At 02:20 PM 2/15/03 -0800, James A. Donald wrote:
...
They will be testing another missile soon. We shall see how
far it goes. They would not waste a nuke on an untested
missile --- which is why they test them.
If their goal is to blackmail us into not invading them, I don't think they
need
>>Bin Laden is more likely to use them on Hollywood and New York, which he
sees as Jew central, than on Washington. <<<
I'd guess a little projection is going on here(?) though with lunatic
ex-trots like Horrowitz,Schwartz,Costa and Hitchens for company anythings
possible eh jim.
My (amateur) p
On Saturday, February 15, 2003, at 02:20 PM, James A. Donald wrote:
Trouble is, west coast might be in reach of North Korea, east
coast is not.
They will be testing another missile soon. We shall see how
far it goes. They would not waste a nuke on an untested
missile --- which is why they te
--
On 14 Feb 2003 at 20:30, Tim May wrote:
> Whether people agree with my views or not, I expect that if I
> am arrested and charged with something I'll get coverage in
> some parts of the press, and maybe even some support from the
> commies and socialists in the "civil rights alphabet soup"
>
On Saturday, February 15, 2003, at 11:46 AM, Morlock Elloi wrote:
This is what we need to fight. And this was, and perhaps still is, the
promises of unlinkable credentials, of untraceable digital cash, and
of
"True Names." Crypto anarchy is needed now more than ever.
There are hardly battlegro
> This is what we need to fight. And this was, and perhaps still is, the
> promises of unlinkable credentials, of untraceable digital cash, and of
> "True Names." Crypto anarchy is needed now more than ever.
There are hardly battlegrounds available. Software runs on machines big ones
make, bits
Tim Wrote:
> When I was accused of planting a bomb to blow up President Clinton, I
> told them to "prove it."
This sounds like an interesting story. Would you care to elaborate?
> Orwell had their number. And the technological powers have made the
> ever-expanding power grab more and more en
On Friday, February 14, 2003, at 07:20 PM, lcs Mixmaster Remailer
wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003 15:29:57 -0800, Tim May wrote:
About Byrd's speech, he is protected by the same Bush doctrine. If a
less powerful person made these charges, he'd face a "talking to" by
the FBI. And after PATRIOT II
