From: shabbir@vtw.org (Shabbir J. Safdar)
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 11:29:16 +0800
To: shamrock@netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Subject: Re: So, what crypto legislation (if any) is necessary?
Message-ID: <199603272043.PAA01837@panix4.panix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Lucky Green writes:
>At 2:08 3/26/96, Shabbir J. Safdar wrote:
>
>It is a widespread myth that wiretaps require warrants. Court ordered
>warrants are not required for a wiretap. They have not been required since
>the Digital Telephony Bill passed. 

(see below)

>That the net, the media, and even
>attorneys are so blissfully unaware of this, even years after the provision
>doing away with requiring warrants became law, is one of the finest
>examples of cognitive dissonance you are ever likely to find. It is too
>disturbing to believe it, so the mind ignores the facts.

When everyone in the world seems to disagree with you, isn't it a good
idea to check the facts?

>Excerpt from the Digital Telephony Bill
(deleted)
[..]
>"My supervisor approved it" may well suffice.

Your misunderstanding of how interceptions are done is dangerous to
what is otherwise a rational, intelligent argument.  

Indeed, there are ways to conduct a wiretap without a judge.  They require
dispensations from people like the Attorney General, for example.  And
this is certainly not a normal practice.

There are a lot of reasons to object to DT, but this is not one of them.

-Shabbir J. Safdar * Online Representative * Voters Telecomm. Watch (VTW)
 http://www.vtw.org/ * Defending Your Rights In Cyberspace