1996-12-02 - Re: denial of service and government rights

Header Data

From: Black Unicorn <unicorn@schloss.li>
To: Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net>
Message Hash: 9e61c8d2bbd78023515732e9603c8001b9f285d6e68f55848568190aff7f78c4
Message ID: <Pine.SUN.3.94.961201224004.2080A-100000@polaris>
Reply To: <32A22FE8.2A1D@gte.net>
UTC Datetime: 1996-12-02 03:43:37 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 1 Dec 1996 19:43:37 -0800 (PST)

Raw message

From: Black Unicorn <unicorn@schloss.li>
Date: Sun, 1 Dec 1996 19:43:37 -0800 (PST)
To: Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net>
Subject: Re: denial of service and government rights
In-Reply-To: <32A22FE8.2A1D@gte.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.94.961201224004.2080A-100000@polaris>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

On Sun, 1 Dec 1996, Dale Thorn wrote:

> Black Unicorn wrote:
> > On Sun, 1 Dec 1996, Dale Thorn wrote:
> > > Black Unicorn wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 30 Nov 1996, Dale Thorn wrote:
> > > > > > Example:  George Bush's old pal at the Wash. DC P.R. firm hires the
> > > > > > niece(?) of a Kuwaiti official to testify in front of Congress in full
> > > > > > view of the American people on television, that the Iraquis were throwing
> > > > > > babies out of incubators in Kuwait, thereby securing the necessary votes
> > > > > > in Congress to prosecute the Gulf War.
> [snippo]
> > Fraud is an excellent answer because it is a meaningless answer.  Fraud is
> > traditionally used to prosecutue those not-quite-a-crime cases because the
> > definition essentially comes down to : "That guy did something we don't
> > like."
> [much drivel snipped]
> So what you're saying is I (or we) can testify in front of Congress on
> essentially any topic, telling a blatant lie (that we know is false, and
> which they will subsequently prove is false), and totally get away with
> it.  You and I can do that, is that what you're saying?

What you're talking about is contempt of congress.  This is not "fraud."

The penality imposed would be purjury.  I don't believe that during that
discussion, the witness was sworn, but I could be mistaken.  In any event,
purjury is purjury, but it hardly rises to the level of conspiracy your
post originally indicated.

> If that is true, then my original contention that things are far worse
> than the person I originally responded to was imagining, stands as
> correct.  Things are bad indeed.

"I had no idea what I was talking about, but as luck would have it I was
right anyhow."

Here, have a bozo button.

Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures
Finger for Public Key   Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern
Vote Monarchist         Switzerland