From: TruthMonger.tm@dev.null
Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 00:46:14 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of
Message-ID: <199705291623.KAA00762@wombat.sk.sympatico.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Tim May wrote:

 

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of

laws.

Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"

---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----

Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,

tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms,

zero

W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information

markets,

Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.

"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information

superhighway."



  Tim's new sig-line gives recognition to one of what I consider to be

the two main reasons that Democracy and Justice can now be considered

a part of America's historical past.



  A major nail in the coffin of Justice for any accused in the U.S.

was when the justice system promoted the concept of guilt by virtue

of "circumstantial" evidence to the point where people can now be

convicted as a result of speculation rather than evidence. Prosecutors

now seem to need only to convince the sheeple that it was "possible"

for the defendant to have commited the crime and that circumstantial

evidence points *only* to the accused.

  As well, the justice system only allows the government prosecutors

to indulge in "speculation" and denies the defense the opportunity

to do the same. The McVeigh prosecutors are allowed to put on a key

witness who has openly stated that he's going to get rich by telling

fables, yet the defense's witnesses are barred from testifying

because the judge declares their testimony to be unreliable and

the defense's planned defence to be based on speculation.



  Now that this nail has been driven home, the only thing standing 

between the average citizen and random or targeted unjust imprisonment 

is a cause of action for the government to proceed on. Tim C. May's

sig-line eloquently points out that the black-robed magicians of the

justice system now have enough cards strategically put in place to

be able to pull an Ace of Subpoena's seemingly out of thin air.

  If a perfectly normal, average grandmother/citizen can be threatened

with imprisonment for putting money in someone else's parking meter

then, pray tell, which action of the average citizen *cannot* be used

to imprison him or her?

  The Pandora's box of laws, regulations and "perceived possibilty of

illegality" (probable cause) leaves each of us open to random or

targeted search, seizure, arrest and imprisonment not only for laws

and crimes which actually exist, but also for those which can be

deduced by "speculation" as to the "possibility" of our having had

an "intent" to do something illegal.

  (Twenty years ago I called my lawyer at four a.m. and he asked me

what charge the police were using to hold me. I told him, "I think

the charge is 'Suspicion of being in jail.'" He laughed and said,

"They may *have* you on this one, Bubba." Back then it was a joke,

but I fear that today it reflects reality.)



  A grandmother in the midwest U.S. plugs someone else's parking meter

and faces prosecution and interrogation. She mentions she was on her

way to pick up paint for a shed being built in her back yard. It turns

out she has no permit to build a shed on her property. The zoning

official who inspects her house for further malefeasance sees a gun

(hunting rifle) in a closet and a line of a white, powdery substance

(roach poison) on a kitchen counter. Police search the house and seize

the computer as evidence. The woman's son has his cypherpunks list

messages on the computer, including Jim Bell's AP/IRS posts.

  What was the woman doing in plugging someone else's parking meter?

She was attempting to prevent the government from collecting money

from a citizen by way of a fine for not paying his/her parking tax.

Her proven "link" to Jim Bell, terrorist and tax protestor, can be

seen as evidence of a "conspiracy." (The question now becomes one

of whether she will testify against Bell in return for a reduction in

her charges, or whether he will do so against her.)



  If you consider the above to be in the least far-fetched then you

have little understanding of the working of our present-day justice

system. If you consider the above to be an unlikely scenario even if

the woman was being *targeted* for prosecution then you are totally

out of touch with the reality of the current state of the justice

system in America.



There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of

laws.



  No matter how much anyone attempts to minimize or justify Tim C. May's

statement, it is undeniable that the government currently has virtually 

unlimited power to accuse, convict and imprison its citizens.

  The IRS is the prime example of this fact. It has long been a known

fact, admitted even by IRS officials, that it is impossible for any

citizen to completely comply with the country's tax laws over a period

of years. What is even more disturbing is that interpretation of the

tax laws lies largely in the hands of the IRS, not in the justice

system.

  Add to this the fact that despite having acted in accordance with the 

legal judgement of an army of tax attorneys, the guilt of any "crime"

falls on the citizen and we are all potential felons. Not only this, but

with the plethora of legislation covering every aspect of our activity

in our private lives and in our interactions with society, most of us

are likely guilty of a multitude of potential felonies.



  Of course, only *bad* people have reason to be fearful, right? Only

those who cause *trouble* need fear being *targeted* for prosecution,

right? This is of no concern to the average citizen, such as yourself,

right?

  Right. As long as you watch what you do and say so that you give the

government no reason to label you as a troublemaker, then you have no

reason to fear. As long as you make certain that you have nothing in

your life that can even give the "appearance" of connecting you to the

*bad* people, you will be safe from government persecution.

  The price to pay for guaranteeing your freedom is small. Quit hunting

and sell your guns. Get rid of white, powdery substances such as roach

poison, sugar, flour. Never fail to signal for a turn. Always wear

your seat belt and drive 55 mp/h. Never wear jeans or pay cash for an

airline ticket. Never read "The Turner Diaries" or "Assassination

Politics."

  Which reminds me...

  Unsubscribe from the cypherpunks list, physically destroy your 

computer and never chew gum in a courtroom. (Twenty-four hours in

jail for contempt of court in Phoenix, Arizona.)



  Now that you remain at home and have no contact with the outside

world except to meet all of your legislatively mandated requirements

as a citizen the only thing you need to fear is what the government

*already* has that they can use against you if you become a "target"

of prosecution.



  Cynical? Moi?

  1984 came and went with society by and large dismissing the book, 

"1984," as having been realized in actuality. I was mystified as to

how anyone, let alone nearly everyone, could fail to recognize that

the seeds had already been planted to bring to fruitation almost every

concept of Big Brother that was focused upon in the work.

  I believe that any rational person can see, in retrospect, that Big

Brother was already a fact of life by then. However, it was of no 

concern to most of us because not only did it did not negatively impact

us personally, but also because the arising fascist/police state/society

seemed to have little potential to do perswrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of

laws.

  When cops are acquitted of beating a citizen, then if they are still

"targets" the government can charge them with violating the citizen's

civil rights. When O.J. Simpson is acquitted and is still a target, then

a jury of middle-Americans can break him under another set of laws.

  When the government fails to convict Declan for terrorism because of

something he has written about Jim Bell's prosecution, then they can

charge him with tax evasion for the deductions he has taken for

business expenses when writing is only a "hobby" he has used to

commit tax fraud. {The justice system will look to the IRS for the

proper interpretation of Section 20098.6, Subsection AF488GC, which

states "Writing is Declan's employment, not just a hobby." Their 

interpretation will result in a conviction.}



  The government has stacked all the dice in favour of themself and

against the citizen. If they can't successfully persecute/prosecute

the citizen under "this" law, they will try again under "that" law.

If they still fail to get a conviction, they can prosecute under

yet another law and drag the case out to the point it financially

breaks the citizen.

  If the citizen gets a large measure of financial and legal support,

as in the case of Phil Zimmerman, they may survive. If not, they are

"toast" in a very short period of time.



There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of

laws.

  In 1984, "1984" had become a reality for "them."

  Now it is a reality for "us."



TruthMonger