Jim Bell sentenced to 10 years in prison

[Faustine]

Jim wrote:

> On 31 Aug 2001, at 15:21, Faustine wrote:
>> Bah, it's dangerous to be so sure. And all the fevered talk 
>> about Aimee being a fed is hysterical.
> Feds tend to stick out in the same way she does.  That does not 
> prove she is a fed of course, it is not even particularly good 
> evidence that she is a fed, but there are feds on this list.

All I'm saying is that if the feds are doing their job well, they won't 
stick out at all. Smells like a witch hunt.


>> Haven't you ever gone to a usenet group and baited people just 
>> for the hell of it because you were bored?
> 
> She does not know enough about us to bait us correctly -- she 
> also issues appeasing win-their-confidence stuff, and it is the 
> wrong stuff.  That incompetent buttering up very fed like 
> behavior.  Someone who does not know enough to issue the right 
> win-their-confidence stuff usually does not care enough to issue 
> win-their-confidence stuff.  Of course it could be she is merely 
> incompetently trying to douse the flames she has incompetently 
> raised.  

Anyone who comes here and regularly expresses unpopular opinions in a 
provocative way is generally--almost by definition--"not liked". And if you 
don't like someone, you tend to interpret anything they do in the light of 
your not liking them. I can't help but think that since the topics being 
discussed here are so sensitive, everyone gets a little twitchy and runs 
the risk of going overboard in the way they perceive "dissenters" who are 
at odds with the prevailing wisdom. 

Actually, I think the group would be better off if more people were around 
to goad everyone into clarifying their thoughts and articulating them 
succinctly and persuasively. Couldn't hurt. Believe it or not, Choate is 
doing everyone a favor. 

And even if a whole gang of feds were actively trolling the group, what 
difference would it make as long as everyone has enough sense to see 
through it and keep their heads on straight? In a sick and perverse sense, 
you might call it Darwinian justice. 

Also, the "but they're wasting our time" angle is easily circumvented by 
having the self-discipline not to write knee-jerk replies to obvious 
nonsense. Some people never learn...


>The distinctive characteristic of an undercover fed is
> that they are pretending to be someone they are not, and doing it
> badly, confused about what their role is, and uninformed of how
> real people in that role act -- for example her recent flame
> againt ZKS.  Real people who are really concerned about the
> security of ZKS, and really hate and fear the NSA, do not talk
> like that.

I must have missed it. Unless you think I'm one of her nyms, you might 
noticed I've had some unkind words for ZKS myself. Becuase as much as I 
fear the NSA, I fear gullibility and stupidity among the well-intentioned 
even more. And if saying so makes for a more entertaining debate, well, so 
much the better.


> Now quite possibly she is just upset by getting continually 
> flamed, and is just putting on a rather bad act to persuade us 
> she is on our side.  But putting on a rather bad act is also 
> something feds do.  Incompetent acting is does not mean one is a 
> fed, but if one is a fed, it means one acts incompetently. 

True, but if she really is incompetent, she's hardly a threat, is she. The 
only feds to really worry about are the competent ones. 

~Faustine.