-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Nomen wrote: jya>>I don't recall the rationale used by the USPO to forbid CJ from >posting to cypherpunks. Anybody know the answer to that?
>Since when is it unusual to forbid parolees from associating with >unsavory and immoral characters? Tarring everyone here with such a broad brush hardly seems appropriate. Just a quick reminder: you're as much "here" as anyone else is, even if you have fooled yourself into feeling a false sense of distance behind that remailer of yours. So unless you see yourself as "unsavory and immoral", you might understand how some people here could be interested in an apology. Or at the very least an explicit clarification. More to the point, I think the parole officers were probably as interested in depriving CJ of a stage as anything else. Maybe he isn't as florid or likely to act out if he doesn't have an audience to egg him on. Where else is he going to connect with people who think there's anything more to his case than just that of another pathetic garden-variety washed-up lunatic? If he ever finds such a place, they'll probably ban it too. It could be purely punitive, but I think the encouragement factor is worth considering. ~Faustine. *** He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself. - --Thomas Paine -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1 (C) 1997-1999 Network Associates, Inc. and its affiliated companies. (Diffie-Helman/DSS-only version) iQA/AwUBPB5Yvvg5Tuca7bfvEQIJwwCfVGjnQykxIHm2A0SspH/YxwSt2mYAoIS/ 8kv2oni6+E2fjJLLODIcpzIa =fzCT -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
