RE: Manhattan Mid-Afternoon
Peter Trei [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bill Stewart[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote And even then, Swedish president Palme was assassinated some years ago. [...] He was far from merely a Swedish president. Quite true. He was Swedish prime-minister, there is no president in _Kingdom_ of Sweden. But I do agree with you in that what happened to Palme is more accurately characterized as an assassination, not as a terrorist act. Suonpää...
Re: Bombings, Surveillance, and Free Societies
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- At 02:22 PM 9/12/01 , Tim May wrote: Personally, while I feel sorry for the dead in Israel, I think anyone who moves to a small desert state surrounded on all sides by Arabs who want their land back is asking for trouble. Tim May feels as sorry for the dead in Israel as Arafat and the Taliban feel for the dead in NYC and DC. Sorry Tim. Every one in Washington was not killed, but maybe next time. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: Hush 2.0 wmIEARECACIFAjufxCIbHGNhc2V5Lml2ZXJzb25AaHVzaG1haWwuY29tAAoJECOHEkU4 cuRB/YYAn2SKupNhCaeVglmi+OZHR8/EMRQNAJoCt2e/8q2LNtvQxLINIdVPv4ID0A== =3XX3 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
This is a pleasant surprise!!! 100K103A2
This is a pleasant surprise !!! Simply for accepting our FREE invitation to see this opportunity work for YOU, we'll lock in your position and EVERYONE who signs up AFTER you, signs up UNDER you!! You can take your time, and review all the benefits of your free membership, because frankly, there are too many remarkable benefits to be able to understand them all at a glance. For an example my sponsor's sponsor is earning $8,000.00 a month guaranteed income, and in a year, she has earned a life-time income!! I'm now earning a guaranteed income, and very soon, you can also!! Why are we doing this? Because when you see the explosive growth, and momentum, and you see how this program was designed to help any sincere marketeer succeed, you'll accept the down line we've placed under you, and you'll decide to harvest your piece of this incredible event. So what are you waiting for? This is a FREE, No Cost, No Obligation opportunity to watch your monthly commissions grow. The person who just signed up will be pleased to add you to their down line. See for yourself: JOIN FREE!!! JOIN FREE!!! To join our FREE post launch program, send us an email mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=Join_Post_Paunch_for_Free100K103A2!!! and include your First Name, Last Name, and Email in the text... --- This is the program that built itself, while I was too busy beating myself up with the others. It was FREE to join, and they said they would PROVE that it worked. Guess what.it Works! Let me show you, and prove it to you too. No hype, no shouting, no risk, just an opportunity to make a guaranteed income every month... Send me an Email - I'll take it from there|;-} JOIN FREE!!! JOIN FREE!!! TTo join our FREE post launch program, send us an email mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=Join_Post_Paunch_for_Free100K103A2!!! and include your First Name, Last Name, and Email in the text... We will send you an email to confirm your free membership, and provide additional benefits of the program. You have nothing to lose and potentially a lot to gain! Regards, R.A.Chapman If you choose not to receive info from us, send us an email, and your wishes will be honored. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=Please_Remove100K103A2 and include your email address(es) in the text... _
Re: Basking in the Glow of Terror
On 12 Sep 2001, at 23:30, Frog2 wrote: Assertion: The overt sophistication of this attack was such that I have a hard time believing the perps would leave so many obvious clues behind without intending to. These are suicide attacks. Why do they care what clues they leave? Interesting that a friend at work asked the very same question when I made that assertion. My answer: They don't, but their handlers certainly do. Your piece eloquently supports my opinion that this was a large- scale, well-planned operation. It was not planned solely by the perps who carried out the missions. Their handlers will not want to be easily identified, lest they draw nuclear fire. Therefore, all the easily discovered clues will doubtless be diversionary. -- Roy M. Silvernail Proprietor, scytale.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ending States That Support Terrorism
Anyone have the list of countries that Bush is planning on scheduling for termination? I would imagine Afganistan and Iraq are the first two. Will he toss in Syria, Sudan, and Libya as well? It looks like the game that is being played here, is that all countries are being given an opportunity to pledge unconditional support and cooperation for Bush's War against those rendering aid to terrorism, now declared to be the primary focus of his administration, and whoever declines will constitute the enemy. Pakistan has even climbed aboard, in the hopes that we won't drop any bombs on them on our way to Afganistan. Of course, they must prove their loyalty by cutting off Afganistan's oil and gas, and permitting us to base our troops there. Isn't playing these sorts of games with Saudi Arabia, the location of Islam's most sacred sites, the reason Osama bin Laden is mad at the US to begin with? Is this how Hitler started? While all of this is transpiring, a smirking Ariel Sharon, the war criminal elected by acclaimation, will be taking more of the Palestinians' land. So when's the Congress going to outlaw encryption? I assume we'll all be expected to make such small sacrifices for the larger good. We're all supposed to fly American flags for the next 30 days to show our support for all of this. I wonder if they'll be taking names. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law
Re: Ending States That Support Terrorism
On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 02:36:14PM -0700, Eric Cordian wrote: So when's the Congress going to outlaw encryption? I assume we'll all be expected to make such small sacrifices for the larger good. I assume you wrote this before you saw my Wired article on the topic. -Declan
Eric Hughes' email
Hi, does anyone have a copy of the email Eric Hughes sent out? I somehow didn't get it and I can't find it in the archive. Thanks!
RE: Congress mulls crypto restrictions in response to attacks
Amateur radio was the first casualty after Pearl Harbor. Some criticize the action now, of course. ~Aimee -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Declan McCullagh Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 3:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Congress mulls crypto restrictions in response to attacks http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46816,00.html Congress Mulls Stiff Crypto Laws By Declan McCullagh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 1:45 p.m. Sep. 13, 2001 PDT WASHINGTON -- The encryption wars have begun. For nearly a decade, privacy mavens have been worrying that a terrorist attack could prompt Congress to ban communications-scrambling products that frustrate both police wiretaps and U.S. intelligence agencies. Tuesday's catastrophe, which shed more blood on American soil than any event since the Civil War, appears to have started that process. Some politicians and defense hawks are warning that extremists such as Osama bin Laden, who U.S. officials say is a crypto-aficionado and the top suspect in Tuesday's attacks, enjoy unfettered access to privacy-protecting software and hardware that render their communications unintelligible to eavesdroppers. In a floor speech on Thursday, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire) called for a global prohibition on encryption products without backdoors for government surveillance. This is something that we need international cooperation on and we need to have movement on in order to get the information that allows us to anticipate and prevent what occurred in New York and in Washington, Gregg said, according to a copy of his remarks that an aide provided. President Clinton appointed an ambassador-rank official, David Aaron, to try this approach, but eventually the administration abandoned the project. Gregg said encryption makers have as much at risk as we have at risk as a nation, and they should understand that as a matter of citizenship, they have an obligation to include decryption methods for government agents. Gregg, who previously headed the appropriations committee overseeing the Justice Department, said that such access would only take place with court oversight. [...] Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy, a hawkish think tank that has won accolades from all recent Republican presidents, says that this week's terrorist attacks demonstrate the government must be able to penetrate communications it intercepts. I'm certainly of the view that we need to let the U.S. government have access to encrypted material under appropriate circumstances and regulations, says Gaffney, an assistant secretary of defense under President Reagan. [...] - POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ -
Re: CNN Using 1991 Footage of Celebrating Palestinians?
I agree with Liz. This violates journalistic principles (old footage can be used but must be labeled file footage or similar) and would expose CNN to withering criticism from its competitors and other journalists. Worth ignoring. -Declan On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 01:46:16PM -0700, lizard wrote: Matthew Gaylor wrote: CNN Using 1991 Footage of Celebrating Palestinians Can anyone verify this? http://www.indymedia.org.il/imc/israel/webcast/display.php3?article_id=6946 Reading through the following comments, it seems unlikely. Possible, but unlikely. The evidence, at this point, consists of an obviously anti-US poster referring to an unnamed Professor with an unseen tape. That's pretty low on the rely-o-meter. I won't say it's impossible, but I want a better source.
New flight rules
That won't work you dolt! You are forgetting about string, cord, and belts. No belts! And no long fingernails! They should just handcuff us to our seats. And let us up one at a time to go potty. Yeah, that's it. Dynamite Bob wrote: Airlines would only be allowed to provide passengers with plastic knives and butter knives to eat their meals, an FAA spokesman said. http://sg.news.yahoo.com/010912/1/1fwyc.html Also: only crayons, no pens or pencils. All PDAs, with their sharp styli and brittle glass displays, will be replaced with Etch-a-Sketch toys. Also all fingernails must be trimmed to 2mm past the fingerpad, this must be done before passing through security as nailclippers with nailfiles will not be permitted on board, either. Good thing none of the Martyr Airlines dudes shorted out their laptop batteries to make a diversion... .. Jeezus guys, get a clue. You can't pull the same stunt twice, whether its a 'normal' hijacking which turns out to be different (so much for passenger compliance..), or the latest social-engineering virus trick. The rubes *do* learn. The next time, its a bottle of Japanese Subway Perfume. Alas, a lot less eye candy with that.
A Call for a Chorus of Voices
2001 September 13 A Call for a Chorus of Voices To All Who Would Defend Liberty and Freedom: Yesterday I wrote an open letter to all my fellow citizens. Today I write to all those who would defend liberty, on-line and everywhere else, from the looming threat of demagoguery that now hangs over us all. This morning I arose from my sleep with two realizations. First, that I would have changed the title of my letter had I thought about it. This has been pointed out by others. Second, that yesterday was the ninth anniversary of the first cypherpunks meeting; I had not realized this in the moment. When I began to write yesterday's letter, I had in mind to write a different letter than the one that thence I wrote. I had first intended a message to you my comrades, but in the moment I started typing I began to cry, because I had been struck as if by an external blow with the realization of whom I wanted to address. It was difficult for me to touch the well of my sincerity, because I have been and yet remain deeply cynical about my country, my government, and the particularly resilient propaganda of our media in the image of democracy. I had written only the title before I was overcome. For now the next phase of the work has commenced for which cypherpunks was preparation. The goal to affix into our society a bodiless ability to hide has greatly been achieved, yet the nascent robustness of these systems is as yet fragile. Our institutions do not yet breathe the ethos of individual liberty without supplemental air. The threat is not unique, however, and the task at hand is wider than our own concerns. As personal ability is bound up in technology, the technologies of which my friends and I have been so fond are but a section a larger movement, the movement to a democracy more about the demos than the kratein, more about the people than the ruling. I shall not enumerate these trends into which cypherpunks so neatly fits. We are at a juncture in the road of our culture, whether to pursue the path of safety by limiting the individual and ignoring their desires or to pursue the path of safety by strengthening the individual and working out a new commons of desire. We cannot choose both; they are mutually hostile to each other in spirit and in practice. Our response to this week's terrorism will mark the proclivities of our future course. I have been challenged to write a narrow essay on privacy particularly. I regret to say that I cannot. My heart is elsewhere, and I have moved from privacy alone as a tool for my aspirations. I could not be as eloquent about privacy in isolation, because in truth I see no longer the isolation in which I was previously so comfortable. And thus I call for a chorus of voices to ring out and to proclaim the welter of specific consequences of walking down the path of individual liberty. My heart has been full in reading the spontaneous upwelling of sentiment from Perry Metzger, Sean Hastings, Matt Blaze, and Blanc Weber. Add to these your own voice, your own words, your own concerns. I seek the vision of a harmonious chorus without director, a single message rising in many throats, the motive wheel without a center. Speak about whatever you will, but speak true and speak from the heart. There are enough whose hearts are privacy and anonymity that I have nothing but faith that chorus shall contain enough of those voices. My heart is with you all, even though I shall not lead the charge. To touch one's own true voice may need the passage through ordeal, yet persevere, for everyone can find it. May peace arise from you all, and may the power of your souls become manifest in your deeds. Eric Hughes [Please feel free to post this at will.]
Re: Congress mulls crypto restrictions in response to attacks
On Thursday, September 13, 2001, at 01:58 PM, Declan McCullagh wrote: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46816,00.html Congress Mulls Stiff Crypto Laws By Declan McCullagh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 1:45 p.m. Sep. 13, 2001 PDT WASHINGTON -- The encryption wars have begun. For nearly a decade, privacy mavens have been worrying that a terrorist attack could prompt Congress to ban communications-scrambling products that frustrate both police wiretaps and U.S. intelligence agencies. Tuesday's catastrophe, which shed more blood on American soil than any event since the Civil War, appears to have started that process. Some politicians and defense hawks are warning that extremists such as Osama bin Laden, who U.S. officials say is a crypto-aficionado and the top suspect in Tuesday's attacks, enjoy unfettered access to privacy-protecting software and hardware that render their communications unintelligible to eavesdroppers. In a floor speech on Thursday, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire) called for a global prohibition on encryption products without backdoors for government surveillance. This is the main reason it is ESSENTIAL that the rest of the world NOT (repeat NOT) support the U.S. in their upcoming actions against the likely WTC terrorists. If Russia, China, India, Pakistan, the Arab countries, and of course the European nations sign on, this will truly usher in a New World Order. Strong crypto will be banned so quickly our heads will spin (those of us not already arrested and dealt with). I have no idea how to derail this freight train that is beginning to gather speed. Dark times are coming. I'll bet a complete ban on strong, unescrowed crypto is passed in all European countries, Russia, China, Japan, and the U.S. by, say, December 15th. Congresscriminals are stumbling over their feet in their race to repeal big chunks of the Bill of Rights. For most countries, with no real Bills of Rights, the statists will use this to cement their own power. Dark times. --Tim May
RE: Cypherpunks and terrorism
Nomen Nescio wrote: It is at exactly this time that soul searching is most appropriate. Now is when you should ask yourself: Am I doing the right thing? Am I making the world a better place? You don't have to convince some devil's advocate. Just convince yourself. Nomen assumes facts not in evidence. Those of us who have been on Cypherpunks for years--including Greg--have already done that appropriate soul searching. It is because we have come to the conclusion that we are making the world a better place, that we support strong crypto. Nomen's moral uncertainty sounds like a personal problem to me. S a n d y
RE: Cypherpunks and terrorism
Greg Broiles writes: I propose that this sort of discussion - about whether or not, in the face of violence and tragedy, some aspect of human freedom and expression can be suitably justified to satisfy every self-appointed devil's advocate - is absolutely unproductive and serves only to suck energy and concentration from more interesting projects. It's astonishing that you should say this. It is at exactly this time that soul searching is most appropriate. Now is when you should ask yourself: Am I doing the right thing? Am I making the world a better place? You don't have to convince some devil's advocate. Just convince yourself. You're about to begin running a remailer. Apparently you haven't done so before. Well, it should be quite an education. Keep it up for a year and you'll be more qualified to judge whether this technology is good or bad, on balance. One thing is certain: if you go into it just because you think it will be an interesting project, you won't stay with it for long.
The Hottest and The Easiest Home Business EVER!!!
Dear [EMAIL PROTECTED], Dear Friend, May I have your permission to send you FREE information of an exciting and very profitable Ez2Run online business? It is truly the Hottest and the Easiest home business today! Fortune 500 company. Fully Automated Internet Business. You can make up to $14,000 per month in your spare time! It is NOT a chain letter, NOT a get-rich-quick scam. It is a legitimate online business that has been around for over 16 years! This program is only available in the US, Canada and Australia at this time. We have expanded to Taiwan, Japan and Hong Kong and will be working with people in those areas soon. This home business is for REAL! No Hype! Please click below to receive FREE VITAL INFORMATION - you must include your name and valid email address: Send Email To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] with Subject: SEND MORE INFO!!! You will be glad you did! Thank you and have a great day! With My Warmest Regards, Jan
Privacy Trade-Offs Reassessed (washingtonpost.com)
http://a188.g.akamaitech.net/f/188/920/4m/www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21207-2001Sep12.html -- -- natsugusa ya...tsuwamonodomo ga...yume no ato summer grass...those mighty warriors'...dream-tracks Matsuo Basho The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
An assault on liberty?
I realize that many will use this event as an excuse for many political agendas, but I think it's important that we think through exactly what happened. It doesn't seem like it was an assault on liberty or a misuse of the liberties we have. Most people can't fly planes. The learning process is long and the licensing requirements are many. Flying a 757 is even more restricted by both cost and licensing requirements. It's not a liberty like walking around the streets or speaking one's mind. It doesn't seem to me that this attack had anything to do with liberty. It's not like someone abused the right to bear arms by shooting someone, it's not like someone abused the right to speak freely by libeling someone, it's not like someone abused the right to drink alcohol by plowing into a school bus after drinking too much. These guys were unauthorized to have knives, they were unauthorized to have bombs, they were unauthorized to fly 757s, they were probably unauthorized to be in the country. Yet they did all of these despite the controls. The hard lesson is that controls don't always work. Licensing requirements, security checkpoints, and armed guards fail. It's sad, but there's no physical law like gravity that we can depend upon to keep ourselves safe. If you ask me, the biggest danger is that we'll add more ineffective security measures in the hopes of doing something. And the real problem is the controls may never be enough to keep us safe. -Peter
Re: J. Neil Schulman On I can't take it anymore ....
At 11:15 AM 9/13/2001 -0700, Derek Balling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 10:28 PM -0700 9/12/01, Steve Schear wrote: If local police officers who fly were allowed to carry their guns with them, warned only to switch to frangible ammunition, this couldn't have happened. But they are. On U.S. domestic flights they have merely to present themselves and acceptable credentials (which BTW the airline personnel are poorly trained to authenticate) and state in a form that they are traveling for LE purposes. There are other formalities that are followed, but overall they are not restricted from carrying. But why should it have to be for law enforcement purposes? Is the LEO somehow less capable of handling his firearm properly because he's not travelling to LGA to pick up a prisoner? I can't speak to the why since those thoughts are rarely communicated outside the FAA. Perhaps its the Fed LEs themselves who reluctant to go through the paperwork unless they are traveling on business. steve
Priceless (tm)
Two dozen boxcutters $20 18 airplane tickets, one way $3500 Jet airplane schooling for four $40,000 Imploding the Bill of Rights, turning US into Israel: Priceless There are some things money can't buy, for everything else there's MasterCard (tm)
Re: Cypherpunks and terrorism
Declan McCullagh writes: On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 06:00:46PM +0200, Nomen Nescio wrote: Some terrorists have exactly this as their goal. They are hoping to trigger a counter-reaction, an over-reaction, by the authorities. They want to see a crackdown on liberties, a police state. This will weaken the enemy and demoralize him. It will increase hostility and make the population less willing to support the government. This is nonsense. I suspect the bin Laden want the U.S. to stop handing Israel billions of dollars a year in aid and weapons. Not bombing pharmecutical plants and lifting an embargo that kills hundreds of thousands (allegedly) of Iraqi women and children might be a nice move too. It's always amazing to see how stupid the responses are to various messages. There seems to be no limit to the ignorance of the cypherpunks. It is well known that this is a motivation for many terrorists. If you will not believe it from an anonymous message, perhaps you will be convinced by quotes from the two co-founders of the cypherpunks, both of whom have said exactly the same thing in messages posted today: Tim May wrote in 1996 and reposted today: : Revolutionary theory says of course that this increased clampdown is a : desired effect of terrorist bombings and attacks. Fear and doubt. : Revolutionary ends rarely happen by slow, incremental movement. Hundreds of : examples, from the original bomb-throwing anarchists to the modern mix of : terrorist bands. The Red Brigade in Italy sought a fascist crackdown, and : the strategy of tension is common. (And even revolutionists of crypto : anarchist persuasion often think laws like the CDA are good in the long : run, by undermining respect for authority and triggering more extreme : reactions) Note his comment about how the Communications Decency Act is actually considered good by revolutionaries of the crypto anarchist persuasion. Know any of those? Gee, the anonymous message made exactly the same point earlier, that someone like Tim May would welcome crackdowns on freedom. Eric Hughes wrote today (in a beautiful message that deserves to be widely distributed): : The goal of these terrorists is to : restrict freedoms in America, to steal its essence and to weaken it. I : shall pray we do not cooperate with this their goal in a hot-headed rush to : immediate results. The same point, made each time: that the terrorists seek to weaken America by causing what Tim May calls an increased clampdown, what Eric Hughes describes as to restrict freedoms in America, and what the anonymous poster characterized as a crackdown on liberties. The difference is that Tim May welcomes the change; Eric Hughes pleads against it; and the anonymous poster merely calls upon cypherpunks to recognize that they have a choice between these contrasting views. There are two contrasting forces at the heart of the cypherpunk philosophy, well exemplified by the two co-founders, and their messages posted today show the difference well. The dark anger of May versus the bright hope of Hughes. Make your choice.
Re: An Open Letter on Privacy and Anonymity
Eric Hughes wrote: 2001 September 12 An Open Letter on Privacy and Anonymity It's a well written letter, unquestionably. But there's a problem. While the title of the letter refers to privacy and anonymity, these terms are hardly used in the body. Privacy is referred to only in the first paragraph were Eric introduces himself as a founder of the cypherpunks, a privacy organization. And anonymity is never mentioned at all! Any essay which purports to address a topic ought to mention it, don't you think? What if he had titled it, an open letter on pedophilia and child abuse? Would the arguments in the letter then automatically mean that we should support those activities? Mostly the letter contains calls for the preservation of liberty. Unfortunately, every politician in the United States, while voting for the most Draconian martial law curfews ever seen, would endorse each paragraph in Eric's message. Without some specifics tying these calls for liberty to concrete policy questions, the letter is not as strong as it should be. We need not curtail our liberty in order to save it. The message is seductive that we may more effectively fight for liberty if we limit our freedoms for a time whose end has yet to be announced. How broadly do we take this? What about the elimination of curbside baggage checkins at airports? Is this a curtailment of our liberty? Is it a sign that we have diminished ourselves? Or is it a reasonable precaution in the face of terrorist hijackings? The letter from Sean Hastings suffered from the same vagueness: Do not let your natural reactions of fear or anger help ANYONE to further their short term political goals, or impose any temporary measures. No temporary measures? They shouldn't have banned flights on Tuesday? Why not, exactly? Seemed like a wise precaution to most people. And no furthering of short-term political goals? The politicians have been wanting to dip into the social security lockbox for months. Now they can. Is this wrong? Isn't it just a matter of changing priorities which everyone will support? Why are we seeing such vague generalities from obviously talented writers? Let's see people go to the heart of the issue. If you want to argue for privacy and anonymity, make the case! The fact that no one will come out and make an argument for these technologies suggests that it is because they are afraid that any argument will be too weak to stand. Eric Hughes, take on this challenge. Write an essay, not in defense of liberty, but in defense of privacy and anonymity, as you promised in your title. And do it at a time when some of the best leads towards tracing these attackers are possible exactly because of a lack of privacy and anonymity. Tell us why the world would be a better place if it were impossible to trace these men. It's not an impossible argument. But it's not easy, either, like supporting freedom. Let's see it done, by someone as talented as you.
American Muslims being attacked and harassed
Unfortunately I've been getting reports from around the US of American Muslims being attacked and harassed. If you want to stay on top of the latest news I recommend that you subscribe to The Muslim Student Association News mailing list (MSANEWS). The list is fairly high volume, but does contain most of the news and perspectives from the Muslim and Islamic communities worldwide. To subscribe, send e-mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message body subscribe MSANEWS Firstname Lastname. MSANEWS Home Page: http://msanews.mynet.net/ Comments to the Editors: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Submissions for MSANEWS: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Problems with subscription: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Regards, Matt- ** Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues Send a blank message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words subscribe FA on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per week) Matthew Gaylor, (614) 313-5722 ICQ: 106212065 Archived at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fa/ **
U.S. Held Liable in '90 Kidnap
http://latimes.com/news/local/la-73744sep13.story?coll=la%2Dheadlines%2Dcalifornia U.S. Held Liable in '90 Kidnap Ruling: A court says the government-arranged abduction of a Mexican doctor sought in the murder of a DEA agent broke international law. By HENRY WEINSTEIN, TIMES LEGAL AFFAIRS WRITER For the first time, a federal appeals court has ruled that a U.S. government-instigated kidnapping of an individual from another country violates international human rights law and that violation can be redressed in a U.S. court. The 3-0 ruling this week by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco stems from the April 1990 abduction of Mexican physician Humberto Alvarez Machain. Alvarez had been indicted in Los Angeles three months earlier on charges that he was involved in the 1985 kidnapping and murder of U.S. DEA Agent Enrique Camarena in Guadalajara. The kidnapping occurred after the Mexican government refused to extradite Alvarez, who was later acquitted in the Camarena case. The decision Tuesday means that Alvarez is entitled to recover a limited amount of damages. The Justice Department, however, is likely to appeal the ruling. In an earlier case, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Alvarez could be put on trial in the United States despite the fact that he had been brought here as a result of a kidnapping. U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration agents based in Los Angeles, using operatives in Mexico, orchestrated the kidnapping. The agency paid about $60,000 to several Mexicans who abducted the doctor and brought him to El Paso and then to Los Angeles, according to testimony by a DEA operative. In 1992 a federal judge here acquitted Alvarez, who was then permitted to return to Mexico--after more than two years of incarceration in the United States. Several other men have been convicted of involvement in the federal drug agent's murder and sentenced to long prison terms. The ruling Tuesday was praised by Los Angeles civil liberties lawyer Paul Hoffman, who has represented the doctor for more than a decade. We have been fighting for a U.S. court to rule that a kidnapping like this was a violation of international law, Hoffman said. Justice Department attorney Robert Loeb said the agency is considering seeking a rehearing from a larger panel of 9th Circuit judges or appealing directly to the U.S. Supreme Court. Alvarez's kidnapping precipitated strained relations between the United States and Mexico and spawned considerable litigation. The decision this week evolved from a federal damage suit that Alvarez filed in Los Angeles a year after he was acquitted on the criminal charges. Alvarez, now 53, sued the U.S. government; DEA agents in Los Angeles and Washington; Francisco Sosa, a former Mexican policeman; and five other Mexican nationals, all of whom are now in the U.S. witness protection program. The case involves important and complicated issues involving how far the government can go in attempting to apprehend a suspect abroad. On most of the major issues, the appeals court ruled against the United States. In one of the most significant parts of the decision, the 9th Circuit rejected the government's claim that as a sovereign nation it was immune from such a suit. The government admits that it knew of and acquiesced in the plan to kidnap Alvarez and bring him to the United States, Judge Alfred T. Goodwin wrote in a decision joined by jurists Mary M. Schroeder and Samuel P. King. Sosa performed the search to assist the DEA agents. Sosa had no individual interest in kidnapping Alvarez other than to curry favor with the DEA agents in the hopes that they would reward him. Therefore, because Sosa acted merely as an agent or instrument for 'law enforcement officers,' the United States has waived
Re: Cypherpunks and terrorism
It's always amazing to see how stupid the responses are to various messages. There seems to be no limit to the ignorance of the cypherpunks. It is well known that this is a motivation for many terrorists. If you will not believe it from an anonymous message, perhaps you will be convinced by quotes from the two co-founders of the cypherpunks, both of whom have said exactly the same thing in messages posted today: Tim May wrote in 1996 and reposted today: (yada yada yada. snip) There are two contrasting forces at the heart of the cypherpunk philosophy, well exemplified by the two co-founders, and their messages posted today show the difference well. The dark anger of May versus the bright hope of Hughes. Make your choice. Stuff your false binary choice, I prefer to think for myself. It seems there is no limit to asininity of federal trolls. --- Sigs? We don' need no stinking sigs!
U.S. hypocrisy about freedom of press in U.S.-hating countries
On Thursday, September 13, 2001, at 09:43 AM, citizenQ wrote: VIA CNN this AM: (somewhat paraphrasing) Bush Sr., speaking to some corporate collection of cronies: We'll also have to look at this Internet thing you all know so much about, and review our policies... Gephardt: We don't have to, we don't want to change the Constitution, but there will need to be a shift in the balance between freedom and security... The planes have hit the towers but the shit has yet to hit the fan. Perhaps we should rename the two towers First Amendment and Second Amendment. I've seen Congressvarmints complaining that the problem with countries around the world is that they allow too much free speech. (He was demanding that Egypt, Jordan, Israel, Syria, and Pakistan put a stop to the laughter and cheers of people celebrating the WTC and Pentagon events.) Some years ago I would have been shocked to hear U.S. officials calling for press crackdowns, but I have grown accustomed to this. The U.S. position in Sudan, Bosnia, etc. has been to _disarm_ ordinary farmers and merchants, to _control_ newspapers, and to institute random searches and seizures. They argue that the Bill of Rights obviously applies to U.S. citizens (or, they admit, maybe to non-citizens residents in the U.S. and its territories). This notion that the U.S. should press for disarmament of civilians, for press restrictions, for warrantless searches and seizures, and for other such things (*), all shows the utter hypocrisy of the U.S. It is rank hypocrisy for U.S. Congressmen to be calling for crackdowns on the press of other nations. No wonder they laugh when we are attacked. Look on your works, ye mighty, and despair. --Tim May
Re: Cypherpunks and terrorism
Nomen Nescio wrote: The fact is, crypto as we know it is a luxury. It didn't even exist ten years ago. None of the crypto tools we use did. We can hardly make a case that banning or restricting access to them will send us back into the stone age. Please, let's end these spurious arguments that providers of crypto tools are no different than the people who make the metal in the airplane wings. There's a big difference, which anyone with an ounce of sense can see. Banning airplanes is not an option. Banning crypto is. I disagree. Ten years ago neither the Web nor e-commerce existed, either, and ordinary people had barely heard of email or cell phones. Their privacy was protected by the labor and traceability of intercepting paper mail and tapping analog phones. Without encryption, every national government will have technology to effortlessly spy on all their citizens all the time. Inevitably, some will use it. Saying cryptography is a luxury because it is new is like saying seat belts are a luxury because horse-drawn carriages didn't have them. Howie Goodell -- Howie Goodell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pr SW Eng, WearLogic Sc.D. Cand HCI Res Grp CS Dept U Massachussets Lowell http://people.ne.mediaone.net/goodell/howie Dying is s 20th-century! http://www.cryonics.org
Shades of X-Files
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Unconfirmed reports just coming in that one of the WTC recovered bodies may be that of Chandra Levy... -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: Hush 2.0 wmAEARECACAFAjuhEE8ZHGtleXNlci1zb3plQGh1c2htYWlsLmNvbQAKCRAg4ui5IoBV n78HAJ9JGJ6PIj115wGElkbvFFZ97Swl9gCcDh3zUlLiYPI+s3TlIfsMJG4y8X0= =723M -END PGP SIGNATURE-
RE: Cypherpunk Threat Analysis (scramble near Crawford)
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tim May Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 1:52 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Cypherpunk Threat Analysis On Thursday, September 13, 2001, at 08:39 AM, Aimee Farr wrote: For the sick people in here that like to call for TNA's (target name and address) for judicial officials etc. -- NLECTC Law Enforcement Corrections Technology News Summary Thursday, September 13, 2001 -- Technological Advances in Assessing Threats to Judicial Officials Sheriff (08/01) Vol. 53, No. 4, P. 34; Calhoun, Frederick S. The majority of sheriff offices throughout the country assign personnel to handle threats made to judges according to which situations pose the greatest risks. Los Angeles I wonder why Agent Farr warns about our list tolerating bomb discussions, and then posts her own provocateur bomb discussions. Did not. I wonder why Agent Farr refers to the sick people in here who cite names of LEAs and then makes a point to cite LEA persons by _name_. *rolls eyes* Agent Farr arrived from _nowhere_ just after the election last year, with no previous detectable online interests, on half a dozen of the most controversial mailing lists and discussion groups. She began baiting and provoking, and when that failed, starting her own Bomb Law Reporter and attempting to entrap discussion group participants in what she has claimed are dangerous activities. No. She has recently claimed that our failure to support Big Brother-friendly networks makes us equivalent to the WTC actors. Did not. The witch hunt began a long time ago, but it has taken on new dimensions recently. Expect to see the real Agent Farr, who is very probably not named Aimee in real life, testifying before Congress on his undercover operations to shut down the Cypherpunks, PGP, and Extropians lists. --Tim May Oh yes, Cypherpunks, PGP and Extropiansthe heart of darknessWhoo...big fish in here. I don't work for Uncle. BTW, big event skyward over my house this a.m. -- rumor is a private aircraft near Bush Ranch. Got a scramble. Flyboys tore up the sky for a good hour this morning. Shrwooom!!! Shrwwm ~Aimee
CNN Using 1991 Footage of Celebrating Palestinians?
CNN Using 1991 Footage of Celebrating Palestinians Can anyone verify this? http://www.indymedia.org.il/imc/israel/webcast/display.php3?article_id=6946 ** Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues Send a blank message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words subscribe FA on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per week) Matthew Gaylor, (614) 313-5722 ICQ: 106212065 Archived at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fa/ **
Re: Alejandro transports
On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, Eric Murray wrote: I think I have seen examples of this before, but I can't remember where. Does anyone know who or what generates it? [example snipped] Looks like random stuff/stego generated using a jargon file for nouns. The grammar is coherent, so it is likely built on top of a generative grammar -- the like of PostModernism Generator. I remember seeing a commercial product capable of this, somewhere, but don't have a link. Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], gsm: +358-50-5756111 student/math+cs/helsinki university, http://www.iki.fi/~decoy/front
An assault on liberty?
I realize that many will use this event as an excuse for many political agendas, but I think it's important that we think through exactly what happened. It doesn't seem like it was an assault on liberty or a misuse of the liberties we have. Most people can't fly planes. The learning process is long and the licensing requirements are many. Flying a 757 is even more restricted by both cost and licensing requirements. It's not a liberty like walking around the streets or speaking one's mind. It doesn't seem to me that this attack had anything to do with liberty. It's not like someone abused the right to bear arms by shooting someone, it's not like someone abused the right to speak freely by libeling someone, it's not like someone abused the right to drink alcohol by plowing into a school bus after drinking too much. These guys were unauthorized to have knives, they were unauthorized to have bombs, they were unauthorized to fly 757s, they were probably unauthorized to be in the country. Yet they did all of these despite the controls. The hard lesson is that controls don't always work. Licensing requirements, security checkpoints, and armed guards fail. It's sad, but there's no physical law like gravity that we can depend upon to keep ourselves safe. If you ask me, the biggest danger is that we'll add more ineffective security measures in the hopes of doing something. And the real problem is the controls may never be enough to keep us safe. -Peter
Re: J. Neil Schulman On I can't take it anymore ....
At 10:28 PM -0700 9/12/01, Steve Schear wrote: If local police officers who fly were allowed to carry their guns with them, warned only to switch to frangible ammunition, this couldn't have happened. But they are. On U.S. domestic flights they have merely to present themselves and acceptable credentials (which BTW the airline personnel are poorly trained to authenticate) and state in a form that they are traveling for LE purposes. There are other formalities that are followed, but overall they are not restricted from carrying. But why should it have to be for law enforcement purposes? Is the LEO somehow less capable of handling his firearm properly because he's not travelling to LGA to pick up a prisoner? D -- +-+-+ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Conan! What is best in life? | | Derek J. Balling | To crush your enemies, see them| | |driven before you, and to hear the | | |lamentation of their women! | +-+-+
Unable to pay your supplier
ATTENTION BUSINESS OWNER OPERATOR s11, From time to time, most companies experience a cash flow problem. These problems can range from temporary cash crunches with the inability to pay trade creditors and suppliers within the granted credit terms to more serious problems including bankruptcy and liquidation. If you own or operate a company with a cash flow problem, we can help. We are a national consulting company specializing in reducing problem debts for companies of all sizes. Since our inception in 1989, we have helped hundreds of companies including small mom and pops to large multi-national organizations. We keep our clients out of the legal system so they can concentrate on their business enabling a large savings in both time and money. We typically reduce our clients accounts payable and other debts to less than 20 cents on the dollar! In fact, our settlements rarely go higher than 35 cents on the dollar. Furthermore, we put our clients in a no lose situation. We always give them the opportunity to accept or reject any settlement we negotiate for them. If they do not like the settlement we negotiated, we charge them nothing. If they accept, our fee is based on a small percentage of what we saved them over the original amount owed. Therefore, we don't charge by the hour, never charge a retainer, but only get paid when you accept a satisfactory settlement that we have negotiated on your behalf. If your creditors are constantly calling your company for payment, or have even retained a collection agency or attorney, I strongly urge you to fill out the form below and fax it back to us. Just imagine what your cash and working capital positions would look like in a few short weeks after an 80% reduction of debt. You have absolutely nothing to lose. Please fill out this form and fax to 1-775-599-3416. If this line is busy, please try faxing to 1-775-599-3092. Name: _ Company: __ Phone Number: __ Best Time to Call: This ad is produced and sent out by: IT Info To be taken from our list please email [EMAIL PROTECTED] with off in the sub ject line.
IP: [ I take it back djf ] U.S. Intelligence Gathering Reviewed(fwd)
-- Eugen* Leitl a href=http://www.lrz.de/~ui22204/;leitl/a __ ICBMTO : N48 10'07'' E011 33'53'' http://www.lrz.de/~ui22204 57F9CFD3: ED90 0433 EB74 E4A9 537F CFF5 86E7 629B 57F9 CFD3 -- Forwarded message -- Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 08:25:22 -0400 From: David Farber [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: IP: [ I take it back djf ] U.S. Intelligence Gathering Reviewed U.S. Intelligence Gathering Reviewed By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Filed at 7:11 a.m. ET NEW YORK (AP) -- A current emphasis on technology over human intelligence-gathering, a funding shortage and an information overload may help explain U.S. intelligence agencies' failure to forestall the worst terror attack on American soil. ``Our raw intelligence has gotten weaker, partly because we're not hiring, we're not paying and we're not analyzing what we're collecting,'' said Anthony Cordesman, an anti-terrorism expert with the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. His comments echoed those of former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, who told CNN that ``it would be well ... to consider beefing up some of our intelligence capabilities, particularly in the areas of human intelligence.'' That's easier said than done, said Gideon Rose, managing editor of Foreign Affairs magazine. ``It's incredibly difficult to find the right people who can infiltrate these groups,'' Rose said. ``As far as making other changes, it means going up against Washington's bureaucratic inertia.'' During the Cold War, the United States began pouring billions into satellite imagery, communications interception and reconnaissance equipment. The tools were also useful in monitoring the moves of organizations such as the PLO and the IRA -- which had traditional, low-tech structures that were relatively easy to follow. But the extraordinary costs meant cutbacks in personnel at the CIA and the National Security Agency, the nation's international eavesdropping arm. As the Cold War came to a close, the number of threatening groups increased tenfold just as the digital revolution hit, making global communications suddenly very cheap and secure. Meanwhile, the numbers of people working in U.S. intelligence remained constant. These days, terrorists can download sophisticated encryption software on the Internet for free, making it increasingly difficult to tap into their communications. One recent report said Osama bin Laden, a suspect in Tuesday's attacks, has used complex digital masking technology called steganography to send photos over the Internet bearing hidden messages. The head of NSA, Gen. Mike Hayden, acknowledged in an interview with CBS' ``60 Minutes II'' earlier this year that his agency is ``behind the curve in keeping up with the global telecommunications revolution,'' adding that bin Laden ``has better technology'' than the agency. Former national security adviser Sandy Berger said Wednesday that the terrorists responsible for Tuesday's carnage displayed ``a level of sophistication that is beyond what any intelligence outfit thought was possible.'' Yet, many believe the perpetrators used low-tech methods to elude Western intelligence. Wayne Madsen, a former NSA intelligence officer, said he believes the terrorists shunned e-mail and mobile phones, using couriers and safe houses instead. He said it was likely the terrorists in each of Tuesday's four hijacked planes didn't know the others existed. Terrorist ``cells are kept small and very independent so intelligence agencies can't establish any sort of network,'' Madsen said. Others say the big problem is not the technological shortcomings but the inability to get inside tightly-knit organizations such as bin Laden's. ``It's not easy to knock on bin Laden's cave and say we'd like to join,'' said Frank Cilluffo, a senior analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. ``These are hard targets for Americans to infiltrate and we need to recruit the kind of people who have the language and the cultural understanding to gain access to these organizations.'' Eugene Carroll, a Navy admiral and a defense expert, agreed. ``These people can only be countered by superb intelligence. The U.S. doesn't have it,'' he said. Experts say intelligence-gathering, to be effective, must involve close coordination between eavesdropping and spying. In practical terms, this means cooperation between the NSA and CIA. Madsen said there is reason to believe the NSA received some good intelligence showing bin Laden's involvement in Tuesday's attacks but that it wasn't recognized as such. ``There's an information overload out there and not surprisingly it becomes very hard to process, prioritize it and share it,'' said Ian Lesser at the Rand Corporation think tank. Others said that some of the best intelligence people had been lost to the dot.com boom while promising junior
Cypherpunk Threat Analysis
For the sick people in here that like to call for TNA's (target name and address) for judicial officials etc. -- NLECTC Law Enforcement Corrections Technology News Summary Thursday, September 13, 2001 -- Technological Advances in Assessing Threats to Judicial Officials Sheriff (08/01) Vol. 53, No. 4, P. 34; Calhoun, Frederick S. The majority of sheriff offices throughout the country assign personnel to handle threats made to judges according to which situations pose the greatest risks. Los Angeles security consulting firm Gavin de Becker has developed an advanced threat-management system that incorporates computers. Assessing which threat poses the most risk to court officials or jurors is difficult. According to the U.S. Marshals Service's case files, people making threats rarely carry them through. Gavin de Becker's MOSAIC program provides a series of questions designed to assess the potential risk posed by different situations and people. The Supreme Court Police use the program for ensuring the safety of the chief justices. (www.sheriffs.org) ~Aimee
Letter to U.S. Agencies
I am sending this to certain appropriate representatives: Osama Bin Ladin said in an interview: We have seen in the last decade the decline of the American government and the weakness of the American soldier who is ready to wage Cold Wars and unprepared to fight long wars. But American soldiers are not the only ones who are weak and unprepared: every new threat against America (both externally and from within) produces efforts to increase security by the method of weakening already defenseless civilians even further. Every new threat against the nation means we the individuals must become more transparent, that we must allow greater trespass against the sanctity of our private lives, and forsake personal authority over our circumstances, in order that official policing agencies may be assured that we are not criminals, that we have no evil intentions against others, that we are not concealing secret plans against the State. To ensure against the potential threat of enemies among us, our power to act is deemed necessary to circumscribe and an attempt to control the use of any utensil is extended beyond common sense: we are pressured to give up any technology or instrument which could potentially be turned to a destructive purpose; we must not carry or be given any kind of tool, no matter how normally innocuous, which could be employed abnormally as a weapon. If this goes on, we will all become as babes in the woods - naked, disabled, and totally dependent upon paranoic caretakers for protection. The U.S. will become like the former U.S.S.R. The whole load of responsibility for safety cannot be carried by only a few. The damage to the World Trade Center towers resulted in the fall of the interior levels and the total collapse of the buildings. Like these towers, the most impressive free nation on the planet could fall under terrorism because its interior - we the people - lack the wherewithal to act in their own behalf. President Bush remarked that This is an enemy who preys on unsuspecting people. Unsuspecting people who are unpracticed and unprepared. We all must be allowed to participate in our own defense. We should not be prevented from accoutering ourselves properly in order that we may respond appropriately to danger and be of practical use toward normality and our own security and safety. .. Blanc
RE: Manhattan Mid-Afternoon
-- On 12 Sep 2001, at 14:59, Trei, Peter wrote: I sincerely hope that the remaining perpetrators of this atrocity are found and punished, but entertain no illusions that doing so will prevent future attacks. That can only come from a shift of US government attitude from I've got the biggest stick, to one of non-interference. If it turns out that some of the terrorists were people who were beaten up a few times too many by Israeli soldiers, then the US government's only effectual remedy is to stop its alliance with Israel. If, however, it turns out that all the terrorists were from some countries that are unfree, poor and miserable, and are outraged by the fact that we are free, rich and happy, and blame us, rather than themselves, for their poverty and misery, then the only way to appease them would be to become unfree and poor. I would rather toast the entire third world, than make such a concession. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG Y7uaIORhvsiSNFbd3uvHLO13Q10f+FGbxTR+8Hs+ 4oZbuoQ/ovQxHW9rYGsfEYtOODo7dZvu+F4J7s4Xi
Anonymizer Op Safe Investigation / Official Anonymity
Anonymizer.com Launches 'Operation Safe Investigation' to Help Law Enforcement and Journalism Professionals Maintain Anonymity and Safety Online PRNewswire (09/06/01) NLECTC Law Enforcement Corrections Technology News Summary Thursday, September 13, 2001 ... Anonymizer.com just debuted its Operation Safe Investigation program to protect the identities of law enforcement agents and journalists conducting investigations via the Internet. Under the program, the company will allocate as many as 25 user licenses for its Anonymous Surfing service. Accounts remain active for a period of three months, but participants will receive an option to continue using the licenses at a reduced cost in the future. Law enforcement officials require anonymity to conduct investigations about the activities of Web surfers suspected of criminal activities and for accessing certain Web sites that show different Web pages based on a user's identity. In addition to allowing investigators to effectively conceal their identities, the service provides protection from various security and privacy threats found on the Web. (www.prnewswire.com) ~Aimee Anonymity would be a greater aid to LEA to grease _incoming_ information flows. I've got flyboys scratching the sky here all a.m. - Shrwwoom Shrwwom!!! Serious play up there.
Re: J. Neil Schulman On I can't take it anymore ....
At 10:01 AM 9/13/2001 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 10:28:24PM -0700, Steve Schear wrote: But they are. On U.S. domestic flights they have merely to present themselves and acceptable credentials (which BTW the airline personnel are poorly trained to authenticate) and state in a form that they are traveling for LE purposes. There are other formalities that are followed, but overall they are not restricted from carrying. I believe after a Washington Post expose a few months ago (or perhaps it was just concidental) this rule was changed. I was not aware. Thanks for the info. steve
RE: Cypherpunks and terrorism
Many people have made this point, but it is so fundamentally wrong that it's hard to believe that anyone takes it seriously. No one really does. Paper, and metal, and knives, and airplanes, and all the other things which have been compared to anonymity tools, are different in one major respect: it would be an inconceivable hardship to ban them. Can we really say the same thing about cryptography? About steganography tools? About the anonymous mail services which bin Laden has been reported to have used (yesterday on TV it was mentioned several times)? What you are really talking about when you talk about cryptography is privacy, is individuality, is self determination. Certainly commerce wouldnt' grind to halt if these trivialities were dispensed with. After all, Commerce really is what it is all about isn't it? With the supreme court of the us making judgements on what is good for the consumer, now that the old term taxpayer,or even the arcane term citizen no longer applies. Would commerce grind to a halt if we didn't have anonymous remailers? Of course not. The same with PGP and SSL and other crypto technologies that are available to everyone. The fact is, crypto as we know it is a luxury. It didn't even exist ten years ago. Many things didn't exist 10 years ago. The real ability to completely and totally enumerate and track every single transaction and action of every single person and store them to be used if not right away to punish immoral acts, at least keep them on file so that it can be done when the incarceration system gets streamlined. I've heard many calls for complete biometric id systems to be put in place for airline access over the last few days. With such a system, why just use it for gov building access and airports? Why not for banks, 7/11 phone cards, groceries, rent payment etc ad whatever. As more and more trangressions become felonised, and more and crimes become federalised, soon we should be able to deny anything to anyone on pretty much a whim. Governments go bad. Many believe governments are bad period. Hence, crypto. It is the only technological response to a technological society. None of the crypto tools we use did. We can hardly make a case that banning or restricting access to them will send us back into the stone age. Please, let's end these spurious arguments that providers of crypto tools are no different than the people who make the metal in the airplane wings. There's a big difference, which anyone with an ounce of sense can see. Banning airplanes is not an option. Banning crypto is.
Congress mulls crypto restrictions in response to attacks
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46816,00.html Congress Mulls Stiff Crypto Laws By Declan McCullagh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 1:45 p.m. Sep. 13, 2001 PDT WASHINGTON -- The encryption wars have begun. For nearly a decade, privacy mavens have been worrying that a terrorist attack could prompt Congress to ban communications-scrambling products that frustrate both police wiretaps and U.S. intelligence agencies. Tuesday's catastrophe, which shed more blood on American soil than any event since the Civil War, appears to have started that process. Some politicians and defense hawks are warning that extremists such as Osama bin Laden, who U.S. officials say is a crypto-aficionado and the top suspect in Tuesday's attacks, enjoy unfettered access to privacy-protecting software and hardware that render their communications unintelligible to eavesdroppers. In a floor speech on Thursday, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire) called for a global prohibition on encryption products without backdoors for government surveillance. This is something that we need international cooperation on and we need to have movement on in order to get the information that allows us to anticipate and prevent what occurred in New York and in Washington, Gregg said, according to a copy of his remarks that an aide provided. President Clinton appointed an ambassador-rank official, David Aaron, to try this approach, but eventually the administration abandoned the project. Gregg said encryption makers have as much at risk as we have at risk as a nation, and they should understand that as a matter of citizenship, they have an obligation to include decryption methods for government agents. Gregg, who previously headed the appropriations committee overseeing the Justice Department, said that such access would only take place with court oversight. [...] Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy, a hawkish think tank that has won accolades from all recent Republican presidents, says that this week's terrorist attacks demonstrate the government must be able to penetrate communications it intercepts. I'm certainly of the view that we need to let the U.S. government have access to encrypted material under appropriate circumstances and regulations, says Gaffney, an assistant secretary of defense under President Reagan. [...] - POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ -
Re: CNN Using 1991 Footage of Celebrating Palestinians?
On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 01:46:16PM -0700, lizard wrote: | Matthew Gaylor wrote: | | CNN Using 1991 Footage of Celebrating Palestinians | | Can anyone verify this? | | http://www.indymedia.org.il/imc/israel/webcast/display.php3?article_id=6946 | | Reading through the following comments, it seems unlikely. Possible, but | unlikely. The evidence, at this point, consists of an obviously anti-US | poster referring to an unnamed Professor with an unseen tape. That's | pretty low on the rely-o-meter. | | I won't say it's impossible, but I want a better source. From Cyberia: http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/breaking_2.html Palestinian Authority threatens camera crews covering celebrations Special to World Tribune.com MIDDLE EAST NEWSLINE Thursday, September 13, 2001 RAMALLAH ? The Palestinian Authority has muzzled coverage of Palestinian celebrations of the Islamic suicide attacks against the United States [...] -- It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. -Hume
DES cracked by teenagers? (fwd)
-- Forwarded message -- Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 16:32:13 -0400 From: Steve Bellovin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: DES cracked by teenagers? According to http://www.hk-imail.com/inews/public/article_v.cfm?articleid=28867intcatid=1, some teenagers reportedly cracked an encryption technology called Data Encryption Standard (DES). I'm skeptical, but I thought I'd toss it out. Anyone have any details? --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb http://www.wilyhacker.com - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Investigators Identify 50 Terrorists Tied to Plot
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-091301terror.story -- -- natsugusa ya...tsuwamonodomo ga...yume no ato summer grass...those mighty warriors'...dream-tracks Matsuo Basho The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
Re: New FAA measures likely to fail as well
-- On 12 Sep 2001, at 19:24, Steve Schear wrote: The knife ban won't work against anyone with even a smidgen of metal detector knowledge. Anyone can purchase a razor sharp ceramic knife like this one http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:Rd6ExOvaDz8:www.smarthome. com/9126.html+ceramic+knifehl=en Better still, this lovely little ceramic knife http://www.argussupply.com/images/boker-2040.gif is street legal in California. Get one now! The only solution is to do what many other nations have successfully done. Arm the crew and tell them to stop any hijacking by whatever means it takes. Against a disarmed crew under orders to cooperate, any weapon will be sufficient. Against an armed crew under orders to die fighting, no weapon will be sufficient. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG wbTKherEmEkb7WrFXVL2SLrBZcFURSqr2WfMfva7 4fHjwEeylrHZNSzsvNFE7AN0q3lxb6O8lmg9JtZ2b
