From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 14:48:43 -0800 (PST)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Dark Times Ahead
Message-ID: <199702232248.OAA22931@mail.pacifier.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 11:38 PM 2/22/97 -0800, Mike Duvos wrote:
>Timothy C. May writes:
>
>> Oh? And will the First Amendment then be repealed?
>
>> "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of speech or
>> prohibiting the free exercise thereof" seems rather clear: Congress cannot
>> insist that a particular form of speech be used to the exclusion of others.
>
>> A ban on coding messages, speaking in languages unintelligible to
>> wiretappers, etc., would quite clearly be thrown out on First Amendment
>> grounds, from everything I know of the Supreme Court and its reasoning.
>
>The Supremes can bypass the First Ammendment anytime they choose by simply
>mumbling something about "society's overwhelming interest in protecting
>itself." 

I'd sure like to know how they figure out what "society" really wants to do! 
 In April of 1993, which the original Clipper chip/system was proposed, not 
all that many people had even heard of the Internet, and far fewer were 
aware of the details of encryption.  Surely they didn't mean to suggest that 
"society" was in favor of Clipper?  Blissfully ignorant, perhaps, but not in 
favor!  (B^)

Obviously, with their "If you only knew what we know" they'll claim that the 
public would have favored Clipper if it knew the real problems, but the way 
I see it, if they REALLY believed that there was a serious threat to 
anything other than merely their jobs, they would have done a better job 
convincing the public.


Jim Bell
jimbell@pacifier.com