[79491] in Cypherpunks
Re: FC: Responses to Tim May's criticism of SAFE, and a rebuttal
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jim Bell)
Sat May 3 16:38:23 1997
Date: Sat, 03 May 1997 13:01:20 -0800
To: Ernest Hua <hua@chromatic.com>, Declan McCullagh <declan@vorlon.mit.edu>
From: jimbell@pacifier.com (Jim Bell)
Cc: cypherpunks@toad.com
Reply-To: jimbell@pacifier.com (Jim Bell)
At 12:10 5/02/97 -0700, Ernest Hua wrote:
> The NSA/FBI is NOT standing still while we are all bickering about
> precisely which dotted-i and crossed-t to support. They can, at
> the stroke of Clinton's executive order pen, initiate effectively
> THEIR law, while we must gather forces and summon Congress to jump
> through enough hoops to pass effective legislation.
>
>In short, they can get what they want instantly, while we cannot
>except through a long and arduous process (during which they can throw
>many procedural and lobbying obstacles to slow us down). The process
>is clearly in THEIR favor (and not without good reason), and we must
>face that fact.
Then let's force them to take that step, which (BTW) they haven't done
already. They are well aware of the highly questionable constitutional
nature of such a system, and I'm sure they're worrying that not only would
such an executive order galvanize opposition to such a plan, it would also
delay for a year or two the perceived "need" for the legislation they
currently (and secretly) seek. By the time the executive order is
overturned by the SC, it'll be too late to restore it as Congressional
legislation.
Jim Bell
jimbell@pacifier.com
