Re: [REBUTTAL] Censorship on cypherpunks?, from The Netly News

[dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)]

aga <aga@dhp.com> writes:
>
> > Of course not, privacy isn't about being a criminal, its about being
> > private. It is not akin to anonymity, *perhaps* those who work
> > anonymously have `something to hide' (still doesn't necessarily make
> > them a criminal, however),
>
> Anonymity on the InterNet is a Constitutional right, and is the
> sole supporter of freedom of speech.

Significantly, Bruce Bough and other EFF/John Gilmore supporters are against
total anonymity just like they're against free speech. They wants to be able
to track down and silence anyone who uses the anonymous remailers to say
something "homophobic" or otherwise politically incorrect - a kind of
"identify escrow".

> > Privacy, on the other hand, simply means that not everything I do is any
> > of your business and I would just as soon you not be tempted to even
> > bother trying to find out.
> >
>
> If you do not send it to me by e-mail, I will never see it.
> Why are you so paranoid that someone is reading your e-mail?
> I never do anything criminal, so I could give a shit less if
> everybody reads all of my fucking mail.

I again remind you the lying shyster Jim Ray who tries to "guest" who
might be behind various anonymous postings and complains to the suspects'
postmasters just in case. What a lying piece of shit. Does anyone know the
snail address for Judge Kozinski? Jim Ray's been boasting so much about his
correspondense with the good judge, that we must warn him about Jim's lies
and hypocricy (notably, his *true* position on anonymity).

---

<a href="mailto:dlv@bwalk.dm.com">Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM</a>
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps