From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 1997 15:21:07 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: OKC Bomber, or Cowardly Lion? / Re: IRS sending warning notes, violating ECPA?
Message-ID: <199707260706.JAA19264@basement.replay.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Kent Crispin wrote:
> > Anon pissed out:
> > >  I am just as certain that Tim has made a conscious decision as to
> > >what level of risk he is willing to take to speak his mind and perhaps
> > >make a difference in the events of his time, without merely being
> > >egoistical, stupid, and suicidal.

> As anon clearly points out, Tim toes the line with his speech,
> carefully avoiding saying anything that escapes constitutional
> protection.
...
> Yes, Tim talks a brave talk.  But...

  But...?
  ...he doesn't cut his dick off with an axe, to show how brave
he is?
  ...he doesn't phone up the DEA and tell them, "I'm shooting
heroin, but please don't raid my house?"
  ...he doesn't take out an ad in the New York Times to announce
that he will be nuking D.C. at 4 p.m. on Friday?

  I once built a bar in Austin, Texas, named "Crazy Bob's Saloon."
I put a diving board on top of the 1 1/2 story building and put an
old bathtub on the sidewalk below, which I filled with water.
  All week long we advertised that at noon, on Grand Opening Day,
Crazy Bob was going to jump off the diving board, and into the
bathtub full of water. During our Grand Opening, 12 noon rolled
around and Crazy Bob walked outside, with everyone following him.
  Crazy Bob looked up at the diving board, then looked down at the
bathtub full of water. He looked back up at the diving board, once
again, and back down at the bathtub full of water. Then he turned
to the crowd, and said, "Folks, they call me _Crazy_ Bob, not
_Stupid_ Bob!" Then we all went back inside and partied down.

  At the end of the night, when everybody had gone home, Crazy Bob
and I took a bottle of whiskey up to the rooftop, had some drinks
and discussed the fact that, as a man of honour, he was obligated
to make the dive, despite the fact that the "sheeple" were more
than satisfied by having an entertaining story to go home and tell
their friends.
  Did he make the dive?
  It's nobody's business but his own. I was there, and at the right
time, in the right place, with the right amount of liquor in me and
a full moon egging me on, I just might tell you. But, regardless, it
would still really be nobody's business except for Crazy Bob's.

  Perhaps Tim May is the _real_ OKC bomber, or perhaps he is the
cowardly lion. (cringing when "Toto" barks :>)
  Whether Tim "walks his talk" or not is not my business, nor is it
Kent's, or anyone else's business. One's public words may reflect
their personal anthem, their own flag/values/beliefs, or their words
may be merely the braying of mules. What matters is the value, or lack
thereof, that we may personally glean from those words, to our own
edification or detriment.
  However, the "rack" is not a "bicycle built for two." When we are
put on the rack, to test the strength of our beliefs, then the pain,
the certainty or doubt, the salvation or degredation, are all our own.

  I enjoy the outrageously strong opinions which do battle on the
CypherPunks list, and I even have a mail folder titled, "CyberPissing,"
in which I save the posts which contain classic cheap-shots.
  I respect those who stand up for what they believe in and are not
hesitant about attacking the faults they find in the logic or beliefs
of others on the list. I consider it a "public service" when others
take a shot that points out my errors/hypocrisy/stupidity, etc. It
gives me the opportunity to say, "They are right. I should adjust my
belief/attitude.", or say, "They are right, but so the fuck what? It
is my personal predeliction to be an asshole about this, and it suits
me just fine."
  It is my personal view, however, that the line between difference of
outlook/opinion and spurious, personal slander is crossed when one
stoops to denigrate the character of another list member by accusing
them of what might be "conscious evils" such as comfortable cowardice,
willful hypocrisy, or determined stupidity.

  Perhaps I will break down on the "rack" and deny all of my strongly
held beliefs, but please don't accuse me of being a boastful coward
who only holds to my beliefs when it is "safe" to do so.
  I may hold views which fail to remain consistent when measured
against standards that reflect the knowledge and experience of others,
but please don't accuse me of willfully attempting to espouse my views
only to my benefit and at the expense of others.
  Sometimes I'm a fucking idiot and probably ought to be taken out
and shot, but I strive to come by my stupidity "honestly," and not to
use stupidity as an "excuse" to do evil.
 
  Tim May is a grouchy old CypherPunk with an itchy trigger finger and
Kent Crispin has suffered the misfortune of having the the government
secretly implant silicon chips in his brain that flash random images
of current and past senators, congressmen and presidents repeating,
"I am not a crook...I am not a crook..."
  I am certain that each of them is equally certain of their beliefs,
and the decision as to which of them would make the world a better
place by using the Dr. Kevorkian Gift Certificate I sent them for
Christmas lies in the hands of the individuals who support or
oppose their stance on various issues.

  My personal opinon is that we should "Kill them both, and let
TruthMonger sort them out."
  Of course, I may be biased in this regard. After all, I am...

TruthMonger