On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 16:21:08 +0200 (CEST), Anonymous
<nobody@paranoici.org> wrote:

>Who has to use anonymous remailers when simply expressing their opinions? Is[/vbcol
]

Who said anyone needs a reason? Who said they can't use them even if
they don't have to?
[vbcol=seagreen]
>there such a thing as constitutionally protected free speech in the united
>states? I tend to doubt it. For example  If you make "racist" statement on
>the internet that did not threaten anyone or advocate the overthrough of go
vernments
>is it likely you might then be scrutinized, identified, looked into etc?

It's not only likely, it's probable. It may not even be government
doing it. I think that for the average person the spammers and data
collectors are the ones you need to be anonymous from. And some of
them are pretty smart.

But then again, what difference does it make? Can't people just use
remailers and other anonymous methods because they want to? Isn't
speaking anonymously part of that freedom of speech, and don't many
places restrict the things you need to be able to speak anonymously
like encryption?

I think you have it bass ackwords, my friend. It's that protected
right that allows anonymity, and anonymity is nothing more than
exercising that right. The two go hand in hand.

--
~.---,c--c   George Mason -------------------------
( )__./'`\   http://www.cyberspace.org/~gmason/
/   |`..'   Remove Your Panties To Reply By Email.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]