🚀 go-pugleaf

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

> From: Jellicle <~@~.~>
> Subject: Re: iStar memo:  don't tell customers list of banned newsgroups
> Date: Fri, 12 Jul 1996 14:27:40 -0400
> Message-ID: <4s65hk$5g5@sleepy.inch.com>
> References: <4rmsbp$5ur@insight.dcss.mcmaster.ca>
              <jbtoacf.-0707960850350001@ip93-106.tor.interlog.com>
              <4ro8na$du@news.intranet.ca>
              <radfordr-0807961957040001@ts39-13.tor.istar.ca>
              <4rs9m5$rf9@milo.vcn.bc.ca>
              <radfordr-0907961852180001@ts6-01.tor.istar.ca>

> If any illegal content is grounds for a group being banned, why don't
> I just send a kiddie porn binary to EVERY newsgroup.  Even if cancelled,
> it would have stayed on your system for a few seconds...  That way, I
> can shut down all of Usenet.

> Isn't that a happy thought?

Hardly a new one, though.

> Instead of rolling over and playing dead (to all the Canadian ISPs out
> there, and any other applicable ones), why don't you stand up and fight
> the stupid laws which make this scenario plausible?

As I have already pointed out in another message, this is simply not
possible, from a political viewpoint.  _Anyone_ who opposes Section
163.1 of the Criminal Code of Canada, is liable to be labelled as a
supporter of "child pornography."  There is no political percentage for
the politicians to support the changes that are necessary.

When it comes to certain subjects, particularly the subject of children
and sex, there is an automatic knee-jerk reaction--"Kill the pedophiles!
Castrate them!" etc.  Look at some of the demonstrations we've seen in
Canada by irate parents who don't want a pedophile in their
neighbourhood.  These are men who have already served their sentences;
yet the public is still out for blood--there have even been calls for
life imprisonment for pedophile offences.

> Not I, said the ISP.
> Not I, said the admin.
> Not I, said the sysop.

Who's got the _minimum_ required-- $250,000 -- to muster a Supreme Court
appeal on the constitutionality of Section 163.1 of the Criminal Code?
(Plus, you have to break the law and be charged, and thus risk jail
time, if convicted.)

The ideal case would have been the Fergus BBS sysops, who, because they
couldn't afford the expense of a legal defence, plea-bargained down to a
guilty plea of possession of child pornography, in the form of _stories_
which someone had, unknown to them, placed in their upload area.

When the simple writing down of words on paper becomes a crime, what's
next--not being able to _speak_ about certain topics?  After that--not
being able to _think_ about certain topics?

Eric Blair and Kafka would both find themselves quite at home in today's
Canada.

> -- Jellicle

<Baal@nym.jpunix.com>   <alt.anonymous.messages>   <Baal@alpha.c2.org>
1024/A21829FD 1995/07/10            PGP public key on keyservers
Fingerprint:    5A 64 DB DB 2C FE C0 FE  63 A7 A3 59 58 DA A6 EA



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: cp850

iQCVAgUBMecCVpR7IeiiGCn9AQHjwAP/YXhLYuofwo6hROdV5Mf0D8tpus+zsDtA
yT5pY9cBj6NFRLEuJupSPl8y6m/7jJfGhyPlKT7IvpJkimOjGM12BoXA57AQ3Tte
G9n7FYnRj7cw8iu5lsrWOSHcqShrRB1YDg+ODLR6y5hkb+H3OQ4JTgI8m2+ho6Iw
fBECSBJtHkI=
=zoAW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----