bombs in here and grossly
mischaracterize an entire forum.]
In this issue
US v. DUMB BOMB GUY, No (...in this country, recently.) [*FN1]
--
He became friendly with a member of a different motorcycle club
Somebody asked:
1) Are the secret warrants always revealed eventually, regardless of
whether a court case happens or the evidence is introduced? Is
it possible
that there are N never-revealed secret warrants for every warrant
discussed in open testimony?
Greg (I think) wrote:
Yes. There is
Harmon wrote:
Interesting -- where did I get the idea that warrants for
surreptitious entry were only allowd for cases of national security. I
thought Reno was trying to get Congress to pass legalizing this, but was
turned down.
SURREPTITIOUS ENTRY WARRANTS.
Surreptitious entry
George, quoting me:
Bingo.
Remember what Uni said about not amused judges?
We should have just left it at that.
Maybe. Just so I'll know for sure, are you agreeing with me or
ridiculing me?
I don't remember what was said at this point. :)
My comments were good-natured, George.
George:
Look, we are just trying to envision what opponents are likely
to try. The
outcome will depend on the facts.
Are you sure it isn't more likely to depend on things that should be
completely irrelevant, say, what you look like? There was a hot
chick I used to work with who
James wrote:
--
On 5 Aug 2001, at 5:07, Aimee Farr wrote:
If you read any of those cites and shep'd them, you will see
there are circumstances where defendants didn't know the
documents were relevant to a specific lawsuit.
That summary of those cases seems misleading to me
Sandy, I so appreciate your attempts to span the gap, here, but I feel like
I am watching you hurt yourself. Repeatedly. To no end.
~Aimee
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Sandy Sandfort
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 12:07 PM
To:
Declan wrote:
On Sat, Aug 04, 2001 at 01:03:59AM -0500, Aimee Farr wrote, quoting Tim.
YOU are calling ME an Internet rant generator?
Hahahahahaha.
That's the damn truth, isn't it?
mention the anonymous authorship of the Federalist Papers. Not to
mention many related issues
=01a0255p.06
~Aimee
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 11:31 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Aimee Farr
Subject: RE: About lawyers and spoliation
--
On 4 Aug 2001, at 1:03, Aimee Farr wrote:
I wasn't speaking of security
James wrote:--
Black Unicorn's argument seemed to be Everything is forbidden,
therefore you need to hire a lawyer who will issue the magic
incantations to make it legal.
Sadly, that is A DAMN FACT.
This is nonsense on two counts:
1. Not everything is forbidden.
While everything is
1 - 100 of 135 matches
Mail list logo
