From: nobody@neva.org (Neva Remailer)
Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 07:01:03 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re: Br'er Tim and the Bug Hole
Message-ID: <199711142245.QAA05891@dfw-ix4.ix.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Robert Hettinga wrote:
>> If Tim and others fail to exercise their right to say what they
>> believe, then it is likely those rights will be suspended in due
>> time.
>
>Like I said before, it makes sense, but not because Foucault said
>it. Broken clocks, and all that. Besides, Monty, I hate appeals to
>authority almost as much as I hate ad honminae.

Are you asking me to use Foucault's line without giving him credit?
That doesn't seem right to me.

Foucault's essay was insightful and significantly influenced my point
of view.  Not only does he deserve the credit, but mentioning his name
may direct other interested readers toward his work.

BTW, how much of Foucault have you actually read?  I am generally
unfamiliar with his work, but I have a sinking feeling the same can be
said for certain of his critics.

It is easy to give French intellectuals a cursory reading and conclude
that there is nothing there.  However, often there is quite a lot of
something there, but it comes from people with a different
intellectual tradition than our own so it is harder to understand.  An
apparently absurd sentence is often a reference to a body of work with
which we are not familiar.

>> It seems to me that Tim said "The judge in the Paladin case
>> committed a capital crime" and not "The judge in the Paladin case
>> committed a capital crime and should be gunned down in the streets
>> like a dog."
>
>Frankly, I believe that the two sentences above are exactly the same
>thing,...

No, in the first case the possibility of a fair trial with an
impartial jury exists.  They are different statements.

>...but that it was pretty apparently a wish (if not a threat, if you
>want to pull semantic hairs until one bleeds) that the judge be
>assassinated,...

Tim has repeatedly made it clear to the world that this was not his
meaning.  What is your purpose in declaring otherwise?

>...because a judge can't be killed, legally, for *any* decision he
>makes. I expect that gunning the judge down in the street like a dog
>would fit Tim's bill quite nicely.

In every other instance in which Tim has discussed capital punishment,
it has been in the context of a trial.

If OJ had committed a brutal murder in a state without the death
penalty, say Massachusetts, and Tim said "OJ is guilty of a capital
crime", would you conclude that he was calling for his murder?

Clearly that would not be reasonable.  So why do you feel the meaning
changes when "OJ" is substituted for "The judge"?  Perhaps you harbor
latent urges to murder our public officials and wish to draw attention
from yourself by pointing the finger at Tim.  You seem to be talking
about it more than anybody else.

>And, Monty, here's another fact: the world isn't going to end on
>Thanksgiving Day, much less at the beginning of the millennium. Armed
>storm troopers are probably *not* going to decend on the denizens of
>this list and haul them off to newly built gulags in the Rockies
>somewhere, or whatever the current fantasy of the moment is.

When you drive do you always wear your seat belt, or just when you are
going to have an accident?

Incidentally, it is well documented that in the 1980s, the USG had
detailed plans for mass arrests of dissident citizens.  Ten army camps
had been selected for this purpose.  The plan was to be executed in
the event the country invaded Nicaragua.  The USG has incarcerated
masses of U.S. citizens without trial at least twice during the 20th
century.

To claim it cannot happen again seems a little naive.

>> The book I am reading is called "The Aurora: A Democratic-Republican
>> Returns" by Richard N. Rosenfeld.
>
>Okay. Here's where I cop to bad craziness. It's now time for me to
>fess up and get my butt hammered like a gentleman. :-).

You certainly take your medicine like a man.  Good.

>> 1. Publius was John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison.
>> Jay and Hamilton were leaders of the party attempting to subvert
>> the Constitution.
>
>Mostly Madison, I believe, and, oddly enough, a protoge of Jefferson
>at one point.

Hamilton wrote 51 of the essays, Madison 26, Jay 5, and 3 were written
jointly by Madison and Hamilton.

If you are saying he attempted to subvert the Constitution, this
letter will be of interest.  (May 20, 1798 Madison to Jefferson):

>The Alien bill proposed in the Senate is a monster that must forever
>disgrace its parents.  I should not have supposed it possible that
>such a one could have been engendered in either House & still
>persuade myself that it cannot be fathered by both... These addresses
>to the feelings of the people from their enemies may have more effect
>in opening their eyes than all the arguments addressed to their
>understandings by their friends.  The President also seems to be
>co-operating for the same purpose.  Every answer he gives to his
>addressers unmasks more and more his principles & views.  His
>language to the young men at Ph[iladelphia] is the most abominable &
>degrading that could fall from the lips of the first magistrate of an
>independent people...  It throws some light on his meaning when he
>remarked to me "that there was not a single principle the same in the
>American & French Revolutions;"... the abolition of Royalty was, it
>seems, not one of his Revolutionary principles...

>> 6. Jefferson did not write the Bill of Rights.  He was in France at
>> the time and was pleased to hear these amendments had been added to
>> the Constitution.
>
>I don't believe that's right. I believe, if you check it out, that
>Jefferson sent the Bill of Rights to the Constitutional Convention
>from France, and that Madison, ironically enough, had a hand in
>getting it passed.

Perhaps it is your turn to crack open a book and find the reference.
I would be quite interested (and surprised) if you can substantiate
your claim.

Monty Cantsin
Editor in Chief
Smile Magazine
http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html
http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQEVAwUBNGwLVZaWtjSmRH/5AQEvNAf9HjMM4D8eB2Uv+h+IqxvMCgY1fFMpt1Cx
IuvO2Q8OUrg1HaQxJ52c4HDPms56rbBUw1slwTqL0hIVcdAENy4v/rU5NXodvsLJ
9CS9eWn1MJb1vxZLj+B3z9p/yhVYYeedbTFKt1chy2Y7OOuDGTcSUS8BSH7CK8Fp
s7nVPQSuTZ60O3Md58qGh+aRT3wHBNxNcwNdtuiCA1knZehhRrQe2qX6PMzt9app
MmNJ01PNcKp1X1cLhmtu/jfbeFlUp0V44YAo2D+RVgvrzP8B4C+avAWoO96d4KhY
krE6bRQZ443D2Ktkc6D7QVxAu0tmHnjADftRAHf6W3A8tER8KcAgJQ==
=6DIt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----