From: "Phillip M. Hallam-Baker" <hallam@ai.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 09:00:09 +0800
To: "cypherpunks" <cypherpunks@toad.com>
Subject: Potential terrorists
Message-ID: <199707100037.UAA06462@life.ai.mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




Potential terrorists is I believe a term of art.

It is basically someone who has acquired the means to conduct terrorism, is
believed to have the intent but is not known to have committed an act.

Its basically someone in an advanced stage of a conspiracy. If the FBI had
got wind of McVeigh a week before the bombing and knew he had the truckload
of explosives he would fit this description.


Thing I missed on the Bonn report was any indication about the UK
government's policy. I suspect that this means it is either in accord with
the rest of Europe or more likely as yet undetermined. Statements to the
effect that they are following the Tory/US line seem to fit baddly. If the
UK was acting as appostles for the US they would have stated their
position.

I believe the UK government is an important key. The UK inevitably has more
influence in the US than the rest of Europe since the language and legal
systems are compatible. The reverse is also true and in the past more so
because the Tories were desperate to have US nuclear arms. If the US can't
bend the UK to its side it has lost the argument in Europe.

The Blair administration has a massive legislative program ahead of it
undoing 18 years of Tory mismanagement and corruption. They are very
carefull to avoid any issue which they think may take a lot of
parliamentary time. A small number of Labour backbenchers who support our
cause could therefore prevail.



Phill