mitnick-digest Tuesday, September 29 1998 Volume 01 : Number 169 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 21:47:17 EDT From: WyRmXx@aol.com Subject: Re: off-topic silliness derived from [mitnick] Re: check for mitnickt-shirts:.. In a message dated 9/27/98 8:15:08 PM US Eastern Standard Time, abaddon@cs.umb.edu writes: > Don't get me wrong -- I'm happy to trade insults with WormFucker in private. > I'm just not up for the exponential escalation that happens when it goes on > over the list. you want it to stop but you keep it going..why? must i say shut up again? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 22:13:30 -0400 From: kerry Subject: [mitnick] Sentencing statistics Here are some statistics for the Ninth Circuit: (US Sentencing Commission http://www.ussc.gov) - ---------------------------------- 1997 Average Length of Imprisonment (after conviction) (or, "Some Crimes Kevin Would Already Have Served His Time for in PreTrial Imprisonment if He'd Committed Them and Been Convicted...") Assault: 37.9 months = 3 yrs, 1.9 months Manslaughter: 34.2 months = 2 yrs, 10.2 months Burglary/Breaking & Entering: 28.8 months = 2 yrs, 4.8 months Auto Theft: 21.9 months = 1 yr, 9.9 months Larceny: 14.4 months = 1 yr, 2.4 months Fraud: 18.9 months = 1 yr, 6.9 months Embezzlement: 7.0 months Forgery/Counterfeiting: 15.9 months = 1 yr, 3.9 months Money Laundering: 41.1 months = 3 yrs, 5.1 months there are others. see http://www.ussc.gov/linktojp.htm As of right now, Kevin has served 43 months imprisoned prior to trial. If he'd been committed and been convicted of drug trafficking, he would already have served more than half of his sentence (1997 avg sentence for drug trafficking in the Ninth Circuit = 82.2 months) If he'd committed and been convicted of arson, he would nearly have served half of his sentence (1997 avg sentence for arson in the Ninth Circuit = 103.4 months) *********************************************************** FREE KEVIN bumperstickers http://www.mindspring.com/~jump0 *********************************************************** PO Box 17435 - Raleigh NC 27619 - email jump0@mindspring.com checks/money orders payable to "Free Kevin Publicity Fund" *********************************************************** Stickers are sold at cost plus postage - we make no profit from this effort - donations are split equally between Kevin's Defense Fund and the Free Kevin Publicity Fund. *********************************************************** F R E E K E V I N http://www.KevinMitnick.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 19:23:41 -0700 (PDT) From: rOTTEN Subject: Re: off-topic silliness derived from [mitnick] Re: check for mitnickt-shirts:.. On Sun, 27 Sep 1998 WyRmXx@aol.com wrote: > i agree with every word you say rotten. thanks for backing me up and now we > can get on with it I didn't back ANYONE up. If you noticed, I was providing arguments for both sides so that somewhere there could exist a middleground. <..rOTTEN..> nobody move, nobody get hurt error187(1) critical failure ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 22:54:54 -0400 From: kerry Subject: [mitnick] Law Students? Lawyers? Are there any lawyers/law students out there who have access to Westlaw or Lexis-Nexis databases? Unfortunately Dane Torbenson doesn't right now. If anyone does, and you'd be willing to do a little searching for some info please email me! thanks kerry *********************************************************** FREE KEVIN bumperstickers http://www.mindspring.com/~jump0 *********************************************************** PO Box 17435 - Raleigh NC 27619 - email jump0@mindspring.com checks/money orders payable to "Free Kevin Publicity Fund" *********************************************************** Stickers are sold at cost plus postage - we make no profit from this effort - donations are split equally between Kevin's Defense Fund and the Free Kevin Publicity Fund. *********************************************************** F R E E K E V I N http://www.KevinMitnick.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 22:57:10 EDT From: WyRmXx@aol.com Subject: Re: off-topic silliness derived from [mitnick] Re: check for mitnickt-shirts:.. i know..and i didnt ask for this fight and agreed with most of what you said. your letter proved what i was telling that guy..i understand you dont back anyone up. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 20:00:34 -0700 (PDT) From: rOTTEN Subject: Re: [mitnick] Sentencing statistics On Sun, 27 Sep 1998, kerry wrote: > Burglary/Breaking & Entering: 28.8 months = 2 yrs, 4.8 months > Fraud: 18.9 months = 1 yr, 6.9 months > As of right now, Kevin has served 43 months imprisoned prior to trial. Not to be an advocate of the legal system, I might remind youse that if Kevin is convicted of anything similar to the above charges, and given a sentence that closely matches the above sentences, it would total out to about 4 years. When his trial is over, he'll have served about 4 years and will PROBABLY get credit for time served...well, that would be the LOGICAL thing to do.. This means he'll more than likely be a free man when he's convicted. Which still sucks on many many levels...considering, as you pointed out, it wasn't manslaughter, drug trafficking, embezzlement, or any of those other crimes that require imprisonment during the legal process. I dunno...just a thought for whatever it's worth. <..rOTTEN..> nobody move, nobody get hurt error187(1) critical failure ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 20:14:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Support Services Subject: Re: off-topic silliness derived from [mitnick] Re: check for mitnickt-shirts:... rOTTEN wrote: > > A bigot is someone who is intolerant of other people's opinions and > beliefs. By pointing your finger and saying "bigot", you are being > intolerant of their opinions and beliefs, and therefore, are a bigot. Can't there be tolerant bigots ??? Those who don't like other people's opinions or beliefs, but allow them to spew their bullshit anyway? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 23:18:05 +0100 From: digger@mpinet.net (data-digger) Subject: Re: [mitnick] Law Students? Lawyers? >Are there any lawyers/law students out there who have access to Westlaw >or Lexis-Nexis databases? Unfortunately Dane Torbenson doesn't right >now. If anyone does, and you'd be willing to do a little searching for >some info please email me! > >thanks >kerry - --snip-- I sort of have access to the Lexis-Nexis databases. I may not be a law student, but there is a local university that does have the Lexis-Nexis thang. - --m0le ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 23:39:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Aaron Ball Subject: Re: off-topic silliness derived from [mitnick] Re: check for mitnickt-shirts:.. On Sun, 27 Sep 1998 WyRmXx@aol.com wrote: # i know..and i didnt ask for this fight and agreed with most of what you said. # your letter proved what i was telling that guy..i understand you dont back # anyone up. Please take your personal messages off the list -- especially when they're all about trying to claim that someone else just "proved your point" for you. rOTTEN and I have both taken our private, non-mitnick-related debates off the list. Join us. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 00:02:19 EDT From: WyRmXx@aol.com Subject: Re: off-topic silliness derived from [mitnick] Re: check for mitnickt-shirts:.. In a message dated 9/27/98 10:55:44 PM US Eastern Standard Time, abaddon@cs.umb.edu writes: > Please take your personal messages off the list -- especially when they're > all about trying to claim that someone else just "proved your point" for > you. rOTTEN and I have both taken our private, non-mitnick-related debates > off the list. Join us. if so..why did you tell me that on the list? hahaha. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 21:18:57 -0700 From: TheMan2 Subject: Re: [mitnick] Sentencing statistics rOTTEN wrote: >(snip snip) > Which still sucks on many many levels...considering, as you pointed out, > it wasn't manslaughter, drug trafficking, embezzlement, or any of those > other crimes that require imprisonment during the legal process. Does the Government consider Kevin a terrorist? They hold terrorists in jail forever without bail or a trial... Terrorists have no rights... Would they have to declare him a terrorist in order to treat him so? just a thought theman2 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 00:10:38 -0500 From: "Jason Arends" Subject: Re: [mitnick] Law Students? Lawyers? This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01BDEA74.6BE33440 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'm neither a law student or a lawyer, i'm a physics major, but my mom studied to be a paralegal... but i do have access to Lexis-Nexis and lots of cd-rom databases at the university, and law books. if there's anything you need looked up, i'd = be happy to help, 'cause i get bored between classes when i should be doing = my homework. anyway... if there's anything i can do, i'll try to help, = just let me know. ~stick-boy - -----Original Message----- From: kerry To: mitnick@2600.com Date: Sunday, September 27, 1998 10:15 PM Subject: [mitnick] Law Students? Lawyers? >Are there any lawyers/law students out there who have access to Westlaw >or Lexis-Nexis databases? Unfortunately Dane Torbenson doesn't right >now. If anyone does, and you'd be willing to do a little searching for >some info please email me! > >thanks >kerry > >*********************************************************** >FREE KEVIN bumperstickers http://www.mindspring.com/~jump0 >*********************************************************** >PO Box 17435 - Raleigh NC 27619 - email jump0@mindspring.com >checks/money orders payable to "Free Kevin Publicity Fund" >*********************************************************** >Stickers are sold at cost plus postage - we make no profit >from this effort - donations are split equally between >Kevin's Defense Fund and the Free Kevin Publicity Fund. >*********************************************************** >F R E E K E V I N http://www.KevinMitnick.com > > > > - ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01BDEA74.6BE33440 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'm neither a law student or a lawyer, i'm a physics major, but my=20 mom
studied to be a paralegal...
but i do have access to = Lexis-Nexis and=20 lots of cd-rom databases at the
university, and law books.  if = there's=20 anything you need looked up, i'd be
happy to help, 'cause i get bored = between=20 classes when i should be doing my
homework.  anyway... if = there's=20 anything i can do, i'll try to help, just
let me=20 know.

~stick-boy


-----Original Message-----
From: = kerry=20 <jump0@mindspring.com>
To: = mitnick@2600.com <mitnick@2600.com>
Date: = Sunday,=20 September 27, 1998 10:15 PM
Subject: [mitnick] Law Students?=20 Lawyers?


>Are there any lawyers/law students out there who = have=20 access to Westlaw
>or Lexis-Nexis databases?  Unfortunately = Dane=20 Torbenson doesn't right
>now.  If anyone does, and you'd be = willing=20 to do a little searching for
>some info please email=20 me!
>
>thanks
>kerry
>
>*******************= ****************************************
>FREE=20 KEVIN bumperstickers  http://www.mindspring.com/~jump= 0
>***********************************************************<= BR>>PO=20 Box 17435 - Raleigh NC 27619 - email jump0@mindspring.com
>chec= ks/money=20 orders payable to "Free Kevin Publicity=20 Fund"
>*******************************************************= ****
>Stickers=20 are sold at cost plus postage - we make no profit
>from this = effort=20 - -  donations are split equally between
>Kevin's Defense Fund = and the=20 Free Kevin Publicity=20 Fund.
>***********************************************************<= BR>>F=20 R E E  K E V I N  http://www.KevinMitnick.com
&= gt;
>
>
>
- ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01BDEA74.6BE33440-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 23:52:34 -0500 From: "Jason Arends" Subject: Re: [mitnick] Law Students? Lawyers? I'm neither a law student or a lawyer, i'm a physics major, but my mom studied to be a paralegal... but i do have access to Lexis-Nexis and lots of cd-rom databases at the university, and law books. if there's anything you need looked up, i'd be happy to help, 'cause i get bored between classes when i should be doing my homework. anyway... if there's anything i can do, i'll try to help, just let me know. ~stick-boy - -----Original Message----- From: kerry To: mitnick@2600.com Date: Sunday, September 27, 1998 10:15 PM Subject: [mitnick] Law Students? Lawyers? >Are there any lawyers/law students out there who have access to Westlaw >or Lexis-Nexis databases? Unfortunately Dane Torbenson doesn't right >now. If anyone does, and you'd be willing to do a little searching for >some info please email me! > >thanks >kerry > >*********************************************************** >FREE KEVIN bumperstickers http://www.mindspring.com/~jump0 >*********************************************************** >PO Box 17435 - Raleigh NC 27619 - email jump0@mindspring.com >checks/money orders payable to "Free Kevin Publicity Fund" >*********************************************************** >Stickers are sold at cost plus postage - we make no profit >from this effort - donations are split equally between >Kevin's Defense Fund and the Free Kevin Publicity Fund. >*********************************************************** >F R E E K E V I N http://www.KevinMitnick.com > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 04:35:03 -0400 (EDT) From: ksandre Subject: Re: [mitnick] response from james@nashscene On Sun, 27 Sep 1998, Bachrach wrote: > Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 21:17:08 -0400 > From: Bachrach > -----Original Message----- > From: black sheep > Date: Sunday, September 27, 1998 3:00 AM > Subject: [mitnick] response from james@nashscene > > >>I must admit that I made some factual errors (largely because > >>I got my information from CNN and MSNBC). > > Houston we have a problem... > The minute you see that you know that there's something wrong with society. > I mean, if that said the national enquirer it would be no big deal, but > those are two of the largest and most respected news agencies in the > country, and with CNN, most likely the world. (CNN international is all over > in Europe and Asia.) > That makes it even more appearant [to me anyway] that Kevin Mitnick's story and issues [and other reports on Hackers & Hacking in general] should be taken up by F.A.I.R. [Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting] in some form. > >>in my opinion, you are absolutely right to be upset about it-- > >>no one should be denied due process). > > let's see, we have the fourth amendment (they didn't show him a warrant even > though he demanded it), the sixth (speedy trial), the first (right to > freedom of speech and association, [no computer]), and I think I may even be > missing a few.... Oh yeah, equal representation. > What about the issue of whether or not Kevin Mitnick will ever be able to tell _his_ side of his story outside the Courtroom? (Especially since Miramax/Shimomura/Markoff/NYT, etc. get to tell it ANYway they like!) Or the issue of the production/release of a film the subject of which has yet to be brought to trial? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 04:40:11 -0400 (EDT) From: ksandre Subject: Re: [mitnick] Sentencing statistics On Sun, 27 Sep 1998, TheMan2 wrote: > Does the Government consider Kevin a terrorist? > They hold terrorists in jail forever without bail or a trial... > Terrorists have no rights... > Would they have to declare him a terrorist in order to treat him so? > just a thought > Equating Hackers with Terrorists seems to be the current vogue for the News Media (and Government [FBI, etc.]) these days. Maybe the Government is moving toward that direction as Official Policy Law? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 05:38:16 -0400 (EDT) From: ksandre Subject: [mitnick] more on MALLS & flyer hand-out Re: legal status of handing-out flyers in MALLS Here's another article on the issue of distributing flyers in shopping malls. This story has even more detail on the issues involved and more enumeration of various States' Legal Positions. (BTW, this is not exactly off-topic, people-new-to-this-list, since this was posted as an issue in previous discussions around the time of the first anti-Miramax protest.) - ---------- Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 18:47:26 -0400 (EDT) From: David Diamond To: NH Peace Action Mailing List Subject: More on The Footlocker Eight Here's an article about the Footlocker Eight trial, from the Prividence (RI) Journal-Bulletin, which was reprin[t]ed in Foster's Daily Democrat. - --------------------------------------------- 09/27/98 Free speech protesters arrested for trespassing at Mall of New Hampshire By TOM MOONEY Journal Staff Writer MANCHESTER, N.H.: Around here, they're known as the "Foot Locker Eight." They challenged a ban on free speech in what some argue is America's new village green: the mall. Police arrested them for trespassing on private property. Arnold Alpert is 42, soft-spoken and the coordinator of the New Hampshire chapter of the American Friends Service Committee, a human-rights group started 80 years ago by Quakers. In April, he and two dozen supporters went to the Mall of New Hampshire with leaflets that portrayed several shoe and clothing manufacturers as exploiters of Third-World factory workers. "We have a big concern with the exploitation of workers in the global community, and we needed to communicate that with people," says Alpert. "We went to where people congregate today. We went to the mall." The protesters handed out leaflets to shoppers knowing that their action would land some of them in a police wagon. (Mall officials had denied their request to leaflet, but Alpert had politely informed them and the police that the protesters would be coming anyway.) Their arrest became the latest dust-up in a national debate over whether malls; technically, private property; have socially evolved into our new Main Streets, places where such First Amendment rights as freedom of expression should be protected. Certainly, malls are no longer just shopping centers. Young people socialize there, en masse. Senior citizens exercise along malls' lengthy corridors. There are blood drives and Girl Scout cookie sales and events that raise money for charities or public consciousness against drunken driving. But officials at the Mall of New Hampshire, as at malls around the country, say they are under no obligation to tolerate activity that might curtail their sole reason for existence: generating business. "Our mission is to provide a hassle-free, comfortable environment for shoppers," says Judith Lambert, manager of the Mall of New Hampshire. Handing out leaflets "is in conflict with that mission." Last week, Alpert and the other members of the "Foot Locker Eight" were in Manchester District Court, attempting to get the trespassing charges dismissed. They argued that, since malls have replaced town centers as public forums, First Amendment protections should apply there. "Of course the mall is private property," Alpert says, "but private property rights are not absolute." He points to the civil rights movement of the 1960s, when private restaurants refused to serve African Americans because of their race. "The law was changed, and today restaurants can't refuse to serve someone because of race or gender," Alpert says. "We're saying this is a comparable situation." Further, he argues that the Mall of New Hampshire's policy is unfairly enforced. As an example, he points to primary day, 1996. On that February day, presidential hopeful Steve Forbes walked through the mall shaking hands and talking to shoppers, trailed by a horde of reporters and photographers (who usually are barred from working in shopping centers without prior approval). "Steve Forbes wasn't there shopping," says Alpert. "He was doing what politicians do. And he went there, to the mall, because that's where the people are, which is the same reason why we went there." In response, Lampert, the mall manager says, "you can't prevent that from happening. . . . We can't tell someone they can't come to the mall. But we can tell them they can't leaflet and can't make speeches." Besides, Lampert says, "a presidential election is only once every four years. It's a pretty infrequent experience." The hearing in Manchester District Court is to continue next month. Whatever the outcome, an appeal will be certain, leaving the ultimate decision up to the state Supreme Court. In 1968, in the midst of anti-war demonstrations, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that malls were public forums and thus were places where First Amendment rights were protected. Four years later, the high court reversed itself, saying that malls were private property and owners were not required to allow anyone on that property for reasons other than shopping. The issue has remained alive in states whose constitutions provide more individual freedoms than the federal rights guaranteed in the First Amendment. But the outcomes of those battles have rarely favored free-speech proponents. In 1972, the Rhode Island Supreme Court upheld the right of the Midland Mall (now the Rhode Island Mall) to bar solicitation of signatures for voting petitions, according to Steven Brown, executive director of the local American Civil Liberties Union. In Connecticut, the state Supreme Court allowed malls to exlude groups about 15 years ago, after a clash at a shopping center where the Ku Klux Klan was soliciting new members. In only six states have courts ruled; to varying degrees; that malls meet the criteria for consideration as public forums, says Frank Askin, a Rutgers University law professor and general counsel for the ACLU's national board. Those states are California, Washington, Oregon, Colorado, New Jersey and Massachusetts. In Massachusetts, the law is quite limited, applying only to the gathering of signatures for voting petitions, says Askin. Nancy Sterling, a spokeswoman for the Emerald Square Mall, in North Attleboro, says the more-restrictive the law, the better. "Our overall goal is to make our mall a pleasant shopping experience and a place where people want to come," she says. "If you go shopping, you may not want to be accosted by someone . . . who comes up and they want you to sign a petition or want you to buy candy." At the Rhode Island Mall, in Warwick, no political or social activist groups are allowed to espouse opinions or to leaflet, says manager Allen Smith. "If we allow one (group) in, we would have to allow access to everyone," he says. "So our policy is, we just don't allow groups in for those purposes." However, the mall does allow in various charitable organizations to run fundraisers. Smith says he doesn't believe the mall is setting a dangerous precedent by doing so because those groups "offer something for shoppers," such as gift-wrapping. Officials at the Warwick Mall did not return several telephone messages. The issue of free speech in malls has sparked controversy around the country in recent years. In Detroit, Westland Mall officials booted out the Salvation Army bell-ringers, reasoning that if they allowed in the charity group, they might also have to open the mall to more-controversial groups. In Washington, D.C., members of an AIDS awareness group were ejected from the Springfield Mall for passing out condoms and fliers. In Las Vegas, a federal judge declared a five-block stretch of downtown; formally open to the public; to be private property, after civil libertians objected to a city ordinace that banned leafleting there. Civil libertarians, who support the concept of free speech in malls, point to a 1994 decision by New Jersey's state Supreme Court as their hope for the future. That court's ruling stemmed from a case pitting several New Jersey malls against Gulf War protesters. The activists argued, successfully, that shopping centers had replaced downtowns and, like the village green, must be open to the free exchange of ideas. "The New Jersey case basically opened the question up wide," says Claire Ebel, executive director of the New Hampshire ACLU, which is representing the "Foot Locker Eight." But Frank Askin, a Rutgers University law professor who argued the New Jersey case, says the case doesn't represent any dramatic pendulum-shift toward greater free speech. At around the same time the New Jersey state Supreme Court was making its far-reaching decision, he says, "Ohio went the other way, saying (malls) are private property." And since then, in Minnesota, the Mall of America; which was funded in part with public money; has begun imposing curfews on unchaperoned teenagers, because of a growing problem of juvenile violence. Story Filed By The Journal-Bulletin, Providence, RI - ------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 07:02:23 -0700 From: "luvshark" Subject: RE: [mitnick] Sentencing statistics > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-mitnick@2600.com [mailto:owner-mitnick@2600.com]On Behalf Of > rOTTEN > Sent: Sunday, September 27, 1998 8:01 PM > To: mitnick@2600.com > Subject: Re: [mitnick] Sentencing statistics > > > On Sun, 27 Sep 1998, kerry wrote: > > > Burglary/Breaking & Entering: 28.8 months = 2 yrs, 4.8 months > > Fraud: 18.9 months = 1 yr, 6.9 months > > As of right now, Kevin has served 43 months imprisoned prior to trial. > > Not to be an advocate of the legal system, I might remind youse that if > Kevin is convicted of anything similar to the above charges, and given a > sentence that closely matches the above sentences, it would total out to > about 4 years. > > When his trial is over, he'll have served about 4 years and will PROBABLY > get credit for time served...well, that would be the LOGICAL thing to do.. > > This means he'll more than likely be a free man when he's convicted. > > Which still sucks on many many levels...considering, as you pointed out, > it wasn't manslaughter, drug trafficking, embezzlement, or any of those > other crimes that require imprisonment during the legal process. > > I dunno...just a thought for whatever it's worth. > > > <..rOTTEN..> > > nobody move, nobody get hurt > > error187(1) critical failure > I agree , that would be the logical thing. Unfortunately even after "paying his debt to society" (sarcasm intended) he will most likely be put on some sort of long term probation that will prohibit him from using certain technologies. I feel if a man does his whole sentence without parole , as all federal prisoners do , their debt is paid... Luvshark http://home1.gte.net/vthing/index.htm Dont ya hate it when losers call each other losers ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 08:51:09 -0600 From: Ray Randolph Subject: [mitnick] Picketing The Trial Are there any plans to stage a picket outside the Mitnick Trial? There will be a LOT of media there, and signs and leaflets talking about the denial of due process would be likely to get a lot of attention. - -Ray - -- "This article represents only the opinion[s] of its author, and is not an official or unofficial position of, or statement by, the Hewlett-Packard Company. The text is provided for informational purposes only. It is supplied without warranty of any kind." M. Ray Randolph -- IT Solutions Specialist Phone -- (970)898-7909 Hewlett Packard Fort Collins, Colorado ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 17:01:49 -0700 From: hugh field Subject: Re: [mitnick] Picketing The Trial Absolutely. I live in San Diego, but I plan to drive up with a few friends and picket. ~hugh Ray Randolph wrote: > > Are there any plans to stage a picket outside the Mitnick Trial? There > will be a LOT of media there, and signs and leaflets talking about the > denial of due process would be likely to get a lot of attention. > > -Ray > > -- > "This article represents only the opinion[s] of its author, and is > not an official or unofficial position of, or statement by, the > Hewlett-Packard Company. The text is provided for informational > purposes only. It is supplied without warranty of any kind." > > M. Ray Randolph -- IT Solutions Specialist > Phone -- (970)898-7909 > Hewlett Packard > Fort Collins, Colorado - -- ********************************hugh field****************************** | redtide@serve.com | PGP public key @ www.serve.com/redtide/pgp.txt | ************************************************************************ | God: "If I were to tell you that there is an army of angels waiting | | in Heaven, and on the Day of Judgement they will be unleashed upon | | the world to slay all the unbelievers, what would your response be?" | | Response: "Pre-emptive nuclear strike." | ************************************************************************ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 21:45:32 EDT From: Sacrosantx@aol.com Subject: Re: [mitnick] Picketing The Trial If there is gona be something.. I will make sure its my life mission to be there with signs. Sacrosant "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." -Ghandi ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 21:45:40 -0500 From: Jaeger Subject: Re: [mitnick] OFF-TOPIC "the word GAY" rotten, I've disagreed with you over a lot of things, but I must agree with you on this... people shouldn't whine as much as they do, but at the same time, people need to understand where the whiners are coming from... right on man... Jaeger > 1) Profanity offends people. It doesn't matter WHAT word you use, > the > word is PROFANE. Profanity in and of itself WILL offend someone. If > you > use the word FUCK, you're bound to offend SOMEONE. > > 2) The word "Gay" means "happy". It later made a transformation to > describe homosexuals, it then later made a transformation to describe > anything that's either embarassing or lackluster in quality or > something > that makes one look stupid, as in: "hey, this T-shirt is gay". This > definition exists primarily during the developmental years and if the > person enters the real world and interacts with a diverse group of > people > will normally fade by adulthood. > > 3) Those who ENCOUNTER profanity should take into consideration the > EMOTION behind the word. If the word "gay" wasn't meant to deride > homosexuals, it shouldn't be taken as such. If I use the word "nigga" > to > say, "man, that nigga is crazy" it's not the same as saying, "That > guy's a > fucking nigger!" Listen to George Carlin's spiel on language, you may > be > enlightened. > > 4) Those who use profanity should take into consideration that you > may be > speaking to a bunch of thin-skinned hypocritical pantywaists, and > either > NOT use profanity or use it selectively. > > 5) If gays find the word "gay" to be offensive, it shouldn't be used > at > all, by ANYONE, including them. It doesn't make sense that a word > should > be considered EVIL if used by anyone outside of your social group. > That's > hypocrisy, either the word shouldn't be used, or it can be used. If > you > opt to use a word that has several definition, know that those OTHER > definitions will be used eventually. > > You may argue: "Well, he used to word 'gay' to describe something > negatively" but that's not the same thing as saying "this t-shirt is > only > fit for a homosexual to wear". > > 6) If you use the word "gay" as a 'negative adjective', you'll find > that > it's not something that you'll get to say frequently in the real > world...in high school, sure, at a job or in casual conversation, no. > With friends that share similar backgrounds, yes. On an internet > mailing > list, well, you may want to reconsider. > > As far as the word "homophobe" is concerned, it's a word that > describes a > FEAR of latent homosexuality. One who openly opposes it isn't > necessarily > AFRAID of it, just against it for whatever reason. > > For those who use the word "homophobe" to describe anyone who doesn't > accept homosexuality as a valid condition of the mind, LIVEN UP. If I > > don't like broccoli, I'm not a broccoliphobe. > > And if you have a problem with homosexuals, relax. Suppress your > anger, > you may find that homosexuals can be decent people just like anyone > else. > > I used to use the word "gay" allatime to describe shit that was just > straight out GAY. "Man, Craig is so gay, he thinks he's a skater, but > > can't ollie over a crack in the sidewalk". (notice no specific > reference to sexual preference? ) When I started working with gay > people > and meeting them, the word became part of my vocabulary that wasn't > used > very much...like the word "antidisestablismentarianism". > > Words are words, it's what's BEHIND them that should offend people. > > And this concludes my dissertation for you fags. > > <..rOTTEN..> > > nobody move, nobody get hurt > > error187(1) critical failure ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 19:59:08 -0700 From: "luvshark" Subject: RE: [mitnick] Picketing The Trial > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-mitnick@2600.com [mailto:owner-mitnick@2600.com]On Behalf Of > Sacrosantx@aol.com > Sent: Monday, September 28, 1998 6:46 PM > To: mitnick@2600.com > Subject: Re: [mitnick] Picketing The Trial > > > If there is gona be something.. I will make sure its my life mission to be > there with signs. > > Sacrosant > > > "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." -Ghandi > > I live in Washington State , and unfortunately I am not in the Tax bracket that allows me to fly to LA to got o the trial , but we do have a federal building and court house here. I could organize a small picket here to show support and draw attention to the issue. we could form a communication network to keep each other updated. Please let me know what you think... Luvshark http://home1.gte.net/vthing/index.htm If you choke a smurf , What color would it turn ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 08:33:26 +0200 From: Hamburg Robbert <95100526@student.sem.hhs.nl> Subject: [mitnick] Finacial support Kevin We can support kevin financially if you press some banners. He will get paided for that and the money orders will be send to his grandmother. When I know the url's you will get them from me. Greetings ROB ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 23:42:51 -0700 From: "Luvshark" Subject: RE: [mitnick] Picketing The Trial > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-mitnick@2600.com [mailto:owner-mitnick@2600.com]On Behalf Of > Sacrosantx@aol.com > Sent: Monday, September 28, 1998 6:46 PM > To: mitnick@2600.com > Subject: Re: [mitnick] Picketing The Trial > > > If there is gona be something.. I will make sure its my life mission to be > there with signs. > > Sacrosant > > > "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." -Ghandi > > I live in Washington State , and unfortunately I am not in the Tax bracket that allows me to fly to LA to got o the trial , but we do have a federal building and court house here. I could organize a small picket here to show support and draw attention to the issue. we could form a communication network to keep each other updated. Please let me know what you think... Luvshark http://home1.gte.net/vthing/index.htm If you choke a smurf , What color would it turn ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 03:14:06 -0500 From: "terje" Subject: Re: [mitnick] OFF-TOPIC "the word GAY" cheers to that man. terje ps i apologize for the one line post...i had to say that >> 1) Profanity offends people. It doesn't matter WHAT word you use, >> the >> word is PROFANE. Profanity in and of itself WILL offend someone. If >> you >> use the word FUCK, you're bound to offend SOMEONE. >> >> 2) The word "Gay" means "happy". It later made a transformation to >> describe homosexuals, it then later made a transformation to describe >> anything that's either embarassing or lackluster in quality or >> something >> that makes one look stupid, as in: "hey, this T-shirt is gay". This >> definition exists primarily during the developmental years and if the >> person enters the real world and interacts with a diverse group of >> people >> will normally fade by adulthood. >> >> 3) Those who ENCOUNTER profanity should take into consideration the >> EMOTION behind the word. If the word "gay" wasn't meant to deride >> homosexuals, it shouldn't be taken as such. If I use the word "nigga" >> to >> say, "man, that nigga is crazy" it's not the same as saying, "That >> guy's a >> fucking nigger!" Listen to George Carlin's spiel on language, you may >> be >> enlightened. >> >> 4) Those who use profanity should take into consideration that you >> may be >> speaking to a bunch of thin-skinned hypocritical pantywaists, and >> either >> NOT use profanity or use it selectively. >> >> 5) If gays find the word "gay" to be offensive, it shouldn't be used >> at >> all, by ANYONE, including them. It doesn't make sense that a word >> should >> be considered EVIL if used by anyone outside of your social group. >> That's >> hypocrisy, either the word shouldn't be used, or it can be used. If >> you >> opt to use a word that has several definition, know that those OTHER >> definitions will be used eventually. >> >> You may argue: "Well, he used to word 'gay' to describe something >> negatively" but that's not the same thing as saying "this t-shirt is >> only >> fit for a homosexual to wear". >> >> 6) If you use the word "gay" as a 'negative adjective', you'll find >> that >> it's not something that you'll get to say frequently in the real >> world...in high school, sure, at a job or in casual conversation, no. >> With friends that share similar backgrounds, yes. On an internet >> mailing >> list, well, you may want to reconsider. >> >> As far as the word "homophobe" is concerned, it's a word that >> describes a >> FEAR of latent homosexuality. One who openly opposes it isn't >> necessarily >> AFRAID of it, just against it for whatever reason. >> >> For those who use the word "homophobe" to describe anyone who doesn't >> accept homosexuality as a valid condition of the mind, LIVEN UP. If I >> >> don't like broccoli, I'm not a broccoliphobe. >> >> And if you have a problem with homosexuals, relax. Suppress your >> anger, >> you may find that homosexuals can be decent people just like anyone >> else. >> >> I used to use the word "gay" allatime to describe shit that was just >> straight out GAY. "Man, Craig is so gay, he thinks he's a skater, but >> >> can't ollie over a crack in the sidewalk". (notice no specific >> reference to sexual preference? ) When I started working with gay >> people >> and meeting them, the word became part of my vocabulary that wasn't >> used >> very much...like the word "antidisestablismentarianism". >> >> Words are words, it's what's BEHIND them that should offend people. >> >> And this concludes my dissertation for you fags. >> >> <..rOTTEN..> >> >> nobody move, nobody get hurt >> >> error187(1) critical failure > > > > ------------------------------ End of mitnick-digest V1 #169 *****************************