1995-09-13 - Re: Whitehouse “dissident” web site monitoring?

Header Data

From: Adam Shostack <adam@bwh.harvard.edu>
To: hallam@w3.org
Message Hash: 784cfc0ecab90cd8ba29aa6e4f00dd82ceda4cc57ddb03c6f8a05fc65a301b51
Message ID: <199509131416.KAA06476@bwh.harvard.edu>
Reply To: <9509130226.AA22319@zorch.w3.org>
UTC Datetime: 1995-09-13 14:17:23 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 13 Sep 95 07:17:23 PDT

Raw message

From: Adam Shostack <adam@bwh.harvard.edu>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 95 07:17:23 PDT
To: hallam@w3.org
Subject: Re: Whitehouse "dissident" web site monitoring?
In-Reply-To: <9509130226.AA22319@zorch.w3.org>
Message-ID: <199509131416.KAA06476@bwh.harvard.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Phill wrote:

| If we are serious about privacy I think we should be very clear that
| we respect the privacy of Whitehouse staffer and staffers in the
| Senate and House. I'm not being partisan about this, I have put a
| lot of effort into getting participationfrom the right as well as
| the left. I've just not been very successful in that area.


	Sure.  I'll respect their privacy as much as they, and the
organizations they oversee, respect mine.  I'll use as the
respresentative organizations the IRS and the Social Security
Administration, which respects my pricvacy so much that they use
prison inmates to process paperwork.

	If I was in a nasty mood, I'd add the USPS.

	Sarcasm aside, they show no interest in other people's
privacy.  Why should we go out of our way to do anything but show them
how bad the situation is?

Adam

-- 
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
					               -Hume





Thread