On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Daniel Roethlisberger wrote:
> > 19% by value were from France; 57% from the Soviet Union (ie Russia),
> > East Germany, and Czechoslovakia; 8% from China.
> [...]
> > It is not coincidental that the Security Council members opposed to
> > taking any action on Iraq's repeated
At 09:24 PM 12/17/2003, Patrick Chkoreff wrote:
The really interesting aspect of this is what it portends for the
future. If, as Clay suggests, the current situation is like Prohibition
from citizen perspective can we expect a similar repeal of government
surveillance? If not, what will happen
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Michael Kalus wrote:
> BTW, can you provide me with a reference for the "dangling bodies'?
> Because I was unable to find anything on this so far.
I was travelling in the area (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Turkey)
at the time. In the 1960s the usual overland traveller
On 18 Dec, Trei, Peter wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>I would like to throw in with the OTO gunners here. [...]
>
> OTO
> Ordo Templi Orientalis?
>
> You don't mean *that*, do you?
Why not?
> I suspect I'm suffering from acronym overloading.
I was simply agreeing with the post of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I would like to throw in with the OTO gunners here. [...]
OTO
Ordo Templi Orientalis?
You don't mean *that*, do you?
I suspect I'm suffering from acronym overloading.
Peter
I would like to throw in with the OTO gunners here. If you are
interested in an expanded and predictive analysis, check here.
US aggression leads predictably to bad results: Take action to stop the war now
http://proclus.tripod.com/radical/wartext4.html
I wrote it in April, while US bombs were
Jim Dixon wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, James A. Donald wrote:
On 17 Dec 2003 at 22:54, Michael Kalus wrote:
No, but it is very interresting that all of this didn't
matter while Saddam was the "good guy" for our causes (and by
that I mean the Western world general).
You are making up
Jim Dixon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-12-18/19:18]:
> 19% by value were from France; 57% from the Soviet Union (ie Russia),
> East Germany, and Czechoslovakia; 8% from China.
[...]
> It is not coincidental that the Security Council members opposed to
> taking any action on Iraq's repeated violations
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Tyler Durden wrote:
> I'm very interested in hearing about whether any P2P networks support
> encrypted transactions of any sort yet (ie, can one yet pay for some files
> via P2P)? Are there any P2P Networks being designed deliberately to support
> anything/everything, includi
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, BillyGOTO wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 07:18:04PM +, Jim Dixon wrote:
> > Relevant numbers from the Times today, quoting Air Force Monthly, January
> > 2003: from 1980 to 1990 Iraq imported 28.9 billion pounds worth of
> > weapons. 19% by value were from France; 57%
Uh...I assume you're quoting somebody here?
The last point is actually a very good one, but getting there requires
hacking through gobbledeegook. What's this "all businessmen" silliness? And
using vpns WITHIN a company? As an employee of a major Wall Street firm, I
can tell you that's completel
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, James A. Donald wrote:
> On 17 Dec 2003 at 22:54, Michael Kalus wrote:
> > No, but it is very interresting that all of this didn't
> > matter while Saddam was the "good guy" for our causes (and by
> > that I mean the Western world general).
>
> You are making up your own histo
James A. Donald wrote:
--
On 17 Dec 2003 at 22:54, Michael Kalus wrote:
No, but it is very interresting that all of this didn't
matter while Saddam was the "good guy" for our causes (and by
that I mean the Western world general).
You are making up your own history.
Am I? The west tr
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 07:18:04PM +, Jim Dixon wrote:
> Relevant numbers from the Times today, quoting Air Force Monthly, January
> 2003: from 1980 to 1990 Iraq imported 28.9 billion pounds worth of
> weapons. 19% by value were from France; 57% from the Soviet Union (ie
> Russia), East Germa
--
On 17 Dec 2003 at 22:54, Michael Kalus wrote:
> No, but it is very interresting that all of this didn't
> matter while Saddam was the "good guy" for our causes (and by
> that I mean the Western world general).
You are making up your own history. When Saddam came to power,
he seized west
--
Encryption is a defense against threats. For people to adopt
encryption, they need to be threatened.
All businessmen are guilty of insider trading and destruction
of evidence. In consequence all businessmen use encrypted vpn
internally within companies, but not, however, in external
c
On Wednesday, December 17, 2003, at 09:38 PM, Steve Schear wrote:
Note that the broadening adoption of encryption is not because users
have become libertarians, but because they have become criminals; to
a
first approximation, every PC owner under the age of 35 is now a
felon.
http://www.shirky.
Harmon Seaver wrote:
> > This isn't a ski mask burglary. We KNOW Saddam ruled Iraq.
> > We KNOW what crimes were committed. Simple syllogism.
>
> No we don't. We only know what the propaganda mills have told us.
> Twenty years ago it was a different story.
The propaganda mills were working fo
At 12:39 PM 12/17/2003, Patrick Chkoreff wrote:
Well, Clay Shirky has done it again, writing a very insightful article
on the current digital scene, this time on the unintended but
beneficial consequences of RIAA's crackdown on file sharing.
Here is one particularly telling excerpt:
Note that the
"You can't
predict what "the crowd" will say, and the Arab "crowd" is no more
symplistic than the American one. It does "work" somewhat differently,
and does display different "mentality", whatever that means, but none of
it is exploitable with any useful degree of certainty by cheap armchair
psych
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 03:10:35AM +0100, Tarapia Tapioco wrote:
> Harmon Seaver wrote:
> > > This isn't a ski mask burglary. We KNOW Saddam ruled Iraq.
> > > We KNOW what crimes were committed. Simple syllogism.
> >
> > No we don't. We only know what the propaganda mills have told us.
> > Twen
R. A. Hettinga wrote:
At 2:58 PM + 12/12/03, ken wrote:
Bruce is a lefty, but not a statist
rghhht...
That's like saying that he's a sow, but not a boar...
grunt grunt
--
On 18 Dec 2003 at 5:40, privacy.at Anonymous Remailer wrote:
> I think you might have forgotten about the other half the
> system, due process. Even if you "KNOW" something, you've got
> to go through the motions.
Different rules apply in war.
Despite the fact that he looked like a homeles
--
Michael Kalus:
> he [Saddam] is shown and "paraded" on TV (and don't tell me
> he wasn't because showing a man in his state, showing how he
> gets examined is clearly an attempt to "break the morale").
James A. Donald;
> > Secondly; It is being overly sensitive about the feelings
> > of th
At 02:49 PM 12/17/2003 -0600, Harmon Seaver wrote:
On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 06:59:59PM -0500, John Kelsey wrote:
> us. Maybe they will, maybe they won't, but our foreign policy ought to be
> made based on what is in our long-term best interest ("our" meaning
> American citizens); realistically, ter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Human Rights Watch, Amnesty, and countless Iraqi refugees all report
> similar stories of widespread torture and murder. Is it your position
> that these are all propagandists?
>
> Dismissing as "propaganda" any reports that oppose your argument,
At 12:39 PM 12/17/2003, Patrick Chkoreff on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, Clay Shirky has done it again, writing a very insightful article
on the current digital scene, this time on the unintended but
beneficial consequences of RIAA's crackdown on file sharing.
Here is one particularly telling
James A, Donald writes:
> I see: So when the US army is so unkind as to film Saddam
> acting submissive, this is a shocking violation of his human
> rights, and your bleeding heart feels for him deeply.
> But when, however, people fly a plainload of passengers into
> two tall buildings and murde
--
Clay Shirky:
http://www.shirky.com/writings/riaa_encryption.html
tells us "The RIAA Succeeds Where the Cypherpunks Failed"
[...]
The Government's failure to get the Clipper implemented came at
a heady time for advocates of digital privacy -- the NSA was
losing control of cryptographic
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003, BillyGOTO wrote:
>> Nice, but the problem still remains: At this point it doesn't matter
>> what he has done (or we say he has done). This is not a punishment.
>> "Innocent until proofen guilty" anyone? This is the basis for the
>> "enlightened" western society, no?
>This
30 matches
Mail list logo
