Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [80sBBS] Busted BBSes of the 1980s --> Bombs and other Incendiary Devices - Question

Expand Messages
  • The Shrink
    I remember several BBS s where the owners were busted for credit card fraud and/or phone fraud (phreaking), but not for bomb files.. My BBS had a wide
    Message 1 of 32 , May 2, 2010
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      I remember several BBS's where the owners were busted for credit card fraud
      and/or phone fraud (phreaking), but not for bomb files.. My BBS had a wide
      collection of anarchy materials on it back in the day and I never once was
      even contacted about it..



      From: 80sBBS@yahoogroups.com [mailto:80sBBS@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
      Joe Roberts
      Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 9:38 AM
      To: 80sBBS@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [80sBBS] Busted BBSes of the 1980s --> Bombs and other
      Incendiary Devices - Question





      On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 3:34 AM, Bruce A Wakelee <pyster@...
      <mailto:pyster%40yahoo.com> > wrote:
      > I'm confused, as these files as far as I am aware, are all legal to
      possess. My BBS was filled with them, and I wrote afew myself. Sure they
      werent busted for something else?
      >
      > -Bruce

      I'm not sure, actually. I just know they were involved and they were
      the main part of the headline. My memory is really fuzzy. I am
      fairly certain they are protected by the First Amendment, but that
      apparently didn't stop police, or there was some other pretext for the
      bust and the bomb stuff made the headlines.

      BTW, want to give a shout out to Echelon: hate the game, not the player.

      That is all.





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • The Shrink
      I agree with you on all points.. I ve recently had issues with neighbors who because they dislike cats decided to call animal control on my household, even
      Message 32 of 32 , May 10, 2010
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        I agree with you on all points.. I've recently had issues with neighbors who
        because they dislike cats decided to call animal control on my household,
        even though we're within the legal limit on number and ours are healthy and
        well taken care of, yet they let their dog run loose all the time.. People
        need to examine their own shit to make sure it doesn't stink before digging
        in someone elses..



        From: 80sBBS@yahoogroups.com [mailto:80sBBS@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
        Joe Roberts
        Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2010 3:34 PM
        To: 80sBBS@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [80sBBS] Re: Busted BBSes of the 1980s --> Bombs and other
        Incendiary Devices - Question





        On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Steve Radich <stever@...
        <mailto:stever%40bitshop.com> > wrote:

        > I don't mean to be overly negative about your post, but I want to point
        out two things:

        > 1) If the world followed this philosophy Hitler would be in power, it
        wasn't "our" business to stop him from killing Germans (Jews, Polish, etc.).
        It started as German citizens they didn't want - clearly within "their"
        business by the above definition. Yes, expanded and I don't want to get the
        thread off to history - just pointing out at the beginning it wasn't the
        world's business and I don't think anyone would say the world would be a
        better place if everyone minded their own business.

        I think the concept of "leave us alone" is predicated upon the context
        of "victimless crimes," which is what we're talking about here. The
        point about Hitler is that he was not minding his own business and was
        in fact committing a crime which makes it everyone's business, the
        same way when a rapist is victimizing someone, it's all of our
        business.

        But this doesn't really cover the snotnosed busybody little
        tattletales in our culture who don't understand boundaries. And I
        would extend this to politics too, and the amount of intrusion into
        our lives the crimes of the few have justified in the minds of so
        many. Liberty's price is that you don't get a perfectly antiseptic,
        padded-room society. A little danger comes with it. It's still a
        bargain in my opinion. Liberty ought to exist in an environment of
        reason, anyway, which gives a common framework for our dealings with
        others.

        > 2) There's a saying: "Evil will prevail when good men do nothing" -
        Edmund Burke is apparently the author.

        Right, except to some people smoking a joint or looking at naked women
        is "evil." A corollary to Burke's admirable sentiment here is:
        Authoritarianism can also prevail when self-righteous men insist on
        standing on my dick.

        > Now about the context of your post this may not apply, but you made your
        statement pretty broad so I'm pointing pointed this out.

        I'm pretty sure the context was implied. In one case, a ddial which
        was private property: "democracy" on bulletin boards is at the
        pleasure of the SysOp, or more precisely, the one who plays the build
        and mixes his labor with the application, and in the other case, a
        pornographic pleasure shack, neither of which infringe anyone else's
        rights. Not to use political terminology or whatever, but I've
        noticed over the course of my life that "shall not be infringed" is a
        statement people take to mean exactly opposite of what it actually
        does mean. Or free speech, "except/but." I regard the "except/but"
        crowd as a far greater threat than the occasional guy who uses his
        freedom to be an asshole.

        > I want to conclude with people many times interfere FAR too much, and
        freedom is great and should be respected by all (including the person who is
        free to do what they want). If everyone was free, lived decent, and didn't
        try to hurt /take advantage of others then the world would be a better
        place and nobody would need to mind anyone but their own business - I just
        don't feel that's realistic very often.

        I have felt pushed around by laws, rules, and regulations governing
        what I can and can't do far often than I've felt pushed around by
        people who were doing "evil." That's just a statement of my own
        existence in the United States. That could change, of course. But
        from my point of view, most people do live free and decently. At
        least, far more than than don't. And the minority who don't certainly
        do not provide ample justification for more laws, more regulation, or
        in a word, more violations of our civil liberties. I am still far
        more wary about laws, authority, government, and so on, than I am
        about occasional crimes of immoral individuals.

        I am 37 years old right now. One time, a few years ago, some
        aassholes broke into my truck in Tucson, and attempted to steal it.
        We caught them in the middle of it and they ran.

        Setting aside schoolyard scrapes, that's the only crime I've ever been
        a victim of a crime that I can recall. That's not a bad record,
        especially when you consider that stealing trucks is already a crime
        (and even this started with them sticking their nose into my business:
        my truck).

        > I probably deviated already too far off topic from 80sBBSes,

        It's okay. The point of this list is less about staying on topic all
        the time and more for a crowd of people who were "there" to hang out
        and have discussions.





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.