1996-08-03 - Re: URGENT: Surveillance Bill Gets New Life - House Vote lLikely TODAY!

Header Data

From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 297d816083d200a266fb0a12c131a9120c1f632bb6cc23896afd13ee25e605b7
Message ID: <199608030013.RAA03026@mail.pacifier.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-08-03 02:55:39 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 10:55:39 +0800

Raw message

From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 10:55:39 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: URGENT: Surveillance Bill Gets New Life - House Vote lLikely TODAY!
Message-ID: <199608030013.RAA03026@mail.pacifier.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 02:21 PM 8/2/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote:

>("I had no idea of what was in the Communications Decency Act...it just
>sounded like the "decent" thing to vote for."....."You mean the
>Anti-Terrorism Bill suspends habeus corpus? What's that? I'll ask my
>staffers to look into it.")
>
>Fuck 'em all. Fawkes had it wrong...they're not worth the powder to blow
>'em to hell.
>
>All we can do is work on technological workarounds. Making their $2 billion
>Wiretap Boondoggle a worthless exercise is a start.

I thought of what I consider to be an excellent "workaround."   The way I 
see it, a majority of us want to see a majority of them dead, or at least 
resigned.  If that's the case, why can't we get what we want?



Jim Bell
jimbell@pacifier.com





Thread