 sj |
||
|
||
No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If?
|
|
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Cluin Date: 22 Feb 03 - 04:41 PM I vote we throw `em Clinton. That should scare `em off. ;) |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: michaelr Date: 22 Feb 03 - 04:36 PM Just `cos you're not paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you. Cheers, Michael |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: GUEST,hrpgrrl Date: 22 Feb 03 - 03:47 PM rr...or that he lives down the street from Skylinks Golf course? |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Clinton Hammond Date: 22 Feb 03 - 12:52 PM Hell, I wouldn't even have to be tortured! ,-) |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Rick Fielding Date: 22 Feb 03 - 12:35 PM What I want to know Nick, is how did they know I NEEDED enlarging?! Rick (under torture, I'll turn you ALL in!) |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: GUEST,Nick Date: 22 Feb 03 - 12:08 PM WHile the general assumption in this thread seem to be that the privacy offered by any website has political ramifications, the only privacy policy ever offered is that the site will not give out, or sell your adress to commercial interests. So the question for Joe would be if he would sell me to the spam merchants? Would I then get emails offering me ways to enlarge my Republican? Nick |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: rangeroger Date: 22 Feb 03 - 01:48 AM Harpgirl you left out the part that he is the chair for the Language Arts department at Norwalk High School. rr |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Cluin Date: 21 Feb 03 - 10:10 PM Phew! Who cut one? |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: michaelr Date: 21 Feb 03 - 09:50 PM pffftt |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: GUEST,Merlee the Border Collie Date: 21 Feb 03 - 05:29 PM As a member in good standing of the McNab'em Border Collie League aka MBCL, I'd like to lodge a complaint about the maligning of our character concerning the emasculation of certain shrubs. While it is true that in extreme circumstances one of our supra-intelligent breed may act above and beyond duty, we do draw the line at such ignominous and distasteful deeds. Our policy is "let them eat dick!" In Solidarity with MBCL's everywhere, Merlee TBC |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: TIA Date: 21 Feb 03 - 05:18 PM urgent: The buttered monkey waltzes repeat: The buttered monkey waltzes implement now. |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Don Firth Date: 21 Feb 03 - 03:14 PM Well, that confirms it, Peg. I always had him figured for some kind of weenie. I am not concerned about anything I have posted on Mudcat. I shoot my mouth off every time I get the chance and have done so all my life. My views have changed a bit as I have grown and matured over the years (at one time I was kinda conservative, but then I got exposed to the real world), but I have never been reticent about stating what I believe in explicit terms. If this puts a burr under anybody's saddle and they have the power to haul me off to a concentration camp or some other kind of detention center, they can do it any time they want. But I know I will be in the company of a huge number of like-minded people. I know that the FBI developed a file on me in the early Fifties (not that I was doing anything of a political nature other than singing folk songs and associating with a number of subversives--such as a couple of Quakers and a registered Conscientious Objector) because I actually talked to an FBI agent several times (he asked me about a number of my folk singing friends, but there is nothing I could or would tell him). My views are known to all. I'm in the telephone book. They can come and get me any time they want. And, no, I will not shut up! I will not be intimidated!! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: NicoleC Date: 21 Feb 03 - 02:43 PM The Prez is not dickless. Other than the obvious one in his VP, there's also Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz and Rove. |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: harpgirl Date: 21 Feb 03 - 02:25 PM hmmmm let's see...who went to the University of Maine in Orono, was a Philmont Ranger, is legally blind, plays piano, used to be the Songmeister for the Longbeach Hash House Harriers? (I know more, but this is a start)....will the real -------- please stand up! |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Clinton Hammond Date: 21 Feb 03 - 02:04 PM "We had eveything under control until dickless here shut off the power grid." "Is this true?" "Yes... this man has no dick... Well, that's what I heard." --Ghostbusters-- ,-) |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Peg Date: 21 Feb 03 - 02:00 PM I have it from reliable sources that George W. Bush actually has no penis at all, but a length (a short one, but a length) of bratwurst. Dubya's penis was bitten off by the family border collie soon after his birth, tragically. The family physician suggested a trip to a clinic in Europe (all those stories from the liberal news media about how our president never once visited Europe before he was, uh, elected? Don't believe 'em). This surrogate penis of pale spiced meat was given him in exchange for his father's balls in East Berlin many years ago. The family thought it worth the sacrifice, for reasons we may never understand. This explains a lot. (well, since it was getting so nothing factual was being posted in here anyway...) |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: GUEST,Cluin Date: 21 Feb 03 - 01:45 PM Not really, Clinton. He could be a needle-dick or completely dick-less. It's best to be sure of your information before you post. |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: MMario Date: 21 Feb 03 - 01:44 PM God I like a good fiction story! |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: GUEST,The Dreaded Guest Date: 21 Feb 03 - 01:41 PM Did I post the link to the New Orleans Times-Picayune article about the mayor of that city turning over everything to the office of Homeland Security? New Orleans is now being run by the Feds. And they are holding seminars right now training other area cops and city officials on how to behave in the future. One consequence of this is that (heard this on the radio earlier, and I'm sure it'll be verified in print later), the police in Cedar Park, TX are now wearing black ski masks on the side of the road. Interstate Highway 35...just north of Austin, TX. Cops just standing around in areas of maximum traffic, getting the public used to the sight of men in black ski masks. And they've taped over their badge numbers with little 'stick ems' that say 'BAD BOY'. One of the cops said that's what they learned in New Orleans. And you're concerned about privacy? The reason for the ski masks is so foreign troops can be inserted covertly...so we won't be able to identify tell-tale racial facial features. How do you think they're going to lock down all public schools, fight off the attacks by armed parents, post guards in all U.S. factories, seal off all cities within two hours, etc., etc., etc.? The foreign troops are here, and now we won't be able to recognize them in their ski masks. So yeah...my 'security' on this freakin' machine is HIGH on my list of priorities right now. |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Clinton Hammond Date: 21 Feb 03 - 01:33 PM I think it's a safe assumption Cluin... |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: GUEST,Cluin Date: 21 Feb 03 - 01:26 PM You should watch what you say in a public forum, Peg. You don't REALLY know that GWB is a pencil-dick. |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: InOBU Date: 21 Feb 03 - 01:22 PM "From: leprechaun - PM Date: 21 Feb 03 - 12:12 AM Oh yeah, you guys think you're all so brave! But if the revolution happens and the anarchists take over, then I'm the one they're coming after. " that's what I was responding to... Cheers Larry |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 21 Feb 03 - 01:05 PM No, leprechaun, it was InOBU being ironic - "the anarchists whould likely put you in jail". And me being pedantic. |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Peg Date: 21 Feb 03 - 01:05 PM hate speech? "We're gonna hunt 'em down and smoke 'em outta their holes..." --George W. Bush Now I call THAT "hate speech." |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: leprechaun Date: 21 Feb 03 - 12:55 PM I didn't say nothin' about no anarchist jails. And if anybody in the government ever shoehorns in the time to start looking at this site, it won't be to look for people saying naughty things about the administration. There's plenty of Peg style hate speech every day in letters to the editors all across the nation. The internet goon squads might make it around to this site if Posse Comitatus GUEST starts shooting people or michaelr blows up a McDonald's, but even then, they'll have to leave a clue that leads the investigators here. I can see it now. Joe Friday: "What's this thing they used to ignite the bomb?" Inspector Gannon: "Well, it looks like a T-shirt. And there a logo on it, a banjo or something." Joe Friday: "So what the heck is a Mudca Caf?" |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: MMario Date: 21 Feb 03 - 12:29 PM what people forget - anything put onto the net is essentially "said" in public. |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: GUEST,Hollowfox, on a different computer at work Date: 21 Feb 03 - 12:27 PM Now children, didn't you get told never to put anything on the 'net that you wouldn't shout to the world? That advice has been around for years. Back in the 1960's Theodore Bikel said that it's hard to find a right-wing folksinger, so if the gumment gets nuts enough, the 'Cat might get glanced at eventually. A recent issue of Library Hotline said that said gumment has decided not to monitor the 'net. (Hooray, we're not imitating China!) Well, guest, you've saved the authorities (whichever ones get the job) of serving Max a warrent, thanks to the Google cache advice. If they're interested in an excercise in the use of the Right of Free Speech, then they'll find it right here. |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: katlaughing Date: 21 Feb 03 - 12:26 PM He's not very adept at protecting his own privacy either, Peg. Several of us do know his real name and where he lives. So much for his touting anonymity! |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Peg Date: 21 Feb 03 - 12:20 PM well, I DID just type out a long missive stating all of the inaccuracies and flat-out wrong information in Gargoyle's little dossier on my whereabouts, but it got eaten somehow! Suffice it to say, he is wrong about my phone number (couldn't even try directory assistance?), my proximity to a "stadium", my "roommate" (I do not have a roommate, I live alone here), how I get to work (never heard of Pierpoint--what is it? a street? Not in this neighborhood), and the fact that I have never owned a car (I have). And his information on my neighborhood seems approximately five years (or more) out of date. If he fancies himself an internet spy, he needs to update his software or something. I wonder if he will now attempt snooping into others' personal lives who have posted their information here. You'd think he had something better to do. Doug: Your sarcasm is lame. I am more a lady than you are a man. Proper? Who cares? |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: GUEST Date: 21 Feb 03 - 11:53 AM KJ, It does pose an interesting moral dilemma. I'm in a different position to Max in that I use the services of a Web Host and I don't hold my own data on either of the sites I maintain. The main implication there is that any authority could bypass me (and I'd have to bypass Pip for the Annexe - I'm programmer there, not owner/administrator) to try to obtain information. As far as political statements go, I think I would be as awkward as possible with authorites... I mean I think Bush is a spoilt brat playing "toy soldiers" with human beings, that Toady Blair is just that in his relationship with Bush and I should be free to be allowed to express that in forums that accept political speach, just as anyone with opposing views should be allowed to praise the same people. One question, at least from a UK perspective is: "even if I had my own server, could I stop the authorities?". I know the police have the rights to take and inspect computer equipment where paedophillia is suspected but am unsure elsewhere. I would guess that suspicion of terrorist activity could be another one and that making a political statement could, in the current climate, be seen as supporting terrorists... Jon |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Art Thieme Date: 21 Feb 03 - 10:59 AM Hell, I still don't think that Bush is the president. That election travesty was the beginning of negative occurances galore. Robert Frost, in his poem THE OVENBIRD--- A question that he frames in all but words, What to make of a diminished thing. Art Thieme |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Kernow John Date: 21 Feb 03 - 10:41 AM If Max or Joe should be required to hand over any information about me they have my full permission to do so. The guys go out of their way to provide this forum for me and others to get enjoyment out of what is for me a hobby. There is no way they should take stick for me or any of the others who use this place, guests or members. Just my 2p but there you go. John |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Forum Lurker Date: 21 Feb 03 - 09:02 AM I have to disagree with you when you claim that "the unity found in this group is the moral and ethical eqiuvalent of a lynch mob." I think that there are a good many of us who would stand up even if they didn't know the person being arrested, merely some pertinent information. When it's people you know and trust, you speak up. Michaelr, I am quite familiar with Niemoller's poem. That's why, being a straight white man, I still stand up for the rights of women, minorities, and the GLBT community. |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: GUEST Date: 21 Feb 03 - 07:37 AM Actually, the only reason government authorities on a Patriot Act (US) or suspicion of terrorism (UK) witch hunt would want any information from Max, would be to get the information Jon describes above, to match with a particular post's political content. That is the kind of corroborating evidence that is typically used against people targeted by intelligence agencies, justice department, etc. There haven't been any public cases, to my knowledge, in the US where this information has been sought for political purposes, but there have been many cases brought to trial already over privacy of an anonymous poster in business cases, where a corporation wants to go after someone being critical of management or product/service. However, the Bush administration's Injustice Dept. has been making regular proclamations about their intent to pursue people on the internet, and close down public forums where political dissent is found. When combined with yesterday's arrests, the effect can be pretty swift and immediate. Again, I agree with Gargoyle in this instance. Nobody in the Mudcat forum would make a peep if one of their own were arrested and taken away. Like I said, the unity found in this group is the moral and ethical equivalent of a lynch mob, not a group of people who would stand up to authority when the heat came down. There isn't that level of integrity here, as Gargoyle has pointed out. As to what Max would do when faced with a subpoena to disclose information about anonymous, pseudonymous, or named posters, I'm betting dollars to donuts he'd turn the information over in a heartbeat. My opinion only, of course. |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: GUEST,Jon Date: 21 Feb 03 - 07:15 AM Michael, the first thing to ask yourself is what information do Mudcat hold on you? The main source of information is the stuff you chose to provide on the membership page and at present, there is nothing to enforce the validity of any information there. Assuming Max is not involved in ilegal hacking, in most cases there is little he can to to establish the personal identity of a poster. In that sense, I think Joe Offer's comments have been a little missunderstood. The HTTP headers sent with your request for a page will kick out information such as the IP address, the browser and operating system you are using, any cookie information, information contained within forms, etc. so in most cases, you don't exactly have to be Einstein to work out that "he who posted this, also posted that". I think that is what Joe meant and in most circumstances they will know what is going on. IP addresses can of course be traced and I don't know Max's position if he was asked by authorities to disclose the IP address for a post. One thing I can be fairly sure on though is that (assuming the ISP has the information) they would be unlikely to give personal information to a forum operator. I would suspect "I've got this troll at Mudcat, please can I have his name and address so I can deal with him" would be greeted by laughter. Besides any of this, you could always mask your real IP address by using a proxy. Jon |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 21 Feb 03 - 06:30 AM Anarchist jails? No such animal. If anone sets up jails, one thing you know for sure is that they aren't they aren't Anarchists. An Anarchist FAQ |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: GUEST Date: 21 Feb 03 - 06:22 AM The unity found among Mudcat anti-privacy warriors is as reassuring as a lynch mob. |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: An Pluiméir Ceolmhar Date: 21 Feb 03 - 06:04 AM Given the known tendency of folkies and other danged hippie types to be anti-war (barring a few honourable exceptions like DougR and Claymore), and also given the lengths to which the CIA went to collect information of even marginal use long before the present climate of war hysteria, I'd be amazed if someone from the Poindexter Stasi wasn't monitoring our little chats. That would amount to criminal neglect on their part. So hi, there, Mr Snitch, and welcome to what's left of the free world. |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Rapparee Date: 21 Feb 03 - 05:53 AM There is NO privacy, NONE, ZILCH, ZERO, NADA, ZIP on the Internet! Folks, it's built into the way the Internet works. The data is passed from one server to another, across the country and around the world. Each server keeps the data from a specified length of time, the length of time being determined for each server. This is to insure that the data is received without errors. Each server is also backed up at regular intervals, sometimes more often than daily. The backups are not reused until a later date -- and even then earlier data can sometimes be read through a later backup written over the earlier data. In short, if someone wants to read what you send, all they have to do is have access to an Internet node "downstream" from you. Or to the backups of such a server. Want real paranoia? There are only about 13 or so "main" Internet servers worldwide! Believe this, and if you don't check out how the Internet is designed (I admit it, I've simplified things quite a bit here). No privacy, and it doesn't matter if "They" get to Max and Co. or not. Moreover, "They" don't need your IP address to find you (it might not be the same from time to time anyway) -- the machine address broadcast by your computer is specific to that machine. Mike Doellman 175 Cave Run Drive, #12 Erlanger, KY 41018 (who has designed and installed Internet accessible networks) |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: katlaughing Date: 21 Feb 03 - 05:46 AM Bravo, Larry! Peg, ya can't have it both ways...either he's a dickhead OR a pencildick, ya know?**BG** Totally agree with you, either way! |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: InOBU Date: 21 Feb 03 - 05:28 AM Dear Friends: Any amount of paranoia is justified in an America which proposes to remove the first right, citizenship from those who one branch of government, the executive branch, decides is in support of terrorism. However, the greatest protection against this tyrany is to be brave, and brave together. Mr. Bush and his cronies seek to spread fear of speaking out. The arrest of my dear friend Lynne Stuart, who epitomises what a fearless American lawyer should aspire to be, the arrest of the Florida palistinian professor, who's speaches I find to be extreem, but protected by the first amendment I love, these actions are designed to keep up from standing together by the hundreds of thousand to say no to war, to say no to American fasism, to say no to the removal of the rights for which Americans separated themselves from England. We must be as brave as the Americans who said no in the eighteenth century to rule by a king who tried in star chambers, in the nineteenth centry, those fellows of mine, who smuggled slaves out of the American south. My dear friend Leprichan. I agree, the anarchists whould likely put you in jail. However, they will never in any dream, run this nation. The real barbarian at the door is now inside the door and removeing those rights you swore to uphold. There is much more in common between thee and me than between the Anarchists and I, and though I love the Anarchists and their belief in human good, they often hijack the peaceful efforts of many by misbehaving at demonstrations. However, the most paranoid among us cannot emagine a sinario by which these teenage kids will paint the whitehouse black and hoist the A flag over the capitol. So yes, as I have sometimes said, I am Lawrence Otway, 80 Saint Marks Place New York, 10003, completely open to discuss with my fellows in America and the world the great freedoms we are called in, in this generation to protect. God send us a Franklynn, Payne and Jefferson (not Bill Jefferson Clinton, I should say) to remind us that slave owning men once dreamed larger than they could live to create this nation of great potential, now endangered by small men with dreams of control, tyrants who weald fear and call it freedom. Liberty, use it or loose it. Larry |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: DougR Date: 21 Feb 03 - 01:57 AM Garg, you are a riot! Peg: spoken like a true proper lady. Lep: I'm not too concerned about it. Rick: you might want to make room for a bunch of folks at your place if things get pretty scary for them down here south of the border though. :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: GUEST,.gargoyle Date: 21 Feb 03 - 12:47 AM Peg Aloi [Personal information deleted - Joe Offer] Sincerely, Gargoyle
NOW - being a WISE Mudcatter - you have followed Gargoyle's advice and all your entered information is bogus...and your identity has been miss-cast onto an unsuspecting soul you don't know. |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Clinton Hammond Date: 21 Feb 03 - 12:42 AM "Naaah -- this is AMERICA!" Not here it isn't... and I'm so very happy about that... |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: leprechaun Date: 21 Feb 03 - 12:33 AM Mikey - maybe you and flag-burner GUEST could go together and get a discount on some appropriate medication. |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: michaelr Date: 21 Feb 03 - 12:28 AM Ahh -- it's sort of nice to see my humble scenario has caused such outbreaks of levity... but the laughter does sound a bit forced to these ears. We're slowly waking up to the possibility, aren't we, that yes, it could happen here. "Naaah -- this is AMERICA!" Exactly. If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention. Thanks, Nicole, for acknowledging that my concern is valid. (Extra thanks to leprechaun for proving our Guest right.) Forum lurker, I refer you to Martin Niemoller's words. It's called "creeping fascism". It happens little by little, while we're being bombarded by weapons of mass distraction. Cheers, Michael |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: leprechaun Date: 21 Feb 03 - 12:12 AM Oh yeah, you guys think you're all so brave! But if the revolution happens and the anarchists take over, then I'm the one they're coming after. I shudder to think what all you radical vegetarians are gonna do to Doug R and me. And I'm gonna be real offended if we don't get some good protest songs for our sake. Actually I can hardly wait to be the oppressed one. Then you folks'll see some real special whinin', yeah you bet! |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Neighmond Date: 20 Feb 03 - 11:59 PM If they want me let the sonny beaches come and get me, i'll set their silly arses straight. I am but a simple man but if they manage to get me it won't be while I'm standing still! |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Rick Fielding Date: 20 Feb 03 - 11:39 PM Clinton, if they get you and I, is it OK if you get tortured first? I'm not havin' a great year health-wise, and I'd probably give up all my secrets too quickly! (like: play yer "F" chords properly!) J Edwina Hoover |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: catspaw49 Date: 20 Feb 03 - 11:29 PM LOL....Peg, I luv ya'.....Kiss me fool!!! Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Clinton Hammond Date: 20 Feb 03 - 11:24 PM Ya! What Peg said! |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Forum Lurker Date: 20 Feb 03 - 11:13 PM I'm with NicoleC. I doubt that anything I say will actually make me a suspect, because I am not of an ethnicity viewed as questionable. Sad but true. If they do come after me, I think I have a fair shot at getting habeus corpus to work. |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: wysiwyg Date: 20 Feb 03 - 11:09 PM Tellya whut, worried Guests, if they come drag you off there will be a thread of songs protesting it. Be sure we get notified, OK? Be pretty hard to personalize your protest song without any kinda handle, do you want to not only disappear but do it invisibly and anonymously???? Or maybe peeople think Max is a Bush plant. Oh yeah, Mudcatters, we'se dangerous! ~Susan |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Peg Date: 20 Feb 03 - 11:09 PM George Bush is a war-mongering moron, a coke-snorting dickhead, and a pompous mealy-mouthed inarticulate monkey-brained pencil-dick! come and get me, boys... Peg Aloi |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: NicoleC Date: 20 Feb 03 - 11:03 PM I think Michael is expressing a valid concern -- if folks are being arrest meerly because of their professed political beliefs, it's not far-fetched to wonder who's next. Telling people that if they are afraid, they should stop talking is exactly what this kind of intimidation by surveillence is supposed to do -- the de facto suppression of free speech by fear tactics. If it gets that bad... well, let's hope it doesn't. Even if they (or Max) erase the data, it can still be recovered if they really want it, and Google has it cached anyway. Be proud of your views and speech 'em loud anyway! I won't hide. As far as I'm concerned my views are my views and I stand behind them. They can come and get me, but I will not be bullied into voluntarily giving up my right of free speech! |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: artbrooks Date: 20 Feb 03 - 10:54 PM My name is my name. I live in Albuquerque. I'm in the telephone book. The basic premise of this thread is juvenile. |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: tar_heel Date: 20 Feb 03 - 10:50 PM well geeeeeeeeeee,just wrap the dudes up in plastic and duct tape....problem solved... |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Clinton Hammond Date: 20 Feb 03 - 10:50 PM Anybody who believes that there's ANY anonimity on the internet is fooling themselves... So I always use my one name... I always use my real address... I ALWAYS use the same email addy... Because there's no point at all in even trying to hide... If your silly little american government wants to monitor what I do online... I don't care a tinkers cuss... I pitty the poor bugger who's ob it is to follow me around cyberspace... The people who watch paint dry have a more exciting life... ,-) |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: GUEST Date: 20 Feb 03 - 10:45 PM More Mudcat politeness and manners. These are the people who routinely tell me how rude I am for not filling in the from blank. |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: leprechaun Date: 20 Feb 03 - 10:44 PM Well if all you radical turds are so chicken, why don't you just leave? Pussy! |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: michaelr Date: 20 Feb 03 - 10:26 PM Exactly, Guest. It's pretty clear that they will use the proposed legislation to identify dissenters, and stamp out dissent. Was it Goering or Goebbels who said at the Nuremberg trials I paraphrase) "A government can always bend the people to its will by identifying an enemy, claiming the country is under attack, and labeling anyone who questions it as unpatriotic"? Be afraid... be very afraid. How about it, Joe? Cheers, Michael |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: GUEST Date: 20 Feb 03 - 10:16 PM Michael, I think you ask a very reasonable question, and I believe Gargoyle has given what is most likely the right answer. Max is not going to refuse to give the information requested. He isn't going to risk any such thing to protect the identities of any posters here, no matter how much he likes them. I believe your question is also pretty timely. Are you asking now, because of today's arrests of the supposed "Palestinian terrorists", one of whom is a university professor in Florida? This is getting very scary. The US, to my knowledge, is not at war with the Palestinians, or with Hamas, Islamic Jihad, or any other Palestinian groups. These people are being rounded up for their associations with Palestinian nationalists and militants, and for membership in an association which "sympathizes" with them. So, if anyone here is a member of Irish NORAID, or a party member of Sinn Fein...well. I think people will get the picture. The roundups of political dissidents has now begun. |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: Sorcha Date: 20 Feb 03 - 10:06 PM Yea, right. |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: GUEST,.gargoyle Date: 20 Feb 03 - 09:08 PM There is no "integrity" within the MC organization.
They WILL SQUEAL and it will be loud, long and in three-part harmony.
NEVER use your real name and NEVER use a real address and NEVER use an e-mail box more than a three times in the same year.
Sincerely,
These are principles founded in the earliest days of the net....before Mr. Gates made it accessable to the masses of asses....who will swing in a sling as the noose is let loose.
They'll Scorch ya Sorcha! |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: michaelr Date: 20 Feb 03 - 08:58 PM You're kidding, right, Kevin? I'm saying "extremist" as viewed by people like John Ashcroft. Several members, including myself, have been quite outspoken on this forum, to say nothing of any number of Guests, at least one of which has identified himself as an anarchist. Remember, they say (and I don't think they're joking) if you're not with us, you're with the terrorists. |
|
Subject: RE: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 20 Feb 03 - 08:49 PM What extremist views? Apart maybe from some people expressing support for Bush and company I don't think I've seen many that would qualify. I think the Mudcat would rank fairly low as a priority for the architects of the New Amerika. |
|
Subject: No BS : Mudcat Privacy - What If? From: michaelr Date: 20 Feb 03 - 08:42 PM I'd like to see Joe Offer or Max respond to this. Please indulge me in reading the following scenario: 1. Fact: The US government proposes to monitor the Internet for communications of terrorists or their sympathizers. 2. Fact: A number of posters on Mudcat voive views which are extremely critical of the government, and which could be construed as being sympathetic to terrorists. 3. Fact: As Joe has said, he, Max, and certain others know the identity of "anonymous" posters and/or the computers their posts originate from. Suppose that Homeland Security agents come across Mudcat and decide to take an interest in the folks who voice extremist opinions. Suppose they knock on Joe's or Max's door (or just break the door down without knocking), perhaps wielding a search warrant, and demand disclosure of the posters' identities. Suppose they threaten Joe or Max with arrest and prosecution if they don't comply. Given the current climate and mindset in Washington, this is not a far-fetched scenario. What would you do Joe? Max? And further, what can be done to protect posters' identities before such a thing happens? Cheers, Michael Sorry for the slow response, Michael. I was at the seashore for three days. |
| Share Thread: |