From: Anonymous <nobody@REPLAY.COM>
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 1997 02:35:08 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re: Is Tim May guilty of illegally advocating revolution?
Message-ID: <199712011825.TAA22548@basement.replay.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Tim May writes:
> At 11:33 PM -0700 11/29/97, Bill Stewart wrote:
> 
> >As for the case of May vs. Reno, 99 US 666 (1999) (:-), I've never
> >heard Tim call for the violent overthrow of the US government.
> >He's called for a far more dangerous method of getting rid of it
> >(rendering it obsolete and letting the public catch on at their own speed),
> >and he's also expressed the position that if a bunch of
> >black-hooded thugs invade his house some night he'll defend himself
> >first and not worry about checking their bodies for stinkin' badges
> >or designer logos on their backs until the bullets stop flying.
> >
> >Not guilty.
> 
> An almost complete summary of my stance.
> 
> But Bill left out the third leg of my tripod, that I expect to wake up some
> morning and learn that some major city, perhaps Washington, D.C. has been
> nuked or bugged.

You've both forgotton the fourth leg of the tripod, the one where Tim May
calls for the governor of Florida to be shot (along with other officials).
Governor Chiles' capital crime?  He refused to allow California wine to
be sold in Florida.  On Fri, 9 May 1997, Tim May wrote:

> Chiles and his co-conspirators should be shot for high crimes against the
> Constitution. After Clinton, Freeh, Kerrey, and the other traitors.

Everyone likes to overlook this, pretending that May didn't mean it.  Well,
he never withdrew it, did he?  He never apologized for it.  He's on the
record as explicitly calling for the murder of high officials.

And of course May further revealed his true colors with this horror,
from the same message:

> Every day that passes, I'm more convinced that McVeigh did the right thing.
> Some innocents died, but, hey, war is hell. Broken eggs and all that.

May's apologists have tried to pretend that he didn't say this, that he
said that he was beginning to understand McVeigh, or something.  That's
not what he says here.  He says he is becoming convinced that McVeigh
did the right thing in murdering all those people.

He callously compares the shattered bodies of the children and other
innocent victims to broken eggshells.  Monty Cantsin has provided us
a moving description of the painful deaths of the children in Waco.
Will dying of asphyxiation under pressure too great even to draw a breath
be any easier?

Again, you will search the archives in vain to find any apology for this,
any withdrawal.  May hides behind the words of others, as he does above,
hoping that their softened interpretations will make people forget the
plain facts about what he wrote.

If Tim May does not agree with the quotes above, let him say so now.