From: “Montgomery, Lynn” <lmontgomery@jii.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 31f316de3455d29dddb3500d02288eb84b8ddfccc1098b7698094d24044a2bfe
Message ID: <AC77E198ACECD011AC1500805FBE38240630A7@juniper.jones.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-09-09 21:12:09 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 05:12:09 +0800
From: "Montgomery, Lynn" <lmontgomery@jii.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 05:12:09 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: FW: Notification: Inbound Mail Failure
Message-ID: <AC77E198ACECD011AC1500805FBE38240630A7@juniper.jones.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Please remove dpeterson@jonescyber.com from your mailing list. He is no
longer at this company.
-----Original Message-----
From: Montgomery, Lynn
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 1997 2:46 PM
To: Montgomery, Lynn
Subject: Notification: Inbound Mail Failure
The following recipients did not receive the attached mail. A NDR was
not sent to the originator for the following recipients for one of the
following reasons:
* The Delivery Status Notification options did not request failure
notification, or requested no notification.
* The message was of precedence bulk.
NDR reasons are listed with each recipient, along with the notification
requested for that recipient, or the precedence.
<dpeterson@jonescyber.com> dpeterson@jonescyber.com
MSEXCH:IMS:JONES:CORPORATE:CEDAR 0 (000C05A6) Unknown
Recipient
Precedence: bulk
The message that caused this notification was:
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Letter sent to SJ Mercury staff on CA SJR-29 ...
From: Ernest Hua <hua@chromatic.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 14:30:38 -0600
Cc: hua@chromatic.com
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 13:26:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ernest Hua <hua@chromatic.com>
To: business@sjmercury.com, computing@sjmercury.com,
state@sjmercury.com
Subject: Why no coverage of CA resolution on Encryption?
Cc: hua@chromatic.com
Why was there no coverage of CA State resolution SJR-29?
I find it using the search facility at:
http://www.sen.ca.gov/www/leginfo/SearchText.html
And the result is at:
http://www.sen.ca.gov/htbin/ca-billpage/SJR/29/gopher_root2:[bill.curren
t.sjr.from0000.sjr0029]
The on-line magazine has a full article by Will Rodger on this:
http://www.zdnet.com/intweek/daily/970908b.html
Apparently there was some attempt by the Clinton Administration to
cover up their lobbying effort. I don't understand why the
Administration would care about a California state RESOLUTION of all
things. Why does the Clinton Administration want to prevent a state
legislature from speaking its mind?
And what's with this attempt to claim "copyright" on that fax?
Please get some answers on this! The US Senate/House will be voting
on important encryption legislation in the coming days. The people of
this country deserves to have a open, informed, serious discussion of
one of the most important privacy issues of the information age. We
cannot afford to let a few intelligence and law enforcement agencies
dictate policy TO us against our will.
Ern
Return to September 1997
Return to ““Montgomery, Lynn” <lmontgomery@jii.com>”
1997-09-09 (Wed, 10 Sep 1997 05:12:09 +0800) - FW: Notification: Inbound Mail Failure - “Montgomery, Lynn” <lmontgomery@jii.com>