June 2001 - cypherpunks-legacy

I WAS SICK OF BEING FAT!!!!!!!
by estoil0c0＠icytundra.com 22 Jun '01

22 Jun '01

1 0

RE: Critiques of Libertarianism
by Faustine 22 Jun '01

22 Jun '01

On Thu, 21 Jun 2001 a3495(a)cotse.com wrote: > "This diversity of libertarian viewpoints can make it quite difficult to > have a coherent discussion with them, because an argument that is valid for > or against one type of libertarianism may not apply to other types." > > ....you mean you actually have to LISTEN to people before you stick them in > a conceptual box and slap your two-bit pre-made labels on them??? Say it > ain't so!!!! Moron. >And you're proud you don't have to listen to folks before you stick 'em in >a box? Er, you might want to have a look at my old posts to get my thoughts on thar sort of thing. >Bullshit, Libertarians choose to call themselves by that label, >it's a self imposed box. Your criticism is without merit. Or perhaps the >ghost of Wittgenstein will walk through you... You probably have a point if you're talking about the "capital L" fanatic types. Nevertheless, I don't think anyone should be so intellectually lazy and mentally impoverished that they need to rely on labels--self-imposed or otherwise--to have a "coherent" conversation. Maybe the people who do deserve to talk at each other. >Further, you misrepresents what he says. Oh? I fully reserve the right to remain unimpresssed. LOL >Check the archives, various >folks have made the distinctions between the various components of CACL >quite clear, it's why I always make it clear what the particular 'common >character' I am refering to when I 'lump 'em into one box'. I'm guessing this has more to do with the caliber and temperament of people who post to message boards than as something representative of any particular body of academic works, such as it is. Face it: if all you knew about any group of ideas was what you could deduce from Usenet posts, it would be a pretty sorry spectacle indeed. What passes for fascinating debate on message boards is more often than not uninformed bush-league armchair philosophizing, it's that simple. In fact, that's part of the problem right there: people are too busy throwing labels around to really get to the meat of the issues. >It is also clear that a global critique of one 'view' isn't necessarily >applicable to the other. But when is a global critique truly useful and relevant at all? The point I'm trying to make is a little clearer if you substitute a more familiar concept: "What is liberalism?" "What has liberalism meant, historically?" "What does it mean to be 'a liberal' in the United Stated today?" See, not so easy, is it. You can start talking about certain aspects of the term and its usage, but it's certainly not the type of thing you can completely cover and come to terms with in a few posts! No need to try to force something rich, complex and evolving into a brittle "all or nothing" proposition. It's as ridiculous to assume that any one person can "speak for" libertarianism as it is to have a "representative of liberalism". The people who try generally aren't with the time it takes to read them. > In other words, there are a variety of issues with a >concomitent multiplicity of views that get pushed into 'libertarian'. Sure-- as is the case with other general terms like "liberalism" and "conservatism". >His point that this makes it hard to understand the fundamental characters to qualify for 'libertarian' is valid. It also happens to be a valid >critique of its practitioners. This might be an issue for partisans and ideologues, otherwise it's 100% irrelevant. As far as I'm concerned, the real enemy is a mindset which allows you to let a label do your thinking for you. > You can take any philosophical position under the sun and always find > idiots and straw men who "support" it to knock around, why should > libertarianism be any different. There's plenty of room for real debate > here, too bad he's not up for it. Oh well! >>Exactly, and if the philosophy can't stand on it's own two feet despite >>this then it deserves the ignomy it will receive. It's not "a philosophy" any more than liberalism is, and you're confusing the supporters with the ideas themselves again. You want to talk Hayek? Let's talk Hayek. You want to debate Stirner? Jim Bell and AP? Go for it. The fact that there isn't much overlap in no way keeps me from having a meaningful and "coherent" conversation about libertarian ideas with people who happen to agree with parts of them. It's when the discussion degenerates into partisans throwing dogma and generalities at each other that it gets really, really tiresome. I'm certainly no purist, but the fact remains that I'm far more likely to pay attention to critiques of the free market by real economists who actually have a clue as to what they're talking about--like Brad Delong at Berkeley(http://www.j-bradford-delong.net). People on all sides can foam at the mouth all they please, but it won't affect policy and scholarship one way or the other. Which in the long run, is all that matters anyway. ~Faustine. BTW, no hard feelings Jim, I think it's great you're bringing this sort of thing up here. Shaking people out of their complacency is always a good thing.

1 0

Louis Cypher <cypherl@hotmail.com>
by Anonymous 22 Jun '01

22 Jun '01

Amusing. The guy caling himself Louis Cypher is apparently connecting to the Internet from within Mitre. X-Originating-IP: [129.83.19.1] Who have you pissed off, Sunder? -MW-

1 0

Audio one-time pad smart-card?
by A. Melon 22 Jun '01

22 Jun '01

Hold the ComDot card, a new product from Tel Aviv-based ComSense Technologies Ltd., up to your computer's microphone and squeeze the slight bump in its center. Otherwise indistinguishable from a garden-variety credit card, it emits a high-pitched series of noises similar to that of a fax machine or dial-up modem. Because it communicates via sound, the ComDot doesn't require a specialized card reader like other "smart" cards -- only a computer with a sound card and a microphone. It is even designed to work over the telephone. [...] The card transmits an encrypted identifying code via high-frequency sound waves -- a long screech, followed by a lower-pitched warble. The computer then verifies the ID with the ComSense servers; the user enters a PIN (personal identification number) for added security, and the log-in is complete. [...] The ComDot itself consists of a three-year battery, computer processor, two speakers and a small amount of memory. It never emits the exact same tone twice, so even if someone trying to gain unauthorized access to patient files were to record the sound and replay it, they would not succeed. [...] Not only could the ComDot sit inside a fraud-proof, ultra-secure credit or ATM card, but the technology could also be used to validate online commerce transactions. Instead of merely requiring consumers to type in their credit card number, they would squeeze their ComDots, and perhaps enter a PIN. [...] http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/ptech/06/22/smart.card.reut/index.html

1 0

Information for NBCi Members about www.nbci.com
by NBCi 22 Jun '01

22 Jun '01

This is an informational mailing regarding NBC Internet, Inc. You have received this e-mail because our records indicate that you are a registered user of www.nbci.com. NBCi is in the process of making certain changes to our portal offering that may affect the way you use the site. We are making these modifications in light of recent changes in the Internet advertising and financial markets. The following questions and answers will provide you with information about the upcoming changes. A. What will happen now? 1. Initially, most of NBCi's current features and services will remain operational with certain exceptions, including the following: - New files will not be able to be uploaded to http://sharehouse.nbci.com; - New pictures will not be able to be uploaded to some NBCi clubs; - The Pogo game section of NBCi has recently been transitioned to http://www.pogo.com/. We anticipate that NBCi members may login to the http://www.pogo.com/ url using an existing account, retaining current ranking and earned points. - On July 6th, Fusion One will discontinue their sync service with the NBCi calendar application. (You will still be able to use Fusion One to synchronize with non-NBCi applications.) 2. The www.nbc.com url will continue to take you directly to programming information about the NBC Television Network. Note: In the coming months, you may see additional changes to the www.nbci.com site. It is our intention to provide you with advance notice of any significant changes to our portal offering. Notice will be sent to the alternate e-mail address currently listed in your NBCi membership information. B. What does this mean to you? 1. Make sure you have a backup of all data stored on www.nbci.com (such as your web site and shared files), as well as on Xoom.com and SNAP.com. Such a backup should be stored on your hard drive, on floppy disks or other web site hosting providers, but not on NBCi. 2. Begin evaluating alternative web site hosting providers. We recommend that you plan to have your site and shared files hosted by a different provider as soon as possible and before July 15th. NBCi has made arrangements with Homestead.com for web page hosting and XDrive.com for file storage to help make the transition a smooth one. - For more information about Homestead.com for your web page hosting needs, visit: http://homesteadannouncements.homestead.com/NBCI.html - For more information about Xdrive.com for your file storage needs, visit: http://plus.xdrive.com/target.html?path=signup.html,aff=nbci061301 3. Copy the contents of your address books (used in Calendar and e-mail applications) onto your hard drive so that you have access to that information when you are not on NBCi. (Again, we expect that your e-mail address will continue to work, but you should make a copy of data such as e-mail addresses and the contents of important e-mails for your records.) 4. Copy the contents of your portfolios, such as the stock names and symbols, purchase dates, amounts, etc., so that you have access to that information when you are not on NBCi. Instructions for copying and printing the contents of your address book and portfolio are published at: http://www.nbci.com/LMOID/resource/0,566,-5687,00.html. C. How can you stay informed? - The contents of this e-mail as well as answers to frequently asked questions will be located at: http://www.nbci.com/LMOID/resource/0,566,-5605,00.html - If you have specific questions about your e-mail account, contact mail.com (a separate company) directly using this form: http://www2.email.com/snap/supportform.jhtml. Note: If you use NBCi through one of our ISP distributors, such as PacBell, Verizon or Prodigy, please contact your ISP directly for additional information. General Disclaimer Please note that pursuant to our terms of service (which can be accessed from www.nbci.com) NBCi has the right to unilaterally stop all service and functionality to our web sites; however, we understand the importance of your information and desire to provide you with sufficient notice to allow you to act accordingly. Nothing contained in this mailing is intended to or shall supercede our terms of service. You can view our full terms of service if you have any questions at: http://www.nbci.com/LMOID/resource/0,566,home-764,00.html?fd.ft.ts.h.s-764. For risks about NBCi's business, see its Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000, as well as its other SEC filings. This email was sent to: cypherpunks(a)toad.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

<no subject>
by Pieter Kramer 22 Jun '01

22 Jun '01

hey heres another completely safe hommade bomb thats a little funner heres what you nead 1. a jar with a screw on lid preferably plastic because it dosn't shatter that can hold about a cup of water 2. a small container that can hold three or four tabelspoons of water a film canaster will do fine 3. baking soda 4. vinager 5. water baloon 6. nail (optional) 7. dish soap or bubble bath whatever you got that makes bubbles heres how you do it 1.fill the film container with baking soda but not all the way 2. film the plastic jar with vinager and about some dish soap but no all the way to the top (about four tabelspoons will do it for dish soap but other stuff may take more or less) 3. take the lid of the plastic container poke a very small hole about the radius of a pencil than put the water baloon in it and glue it in good on both sides I suggest a glue gun or wood glue not whight school glue 4. heres the trickey part put the film container in the jar so that it floats you may have to take some baking soda out 5. screw the lid on tight 6. now you nead to be carefull not to tip or bump it at all when you are ready when you are shake it this makes the vinager and baking soda combine making the baloon expand and popping spraying foam everywhere 7. if the baloon doesn't explode look inside if their is lots of vinager left you nead more baking soda if their is lots of baking soda left you nead more vinager 8. if you still cant get it to xplodde glue a nail so it will poke the baloon when the baloon expands WARNING be carefull not to get the foam in youre eyes its vinager so it will sting

1 0

Thought-A-Day
by Fountain Of Joy 22 Jun '01

22 Jun '01

"Without courage, all other virtues lose their meaning." --Sir Winston Churchill ***************************************************************************** Your name has been recommended to receive thoughts of wisdom from Fountain of Joy.These refreshing thoughts will be delivered,free of cost,to your desktop,everyday,for an initial evaluation period.We believe that the meaningful insights of these carefully selected thoughts will bring peace,success & happyness in your life. If you would like your near and dear ones to receive these thoughts,please send their email addresses to amaha(a)vsnl.net We apologise if this email is received by you in error.If you desire to unsubscribe,reply to this email with 'remove' in the subject line. Thank you. ----Director, Fountain of Joy (Non-religious Organisation)

1 0

None
by sales1 22 Jun '01

22 Jun '01

Estimado Cliente, Mi nombre es David, Yo represento a la compania Compu Expert Distribution, que esta situada en la Ciudad de Indusrty, CA en los Estados Unidos de America. La compania tiene mas de tres anos en el mercado. Tenemos clientes a nivel mundial. Por ejemplo tenemos clientes en Mexico, Chile, Brazil, Venezuela, Argentina, etc. etc. Algunos de nuestros productos incluyen disco compactos grabables de todo tipo, tamano, color y de mejor calidad (grado A) a un precio "increible". Nosotros no solamente ofrecemos la mejor calidad, pero tambien al mejor precio porque tenemos el apoyo total de nuestras fabricas. Le garantizamos que nuestro precio es el mas bajo en el mercado . Nos dedicamos a servir clientes de mundo entero, pero especialmente al continente americano. Nuestras variedades de productos son unicos en California, desde discos compactos regulares para grabar (74min/80min, plata/plata, oro/oro, oro/azul, de colores "rojas, amarilla, naranja, azul, negro, verde", regrabables, de tres pulgadas, estilo de tarjeta de negocio, rectangular, etc) , DVD-R y muchos mas productos disponibles. Nuestra compania ofrece discos compactos de la misma calidad como los producidos por la compania Japonesa Sony. Espero que les pueda ayudar a su negocio, porque comprando de nuestra compania les va a ahorrar mucho dinero y ademas sus clientes van a estar muy contento de la calidad del producto. Llamame hoy, mi numero telefonico es (626) 581-3777. Y mi extension es 107. Si no puedes llamarme, tambien me puedes responder por la email. Ahora tambien tenemos un nuevo producto que se llama "3 in 1 label kit", este es un aparato que es usado para etiquetear 3 tipos de discos( CD-R, 3" y discos de tipo tarjeta de negocio), este producto ya viene con etiquetas incluidas y tambien el software para su uso imediamente. Tambien vendemos las etiquetas por separado en caso de que necesites mas. Somos la unica compania que ofrece este tipo de aplicador y tenemos el derecho reservado en America. Tambien ofrecemos el compact flash memoria que se utilizan para camaras digitales y computadoras portatiles de excellente calidad y a un excellente precio. Si esta interesado, dejeme saber para poder enviarle muestra gratis de nuestros excellentes productos y si tiene alguna pregunta no dudes en llamame or enviarme una email. Nuestra pagina de la web esta lista para su informacion. Que tenga un buen dia y espero escuchar de usted muy pronto. Atado a este email estan los archivos que contienen una lista de precios de nuestros productos. Respetuosamente David Tel(626)581-3777 ext107 Fax(626)581-3778 Mi email es dyao(a)compuexpertusa.com Compu Expert Distribution, Inc. 18539 E. Gale Ave City of Industry, CA 91748 U.S.A David Compu Expert Distribution, Inc. 18539 E. Gale Ave., City of Industry, CA 91748 U.S.A Tel: (626)581-3777 ext 107 Fax:(626)581-3778 email: dyao(a)compuexpertusa.com website: www.compuexpertusa.com

1 0

Matt - FBI Oversight by Bootlicking Senators?
by Jim Bovard 22 Jun '01

22 Jun '01

Matt: Thought you might get a laugh out of this piece on the Senate Judiciary Committee's first FBI oversight hearing. I don't think there is going to be any BS shortage in Washington this summer. take it easy Jim Bovard's Batterings June 22, 2001 American Spectator Online www.spectator.org FBI Oversight by Bootlicking Senators? By James Bovard The Constitution has been saved! The Senate Judiciary Committee last week held the first of a series of oversight hearings on the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Committee chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) set a lofty tone in his opening statement: "Our purpose in holding these hearings is to find ways to restore confidence in the FBI, not to tear it down. There are many irresponsible critics of the FBI who promote their conspiracy theories on Internet Websites and in the popular media." However, anyone who sat through the hearing would have to wonder which is more deluded -- the typical anti-FBI website or the U.S. Senate. The senators supposedly came to discover and proclaim truth. Instead, they did as they usually do -- they groveled at the mere mention of the FBI and competed to heap laurels on the heads of federal agents. The only thing that kept most senators from actually licking boots was FBI Director Louis Freeh's decision to spurn Leahy's invitation to testify at the hearing. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Cal), in her opening statement, proudly announced that "I went through the Ruby Ridge hearings and I went through the Waco hearings," which the Senate Judiciary committee conducted in 1995. Her choice of words is accurate: She had sat there like a potted plant during those hearings -- except when she made inane comments or sought to impede other senators from uncovering federal malfeasance. A big clue that Wednesday's hearing was a farce was the lead-off witness: John "Saint Jack" Danforth, Janet Reno's hand-picked special counsel on Waco. Danforth was his usual pious self, repeatedly assuring senators that the FBI did nothing "dark" at Waco. Danforth's remarks stirred no controversy -- in the committee's view, evidently, there couldn't be anything "dark" about sending in tanks in broad daylight to gas young children. Senators are anguishing over the need to create a new oversight mechanism to make double-sure that all FBI agents obey the law. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) announced a bill to create a "blue ribbon commission to conduct a top-to-bottom review" of the FBI. Their press release noted that the commission would "be made up of top law enforcement experts." Schumer hailed the FBI as "the premier law enforcement agency in the world" and Hatch gushed that the FBI is "one of the finest law enforcement agencies in the world." It is most ironic to have Schumer and Hatch in the forefront of FBI "reform" -- since they were two of the biggest FBI apologists. Hatch worked mightily in 1995 to block Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA)'s valiant efforts to conduct an investigation into federal abuses at Ruby Ridge. Hatch even publicly praised FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi - who killed Vicki Weaver as she stood in her cabin door holding her baby -- as a "great American hero." Schumer was the Clinton administration's point person during the House hearings on Waco in the summer of 1995. Schumer continually derided and sneered at any suggestion that the FBI had done anything less than laudatory during its siege and final assault on the Branch Davidians. Schumer did more than any other congressman to protect the FBI coverup on Waco. (During the hearing Wednesday, Schumer congratulated Danforth for doing a great job with his Waco investigation). In sharp contrast to all the other committee members, Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) has consistently and courageously pursued allegations of FBI abuses. Grassley is one of the few Republicans who does not instinctively cringe and kowtow at any mention of the FBI's name. Nor does he spend half his allotted speaking time at hearings apologizing for raising any doubts about the FBI's infallibility. Grassley derided the notion of appointing an "FBI Review Commission." He noted that the "end result" of commissions to investigate the FBI "has usually been that the FBI ends up with a bigger budget, more jurisdiction, and the Director [of the FBI] walks out with a nice pat on the back." The same could be said of the response by Congress to most of the FBI fiascoes of the last decade. After the FBI sent in the tanks at Waco, Congress provided a hefty budget increase to expand its Hostage Rescue Team. (FBI reforms are percolating elsewhere in Washington. Attorney General John Ashcroft announced Wednesday - a few minutes before the start of the Senate hearing -- his plans to create a Strategic Management Council for the FBI, stocked with plenty of insiders from federal law enforcement. Also on Wednesday, the House Judiciary Committee passed a bill to create an Inspector General for the FBI.) There was scant awareness at the hearing that part of the blame for FBI misconduct rests on the U.S. Senate - especially on the Judiciary Committee -- for its lax oversight. Instead, senators speak as if FBI abuses were something that "just happened" in spite of the explicit wishes of Senate Judiciary Committee members for the FBI to "play fair and square." The Senate has been criminally negligent in overseeing federal law enforcement -- and now we are supposed to be thrilled that some senators are calling for the appointment of another review commission. Charles Carroll of Maryland, one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence, declared that it was the task of elected representatives "to examine severely, and judge impartially the conduct and the measures of those employed in the administration, to represent the grievances, and watch over the liberties and the properties of the people of this nation." Carroll's concept of a representative's duty seems even more archaic than George Washington's wooden teeth. James Madison's scheme for a "balance of power" between the legislative and executive branches did not assume that senators would perennially prostrate themselves before the feet of federal lawmen. The Judiciary Committee is planning to conduct other FBI "oversight" hearings. Perhaps more senators will leave their knee-pads at home for the next round of questioning. Perhaps Grassley's example and record will finally inspire his fellows. Perhaps Leahy will surprise and silence cynics by resolutely pursuing the hard facts underlying the FBI's greatest controversies. Perhaps... James Bovard is the author of "Feeling Your Pain": The Explosion & Abuse of Government Power in the Clinton-Gore Years (St. Martin's Press, 2000). ************************************************************************** Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues Send a blank message to: freematt(a)coil.com with the words subscribe FA on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per week) Matthew Gaylor, (614) 313-5722 ICQ: 106212065 Archived at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fa/ **************************************************************************

1 0

Matt - FBI Oversight by Bootlicking Senators?
by Jim Bovard 22 Jun '01

22 Jun '01

Matt: Thought you might get a laugh out of this piece on the Senate Judiciary Committee's first FBI oversight hearing. I don't think there is going to be any BS shortage in Washington this summer. take it easy Jim Bovard's Batterings June 22, 2001 American Spectator Online www.spectator.org FBI Oversight by Bootlicking Senators? By James Bovard The Constitution has been saved! The Senate Judiciary Committee last week held the first of a series of oversight hearings on the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Committee chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) set a lofty tone in his opening statement: "Our purpose in holding these hearings is to find ways to restore confidence in the FBI, not to tear it down. There are many irresponsible critics of the FBI who promote their conspiracy theories on Internet Websites and in the popular media." However, anyone who sat through the hearing would have to wonder which is more deluded -- the typical anti-FBI website or the U.S. Senate. The senators supposedly came to discover and proclaim truth. Instead, they did as they usually do -- they groveled at the mere mention of the FBI and competed to heap laurels on the heads of federal agents. The only thing that kept most senators from actually licking boots was FBI Director Louis Freeh's decision to spurn Leahy's invitation to testify at the hearing. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Cal), in her opening statement, proudly announced that "I went through the Ruby Ridge hearings and I went through the Waco hearings," which the Senate Judiciary committee conducted in 1995. Her choice of words is accurate: She had sat there like a potted plant during those hearings -- except when she made inane comments or sought to impede other senators from uncovering federal malfeasance. A big clue that Wednesday's hearing was a farce was the lead-off witness: John "Saint Jack" Danforth, Janet Reno's hand-picked special counsel on Waco. Danforth was his usual pious self, repeatedly assuring senators that the FBI did nothing "dark" at Waco. Danforth's remarks stirred no controversy -- in the committee's view, evidently, there couldn't be anything "dark" about sending in tanks in broad daylight to gas young children. Senators are anguishing over the need to create a new oversight mechanism to make double-sure that all FBI agents obey the law. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) announced a bill to create a "blue ribbon commission to conduct a top-to-bottom review" of the FBI. Their press release noted that the commission would "be made up of top law enforcement experts." Schumer hailed the FBI as "the premier law enforcement agency in the world" and Hatch gushed that the FBI is "one of the finest law enforcement agencies in the world." It is most ironic to have Schumer and Hatch in the forefront of FBI "reform" -- since they were two of the biggest FBI apologists. Hatch worked mightily in 1995 to block Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA)'s valiant efforts to conduct an investigation into federal abuses at Ruby Ridge. Hatch even publicly praised FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi - who killed Vicki Weaver as she stood in her cabin door holding her baby -- as a "great American hero." Schumer was the Clinton administration's point person during the House hearings on Waco in the summer of 1995. Schumer continually derided and sneered at any suggestion that the FBI had done anything less than laudatory during its siege and final assault on the Branch Davidians. Schumer did more than any other congressman to protect the FBI coverup on Waco. (During the hearing Wednesday, Schumer congratulated Danforth for doing a great job with his Waco investigation). In sharp contrast to all the other committee members, Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) has consistently and courageously pursued allegations of FBI abuses. Grassley is one of the few Republicans who does not instinctively cringe and kowtow at any mention of the FBI's name. Nor does he spend half his allotted speaking time at hearings apologizing for raising any doubts about the FBI's infallibility. Grassley derided the notion of appointing an "FBI Review Commission." He noted that the "end result" of commissions to investigate the FBI "has usually been that the FBI ends up with a bigger budget, more jurisdiction, and the Director [of the FBI] walks out with a nice pat on the back." The same could be said of the response by Congress to most of the FBI fiascoes of the last decade. After the FBI sent in the tanks at Waco, Congress provided a hefty budget increase to expand its Hostage Rescue Team. (FBI reforms are percolating elsewhere in Washington. Attorney General John Ashcroft announced Wednesday - a few minutes before the start of the Senate hearing -- his plans to create a Strategic Management Council for the FBI, stocked with plenty of insiders from federal law enforcement. Also on Wednesday, the House Judiciary Committee passed a bill to create an Inspector General for the FBI.) There was scant awareness at the hearing that part of the blame for FBI misconduct rests on the U.S. Senate - especially on the Judiciary Committee -- for its lax oversight. Instead, senators speak as if FBI abuses were something that "just happened" in spite of the explicit wishes of Senate Judiciary Committee members for the FBI to "play fair and square." The Senate has been criminally negligent in overseeing federal law enforcement -- and now we are supposed to be thrilled that some senators are calling for the appointment of another review commission. Charles Carroll of Maryland, one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence, declared that it was the task of elected representatives "to examine severely, and judge impartially the conduct and the measures of those employed in the administration, to represent the grievances, and watch over the liberties and the properties of the people of this nation." Carroll's concept of a representative's duty seems even more archaic than George Washington's wooden teeth. James Madison's scheme for a "balance of power" between the legislative and executive branches did not assume that senators would perennially prostrate themselves before the feet of federal lawmen. The Judiciary Committee is planning to conduct other FBI "oversight" hearings. Perhaps more senators will leave their knee-pads at home for the next round of questioning. Perhaps Grassley's example and record will finally inspire his fellows. Perhaps Leahy will surprise and silence cynics by resolutely pursuing the hard facts underlying the FBI's greatest controversies. Perhaps... James Bovard is the author of "Feeling Your Pain": The Explosion & Abuse of Government Power in the Clinton-Gore Years (St. Martin's Press, 2000). ************************************************************************** Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues Send a blank message to: freematt(a)coil.com with the words subscribe FA on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per week) Matthew Gaylor, (614) 313-5722 ICQ: 106212065 Archived at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fa/ **************************************************************************

1 0