From: Mikhael Frieden <mikhaelf@mindspring.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 15:12:02 +0800
To: Jon Galt <jongalt@pinn.net>
Subject: Re: Report on UN conference on Internet and racism
Message-ID: <3.0.16.19971126013912.10c79c0e@pop.mindspring.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



At 09:45 AM 11/24/97 -0500, Jon Galt wrote:
>> >>         Not a damned thing. While in this country they are in the act of
>> >> committing a crime.

>(Galt)
>> >And who is it that gets to decide what is a "crime" and what is not?  

>(Frieden)
>>         It would appear to me that an illegal in the country is as much in
>> the act of committing a crime as a burglar is while in a place other than
>> his own. 

>I don't dispute this.  If a "crime" is defined as whatever the 
>politicos/bureaucrats/hoodlums say it is, then a "crime" is certainly 
>being committed.  (Of course there is another definition of crime.)

        Actually there are the courts who write their own law by intuition
protected by life tenure. 

>(Galt)
>> >The 
>> >politicos, the bureaucrats, the hoodlums in DC and elsewhere who think 
>> >they have the right to run the lives of everybody else.

>(Frieden)
>>         The politicians are responding to voters. The voters who are
>> pressuring them are siding with foreign nationals against the interests of
>> the United States which is presumed to be their new country of loyalty.

>"If voting could change anything, it would have been outlawed long ago."  
>Not strictly true.  But if I vote or don't vote...well it's just about 
>the same difference as whether I buy a lottery ticket or not.

>Don't vote - it only ENCOURAGES them!

        There has been a suggestion to outlaw political parties. Once
outlawed solicitations and organizations could be criminalized. 

        More practically, the ultimate objective if to find a way to
prohibit politicians from being involved in any that can yield a profit.
Force they to stick to the "thou shalt nots." Never let them get into areas
where compliance with the law can yield a profit. "For only from profits
can come campaign contributions." 

>> That siding should be sufficient justification remove citizenship and
>> return them to the land of dysentary and mui Ninos. 

>Citizenship, Schmitizenship.  Granted I don't want to renounce my 
>citizenship - at least not at the moment.  But the whole game of riling 
>up people's emotions about "citizenship" and "patriotism" is just a bread 
>and circuses ruse to keep us focused on something other than what the 
>professional control freaks are doing to us.

        But certainly any professed citizen acting in a manner other than
the pure self interest of the US be sent elsewhere. 

        Or as RAH suggested, voting should not be matter of age and
breathing only. 

>(Galt)
>> >Again I ask the question:
>> >What gives the hoodlums in Washington DC the right to draw a line on a 
>> >map and control people's travel across that line?
 
>>         The people who made handgun ownership a felony gave them that
right. 

>The people who made handgun ownership a felony should be sent down a dark 
>alley without any means of self-defense.  Perhaps they would gain a small 
>glimmer of understanding of the real issues - unless they already 
>understand that they are the hoodlums around the corner in the dark 
>alley.  In that case....

        Anyone involved in the illegal drug business and in his right mind
does everything he can to assure that his drugs remain illegal. That
includes encouraging every manner of condemnation of drugs even if only
inviting the simpletons to give their anti-drug speech for a hefty
honorarium. 

>>         Lawmakers are resonsible for all foreseeable consequences not just
>> the intended consequences. 

>Lawmakers can hardly be held responsible for tying their own shoes!  I 
>suspect you had your satire mode on full when you wrote this.

        I have often suspected this is the alternate reality created by a
satirist. Nothing can really be as absurd of this. 



-=-=-
The 2nd guarantees all the rest.