Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Kill Yourself 18
!!!!!THE HTML VERSION OF THIS ISSUE UNDER NETSCAPE IS HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!!!!!!
!!!!!!!THE HTML VERSION OF THIS ISSUE CONTAINS MANY HIGH QUALITY IMAGES!!!!!!!
ÛÛÛ Û ÛÛÛ ÛÛÛ ÛÛÛ
Û Û Û Û Û
ÛÛ Û Û Û
Û Û Û Û Û
Û Û Û ÛÛÛÛÛ ÛÛÛÛ
Issue Number 18 ÜÜÜ ÜÜ Ü ÜÜ
ÛÜÛ ÛßÛ Û Û ÛßÜ ÛÜÜ ÛÜ Û ÛÜ
Û ÛÜÛ ÛÜÛ ÛßÜ ÜÜÛ ÛÜ ÛÜ Û
http://hops.cs.jhu.edu/~mbk/killyourself.html
IAMHOLTZ@oak.grove.iup.edu / BEAN@cpcn.com
148 Jackson St. / Indiana, PA / 15701
McCroskey's Corner: Lamont McCroskey
Editor: Dave Holtz
ÕÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍ͸
³A 'zine that explores everything that's wrong.³
³This includes: Earth, America, labels, stupid ³
³people, illiteracy, incompetence, mainstream, ³
³ignorance, religion,annoying people,education,³
³and whatever else we can think of that's wrong³
ÔÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍ;
January 1996
DIY
FREE
ANTI-(c)
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
Fuck, shit, bitch, bastard, breast, dick, cock, penis, vagina, clit, vulva,
uterus, balls, testes, sack, scrotum, suck, horny, rape, cum, anal, hell, oral,
butt, ass, asshole, tit, boob, nipple, sex, slut, whore, hoe, head, blow job,
twat, rim, pubic hair, pussy, cunt, semen, damn -- DON'T SAY THESE WORDS!
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
IN THIS ISSUE WE EXPLORE...
ÛßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÛ
Û THe EleCTrONiC BiLL oF RiGHts Û
ßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßß
ÛßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÛ
Û NeT CeNsORsHiP! Û
ßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßß
ÛßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÛ
Û NeT CeNsORsHiP AgAIn! Û
ßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßß
ÛßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÛ
Û EvEN MoRe NeT CeNsORsHip! Û
ßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßß
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
ORIGINAL WORKS INCLUDE...
ÛßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÛ
Û "A ViSit FrOm sT. CeNsORleSS" Û
ßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßß
ÛßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÛ
Û "MarTiaL LaW WiTH a ChErRY On tOP" Û
ßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßß
ÛßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÛ
Û "If YoU DoN'T LiKe iT" Û
ßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßß
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
McCROSKEY'S CORNER EXPLORES...
ÛßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÛ
Û ThE tRuTh aBouT CeNsORsHip Û
ßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßß
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
IN CLOSING...
ÛßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÛ
Û THe WORd Of gOD HaS Too MuCH pOWeR Û
ßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßß
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
* * * * * * * * * * * *
* Pre-Release Version *
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Electronic Bill of Rights
We
Free Adults
Women And Men
All As Equals
Undersigned
Demand:
The right to privacy of electronic communications
without interference or surveillance.
The right to navigate in an unrestricted manner
through generally accessable public, electronic
networks.
The right to access on public electronic networks
regardless of income, ethnicity, gender, physical
location or disability.
The right to access any public article, newsgroup,
message or other electronic communications from
whichever person or area we so desire.
The right to uncensored, free, and uncontrolled
communications to and from unmoderated, public areas.
The right to create newsgroups, to form online
communities and other electronic resources and to
discuss matters of interest to multiple participants,
without interference, retribution or undue restrictions.
The right to control and restrict access to private
mail boxes and other personal, non-public file areas
and to deny access if we so desire.
The right to security and protection from forged
messages, cancellations and articles.
The right to protection, should we so choose, from
mail bombing, automatic mailers, large, unrequested
file or data transfers and similar harassments.
The right to due judicial process and proper legal
representation in any conflicts with a services
provider.
The right to uninterrupted services and reasonable
access to contracted electronic services and
resources without hindrance or prejudice.
The right to notification, positive verification
and approval when and if personal access codes or
any other personal and private data are transmitted
to anyone by the services provider.
The right to confidential deletion of all private
and personal electronic information from the data-
bases of a services provider should we so choose.
We the undersigned adults, women and men as equals demand
these rights of our governments and Electronic Media services
providers. We will stand united in the defence and the
furtherance of these our electronic rights. Readers please
circulate, sign and present this document to your ISP as a
condition of continuance and maintenance of your accounts.
Forward completed documents to your respective governments.
We shall overcome.
Signatories *
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
* Signatory Format:
Name <E-Mail> (City/State)
"WWW URL"
Example Signators:
______________________________________________________________
T. Citizen <123r5@any.net> (Freetown,S. Africa)
"http://www.any.net/sa/ind/citizen"
______________________________________________________________
K. Public <kish_public@non.com> (Calcutta,India)
"http://www.non.com/liberty/1995/public""
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
ISSUES/PROBLEMS...
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
THE FOLLOWING ENTRY BROUGHT TO YOU BY
Stephen Williamson
Motley Focus Locus -- http://www.motley-focus.com/~timber
AfterNoon Magazine --
http://www.motley-focus.com/~timber/afternoon.html
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³PROBLEM 78493 of 398267493 ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
It's an account of an expanding attempt by AOL to tighten control over a
poets' group there, and it charges that an extreme degree of censorship has
developed recently -- that they've even removed a poem because it included
the word "breast."
We have no involvement in this writers' group and like many people on the Net,
we think that trying to do a poets' group on AOL will inevitably lead to
problems. I keep an address on AOL for submissions purposes, and as an
E-mail backup when my service provider is down, but its "Terms of Service"
make publishing there out of the question for us.
Nevertheless, this writer's anguish seems deeply felt and AOL's response to
it completely inadequate.
We wrote a number editors last month about forming an Association of
Electronic Magazines, and here, arriving on our electronic doorstep, is
correspondence which shows one more reason to seriously consider doing so.
This is not an issue of writing quality, but of freedom of
expression.
It's understandable that these writers don't want to be
forced off AOL, where their group is visible and can attract
new members freshly arriving on the Web. Here they've not
onlygotten support from one another, but have been able to
accomplish something which we believe is important for all of
us.
The long and the short of it is that we hate to see a few large corporations
gain control over information, and restrict the freedom of expression of new
arrivals to Internet.
The correspondence follows. I've edited it very slightly to avoid
repetition, and in a couple of spots added in material left out when I
chopped off some not-so-well-written responses while on line.
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³SOLUTION 78493 of 398267493 ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
If these writers can produce an example of AOL's turning down a poem for
including the word "breast," or even less extreme examples, then I think they
have a case which they should take public. Even if they don't, the issue of
intellectual freedom remains the same. AOL has stopped responding to my
letters -- perhaps with good reason. Maybe a few letters from you would get
them to consider starting up a dialog about this again.
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
THE FOLLOWING ENTRY BROUGHT TO YOU BY
editor@eff.org
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³PROBLEM 78493 of 398267493 ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
Subject: Latest Telecom Bill Provisions Would Cripple Online Free Speech
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Electronic Frontier Foundation has reviewed the draft language
of the "indecency" sections of the Telecommunications Deregulation Act
proposed by Sen. Pressler's joint conference committee. In every
respect, this language is abhorrent to all who value the First
Amendment's guarantees of freedom of speech.
This latest "indecency" legislation from Congress would impose upon the
Internet a vague and unspecified "speech code", chilling
freedom of speech among law-abiding citizens while having little or no
affect on purveyors of obscenity or child pornography (both of which are
already illegal, online or offline, in the US.) The Justice Dept. itself
agrees that law enforcement needs no new anti-porn laws for this medium.
Despite the claims of the bill's supporters, this would not be a law
limited to pornography or the sexual abuse of children. Instead, the
Telecom Bill would criminalize a great range of expression that
is legal in media such as books, newspapers, cable television, film and the
stage, as well as group conversation and personal correspondence. It
would reduce discussion and publication on the Net to what is appropriate
for a third-grade classroom. Our government is proposing to regulate the
free exchange of ideas. This is unacceptable.
Problems with the legislation include:
1) It would unconstitutionally censor speech on the Internet as if it
were a "one-to-many" broadcast medium, despite the fact that less-
restrictive means are available to prevent access to sexual (or any other)
material - means like ratings, labelling and filtering systems and
services. All content and communication on the Net would be placed under
the control of the Federal Communications Commission, whose unelected
officials in Washington, DC, would set the standards of what is
"acceptable" expression online.
2) Anyone who makes so-called indecent content available on the
Net in places where children *might* come across it, would be guilty of a
felony and punishable by a jail term and a quarter-million dollar fine.
It is as if librarians could be sent to jail simply because a child might
come across the King James Bible, or works by Norman Mailer or J.D.
Salinger on the library's shelves.
3) The term "indecency" is deliberately left undefined in the statute.
This uncertainty will act as a "chilling effect" on the free speech of
citizens who are unsure about its meaning, and will retard business and
educational investment in the medium.
4) Online services providers would be held liable even if they enable
parents and other users to employ filters and labelling systems to block
"offensive" content.
5) The statute does not prevent the states from enacting their own
censorship laws. This will create legal mayhem, and increase
the risk of conflicting regulatory burdens on service providers and users.
In sum, the latest "indecency" proposal has all the problems of previous
proposals and adds some new ones. It insists on treating computer networks
as if they were like broadcasting, and as if they had what the Supreme Court
takes to be broadcasting's unique characteristics of pervasiveness and
spectrum scarcity. But the network capacity is not "scarce" in the sense
that broadcast frequencies are, and the Net is not "pervasive" in in the
sense that content is "pushed" toward a passive audience unable to block
unwanted material before receiving it -- on the Net, content is "pulled
by the user, who has a widening range of filtration options available.
Thus there is no rationale for this new iteration of the "Communications
Decency" legislation, which would transmute a medium that has been the
fulfillment of the promise of the First Amendment into a lowest-common-
denominator environment fit only for goverment-regulated expression.
EFF opposes it, as you should.
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³SOLUTION 78493 of 398267493 ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
If you are interested in discovering what you can do to oppose this
legislation, which has not yet been reported out of conference committee,
please check the EFF web page (http://www.eff.org/) and the Voters Telecom
Watch web page (http://www.vtw.org/). It is not too late to let your
Representatives and Senators know that you value the First Amendment online,
and that you will not support politicians and policymakers who pass ignorant,
ineffective, and destructive laws that do little or nothing to protect
children, and that savagely undercut our freedom of speech in the online
world.
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
THE FOLLOWING ENTRY BROUGHT TO YOU BY
igoddard@CapAccess.org
jhdaugh@a-albionic.com
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³PROBLEM 78493 of 398267493 ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
___________________________________________________________________
| |
| COMPUSERVE SERVICES GERMAN SPEECH GESTAPO |
| |
|___________________________________________________________________|
CompuServe -- heretofore to be known as ``CompuServile'' -- has just
buckled under to a German law that bans pornography on the Internet.
In an effort to please its Gestapo masters, CompuServile has elected
to censor hundreds of USENET groups which focus on sexual issues.
If servers anywhere on earth will automatically service any fascist law
passed by any fascist country on earth, free speech will be history.
This is serious.
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³SOLUTION 78493 of 398267493 ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
CONSUMERS MUST FIGHT BACK N O W
DEFEND FREEDOM OF SPEECH
-------->> B O Y C O T T C O M P U S E R V I L E <<---------
________________________________________________________________________
Lovers of liberty CANCEL your CompuServile accounts NOW. Tell CompuServile
you will NEVER again employ their services until they BAN THE BAN.
Forward this post far and widE
CompuServile can ban whatever they want in an effort to appease whatever
fascist gov't they want, and we can employ whatever server we want. See
you later CompuServile !
This is serious. The market -- i.e., THE PEOPLE -- must react swiftly
and decisively. Boycott CompuServile NOW.
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
THE FOLLOWING ENTRY BROUGHT TO YOU BY Tom Hicks (tomh@serv.net)
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³PROBLEM 78493 of 398267493 ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
FULL TEXT OF HOUSE BILL 2267 - "AN ACT Relating to the well-being of
children" -- READ THIS CAREFULLY! REP. MCMAHAN AND THE CHRISTIAN
COALITION HOPE YOU WON'T.
---
H-3697.2 _______________________________________________
HOUSE BILL 2267
_______________________________________________
State of Washington 54th Legislature 1996 Regular Session
By Representatives McMahan, Sheahan, Mulliken, Hargrove, McMorris,
Talcott, Thompson, Backlund, Mastin, Robertson, D. Sommers, Johnson,
Casada and Boldt
Read first time 01/09/96. Referred to Committee on Law & Justice.
AN ACT Relating to the well-being of children; adding new sections
to chapter 9.68 RCW; repealing RCW 9.68.015, 9.68.050, 9.68.060,
9.68.070, 9.68.080, 9.68.090, 9.68.100, 9.68.110, 9.68.120, 9.68.130,
9.68A.140, 9.68A.150, and 9.68A.160; prescribing penalties; and
declaring an emergency.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
{+ NEW SECTION. +} Sec. 1. As used in sections 1 through 5 of
this act, the following terms have the meanings indicated unless the
context clearly requires otherwise.
(1) "Minor" means any person under the age of eighteen years.
(2) "Harmful to minors" means any matter or live performance:
(a) That the average adult person, applying contemporary community
standards, would find, when considered as a whole, appeals to the
prurient interest of minors; and
(b) That explicitly depicts or describes, by prevailing standards
in the adult community with respect to what is suitable for minors,
patently offensive representations or descriptions of:
(i) Ultimate sexual acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated;
or
(ii) Masturbation, fellatio, cunnilingus, bestiality, excretory
functions, lewd exhibition of the genitals or genital area, sexually
explicit conduct, sexual excitement, or sexually explicit nudity; or
(iii) Sexual acts that are violent or destructive, including but
not limited to human or animal mutilation, dismemberment, rape, or
torture; and
(c) That, when considered as a whole, and in the context in which
it is used, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific
value for minors.
(3) "Sexually explicit conduct" means physical contact with a
person's clothed or unclothed genitals, pubic area, buttocks, perineum,
or, if such person be a female, breast.
(4) "Sexual excitement" means the condition of human male or female
genitals when in a state of sexual stimulation or arousal; or the
depiction of covered male genitals in a discernibly turgid state.
(5) "Sexually explicit nudity" means the showing of the human male
or female genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or perineum with less than a
full opaque covering; or the showing of the female breast with less
than a full opaque covering of any portion thereof below the top of the
nipple.
(6) "Matter" means a motion picture film, a publication, a sexual
device, or any combination thereof.
(7) "Motion picture film" means any:
(a) Film or plate negative;
(b) Film or plate positive;
(c) Film designed to be projected on a screen for exhibition;
(d) Film, glass slides, or transparencies, either in negative or
positive form, designed for exhibition by projection on a screen;
(e) Video tape; or
(f) Any other medium used to electronically transmit or reproduce
images on a screen.
(8) "Publication" means any book, magazine, article, pamphlet,
writing, printing illustration, picture, sound recording, telephonic
communication, or coin-operated machine.
(9) "Sexual device" means any artificial device primarily designed,
promoted, or marketed to physically stimulate or manipulate the human
genitals.
(10) "Live performance" means any play, show, skit, dance, or other
exhibition performed or presented to or before an audience of one or
more, in person or by electronic transmission, or by telephonic
communication, with or without consideration.
(11) "Person" means any individual, partnership, firm, association,
corporation, or other legal entity.
(12) "Knowledge of its character" means that the person has
knowledge that the matter or performance contains, depicts, or
describes activity or conduct that may be found to be patently
offensive under subsection (2)(b) of this section. Such knowledge may
be proved by direct or circumstantial evidence, or both.
(13) "Knowledge" means knowledge as defined in RCW 9A.08.010(1)(b).
{+ NEW SECTION. +} Sec. 2. No person shall with knowledge of its
character:
(1) Display matter that is harmful to minors, as defined in section
1(2) of this act, in such a way that minors, as part of the invited
general public, will be exposed to view such matter; however, a person
shall be deemed not to have displayed matter harmful to minors if the
matter is kept behind devices commonly known as blinder racks so that
the lower two-thirds of the matter is not exposed to view;
(2) Sell, furnish, present, distribute, allow to view or hear, or
otherwise disseminate to a minor, with or without consideration, any
matter that is harmful to minors as defined in section 1(2) of this
act; or
(3) Present to a minor or participate in presenting to a minor,
with or without consideration, any live performance that is harmful to
minors as defined in section 1(2) of this act.
{+ NEW SECTION. +} Sec. 3.. In any prosecution for violation of
section 2 of this act, it shall be an affirmative defense that:
(1) The matter or performance involved was displayed or otherwise
disseminated to a minor by the minor's parent or legal guardian, for
bona fide purposes;
(2) The matter or performance involved was displayed or otherwise
disseminated to a minor with the written permission of the minor's
parent or legal guardian, for bona fide purposes; or
(3) The person made a reasonable bona fide attempt to ascertain the
true age of the minor by requiring production of a driver's license,
marriage license, birth certificate, or other governmental or
educational identification card or paper, or copy thereof if supplied
by mail or electronic facsimile when in-person production thereof is
impractical, and not relying solely on the oral allegations or apparent
age of the minor.
{+ NEW SECTION. +} Sec. 4. Any person who is convicted of
violating any provision of section 2 of this act is guilty of a gross
misdemeanor. Each day that any violation of section 2 of this act
occurs or continues shall constitute a separate offense and shall be
punishable as a separate violation. Every act, thing, or transaction
prohibited by section 2 of this act shall constitute a separate offense
as to each item, issue, or title involved and shall be punishable as
such. For the purpose of this section, multiple copies of the same
identical title, monthly issue, volume, and number issue, or other such
identical material shall constitute a single offense.
{+ NEW SECTION. +} Sec. 5. The state of Washington hereby fully
occupies and preempts within the boundaries of the state the entire
field of regulation and sanctions for displaying, selling, furnishing,
presenting, or otherwise distributing matter or performances that are
harmful to minors. Counties, cities, towns, or other municipalities
may enact only those laws and ordinances relating to matter and
performances harmful to minors that are consistent with this chapter.
Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive
than, or exceed the requirements of this chapter shall not be enacted
and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code,
charter, or home rule status of such county, city, town, or
municipality.
{+ NEW SECTION. +} Sec. 6. The following acts or parts of acts
are each repealed:
(1) RCW 9.68.015 and 1959 c 260 s 2;
(2) RCW 9.68.050 and 1992 c 5 s 1 & 1969 ex.s. c 256 s 13;
(3) RCW 9.68.060 and 1992 c 5 s 2 & 1969 ex.s. c 256 s 14;
(4) RCW 9.68.070 and 1992 c 5 s 4 & 1969 ex.s. c 256 s 15;
(5) RCW 9.68.080 and 1969 ex.s. c 256 s 16;
(6) RCW 9.68.090 and 1992 c 5 s 3 & 1969 ex.s. c 256 s 17;
(7) RCW 9.68.100 and 1969 ex.s. c 256 s 18;
(8) RCW 9.68.110 and 1969 ex.s. c 256 s 19;
(9) RCW 9.68.120 and 1969 ex.s. c 256 s 20;
(10) RCW 9.68.130 and 1975 1st ex.s. c 156 s 1;
(11) RCW 9.68A.140 and 1987 c 396 s 1;
(12) RCW 9.68A.150 and 1987 c 396 s 2; and
(13) RCW 9.68A.160 and 1987 c 396 s 3.
{+ NEW SECTION. +} Sec. 7. Sections 1 through 5 of this act are
each added to chapter 9.68 RCW.
{+ NEW SECTION. +} Sec. 8. If any provision of this act or its
application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the
remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other
persons or circumstances is not affected.
{+ NEW SECTION. +} Sec. 9. This act is necessary for the
immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or
support of the state government and its existing public institutions,
and shall take effect immediately.
--- END ---
---
CURRENT STATUS
HB2267 is currently awaiting a committee hearing scheduled for 1/17/96
before House Law and Justice Committee at 1:30 in House Hearing Room A,
John L. O'Brien Bldg. This is a full public hearing on HB2267, and
proponents and opponents alike have the opportunity to speak before the
committee in testimony on the bill.
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³SOLUTION 78493 of 398267493 ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
WHAT CAN YOU DO?
Unlike last year, the 54th legislative is a "short," 60-day session in a
general election year. Legislative action in Olympia can only be called
fast and furious. Time is short to act! There's a lot you can do to
promote the well-being of children and oppose HB2267 in the coming days:
* Share this CITIZEN ONLINE ACTION ALERT with your friends, family,
coworkers, community group and others. Unless we are all aware of this
bill, its supporters and proponents, as well as what this means to
everyone inside and outside the online community, effective opposition
is impossible. Spread the word!!
* Get ready to send hardcopy letters, faxes and email to our elected
officials in Olympia opposing HB2267. CITIZEN ONLINE will be issuing
another Action Alert on 1/12/96 detailing committee members, key elected
officials, phone/address/fax/email lists, as well as some talking points
and other timely information to empower you, as citizens, to voice your
opposition or make your suggestions on how we can all really ensure the
well-being of children without eliminating freedom of expression and
curtailing civil liberties of all citizens of Washington State. The same
elected officials who did not understand last year's censorship bills,
or never bothered to read past the attractive titles, are still in
Olympia this session. Your letters and comments will help educate them
to the dangers and pitfalls a bill like HB2267 can pose for us all.
* Be ready to write your local newspaper voicing opposition to HB2267.
The same talking points you'll use in writing your elected
representatives can be powerful messages to the community through local
press "Letters to the Editor." We can count on proponents using every
media trick and tool to get their agenda around citizens of Washington
State by attempting to portray their opposition, in the sneering words
of Rep. Lois McMahan, as "a handful of ultraliberal elected officials
and uninformed people from Seattle."
* Make arrangements to take the afternoon of Wednesday, January 17 off
and join with others voicing their opposition to HB2267 in testimony
before the House Law and Justice Committee. As James Love of the
Taxpayer Assets Project says, "Political action occurs in geographic
space, not cyberspace." Taking the time to be in Olympia in-person is
the very best way you can show your opposition in a manner elected
officials can understand. Proponents will be there--you must be, too!
For those wanting additional information, their own copy of HB2267 or
other information about the activities and members of Washington's 54th
Legislature, gopher leginfo.leg.wa.gov, a free-access service.
Those wanting to receive CITIZEN ONLINE directly should send an email
message to wcis@eskimo.com.
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
SHORT STORIES/POETRY...
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
THE FOLLOWING ENTRY BROUGHT TO YOU BY
Larry Flint Publications
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³ "A Visit From St. Censorless" ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
T'was the night before Christmas,
And all through the city
Not a publisher published
A dirge or a ditty.
The pressures were silent, as silent as night,
For the ink had been smilled in the heat of a fight.
The jailhouse was loaded with writers and eds
Whose writing and ed-ing had displeased the feds.
Now the judges and jurists, all safe in their beds,
Had delusions of "purity" snug in their heads.
They had squelched all dissent and all "flagrant bad taste"
Till the edges of Truth had been seared and laid waste.
More pablum prevailed and dullness was rife
For never such drivel you've heard in your life.
Pages of newspapers shriveled and shrank
And all that remained smelled- God, how it stank!
The news was like nothing, like nothing at all,
But was slanted, distorted to suit City Hall.
Now Bellamy Bluenose, the D.A. of note,
Had a special incentive, an eye on the vote.
"Our Hero" had settled, all cozy and warm,
In the comfort of Christmastide, so true to form.
He dozed and he nodded till he was quite out,
When a sequence occured that gave him a clout.
There in his room was heard such a clatter
He harked and he peered to determine the matter.
"Bellamy Bluenose!" a booming voice beckoned.
("I guess I am being subpoenaed," he reckoned.)
"Who do you think you are?" the voice spoke,
"To throttle the minds and the feelings of folk?
Have you ever invisioned-in truth or in fables-
The people of Cityville turning the tables?
People with noses-the black, brown and white-
May turn on the blue as 'distasteful'-a 'fright.'
When where would you be, all undefended,
With no one to help you, alone and upended?
Your schnozzle is blue; quite strange, but let's face it,
No one aspires to malign or debase it.
They leave it alone as a part of your right,
So how 'bout the men in the brig this cold night?"
The light in the window was all bright and garish
As Bellamy woke; t'was a dream all nightmarish.
A cold day was dawning, and X marked the place
Where Truth had been hobbled and slapped in the face.
He dressed in a flash as bad vibes alarmed him,
On this morn of all morns hardly anything charmed him,
Till he took to the streets with a cause and a plan,
A guy fully scared by the ghost of The Man.
He imagined himself a pariah of sorts
Arrested and handcuffed and hauled into courts-
All for some different manner he chose,
All for the want of an "average nose."
So filling the air with a change of intention,
He wakened the Cityville Chief of Detention.
"Unfair!" he recanted aloud. "Unlock 'em!
I see we were wrong to confine and cell-block 'em."
And they heard him exclaim as he entered the jail,
"Put the X back in Xmas and let Truth prevail!"
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
THE FOLLOWING ENTRY BROUGHT TO YOU BY
Propagandhi
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³ "Martial Law With A Cherry On Top"³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
The constitutional rights of (ascribed) "Canadians" as outlined in the
Charter of Rights and Freedoms allegedly include absolute freedom of thought,
belief, opinion and expression via and media of communication. However, these
seemingly generous rights are offset by a limitations clause, rendering them
all arbitrary and subject to the discretion of those in positions of authority.
Basically, what this means, is that we in Canada live in a constant state of
martial law, with the Charter acting merely as a spoonful of sugar to help it
go down. Freedom of thought and expression, contrary to statist thought, are
not rights or privelages to be granted or revoked. They are values inherent to
being human. The misconception is a trait inherent to all nations and all
statist political systems where humans are perceived as subjects of the crown,
state or flag before they are perceived as individuals. They depend on our
dependence. Don't be a pawn. Don't give it to them.
Reject their values
Reject tradition
Burn their flag
Fuck their system
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
THE FOLLOWING ENTRY BROUGHT TO YOU BY
Culture Shock
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³ "If You Don't Like It" ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
certain things that need to be said
are left inside your moralist mind
for fear of upsetting the status quo
silence rules over the words you can't find
which means that whatever it was out there
-outside the head and the waves of disdain-
is left to thrive and succeed and exist
and of your contempt only the looks remain
if you don't like it say you don't like it
so a stare and a critical 'all seeing' eye
are the end result of a failure to change
silence is scornful but it won't change a thing
your values and morals keep your tongue in its chains
try shoving your feelings out loud in ths dark
there's nobody listening but you still feel alive
then try it again in a crowded street
and feel the difference the freedom inside
reinstate your ego as part of what you are
become the dream you dreamt of
don't watch it from afar
if you don't like it say you don't like it
nothing will change if you sit there and take it
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³ McCROSKEY'S CORNER ³
ÃÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ´
³ ThE tRuTh aBouT CeNsORsHip ³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
Please send all responses to lamont@CPCN.COM
Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to another McCroskey's corner. I'm
sure that by now you've realized that this issue focuses on censorship. And
another thing that you've probably noticed is that all of the zine is against
censorship. Well, I've decided to take the side of censorship just to see
if it can be done.
First of all, I'd just like to lay out a couple of definitions
because I know that they'll come up later and I'd like you all to know exactly
what the words mean.
PORNOGRAPHY: a portrayal of erotic behavior designed to cause sexual
excitement.
OBSCENITY: any language or behavior believed to corrupt public morals.
Can be used to refer to printed or pictoral material that glorifies violence
against women or degrades women.
Now, with those out of the way, let us continue. A country's values are
reflected by its policies. If a country doesn't believe in racism, it should
not protect its racist expression. But it's not just racism that's out there,
we're talking about other major topics like violence and pornography. Sure,
it's written in the Constitution that the people have freedom of speech, but
you have to know where to draw the line. You can either defend freedom of
speech, which would allow people to preach any evil that they wanted to, and
which would in turn be promoting their ideas. Or you can take away one of the
things that made this country what it is, but it would be for the good of the
people. It all depends on how you feel about it I guess.
And what is it with the internet? Why is it that people feel that the
internet should be some safe haven? There are federal laws against
the interstate sale and distribution of pornographic materials and against the
presentation of obscene material on radio or T.V. So where's the difference
between radio, T.V., and the internet? They are all used for either education
or entertainment, and practically everyone has access to all three of them.
The only reason that the internet was able to get away with it so far was due
to a lack of any real management, until now. The internet should be treated
just like radio and T.V.
Let's look at some of the facts. In 1986, the Attorney General's
commission on Pornography determined that a relationship existed between
sexually violent or degrading materials and the amount of sexual violence
in society. In 1983, The U.S. Department of Justice concluded that virtually
%100 of of aggression researchers agree that there is a cause-effect
relationship between the consumption of entertainment violence and an
increased tendency towards anger and violence in viewers. Also during the
80's the U.S. Attorney General's Task Force on Family Violence reported that
the evidence is becoming "overwhelming" that T.V. violence is playing a
significant role in the high levels of violence in the American family.
Broadcasters are also given free licenses to use the airwaves for the
public interest. Though it doesn't say the public's BEST interest, I'm sure
that they can figure this out. Yet violent entertainment is broadcasted every
hour. This is where something like censorship comes into play. It gives the
people the violent entertainment that they want to see, without overdoing it
and turning society into a bunch of blood-thirsty animals.
What's wrong with censorship? I see no problem with it at all, as
long as it's being used for the good of the people. People need to get off
of this "keep the internet free!" kick and just come to terms with the fact
that it's no different from T.V. or radio. Not only that, but look at it this
way: Congress passed the bill on internet censorship, and the people elected
congress to represent them. This must be what a majority of the people want,
so live with it.
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³IN CLOSING:³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
Who is to say what is 'decent' and 'indecent?' So many times before the
decision as to whether something is right or wrong has depended solely on
those who possess power such as the Church and the Government. Are we going
to sit back and allow the last form of true free speech in the world be
destroyed? Next they'll hit public places like libraries, there is no doubt
in my mind. All you can do now is send out those letters and stand your
ground. Don't let their threats scare you. The bill has not been passed.
It's time to either take the power back or KiLL YOURSELF!
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³DISTRIBUTION IS AS FOLLOWS:³
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
E-MAIL:
* IAMHOLTZ@oak.grove.iup.edu
* BEAN@cpcn.com
FTP:
* ftp.eng.ufl.edu/incoming
* etext.archive.umich.edu/pub/Zines/KillYourself
* ftp.etext.org/pub/Zines/KillYourself
* locust.cic.net/pub/Zines/KillYourself
GOPHER:
* gopher://gopher.etext.org/11/Zines
HTML:
* http://hops.cs.jhu.edu/~mbk/killyourself.html (homepage)
* http://www.etext.org/Zines/KillYourself
ðððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððððð
