Re: IRS sending warning notes, violating ECPA?

[Alan <alan@ctrl-alt-del.com>]

On Wed, 23 Jul 1997, Tim May wrote:

> Date: Wed, 23 Jul 1997 09:53:09 -0700
> From: Tim May <tcmay@got.net>
> To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
> Subject: Re: IRS sending warning notes, violating ECPA?
> 
> 
> At 9:16 AM -0700 7/23/97, Ryan Lackey wrote:
> >(I think Tim is doing a lot more for the cypherpunks cause by not being
> >in jail than he would being locked up in jail pending trial for 5 months..
> >but that's not really an issue anyway -- one's life is one's own, do as thou
> >wilt and all)
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> I gather from the quoted comments in Ray A.'s and William G.'s messages
> that Kent Crispin is arguing that I'm one of the sheeple because I have not
> blown up any buildings or committed other felonies. (Actually, how does he
> know I haven't? Perhaps my public personna is not the full story... Hmmhhh.)

I believe the proper term for this is "Agent Provoceteur".

> (And Crispin was not around, on this list or anywhere in cyberspace I ever
> noticed, a few years ago when I anonymously launched Blacknet, a
> clearinghouse for military and other secrets. Consult the archives,
> including the investigations launched by several agencies in D.C. I did it
> as a technology demonstration, though I did get some weird offers of
> information about how the CIA was targetting African diplomats for
> compromise in Georgetown.)

Kent has missed most of the fun on this list.  The RC4 and RC2 postings,
the Clipper revelations via dumpster diving at Micronix (sp?), and lots
more.

> Crispin also has a very poor understanding of what CPs have done,
> apparently thinking the postings on this list in the short time he's been
> here represent the sum total output.

Actually the list had been in quite a bit of decline (almost typed
"Declan" ]:> ) for a while before he showed up.  He needs to go back and
review the archives.  (Maybe someone needs to do a "Historical Review of
the Achievements and Pontifications of the Cypherpunks(tm)" as a doctoral
thesis.)

[snip]

> The courts are our best hope in striking down repressive legislation.
> Congress is not a viable hope...they exist solely to generate more laws.

>From the recient decisions I have seen, it appears that the courts are
starting to reject the Control Freak attitude and roughshod trampling of
the constitution by the Clinton administration.  The Reno "justice"
department keeps coming back with cases saying "we don't have enough
powers to do our job".  The first few times they cut them some slack, but
the more they give Reno and her cohorts, the more they seem to want.
(Nothing less than a complete and total police state seems to satisfy
her.)  I think they are starting to get the point that the DOJ seems to
believe they are above the constitution or that it is no longer relevant.

(I seem to remember a quote that was proported to be from some program
Clinton did for MTV that made similar claims about the first amendment no
longer being relevant these days.  I am not certain if the quote is
correct though, as the source was not very reliable.)

Maybe their is hope via the Supreme Court.  But considering that Clinton
has the ability to "rig the court" with judges that support his ideology,
that may not last.  (Why do I have a feeling that we may see more judges
"retiring" before Clinton/Gore are out of power?)

alan@ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply
Alan Olsen            | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys.