Re: was: Echelon-like resources..

[Ken Brown]

Tyler Durden wrote:

[...]

> Granted, Chonskty can be a little tiring on the ears

His voice seems to have mellowed over the years. I heard him on the
radio last week and he sounded just like Garrison Keillor :-)

Ken Brown

Re: Echelon-like resources...

[R. A. Hettinga]

At 10:52 AM -0700 on 10/13/02, Bill Stewart wrote:


> (You may not remember, but there was a program from fortify.net
> that "fixed" 40-bit implementations of Netscape,
> and there was even a one-liner Javascript signature-line program
> that let you set Netscape to use 128 bits...

Not to mention the plaintext settings imbedded in the Netscape *executable*.

"...it took you long enough", said a Netscape cypherpunk at the time of its
discovery...

Cheers,
RAH
Who saw them making the t-shirts, with pasted text from the file itself at
FC97, complete with "cypherpunks policy" on it...

-- 
-
R. A. Hettinga 
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

Re: Echelon-like resources...

[Bill Stewart]

At 01:06 PM 10/13/2002 -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
>Oh yeah. Interesting. Of course, this would be done only.
>if the sender knew or supected how mass-scanning might be done.
>And so the existence of another level of heavier encryption ...
>might be a tip off that this is not simply a financial transaction.

Back when the Feds were trying to tell us that we should be
patriotic loyal Americans and use weak crypto because it
helps in the fight against Communism and other spies,
they were making it clear that they *wanted* mass-scanning,
and were busy lobbying Congress to give them money for it
and also trying to get laws forcing phone companies to
make things easy for them to do much higher volumes of scanning
than the relatively limited amount they do now.

Also, financial transactions are the ones that most need strong crypto,
and have been most successful in getting permission to use it,
because everybody understands that bank robbery is Bad,
and credit card theft is Bad, and if banks and internet
credit card transactions were forced to use weak crypto,
Bad Guys could afford to build cracker machines on spec
and pay for them with what they steal.

This was especially the case after the EFF's DES cracker
demonstrated that $250,000 was enough for a couple-day crack.
But the Feds have been letting banks use DES for decades,
and triple-DES for a while, and Netscape's inclusion of
SSL in their browser was really the beginning of the end
for the crypto bans, and a brave move on their part,
especially since the difference between 40-bit and 128-bit RC4
is just how many of the bits you use in the key setup.
(You may not remember, but there was a program from fortify.net
that "fixed" 40-bit implementations of Netscape,
and there was even a one-liner Javascript signature-line program
that let you set Netscape to use 128 bits...

Re: was: Echelon-like resources..

[Bill Stewart]

>> > Our bombing  of the sudanese
>> > pharmacuetical factory?
>>
>>Yes: The factory was bombed, but actual
>>deaths were one night watchman, "not tens of thousands",

If so, that's gross incompetence on the part of the US military,
since the official rationale for why we were cruise-missiling it
was that we were trying to kill Osama bin Laden after the
bombing of the US embassies that he allegedly masterminded.


>>and he asserted that the
>>Sudanese government are the good guys in
>>the civil war, and their opponents terrorists.

Chomsky said that?  That's appalling...

Re: was: Echelon-like resources..

[James Donald]

Sunder:
> > Yes: The factory was bombed, but actual  
> > deaths were one night watchman, "not tens 
> > of thousands", and he asserted that the  
> > Sudanese government are the good guys in 
> > the civil war, and their opponents  
> > terrorists. 

James A. Donald:
> And how many of their citizens have or will die due
> to lack of those very
> same pharamceuticals that the bombed factory can no
> longer produce? Or
> suffer from disease due to the same?

Possibly, but neither you nor Chomsky knew or cared
what pharmaceutical the factory produced, whereas I
do.  Thus my estimates of likely casualties are likely
to be better than Chomsky's

My point was not that the bombing was OK, but that
Chomsky was pulling his facts out of his ass.

His initial claim was that tens of thousands were
killed directly by the bombing, and he came up with
this stuff about shortages of pharmaceuticals only
after being challenged on that claim.
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com

Re: was: Echelon-like resources..

[James Donald]

--- Tyler Durden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, you haven't given me a very convincing
> argument here. In most of his 
> writings, Chomsky makes it clear that the deaths
> were not due to the bomb, 
> but the loss of medicine (such as penecillin) in
> Sudan's only pharmecuetical 
> factory.

As those who investigated the matter know, and Chomsky
did not know, the factory produced chloroquine, which
is inexpensive and widely available from many sources.
 There is no indication that chloroquine is any more
expensive or less available than it was.

Chomsy and his supposed sources did not know or care
what the factory produced, let alone how much it
produced, so where does the figure of ten thousand
come from?

> the 
> accusation and conviction were quite damming


The list of countries convicted by the "world court"
is for the most part a list of the worlds most free
countries and most law abiding governments, and the
accusers are, for the most part, a list of the worlds
most murderous regimes.


> you claim Chomsky 
> regularly "lies" on many of his citations, I would
> have thought that this at 
> least would be one citation you'd check.

If the world court had condemned Pol Pot's Cambodia,
then I might have bothered to check.   It did not.  
The world court is run by much the same folk who run
the UN human rights commission.
> 
> Got to say...I'm a busy man, and you haven't even
> said anything meriting 
> even the investigaion of your dis-chomsky web page.

For another example of Chomsky lying in his citations

Those who love tyranny and slavery, love the lies and
liars that protect it.

For another expose of some other lies of Chomsky, see
Nathan Folkert's check of various citations given by
Chomsky during the Faurisson issue
http://groups.google.com/groups?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ogle.com
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com

Re: Echelon-like resources...

[Eugen Leitl]

On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Tyler Durden wrote:

> "And of course you can package 'strong' encryption into a 'weak' encryption 
> envelope, so you will only know that 'strong' encryption has been used after 
> you've broken the 'weak' envelope."
> 
> Oh yeah. Interesting. Of course, this would be done only if the sender knew 
> or supected how mass-scanning might be done. And so the existence of another 

Come on, do the math. There's a lot of traffic travelling all over the
world right now. The volume still grows, albeit not at the projected
hyperexponential rate. Assuming you don't tap decentrally (because that
amount of hardware is a bit hard to hide, and thus hampered by such silly
things like warrants (even rubberstamped), and feds installing boxes in
ISPs racks and issuing gagging orders to abovementioned), you use the fact
that the network topology is mostly a tree (so make it a mesh, then), and
tap high speed lines (fiber). While I assume that there you can screen and
filter if it's cleartext with lots of dedicated hardware, you're
absolutely screwed if it's even 'weak' encryption. At these data rates
you'll have trouble even computing the entropy of the data stream as it
streams through your FIFO. Storing all of it is impractical, so you have
to restrict yourself to extremely targeted (by source/origin, or the tag,
assuming there is one).

> level of heavier encryption (see next paragraph) might be a tip off that 
> this is not simply a financial transaction.

1) while I haven't done the numbers I would say there's maybe 10-20% of 
   all traffic that is 'weak' encryption vs. 90-80% 'strong' encryption.
   Even if it's as bad as 50%/50% it is still completely irrelevant.

2) to tell whether there's something inside you have to break it. That's 
   why I consistenly say 'weak' instead of weak.
 
> But, it occurs to me that in some cases what might be done to determine the 
> presence of hard encryption is for hardward to attempt to decrypt it for a 
> certain fixed time, and if there's no success with X 
> minutes/hours/milliseconds or whatever, then one assigns a certain 

Or days, months, years, centuries, or whatever. On several megabucks worth
of hardware.

> probability that said message has been encrypted using something stronger 
> than the International version of Bogus Notes (for instance). But of course, 

Why should we concern ourselves with users of broken crypto? It's their
problem, not ours. Since they're but a fraction, the use of strong crypto
all by itself (assuming, you can tell, which is a high threhold) is not
incriminating.

> I'm willing to concede that at his point I'm talking completely out of my 
> arse. (That will change when I get time to do some real homework in this 
> area, however.)

Re: Echelon-like resources...

[Tyler Durden]

"And of course you can package 'strong' encryption into a 'weak' encryption 
envelope, so you will only know that 'strong' encryption has been used after 
you've broken the 'weak' envelope."

Oh yeah. Interesting. Of course, this would be done only if the sender knew 
or supected how mass-scanning might be done. And so the existence of another 
level of heavier encryption (see next paragraph) might be a tip off that 
this is not simply a financial transaction.

But, it occurs to me that in some cases what might be done to determine the 
presence of hard encryption is for hardward to attempt to decrypt it for a 
certain fixed time, and if there's no success with X 
minutes/hours/milliseconds or whatever, then one assigns a certain 
probability that said message has been encrypted using something stronger 
than the International version of Bogus Notes (for instance). But of course, 
I'm willing to concede that at his point I'm talking completely out of my 
arse. (That will change when I get time to do some real homework in this 
area, however.)



>From: Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: Tyler Durden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>CC: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Echelon-like resources...
>Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 13:32:45 +0200 (CEST)
>
>On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, Tyler Durden wrote:
>
> > And indeed, in a world where most messages are fairly weakly encrypted,
> > bursts of strongly-encrypted messages will stand out all the more and
> > possibly flag the need for other methods of investigation.
>
>Doesn't figure: while it's easy to screen for high information entropy
>(archives have a signature), telling weak encryption from strong is
>nontrivial, unless it's conveniently labeled, and you're limiting the
>attack to a tiny fraction of the entire traffic, not realtime.
>
>And of course you can package 'strong' encryption into a 'weak' encryption
>envelope, so you will only know that 'strong' encryption has been used
>after you've broken the 'weak' envelope.




_
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

Re: was: Echelon-like resources..

[Eugen Leitl]

On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Sunder wrote:

> Of course, for all you and I really know that could have been an Anthrax
> factory cleverly disguised as as a pharmaceuticals factory, but we can put
> up rethorical questions and answers such as these for the next millenia
> and not get anywhere either.

Exactly. So let's stop burning synapses on trivialities of daily politics.
Being too out of touch is never advisable, but taking a deliberate
vacation every now and then from the mass media sometimes pays.

Re: Echelon-like resources...

[Eugen Leitl]

On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, Tyler Durden wrote:

> And indeed, in a world where most messages are fairly weakly encrypted, 
> bursts of strongly-encrypted messages will stand out all the more and 
> possibly flag the need for other methods of investigation.

Doesn't figure: while it's easy to screen for high information entropy
(archives have a signature), telling weak encryption from strong is
nontrivial, unless it's conveniently labeled, and you're limiting the
attack to a tiny fraction of the entire traffic, not realtime.

And of course you can package 'strong' encryption into a 'weak' encryption 
envelope, so you will only know that 'strong' encryption has been used 
after you've broken the 'weak' envelope.

Re: was: Echelon-like resources..

[Sunder]

> Yes: The factory was bombed, but actual  
> deaths were one night watchman, "not tens 
> of thousands", and he asserted that the  
> Sudanese government are the good guys in 
> the civil war, and their opponents  
> terrorists. 

And how many of their citizens have or will die due to lack of those very
same pharamceuticals that the bombed factory can no longer produce? Or
suffer from disease due to the same?

Perhaps not tens of thousands, but more than just the single night
watchman, I'd say.

The point isn't how many deaths, but what collateral damage was done.  Not
just in the sense of civilian casualties, but also the damage inflicted on
those by the effect of not having said facility around.


Of course, for all you and I really know that could have been an Anthrax
factory cleverly disguised as as a pharmaceuticals factory, but we can put
up rethorical questions and answers such as these for the next millenia
and not get anywhere either.

Re: was: Echelon-like resources..

[Tyler Durden]

"Yes: The factory was bombed, but actual
deaths were one night watchman, "not tens
of thousands","



Well, you haven't given me a very convincing argument here. In most of his 
writings, Chomsky makes it clear that the deaths were not due to the bomb, 
but the loss of medicine (such as penecillin) in Sudan's only pharmecuetical 
factory.

"Or the fact that Nicaruaga brought  the
> > US before the world court and won?
>
>Perhaps that was true,"

Uh...perhaps? That should be a very easy thing to find out, and as the 
accusation and conviction were quite damming, and as you claim Chomsky 
regularly "lies" on many of his citations, I would have thought that this at 
least would be one citation you'd check.

Got to say...I'm a busy man, and you haven't even said anything meriting 
even the investigaion of your dis-chomsky web page.


>From: James Donald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: was: Echelon-like resources..
>Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2002 11:57:24 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Tyler Durden
> > As for Chomsky lying, can you give us
> > some specific citations? Did he lie
> > about our support for Sadam Hussein?
>
>No
>
> > Our support for Indonesia?
>
>Yes
>
> > Our bombing  of the sudanese
> > pharmacuetical factory?
>
>Yes: The factory was bombed, but actual
>deaths were one night watchman, "not tens
>of thousands", and he asserted that the
>Sudanese government are the good guys in
>the civil war, and their opponents
>terrorists.
>
> > Or the fact that Nicaruaga brought  the
> > US before the world court and won?
>
>Perhaps that was true, but pretty much
>everything else he reported on Nicaragua
>was a lie, for example that the
>Sandinistas won free elections, and that
>the contras were a creation of the US,
>and that the Sandinistas were more
>popular than the contras.
>
> > Granted, Chonskty can be a little
> > tiring on the ears, but my knee-jerk
> > reaction towards your calling him a
> > liar is that you misunderstood the
> > citation. But then again, I could be
> > wrong, so do give us some examples, eh?
>
>See my web page "Chomsky lies"
>http://www.jim.com/chomsdis.htm
>Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
>http://faith.yahoo.com




_
Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com

Re: was: Echelon-like resources..

[James Donald]

Tyler Durden 
> As for Chomsky lying, can you give us  
> some specific citations? Did he lie
> about our support for Sadam Hussein? 

No 

> Our support for Indonesia? 

Yes 

> Our bombing  of the sudanese  
> pharmacuetical factory? 

Yes: The factory was bombed, but actual  
deaths were one night watchman, "not tens 
of thousands", and he asserted that the  
Sudanese government are the good guys in 
the civil war, and their opponents  
terrorists. 

> Or the fact that Nicaruaga brought  the 
> US before the world court and won? 

Perhaps that was true, but pretty much  
everything else he reported on Nicaragua 
was a lie, for example that the  
Sandinistas won free elections, and that 
the contras were a creation of the US,  
and that the Sandinistas were more  
popular than the contras.

> Granted, Chonskty can be a little  
> tiring on the ears, but my knee-jerk   
> reaction towards your calling him a  
> liar is that you misunderstood the
> citation. But then again, I could be  
> wrong, so do give us some examples, eh?

See my web page "Chomsky lies"
http://www.jim.com/chomsdis.htm
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com

Re: was: Echelon-like resources..

[Tyler Durden]

Uh, first of all can we get rid of the part of the subject line that says 
"Durden lies"? (Particularly seeing how the quote attributed to me did not 
originate from me.)

As for Chomsky lying, can you give us some specific citations? Did he lie 
about our support for Sadam Hussein? Our support for Indoesia? Our bombing 
of the sudanese pharmacuetical factory? Or the fact that Nicaruaga brought 
the US before the world court and won?

Granted, Chonskty can be a little tiring on the ears, but my knee-jerk 
reaction towards your calling him a liar is that you misunderstood the 
citation.
But then again, I could be wrong, so do give us some examples, eh?


From: James Donald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Durden lies, was: Echelon-like resources..
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 14:11:12 -0700 (PDT)

> > > > "Our overriding purpose, from the
> > > > beginning through to the present
> > > > day, has been world domination -
> > > > that is, to build and maintain
> > > > the capacity to coerce everybody
> > > > else on the planet: nonviolently,
> > > > if possible, and violently, if
> > > > necessary. But the purpose of US
> > > > foreign policy of domination is
> > > > not just to make the rest of the
> > > > world jump through hoops; the
> > > > purpose is to faciliate our
> > > > exploitation of resources." -
> > > > Ramsey Clark, former US Attorney
> > > > General

From: "Trei, Peter"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The Sun is an alternative news magazine
> which has been in print since 1974.
> It's mammothly unlikely that they would
> fabricate the interview out of whole
> cloth, since Clarke would sue for libel
> and/or defamation.

On the contrary, this is standard routine
communist behavior. They are always
inventing fantastic citations, for
example the much quoted "Intoxicating
Augmentation" quote that Karl Marx
attributed to Gladstone (then prime
minister of England) which generation
after generation learned scholars have
learnedly cited as evidence that free
market capitalism was bad for workers.

Since Clarke is a public figure he cannot
sue for libel, so he is a good peg to
hang such a citation on.  If Karl Marx
could get away with attributing fantastic
citations to the Prime Minister, "the
sun" can certainly get away with
attributing them to an attorney general.
The enormous flood of such bogus
citations make it unlikely that any one
of them will be challenged.   Look at
Chomsky. Every few pages he has a
similarly fraudulent citation, and no one
ever sues him, even though in some cases
one can check the materials he cites, and
find that he is lying.
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com





_
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

Re: Durden lies, was: Echelon-like resources...

[Tyler Durden]

Yo! I didn't write anything of the kind.

Actually, this post mystifies me...even had I posted those quotations, as 
scary as they may be, I don't understand Anonymous' reaction to them 
(waitaminute...maybe I do understand...it's interesting to consider that the 
sender seems to have gone to some trouble to remain anonymous for a 
relatively banal post).

As for "the point", as a newbie here (I was an optical network engineer from 
95 to recently, now on $$$-street), I wanted to raise the issue that looking 
at the crytpography issue "statistically" may yield conclusions that 
contradict a more "linear", message-by-message examination of certain 
issues.

For instance, I would be interested to see a response from the powers that 
be, if a credible grass-roots push were made to encourage everyone, from 
children to senior citizens, to use a lite form of cryptography (yes, such 
as in Lotus Notes) on EVERY message they sent.


Or perhaps you've all discussed this before, but the responses I've seen so 
far don't indicate that.



From: Anonymous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Tyler Durden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Durden lies, was: Echelon-like resources...
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 18:33:46 +0200 (CEST)

On Fri, 11 Oct 2002 10:29:53 -0400, you wrote:
>
> "War is just a racket ... something that is not what it seems to the
> majority of people. Only a small group knows what its about. It is
> conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the
> masses."  --- Major General Smedley Butler, 1933
>
> "Our overriding purpose, from the beginning through to the present
> day, has been world domination - that is, to build and maintain the
> capacity to coerce everybody else on the planet: nonviolently, if
> possible, and violently, if necessary. But the purpose of US foreign
> policy of domination is not just to make the rest of the world jump
> through hoops; the purpose is to faciliate our exploitation of
> resources."
> - Ramsey Clark, former US Attorney General

Is there some reason you want to publish these bogus, uncitationed, false, 
propaganda quotations?
Just adding to misinformation? Preferring to further downgrade the public 
discourse? Planting lies
for subsequent citation as proof of something? What an asshole.




_
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

Re: Durden lies, was: Echelon-like resources...

[Steve Furlong]

On Friday 11 October 2002 14:13, Trei, Peter wrote:
> If anonymous were a person of character...

Oxymoron, eh?

Pseudonymity has many socially acceptable features. Anonymity has all of 
the practical benefits of pseudonymity and no additional advantages in 
a conversational forum such as cpunks. Anonymous persons (or 
dumbassbots; it's hard to tell sometimes) who snipe from behind the 
veil may be assumed to be cowardly jackasses.

-- 
Steve FurlongComputer Condottiere   Have GNU, Will Travel

Vote Idiotarian --- it's easier than thinking

Re: Durden lies, was: Echelon-like resources...

[Harmon Seaver]

   You have to realize that there are any number of fedzis who subscribe to this
list, it's a well authenticated fact, matter of court testimony. And fedzis
aren't noted for brains, or even being able to read, which is why he attacked
you instead of me. And of course most fedzis positively foam at the mouth when
hearing the truth being spoken, thus the rabid nature of his spewing. 

-- 
Harmon Seaver   
CyberShamanix
http://www.cybershamanix.com

"War is just a racket ... something that is not what it seems to the
majority of people. Only a small group knows what its about. It is
conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the
masses."  --- Major General Smedley Butler, 1933

"Our overriding purpose, from the beginning through to the present
day, has been world domination - that is, to build and maintain the
capacity to coerce everybody else on the planet: nonviolently, if
possible, and violently, if necessary. But the purpose of US foreign
policy of domination is not just to make the rest of the world jump
through hoops; the purpose is to faciliate our exploitation of
resources."
- Ramsey Clark, former US Attorney General
http://www.thesunmagazine.org/bully.html

Re: Durden lies, was: Echelon-like resources..

[Bill Stewart]

At 02:11 PM 10/11/2002 -0700, James Donald wrote:

> > > > "Our overriding purpose, from the
> > > > beginning through to the present
> > > > day, has been world domination -
.
> > > > Ramsey Clark, former US Attorney General

From: "Trei, Peter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The Sun is an alternative news magazine
> which has been in print since 1974.
> It's mammothly unlikely that they would
> fabricate the interview out of whole
> cloth, since Clarke would sue for libel
> and/or defamation.

On the contrary, this is standard routine
communist behavior. They are always
inventing fantastic citations, [...]


But that's just the kind of thing Ramsey Clark would say.

Not Ramsey Clark in his position as spokescritter for the
military-industrial complex explaining how great the US is,
but Ramsey Clark the well-known leftist critic of US policy
describing what he thinks US policy has been.


~
As opposed to Linus Torvalds's followers talking about
their objectives for World Domination :-)

Re: Durden lies, was: Echelon-like resources..

[James Donald]

> > > > "Our overriding purpose, from the
> > > > beginning through to the present
> > > > day, has been world domination -
> > > > that is, to build and maintain
> > > > the capacity to coerce everybody
> > > > else on the planet: nonviolently,
> > > > if possible, and violently, if
> > > > necessary. But the purpose of US
> > > > foreign policy of domination is
> > > > not just to make the rest of the
> > > > world jump through hoops; the
> > > > purpose is to faciliate our
> > > > exploitation of resources." -
> > > > Ramsey Clark, former US Attorney 
> > > > General

From: "Trei, Peter"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The Sun is an alternative news magazine
> which has been in print since 1974.
> It's mammothly unlikely that they would
> fabricate the interview out of whole
> cloth, since Clarke would sue for libel 
> and/or defamation.

On the contrary, this is standard routine
communist behavior. They are always
inventing fantastic citations, for
example the much quoted "Intoxicating
Augmentation" quote that Karl Marx 
attributed to Gladstone (then prime
minister of England) which generation
after generation learned scholars have
learnedly cited as evidence that free 
market capitalism was bad for workers.

Since Clarke is a public figure he cannot
sue for libel, so he is a good peg to
hang such a citation on.  If Karl Marx
could get away with attributing fantastic
citations to the Prime Minister, "the 
sun" can certainly get away with
attributing them to an attorney general.
The enormous flood of such bogus
citations make it unlikely that any one 
of them will be challenged.   Look at
Chomsky. Every few pages he has a
similarly fraudulent citation, and no one
ever sues him, even though in some cases
one can check the materials he cites, and
find that he is lying.  
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com

Re: Durden lies, was: Echelon-like resources...

[Steve Schear]

At 06:33 PM 10/11/2002 +0200, Anonymous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Fri, 11 Oct 2002 10:29:53 -0400, you wrote:
> >
> > "War is just a racket ... something that is not what it seems to the
> > majority of people. Only a small group knows what its about. It is
> > conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the
> > masses."  --- Major General Smedley Butler, 1933
> >
> > "Our overriding purpose, from the beginning through to the present
> > day, has been world domination - that is, to build and maintain the
> > capacity to coerce everybody else on the planet: nonviolently, if
> > possible, and violently, if necessary. But the purpose of US foreign
> > policy of domination is not just to make the rest of the world jump
> > through hoops; the purpose is to faciliate our exploitation of
> > resources."
> > - Ramsey Clark, former US Attorney General
>
>Is there some reason you want to publish these bogus, uncitationed, false,
>propaganda quotations?
>Just adding to misinformation? Preferring to further downgrade the public
>discourse? Planting lies
>for subsequent citation as proof of something? What an asshole.

In War Is A Racket, Butler argued for a powerful navy, but one prohibited
from traveling more than 200 miles from the U.S. coastline. Military
aircraft could travel no more than 500 miles from the U.S. coast, and the
army would be prohibited from leaving the United States. Butler also
proposed that all workers in defense industries, from the lowest laborer to
the highest executive, be limited to "$30 a month, the same wage as the
lads in the trenches get." He also proposed that a declaration of war
should be passed by a plebiscite in which only those subject to
conscription would be eligible to vote.

There are many references to the Butler quote although I can't find a
citation which gives the event(s) from which the speech occurred.  I'll
keep looking.

BTW Butler was a very interesting , colorful and it seems key fellow in
American history.  But for his political and economic naivete a coup d'itat
intended to remove President Franklin D. Roosevelt from office in 1934
might have succeeded. Bummer!


"War is just a racket ... something that is not what it seems to the
majority of people. Only a small group knows what its about. It is
conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the
masses."  --- Major General Smedley Butler, 1933

Re: Durden lies, was: Echelon-like resources...

[Harmon Seaver]

   Here's the cite for the Ramsey Clark quote.


On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 06:33:46PM +0200, Anonymous wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Oct 2002 10:29:53 -0400, you wrote:
> >
> > "War is just a racket ... something that is not what it seems to the
> > majority of people. Only a small group knows what its about. It is
> > conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the
> > masses."  --- Major General Smedley Butler, 1933
> >
> > "Our overriding purpose, from the beginning through to the present
> > day, has been world domination - that is, to build and maintain the
> > capacity to coerce everybody else on the planet: nonviolently, if
> > possible, and violently, if necessary. But the purpose of US foreign
> > policy of domination is not just to make the rest of the world jump
> > through hoops; the purpose is to faciliate our exploitation of
> > resources."
> > - Ramsey Clark, former US Attorney General
> 
> Is there some reason you want to publish these bogus, uncitationed, false, 
>propaganda quotations? 
> Just adding to misinformation? Preferring to further downgrade the public discourse? 
>Planting lies 
> for subsequent citation as proof of something? What an asshole.

-- 
Harmon Seaver   
CyberShamanix
http://www.cybershamanix.com

"War is just a racket ... something that is not what it seems to the
majority of people. Only a small group knows what its about. It is
conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the
masses."  --- Major General Smedley Butler, 1933

"Our overriding purpose, from the beginning through to the present
day, has been world domination - that is, to build and maintain the
capacity to coerce everybody else on the planet: nonviolently, if
possible, and violently, if necessary. But the purpose of US foreign
policy of domination is not just to make the rest of the world jump
through hoops; the purpose is to faciliate our exploitation of
resources."
- Ramsey Clark, former US Attorney General
http://www.thesunmagazine.org/bully.html

RE: Durden lies, was: Echelon-like resources...

[Trei, Peter]

Anonymous wrote:

> >From: Anonymous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: "Tyler Durden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: Durden lies, was: Echelon-like resources...
> >Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 18:33:46 +0200 (CEST)
> >
> >On Fri, 11 Oct 2002 10:29:53 -0400, you wrote:
> > >
> > > "War is just a racket ... something that is not what it seems to the
> > > majority of people. Only a small group knows what its about. It is
> > > conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the
> > > masses."  --- Major General Smedley Butler, 1933
> > >
> > > "Our overriding purpose, from the beginning through to the present
> > > day, has been world domination - that is, to build and maintain the
> > > capacity to coerce everybody else on the planet: nonviolently, if
> > > possible, and violently, if necessary. But the purpose of US foreign
> > > policy of domination is not just to make the rest of the world jump
> > > through hoops; the purpose is to faciliate our exploitation of
> > > resources."
> > > - Ramsey Clark, former US Attorney General
> >
> >Is there some reason you want to publish these bogus, uncitationed,
> false, 
> >propaganda quotations?
> >Just adding to misinformation? Preferring to further downgrade the public
> 
> >discourse? Planting lies
> >for subsequent citation as proof of something? What an asshole.
> 
Anonymous had better learn to read, or at least quote email correctly.
The signature quotations were not posted by Durden, but by Harmon
Seaver. I too found them astonishing, but unlike anonymous, I try to
check things out before calling foul. Anon should learn to use Google.

Ramsey: http://www.thesunmagazine.org/bully.html

The Sun is an alternative news magazine which has
been in print since 1974. It's mammothly unlikely 
that they would fabricate the interview out of whole cloth,
since Clarke would sue for libel and/or defamation.

Butler: Numerous sources. Butler certainly existed;
Amazon has at least two biographies available, and
one of them has a sample page image refering to his
1935 book 'War is a Racket', titled after the 1933 
speech.

Part of the speech can be found here:
http://www.fas.org/man/smedley.htm

5 chapters of the book can be found here:
http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm

If anonymous were a person of character he/she/it would
apologize, first to Tyler Durden, for misquoting, and second
to Harmon Seaver, but accusing him of lying.

Peter Trei

Re: Echelon-like resources...

[Greg Broiles]

At 10:54 AM 10/11/2002 -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:


Which returns to my original point: the "easy" availability of strong 
crypto products does not mean it is unprofitable for an agency to continue 
to push populations towards lighter forms of encryption.

Assuming that the agency's goal is to maximize surveillance returns and 
that they're unconcerned with security generally, yes, you're right.

So?


--
Greg Broiles -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP 0x26E4488c or 0x94245961

Durden lies, was: Echelon-like resources...

[Anonymous]

On Fri, 11 Oct 2002 10:29:53 -0400, you wrote:
>
> "War is just a racket ... something that is not what it seems to the
> majority of people. Only a small group knows what its about. It is
> conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the
> masses."  --- Major General Smedley Butler, 1933
>
> "Our overriding purpose, from the beginning through to the present
> day, has been world domination - that is, to build and maintain the
> capacity to coerce everybody else on the planet: nonviolently, if
> possible, and violently, if necessary. But the purpose of US foreign
> policy of domination is not just to make the rest of the world jump
> through hoops; the purpose is to faciliate our exploitation of
> resources."
> - Ramsey Clark, former US Attorney General

Is there some reason you want to publish these bogus, uncitationed, false, propaganda 
quotations? 
Just adding to misinformation? Preferring to further downgrade the public discourse? 
Planting lies 
for subsequent citation as proof of something? What an asshole.

Re: Echelon-like resources...

[Tyler Durden]

OK, let's assume for the same of argument that it takes about 1 minute for 
Echelon/NSA-like resources to break a weakly encypted lotus notes message. 
And then let's assume that there's a whole LOT of these machines sitting 
somewhere.

And as the grumpy Tim May has suggested, perhaps only a small fraction of 
encrypted messages are (or can be) sent for decryption.

Then the expenditure of such resources is going to be a big statistical 
optimization problem, akin to that faced in the credit card industry (eg, in 
approving or declining a POS transaction).

The gub'mint or whatever doing such monitoring will therefore probably look 
for certain signs that will kick off decryption. For instance, the sporadic 
use of cryptography in cetain demogrpahic areas might cause a % of those to 
be sent over for routine check, particularly if there is no encryption used 
by that populace, and then all of a sudden there are bursts.

Also, changing the strength of encryption might be a kickoff, but again I 
reveal I am a newbie with this question: Is it possible to determine (at 
least approximately) the strength of encryption of an intercepted message?

Then, if someone from, say, the b'Arbes neighborhood of Paris moves suddenly 
from weak to strong encryption in his messaging, that would kick off a flag 
somewhere sending that message for cracking.

So if a bin Laden were smart, he should routinely use encryption for all of 
his messages, even the most trivial, because the change in pattern would be 
a tipoff to send his encrypted messages for hacking.

And the there are probably less obvious, large-scale statistical patterns 
indicating something's up, and causing a % of such messages to be hacked and 
then sent for routine check for key words.





>From: Adam Back <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: Tyler Durden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Echelon-like...
>Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 20:41:21 +0100
>
>Sounds about right.  64 bit crypto in the "strong" version (which is
>not that strong -- the distributed.net challenge recently broke a 64
>bit key), and in the export version 24 of those 64 bits were encrypted
>with an NSA backdoor key, leaving only 40 bits of key space for the
>NSA to bruteforce to recover messages.
>
>The NSA's backdoor public key is at the URL below.
>
>   http://www.cypherspace.org/~adam/hacks/lotus-nsa-key.html
>
>(The public key had an Organization name of "MiniTruth", and a Common
>Name of "Big Brother" -- both Orwell "1984" references, presumably by
>a lotus programmer).
>
>Adam
>
>On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 02:34:38PM -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
> > "I assume everyone knows the little arrangement that lotus
> > reached with the NSA over its encrypted secure email?"
> >
> > I'm new here, so do tell if I am wrong. Are you referring to the two 
>levels
> > of Encryption available in Bogus Notes? (ie, the North American and the
> > International, the International being "legal for export".)
> > At one of my previous employers, we were told the (apocryphal?) story of
> > some dude who got arrested on an airplane for having the more secure 
>version
> > of Notes on his laptop.
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: "David Howe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >To: "Email List: Cypherpunks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >Subject: Re: Echelon-like...
> > >Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 18:38:36 +0100
> > >
> > >On Wednesday, October 9, 2002, at 07:28  PM, anonimo arancio wrote:
> > > > The basic argument is that, if good encryption is available overseas
> > > > or easily downloadable, it doesn't make sense to make export of it
> > > > illegal.
> > >Nope. The biggest name in software right now is Microsoft, who wasn't
> > >willing to face down the government on this. no export version of a
> > >Microsoft product had decent crypto while the export regulations were 
>in
> > >force - and the situation is pretty poor even now. If microsoft were
> > >free to compete in this area (and lotus, of notes fame) then decent
> > >security *built into* the operating system, the desktop document suite
> > >or the email package - and life would get a lot, lot worse for the
> > >spooks.  I assume everyone knows the little arrangement that lotus
> > >reached with the NSA over its encrypted secure email?




_
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

Re: Echelon-like resources...

[Harmon Seaver]

   Why the hell would anyone use lotus notes encryption for anything whatsoever?


On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 09:37:52AM -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
> OK, let's assume for the same of argument that it takes about 1 minute for 
> Echelon/NSA-like resources to break a weakly encypted lotus notes message. 
> And then let's assume that there's a whole LOT of these machines sitting 
> somewhere.
> 
> And as the grumpy Tim May has suggested, perhaps only a small fraction of 
> encrypted messages are (or can be) sent for decryption.
> 
> Then the expenditure of such resources is going to be a big statistical 
> optimization problem, akin to that faced in the credit card industry (eg, 
> in approving or declining a POS transaction).
> 
> The gub'mint or whatever doing such monitoring will therefore probably look 
> for certain signs that will kick off decryption. For instance, the sporadic 
> use of cryptography in cetain demogrpahic areas might cause a % of those to 
> be sent over for routine check, particularly if there is no encryption used 
> by that populace, and then all of a sudden there are bursts.
> 
> Also, changing the strength of encryption might be a kickoff, but again I 
> reveal I am a newbie with this question: Is it possible to determine (at 
> least approximately) the strength of encryption of an intercepted message?
> 
> Then, if someone from, say, the b'Arbes neighborhood of Paris moves 
> suddenly from weak to strong encryption in his messaging, that would kick 
> off a flag somewhere sending that message for cracking.
> 
> So if a bin Laden were smart, he should routinely use encryption for all of 
> his messages, even the most trivial, because the change in pattern would be 
> a tipoff to send his encrypted messages for hacking.
> 
> And the there are probably less obvious, large-scale statistical patterns 
> indicating something's up, and causing a % of such messages to be hacked 
> and then sent for routine check for key words.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >From: Adam Back <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: Tyler Durden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: Re: Echelon-like...
> >Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 20:41:21 +0100
> >
> >Sounds about right.  64 bit crypto in the "strong" version (which is
> >not that strong -- the distributed.net challenge recently broke a 64
> >bit key), and in the export version 24 of those 64 bits were encrypted
> >with an NSA backdoor key, leaving only 40 bits of key space for the
> >NSA to bruteforce to recover messages.
> >
> >The NSA's backdoor public key is at the URL below.
> >
> > http://www.cypherspace.org/~adam/hacks/lotus-nsa-key.html
> >
> >(The public key had an Organization name of "MiniTruth", and a Common
> >Name of "Big Brother" -- both Orwell "1984" references, presumably by
> >a lotus programmer).
> >
> >Adam
> >
> >On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 02:34:38PM -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
> >> "I assume everyone knows the little arrangement that lotus
> >> reached with the NSA over its encrypted secure email?"
> >>
> >> I'm new here, so do tell if I am wrong. Are you referring to the two 
> >levels
> >> of Encryption available in Bogus Notes? (ie, the North American and the
> >> International, the International being "legal for export".)
> >> At one of my previous employers, we were told the (apocryphal?) story of
> >> some dude who got arrested on an airplane for having the more secure 
> >version
> >> of Notes on his laptop.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> >From: "David Howe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> >To: "Email List: Cypherpunks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> >Subject: Re: Echelon-like...
> >> >Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 18:38:36 +0100
> >> >
> >> >On Wednesday, October 9, 2002, at 07:28  PM, anonimo arancio wrote:
> >> > > The basic argument is that, if good encryption is available overseas
> >> > > or easily downloadable, it doesn't make sense to make export of it
> >> > > illegal.
> >> >Nope. The biggest name in software right now is Microsoft, who wasn't
> >> >willing to face down the government on this. no export version of a
> >> >Microsoft product had decent crypto while the export regulations were 
> >in
> >> >force - and the situation is pretty poor even now. If microsoft were
> >> >free to compete in this area (and lotus, of notes fame) then decent
> >> >security *built into* the operating system, the desktop document suite
> >> >or the email package - and life would get a lot, lot worse for the
> >> >spooks.  I assume everyone knows the little arrangement that lotus
> >> >reached with the NSA over its encrypted secure email?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
> http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

-- 
Harmon Seaver   
CyberShamanix
http://www.cybershamanix.com

"War is just a racket ... something that is not what it seems to the
majority of people. Only a small group knows what its about. It is
conducted for the benefit of the very

Re: Echelon-like resources...

[Tyler Durden]

"Or whatever? What makes you think that anyone can crack any of the strong 
encryption?"

I don't think they can. But your point seems to miss my own point. There 
will certainly be a certain number of uncrackable mesages out there (as a 
trained physicist I am fairly certain that even military quantum computing 
efforts are nowhere near theability to crack strongly encrypted messages). 
But there will also be a large number of less-strongly and even weakly 
encrypted messages being sent out there. Various agencies with large amounts 
of hardware will be looking at this as a statisitcal/logistic issue...I 
strongly doubt they only attempt cracking on a message-by-message basis.

And indeed, in a world where most messages are fairly weakly encrypted, 
bursts of strongly-encrypted messages will stand out all the more and 
possibly flag the need for other methods of investigation.

Which returns to my original point: the "easy" availability of strong crypto 
products does not mean it is unprofitable for an agency to continue to push 
populations towards lighter forms of encryption.





>From: Harmon Seaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: Tyler Durden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Echelon-like resources...
>Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 09:39:01 -0500
>
>On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 10:29:53AM -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
> > Harmon Seaver wrote...
> >
> > >   Why the hell would anyone use lotus notes encryption for anything
> > >whatsoever?
> >
> > Lotus Notes or whatever, of course. The point here is that larger
>
>Or whatever? What makes you think that anyone can crack any of the 
>strong
>encryption?
>
>
>--
>Harmon Seaver
>CyberShamanix
>http://www.cybershamanix.com
>
>"War is just a racket ... something that is not what it seems to the
>majority of people. Only a small group knows what its about. It is
>conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the
>masses."  --- Major General Smedley Butler, 1933
>
>"Our overriding purpose, from the beginning through to the present
>day, has been world domination - that is, to build and maintain the
>capacity to coerce everybody else on the planet: nonviolently, if
>possible, and violently, if necessary. But the purpose of US foreign
>policy of domination is not just to make the rest of the world jump
>through hoops; the purpose is to faciliate our exploitation of
>resources."
>- Ramsey Clark, former US Attorney General




_
Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com

Re: Echelon-like resources...

[Tyler Durden]

Harmon Seaver wrote...

>Why the hell would anyone use lotus notes encryption for anything 
>whatsoever?

Lotus Notes or whatever, of course. The point here is that larger 
organizations with decryption capabilities probably do not think on the 
message-by-message level very often, just like credit card companies and 
insurance agencies deal with their customers in statistical buckets.

It's also conceivable that a large variety of individuals, of varying levels 
of sophistication and education, catch wind of information the government 
may be interested in. Some of them may not feel or know that their message 
is of enough importance to go outside ofLotus Notes or whatever if they have 
it.




>
>
>On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 09:37:52AM -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
> > OK, let's assume for the same of argument that it takes about 1 minute 
>for
> > Echelon/NSA-like resources to break a weakly encypted lotus notes 
>message.
> > And then let's assume that there's a whole LOT of these machines sitting
> > somewhere.
> >
> > And as the grumpy Tim May has suggested, perhaps only a small fraction 
>of
> > encrypted messages are (or can be) sent for decryption.
> >
> > Then the expenditure of such resources is going to be a big statistical
> > optimization problem, akin to that faced in the credit card industry 
>(eg,
> > in approving or declining a POS transaction).
> >
> > The gub'mint or whatever doing such monitoring will therefore probably 
>look
> > for certain signs that will kick off decryption. For instance, the 
>sporadic
> > use of cryptography in cetain demogrpahic areas might cause a % of those 
>to
> > be sent over for routine check, particularly if there is no encryption 
>used
> > by that populace, and then all of a sudden there are bursts.
> >
> > Also, changing the strength of encryption might be a kickoff, but again 
>I
> > reveal I am a newbie with this question: Is it possible to determine (at
> > least approximately) the strength of encryption of an intercepted 
>message?
> >
> > Then, if someone from, say, the b'Arbes neighborhood of Paris moves
> > suddenly from weak to strong encryption in his messaging, that would 
>kick
> > off a flag somewhere sending that message for cracking.
> >
> > So if a bin Laden were smart, he should routinely use encryption for all 
>of
> > his messages, even the most trivial, because the change in pattern would 
>be
> > a tipoff to send his encrypted messages for hacking.
> >
> > And the there are probably less obvious, large-scale statistical 
>patterns
> > indicating something's up, and causing a % of such messages to be hacked
> > and then sent for routine check for key words.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: Adam Back <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >To: Tyler Durden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >Subject: Re: Echelon-like...
> > >Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 20:41:21 +0100
> > >
> > >Sounds about right.  64 bit crypto in the "strong" version (which is
> > >not that strong -- the distributed.net challenge recently broke a 64
> > >bit key), and in the export version 24 of those 64 bits were encrypted
> > >with an NSA backdoor key, leaving only 40 bits of key space for the
> > >NSA to bruteforce to recover messages.
> > >
> > >The NSA's backdoor public key is at the URL below.
> > >
> > >   http://www.cypherspace.org/~adam/hacks/lotus-nsa-key.html
> > >
> > >(The public key had an Organization name of "MiniTruth", and a Common
> > >Name of "Big Brother" -- both Orwell "1984" references, presumably by
> > >a lotus programmer).
> > >
> > >Adam
> > >
> > >On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 02:34:38PM -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
> > >> "I assume everyone knows the little arrangement that lotus
> > >> reached with the NSA over its encrypted secure email?"
> > >>
> > >> I'm new here, so do tell if I am wrong. Are you referring to the two
> > >levels
> > >> of Encryption available in Bogus Notes? (ie, the North American and 
>the
> > >> International, the International being "legal for export".)
> > >> At one of my previous employers, we were told the (apocryphal?) story 
>of
> > >> some dude who got arrested on an airplane for having the more secure
> > >version
> > >> of Notes on his laptop.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> >From: "David Howe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >> >To: "Email List: Cypherpunks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >> >Subject: Re: Echelon-like...
> > >> >Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 18:38:36 +0100
> > >> >
> > >> >On Wednesday, October 9, 2002, at 07:28  PM, anonimo arancio wrote:
> > >> > > The basic argument is that, if good encryption is available 
>overseas
> > >> > > or easily downloadable, it doesn't make sense to make export of 
>it
> > >> > > illegal.
> > >> >Nope. The biggest name in software right now is Microsoft, who 
>wasn't
> > >> >willing to face down the government on this. no export version of a
> > >> >Microsoft product had decent crypto while the export regulations 
>were
> > >in
> > >> >force - and the situation is pretty poor ev

Re: Echelon-like resources...

[Harmon Seaver]

On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 10:29:53AM -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
> Harmon Seaver wrote...
> 
> >   Why the hell would anyone use lotus notes encryption for anything 
> >whatsoever?
> 
> Lotus Notes or whatever, of course. The point here is that larger 

   Or whatever? What makes you think that anyone can crack any of the strong
encryption? 


-- 
Harmon Seaver   
CyberShamanix
http://www.cybershamanix.com

"War is just a racket ... something that is not what it seems to the
majority of people. Only a small group knows what its about. It is
conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the
masses."  --- Major General Smedley Butler, 1933

"Our overriding purpose, from the beginning through to the present
day, has been world domination - that is, to build and maintain the
capacity to coerce everybody else on the planet: nonviolently, if
possible, and violently, if necessary. But the purpose of US foreign
policy of domination is not just to make the rest of the world jump
through hoops; the purpose is to faciliate our exploitation of
resources."
- Ramsey Clark, former US Attorney General