Chutzpah! FBI Calls Privacy Extremists Elitist

FBI Calls Privacy Extremists Elitist
(09/25/97; 4:30 p.m. EDT)
By David Braun, TechWire 

MONTREAL -- Extremist positions on electronic encryption are not only
threatening to normal law enforcement, but they are also elitist and
nondemocratic, said Alan McDonald, a senior counsel member with the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, at the International Conference on
Privacy in Montreal on Thursday.

Addressing a workshop on how far society should go in trading off
privacy for effective law enforcement, McDonald said privacy activists
had fought any balance in proposed encryption legislation.

"Such absolute positions threaten not only electronic searches but
also conventional searches for data that has been encrypted," McDonald
said.

Absolute positions on privacy were "pernicious on several levels,"
McDonald added.

The absolute positions "handcuffed" law enforcement while also raising
rights for citizens to levels that were unreasonable and that would
have been foreign to the nation's founding fathers. Extreme privacy
positions were ultimately elitist and nondemocratic in that they
presumed the views of a knowing privacy cognoscenti should pre-empt
the views of the nation's elected officials and the Supreme Court,
McDonald said.

McDonald's statements came a day after a key committee of the
U.S. House of Representatives rejected an FBI-supported proposal that
would have compelled the makers of encryption products to include
features that would enable law enforcement agencies to gain immediate
and, if necessary, covert access to unscramble any coded data.

Extremists presumed that the citizens could not trust the elected
government and the Supreme Court to make decisions or to correct
mistakes if any are made, McDonald said.

"Based on a theory of potential government abuse, important tools
commonly used are to be restricted or embargoed," McDonald said.

McDonald said efforts in the United States to enhance effective law
enforcement search and seizure capabilities had proceeded without
harming legitimate privacy concerns.

In the area of electronic surveillance, McDonald said, privacy
enhancements had frequently received treatment "superior to that
required under our Constitution."

With minor exceptions, neither the laws nor the cases decided
regarding effective law enforcement or privacy had come about with the
view that either were absolute in their nature, McDonald said. Law
enforcement measures had been tempered by considerations of personal
privacy, and privacy laws had been balanced with effective law
enforcement.

Notwithstanding the substantial threats posed by national and
international organized crime, drug cartels, and terrorists, the
United States had remained true to its Constitutional moorings, and
its commitment to a system of ordered liberties, McDonald said.

"When people don't know much about electronic surveillance, they are
fearful of it. But when they know Congress passed laws and the Supreme
Court reviewed them and that there are numerous constraints and
procedures, then it makes sense to them. It seems rational and
balanced," McDonald said.



-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David HM Spector                                         spector@zeitgeist.com
Network Design & Infrastructure Security                 voice: +1 212.580.7193
Amateur Radio: W2DHM (ex-N2BCA) (ARRL life member)       GridSquare: FN30AS
-.-. --- -. -. . -.-. -  .-- .. - ....  .- -- .- - . ..- .-.  .-. .- -.. .. ---
"New and stirring things are belittled because if they are not belittled, 
the humiliating question arises, 'Why then are you not taking part in them?'"
                                                        --H. G. Wells

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

    and the worst part of it: the man is so far fucked that he is serious.

    the "man" must have been reprogrammed to forget _anything_ he learned
    about the inalienable rights of 'The Declaration of Independence' or
    the ringing words: "We the people, in order to forge a more perfect 
    union..." preamble of 'The United States Constitution'. 
    
    to stand before humanity, with a straight face and the audacity to
    state:

        "...raising rights for citizens to levels that were 
        unreasonable and that would have been foreign to 
        the nation's founding fathers."

    is beyond my ken --and cost me my lunch (just wiped off the
    screen...  forget the keyboard).

    where does our government hatch these asshole fascist police state 
    hacks?  Jefferson, Madison, Adams, Paine, etc. all practiced 
    cryptography, in fact Jefferson's thesis was considered 'elegent' for     
    almost 100 years.

    elitists, my ass! --just knowledgeable enough to know when we're 
    about to be fucked  --normally, I get kissed in this kind of 
    'bargain'.

 --
 "Experience keeps a dear school, but fools will learn in no other."     
        --Benjamin Franklin
 ______________________________________________________________________
 "attila" 1024/C20B6905/23 D0 FA 7F 6A 8F 60 66 BC AF AE 56 98 C0 D7 B0 


on or about 970925:2354 
    David HM Spector <spector@zeitgeist.com> purported to have reported:

+FBI Calls Privacy Extremists Elitist
+(09/25/97; 4:30 p.m. EDT)
+By David Braun, TechWire 

+MONTREAL -- Extremist positions on electronic encryption are not only
+threatening to normal law enforcement, but they are also elitist and
+nondemocratic, said Alan McDonald, a senior counsel member with the
+Federal Bureau of Investigation, at the International Conference on
+Privacy in Montreal on Thursday.

+Addressing a workshop on how far society should go in trading off
+privacy for effective law enforcement, McDonald said privacy activists
+had fought any balance in proposed encryption legislation.

+"Such absolute positions threaten not only electronic searches but also
+conventional searches for data that has been encrypted," McDonald said.

+Absolute positions on privacy were "pernicious on several levels,"
+McDonald added.

+The absolute positions "handcuffed" law enforcement while also raising
+rights for citizens to levels that were unreasonable and that would
+have been foreign to the nation's founding fathers. Extreme privacy
+positions were ultimately elitist and nondemocratic in that they
+presumed the views of a knowing privacy cognoscenti should pre-empt the
+views of the nation's elected officials and the Supreme Court, McDonald
+said.

+McDonald's statements came a day after a key committee of the U.S.
+House of Representatives rejected an FBI-supported proposal that would
+have compelled the makers of encryption products to include features
+that would enable law enforcement agencies to gain immediate and, if
+necessary, covert access to unscramble any coded data.

+Extremists presumed that the citizens could not trust the elected
+government and the Supreme Court to make decisions or to correct
+mistakes if any are made, McDonald said.

+"Based on a theory of potential government abuse, important tools
+commonly used are to be restricted or embargoed," McDonald said.

+McDonald said efforts in the United States to enhance effective law
+enforcement search and seizure capabilities had proceeded without
+harming legitimate privacy concerns.

+In the area of electronic surveillance, McDonald said, privacy
+enhancements had frequently received treatment "superior to that
+required under our Constitution."

+With minor exceptions, neither the laws nor the cases decided regarding
+effective law enforcement or privacy had come about with the view that
+either were absolute in their nature, McDonald said. Law enforcement
+measures had been tempered by considerations of personal privacy, and
+privacy laws had been balanced with effective law enforcement.

+Notwithstanding the substantial threats posed by national and
+international organized crime, drug cartels, and terrorists, the United
+States had remained true to its Constitutional moorings, and its
+commitment to a system of ordered liberties, McDonald said.

+"When people don't know much about electronic surveillance, they are
+fearful of it. But when they know Congress passed laws and the Supreme
+Court reviewed them and that there are numerous constraints and
+procedures, then it makes sense to them. It seems rational and
+balanced," McDonald said.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: latin1
Comment: No safety this side of the grave. Never was; never will be

iQCVAwUBNCtKwL04kQrCC2kFAQHBiQP/fjKrGf6memEM8yl7tmpVfn/ir7kVe4yk
VJSRTHfjDPdOwGNlx0Oe8l9NF8W21MUzL60Ag9Lq+0edHaoZYZSon3PDsR4v+51V
h/uNarOPGpGqlNnVKUHUzpVJc2BD0dt/6loYvC1hd0+1VkseBtY/3+v3MFpVTx03
FfzazMiiU/k=
=pFY0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Thu, 25 Sep 1997, David HM Spector wrote:
> FBI Calls Privacy Extremists Elitist
> (09/25/97; 4:30 p.m. EDT)
> By David Braun, TechWire 
> The absolute positions "handcuffed" law enforcement while also raising
> rights for citizens to levels that were unreasonable and that would
> have been foreign to the nation's founding fathers.
[...]
> Extremists presumed that the citizens could not trust the elected
> government and the Supreme Court to make decisions or to correct
> mistakes if any are made, McDonald said.

Somebody please tell me that this is a forged quote.... We are now
"privacy extremists"? What's next? "Privacy militia"?

-- Lucky Green <shamrock@cypherpunks.to> PGP encrypted email preferred.
   "Tonga? Where the hell is Tonga? They have Cypherpunks there?"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          SANDY SANDFORT
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Folks,

On Fri, 26 Sep 1997, Lucky Green wrote:

> Somebody please tell me that this is a forged quote.... We are now
> "privacy extremists"? What's next? "Privacy militia"?

I wouldn't expect anything less from a "surveillance extremist."


 S a n d y

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sandy Sandfort <sandfort@crl.com> writes:

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>                           SANDY SANDFORT
>  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
>
> Folks,
>
> On Fri, 26 Sep 1997, Lucky Green wrote:
>
> > Somebody please tell me that this is a forged quote.... We are now
> > "privacy extremists"? What's next? "Privacy militia"?
>
> I wouldn't expect anything less from a "surveillance extremist."
>
>
>  S a n d y
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


I wouldn't expect anything less from a "C2Net moderation extremist".

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

Sandy Sandfort wrote something really lame, but I'm glad he's back,
anyway:

Sandy,
  I'm glad you're back.
  I've been trying to flame the current list contributors, but they
just don't present such an inviting target as you do--not that they
don't try.

  Since your absence on the list, there have been those who have tried
to support asinine positions, but none of them have had your ability
to do so with the complete clueless lack of recognition of basic logic
that you bring to the task.

  Certainly, there will be those who take my violent, irrational 
animosity toward you as a sign that I secretly lust for your tight,
smooth derriere, but those are mostly people who follow Dimitri's
posts, so what the hell do they know, eh?
  No matter how nonsensical my baseless, arbitrary attacks on your
integrity and character, we will always be able to look back in 
fondness on the night we spent together in Nuevo Laredo. 
(Unless that was my brother...I was really drunk.)

  Regardless, no matter how boring the list has been in your absence,
I have remained a list member solely in order that you would some day
feel comfortable returning to the list, knowing that there would be
at least one list member whose reputation capital was lower than yours.

  Please take your time getting aclimated to the list once again. As
proof of my sincerity in welcoming you back to the CypherPunks list, 
if it appears that your reputation capital is in danger of sinking 
even lower than mine, I will reveal myself as a champion of GAK and
Key Escrow, in order to keep you from having to scrape your knees
on the steps of the tomb of the Unknown Cocksucker.

  Please be assured that my motives for celebrating your return to
the list have nothing to do with the fact that I am in everybody
else's killfiles.
  I change my list persona two or three times a week in order to
circumvent the efforts of other list subscribers to avoid my 
senseless rants.

  I am still, despite efforts to dissuade me from my ghoul, the chief
proponent of strange crypto on the CypherPukes lisp, despite ? the
Platypus's frogulent clams to the cuntrary.

Tojohoto
http:/huh?.eh?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

    let's see... how do I phrase this?  ...uuuuhhh.

    Hey, I got it!  

    Toto's lost it! (not that he ever had it)

    some things just never change.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: latin1
Comment: No safety this side of the grave. Never was; never will be

iQCVAwUBNCyka704kQrCC2kFAQFHNAP/TEYhTOVpeG3wTfJjX4u88tk0yj8DDA4p
5sA0yJpOmoZ3rM3mdY0PcHeagyxPfIXp/TccJNt5yfaNZkGrdeaBhWVsa/pwu+oZ
Ahk08JK949cQqjZ8Wd5WkAtz//52fxL46CijzsYqxNyUbuqlffxdnuXtO6YwBiiR
BjAlbF8oYb0=
=iHxM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 8:54 PM -0700 9/25/97, David HM Spector wrote:
>Extremists presumed that the citizens could not trust the elected
>government and the Supreme Court to make decisions or to correct
>mistakes if any are made, McDonald said.
>
>"Based on a theory of potential government abuse, important tools
>commonly used are to be restricted or embargoed," McDonald said.

It's not just a theory.  It's the history of abuse.  And remember, the taps
were used to get blackmail material on members of congress, control their
votes, and make J. Edgar Hoover director for life.  That's why we can't
trust the elected government.




- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | Internal surveillance      | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | helped make the USSR the   | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz@netcom.com | nation it is today.        | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQB1AwUBNCxz7NQgMXPCzT+1AQFchgL+OI8NeCB76D7zQj1wl6MXd9DCipvYk1Nc
invpNX743Wex/sWZ1h8E36G1tni01WLFw0y+IwFAip1rr6rMzUayy+0AL/PfQaIg
40ojdJp5V0O1eMApbDQ/lrArB5Kb2E4E
=qK/v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Thu, 25 Sep 1997, David HM Spector wrote:

> 
> 
> FBI Calls Privacy Extremists Elitist
> (09/25/97; 4:30 p.m. EDT)
> By David Braun, TechWire 
> 
> MONTREAL -- Extremist positions on electronic encryption are not only
> threatening to normal law enforcement, but they are also elitist and
> nondemocratic, said Alan McDonald, a senior counsel member with the
> Federal Bureau of Investigation, at the International Conference on
> Privacy in Montreal on Thursday.
> 

"This is a Republic, not a Democracy"

-way it spozed to be...