From: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 19:47:59 +0800
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <QQacwk29023.199602141137@relay3.UU.NET>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 07:36 PM 2/13/96 -0800, Bill Frantz wrote:
>At  8:15 PM 2/13/96 -0500, Declan B. McCullagh wrote:

>>That may well be true, but speaking as someone who's worked on U.S.
>>Presidential campaigns, that kind of protection is expensive,
>>time-consuming, intrusive, and unlikely to be extended.
>
>I assume that both Declan and Jim Bell agree that people high in the
>government will be immune because they already enjoy this level of
>protection (limitation one).  So the only people we can hit are the cannon
>fodder, not the ones who gave the orders.  It has always been this way with
>war.

Actually, I think the primary targets will be either the middle level 
manager types, or the ones who have attracted a substantial amount of bad 
publicity by "following orders."  Lon Horiuchi (the sniper who shot Vicki 
Weaver) for example, would be a excellent example of a person who'd try to 
claim, "I was just following orders."  Okay, maybe he was, but so was Adolph 
Eichmann.  

Once the tax collectors/enforcers were targeted, the rest of the government 
wouldn't be able to operate, and would collapse.


>If, after a couple of the Waco people had been hit, I was given the
>responsibility to protect them I would proceed as follews:
>
>(1) Gather them and their families onto some Army base and step up the
>patrols.  Now I have them safe.

And, of course, you've just ruined their lives.  Think about it.  By doing 
this, it is made absolutely, completely, and abundantly clear to them that 
THEY are considered "the enemy" and that their lives are forever put at 
risk.   Previously, government employees could hold their heads up high and 
be proud of their "public service."  Now, if they're discovered, they have 
to disappear.  Does this treatment sound familiar?  Their job description 
and circumstances will more closely resemble that of a Mafia enforcer than a 
proud public servant.  They'll have to teach their children to lie about 
what their parent does, rather than risk getting exposed.

Who, exactly, would want to work for the government under such 
circumstances?  Remember, we're not just talking about a tiny fraction of 
their number; if the most egregious ones were hidden the ones that were less 
secure would be killed in their place.

Remember, the only reason the government can even afford so many employees 
is because taxes are collected; what happens when literally every IRS agent 
resigns to avoid the bullet or bomb?  The remainder, the "less bad" ones, 
couldn't be paid.  At that point, government collapses.


>(2) Train and release them thru the witness protection program.  Cost
>$20,000/person (if I remember the article John Young posted a pointer to
>correctly.  (Thanks John))  This is probably about the same as the cost of
>their training, so it makes economic sense.

Except that you can't do this for every government employee, and who's going 
to want to work for the government if it is made clear to them that someday 
they'll either be killed, or discovered, or they will have to "go 
underground" to survive.  Not a very good prospect.  And what happens if 
they think there's a fairly good chance that my system will succeed?  Most 
people want to be able to retire with a pension; what's the prospect for 
collecting a pension from a demolished government?!?

>
>(3) Make sure that the names/faces of the cannon fodder in future actions
>are not available to make it harder to target the guilty.
>
>Bill

Then they'll target the "names," the ones who show their faces.  See how this 
works?  If the only way  you can maintain the government is to keep them all 
absolutely anonymous, then that government has FAILED.

Furthermore, this system's anonymity allows disgruntled public employees the 
chance to collect money by "turning in" their bosses to the public's ire; if 
the personnel list for the government is nominally a secret, it will "leak" 
eventually and those on the list will be followed, confirmed, and targeted.

I'm not a betting man, but if I were forced to place a bet, your position 
doesn't have a prayer.