1996-01-25 - Re: PZ a Nazi?

Header Data

From: hallam@w3.org
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 6a916fd2adf88ca4749fcb5ce88c2ed490fc6709c79698890d199d5d6b493b9a
Message ID: <9601251903.AA12292@zorch.w3.org>
Reply To: <199601230400.UAA29972@infinity.c2.org>
UTC Datetime: 1996-01-25 20:56:03 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 04:56:03 +0800

Raw message

From: hallam@w3.org
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 04:56:03 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: PZ a Nazi?
In-Reply-To: <199601230400.UAA29972@infinity.c2.org>
Message-ID: <9601251903.AA12292@zorch.w3.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



>"Private communications between neo-Nazis on the network are
>effected under a program called "Pretty Good Privacy", devised by
>an American neo-Nazi sympathiser."

Not to my knowledge. If the Sunday Times have screwed up here (as appears the 
case). PZ has hit the UK libel jackpot. The UK libel laws prevent a defendant 
from making practically any defense so even if PZ spent his afternoons walking 
arroung in an SS uniform it probably could not be admitted as evidence by the 
ST.

So get your lawyers to put in a demand for damages PZ, should net you approx $5K 
plus appology. The Telegraph are unlikely to want to try to defend the case.

	Phill





Thread