Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
At 01:28 PM 11/3/01 -0800, Tim May wrote: >On Saturday, November 3, 2001, at 11:06 AM, Declan McCullagh wrote: >> http://www.wartimeliberty.com/article.pl?sid=01/11/03/1813233 >What else is expected in a police state? > >The soldiers say who can travel, and where. > >Fuck this nation. Fuck it to death and start over. You didn't really read the interview, did you? The dumb cunt brought it on herself. Even you wouldn't spit in the eye of a cop at your door and expect no action to be taken. Reese
Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
At 12:04 AM 11/4/01 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >Besides, if this guardsman was as naive as you say how did he know who >she was? As I understood it her name was on a list. ..."on a list." of people who purchased their tickets online. w00h00. >Think about that, on a list... *yawn* >You're an apologistic idiot. You resemble a latah and your CDR node munges From: headers in an obnoxious manner. Reese
Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
At 09:47 PM 11/3/01 -0800, Raymond D. Mereniuk wrote: >On 3 Nov 2001, at 13:28, Tim May wrote: > >> What else is expected in a police state? >> The soldiers say who can travel, and where. >> Fuck this nation. Fuck it to death and start over. > >Tim, you are getting much too cynical! That isn't the right word. Any reasonable person reading Declan's article would realize the dumb cunt brought it on herself by being a curmudgeon and a very uncooperative one at that. Wash your mind out with some soap, both of you. Reese
Re: CDR: Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
On Sat, 3 Nov 2001, Reese wrote: > > At 09:47 PM 11/3/01 -0800, Raymond D. Mereniuk wrote: > >On 3 Nov 2001, at 13:28, Tim May wrote: > > > >> What else is expected in a police state? > >> The soldiers say who can travel, and where. > >> Fuck this nation. Fuck it to death and start over. > > > >Tim, you are getting much too cynical! > > That isn't the right word. > > Any reasonable person reading Declan's article would realize the > dumb cunt brought it on herself by being a curmudgeon and a very > uncooperative one at that. > > Wash your mind out with some soap, both of you. > > Reese Since when are we required to be "cooperative" with illegal searches? And what's with the "dumb cunt" bit? That's not just idiotic, it's idiotic even for you. -- Yours, J.A. Terranson [EMAIL PROTECTED] If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place...
Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
On 3 Nov 2001, at 22:20, Reese wrote: > The dumb cunt brought it on herself. Even you wouldn't spit in the > eye of a cop at your door and expect no action to be taken. Yes, you are right, she was searching for attention but she received more than she bargined for. The point is how did the front line grunt know who to abuse? Obviously there was a bit of a conspiracy here, don't you think? Now this bitch may have deserved it but who is making the decision and what is the basis for that decision? It may appear deserved until you are the target, then your thoughts change a bit. Obviously you have never been a target before and been put thought the usual grinding. I don't like liberal tree hugger types and rarely feel for them but if they restrict her travel privilages what is to stop them from picking on you? You may think you are bullet proof but until you actually experience being a target it is difficult to understand the sense of violation one experiences when one is done over by a system. I kinda like a place where there is a rule of law and everything is totally predictable, something America appears to be moving away from at this moment. Virtually Raymond D. Mereniuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] FBN - Harnessing The Dynamics of The Internet http://www.fbntech.com
RE: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
At 12:32 AM 11/4/01 -0800, S a n d y wrote: >Reese wrote: > >> You didn't really read the interview, >> did you? >> >> The dumb cunt brought it on herself. > >Yeah, just like all those other rape victims... Read the article/interview. Every airline passenger is going through heightened security screening. Dig deeper, you'll find that all airline passengers who purchase tickets online get flagged for bag searches (discrimination by auto-selection). Were other green party members detained or singled out? No. Were other green party members denied air transport? No in both cases, else we would have heard about that by now too, right? One of the airport flunkies even says they'll try getting her on the 4 pm flight, she plays stick in the mud a bit more and gets herself bounced out of the airport, so yeah, go through the park naked at 2 AM, you have no grounds to object if approached by someone who is naked - what you do from there is on you. She was not denied right to travel (as Tim thought), she was free to get in her car and drive to another airport, to a private plane or even all the way to her destination if she wanted. She was denied the use of that particular mode of transport at that particular time, "we" cannot ride horses on the freeway either. Yes that is too a comparable example of denial of right to travel in the precise manner "we" want. A true equestrian would not have pissed the nasty guards off, I guess greens think they can act haughty and snub everyone with impunity - wrong answer (aka idealism = 0, reality = 1). Get a clue, S a n d y. Reese
Re: CDR: Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
At 02:33 AM 11/4/01 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Since when are we required to be "cooperative" with illegal searches? Why do you think it was an illegal search? >And what's with the "dumb cunt" bit? I calls 'em like I sees 'em, and boy, what she did was dumb. Reese
Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
At 12:51 AM 11/4/01 -0800, Raymond D. Mereniuk wrote: >On 3 Nov 2001, at 22:20, Reese wrote: > >> The dumb cunt brought it on herself. Even you wouldn't spit in the >> eye of a cop at your door and expect no action to be taken. > >Yes, you are right, she was searching for attention but she received >more than she bargined for. Oh boo hoo hoo. I shed crocodile tears. Truly. >The point is how did the front line grunt know who to abuse? People flagged by the ticket agent, people who purchase tickets online. That's what got her flagged. Dig deeper, you are missing it. >Obviously there was a bit of a conspiracy >here, don't you think? Obviously. Carry on, you don't need me for this. Reese
RE: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
On 3 Nov 2001, at 23:07, Reese wrote: > equestrian would not have pissed the nasty guards off, I guess greens > think they can act haughty and snub everyone with impunity - wrong answer > (aka idealism = 0, reality = 1). I don't really like the "greens" type of person as they tend to blame every thing on me and my desire to be like an average person with average consumption of our worldly resources but why exactly should they be targeted for special treatment over other travellers who may be more astute in voicing their beliefs? The decision to permit travel should be a matter of policy and not determined by individuals based on their personal beliefs or attitudes. I have experienced this type of treatment in third-world countries where the person making the determination could be influenced by monetary issues. I have always visited places where the degree of hassle was determined by spiritual specifics, ie - religion. Ring a bell here? Green bad, Republican good, Christian good, Muslim bad?, or the other way round!! It would be very sad if America was to become this shallow! Virtually Raymond D. Mereniuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] FBN - Offering PUP - Unbreakable Encryption Techology http://www.fbntech.com/pup.html
Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
On 3 Nov 2001, at 23:12, Reese wrote: > Oh boo hoo hoo. I shed crocodile tears. Truly. > > People flagged by the ticket agent, people who purchase tickets online. > That's what got her flagged. Dig deeper, you are missing it. > Obviously. Carry on, you don't need me for this. What am I missing here? Was the prospective passenger carrying weapons or anything which could be judged as a weapon.? Was the prospective passenger deemed a threat to any of the other passengers or the completion of the flight to its destination? If the answers to any of the above questions were yes then the person should have been arrested, charged and dealt with in a court of law. Otherwise the passenger should have been allowed on the flight regardless of political belief or profile of ticket purchase. The ticket purchaser has suffered discrimation and should be able to seek damages. Or, has ther hassling of citizens become a normal event? If you start to agree to this type of decision you are no different than the Muslims who claim all non-believers to be an enemy. Think about it! Virtually Raymond D. Mereniuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] FBN - Offering PUP - Unbreakable Encryption Techology http://www.fbntech.com/pup.html
RE: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
At 01:41 AM 11/4/01 -0800, Raymond D. Mereniuk wrote: >On 3 Nov 2001, at 23:07, Reese wrote: > >> equestrian would not have pissed the nasty guards off, I guess greens >> think they can act haughty and snub everyone with impunity - wrong answer >> (aka idealism = 0, reality = 1). > >I don't really like the "greens" type of person as they tend to blame >every thing on me and my desire to be like an average person with >average consumption of our worldly resources but why exactly >should they be targeted for special treatment over other travellers >who may be more astute in voicing their beliefs? They weren't, except perhaps by me. Oden was first selected because of how her ticket was purchased, then singled out for special treatment because of how she acted in the airport. >The decision to permit travel should be a matter of policy and not No, you still don't get it. Try this: > So you're saying they made this quote up, IOW it is not > true that she is blacklisted for her political views? > > "An official told me that my name had been flagged in > the computer," a shaken Oden said. "I was targeted > because the Green Party USA opposes the bombing of > innocent civilians in Afghanistan." Dammit! No matter how hard I try to be quiet and lurk, the stupidity on these lists just forces me to decloak! Her name was flagged in the computer, which Ms. Ogen MISINTERPRETED as meaning it was because of her politics. The real story is that it was flagged, but not because of politics, but because she bought her ticket online. People who use Expedia, CheapTickets, LowestFare, Orbitz, and other rock-bottom and somewhat ANONYMOUS ticket services are having their tickets flagged for (S)earch much more frequently than people who use ticket agencies or buy their tickets direct from the airlines. Second, when law enforcement officials are fucking with your shit and tossing your car or your house, you do not interfere. If you feel the need to assist, with a stuck zipper on your l uggage, for example, you ask politely if you can help with that. You do not grab at it as if you were dealing with your clumsy spouse or child. Only a fucking stupid person, whose mind has been liquefied by the benefits of privilege would even remotely think that they could "show ass" in this sort of climate and get away with it.
Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
At 01:58 AM 11/4/01 -0800, Raymond D. Mereniuk wrote: >On 3 Nov 2001, at 23:12, Reese wrote: > >> Oh boo hoo hoo. I shed crocodile tears. Truly. >> >> People flagged by the ticket agent, people who purchase tickets online. >> That's what got her flagged. Dig deeper, you are missing it. > >> Obviously. Carry on, you don't need me for this. > >What am I missing here? Your earlier text, which give context to my responses. >Was the prospective passenger carrying >weapons or anything which could be judged as a weapon.? Was >the prospective passenger deemed a threat to any of the other >passengers or the completion of the flight to its destination? If the >answers to any of the above questions were yes then the person >should have been arrested, charged and dealt with in a court of law. >Otherwise the passenger should have been allowed on the flight >regardless of political belief or profile of ticket purchase. You still do not allow for attitude. "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone." >The ticket purchaser has suffered discrimation Self-inflicted and self-aggravated. >If you start to agree to this type of decision you are no different than >the Muslims who claim all non-believers to be an enemy. "Us v Them" straw man. >Think about it! Smell what you shovel. Reese
RE: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
On 4 Nov 2001, at 0:05, Reese wrote: > The real story is that it was flagged, but not because of > politics, but because she bought her ticket online. People > who use Expedia, CheapTickets, LowestFare, Orbitz, and other > rock-bottom and somewhat ANONYMOUS ticket services are having > their tickets flagged for (S)earch much more frequently than > people who use ticket agencies or buy their tickets direct > from the airlines. I understand this. Point is traveller shouldn't be denied travel unless there is something which dictates they are in some way a bad person which at that point they should be arrested or advised to remedy an ID problem. If a group was to persist in such behavior they be open to a class action lawsuit. Virtually Raymond D. Mereniuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] FBN - Offering PUP - Unbreakable Encryption Techology http://www.fbntech.com/pup.html
Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
On 4 Nov 2001, at 0:11, Reese wrote: > Maybe simple but a legal way of looking at it which must form the basis of dealing with such situations > You still do not allow for attitude. "We reserve the right to refuse > service to anyone." Attitude is a very scary principal to which base passage. If this is truly the case I smell massive lawsuits down the road once the perceived threat retreats. > Self-inflicted and self-aggravated. The airline or airport authority would lose this one in a trial. > Smell what you shovel. All roses on this side. Virtually Raymond D. Mereniuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] FBN - Delivering on the policy of "Lowered Expectations" http://www.fbntech.com/service1.html
RE: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
At 02:23 AM 11/4/01 -0800, Raymond D. Mereniuk wrote: >> The real story is that it was flagged, but not because of >> politics, but because she bought her ticket online. People >> who use Expedia, CheapTickets, LowestFare, Orbitz, and other >> rock-bottom and somewhat ANONYMOUS ticket services are having >> their tickets flagged for (S)earch much more frequently than >> people who use ticket agencies or buy their tickets direct >> from the airlines. > >I understand this. Point is traveller shouldn't be denied travel >unless there is something which dictates they are in some way a bad >person which at that point they should be arrested or advised to >remedy an ID problem. If a group was to persist in such behavior >they be open to a class action lawsuit. http://www.citypaper.net/articles/101801/news.godfrey.shtml In Godfrey's case I agree, but Oden brought it all on herself. Reese
Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
At 02:38 AM 11/4/01 -0800, Raymond D. Mereniuk wrote: >On 4 Nov 2001, at 0:11, Reese wrote: > >> > >Maybe simple but a legal way of looking at it which must form the >basis of dealing with such situations Note that "legal" and "legitimate" are not fully synonymous. >> You still do not allow for attitude. "We reserve the right to refuse >> service to anyone." > >Attitude is a very scary principal to which base passage. If this is >truly the case I smell massive lawsuits down the road once the >perceived threat retreats. What is precedent and case history of the "We reserve the right..." signs in public establishments, restaurants for example? How about the "no shirts, no shoes, no service" signs, whether food is sold at the establishment or not? >> Self-inflicted and self-aggravated. > >The airline or airport authority would lose this one in a trial. They'll lose Godfrey, this one I doubt it. >> Smell what you shovel. > >All roses on this side. Sure. Reese
Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
On 4 Nov 2001, at 0:49, Reese wrote: > What is precedent and case history of the "We reserve the right..." > signs in public establishments, restaurants for example? How about > the "no shirts, no shoes, no service" signs, whether food is sold > at the establishment or not? You can deny services to people providing you have a consistent set of policies, ie - all folks are treated equally. How do you deny air travel to some but not all of a similar nature. I smell lawsuits once the paranoia is over with. > >> Self-inflicted and self-aggravated. > > > >The airline or airport authority would lose this one in a trial. > > They'll lose Godfrey, this one I doubt it. Back to Sandy's coments Re: rape victims. Just because you got a big mouth doesn't mean you should become a victim. Virtually Raymond D. Mereniuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] FBN - Delivering on the policy of "Lowered Expectations" http://www.fbntech.com/service1.html
RE: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
>From Raymond D. Mereniuk: :I kinda like a place where there is a rule of law and everything is :totally predictable, something America appears to be moving away :from at this moment. -- But the situation *is* entirely predictable: Some people in scary positions of responsibility do not want to see, hear, or know The Truth, because they don't know what to do about it. It's all symbolism and familiar stereotype - if you want to get by airport security, . wear an NYPD hat . put a U.S. flag pin on your jacket lapel or somewhere on the top front of your clothing . if taking a book to read, be sure to change the cover to one from those current books written by prominent journalists or other liberal communications personalities . move in a calm manner - no sudden moves, say to help with zippers or anything (remember: they don't trust you, and only they are allowed to determine the course and direction of your next step - any sign of too much or too little self-confidence will be viewed with suspicion) . as you pass by the armed guards, look in their eye, smile sweetly, and say "I'm *so* glad you're here - I feel safer now!" . at the ticket counter, when they ask for your ID, begin with "baahaaahaaa". They will respond with recognition and relax a little. Later, you can send out your posts anonymously and be viciously, uncompromisingly, honest. I think that's how some of the original 'Patriots' did it. .. Blanc
RE: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
Reese wrote: > At 12:32 AM 11/4/01 -0800, S a n d y wrote: > >Reese wrote: > > > >> You didn't really read the interview, > >> did you? > >> > >> The dumb cunt brought it on herself. > > > >Yeah, just like all those other rape victims... > > Read the article/interview. Did. I don't care if she were singles out or not. NOBODY deserves the treatment she got. Period. Reese illustrates one of the less advertised benefits of free speech. Because Reese is free to way and write what he thinks, we all get to learn just what a misogynistic apologist for the initiation of force he is. Thanks for the warning, Reese. S a n d y
Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
-- On 4 Nov 2001, at 1:58, Raymond D. Mereniuk wrote: > What am I missing here? Was the prospective passenger > carrying weapons or anything which could be judged as a > weapon.? Was the prospective passenger deemed a threat to > any of the other passengers or the completion of the flight > to its destination? ] Let us imagine the following scenario. You are going to board a plane. Someone who is known to be, or plausibly alleged to be, a supporter of the terrorist movements the US is currently at war with, also wants to board the same plane. In that situation, your views on their right to travel by plane will probably undergo a sudden change. The enemies of freedom, which this woman certainly is, see freedom as weakness and fear, and use it against us. This creates the danger that they succeed in making us give up freedom, as has perhaps happened in this case, but it is not merely a matter of dumb fucks using terrorism to institute a police state. There is a real threat here, which has to be met with real violence. Analogously in Vietnam, the enemy mingled with the populace, so that even with the best of intentions, US forces wound up killing a lot of ordinary civilians, a problem made far worse by the stupid "body count" policy, where young ambitious officers, like the future Senator Kerrey, were apt to rack up very large body counts by any means convenient. Senator Kerrey was cerrtainly a mass murderer, and the guardsmen who stopped her from flying were certainly thugs, but the reason there are arguably grounds for overlooking Kerrey's cynical murders and the guardsmen's thuggery ,is that in the face of this quite real threat even good people will do things that are hard to distinguish from the things that bad people do. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG 27HMOB8BBeIGfg7aT3n+oRAgMH8E0Sjhpgg7w6id 42AvXfoapB6NduA4gJt1a16zWy7lOQmEju4DrrtGm
RE: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
James A. Donald wrote: > Let us imagine the following scenario. > You are going to board a plane. > Someone who is known to be, or plausibly > alleged to be, a supporter of the > terrorist movements the US is currently > at war with, also wants to board the same > plane. In that situation, your views on > their right to travel by plane will > probably undergo a sudden change. Even in James' wildly exaggerated scenario, I see no reason to stop them from traveling after they had been shown not to be a threat (as was the case with this woman). Nope, political BELIEFS are sacrosanct. Show me a tangible physical threat or leave the lady alone. > The enemies of freedom, which this woman > certainly is... Decaf, James, decaf. S a n d y
Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
On 4 Nov 2001, at 8:59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Senator Kerrey was cerrtainly a mass murderer, and the > guardsmen who stopped her from flying were certainly thugs, > but the reason there are arguably grounds for overlooking > Kerrey's cynical murders and the guardsmen's thuggery ,is > that in the face of this quite real threat even good people > will do things that are hard to distinguish from the things > that bad people do. > > James A. Donald I think "overlooking" is too strong a word, I think it's more reasonable to call it mitigating circimstances. The guardsman needs to have it explained to him (in a way that the lesson will stick) that he does not have the authority to block travellers because he doesn't like their attitude or their political views. I'm not sure what disciplinary action is appropriate, probably a reptimand is good enough as long as it's made VERY clear that any sort of repeat performance will result in sever consequences. George
Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
At 03:10 AM 11/4/01 -0800, Raymond D. Mereniuk wrote: >Back to Sandy's coments Re: rape victims. Just because you got a >big mouth doesn't mean you should become a victim. Would you say greeting every police officer you meet by calling them "useless pigs" would be begging for victimhood? Reese
Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
At 07:36 AM 11/4/01 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >On Sat, 3 Nov 2001, Reese wrote: Me, to Tim May: >> You didn't really read the interview, did you? >> >> The dumb cunt brought it on herself. Even you wouldn't spit in the >> eye of a cop at your door and expect no action to be taken. > >No she didn't. She has a legitimate right to express her political views >of her governments actions with no consequences. This is as silly as the >hassles other people are getting based on their reading material. What is your evidence she was detained and denied a right to fly because of her political views? What evidence do you think I can present, even by drawing from the text of her interview with Declan, in her own words, that she was denied a right to fly out of that airport because of how she acted once she arrived there? >You don't seem to understand American freedom either. I love the pot calling the kettle black in the morning, it smells like stupidity. Reese
RE: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
Reese wrote: > Would you say greeting every police officer > you meet by calling them "useless pigs" > would be begging for victimhood? I'd say it's protected speech. If the cop can't handle that, can't live up to his oath to uphold the law of the land, than he shouldn't be a cop. S a n d y
RE: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
At 08:07 AM 11/4/01 -0800, Sandy Sandfort wrote: >Reese wrote: > >> At 12:32 AM 11/4/01 -0800, S a n d y wrote: >> >Reese wrote: >> > >> >> You didn't really read the interview, >> >> did you? >> >> >> >> The dumb cunt brought it on herself. >> > >> >Yeah, just like all those other rape victims... >> >> Read the article/interview. > >Did. I don't care if she were singles out or not. NOBODY deserves the >treatment she got. Period. I agree. Yet that is how millions of Americans are treated every day, usually because their skin isn't white enough, their bankbook not fat enough. Sound familiar? >Reese illustrates one of the less advertised benefits of free speech. >Because Reese is free to way and write what he thinks, we all get to learn >just what a misogynistic apologist for the initiation of force he is. > >Thanks for the warning, Reese. Further, how simple the analysis of S a n d y is, that he resorts to pathetic ad hominem in an attempt to invalidate the truth of what I have said. Reese
Re: Soldiers in airports screening-out political dissidents
At 09:36 AM 11/4/01 -0800, Tim May wrote: >Actually, a person or business can "refuse to serve" on nearly any basis >except race or gender or a few other politically-correct things. "Tim's >Surf Shop" can choose not to wax the board of Reese, for whatever reason >it chooses. That's right, whether "I" like it or not. >This is why I said in an earlier piece that the Godfrey/Oden cases >should not be used to further the notion of a "right to travel" (if that >"right" is construed as trampling on the rights of Southwest, United, >Tim's Surf Shop, etc. to pick and choose their customers). > >The focus should be on these things: > >-- the presence of soldiers and cops in inspection points, with way too >much lattitude to inspect bags, pull people out of line, question their >reading materials, etc. At the moment, it's National Guard, there is a long precedent for use of Nat.Guard troops for civil things. So long as they do not bring in regular active duty military, in violation of the posse comitatus act. >-- the requirement that ID be presented, which has very little to do >with airline security (for reasons Cypherpunks are very familiar with) An issue in its own right, the airlines were requiring it before 911 and the airline requiring it is not the same as the government wanting it. >-- the general headlong rush into police state measures, with the >sheeple saying "I want to feel safer. I have nothing to hide. Please, >officer, take away my rights! Please, soldiers, check what we are >reading! I want _more_ rights taken away!!" The Patriot Act still amazes me. What were those congresscritters thinking? They weren't, just reacting blindly by the looks of things. Reese
RE: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
At 10:30 AM 11/4/01 -0800, Sandy Sandfort wrote: >Reese wrote: > >> Would you say greeting every police officer >> you meet by calling them "useless pigs" >> would be begging for victimhood? > >I'd say it's protected speech. If the cop can't handle that, can't live up >to his oath to uphold the law of the land, than he shouldn't be a cop. Meanwhile, in real life,,,
Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
At 12:50 PM 11/4/01 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Reese wrote: >> At 03:10 AM 11/4/01 -0800, Raymond D. Mereniuk wrote: >> >> >Back to Sandy's coments Re: rape victims. Just because you got a >> >big mouth doesn't mean you should become a victim. >> >> Would you say greeting every police officer you meet by calling them >> "useless pigs" would be begging for victimhood? > >I'd say it was a good litmus test as to who should actually be a police >officer. Anyone who got perturbed by such a comment has zero business >being a law enforcement officer. I agree. Given the current crop of cops, is it begging for victimhood? Reese
Re: CDR: Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
On Sun, 4 Nov 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Analogously in Vietnam, the enemy mingled with the populace, > so that even with the best of intentions, US forces wound up > killing a lot of ordinary civilians, a problem made far worse > by the stupid "body count" policy, where young ambitious > officers, like the future Senator Kerrey, were apt to rack up > very large body counts by any means convenient. > > Senator Kerrey was cerrtainly a mass murderer, and the > guardsmen who stopped her from flying were certainly thugs, > but the reason there are arguably grounds for overlooking > Kerrey's cynical murders and the guardsmen's thuggery ,is > that in the face of this quite real threat even good people > will do things that are hard to distinguish from the things > that bad people do. Amazing! Here you make an "argument" that mass-murder is an acceptable behaviour, while you are simultaneously arguing that a political BELIEF is *not*. > --digsig > James A. Donald This is the exact kind of "logic" and "policy" that gets the US attacked in the first place James. Ultimately, the problem isn't this woman's political beliefs - it's YOUR political beliefs. And the fact that the USG both shares them and *lives by them*. -- Yours, J.A. Terranson [EMAIL PROTECTED] If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place...
RE: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
Reese wrote: > At 10:30 AM 11/4/01 -0800, Sandy Sandfort wrote: > ... > >I'd say it's protected speech. If the > >cop can't handle that, can't live up > >to his oath to uphold the law of the > >land, than he shouldn't be a cop. > > Meanwhile, in real life,,, Meanwhile, in real life, Reese will play the role of apologist for bully-boy cops when the "cunt" brings it herself. Of course, in the "real world" some of us don't take it laying down. S a n d y Rapists, ask Reese to be your character witness in your next court appearance.
Reese's Test for the Discrimination of Pigs From Cops (Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
At 08:24 AM 11/4/01 -1000, Reese wrote: > >Would you say greeting every police officer you meet by calling them >"useless pigs" would be begging for victimhood? > No, it would be testing the professionalism of the cop/pig in question. Any cop who reacts to being called "useless pig" is, in fact, one. And should be removed from positions of authority. Problem with Nat'l Guardsthugs (or any MIL) is they don't have the training of a cop. [Professional] Cops know force gradations, psyops, constitutional law and case history. Professional soldiers know shout, shoot. Civil ops, civility, is not their domain.
RE: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
At 10:46 AM 11/4/01 -0800, Sandy Sandfort wrote: >Reese wrote: > >> Yet that is how millions of Americans >> are treated every day, usually because >> their skin isn't white enough, their >> bankbook not fat enough. Sound >> familiar? > >All too familiar. That's why it surprises me how avidly Reese >embraces that sort of bully-boy tactics. The time to fight it is after, when there is a tort, not when you are desperate and at their mercy. Oden will not get far, I expect. >> how simple the analysis of S a n d y is, >> that he resorts to pathetic ad hominem >> in an attempt to invalidate the truth of >> what I have said. > >First, I'd already challenged and defeated your "truth." You said "Yeah, just like all those other rape victims..." except she was not a rape victim, the plunging neckline and miniskirt is not at issue. This is more like stripping all your clothes off for a stroll through the park at 2 AM, as I said in my response. >Second, your are a "misogynistic apologist for the initiation of force." Why is that in quotes? Where did it come from? Regardless, you are not reading me, you are inferring from me if you believe that. I said she brought it on herself, I did not say she deserved it. > Why are you offended? Stirring through the responses to me, it strikes me that those of you who have taken issue with me are the ones offended, I'm just calling the situation like I see it. >You seem to embrace that image anyway. Third, you are a hypocrite. >Please re-read what you said about the "cunt" in question. That what she did was dumb and that she brought it on herself? Here is what she said about it all, in her own words, from http://www.wartimeliberty.com/article.pl?sid=01/11/03/1813233 "There was this National Guard guy there. He yells over at me, so everyone can hear, 'Bring your bags over here.' You know how they are when they're all puffed up with themselves. He said, 'Hurry up,' so I slowed down some more. Slowed down some more. "I put my bags on the table. The two women employees were standing there. [I tried to help them with a stuck zipper.] He grabbed my left arm, he started yelling in my face, Interfering with the baggage searchers. I said, 'You can't do that.' He went to grab my arm, and I said, 'Don't touch me.' Lipping off at the security personnel. I saw an older airline guy shake his head, 'No,' and he backed off. The "No" could have meant anything, including she failed the search. "That insulted his little manhood. Her subjective opinion, this interview is filled with it. I heard him say real soft, 'Don't let her on the plane,' like he was talking to himself. We have only her word for this. "Then I go to get on the plane since we're all done and everything, and the American Airlines ticket guy says,' You can't get on the plane.' I say, 'Why not?' ... He says, 'Because this guy says you didn't cooperate with the search.' ... She didn't. "He said, 'Maybe we can get you on the 4:00 plane, He offers. He said, 'Come with me.' I followed very slowly, I sat down for a while. I said I'm carrying these bags; I need a rest... It's called passive resistance. Passive resistance. Resisting. She didn't cooperate with the search or anything else, did she? He went and got six other National Guard guys and they all approached me. Here are these six untrained, ignorant, don't-know-how-to-deal- with-the-public, machine-gun-armed young guys in their camouflage suits with their military gear hanging off of it. "I looked up and started laughing, She laughed. "They had the airport policeman tell me, 'You're not flying out of this airport today.' ... After all the shit, they respond. They wanted to get back at me somehow because I was not a subservient female, because I questioned their manhood. She interprets wrongly, again. "I went to the American Airlines guy and said, 'Is this just today?' He said, 'I don't know.' One clerk said, 'You could drive to Boston [five hours away] and see if you can get out of there.' They still offered to get her to her destination, until she finally pissed them all off. Here is what Wal Sheasby said about it all. Reese Written by Walt Sheasby on Solidarity List Serv. Who is Walt Sheasby? See, for example: http://www.greeninformation.com/SHEASBYINDEX.htm http://pages.prodigy.net/gmoses/nvusa/gopal.htm http://www.indianagreenparty.org/gmo.mv LEADER OF GREEN SPLINTER GROUP FIBS ABOUT AIRPORT HASSLE In an official press release from its Chicago headquarters, the Greens/Green Party USA, a small splinter group that opposes recognition of the Green Party of the United States as the electoral voice of the movement that ran Ralph Nader for President in 2000, declared that one of its leaders was stopped from boarding a flight after a check turned up her name w
Re: Reese's Test for the Discrimination of Pigs From Cops (Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
At 10:56 AM 11/4/01 -0800, David Honig wrote: >At 08:24 AM 11/4/01 -1000, Reese wrote: >> >>Would you say greeting every police officer you meet by calling them >>"useless pigs" would be begging for victimhood? >> > >No, it would be testing the professionalism of the cop/pig in question. Yep. >Any cop who reacts to being called "useless pig" is, in fact, one. >And should be removed from positions of authority. Good luck. >Problem with Nat'l Guardsthugs (or any MIL) >is they don't have the training of a cop. >[Professional] Cops know force gradations, psyops, constitutional >law and case history. Professional soldiers know shout, shoot. >Civil ops, civility, is not their domain. Yep, as far as I know. Too bad none of this justifies the way she resisted the search and then lied about it all, after the fact. Reese
Re: CDR: Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
At 01:03 PM 11/4/01 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Reese wrote: >>>I'd say it was a good litmus test as to who should actually be a >>>police officer. Anyone who got perturbed by such a comment has >>>zero business being a law enforcement officer. >> >>I agree. Given the current crop of cops, is it begging for victimhood? > >No, you don't actually. You DO miss the point. Well, that's that - the final arbiter of all things has spoken. >If 'real life' isn't governed by 'principles' then there is nothing but >who has the biggest stick. > >Which happens to be the entire point that 'principles' were developed, to >alleviate the problems of 'big sticks'. Whatever, Jim. Say, don't you have more url's to forward with only a vague subject line to indicate what they are about? Reese
Re: Soldiers in airports screening-out political dissidents
On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 08:45:05AM -1000, Reese wrote: > of Nat.Guard troops for civil things. So long as they do not bring in > regular active duty military, in violation of the posse comitatus act. This shows a common but not entirely correct view of the PCA. You may wish to read it for yourself: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1385.html A seperate question is whether the PCA has much meaning anymore; it's just an act of Congress and can be repealed by another. Also the PCA seems to strongly indicate the president can call out the military and for domestic law enforcement without Congress' authorization. -Declan
Re: CDR: MATT DRUDGE // DRUDGE REPORT 2001® - Delta Force gets bloody nose, intensity scares the crap out of everybody...
O-kay - the learning process begins. In every war we've ever fought, we've learned from our opponents - if the political leadership gave us the opportunity to do it. Now we know the Talibs have small, heavily armed forces staked out NEXT TO obvious fixed objectives. Our next assaults will be in greater force, and on the CURRENT enemy positions instead of those they've abandoned under bombardment. What that means is that the combination of bombardment and ground assault is WORKING, unless you believe that the positions the Talibs are hastily improvising are better than those they were forced to abandon... Marc de Piolenc Jim Choate wrote: > > http://www.drudgereport.com/flash33.htm
Re: CDR: RE: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Raymond D. Mereniuk wrote: > Ring a bell here? Green bad, Republican good, Christian good, > Muslim bad?, or the other way round!! It would be very sad if > America was to become this shallow! Too late. -- Yours, J.A. Terranson [EMAIL PROTECTED] If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place...
Re: Canadian telling me not to worry so much about Canada- and Singapore-style measures
On 3 Nov 2001, at 22:10, Tim May wrote: > This is why we are supposed to be a nation of _laws_, not of _men_. It > doesn't matter whether these soldiers are country bumpkins or not: the > Constitution still applies. (Scholars may opine that Bangor > International Airport has "invited" soldiers onto its property, blah > blah, or that ordinary search and seizure provisions are waived, blah > blah, but the fact is that soldiers are now frisking people without > search warrants. At this rate, the entire Fourth will be mooted.) What is happening now is wrong. I hope the lawyers get a hold of it and sue all involved and the elected officials which allowed it to happen are removed from office and also assume a financial liability. I would like to berate your country for allowing such country bumpkins into such positions but I note the bumpkins at the Vancouver BC airport were taking the pins out of Remembrance day poppies. > "At the time it apparently was a good idea"? It was a horrible idea but yet so very few realize the true magnitude of the darkness of this action. Kinda like going back to an era of witch hunts except there was no test. > You are hopeless. Every one of the guards, judges, and processing > officials should have been tried for kidnapping and then hung by the > neck until he was dead. Your views are a touch strong. I am disappointed you so quickly label me because my beliefs are less extreme than yours. Kinda puts you in the same category as the country bumpkin National Guardsman in Maine don't you think? > (One reason I have been cynical dates back to 1969 when a teacher was > piously explaining the Nuremberg precedent, that "just following orders" > is no defense. I brought up the imprisonment of Japanese-ancestry and > Italian-ancestry persons, without constitutional due process. My teacher > just shrugged and said "We won the war, so it didn't apply to us.") In 1969 I was too far gone on the hormones of youth and other distractions to notice much. By the early 70s the takeover of India by the British was my cause. The British were a bunch of bastards and they conquered a society for basically economic gain. I was wrong in being overly critical of such actions as they are just part of the evolution of man's society, one society is always overcoming another society. We can't feel guilt for the actions of previous generations long since passed away. Where do we draw the line? To me it is obvious Japanese North Americans should have been compensated for any loss of property or better yet it should not have happened. What about the evil deeds of the US government against the American Indians? Yes, the society of the day screwed those people out of their land. Should our guilt extend that far back or should we have a limitation on guilt similar to your suggestion of a 50 year rule on art pieces. > We are talking about the Constitution, not what is commonplace in ad > hocracies like Canada or in police states like Singapore and Indonesia. The interpretation of the American Constitution is very much based on current standards. There are some long term redeeming values but much is based on current standards. At one point in America the circulation of currency was restricted to keep the masses in their place. Look into the burned over region of New York. During Hoover's time in the FBI the Mafia was denied and homosexuals were persecuted and now we are told Hoover was most likely a homosexual. I don't see a great difference between America during Hoover's time and some of the Asian authoritarian governments of today. The point being most societies are in a constant state of change and hopefully the change is in a position direction. Virtually Raymond D. Mereniuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] FBN - Delivering on the policy of "Lowered Expectations" http://www.fbntech.com/service1.html
Proteja-se contra assaltos!
"Veja o que acontece com uma porta de vidro com 22mm de espessura recebendo 63 disparos de armas de fogo em diversos calibres" ( Cenas reais ) http://glassage.com.br/video.mpg Portas e Janelas de vidro que podem salvar a sua vida, já estão sendo fabricadas em São Paulo, vidros finos e em qualquer côr garantem a sua segurança contra armas de fogo reduzindo quando divulgado a quase nada o número de assaltos. www.glassage.com.br * Caso não queira mais receber mensagens clique e preencha no assunto: "Remover" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
At 10:12 PM 11/3/01 -1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Any reasonable person reading Declan's article would realize the >dumb cunt brought it on herself by being a curmudgeon and a very >uncooperative one at that. Goodbye, Reese. *PLONK* -- Luthor //Remembering is copying and copying is THEFT
RE: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
>Later, you can send out your posts anonymously and be viciously, >uncompromisingly, honest. I think that's how some of the original >'Patriots' did it. As did the 'Atta Boys.' This 'Blanc' is now in the databank of crowing terrorists, and will be reluctantly quoted in the next national high alert. Deceiving the homeland guardians is treason. So the whole thread was entrapment, starting with Declan the arch bait setting cause traitor. What do you expect of 1A in these days except ensnaring dumb fundamentalists. The moles and sleepers fingering the all too constitutional credulous. Home Schooling of the Americas. Take a moment to not cc me your calling attention to your deathwish by bragging your guerilla smarts.
These Girls Will Do Anything You Want hfcnws
Wanna see some SEXY, NUDE JAPANESE SCHOOLGIRLS? Our girls are the baddest, nastiest, most beautiful Japanese teens, and they love to have hardcore sex! Cum inside and see them get down and dirty just for you. http://212.107.196.183/members/japan/index.html You will love our hot Japanese girls. They love to have fun and will do anything to make you cum! Cum inside now, they are waiting to get you off! http://212.107.196.183/members/japan/index.html Hurry, these Japanese girls are waiting to suck you off! If you wished to be removed from our mailing list just click here: http://212.107.196.183/members/japan/remove.htm
Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
Luthor, for the children's sake, come into the present: PLONK is ancient rune of 'thanderals vapiding gas. Hmm, like Luthor Blisset, hoary collectivist nym, which is not to say all reds are dead just fomenting CDC misses.
RE: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
>From someone who isn't really John Young: :This 'Blanc' is now in the databank of crowing terrorists, and will be :reluctantly quoted in the next national high alert. Deceiving the homeland :guardians is treason. -- But, it's not my fault! As is said of girls wearing overly-feminized clothing: they *asked* for it. .. Blanc (I don't need to cc you; I _know_ you're there)
Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
On Sat, 3 Nov 2001, Raymond D. Mereniuk wrote: > Your mention of the list and the guardsman being aware of this > horrible threat coming through the airport were assumed but my > thought was it was a local redneck or folks in a vigilante mood. It > would appear this person was targeted. When such folks take > actions like this there is a reaction, ie - the victim had it written up in > a press release/article and the guardsman and airport appear > pretty stupid. Hopefully the victim of this epsode, and others of > similar episodes, will take legal action and sue. Hopefully the > American system will retain this ability. The American system is supposed to PREVENT it from taking place AT ALL. You're supposed to respect and protect peoples rights up front, not after they drag your ass into court. That guardsman took an oath to protect and uphold the Constitution and ONLY follow legal orders. Detaining or otherwise harrassing anyone for nothing more than their political views, however objectionable isn't acceptable in this country. -- Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
On Sat, 3 Nov 2001, Reese wrote: > You didn't really read the interview, did you? > > The dumb cunt brought it on herself. Even you wouldn't spit in the > eye of a cop at your door and expect no action to be taken. No she didn't. She has a legitimate right to express her political views of her governments actions with no consequences. This is as silly as the hassles other people are getting based on their reading material. You don't seem to understand American freedom either. -- Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
RE: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Blanc wrote: > Later, you can send out your posts anonymously and be viciously, > uncompromisingly, honest. I think that's how some of the original > 'Patriots' did it. Actually I think they first sent out warning, tarred and feathered the objectionable who ignored it while dumping their property in the local bay, then they sent out their notes saying "See, we meant it". -- Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
GMU Student Charged in Flag Burning
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/htx/wjla/20011102/lo/gmu_student_charged_in_flag_burning_1.html -- -- Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
States Devising Plan for High-Tech National Identification Cards (washingtonpost.com)
I believe the Constitution requires the Feds to be in charge of inter-state commerce (see definition 2 of that word if you're confused)... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32717-2001Nov2.html -- -- Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
Salon.com News | Freedom begets evil, and other realizations
http://salon.com/news/col/vincent/2001/11/02/libertarians/index_np.html -- -- Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
$1000 Commission Per Sale $00 Down to Start
It's So Simple To Earn $2,000 - $5,000 Per Week, Nowadays...HOW, you say? With $1,000 COLD HARD CASH Commissions per sale . . .. Just For STARTERS. We're searching for only 12 elite individuals with the work ethic necessary to generate a cash-flow for themselves of $2,000 - $5,000per week, and to increase that to over $20,000 per month, in as little as four to six months. And you know what? If you really have a burning desire and commitment, WE GUARANTEE to disclose the simple techniques so you can reach this explosive income! FOR MORE INFORMATION, send an email with your NAME and PHONE NUMBER and BEST TIME to call TO : [EMAIL PROTECTED] SHOW US your INTEREST LEVEL by including a rating of 1-10 in the subject line. (10 being the highest interest) ~ Can you read a short script, and then turn the interested prospects over to our professional sales medium? (You will not be required to do any selling.) ~ Do you have the self-discipline to ignore the TV for a couple of hours per day? ~ Are you looking for a legitimate home-based business opportunity, that is not just another chain-letter scheme? If you would like to build an amazing income that will grow lightning-fast and have you profit $1,000.00 every time only one prospect makes a purchase, then this is for you! You can build the business under our guidance and support without having to attend meetings or sell people things they don't need. FOR MORE INFORMATION, send an email with your NAME and PHONE NUMBER and BEST TIME to call TO : [EMAIL PROTECTED] SHOW US your INTEREST LEVEL by including a rating of 1-10 in the subject line. (10 being the highest interest) We market a real product, that pays real commissions to you, $1,000.00 per sale, just for making the initial contacts. With our turnkey lead generation systems you'll always talk to people who actually WANT to talk to you. You have nothing to lose, there's no risk involved, nor is there any obligation whatsoever, and you may be qualified to earn thousands of extra dollars per month! SO, INQUIRE NOW! FOR MORE INFORMATION, send an email with your NAME and PHONE NUMBER and BEST TIME to call TO : [EMAIL PROTECTED] SHOW US your INTEREST LEVEL by including a rating of 1-10 in the subject line. (10 being the highest interest) P.S. You literally have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to GET INVOLVED NOW! Don't let this one go by. You have absolutely nothing to lose! This could be the most fascinating and profitable business of your life! ** This is a one time mailing and you'll be automatically removed. If you wish, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] with remove in subject. ***
--Most Responsive Bizop E-mail Leads!
= - FRESH 10,000 List added 11-02-01 = For the more info and link to website, click below: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=EmailInfo1103 -->Do you want to start getting REPLIES for your offer? -->Do you want those replies to be from someone who's actually interested in what you have to offer? **Visit our site to get the MOST responsive e-mail leads available!** 10,000 e-mails for only $10 25,000 e-mails for only $20 50,000 e-mails for only $30 200,000 e-mails for only $50 New Special~ FREE Stealth Mass Mailer with orders of 200,000! One Month FREE Subscription to 5-10 Bulletproof mail servers/day M-F! (never lose your ISP again!) For the more info and link to website, click below: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=EmailInfo1102 -- **Not an experienced direct mailer? We can send your ad for you! Prices start at only $30! --- - SPECIALS! - -- **FREE with EVERY order: Demo of ListMan e-mail manager software **Orders of 50,000 or more: FREE copy Express Mail Server to send your messages! -This is not a demo but a permanent license for the software! **Orders of 200,000 : - Resale Rights for EMS! -->You keep 100% of the profits - InfoDisk with 1000+ Money Making Reports - CheckMAN software ___ To be removed from future mailings: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=Remove
Making Serious Money Has Never Been This Easy! [jskvz]
NEW CD ROM is helping to Create HUGE FORTUNES!! Free Info: * What if you could make a full time income handing/sending out a $1.25 CD ROM? * What if the company paid you EVERY DAY? * What if it was a New York Stock Exchange Company? * What if there was no "real" competition, and everybody needs our service? * What if you got paid when somebody goes to your website and views the hottest video presentation ever and signs up? If you are the least bit curious about why this CD ROM is making us Fortunes!! All you need to do is simply: 1.Send an email to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=CD_ROM 2. Put " CD ROM " in the subject heading We will email you all you need to know to get signed up and making money TODAY!!! Waiting to hear from you soon! GA PS.. Please put "Remove" in subject line to get out of this list. Thanks.
The feebs can read my email, I feel safer already
"This Just In --- Internet to be rooted thru central FBR servers. Death of the 4th Amendment predicted. Movie at 11." We have always been at war with Iraniraqistan. -- "Four Arab-looking guys reading the Koran are much less suspicious if they have the cards and can just slash them through card readers." ~ Alan 'Ausweis Macht Frei' Dershowitz For the irony impaired there now follows a FICTIONAL! (repeat FICTIONAL!) example of exactly the sort of thing that will NOT be grounds for a no-knock warrant. > > Freind, > > Compliments of the season. Grace and peace and love > from Almighty God to you. I hope my letter does not > cause you too much embarrassment as I write to you > in good faith, based on the contact address given > to me by a friend who works at the Pakistani embassy > in your country. Please excuse my intrusion into your > private life. > > I have fallen on some hard times. Vindictive government > officials who are bent on dealing with my family have > made it necessary that I seek your assistance on their > behalf. The Swiss government has already frozen all > the accounts of my family in Switzerland, and some > other countries would soon follow to do the same. > I no longer have freedom of movement in my own country. > > My tent blew away and the gr8 s8n gave my camel a severe > case of hemorrhoids. What with the winter coming next > week, can I stay at your place for a while? ];-p > > > yours > > ITMA > > > > > >
Soldiers in airports screening-out political dissidents
On Sunday, November 4, 2001, at 03:10 AM, Raymond D. Mereniuk wrote: > On 4 Nov 2001, at 0:49, Reese wrote: > >> What is precedent and case history of the "We reserve the right..." >> signs in public establishments, restaurants for example? How about >> the "no shirts, no shoes, no service" signs, whether food is sold >> at the establishment or not? > > You can deny services to people providing you have a consistent > set of policies, ie - all folks are treated equally. How do you deny > air travel to some but not all of a similar nature. I smell lawsuits > once the paranoia is over with. Actually, a person or business can "refuse to serve" on nearly any basis except race or gender or a few other politically-correct things. "Tim's Surf Shop" can choose not to wax the board of Reese, for whatever reason it chooses. This is why I said in an earlier piece that the Godfrey/Oden cases should not be used to further the notion of a "right to travel" (if that "right" is construed as trampling on the rights of Southwest, United, Tim's Surf Shop, etc. to pick and choose their customers). The focus should be on these things: -- the presence of soldiers and cops in inspection points, with way too much lattitude to inspect bags, pull people out of line, question their reading materials, etc. -- the requirement that ID be presented, which has very little to do with airline security (for reasons Cypherpunks are very familiar with) -- the general headlong rush into police state measures, with the sheeple saying "I want to feel safer. I have nothing to hide. Please, officer, take away my rights! Please, soldiers, check what we are reading! I want _more_ rights taken away!!" --Tim May, Occupied America "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759.
Attention: Your Check is Waiting tztwo
Refinance Your Home While RATES ARE LOW! Let Your Home's Equity Work For You! Click Here for full details! We can help YOU LOWER YOUR MONTHLY PAYMENTS! If you are a homeowner located in the U.S., you are eligible to receive money for: Debt Consolidation (combine all your bills into one!) Home Refinancing (reduce your monthly payments and get cash back!) Second Mortgages (receive up to 125% of your home value!) For a FREE APPLICATION or to receive a FREE NO OBLIGATION consultation CLICK HERE NOW YOU CAN: Pay off all your debts Cut down your home's mortgage interest Cut your current credit card payments Lower your mortgage payment and Save Money For a FREE APPLICATION or to receive a FREE NO OBLIGATION consultation CLICK HERE NOW!! To be removed from future mailings, please Click Here
Reprimands considered useless
On Sunday, November 4, 2001, at 10:09 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> > I think "overlooking" is too strong a word, I think it's more > reasonable to call it mitigating circimstances. The guardsman > needs to have it explained to him (in a way that the lesson will > stick) that he does not have the authority to block travellers > because he doesn't like their attitude or their political views. > I'm not sure what disciplinary action is appropriate, probably > a reptimand is good enough as long as it's made VERY clear that > any sort of repeat performance will result in sever consequences. > The problem lies in the _institutional_ abuse of power. Whether that particular soldier is on duty, or "learns his lesson," is neither here nor there. Some _other_ soldier is probably, as we speak, doing the same thing to some other person reading an Unapproved Book, being a member of an Unapproved Political Party, or displaying Unapproved Religious Ornaments. "Reprimanding" a particular soldier does nothing useful. Left as an exercise is what should be done to curtail such violations of Posse Comitatus and such violations of the First and Fourth Amendments. --Tim May "How we burned in the prison camps later thinking: What would things have been like if every security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive?" --Alexander Solzhenitzyn, Gulag Archipelago
Metricom assets sold for $8.25 million
By the time this article got forwarded to me, the URL for the original article was gone, but the title's pretty indicative :-) www.metricom.com has a "goodbye" page, with pointers to the bankruptcy auction for interested bidders. A google search reveals that back in September, Metricom turned down Aerie's offer for $20M (oops), and also that Aerie had been planning to spend $3.5B to build a 2 mile fiber backbone for the ISP they wanted to be. >From: "Steve Stroh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "Dewayne Hendricks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Metricom assets sold for $8.25 million >Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 14:36:19 -0800 >MIME-Version: 1.0 > > >Dewayne: > >What's not mentioned in this article: >* What Aerie bought was mostly intellectual property - the software and >designs for the radios, patents, etc. >* Unclear is if Aerie bought the existing inventory. Apparently there are >lots of radios already manufactured, but not deployed, sitting in storage. >* Metricom's WCS spectrum is not included in the sale to Aerie (apparently >the asset managers feel that it will fetch considerably as much as $50M - >sometime). Unlikely given AT&T Wireless Services' decision to junk their >Fixed Wireless System which will free up more WCS spectrum. >* None of the physical assets of the network are included in this sale, >including poletop radios, wired access points, network operation center, >etc. All of that was "abandoned in place" to free Metricom of the liability >of back rent, lease payments, and other liabilities. >* Rights Of Way were similarly abandoned... > >It'll be interesting to watch! For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Reese wrote: > At 03:10 AM 11/4/01 -0800, Raymond D. Mereniuk wrote: > > >Back to Sandy's coments Re: rape victims. Just because you got a > >big mouth doesn't mean you should become a victim. > > Would you say greeting every police officer you meet by calling them > "useless pigs" would be begging for victimhood? I'd say it was a good litmus test as to who should actually be a police officer. Anyone who got perturbed by such a comment has zero business being a law enforcement officer. -- Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
Re: CDR: Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Jim Choate wrote: > On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Reese wrote: > > > At 03:10 AM 11/4/01 -0800, Raymond D. Mereniuk wrote: > > > > >Back to Sandy's coments Re: rape victims. Just because you got a > > >big mouth doesn't mean you should become a victim. > > > > Would you say greeting every police officer you meet by calling them > > "useless pigs" would be begging for victimhood? > > I'd say it was a good litmus test as to who should actually be a police > officer. Anyone who got perturbed by such a comment has zero business > being a law enforcement officer. Agreed. As an interesting aside, there is actual case law in New York that would be on point here (although I can't for the life of me find the damn citation. Sandy?). The NY Court of Appeals ruled that it is not possible to "disturb the peace of a police officer". The incident was in fact someone calling a cop a "pig", and their subsequent arrest for "disturbing the peace". -- Yours, J.A. Terranson [EMAIL PROTECTED] If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place...
RE: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
Reese wrote: > You didn't really read the interview, > did you? > > The dumb cunt brought it on herself. Yeah, just like all those other rape victims... S a n d y
Re: CDR: Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Reese wrote: > At 12:50 PM 11/4/01 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: > >On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Reese wrote: > >> At 03:10 AM 11/4/01 -0800, Raymond D. Mereniuk wrote: > >> > >> >Back to Sandy's coments Re: rape victims. Just because you got a > >> >big mouth doesn't mean you should become a victim. > >> > >> Would you say greeting every police officer you meet by calling them > >> "useless pigs" would be begging for victimhood? > > > >I'd say it was a good litmus test as to who should actually be a police > >officer. Anyone who got perturbed by such a comment has zero business > >being a law enforcement officer. > > I agree. Given the current crop of cops, is it begging for victimhood? No, you don't actually. You DO miss the point. If 'real life' isn't governed by 'principles' then there is nothing but who has the biggest stick. Which happens to be the entire point that 'principles' were developed, to alleviate the problems of 'big sticks'. -- Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
Re: CDR: Re: Soldiers in airports screening-out political dissidents
On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Reese wrote: > At the moment, it's National Guard, there is a long precedent for use > of Nat.Guard troops for civil things. So long as they do not bring in > regular active duty military, in violation of the posse comitatus act. And it is pure judicial fiat. Guardsmen on duty are active military. -- Yours, J.A. Terranson [EMAIL PROTECTED] If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place...
Business Rights and Free Markets
Tim (and other C-A-C-L proponents) have opined that a 'business' has the 'right' to refuse service to anyone for any reason. This is clearly contrary to both the concept of 'rights' and 'free market' (and is diametricaly opposed to what C-A-C-L proponents claim(!) to want). Things don't have rights. A business is a thing. It is a mechanism whereby one or more people get from here to there. It is analgous to a bicycle and moving from point A to point B. While the people riding the bike clearly have a right to get from A to B by any mechanism that doesn't interfere with others it is a long slide into insanity to then say the bike has equivalent 'rights'. A business can refuse to serve anyone they desire for any reason, but the market such a business operates in is not(!!!) a free market by any definition that folks like von Mises or Hayek would recognize as such. Now C-A-C-L proponents claim (of which this is just another example of their hypocrisy or ignorance - take your pick [1]) that they want to create a free market that is universal in all human activity. Clearly this isn't possible operating under Tim and his supporters particular brand of 'free' which is nothing more than 'freedom for me, not for thee'. A business has the RESPONSIBILITY to refuse service to anyone which threatens that business' operations. They also have a responsibility to make that reaction as minimaly invasive as possible in all cases, no exceptions. There is no "..., but..." in free market or American democracy. [1] Never ascribe to malice what can be attributed to incompetence. -- Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
GADSDEN
C'punks, The Gadsden flag is the only American flag I have any interest in flying. Laissez Faire Books is offering a stylized, anarcho-capitalist (gold on black) version of the Gadsden design on a t-shirt. I'll be picking up mine tomorrow. Check it out: http://laissezfairebooks.com/product.cfm?op=view&pid=ET8568 If you are interested in the history of the Gadsden flag or in buying one, check out: http://www.interesting.com/gifts/gadsden/ http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/us-ratt.html http://www.usflag.org/gadsden.html http://www.vexillum.com/ http://www.usahistorystore.com/ http://www.americastore.com/gadsdenflag.html S a n d y
Re: CDR: GADSDEN
I prefer the Culpepper Flag, same motif but includes the red and white stripes for the original colonies. On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Sandy Sandfort wrote: > C'punks, > > The Gadsden flag is the only American flag I have any interest in flying. > Laissez Faire Books is offering a stylized, anarcho-capitalist (gold on > black) version of the Gadsden design on a t-shirt. I'll be picking up mine > tomorrow. Check it out: > > http://laissezfairebooks.com/product.cfm?op=view&pid=ET8568 > > If you are interested in the history of the Gadsden flag or in buying one, > check out: > > http://www.interesting.com/gifts/gadsden/ > http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/us-ratt.html > http://www.usflag.org/gadsden.html > http://www.vexillum.com/ > http://www.usahistorystore.com/ > http://www.americastore.com/gadsdenflag.html -- Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
Early American Flags with Snake Motif
http://www.usflag.org/gadsden.html -- -- Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
Re: CDR: Re: Soldiers in airports screening-out political dissidents
On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Reese wrote: > Working for the governor of their respective states, unless you're saying > they've been called up by the Army and federalized. There is a long list States are prohibited from having troops. Any(!) troops in the US (be they military, guard, or militia) ARE responsible to Congress and Congress only until Congress assigns them to the President (and only the President) as CinC. -- Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
Re: CDR: Re: Soldiers in airports screening-out political dissidents
On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Reese wrote: > States are not prohibited from having a militia, the National Guard is an > organized militia, until such time they are federalized, at which point > they fall under the Army's Chain of Command. No, the can't except in cases of invasion. > Why do you think all or nearly all states have a National Guard, if it is > prohibited as you claim? Technically the National Guard is unconstitutional. It does not qualify as the 'militia' and ONLY the army, navy, and militia have been authorized (technically an independent air force is also unconstitutional without an amendment) by the Constitution (or Congress through an amendment) to date. The Constitution & Gun Rights: It's bigger than the 2nd alone This document is an ongoing project where I take comments and observations from others and post their questions and my replies. Some of this material is old and some is new. It is intended to demonstrate that when the Constitution as a whole is applied to sensitive issues it in fact provides clear direction on the limits and character of the relation between the the three arms of the government of the United States; federal, state, and individual. I assume that anyone commenting on this document is giving their explicit permission to include them with my replies unless otherwise noted. I would prefer that all discussion take place on the Cypherpunks public mailing list. I will submit all my responces to submissions to that list. If you don't wish to discuss this issue in a public forum please do not respond to me. I have no interest in private discussion on this topic. This country is going through a crisis of civil liberties and a fundamental loss of faith in the tenets of democracy. It is becoming more fascist (ie public management of private property) on a daily basis. In the near future it could become completely socialist (ie public management of public property and elimination of private property) in the name of the greater good. The belief that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the individual is in direct conflict with both the spirit and words of the Constitution. Legislative, judicial, and executive branch decisions and actions speak to this on a daily basis. One of the most controversial topics is the private ownership of weapons and the duty of the government to regulate the same. The current discussion on both sides is limited solely to the 2nd Amendment. Unfortunately this is a stillborn position because it misses fundamental issues and questions. To address those I have listed each of the relevant sections of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Perusal of these make it clear that the right of the individual to own and bear arms with no interference or regulation is a fundamental right of every American. This right is justified by a long history of abuse by political systems of the individual as well as a continous sequence of physical assaults on the citizenry. It is worth making special note that the Presidential claim to executive privilige regarding the use of military forces without Congressional permission is unconstitutional (see Article II). The Constitution clearly states the President is the commander in chief of the armed forces only after they have been called into action. And only Congress may call them into action unless it can not be conveined. The President of the United States is not in the chain of command of the military forces without specific authorization from Congress. Until such time as that is given only Congress has the authority to direct and organize military activities. This means that the President may direct military forces only until Congress convenes. At that point Congress must decide whether to agree to commit the forces. Amendment 2, 4, & 9 provide in and of themselves sufficient grounds to find any federal involvement in the purchase, possession, or operation of a weapon to be unconstitutional. One of the most specious argumenst in this discussion is that 'the people' in the 2nd Amendment is not to be construed as meaning the individual. However, it is clear from the Constitution itself and other amendments, such as the 4th, that this simply is not so. The term 'the people' means that the decision regarding such issues is to be made at the level of the individual. In other words whether a particular individual agrees to participate is completely voluntary. THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. [ Note that the intent of the Constitution, and by extension those who represent us, is to provide freedom of choice (i.e. liberty) for each
A Deliberate Strategy of Disruption (washingtonpost.com)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36356-2001Nov3.html -- -- Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
DRUDGE REPORT FLASH 2001® - New Yorker story false...
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash.htm -- -- Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
Huge«Savings«75%-85%««On«Inkjets«&«Laser«Cartridges««Manufacture«Direct
Buy wholesale direct from the manufacture and cut out the middle man!! Save 75% to 85% on items you use every day. TonerBuys.com. BLASTS the " superstores" and all "Internet sites" For all Inkjets, Laser Cartridges, and fax supplies. Epson and Canon Inkjets starting at $1.99. Hewlett Packard starting at $13.50. Laser Cartridges starting at $21.00. We carry all major brands Hewlett Packard, Canon, Lexmark, Brother etc. Rated a "Top Service" store by Yahoo shopping!! Check Out - www.TonerBuys.com and stop throwing your money away. All products 100% Guaranteed!!! Sincerely, TonerBuys.com. "Quality is our Guarantee" **Current Coupon Special code "AZRYAN" for free shipping on USA orders above $125.00. This message is intended to benifit the recipient. If you would like to be removed please let us know by emailing us at [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put your email address in the subject line.
=?x-unknown?q?Re=3A_CDR=3A_DRUDGE_REPORT_FLASH_2001=AE_-_Ne?==?x-unknown?q?w_Yorker_story_false=2E=2E=2E?=
On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Jim Choate wrote: > http://www.drudgereport.com/flash.htm Um, yeah, right. Amazing how every single thing we have done has been "flawless", how what few casualties we have taken have *all* been from non-taliban causes, how every missing/downed aircraft has been from "dust storms" or other "bad weather"... Does the US really believe that anyone else believes this propaganda bullshit? -- Yours, J.A. Terranson [EMAIL PROTECTED] If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place...
Re: CDR: Re: Soldiers in airports screening-out political dissidents
On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Reese wrote: > Whatever Jim. Have it your way, a century of precedent means nothing. You may want to acquire (and possibly even *read*), "Government By Judiciary". -- Yours, J.A. Terranson [EMAIL PROTECTED] If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place...
Government by Judiciary
I'd never heard of the book before... http://www.anthonyhargis.com/governme.htm -- -- Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
Re: Soldiers in airports screening-out political dissidents
On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Reese wrote: > Whatever Jim. Have it your way, a century of precedent means nothing. I wish The point that the government is so far outside the Constitution and any concept of reasonable 'American democracy' should be obvious, it is usually the reason folks come here to discuss their different perspectives of how and why, as well as what to do about it. -- Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
FW: Damn ! I wish I'd though ot fhis myself
C'punks, Friend of mine sent me this. I like the poetic justice of it. S a n d y > A Good Idea! > > All of the rubble from New York ... all the huge blocks of > concrete and steel, the old busted up computers, refrigerators, > hot water heaters, air conditioners, fire trucks, broken glass, > etc., should be shoveled into C130's and C5A's, flown over > Iraq and Afghanistan and dropped from 32,000 feet. > > A Frigidaire can do a heck of a lot of damage from 5 miles up. > With each assault, we can drop pamphlets: > "Greetings, from the 110th floor of the World Trade Center!" > > The next day it would read, "...from the 109th floor..." > > Then the 108th, etc., etc. > > After 110 days of this, I can't imagine there would be much > left standing on the ground. Can't you just see the headlines: > > "WORLD TRADE CENTER STRIKES BACK!" > > What wonderful irony this would be, and think how much money > we wouldn't have to spend on new bombs or missiles! Not to > mention the 100-million tons diverted from the New York City > landfill.
Re: American Schools Need Flattening Too
So ROTC recruiting uniformed american murders on high school campuses is not disruptive, but a t-shirt is. How about those adverts reminding male fodder to register for the draft? Fly that flag upside down. At 10:06 PM 11/2/01 -0800, Eric Cordian wrote: >CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- A judge ruled Thursday that a 15-year-old sophomore >cannot form an anarchy club or wear T-shirts opposing the U.S. bombing of >Afghanistan because it would disrupt school. Katie Sierra was suspended >from Sissonville High School for three days for promoting the club. She >was also told she could not wear T-shirts with messages such as: "When I >saw the dead and dying Afghani children on TV, I felt a newly recovered >sense of national security. God Bless America." > >In a complaint filed with her mother, Sierra argued her right to free >speech was being denied. > >Circuit Court Judge James Stucky agreed that free speech is "sacred" but >he found that such rights are "tempered by the limitations that they ... >not disrupt the educational process." > >[Congress shall make NO LAW abridging the freedom of NON-DISRUPTIVE > speech (Guffaw)] > >Sierra said she'll pursue the dispute. "I don't want war. I'm not for >Afghanistan," Sierra said. "I think that what we're doing to them is just >as bad as what they did to us, and I think it needs to be stopped." > >James Withrow, lawyer for the Kanawha County Board of Education, argued >that an anarchy club was inappropriate because students "do not feel that >their school is a safe place anymore." "Anarchy is the antithesis of what >we believe should be in schools," Withrow said. > >Sierra's attorney, Roger Forman, said she is "being punished for >expressing her opinion." -- All that fresh air, rations getting low... time to sporulate..
Green Party official refused security check, airline says
- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - From: Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: FC: Green Party official refused security check, airline says To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2001 15:08:59 -0500 This Bangor Daily News article tells a different story about the incident involving Green Party activist Nancy Oden at a Maine airport last week: http://www.bangornews.com/editorialnews/article.html?ID=44958 The article, by Jeff Tuttle, says: >[Oden] was grounded at Bangor International Airport on Thursday after >reportedly becoming uncooperative when she was targeted for additional >screening... "She was uncooperative during the screening process," said >American Eagle spokesman Kurt Iverson, who added that Oden reportedly >would not stand still when security staff tried to wave a metal-detecting >wand over her. "Obviously if they can't submit to screening, [Federal >Aviation Administration] regulations require that they not be allowed to >board the plane." The Green Party has put out a press release, which contains no evidence to buttress Oden's claim that she was singled out before even arriving at the airport for her political views: http://www.greenparty.org/bangor.txt Previous Politech message and interview with Oden: http://www.wartimeliberty.com/article.pl?sid=01/11/03/1813233&mode=thread *** From: Glenn Reynolds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: More on Nancy Oden Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2001 10:34:21 -0500 Seems she's got a background of association with ecoterrorism. http://instapundit.blogspot.com/2001_11_04_instapundit_archive.html#6855693 *** Glenn's above URL says: >NANCY ODEN UPDATE: Turns out there's good reason for Nancy Oden to be >suspected of terrorist links -- ecoterrorist links, that is. See this >item from the Bangor Daily News, pointed out to me by reader Paul >Zrimsek. Oden denied any linkage with the ecoterrorism in question, but >in a very bin Ladenesque "I didn't do it but I approve" kind of way. >Given that ecoterrorism is, in fact, the most prevalent and widespread >form of domestic terrorism, and has continued since 9/11, her presence on >a watch list doesn't seem especially unreasonable in light of heightened >security concerns and fears (though probably wrong) that the anthrax >mailings were masterminded by domestic groups, and her presence on such a >list is likely to be on that basis, and unlikely to have anything to do >with the Green Party's positions on Afghanistan. *** From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 14:08:55 EST Subject: Re: FC: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] It is possible that this story happened exactly the way Nancy Oden wrote it up, but I would be very surprised if there is not another side to this story as well. Most National Guard enlisted soldiers have barely heard of the Green Party let alone would know who a Maine party leader was, what she wrote in a local paper, or would care. The National Guard units of Maine, like National Guard units in every other state, are on a very steep learning curve regarding how to manage airport security. It is not a duty that National Guard units routinely trained for before Sept. 11 except for those Guard and reserve units involved in Civil Administration. The National Guard soldiers will make plenty of mistakes, including big ones, along the way. Members of Guard units come from all civilian occupations and it is not impossible that a few might have voted for Green Party candidates in 2000. But to start a myth that every local activist is being targeted by the National Guard for his or her political views is just plain silly. As long as they are not carrying box cutters or pose a threat to other passengers, no one cares if Green Party officers fly to their heart's content from Bangor to Bute. But one wonders if riding a bike would not be more environmentally friendly than those polluting planes. Mark Rhoads U.S. Internet Council, and, for the sake of full disclosure, a former MP in the DC National Guard *** Forwarded by Anonymous: > > LEADER OF GREEN SPLINTER GROUP FIBS ABOUT AIRPORT > HASSLE > > In an official press release from its Chicago > headquarters, the Greens/Green > Party USA, a small splinter group that opposes > recognition of the Green > Party > of the United States as the electoral voice of the > movement that ran Ralph > Nader for President in 2000, declared that one of its > leaders was stopped > from boarding a flight after a check turned up her > name was on a computer > list because the organization opposes the U.S. bombing > of Afhanistan. The > release said: > Party USA > coordinating committee member, Thursday at Bangor > International Airport > in Bangor Maine, as she attempted to board an American > Airlines flight to > Chicago. > "An official told me that my name had been flagged in
CNN.com - Appeal for death row inmate says lawyer also had represented victim - November 4, 2001
http://www.cnn.com/2001/LAW/11/04/scotus.mickens.ap/index.html -- -- Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
Ian Clarke speaking in Washington DC Monday
Ian Clarke (architect of Freenet) will be in Washington, DC tomorrow and is giving an informal talk. I'm hosting the gathering, which is tomorrow, Monday, November 5, 2001 at 7 pm ET. Email me for directions, etc. if you're interested. -Declan
Get the IRS Off your BACK -- LEGALLY! [vnisu]
AMERICANS: Get the IRS off your BACK -- LEGALLY! THE SECRET the IRS is *TERRIFIED* you'll learn! YOU OWE NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX - and never have! Millions of Americans already have learned the truth and have dropped OUT of the system - (the IRS itself now admits that at least 85 MILLION "taxpayers" are no longer filing!) - AND SO CAN YOU! The Federal Courts themselves, and even the US Supreme Court have verified that it's true! L@@K! "Simply put, pay from a job is a 'wage', and wages are not taxable. Congress has taxed INCOME, not compensation (wages and salaries)." - Conner v. U.S. 303 F Supp. 1187 (1969) And there're MANY other cases, all of which AGREE that the reward for your labor, wages, salaries, and compensation for personal services (commissions) IS NOT, and never have been, TAXABLE! You MUST get this FREE information! Put "NOTAX" in the Subject Box and return this message to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=NoTax Have Great Day. Thanks. PS: To be removed from the list, just put "Remove" in subject line and send.
Get the IRS Off your BACK -- LEGALLY! [watbp]
AMERICANS: Get the IRS off your BACK -- LEGALLY! THE SECRET the IRS is *TERRIFIED* you'll learn! YOU OWE NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX - and never have! Millions of Americans already have learned the truth and have dropped OUT of the system - (the IRS itself now admits that at least 85 MILLION "taxpayers" are no longer filing!) - AND SO CAN YOU! The Federal Courts themselves, and even the US Supreme Court have verified that it's true! L@@K! "Simply put, pay from a job is a 'wage', and wages are not taxable. Congress has taxed INCOME, not compensation (wages and salaries)." - Conner v. U.S. 303 F Supp. 1187 (1969) And there're MANY other cases, all of which AGREE that the reward for your labor, wages, salaries, and compensation for personal services (commissions) IS NOT, and never have been, TAXABLE! You MUST get this FREE information! Put "NOTAX" in the Subject Box and return this message to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=NoTax Have Great Day. Thanks. PS: To be removed from the list, just put "Remove" in subject line and send.
I read your ad
If you are like me, you probably are looking for a business that is simple and has no risk. My husband and I have tried many advertising systems and on-line businesses and had little success until we found an amazing catalog business. It was very easy for us to get started because the cost was $29 and we had 120 days risk-free 100% money back guaranteed refund if we didn't make any money within the first month or two. What we got for that small investment was hundreds of dollars of free Internet marketing training! When I found out that some of the biggest Internet players were also doing this business like crazy, we knew we had finally found the right business. These are the same guys that build web sites for some of the top Fortune 500 companies and they truly know how to Market online as well as make money with the Internet. Because we knew that 99% of North Americans order from catalogs, this business really interested us. The company's reorder rates are consistently documented at 95% or better every year for over 16 years! We knew that the business we build today would keep paying us over and over again... Take a couple of minutes and look at our site http://www.noriskcatalogbiz.com/ws/pp.htm and see if this is the system you've been looking for. If you are failing in the other programs you are currently doing, you will quickly learn the real secrets to online success with a tremendous training system free! I look forward to hearing from you and having you on our TEAM! This email is sent in compliance with strict anti-abuse and NO SPAM regulations. Your address was collected as a result of posting to a link, a classified ad to my FFA Page, you have sent me an E-mail recently, or you are on a list that I have purchased. You may remove your E-mail address at no cost to you whatsoever by simply click on Reply button with "Remove" in the subject line.
Re: DRUDGE REPORT FLASH 2001® - New Yorker story false, says Pentagon
At 07:00 PM 11/04/2001 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >http://www.drudgereport.com/flash.htm Drudge flashes about lots of things. It's nice to get a bit of context besides just the URL, Jim... This is the Pentagon claiming that the story about Delta Force getting shot up during a raid on Afghanistan is incorrect. Seymour Hersh is a journalist who's annoyed the Pentagon for decades, printing stories they don't want printed. This one they're denying before it even hits paper... Also, I don't see any evidence that he "strongly debunked" the story; he flamed it aggressively, but to strongly debunk something you need facts, not just assertions. You also need to have read the story you're debunking, which the spokescritter indicates he hasn't. The phrase " My guess is and my belief is that" also makes it clear that he doesn't know the facts of what happened, though he does indicate that US forces had a helicopter accident and some parachute accidents, and comes close to implying some problems with friendly fire, because he'd rather admit that than admit that The Enemy shot US soldiers. Bunk. === PENTAGON: NEW YORKER STORY FALSE, NO SERIOUS INJURIES DURING DELTA RAID Sun Nov 04 2001 15:13:35 ET Joint Chiefs of Staff General Richard Myers strongly debunked a story filed by the NEW YORKER's Seymour Hersh [set for publication on Monday] which claims U.S. Delta members were seriously injured during a raid on Mullah Omar's complex in Afghanistan. . ===
Re: A Deliberate Strategy of Disruption (washingtonpost.com)
At 07:02 PM 11/04/2001 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36356-2001Nov3.html >-- Very strange - the article headline and subtitle are seriously at odds with the contents of the article. Sounds like the headline editor has much different opinions than Bob Woodward and the primary authors. It's about the 1147 people detained in the anti-terror dragnet. Only 185 of them have problems with their immigration papers. The Washington Post identified 235 of them, and tried to figure out what strategies the Feds are using to pick their targets. The Feds, of course, assert that for except the people being held as material witnesses, all of the detainees violated some law or other. Evidence suggests otherwise, and most of them have not been charged with any crime. Lots of detail.
What is this country about? Freedom of only one kind?
(Ed. Note: Nancy Oden is a top U.S. Green Party official and a member of the party's coordinating committee. An organic farmer, peace activist, and all-around firebrand, she lives in Jonesboro, Maine.) "Just a few weeks ago I had a piece in the Bangor paper. It's on our website, greenparty.org... I submitted it under my name alone. It's a fairly radical piece; that's what I do. I'm a political and environmental activist. "I walked into the Bangor airport. What I saw was National Guard folks all over carrying machine guns... The atmosphere was very tense... This was Thursday... I went over to the American Airlines ticket counter way down at the end. Nobody else was there, except the clerk. I gave him my name. He didn't even ask for photo ID. It was almost like they were expecting me. He put it into the computer. He stayed on the computer a long time, like 10 minutes. "He put an S on the boarding pass, for search. He said, 'You've been picked for having your bag searched.' ... I said to him, 'This wasn't random, was it?' He said, 'No you were in there to be searched, no matter what.' I went over to baggage to put my bags through the X-ray and then went into the boarding area. "There was this National Guard guy there. He yells over at me, so everyone can hear, 'Bring your bags over here.' You know how they are when they're all puffed up with themselves. He said, 'Hurry up,' so I slowed down some more. "I put my bags on the table. The two women employees were standing there. [I tried to help them with a stuck zipper.] He grabbed my left arm, he started yelling in my face, 'Don't you know what happened? Sep. 11, don't you know thousands of people died?' I said, 'You can't do that.' He went to grab my arm, and I said, 'Don't touch me.' I saw an older airline guy shake his head, 'No,' and he backed off. "That insulted his little manhood. He could not force me to listen to his idiot ideas on Sep. 11, whatever it was he wanted to say. So he was angry. I hadn't done anything except pull away from him... I think he was trying to provoke me. They did the wand thing, they were done, and I heard him say real soft, 'Don't let her on the plane,' like he was talking to himself. "Then I go to get on the plane since we're all done and everything, and the American Airlines ticket guy says,' You can't get on the plane.' I say, 'Why not?' ... He says, 'Because this guy says you didn't cooperate with the search.' ... I said, 'Didn't you see him grab my arm?' He said, 'No, your back was to me.' "He said, 'Maybe we can get you on the 4:00 plane, it's the last one today.' I felt, okay, let's put up with this aggravation now and I'll go to Chicago and we'll see what we can do... Then this little guard guy, it wasn't enough to stop me, wasn't done with me. He said, 'Come with me.' I followed very slowly, I sat down for a while. I said I'm carrying these bags; I need a rest... It's called passive resistance. "He went and found the airport police to come and talk with me. He went and got six other National Guard guys and they all approached me. Here are these six untrained, ignorant, don't-know-how-to-deal-with-the-public, machine-gun-armed young guys in their camouflage suits with their military gear hanging off of it. "I looked up and started laughing, 'Is all this for me, guys? What is this about?' There was this big burly guy, he was in front. He said, 'You didn't cooperate with the search.' ... I said what he did was grabbed my arm, and I backed away... He said he only hit your arm. I said even if that's all he did, he's not allowed to do that. He can't hit my arm and demand I listen to him. "They had the airport policeman tell me, 'You're not flying out of this airport today.' ... Of course I had cooperated; why do I care if they search my bags? ... What I didn't like was being singled out because of my political views. They couldn't arrest me because there was no reason for that. They had people who saw there was nothing to arrest me for. They wanted to get back at me somehow because I was not a subservient female, because I questioned their manhood. "I went to the American Airlines guy and said, 'Is this just today?' He said, 'I don't know.' One clerk said, 'You could drive to Boston [five hours away] and see if you can get out of there.' "I never made it out of Bangor. I had to turn around and drive 100 miles back home... The fact that they gave the other airlines my name... They told me they did that... That's incredible." ### Find a job, post your resume. http://careers.yahoo.com
Re: DRUDGE REPORT FLASH 2001® - New Yorker story false=2 C says Pentagon
On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 07:01:43PM -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: > Also, I don't see any evidence that he "strongly debunked" the story; > he flamed it aggressively, but to strongly debunk something > you need facts, not just assertions. You also need to have read the Right. He claims the report is untrue, but (as Jim really should know but doesn't appear to) that does not equate to a debunking. -Declan
Re: FW: Damn ! I wish I'd though ot fhis myself
on Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 02:39:52PM -0800, Sandy Sandfort ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > C'punks, > > Friend of mine sent me this. I like the poetic justice of it. Terminal velocity of dust is pretty low. Reports are that the bulk of the WTC debris are same. There are structural components from the base of the towers, and debris from neigboring buildings, which are more substantial. Frankly, a modicum of HE attached to a guided device is more effective ordinance. There's a poetic sense to this, but not much military practicality. > > S a n d y > > > A Good Idea! > > > > All of the rubble from New York ... all the huge blocks of concrete > > and steel, the old busted up computers, refrigerators, hot water > > heaters, air conditioners, fire trucks, broken glass, etc., should > > be shoveled into C130's and C5A's, flown over Iraq and Afghanistan > > and dropped from 32,000 feet. > > > > A Frigidaire can do a heck of a lot of damage from 5 miles up. With > > each assault, we can drop pamphlets: "Greetings, from the 110th > > floor of the World Trade Center!" > > > > The next day it would read, "...from the 109th floor..." > > > > Then the 108th, etc., etc. > > > > After 110 days of this, I can't imagine there would be much left > > standing on the ground. Can't you just see the headlines: > > > > "WORLD TRADE CENTER STRIKES BACK!" > > > > What wonderful irony this would be, and think how much money we > > wouldn't have to spend on new bombs or missiles! Not to mention the > > 100-million tons diverted from the New York City landfill. -- Karsten M. Self <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Home of the brave http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ Land of the free Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature]
CNN.com - Man arrested with knives, stun gun at O'Hare - November 4, 2001
http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/11/04/inv.ohare.arrest/index.html -- -- Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
An Intelligence Giant in the Making (washingtonpost.com)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33340-2001Nov3.html -- -- Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
Re: CDR: Re: Soldiers in airports screening-out political dissidents
On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Reese wrote: > You've yet to show how the airport departure lounge and check-in counter > is the proper venue to address this. It isn't. ??? Why 'where' even relevant? If it doesn't apply all day, every day, every place then it applies no place at no time. As to a century of precedence, if it's unconstitutional precedence then yes, it means nothing. -- Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
Are you drowning in debt?
Eliminate your credit card debt without filing bankruptcy! Are you tired of making minimum payments and barely getting by? Are you drowning in debt? What will buying this package do for you? *It will TERMINATE your credit card Debt! *Major credit cards only--(No department store cards or gas cards) *This covers cash advances! *This covers unsecured loans as well! *It will allow you to STOP making monthly payments IMMEDIATELY! *It will empower you to take back the control of your life! *Unlike bankruptcy this keeps your affairs COMPLETELY PRIVATE! Only you, the creditors, and the credit bureau will know. YOU WILL NOT lose your HOME, or any other ASSETS! *You will no longer be able to use those credit cards. THIS WORKS BEST IF YOUR TOTAL CREDIT CARD DEBT IS OVER $10,000! Our program runs between $1750-$2450. We offer a guarantee and take all forms of payment in full. This PROGRAM has been used SUCCESSFULLY for 7 YEARS! FOR MORE INFORMATION please call: 1-800-720-9275 EXT. 9156 This works in the US ONLY! To be removed from this email send to : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Eliminate your credit card debt without filing bankruptcy!Are you tired of making minimum payments and barely getting by?Are you drowning in debt?What will buying this package do for you?
Re: Maine National Guard bars Green Party leader from flying
-- On Sun, 4 Nov 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Analogously in Vietnam, the enemy mingled with the > > populace, so that even with the best of intentions, US > > forces wound up killing a lot of ordinary civilians, a > > problem made far worse by the stupid "body count" policy, > > where young ambitious officers, like the future Senator > > Kerrey, were apt to rack up very large body counts by any > > means convenient. > > > > Senator Kerrey was cerrtainly a mass murderer, and the > > guardsmen who stopped her from flying were certainly > > thugs, but the reason there are arguably grounds for > > overlooking Kerrey's cynical murders and the guardsmen's > > thuggery ,is that in the face of this quite real threat > > even good people will do things that are hard to > > distinguish from the things that bad people do. On 4 Nov 2001, at 12:48, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Amazing! Here you make an "argument" that mass-murder is > an acceptable behaviour, while you are simultaneously > arguing that a political BELIEF is *not*. Not what I said. Did not say a political belief was unacceptable behavior, did not say Senator Kerrey's mass murder was acceptable behavior. What I said is that guerrila warfare and terrorism results in situations where it is hard to distinguish between mass murder and self defence, and hard to distinguish between political repression and routine safety precautions. Senator Kerrey (Democrat Party) can claim, implausibly, that he was defending against communist aggression, rather than inflating his body count in order to secure advancement, and we cannot prove otherwise, though it hardly seems plausible. The guardsmen can plausibly claim they were taking sensible precautions against an undeniably real terrorist threat, rather than repressing someone for their political beliefs. We cannot prove otherwise, and it may well be true. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG OX1kihX7e81AT2+o87mF12Ib1AoeMVVLhFCjdj+h 4qH4f/DXHgRgSv3KNNg+9U0i/mA8MtgpuiXnJIEym
