RE: I Got Mine

["Blanc" <blancw@cnw.com>]

Well, I'm glad my post has stirred up everyone into providing examples of proper
cpunk behavior/responses when confronted with a visit from the Friendly
Neighborhood Investigation Corp.   It's great you're sharing your ideas on
recalcitrance and resistance, it's more useful than all the jibberjabber about
how much you hate the govmt.   (Yes, but how do you actually respond to a real
live representative standing at your door (they showed me their Batches), to a
real-live situtation when you are taken to a little room and asked to strip
("asked"?) at the airport?)   Ya'll should have done this earlier, when the news
of Toto first came out.  And think about it now, because if any mail from you
was on his computer, you're likely to be next.

But relax!  -  I said nothing which is not public knowledge, which is not
already evident from the list archives.  As far as I'm concerned, it was true
but essentially useless.   I confirmed things which they already knew or would
already know from the postings to the list -  they mentioned Tim's attitude, for
instance, and Declan's stories on Toto, and the info on John Young's website,
and Toto's website, and asked me if I knew of Adam Back (who?).   Furthermore,
just because I am nice and mannerly doesn't mean I couldn't as well be a
hypocrite.   James Bond is also a complete gentleman.  Depending on the
circumstance.
(Q:  so, are you a hacker?   A:   <g>  no.  I don't know Unix)


Tim said:

: Blanc, I'm afraid that in your desire to be "helpful," you have only
: worsened the situation for Toto. Believe me, they are not interested in
: exculpatory evidence...whatever that might be in this
: context. They are more likely interested in contact lists, in educating
: themselves to make themselves more convincing witnesses, etc. Expect to see
any
: knowledge you conveighed to them coming back in Toto's trial from the mouths
of
: prosecution witnesses.

I was not being "helpful".  I relied to their inquiries; I didn't offer
information.  I made my own inquiries to them, as I already said, about the
dividing line between free speech and when they will go seeking to arrest a
person.

In terms of educating them, I don't have any objections to probing their mind to
see what/how they think about things which we have discussed at length on the
list.   I also don't have any objections in referring them to read further:   I
told them that the cpunks often have deep discussions on this and other such
subjects, where we  pursue an understanding of controversial issues like free
speech and privacy.   I told them that there were many very smart people on the
list, especially back in the earlier years, although some of these had left to
pursue their other interests.  I told them it is an open forum where people come
and go - they stay awhile, sign off, return, there are kooks who show up and get
people riled up, there are those who bring up contradictions and get jumped on
for their philosophical errors.  I said that the spectrum of philosophies
regarding governments go from the extreme anarchists who want to be completely
self-governing, to those on the opposite end who would like to have a camera in
every room of their house watching them in case anything went wrong.  I said
that most people are in the middle, not wanting too much governance but not
totally against it.  I said that when the opposite groups clash, there is a lot
of heat and sometimes light.  (they didn't ask, and I didn't tell them, which
side of the spectrum I'm on)

If one of the investigators says he is interested in the concepts of which we
discuss, I am glad to bring up any points I can make for the side of
self-government, individuality, privacy, etc. (not that I would have a prolonged
argument, but only that I would inquire as to why they are so far out of touch).
If they have any intelligence at all, they will learn something;  if not, well,
let's compare that to the time wasted trying to enlighten one of our current
prolific posters, whose name I shall not mention because I'm sympathetic to his
condition, or all the time which has been spent going over the same arguments
with those who never got any benefit from it anyway.  If there's anyone I would
be glad to aim flashes of brilliant arguments toward, it would be an IRS agent.
At least they would know definitely, without my having to flash my gun or pour
chemicals on their office rug, where I would stand in a case of "emergency".   I
am not afraid of making my stand this way, to their face.

If it is anyone who could use some perspective on the controversies over
government and privacy, it would be them.   And above all else, beyond being
symbolically defiant, I would first aim for being Real.   It can be the hardest
thing to do, stand your ground and be calm and real.

   ..
Blanc
Think Thong