[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

FW: Notification: Inbound Mail Failure

Please remove [email protected] from your mailing list.  He is no
longer at this company.

-----Original Message-----
From:	Montgomery, Lynn 
Sent:	Tuesday, September 09, 1997 2:46 PM
To:	Montgomery, Lynn
Subject:	Notification: Inbound Mail Failure 

The following recipients did not receive the attached mail.  A NDR was
not sent to the originator for the following recipients for one of the
following reasons:

*	The Delivery Status Notification options did not request failure
notification, or requested no notification.
*	The message was of precedence bulk.

NDR reasons are listed with each recipient, along with the notification
requested for that recipient, or the precedence.
<[email protected]> [email protected]
		Precedence: bulk
The message that caused this notification was:


 Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 13:26:34 -0700 (PDT)
 From: Ernest Hua <[email protected]>
 To: [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]
 Subject: Why no coverage of CA resolution on Encryption?
 Cc: [email protected]
 Why was there no coverage of CA State resolution SJR-29?
 I find it using the search facility at:
 And the result is at:

 The on-line magazine has a full article by Will Rodger on this:
 Apparently there was some attempt by the Clinton Administration to
 cover up their lobbying effort.  I don't understand why the
 Administration would care about a California state RESOLUTION of all
 things.  Why does the Clinton Administration want to prevent a state
 legislature from speaking its mind?
 And what's with this attempt to claim "copyright" on that fax?
 Please get some answers on this!  The US Senate/House will be voting
 on important encryption legislation in the coming days.  The people of
 this country deserves to have a open, informed, serious discussion of
 one of the most important privacy issues of the information age.  We
 cannot afford to let a few intelligence and law enforcement agencies
 dictate policy TO us against our will.