((Editor's comments in double parenthesis - Homer))
                            THE WINDS OF WAR
                                ACT - 91
                           11 September 1995
                 Copyright (C) 1995 Homer Wilson Smith
       Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
     There are two kinds of people in the world.  Those that divide
people into two kinds and those that don't.
     With that in mind, I present to you the following SEVERE over
     There are two kinds of people in the world, the good guys and the
bad guys.
     The good guys speak with the Voice of Truth, and the bad guys speak
with the Voice of Lies.
     I believe that anonymity is the foundation of freedom in the known
universe.  Anonymity is the ability to speak either the voice of truth
or the voice of lies without anyone knowing who you are.
     Accountability is the opposite of Anonymity.  Accountability means
that everyone knows who said what and can take them to task for it.
     Both sides can use force to silence the other side, but usually its
the bad guys who use force to silence the good guys, good guys usually
use more voice of Truth to expose the bad guys.
     When they aren't dodging the slings and arrows of the bad guys that
     Truth does not necessarily make you powerful, at least in the early
stages.  In fact lies, and those that bow and pray to lies, make you
powerful.  So when it comes to a match of force, the bad guys often win.
     No one would argue that accountability is a bad thing, but I
would point out that ALL the members of the emerging police state are
adamantly FOR accountability at all times for all their citizens.
That should give one pause to wonder.
     Anonymity is actually very hard to maintain, and absolute anonymity
for all people at all times is very difficult indeed.
     Therefore by observation a society or organization is usually
operating at some gradient scale of anonymity between the extremes of
total anonymity and total non anonymity.
     It can come to pass that certain gradient levels of anonymity end
up benefitting the bad guys more than the good guys.  In these
situations, the bad guys tend to start winning and the good guys
perceive that the bad guys are winning BECAUSE of anonymity.
     Rather than use the weapon of anonymity themselves to protect
against the bad guys, the usual convulsive reaction on the part of the
good guys is to try and close down the channels of anonymity to keep the
bad guys located and corralled.  It never occurs to them to open up the
channels more and use it themselves.
     The logic for closing down the channels of anonymity is very
simple.  Our country is ruled by an Omni Intelligent and Omni Beneficent
God King, therefore if we track down every communication to the person
who said it, our God King will be able to silence the bad guys for us.
     The problem is that our country is not run by a God King, but by
human beings who tend to elect each other into power based on the most
outrageous criteria.
     As the bad guys see themselves getting corralled with
accountability, they simply run for office and get themselves elected
into the positions of power where THEY are the ones duly elected to take
action against the bad guys.  Of course they take action against the
good guys instead.
     It is for this reason that the temptation to tighten
accountability when anonymity is abused can be an error that leads to
a terrible trap worse than any tar pit.  Namely only the bad guys get
to speak, and the good guys get to remain silent fearing for their
     This is why when the police ask if you have something to hide after
you have refused to let them spot search your belongings, you must
always say, "Of course, I have EVERYTHING to hide.  FROM YOU!"
     There are certain basic freedoms that MUST remain in place no
matter how egregious the crimes committed therefrom, even if those
crimes are against your mother or children, because without those
freedoms in place allowing such crimes, THE STATE TAKES OVER AND PUTS
     Which is worse, child pornography or a police state?
     There are lots of ways to try and stop child pornography, but
there are few ways to stop both child pornography AND the emerging
police state which feeds on people's fear of child pornography among
other things.
     Police states are born from certain kinds of people selling FEAR to
the general populace, and the populace buys it.  Such Merchants of Fear
are ALWAYS at the bottom of any police state.  They are the foundation
and rock upon which it is built.
     Anyhow as an ISP it is my job to provide the channels of
communication between people.  That's what I do, I provide the
CHANNEL.  This includes standard accountable type channels and not so
standard anonymous type channels.
     People who communicate with each other tend to get into fights
over what they are communicating about.  Usually they take their
fights out on each other.  But when anonymous channels are used, they
don't know who 'each other' is, so they take it out on the provider of
the channel instead.  That's me.
     It's enough to make you want to throw anonymity in the waste
     Many have suggested that this would be a good idea.  However
those who define anonymity as 'premeditated irreponsibility' are
taking the stand that the resistance movement should always fly a big
red flag above their headquarters to let the enemy know from whence
they foray.
     One might well ask whose side these people are on.

     ((They confuse premeditated UNACCOUNTABILITY with irresponsibility.
It is quite insane to consider that premeditated unaccountability =
premeditated irresonsibility, or that unaccountability =
irresponsibility.  These people should be shot along with the rest of
the collaborateurs.))
     They usually consider that a government is a safe thing to have
around and wish to give it all the power it needs to protect them from
being a victim to 'crime'.
     Anyhow the quest for freedom and its maintenance is an ongoing WAR.
     It will never be any other way.
     Providing a communication channel is a difficult job, it usually
involves a precarious balance between allowing the good guys to speak
and making sure the bad guys don't get away with the gold.
     It is very hard to maintain that balance with both sides pulling
and tugging on you as the provider of the communication channel,
because they can't pull and tug on each other.
     Each side wants anonymity for themselves but not for the other
side.  Each side takes action against the other side by limiting
anonymity in general, and eventually each side falls into the same tar
pit together where no one can speak, no anonymity.
     Ain't Justice Sweet.
     Anyhow one of the main purposes of the Subscriber Agreement is to
make sure that people pull and tug on each other, and leave me out of
it even if they got no one to target at the other end of the
communication line.
Homer Wilson Smith           This file may be found at
homer@lightlink.com          ftp.lightlink.com/pub/homer/act/ACT91.MEMO
Posted to usenet newsgroup:  alt.clearing.technology