[117343] in Cypherpunks
Re: ACTION ALERT: Crypto Legislation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Petro)
Tue Aug 31 21:15:39 1999
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <v04205507b3f2283a3888@[216.112.5.39]>
In-Reply-To: <v03007802b3f194f5a953@[207.226.3.15]>
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 18:02:22 -0700
To: Jim Dempsey <jdempsey@cdt.org>
From: Petro <petro@suba.com>
Cc: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Reply-To: Petro <petro@suba.com>
>John,
>
>It would be a disaster if the rehash of CDT's history were to lead people
>to stay out of the Congressional fight on SAFE, or to obscure what is at
>stake this Fall.
It is a disaster to get involved in the debate. To get
involved is to acknowlege that those traitorous bastards HAVE THE
RIGHTS TO REGUALTE CRYPTO INSIDE OUR BOARDERS.
The 1st and fourth amendments would stand in the way of that,
and maybe the 5th and 10th.
>The Republican leadership of the House have said they intend to bring SAFE
>before the full House for a vote this Fall. If so, SAFE will likely pass,
>with or without CDT's support. The only question is whether what passes is
>close to the current SAFE Act or is an UN-SAFE Act.
Either is unsafe. Either is yet another step towards the
Police State that some here think we will wind up in.
Others of us think we are already there.
Look at the NRA for example--are THEY your role model? Look
at all the good they've done for Gun Rights. Each step of the way
they've compromised, they've BEEN compromised, and WE'VE been
compromised.
I don't think you're actually on the CPUNKS list, so I'll
enclose a little something from another subscriber:
(begin quote)
Ok guys, I think I've asked this a zillion times, without receiving a clear
answer. I'll try again:
WHY THE HELL DO YOU ALLOW THEM TO DO IT?
I'm from Romania, Eastern Europe. I can testify for what happens when the
government becomes an absolute master. I KNOW the terror that you're gonna
feel. Trust me, 1984 is NO exaggeration. And yet, you prefer to sit on your
butt and do nothing about it. WHY?
Mark
(end quote)
He's BTDT, and got the lousy t-shirt ripped off his back. Now
you want the rest of us to join him.
>Like it or not, here's the lineup: if the SAFE Act is brought before the
>full House of Representatives, the allies of the FBI will be allowed to
>offer one or more gutting amendments, preserving the export controls and
>maybe even mandating key recovery. They will characterize these amendments
>as balanced alternatives that protect privacy and national security, etc,
>etc.
Uh-huh, sure they will. And next time out they will tighten
the screws even further, and you will hand them the screw driver,
because it's only "reasonable".
>The vote on the FBI's gutting amendments will be the cyber-liberties vote
>of the year in Congress. It will be close. If a gutting amendment passes,
>SAFE as amended will pass the House. If the FBI amendments are beaten
>back, something close to the original SAFE will pass.
How about working to make sure NOTHING passes?
Or would that make you feel too useless?
>In our view, the main task is to beat the FBI's gutting amendments. If you
>don't like SAFE, urge your Member of Congress to vote against it too. But
>be careful, he or she may think you support the FBI's anti-SAFE position.
You are playing right into their hands. You live on Internet
time. They think in terms of generations. In the long run, they'll
keep picking and picking--unless you, and the rest of us demand they
stop.
--
Interfaces matter. You need mathematical bones; engineering muscle;
but you won't replicate without beautiful skin. Bits, transistors,
wires, code, gummint velveeta is free. Will is expensive. Gutenburg.
Smith. Ford. Moore. Postel. Steam engines were neat. Steam
engines pulling trains were amazing. Computers were neat. Computers
networked were amazing. Warning grunts are useful. The ability of a
charistmatic speaker to fuck with your head is disastrous.--Blank
Frank(anonymously)
