From: Deja Vu <dv@dev.null>
Date: Sun, 5 Oct 1997 03:49:52 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: InforWar 31 / (Part III of 'The True Story of the InterNet')
Message-ID: <343698AF.679D@dev.null>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html

Title: The True Story of the Internet Part II









The True Story of the InterNet

Part III


InfoWar

Final Frontier of the Digital Revolution

Behind the ElectroMagnetic
Curtain


by TruthMonger <tm@dev.null>




Copyright 1997 Pearl Publishing



InfoWar Table of Contents

Anarchist Post of the Century 
Anarchist Post of the Century


Anarchist Post of the Century


Subject: Freedom of Encryption: Is it SAFE?
From: "Michael Pierson" <wfgodot@advicom.net>

To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net

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

There has been much discussion recently concerning how to fix

certain flaws, or block various amendments in encryption
legislation being shepherded through Congress.  A far more
fundamental problem with these legislative efforts from the
beginning was that they involved an implicit concession to the

idea that a U.S. citizen's freedom to privately exchange
information in whatever coding scheme he or she might choose
required some kind of government affirmation or ratification as

validation.  Once one seeks for the government's deigning to
"affirm the rights of United States persons to use and sell

encryption", it can (and does) then easily proceed to attach

conditions and caveats to these "affirmed" rights. 
In the
process the surveillance hawks within the government have
managed, with hardly any struggle, to advance the appearance of

legitimacy for their claims of authority to regulate this form
of
expression. 

Now comes an expectation that the nature of these "affirmed

rights" should be tailored to address "the concerns
of national
security and the federal law enforcement community."  This
same
community has on occasion complained about how their efforts to

fight organized crime and terrorism are being thwarted by not

having the modern newspeak disguised equivalent of "Writs
of 
Assistance" (and they are arguably making progress toward

acquiring just such powers IMO).  Very few politicians are 
willing to commit the heresy of clearly and staunchly asserting

that the information coding methods used by citizens are under

no obligation to pass any litmus test, or to be subject to any

kind of prior approval or restraint determined by criteria of

the law enforcement establishment or anyone else.  If the Feds

lament that this will make their job harder, too bad.  In the

words of Orson Welles: "Only in a police state is the job
of a 
policeman easy." 

When these various legislative efforts attempted to reach beyond

the issues of export restrictions to address those of domestic

use, they became a doubtful and dangerous fix to something that

wasn't broke in the first place.  If the Government is intent
on
"abridging the freedom" to use strong encryption domestically,
a
legislative affirmation of these rights is feeble comfort at
best.  If I'm seeking to protect my possessions, I don't ask a

thief to affirm my property rights. 

Of course, even the export question is really about the aims of

the state's surveillance constituency to obstruct the wide
deployment of strong encryption domestically, and its
interoperability on the internet as a whole.  Challenging the

derisible bogosity of the "preventing the Evil Ones from

acquiring this technology" rationale that is invoked to justify

these restrictions was not something legislation was likely to
do
with any great vigor.  Legislation to "relax" these
restrictions
involves lending credence to the dubious assumption that these

restrictions had any constitutional validity to begin with. 

Any bill that would have truly provided for the statutory
endorsement of the acceptably uncompromised use of strong
encryption never really had much more than a snowball's chance
in
hell of actually being signed into law given the current
political balance of power, did it?  Far more likely, was that
it
could be corrupted and hijacked as a vehicle to further the very

type of restrictions it was purportedly intended to relieve. 
A
collateral consequence is an increased arrogance and presumption

among lawmakers that it is their prerogative to act to define
for
us citizens, what freedoms for domestic use of encryption we
should be permitted.  The growing gallery of GAK amendments and

competing legislative proposals now emerging appears to support

this sad scenario. 

It's starting to look like the prospects for meaningfully
improving the situation with encryption legislation in the
current political environment were about as promising as the
prospects of a neophyte gambler coming out ahead at a crooked

casino.  I expect any apparent winnings in the end will come with

a catch between the lines in the fine print, if they come at all.

In any case, whatever is legislatively affirmed can later be
legislatively denied.  What a King presumes is his to grant, he

usually presumes is his to revoke as well. 

In the end, what will have really been gained by this legislative

venture, and what will have been explicitly or implicitly
surrendered?  As I see it, at this point the issue isn't about

counting wins, it's about cutting losses. 

Freedom of encryption.... Is it SAFE?  I don't think so. 

-Michael 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBNDVks9GJlWF+GPx9AQGctwQAlE+SKB3/rqG7kz3qdcF2I5eBedz3/DDK

f5Vg0Zd8PbhowwT9gWAvyt+ysIZCqRJWMu3vPmWP2iN2ZghLaiGRVv8piXhyUQYl

rhv/rOz1Yc1raJbU5Wk+9Qr9zxQqxHZiAk1G0Irye4yDfi72ar8ndD5CqUegBnaF

QAoyFGtiJZ4=
=2zJO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 


Anarchist Post of the Century


Subject: DejaVu: Cypherpunks as Philosopher Kings
From: "Attila T. Hun" <attila@hun.org>

Reply-To: "Attila T. Hun" <attila@primenet.com>

Organization: home for unpenitent hackers; no crackers!

To: "Timothy C. May" <tcmay@got.net>, cypherpunks
<cypherpunks@cyberpass.net>

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

ten months ago: on or about 961218:1123 
    "Timothy C. May" <tcmay@got.net> purported
to expostulate:

+_Direct action_ is what it's all about. Undermining the state
through
+the spread of espionage networks, through undermining faith in
the tax
+system, through even more direct applications of the right tools
at the
+right times.
+
+When Cypherpunks are called "terrorists," we will have
done our jobs.

    [Tim] said this before Christmas last year as an erudite and
lengthy
    addendum to my lengthy tome: "Cypherpunks as Philosophy
Kings" 
    that pretty well summed our generally mutually agreed "philosophy".

    both were and still are worth reading; anybody who does not
have
    copies, ask.

    but cypherpunk terrorists are not violent; this is all about
making
    information free and protecting privacy with technology.

    despite the fact the Commerce Committee effectively killed
SAFE
    (or we think they did until Oxley tries to tack his amendment

    structure on an appropriations bill in a house-senate conference
or
    "manager's mark" procedure (whatever that is)),
we can not drop the 
    due diligence, and the public must be aroused, called to battle.

    even if there is no action, prepare for the next fire drill.
sow the
    seeds of dissension.

    seems to me we were sure the CDA was dead --except it slipped
in with 
    a manager's mark after the house voted almost unanimously
the other
    way (402-12 or something like that). the capitol hill sleaze

    took a grand slam NO and reported an even worse yes, making
it part
    of a major bill that absolutely was going to pass --and they

    have the gall to call that travesty democracy?  Teddy Roosevelt:

        "It is difficult to make our material condition better
by the 
        best law, but it is easy enough to ruin it by bad laws."

    Tim's message for Christmas last was the prophetic call for
direct
    action; legal action; empowerment action: Robert H. Jackson

    (1892-1954), U.S. Judge:

        "It is not the function of our Government to keep
the citizen 
        from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen
to
        keep the Government from falling into error."

CYPHERPUNKS MUST BE THE JOHNNY APPLESEED 

OF THE INFORMATION AGE.

    the sleazeball, who intends to make J Edgar look like a piker
at 
    surveillance, has the gleam of unabridged power in his eyes.
Louis 
    F[reeh,uck] is charming, even disarming, as he tells a Congressional

    committee:
        "We are potentially the most dangerous agency in
the 
        country if we are not scrutinized carefully." (Jun
'97)

    meaning the FBI will be the most powerful [feared] federal
agency?
    really?  I thought it was already, although the DEA and BATF
have 
    worked hard for the title, too.

    Supreme Justice Louis O. Brandeis said:
        "The greatest danger to liberty lurks in insidious
encroachment 
        by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding."

    and the [London] Electronic Telegraph, on Sunday's front page:

        Mr. Freeh has won $370 million (ú230 million) of

        funding for 2,000 new posts, boosted the number of
        active agents to more than 11,000, and expanded
        open-ended "domestic security operations" from
100 in
        1995 to more than 800.  Twenty-three new FBI offices
        are opening abroad.

    and more:

        But none of this will contain the director's ambitions

        or his power.  He is now believed to be eyeing two
        other "secret police" forces - the Drug Enforcement

        Agency and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms

        - with a long-term view to a takeover.

    F[reeh,uck] holds the key to the Clinton's' ambitions; the
Clintons 
    cite the Roosevelts as their mentors; Hillary even communes
with the
    long dead Eleanor. Bubba's stated goals included extending
FDR's 
    "chicken in every pot" --he's just appeasing the
crowd now.

    Leopards do not change their spots, but Bubba has shifted
to the 
    right with public opinion; he is just like the leopard: playing
with
    his food until sufficient presidential powers have been accumulated

    by the default of Congress and the people.

    But, the INFORMATION REVOLUTION now stands in way of the Clinton

    plans; the Internet can destroy the media control now exercised
by
    the acquiescence of the five Jewish media barons. In fact,
it is 
    destroying their monopoly.

THE CONTROL OF INFORMATION IS THE CONTROL OF POWER.


    Why does F[reeh,uck] hold the key?  Because his job is to
sell the 
    Congress on strangling the information revolution before it
destroys
    truthless governments F[reeh,uck]'s masters understand and
control.

    Franklin D. Roosevelt was inaugurated on 4 Mar 33 stating:

        "I am prepared under my constitutional duty to 
        recommend the measures that a stricken nation in the
        midst of a stricken world may require.  These
        measures, or such other measures as the Congress may
        build out of its experience and wisdom, I shall
        seek, within my constitutional authority, to bring
        to speedy adoption.  But in the event that the
        Congress shall fall to take one of these two 
        courses, and in the event that the national
        emergency is still critical, I shall not evade the
        clear course of duty that will then confront me.  I
        shall ask the Congress for the one remaining
        instrument to meet the crisis broad Executive power
        to wage a war against the emergency, as great as the
        power that would be given to me if we were in fact
        invaded by a foreign foe."

    and, on 9 Mar 33, 5 days later, FDR extracted from an uniformed

    and essentially special session of Congress:
        "Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives
of
        the United States of America in Congress assembled, That
the
        Congress hereby declares that a serious emergency exists
and
        that it is imperatively necessary speedily to put into
effect
        remedies of uniform national application."

    which was based on the War Powers Act (trading with the Enemy)
of
    1917 which was hastily revised to include US Citizens which
had been
    exempted. Next, FDR "franchised" the banks, "licensed"
agriculture
    and so on. But, to render the citizens powerless and to confiscate

    all assets so the national state was the ultimate owner, and

    therefore able to pledge the people for credit to the international

    bankers, the fundamental monetary system changed:
        "Whenever in the judgment of the Secretary of the

        Treasury, such action is necessary to protect the 
        currency system of the United States, the Secretary 
        of the Treasury, in his discretion, may require any 
        or all individuals, partnerships, associations and 
        corporations to pay and deliver to the Treasurer 
        of the United States any or all gold coin, gold
        bullion, and gold certificates owned by such 
        individuals, partnerships, associations and 
        corporations." 

    which closed the loop and made every US citizen chattel as
FDR 
    pledged the good faith and credit of the United States to
the 
    international bankers --in return, an unbelievable flood of
credit 
    was available since the good faith and credit of the United
States 
    is "We the People...."  but FDR sold us downstream
into a debt 
    financed economy from which there is no escape; we are still
there,
    the debt service is destroying any permanent economy AND total

    collapse under the debt load is bequeathed to our children.

    Congress repealed FDR's rubber stamp for the "President"
in 1973,
    but the War Powers Act remains, still modified to treat US

    citizens as the enemy. and the power of the "President"
to make 
    those regulations, and the automatic approval are enshrined
for
    current and future Presidents in Title 12 USC 95(b)
        "The actions, regulations, rules, licenses, orders
and 
        proclamations heretofore or hereafter taken, promulgated,
made,
        or issued by the President of the United States or the
Secretary
        of the Treasury since March the 4th, 1933, pursuant to
the
        authority conferred by subdivision (b) of Section 5 of
the Act
        of October 6, 1917, as amended, are hereby approved and

        confirmed."

    The real issue is the President and the fat cat power brokers
can 
    get away with these shenanigans __as_long_as_the_people_let_them__.

    We are still under the Rule of Necessity. We are still in
a declared
    state of national emergency, a state of emergency which has
existed,
    uninterrupted, since 1933.  

    FDR's licensing agencies were rather trivial in number; today
there 
    are thousands of them, many with their own administrative
courts. 
    FDR took away our common law when he bankrupted America, which
is a 
    national corporation under the Hague convention (courtesy
of Stanton
    and Seward after the Civil War).  Bankruptcy is a contract,
and 
    we are the bait, subject to that court, which is in effect
an 
    Admiralty court, and we are "licensed" to literally
exist by FDR's 
    Social Security Number schema. and every courtroom now flies
the 
    fringed Admiralty flag where habeas corpus is a privilege,
not a 
    right, if it exists at all.

    This is the importance of Louis F[reeh,uck].  He, and Janet
Reno as 
    the DOJ rubber stamp, are holding the collar for your neck.
They
    are selling it to you little by little, or even all at once.

    Why Louis F[reeh,uck]?  Madison Avenue style with credentials;
he
    can sell the program. F[reeh,uck] is the front man, the schill.

    Machiavelli, in his "Discourses of Livy," acknowledged
that great 
    power may have to be given to the Executive if the State is
to
    survive, but warned of great dangers in doing so.  He cautioned:

        Nor is it sufficient if this power be conferred 
        upon good men; for men are frail, and easily 
        corrupted, and then in a short time, he that is 
        absolute may easily corrupt the people."

    sleazeball's comments are scarfed by Congress, sleazeball's
candor
    rocks their cradles, sleazeball shows them private morality
plays
    about a populace running wild with crypto-anarchy, running
wild 
    to burn out the offices of central power...  in other words:

DEPRIVE THEM CONGRESSCRITTERS OF THEIR
 FREE LUNCH AND IMMUNITY.

    is it not odd that the more the government tries to abridge
our free
    speech rights, the more they want to confiscate our weapons?

        free speech is a weapon of democracy!
        privacy is a weapon of democracy!
        cryptography is a weapon of democracy!

    We are not fighting with guns and explosives this time, armed

    insurrection against the power of the Federal government is

    suicidal --we are fighting for our lives and the right to
live our
    lives with words: the ability to hear those words _before_

    government censors and spin doctors render them useless lies.

    Bubba can not win a war of truth and information; we can/

    The Marquis de Sade:
        Are not laws dangerous which inhibit the passions? 
        Compare the centuries of anarchy with those of the 
        strongest legalism in any country you like and you will

        see that it is only when the laws are silent that the

        greatest actions appear.

    however, anarchy is the key word that ignites even the ACLU
against
    your cause; it even makes bedfellows of Pat Buchanann and
the
    homosexual/priest/congressman from Massachusetts...  

    pure anarchy, by definition, does not work, anyway. forget
it. get 
    the concept out of your systems as it inflames everyone and
all 
    other reason is lost in the screaming and police batons. 

    Even Teddy Roosevelt called for the complete extermination
of
    anarchists, to be hunted like vermin. give it up; or go to
your
    private island and fly your rattlesnake flag. even Anguilla
will not
    tolerate anarchists.

    just give us our REAL constitutional rights as Franklin, Madison,

    Jefferson, Adams, and friends intended; give us constitutionalists

    on the Supreme Court, not bleeding hearts, statists, and central

    power freaks. get the Feds out of cradle to grave big government
and
    let the people determine their religion and morality.

    give us freedom of speech, freedom to bear arms, freedom from

    unreasonable searches, freedom not to incriminate ourselves,
and 
    repeal the 14th Amendment so we can have states' rights again.

    if our Constitution were permitted to govern as it was intended,
and 
    the states obeyed the precepts endowed to not further limit
the
    rights of the people, America would be the home of the free,
not big
    government, not freeloaders and the welfare state; not the
leftovers
    of a once great nation.

    give us the rights Abraham Lincoln cherished lovingly:
     "Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for
themselves."

    let _them_, not me, live the downside.

    George Washington, in his farewell address, warned:
       "... change by usurpation; for through this, 
        in one instance, may be the instrument of good, 
        it is the customary weapon by which free 
        governments are destroyed."

    cypherpunk philosopher kings: pick up your picks and shovels,
get 
    your hands dirty, and start digging in; it's going to be a
long and 
    difficult campaign and the tactics needed to expose F[reeh,uck]'s

    true intentions as the schill for the Clintons who are schills

    for the elitist leading the destruction of American democracy.

    The Congressional compromise love match season isn't over
yet; the
    schmoozers and lobbyists, like so many furry rats, still wander
the
    dark halls and tunnels looking for the last, late in the season,

    clandestine and obscene fuck.  any whore will do.

    lobbyists have long reputations for selling out the interests
of
    their paymasters; the lobbyists are so much a part of the
Washington
    culture that they have _no_ morality or moral position --it
is all
    about who they can claim to have influenced --what difference
does
    it make if it is contrary to the client --the art of the deal,

    protect their own position and find newer, richer clients
--whores!
    logrolling and porkbarrel voting --but never go home without
a deal;
    used car salesmanship: get your man.

    I can hear the lobbyists whining now as they are called on
the 
    carpet:
        "aw, come on Mac, we got you a compromise from LEA
demands..."

    never realizing that there is such an action as NO bill, they
sell 
    out half our rights blocking legislation which would never
happen.

    they claim they got back half. what half? --some unknown half
that 
    we _never_ lost!  that is why:
        The 10 Commandments contain 297 words. The Bill of Rights
is 
        stated in 463 words. Lincoln's Gettysburg Address contains
266
        words; and: 
        A recent federal directive to regulate the price of cabbage

        contains 26,911 words. (The Atlanta Journal)

    send the quisling Neville Chamberlains to the gas chambers!

    the public needs to be educated, not in crypto, but in the
horrors of     
    an oligarchy which intends to destroy the fundamental freedoms
on 
    which we stand.  

    publish his credit records; publish his medical records --tell
his
    neighbors about his visits from Child Protective Services...
then
    Joe Coach Potato will figure out he needs something

        AFTER he figures out there are fuckors and fuckees,

        and he's on the short end of that stick. [pardon my French]

    then, and only then, will the masses understand privacy --when
they 
    have lost it. 

    either we show the people before they lose everything to uncle,

    or...    just dump it on the table to show everyone just how
much
    uncle knows about _you_.

    Attila's thought for the day:
      Now, with a black jack mule you wish to harness, you
walk up, 
      look him in the eye, and hit him with a 2X4 over the left
eye.   
      If he blinks, hit him over the right eye! He'll cooperate.
 
          --so will politicians.

    Louis F]reeh,uck], did you really state this hoping everyone
would 
    think you are joking? 
        "We are potentially the most dangerous agency in
the 
        country if we are not scrutinized carefully."

    Louis F[reeh,uck], you obviously know that telling the truth,
before 
    the truth is really the truth, disarms your opposition since
they 
    can plainly see that it is not true.

    there is a limit to what you can endure before you must stand
to 
    be counted --so I will loudly echo Tim's sentiment: 
+
+When Cypherpunks are called "terrorists," we will
have done our jobs.
+
 --
 "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 

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

iQCVAwUBNDHgKr04kQrCC2kFAQHPpAQAj+ukWNVEXT+Zgf920g63wX9EZqT241dj

KFqLQ9lBPZLRQydg/PMDcm8T0oI/RneVh51dep5v17IdJcPQT7MN+0CmX91k6e8m

7Wsd+cNVovzDx6dRsC8ghMDB1QBZdBWW9553FzB89RMfilTikCyqmoP6Tub+23/V

QywxUxa3slA=
=U4tV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Copyright "Anonymous TruthMonger <at@dev.null>"

"Do you feel 'Cypher'...Punk? Well...do you?"




"The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre"

"WebWorld & the Mythical Circle of Eunuchs"

"InfoWar (Part III of 'The True Story of the InterNet')

Soviet Union Sickle of Eunuchs Secret WebSite