There is always the terrorist's, pedophiles, and spy's ohh my, card. I personally would suggest cliche phrases like.
"If we allow encryption the terrorists will win!" On a side note, I suggest you change your argument to the pro side. Bruce Schneier has written some good material on pro encryption, check out http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram.html or read his book "Secret and Lies". BTW, not many people on this list are anti-encryption. -Jason On Tue, 2002-04-23 at 20:19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi all > > I am hoping that someone out there may be able to assist me with my > assignment. > > I am having to write a position paper on - should our government > (Australian) deny individuals the use of strong encryption? > > Unfortunately I have challenged myself and decided that I would support the > idea of the Government denying individuals the right to use strong > encryption. Only problem is I can't find any information that explicitly > supports this argument, nor am I sure what I should put in this 'Position > Paper'. > > Any ideas, any at all? > > Sincerely, > > Trina > > > > _______________________________________________________________________________ > Unencrypted electronic mail is not secure and may not be authentic. > If you have any doubts as to the contents please telephone to confirm. > > This electronic transmission is intended only for those to whom it is > addressed. It may contain information that is confidential, privileged > or exempt from disclosure by law. Any claim to privilege is not waived > or lost by reason of mistaken transmission of this information. > If you are not the intended recipient you must not distribute or copy this > transmission and should please notify the sender. Your costs for doing > this will be reimbursed by the sender. > _______________________________________________________________________________ >
