From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 96 12:03:55 PST
To: "A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security" <PADGETT%TCCSLR@emamv1.orl.mmc.com>
Subject: Re: Anonymous remailers and Leahy bill
Message-ID: <m0tulVI-0008zgC@pacifier.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 01:06 PM 3/7/96 -0500, A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security wrote:
>Do not agree with you. Do support your right to disagree though.
>						 P.fla

That's all this guy said.

Here's my more verbose response.

>Do not agree with you.

You are _entitled_ to not "agree" with me.  What you are NOT entitled to, 
however, is to have a government that violates my rights by attempting to 
restrict crypto and other freedoms, even if it is with the support of 51% of 
the Congress or 51% of the voters or 51% of the population.  (or even 
substantially more.)  If you actively 
support such a government, or even encourage such a government, you are 
doing what is analogous to "inciting a riot":  You are guilty of inciting 
the government to take improper, illegal, unconstitutional, or simply 
immoral actions against me and others, and in my opinion if such actions are 
taken you enter into that conspiracy.

You may be alarmed that I might consider you a criminal for just exercising 
your "free speech."  (If you're not alarmed, you SHOULD be!)  I myself would 
greatly prefer to live in a society where speech was totally free:  There 
would be no laws against libel and slander, and you could "yell 'fire' in a 
crowded theatre" without the possibility of prosecution.  (All the other 
potential customers will be home watching on tape rental, which will make 
what you can do in a theatre less significant.)

But until we live in such a world, I consider that yelling "child porn!" or 
"terrorism!" or "drug smuggling" in "a crowded Congress" or _to_ "a crowded 
Congress" that's anxious to restrict our rights ever further, is an 
incitement to violate my rights.

> Do support your right to disagree though.

No, I don't think you do.  You've done NOTHING to actually _support_ my 
right to disagree, except possibly waste a few bytes of information space on 
a message that you did not see fit to publicize.  (I did, however.)  
Clearly, your "support" for my "right to disagree" is essentially non-existent.

Jim Bell

Klaatu Burada Nikto!




-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMT866/qHVDBboB2dAQHqfAP9F1vYWiHVT67QXNXwuDWpR9n6THRL4S2W
vJq256khHXs4pMawUiGitkovVEDSBM8Tc6t6NpgNbwEojZ40dF147gqq7iTLOrf0
TU4RrUvBKiRJbTXnJM6YdHL7gOHQtU5TqHRft3R9JAHR5zEpetUSIo7+uVbklqqd
Du1cZlTbu68=
=M+dV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----