On Saturday, September 15, 2001, at 08:45 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> --
> On 14 Sep 2001, at 16:25, Trei, Peter wrote:
>> I haven't paid enough attention to AF to be able to form an
>> opinion as to whether she's threatened anyone.
>
> She did not say "I am going to kill a judge". She di
--
On 14 Sep 2001, at 16:25, Trei, Peter wrote:
> I haven't paid enough attention to AF to be able to form an
> opinion as to whether she's threatened anyone.
She did not say "I am going to kill a judge". She did
however say that somone else was going to kill a judge. She
and Nomen are try
--
On 13 Sep 2001, at 20:26, Aimee Farr wrote:
> My post was not "bait." The reason we have anything left of
> the amendments so frequently talked about in here is due to
> the independence of the judiciary. While you can question
> aforesaid independence, threatening the judiciary is beyond
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
At 08:26 PM 9/13/2001 -0500, Aimee Farr wrote:
>Bell's "Assassination Politics" put cypherpunks on some protective
intelligence agendas. It would not be implausible to assume you were being
monitored to see if you "run" with the seeded assassination memes, if on
At 08:26 PM 9/13/01 -0500, Agent Farr wrote:
>Bell's "Assassination Politics" put cypherpunks on some protective
>intelligence agendas.
Longtime fans would recognize that this was rent-seeking, one gang vs.
another:
the federal gang's ability to put 1e7 on O.B-L's noggin. vs. distributed
anonymou
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>At 08:26 PM 9/13/2001 -0500, Aimee Farr wrote:
>>Bell's "Assassination Politics" put cypherpunks on some protective
>intelligence agendas. It would not be implausible to assume you were being
>monitored to see if you "run" with the seeded assassination memes, i
