1996-01-18 - Returned mail: User unknown (fwd)

Header Data

From: Alan Horowitz <alanh@infi.net>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: ca1cdb253dbbd552548d56902332bc0d989f841e6015ff5c8ba0a7ddce428cf7
Message ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960118093140.25459A-100000@larry.infi.net>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-01-18 14:32:10 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 18 Jan 96 06:32:10 PST

Raw message

From: Alan Horowitz <alanh@infi.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 96 06:32:10 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Returned mail: User unknown (fwd)
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960118093140.25459A-100000@larry.infi.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




Alan Horowitz
alanh@norfolk.infi.net

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1996 08:27:15 -0500
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON@infi.net>
To: alanh@larry.infi.net
Subject: Returned mail: User unknown

The original message was received at Thu, 18 Jan 1996 08:26:56 -0500
from alanh@localhost

   ----- The following addresses had delivery problems -----
Name Withheld by Request <anon-remailer@utopia.hacktic.nl>  (unrecoverable error)

   ----- Transcript of session follows -----
... while talking to utopia.hacktic.nl.:
>>> RCPT To:<anon-remailer@utopia.hacktic.nl>
<<< 550 <anon-remailer@utopia.hacktic.nl>... User unknown
550 Name Withheld by Request <anon-remailer@utopia.hacktic.nl>... User unknown

   ----- Original message follows -----
Received: by larry.infi.net (Infinet-S-3.3)
	id IAA19226; Thu, 18 Jan 1996 08:26:56 -0500
Return-Path: alanh
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1996 08:26:56 -0500 (EST)
From: Alan Horowitz <alanh@infi.net>
To: Name Withheld by Request <anon-remailer@utopia.hacktic.nl>
cc: "Alan Horowitz <alanh@infi.net> \"Timothy C. May\"" <tcmay@got.net>
Subject: Re: PPF #25 and the UN test
In-Reply-To: <199601180540.GAA14063@utopia.hacktic.nl>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960118080009.15630B-100000@larry.infi.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Very interesting. You make bona-fide sounding noises.

Now let me ask you this. Do you think that USA has, or will ever have, 
security organs as kick ass as the East Germans had?

Yet within a short time after the Soviets decided, to cede that whole part
of Europe, to the Bonn sphere of influence, those East German operatives 
were running to cover their ass.

Love of Liberty runs deep within the American psyche, analogously to the 
way that devotion to Islam runs deep in the Arab countries. The Islamists 
have plenty of sympathizers in various Arab security organs. Let's recall 
that President Sadat was shot by bona fide memmbers of the Egyptian 
military, in a highly organized operation.

If you were a CFR guy, would you bet your life that you could order 500
more Wacos, without having to fear that thre would be no loyalty problems
inside your chosen operating units? 

Let's accept that 20% of the SEALS said they'd confiscate legally-owned 
firearms from Americans....is 20% enough?    Of the other 80%, could you 
rely on _none_ of them to casue major, major problems?

The secret government has had total control of the economy, since the 
day the Federal Reserve was delegated the authority to create national debt.
America is already well-controlled for the benefit of Insiders. They 
really don't need to attain higher visibility or more power. They are 
anglo-saxons, not banana-republic cult-of-personality types. Does Walter 
Wriston have to worry about  Tim May deciding to stockpile blackpowder 
rifles?

The SEALs are cannon fodder. They know it.

Alan Horowitz 
alanh@norfolk.infi.net








Thread