From: sameer <sameer@c2.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 05:12:05 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: COMMUNITY CONNEXION, INC. RESPONDS TO THE SIMON WIESENTHAL CENTER
Message-ID: <199602192005.MAA01242@infinity.c2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


For Immediate Release - February 20th, 1996
Contact: Sameer Parekh 510-601-9777x3

COMMUNITY CONNEXION, INC. RESPONDS TO THE SIMON WIESENTHAL CENTER

Berkeley, CA - In an open letter sent to the Simon Wiesenthal Center,
Community ConneXion, Inc., the Internet Privacy Provider, explicitly
stated its refusal to agree to their request to restrict access to
services based on the content of the web pages their customers may
implement using Community ConneXion services.

In a letter to Community ConneXion dated February 6th, the Simon
Wiesenthal Center requested that they refuse to carry messages that
"promote racism, anti-Semitism, mayhem and violence." Their target in
the request was not Usenet, the discussion forums on the Internet
which were recently targeted for censorship by CompuServe, but the
World-Wide-Web, the area of the Internet which allows anyone to serve
their words and ideas to the nearly thirty million people on the
Internet.

Efforts are growing to regulate content on the Internet and restrict
freedom of expression. Community ConneXion, Inc. is opposed to all
forms of censorship. In his response to the Simon Wiesenthal Center,
Sameer Parekh, President of Community ConneXion, issued a statement in
reply to the Center's request that Internet providers pledge to
restrict service, "Community ConneXion, Inc. considers it our civic
duty to provide Internet access, services, and privacy to any
individual or group, no matter what their political or social agenda."

The Simon Wiesenthal Center is asking Internet providers to restrict
access to individuals and groups who would use their services to
promote hateful ideas. "The answer to hateful speech is more speech,"
said Parekh, "Rather than attempting to ban hateful speech, which does
nothing to prevent the hate and the effects of hate in the long run,
human rights groups should devote their time and energies towards
positive activities, such as speaking out debunking the hate groups
and holocaust revisionists. Only by speaking out against the
hate-mongers can any progress be made. Trying to stop them from
speaking will only serve to encourage them."

The very same services that Community ConneXion refuses to censor may
be used by the persecuted groups who are harassed by the anti-Semites
and neo-Nazis to aid them to protect themselves from
persecution. "Using our services someone who may be afraid of the
neo-Nazis, perhaps because they live in a very intolerant town, may
set up web pages speaking out against the anti-Semites, but not reveal
their real name or address. In this way people can provide information
and speak out against the hate without fearing any repercussions. The
very same services which can help drive out hate are the very same
ones which the Simon Wiesenthal Center is asking Internet providers to
restrict."

Community ConneXion, Inc. is the leading provider of privacy on the
Internet. They provide anonymous and pseudonymous Internet access and
web pages in addition to powerful web service, virtual hosts, and web
design consultation. Information is available from their web pages at
http://www.c2.org/.

Attachments: Open letter to the Simon Wiesenthal Center; Community
  ConneXion, Inc. statement on the provision of services to
  controversial viewpoints

February 19, 1996
Rabbi Abraham Cooper
The Simon Wiesenthal Center
9760 West Pico Boulevard
Los Angeles, California 90035

Dear Rabbi Cooper:

	Thank you for your letter concerning the spread of unpopular
views via the Internet.
	Community ConneXion, Inc., The Internet Privacy Provider, is
not going to censor the content of its customers' Web pages. Our
statement regarding provision of services to controversial groups is
attached, as well as our official policies.
	While the reasons to not censor Internet traffic are great, we
will only describe a few of them in order to explain our
decision. First, the best way to fight speech is with more
speech. Second, it violates the fundamentals upon this country was
founded, in particular the ideal of freedom of expression. Finally, we
believe that trying to restrict harmful speech, which, for example,
"conspires against democracy," does more damage to the cause of
democracy than allowing the hateful individuals and organizations to
speak in the first place.
	In order to fight the hateful speech to which your
organization objects, it is more productive to speak out against the
hate and the lies of the anti-Semites and neo-Nazis than to try to
prevent them from speaking. By preventing them from speaking, you are
giving them more allies, and more legitimacy than they would have if
you merely spoke out against them and debunked their words. If you
actually take proactive action towards debunking their lies, people
will understand that they are actually lying. By preventing them from
speaking, you are promoting the idea that they actually might have
something valuable to say.  Hateful action, of course, should be
prosecuted to the fullest extent permissible by law.
	Second, this country was founded on the ideal of freedom of
expression. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is
the first one on the list of the Bill of Rights. Restricting access to
freedom of expression to only people with acceptable viewpoints is not
true freedom of expression.
	Finally, and most important, restricting speech in order to
ostensibly protect democracy does more to damage democracy than to
help it. Censorship leads towards a more restrictive society, one
which grows ever more similar to the totalitarian government of the
Third Reich, which made the atrocities of the Holocaust possible. In
order to prevent such an atrocity from happening again, no government
must be allowed to gain the power over its citizens that was allowed
the Third Reich. By asking for restrictions on speech you are asking
for a return to the controls which gave the Third Reich its power.
	Therefore, we have taken a stance directly opposed to any and
all forms of censorship.  Community ConneXion, Inc. considers it our
civic duty to provide Internet access, services, and privacy to any
individual or group, no matter what their political or social
agenda. Thank you.

Sincerely,



Sameer Parekh
President
Community ConneXion, Inc.
--
Community ConneXion, Inc.
on the provision of services to those with unpopular viewpoints

The Internet is an unprecedented technological tool which for the
first time in history has democratized communications throughout the
world. It provides tens of millions of people with the tools to
communicate freely and share their ideas to an audience whose size and
diversity was previously unimagined. It is the embodiment of the
concept of an international marketplace of ideas.

As such it deserves to be encouraged and protected from those who
would restrict it. There are those who would limit the use of this
incredible power only to those with popular views. Community
ConneXion, Inc. has a First Amendment right and a moral obligation to
provide groups of all viewpoints with the ability to express their
viewpoints in an unintrusive, non-harassing manner on the Internet.

Given the unprecedented potential and scope of the Internet, Community
ConneXion, Inc. considers it our civic duty to provide Internet
access, services, and privacy to any individual or group, no matter
what their political or social agenda.



Sameer Parekh
President
Community ConneXion, Inc.