RE: Destroying PCs remotely?

["JT" <ptourvi1 () twcny rr com>]

Shawn, it seems you are backtracking now.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: full-disclosure-admin () lists netsys com 
> [mailto:full-disclosure-admin () lists netsys com] On Behalf Of 
> Shawn McMahon
> Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 8:53 AM
> To: full-disclosure () lists netsys com
> Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Destroying PCs remotely?
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 05:24:40PM -0400, JT said:
> > Please explain to me how a senator proposes a law without 
> first "thinking
> > about it" "blowing off steam about it" etc etc. Either way, 
> what you learned
>
> Why would I bother to do that, when it's not relevant to the 
> discussion
> at hand?

Funny, it was relevant two emails ago when you were telling us we were
overreacting because he didn't even propose it as a law....even though it
would seem he is having hearings on the matter. I wonder what the process is
before he proposes a new law!?

> > Let's take a look at some of the stuff he's been up to that 
> doesn't affect
> > you:
> >
> > He was co author of the DMCA, and also responsible for the 
> Copyright Term
> > Extension Act, or CTEA.
>
> Which was passed by the Senate, not solely by Hatch.  I'm 
> voting against
> anybody who voted for it; are you?  That's how a Republic works.

Read it again pal. He CO AUTHORED it, meaning he was one of the people that
created it. Sorta hard for the ANY of the senate to pass a law that didn't
exist until HE MADE IT UP!!  Maybe you believe we live in a republic, but as
it stands, the government is controlled by big business and lobbying. Maybe
you don't understand the definition of a republic? Here's a short def. for
ya:
First, power is derived from the people, and second the government itself
operates within and under the control of the law. In other words: In a
REPUBLIC the People are the Masters and the government is subordinate. Maybe
you don't know US history? We don't really have a strong line of "operating
within and under control of the law". And the gov. certainly is NOT
subordinate to us.  

 
> > He also was responsible for a bill that would have extended 
> the term of the
> > patent for Claritin, as he use Schering-Plough's corporate 
> jet when he was
> > running for president.
>
> Which would have been passed by the Senate, not solely by Hatch.

What part of "responsible" don't you understand. These bills did not exist
until he proposed them. 
> > He is also a backer of the patriot act, legislation that 
> made it easier for
> > the FBI to use Carnivore, and other legislation that erodes 
> our civil
> > rights. 
>
> Which I favor.  On balance, it's a good law.  He who would give up
> essential security for temporary liberty shall have neither.  The
> Patriot Act amounts to short-term inconvenience for a few, 
> that the many
> might live.  Hard to enjoy liberty and the pursuit of 
> happiness without
> life.
First off, your Ben Franklin quote is backwards..second...the original quote
you're trying to use directly contradicts everything following it. The
correct quote is "He who would give up essential liberties for temporary
security shall have neither"  Let me translate that for ya cause it's a
quote MY side uses to support our point anyways LOL- 

If we give up rights like the patriot act has us do in the hopes for some
temp. security, we will have neither. Get it?

That means MORE laws, stripping away MORE RIGHTS, in the name of SECURITY,
is USELESS and WILL NOT WORK.

BTW-
The patriot act does NOT amount to a SHORT TERM inconvenience. It is obvious
sir, that you have no idea what is going on in our government. If you did,
you would know that Hatch and others are trying to get the Patriot act
extended and WERE trying almost immediately after it was passed. It is
people like you who are allowing our civil liberties to be stripped away.
You obviously do not keep track of what is happening in D.C. and instead
would rather spout what you THINK is happening.
> -- 
> Shawn McMahon     | Let every nation know, whether it wishes 
> us well or ill,
> EIV Consulting    | that we shall pay any price, bear any 
> burden, meet any
> UNIX and Linux          | hardship, support any friend, 
> oppose any foe, to assure
> http://www.eiv.com| the survival and the success of liberty. - JFK

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html