[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: [tor-talk] Non-free country law preventing Tor from getting donations

On Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:17:44 -0500
Joe Btfsplk <joebtfsplk@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 6/15/2014 2:08 PM, Mirimir wrote:

> "It was OK for the founding fathers to be extreme militants, but no
> one can do it after that, or they'll go to jail."
> I'm not saying Tor Project (by themselves) should start a revolution 
> over embargo laws. 

	The tor project is an establishment project. The
	last thing they want is a ´revolution´ 

	Of course, members of  this mailing list like to parade as
	freedom fighters, but they are only fooling people who want
	to be fooled. 

>  But that scenario is similar to historical cases
> (in some respects).  Women couldn't vote; black people had to use
> different restrooms, water fountains.  

	Ah yes. There were some problems for blacks in the american
	free society eh? And who caused the problems?

	Why, it seems the problems were caused by...the government, a
	´legal entity´ that  first enforced slavery till 1870 and then
	apartheid till the 1970s...

	And, go figure, that happens to be the same all loving
	government responsible for the department of war/´defense´ and
	responsible for  spying projects like tor. 

> I personally saw that growing
> up in the South. 

	And how do things look like know in the good old US? No racism
	at all, or millions of brown people jailed perhaps? 

> On all those things & hundreds more, someone / some
> group had to stand up - & do more than send an email, that can be
> deleted by a flunkie, for anything to change.
> > As long as funding doesn't come with strings, there's no problem
> > with accepting it.
> Very true - more so w/ people already using Tor or those that would 
> never look at how Tor is funded.
> But if some sayings were ever true, it's, "Perception is reality,"
> and "You're judged by the company you keep."
> People on the outside looking in, see an organization, whose primary 
> purpose is to provide means to protect privacy, *especially* from
> gov't agencies, but the major portion of their funding comes FROM a
> gov't agency.

	Heres news for you : 

	The primary purpose of the tor project is to spy on people who
	are not subservient to the american military. 

	The US military can´t easily spy on internet traffic in places
	like, say, china or iran, because those countries are

	So the US military needs something like tor. 

	Also, tor is a way for the US military to monitor its own

> I'm sorry - but no matter how much I or anyone else loves Tor, to
> many "thinking" outsiders, it would appear quite fishy (if they know
> that funding fact).  "It just don't look right."
> I think it's fishy - _& I like Tor_.  If I'd actually known that fact 
> before I used it, I'd have thought something wasn't right.

	Yep. Something isn right. Hm. Or rather : some things (plural) 
	aren´t right.

> It may be, if they really want to grow the Tor user base
> (continually), it may have to appeal to a broader audience, for many
> of whom the funding source issue may well be a stumbling block.

tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to