From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 94 12:56:17 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Wiretap Bill is just the beginning...
Message-ID: <199408121956.MAA01058@netcom14.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



An interesting message from Brock Meeks, citing FBI Director Louis
Freeh's admission that the government may not be content with the
Wiretap Bill as written. We all knew this.

I hope the collaborators at EFF wake up.

--Tim


From: brock@well.sf.ca.us (Brock N. Meeks)
Newsgroups: alt.activism.d,alt.politics.datahighway,alt.privacy,alt.society.resistance,comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: EFF Statement on Leahy/Edwards Digital Telephony Bill
Date: 12 Aug 1994 05:38:03 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
Lines: 23
Sender: nobody@cs.utexas.edu
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9408120314.A14499-0100000@well>
References: <9407117766.AA776643994@ccgate.infoworld.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.cs.utexas.edu

On Thu, 11 Aug 1994, Brett Glass wrote:

> 
> There is a real danger that ANY
> concession the EFF makes will be leveraged by the spooks -- who do not
> appear to care a whit about 4th Amendment rights or personal privacy -- to
> further undermine our rights in the future. No bill without incredibly
> strong firewalls against future erosions of civil rights should have ANY
> support from the EFF.


During hearings on this bill yesterday (thurs.), FBI Director Freeh was 
asked if, at some point, he thought that the FBI would try to extend the 
coverage of this bill because, as Freeh admitted, "some criminals aren't 
going to be caught" because they will use communications systems not 
covered under this bill

Freeh said "it's possible" that the FBI would seek an expanded scope.  
It's clear the FBI isn't thinking of this bill as an end point, it's just 
the start for them.

Brock Meeks
CyberWire Dispatch