From: "Charles Anthony" <canthony@info-nation.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 11:45:59 -0700 (PDT)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: (Fwd) Re: AP Revisited
Message-ID: <199704071845.NAA16677@bitstream.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


------- Forwarded Message Follows -------

Date:          Mon, 07 Apr 1997 11:48:48 -0400
From:          Hallam-Baker <hallam@ai.mit.edu>
To:            Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>, cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject:       Re: AP Revisited


I think its quite wrong to see Clinton as someone who believes in 
the authoritarian position, the real problem is he cuts his cloth
according to the popular whim.


Think again. Clinton and his administration are rabid when it comes 
to cryopto policy and the expansion of the FBI and others ability to 
pry into the lives of innocent citizens.. The draft of the crypto 
legislation is a good example of how, when given an opportunity to 
act out of the general public's sight and grasp, he's in there 
seeking even more ridiculously easy ways to get into everybodies 
business. I mean the current draft requires only a govt request in 
order to obtain access to your email. NOT a court ordered/appproved 
warrant- They may as well ask to be allowed to open and read 
every letter and pkg at the post office too.(and if this draft 
becomes law they probably will)


All of these 'new' and neccessary' intrusions are Clinton 
proposals, not hold overs from some other admininstration. If he were 
opposed in principle he could certainly 'cut his cloth' along less 
authoratarian lines, following the lead of many of the 
administrations own committee reports that have come out against key 
escrow plans, but he will not budge on the issue. In fact, each time 
it is put back out there it gets worse.

Clinton's  ability to coopt left energy and appear to be less than he 
is is- earning appologistic comments like the one above- is  what is 
really frightening. When it comes to US citizens civil liberties, 
Clinton is more dangerous than Reagan and Bush put together and I 
wouldn't call either of them friends of the people.



Since it has been thrown around so much, remember that Hitler was a 
most powerful speaker, who  connected well with the masses, 
couching nazi policy in the terms that gave the people what they 
wanted to hear. They too thought he was a most sincere and earnest 
fellow, with only the good of the country at heart.


A 'Nixon' would never get away with this sort of proposal- but a 
telegenic, non-enhaling, sax playing, mcdonalds eating, aw shucks, 
(they lay it on thick you think?) well meaning bubba? 


--C


**********************************************************************
Charles Anthony
canthony@info-nation.com
http://www.info-nation.com

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6.3a

mQBtAzM63W8AAAEDAMRi15+AIXC0j2R7IrdeNhM7AQXPGAYAd2mCNhKrQa09fICZ
4jEpTd0biV+3nMAL6/6pWUm1AmFPS/FngecmXkrmMPlbgv3O0dapbJ2/FQf3XUtH
Z5AEOdKL9xK5Ml7dCQAFE7QIY2FudGhvbnmJAHUDBRAzOt1wi/cSuTJe3QkBAemw
AwC1DGxodXVPkA1D6uLdqFvP5H3/98i/gM2x9IvvfZscWszwrJuOhkYyd71TF7K5
gy55OqPp+Rf77On0XhmHoi98Y4HOSTHYPhN9o9zQQ+pn/4HmxQ4Tbtih2sCDNvmG
b2g=
=0pHR
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----