Ivo Skoric on Sun, 18 Nov 2001 09:34:30 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> ivogram [x3: stingers, secdef's powers, immigration law] |
"Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net> Re: Will missles return to sting? Just unjust HirsonWexlerPerl Immigration Law News Flash! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From: "Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net> Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 13:56:09 -0500 Subject: Re: Will missles return to sting? This sounds like a reasonable threat. Early in 1990's when Croatia became a country, there was a celebration on a Croatian merchant ship in the Red Hook harbour in Brooklyn. This was behind the US border, effectively. My friend and me got in driving his 14ft moving truck. We were waved in and out of area and nobody ever checked the truck - this would perhaps be impossible to imagine after 9-11. The truck was empty in both directions - but in theory the ship could have brought some Stinger missiles from Bosnia unused by mujahedeen, and we could have brought them back into the US, with no knowledge of the US authorities. And whenever I hit the surf at the Jones Beach remote West End I see a number of wide fuselage airliners coming from Europe flying low preparing for anding on JFK, easy targets - I always wondered whether the TWA flight 800 was shot down like that by a Stinger missile by some Al Qaeda or other terror group. ivo date sent: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 03:28:32 -0500 send reply to: International Justice Watch Discussion List <JUSTWATCH-L@LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU> from: Daniel Tomasevich <danilo@MARTNET.COM> subject: Will missles return to sting? to: JUSTWATCH-L@LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU Will Stinger missles be used by anyone in Afghanistan? There are still many of them out there that the CIA wasn't able to purchase back. More than a decade after the Soviets left Afghanistan, some 300 to 600 Stinger missiles remain unaccounted for. Some CIA boosters attempt to downplay the threat by claiming that the batteries in the missiles have only a short shelf life. However, while researching at the National Security Archives, I uncovered a 1987 document from the U.S. Army Central Command stating clearly that "the BCU, the power source required to activate the Stinger, has a shelf life of at least 10 years, with a reliability rate of 98%-99%." Daniel (article not for cross posting) ------------------------------------------------------------- USA Today Wednesday, November 14, 2001 Editorial/Opinion "Will missiles return to sting?" By Alan J. Kuperman Federal investigators are treating the crash of American Airlines Flight 587 as an accident, and it may well turn out to be just that. But the possibility of a terrorist act crossed every mind when the news broke Monday that an airliner had dived into a New York neighborhood. There was instant speculation that the airliner might have been the victim of a bomb - or, even more ominously, a surface-to-air missile. Not likely this time, we are being assured. But the risk remains: No amount of heightened security within an airport will stop the launch of a man-portable surface-to-air missile from an off-site location. During takeoff and landings, lumbering civilian airliners are defenseless against such missiles, which have fallen into troublemakers' hands around the globe. Ironically, the roots of this missile proliferation lie in U.S. policy toward Afghanistan in the mid-1980s. At that time, the occupying Soviet army was using helicopters to batter the Afghan mujahedin rebels, our allies. After 2 years of heated debate, the United States in late 1986 provided the rebels one of our highest-technology weapons: the man-portable Stinger anti-aircraft missile. At first, the Stinger had a decisive impact, shooting down dozens of Soviet and Afghan military aircraft in a few months. In short order, however, the Red Army adopted a series of technical and tactical countermeasures that effectively nullified the Stinger. The Soviets retrofitted aircraft with flares, infrared beacons and exhaust baffles to disorient the missiles, and their pilots operated at night or employed terrain-hugging tactics to prevent the rebels from getting a clear shot. Within about a year, the Stinger became so ineffective that the rebels essentially stopped firing them. That's when the Central Intelligence Agency made a crucial error. Basking in the Stinger's early success, and apparently unaware that the rebels had stopped firing the missiles, the CIA provided the rebels hundreds more. With no immediate need for the missiles, the rebels either sold them at international arms markets or squirreled them away for future use. Thanks to this CIA mistake, the missiles spread to rebel and terrorist groups around the world. In 1987, it was reported that an Iranian boat had fired a Stinger that hit a U.S. helicopter in the Persian Gulf but failed to explode. In 1991, Tunisian fundamentalists reportedly used a Stinger in a failed assassination attempt. In the early 1990s, Stingers shot down aircraft in civil wars in Bosnia (twice) and Tajikistan, according to reliable accounts. In addition, an anti-aircraft missile was used in 1994 to shoot down the plane carrying the presidents of Rwanda and Burundi, triggering the Rwandan genocide. Media reports also indicate that Stingers have been acquired by Kashmiri militants, Indian Sikhs, the Iranian drug mafia, Iraq, Qatar, Zambia, North Korea, Libya and militant Palestinian groups. In addition, authorities have broken up plots to acquire the missiles by the Irish Republican Army, the Medellin cartel, Croatian rebels, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Chechen secessionists and Cuban exiles. The first President Bush tried to stop this hemorrhaging after it became clear that our former Afghan allies were linked to radical Islamic terrorists. He gave the CIA $10 million to buy back the Stingers, and when that proved inadequate, the agency got another $55 million in 1993. The CIA eventually retrieved a few dozen Stingers, but the main effect of the buyback program was to bid up the black-market price of the missile from its original value of $30,000 to as high as $200,000. Inadvertently, this enabled rebels and terrorists to sell Stingers back to the CIA at inflated prices and then to use the proceeds to buy even larger numbers of cheaper missiles at arms bazaars. To put this in context, the $65 million appropriated to the CIA to buy back a fraction of the leftover Stingers is about twice the Pentagon's original purchase price for all of the missiles provided to the rebels. More than a decade after the Soviets left Afghanistan, some 300 to 600 Stinger missiles remain unaccounted for. Some CIA boosters attempt to downplay the threat by claiming that the batteries in the missiles have only a short shelf life. However, while researching at the National Security Archives, I uncovered a 1987 document from the U.S. Army Central Command stating clearly that "the BCU, the power source required to activate the Stinger, has a shelf life of at least 10 years, with a reliability rate of 98%-99%." The scariest part is that civilian airliners are considerably more vulnerable than military aircraft to Stingers and other such missiles. They are bigger, slower and have no defense mechanisms, and areas adjacent to commercial airports are unguarded. Simply put, during takeoff and landing, airliners are sitting ducks for anyone able to get close to the airport with a functioning surface-to-air missile. To defend against the missile threat would be a major challenge. Only two methods are possible. First, civilian aircraft could be equipped with the same missile detectors, flares, infrared jammers and other countermeasures as military aircraft. This likely would cost billions of dollars, unbearable for an airline industry already reeling from the aftereffects of the recent terror attacks - unless the federal government footed the bill. Second, we could establish large exclusion zones around airports to prevent anyone on the ground from getting a shot while the plane remained within range below about 15,000 feet. However, this would be unfeasible at airports located in densely populated areas, such as those in New York, Los Angeles and Washington. To those cognizant of the missile threat during the past 15 years, it has been a pleasant surprise that few civilian airliners have been shot down by terrorists. Experts traditionally have explained our good fortune by saying that terrorists do not seek to kill large numbers of civilians, which would serve no political purpose. In the wake of Sept. 11, however, that reassuring assumption must be reassessed. Alan J. Kuperman, a visiting scholar at the University of Southern California's Center for International Studies, is the author of a 1999 Political Science Quarterly analysis of the Stinger missile and U.S. intervention in Afghanistan. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From: "Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net> Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 13:57:13 -0500 Subject: Just unjust The victorious Northern Alliance conquered Afghanistan: Herat, Kandahar, Mazar-i-sharif, Kabul - all key Afghan cities are now more or less under their control. So, they can now proceed with the favorite pastime of the Afghan warring factions: punishing the enemy. Northern Alliance commander Dostun, reportedly, likes to tie them for the tank tracks and then drive the tank around, until they are certifiably grinded. Next: bombing Afghanistan to get rid of Northern Alliance. Taliban are in 'tactical retreat' as their one-eyed leader Mullah Omar says, still bent on the destruction of the US, Allah willing. This of course is just a double-speak for losing the war. OBL is nowhere to be found, however. And the world anxiously awaits his next video-letter. Although, this may be more difficult to deliver now - since the US bombed Al Jazeera's Kabul satellite uplink station, asuring the CNN's lasting world's supremacy as the news provider. Meanwhile the Dept. of State provided INS with a list of Muslim countries from which males of fighting age should be put under scrutiny - whether they are trying to get to the US, or are already in the US. Nationalist profiling? And the president signed an executive order that, if read between the lines, says the following: Any non-American citizen who George Bush personally doesn't like from time to time can be 'determined' a terrorist, and thus subject to arrest, indefinite detention and a military court trial, without a right to appeal. Of course, this applies only if it is in the interest of the United States. I.e. those like Dostun, will not be determined terrorists right now, because they are allies of the U.S. in the current war. But this may change in the future, of course, subject to king W.'s disposition. Nice work on making the US look really unfriendly to new immigrants - and that after more than two centuries of inviting them over. Of course, the new executive order was unwelcomed by practically the entire liberal America, human rights groups, and even some conservative columnists... ivo >From LCHR: "The way I read this, when the president points a finger at someone and says he is a 'terrorist,' that person goes before a military commission and Donald Rumsfeld sets the rules," said Elisa Massamino of the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights. "This will be seen as a kangaroo court. We are struggling with international opinion to say this is a just war, and this has a great potential to backfire against us." >From AI: Amnesty International is particularly concerned that the Military Order: - is discriminatory by affording foreign nationals a lower standard of justice than US nationals; - gives unfettered and unchallengeable discretionary power to the executive to decide who will be prosecuted and under what rules, as well as to review convictions and sentences. This is inconsistent with the principle of the separation of the executive and the judiciary; - expressly bypasses the normal principles of law and rules of evidence applied in the trials of people charged with criminal offences in the US courts; - provides no right of appeal against conviction or sentence to a higher court, or access to redress for any human rights violations that may occur during arrest, detention or prosecution; Even Will Safire attacked the measure! -> <underline><color><param>0000,8000,0000</param>http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/15/opinion/15SAFI.html No longer does the judicial branch and an independent jury stand between the government and the accused. In lieu of those checks and balances central to our legal system, non-citizens face an executive that is now investigator, prosecutor, judge, jury and jailer or executioner. In an Orwellian twist, Bush's order calls this Soviet-style abomination "a full and fair trial." <underline><color><param>0000,8000,0000</param>http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/14/national/14DETA.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23716- 2001Nov13.html http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/11/13/inv.military.trials/index.html http://www.usnewswire.com/topnews/Current_Releases/1113- 184.html ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Military Order on Detention, Treatment of Non-Citizens U.S. Newswire 13 Nov 19:13 White House Military Order On Detention, Treatment and Trial Of Certain Non-Citizens In The War Against Terrorism To: National Desk Contact: White House Press Office, 202-456-2580 WASHINGTON, Nov. 13 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The following was released today by the White House: MILITARY ORDER: DETENTION, TREATMENT, AND TRIAL OF CERTAIN NON-CITIZENS IN THE WAR AGAINST TERRORISM By the authority vested in me as President and as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Authorization for Use of Military Force Joint Resolution (Public Law 107-40, 115 Stat. 224) and sections 821 and 836 of title 10, United States Code, it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1. Findings. (a) International terrorists, including members of al Qaida, have carried out attacks on United States diplomatic and military personnel and facilities abroad and on citizens and property within the United States on a scale that has created a state of armed conflict that requires the use of the United States Armed Forces. (b) In light of grave acts of terrorism and threats of terrorism, including the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, on the headquarters of the United States Department of Defense in the national capital region, on the World Trade Center in New York, and on civilian aircraft such as in Pennsylvania, I proclaimed a national emergency on September 14, 2001 (Proc. 7463, Declaration of National Emergency by Reason of Certain Terrorist Attacks). (c) Individuals acting alone and in concert involved in international terrorism possess both the capability and the intention to undertake further terrorist attacks against the United States that, if not detected and prevented, will cause mass deaths, mass injuries, and massive destruction of property, and may place at risk the continuity of the operations of the United States Government. (d) The ability of the United States to protect the United States and its citizens, and to help its allies and other cooperating nations protect their nations and their citizens, from such further terrorist attacks depends in significant part upon using the United States Armed Forces to identify terrorists and those who support them, to disrupt their activities, and to eliminate their ability to conduct or support such attacks. (e) To protect the United States and its citizens, and for the effective conduct of military operations and prevention of terrorist attacks, it is necessary for individuals subject to this order pursuant to section 2 hereof to be detained, and, when tried, to be tried for violations of the laws of war and other applicable laws by military tribunals. (f) Given the danger to the safety of the United States and the nature of international terrorism, and to the extent provided by and under this order, I find consistent with section 836 of title 10, United States Code, that it is not practicable to apply in military commissions under this order the principles of law and the rules of evidence generally recognized in the trial of criminal cases in the United States district courts. (g) Having fully considered the magnitude of the potential deaths, injuries, and property destruction that would result from potential acts of terrorism against the United States, and the probability that such acts will occur, I have determined that an extraordinary emergency exists for national defense purposes, that this emergency constitutes an urgent and compelling govern-ment interest, and that issuance of this order is necessary to meet the emergency. Sec. 2. Definition and Policy. (a) The term "individual subject to this order" shall mean any individual who is not a United States citizen with respect to whom I determine from time to time in writing that: (1) there is reason to believe that such individual, at the relevant times, (i) is or was a member of the organization known as al Qaida; (ii) has engaged in, aided or abetted, or conspired to commit, acts of international terrorism, or acts in preparation therefor, that have caused, threaten to cause, or have as their aim to cause, injury to or adverse effects on the United States, its citizens, national security, foreign policy, or economy; or (iii) has knowingly harbored one or more individuals described in subparagraphs (i) or (ii) of subsection 2(a)(1) of this order; and (2) it is in the interest of the United States that such individual be subject to this order. (b) It is the policy of the United States that the Secretary of Defense shall take all necessary measures to ensure that any individual subject to this order is detained in accordance with section 3, and, if the individual is to be tried, that such individual is tried only in accordance with section 4. (c) It is further the policy of the United States that any individual subject to this order who is not already under the control of the Secretary of Defense but who is under the control of any other officer or agent of the United States or any State shall, upon delivery of a copy of such written determination to such officer or agent, forthwith be placed under the control of the Secretary of Defense. Sec. 3. Detention Authority of the Secretary of Defense. Any individual subject to this order shall be -- (a) detained at an appropriate location designated by the Secretary of Defense outside or within the United States; (b) treated humanely, without any adverse distinction based on race, color, religion, gender, birth, wealth, or any similar criteria; (c) afforded adequate food, drinking water, shelter, clothing, and medical treatment; (d) allowed the free exercise of religion consistent with the requirements of such detention; and (e) detained in accordance with such other conditions as the Secretary of Defense may prescribe. Sec. 4. Authority of the Secretary of Defense Regarding Trials of Individuals Subject to this Order. (a) Any individual subject to this order shall, when tried, be tried by military commission for any and all offenses triable by military commission that such individual is alleged to have committed, and may be punished in accordance with the penalties provided under applicable law, including life imprisonment or death. (b) As a military function and in light of the findings in section 1, including subsection (f) thereof, the Secretary of Defense shall issue such orders and regulations, including orders for the appointment of one or more military commissions, as may be necessary to carry out subsection (a) of this section. (c) Orders and regulations issued under subsection (b) of this section shall include, but not be limited to, rules for the conduct of the proceedings of military commissions, including pretrial, trial, and post-trial procedures, modes of proof, issuance of process, and qualifications of attorneys, which shall at a minimum provide for -- (1) military commissions to sit at any time and any place, consistent with such guidance regarding time and place as the Secretary of Defense may provide; (2) a full and fair trial, with the military commission sitting as the triers of both fact and law; (3) admission of such evidence as would, in the opinion of the presiding officer of the military commission (or instead, if any other member of the commission so requests at the time the presiding officer renders that opinion, the opinion of the commission rendered at that time by a majority of the commission), have probative value to a reasonable person; (4) in a manner consistent with the protection of information classified or classifiable under Executive Order 12958 of April 17, 1995, as amended, or any successor Executive Order, protected by statute or rule from unauthorized disclosure, or otherwise protected by law, (A) the handling of, admission into evidence of, and access to materials and information, and (B) the conduct, closure of, and access to proceedings; (5) conduct of the prosecution by one or more attorneys designated by the Secretary of Defense and conduct of the defense by attorneys for the individual subject to this order; (6) conviction only upon the concurrence of two-thirds of the members of the commission present at the time of the vote, a majority being present; (7) sentencing only upon the concurrence of two-thirds of the members of the commission present at the time of the vote, a majority being present; and (8) submission of the record of the trial, including any conviction or sentence, for review and final decision by me or by the Secretary of Defense if so designated by me for that purpose. Sec. 5. Obligation of Other Agencies to Assist the Secretary of Defense. Departments, agencies, entities, and officers of the United States shall, to the maximum extent permitted by law, provide to the Secretary of Defense such assistance as he may request to implement this order. Sec. 6. Additional Authorities of the Secretary of Defense. (a) As a military function and in light of the findings in section 1, the Secretary of Defense shall issue such orders and regulations as may be necessary to carry out any of the provisions of this order. (b) The Secretary of Defense may perform any of his functions or duties, and may exercise any of the powers provided to him under this order (other than under section 4(c)(8) hereof) in accordance with section 113(d) of title 10, United States Code. Sec. 7. Relationship to Other Law and Forums. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to -- (1) authorize the disclosure of state secrets to any person not otherwise authorized to have access to them; (2) limit the authority of the President as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces or the power of the President to grant reprieves and pardons; or (3) limit the lawful authority of the Secretary of Defense, any military commander, or any other officer or agent of the United States or of any State to detain or try any person who is not an individual subject to this order. (b) With respect to any individual subject to this order -- (1) military tribunals shall have exclusive jurisdiction with respect to offenses by the individual; and (2) the individual shall not be privileged to seek any remedy or maintain any proceeding, directly or indirectly, or to have any such remedy or proceeding sought on the individuals behalf, in (i) any court of the United States, or any State thereof, (ii) any court of any foreign nation, or (iii) any international tribunal. (c) This order is not intended to and does not create any right, benefit, or privilege, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or equity by any party, against the United States, its departments, agencies, or other entities, its officers or employees, or any other person. (d) For purposes of this order, the term "State" includes any State, district, territory, or possession of the United States. (e) I reserve the authority to direct the Secretary of Defense, at any time hereafter, to transfer to a governmental authority control of any individual subject to this order. Nothing in this order shall be construed to limit the authority of any such governmental authority to prosecute any individual for whom control is transferred. Sec. 8. Publication. This order shall be published in the Federal Register. GEORGE W. BUSH THE WHITE HOUSE, November 13, 2001. Copyright 2001, U.S. Newswire Ivo Skoric 1773 Lexington Ave New York NY 10029 212.369.9197 ivo@balkansnet.org http://balkansnet.org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From: "Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net> Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 13:54:29 -0500 Subject: HirsonWexlerPerl Immigration Law News Flash! More on decreasing liberties of foreign nationals in the US - this may well end the image of the US as the most popular destination for immigrants. Well, there are other places on the planet, aren't there? This law applies to males of fighting age from Muslim countries (the definition that seems to be translated from the Serbian army practice in Bosnia). Note: Bosnians are _NOT_ on the list. Note #2: INS is really short on roaming agents so those checks within the US do not seem like such a big and overwhelimg threat. ivo ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- HirsonWexlerPerl Attorneys at Law Practice Limited to Immigration & Naturalization Law Immigration Legal Update www.hirson.com November 14, 2001 The U.S. Department of State Introduces A New Security Hold for Certain Arabic and Muslim Men. The U.S. Department of State has announced that it will add an additional 20 day waiting period to the processing of nonimmigrant visa applications of men between the ages of 16 and 45 from certain Arabic and Muslim countries. This new security hold will allow the Department of State to do the following: cross check applicants' names with the FBI's terrorism databases; require applicants to complete a new background questionnaire that will reveal any previous military service, previous weapons training, previous travels, and previously held passports. The new security hold applies to more Arabic and Muslim countries than those currently listed as countries which sponsor or support terrorist activities. The countries that are subject include: Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen. What Foreign Nationals Should Expect While Traveling Within the United States. Since the attacks of September 11, 2001, foreign nationals have expected increased scrutiny when entering the United States and now should expect increased scrutiny when traveling within the United States. The Immigration and Naturalization Service ("INS") is now enforcing a little known provision of the United States immigration laws found under Section 264 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which requires all foreign nationals over the age of eighteen to carry documentation evidencing both their identity and immigration status "at all times". A foreign national who fails to comply with this regulation can be guilty of a misdemeanor and may face fines and even jail time. Foreign nationals should carry their passports or a government issued identification document to establish their identity. In addition, foreign nationals must carry documentation to establish their immigration status. Examples of documentation establishing immigration status include: Foreign Nationals in Temporary or Nonimmigrant Visa Status. These foreign nationals must carry the notice of approval and I-94 Record. Students should also carry their I-20 forms. Nonimmigrants who are employed in the United States should carry additional documentation verifying that their current employment is authorized and consistent with their visa status (company issued identification, recent payroll check stubs, business cards, and a letter from the employer stating the foreign national's current position.) Applicants for Permanent Residence whose temporary visa status have expired should carry the INS-issued receipt notice evidencing their filing of Form I-485 and, if employed in the U.S., their Employment Authorization Document ("EAD card"). Permanent Residents should carry their alien registration cards or their passports, which must contain a stamp verifying status as a permanent resident. Other types of Documentation which evidence Immigration Status may include, but are not limited to: I-95, Crewmen's Landing Permit; I-184, Alien Crewman Landing Permit and Identification Card; I-185, Nonresident Alien Canadian Border Crossing Card; DSP-150 (effective 10/01/01, replaces Form I-186) Nonresident Alien Mexican Border Crossing Card; I-688, Temporary Resident Card. Other legislation to watch for: Attorney General John Mr. Ashcroft has submitted an INS reorganization plan to the White House's Office of Management and Budget. The plan separates the INS' immigration-services function from its enforcement function. Other efforts under way on Capitol Hill are more radical, including splitting the INS into two separate agencies. For further questions about these, or any other U.S. Immigration topics, please feel free to contact our New York office and speak with one of our attorneys at (212) 509-4921 or e-mail us at hirson-ny@hirson.com New York, NY, hirson-ny@hirson.com; Newport Beach, hirson@hirson.com; Los Angeles, hirson-la@hirson.com; San Diego, CA, hirson-sd@hirson.com; Wilton, CT, hirson-ct@hirson.com; Phoenix, AZ, hirson-az@hirson.com; Las Vegas, NV, hirson-lv@hirson.com; Toronto, Canada, hirson-toronto@hirson.com Web Based Case Tracker Capability CONTACT US FOR ALL OF YOUR U.S. AND CANADIAN IMMIGRATION LAW REQUIREMENTS If you wish to be removed from our Immigration Law News Flash! e-mail list, please contact rita@hirson.com Ivo Skoric 1773 Lexington Ave New York NY 10029 212.369.9197 ivo@balkansnet.org http://balkansnet.org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net