August 2002 - cypherpunks-legacy

get me the fuck out of oz
by Wilfred L. Guerin 20 Aug '02

20 Aug '02

death to narnians death to lookies death to lambs and sheep death to nosepickers death to all others undesirable... possibly even death to praetorians. ... get me the fuck out of oz, and away from this god forsaken continent. advise ultra-heavy response. I hear the ukraine has nice dark portallous places and devices? Only a suggestion. Any options other than south are viable. toodlez. -Wilfred Lee Guerin Wilfred(a)Cryogen.com

3 2

Keychain drive fits in small bucket of sulphuric acid.
by Matthew X 20 Aug '02

20 Aug '02

http://www.nando.net/technology/story/503322p-4012672c.html (August 19, 2002 8:34 a.m. EDT) - It's time to bag the floppy disk drive. The drives, whether the 5.25-inch from the early days of personal computing or the almost-universal 3.5-inch plastic squares of today, are no longer necessary. A new widget called a Cruzer has convinced me that floppies are now as quaint as shirt armbands and sock garters. Regular readers will know that this is a bit like the Supreme Court declaring Casual Mondays and putting aside those stuffy black robes for sandals and shorts. Every system recommended here has included at least one floppy drive, and Apple was soundly thrashed for not including one on the iMac. No more. Here's what brought about the sea change: Cruzer is a grey-and-black flash memory widget with a USB port. It measures 1.73 by 2.68 inches and is 0.67 inches thick. It weighs about as much as a small tube of lip gel. But it will hold 32, 64, 128 or 256 megabytes of data and work effortlessly and seamlessly on both Windows and Mac platforms. It's a new product from SanDisk Corporation of Sunnyvale, Calif. When connected to the USB (Universal Serial Bus) port of a running system, the Cruzer becomes just another disk drive and you can write to it, read from it, erase, copy - all the things you can do with a standard hard drive. But because it is flash memory - no moving parts - moving files to or from the Cruzer is very, very fast, much faster than a CD-ROM read-write drive. And any electricity it needs comes from the USB connection. To put all that in perspective, the hard disk drives that stored stock information for The Associated Press 25 years ago stored 10 megabytes. They were the size of washing machines, took two strong men to lift, and had to be kept in an air-conditioned power-condition environment. The 64-megabyte Cruzor review unit, with the data capacity of six of those monsters, comfortably shared a shirt pocket with a cell phone for the trip from the office computer to the home computer for data transfer tests. And it cared not a whit that the temperature on the train platform in Penn Station was around 115 F. The cost of the Cruzer is also comparatively tiny - $49.99 for the 32-megabyte version, $74.99 for the 64 megabyte and, by the time you're up to 256 megabytes, $199.99. Because it behaves just like a hard drive, Cruzer doesn't care what size your files are, up to capacity. And the storage cards can be removed and upgraded. The product comes with a two-inch USB extension cable, but you don't have to use it. And it comes with some encryption software that you don't have to use either. It also doesn't require drivers. For Windows machines, the requirements are a Pentium PC with USB support and Windows 98, 98SE, 2000, ME or XP. The Mac needs USB support and either Mac OS 9.1.whatever or OSX v10.1.2+. (Now that Apple gets a pass on its no-floppy products, the new gripe will be about the way it labels its operating system versions. Do we really need three decimal places?) SanDisk products are available at retail. And you can find them at the sandisk.com Web site. Note that the prices quoted on the Web site are higher for the first two levels of storage than the prices now being quoted by company reps. The Cruzer is being promoted as a "keychain" drive and comes with a little fuzzy carrier that has a keyhook, but that's probably not the best way to use it.

1 0

Catherine Trammel Bill, Sacramento.
by Matthew X 20 Aug '02

20 Aug '02

California Assembly committee passes new 'Son of Sam' bill By The Associated Press 08.19.02 Printer-friendly page SACRAMENTO An Assembly committee unanimously passed a bill late last week that would allow victims to sue criminals for monetary damages long after the crime. The state Supreme Court struck down the original version of the "Son of Sam" law in February, declaring it a violation of free-speech rights. That law, enacted in 1983, banned felons from profiting from their criminal actions with books or movies, diverting their profits to the victims instead. SB1887, which passed the Assembly Judiciary committee on Aug. 16, attempts to circumvent the court's ruling by simply extending the statute of limitations for victims' lawsuits from one year after the crime to 10 years after the felon is freed from prison and completes parole. That would allow time for victims to sue for any money made by the felon as a result of the crime. The "Son of Sam" bill, authored by Sen. Bruce McPherson, D-Santa Cruz, is named after the first such law passed in New York, inspired by "Son of Sam" serial killer David Berkowitz, who was offered a substantial sum for his story. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down that law in 1991. The Senate unanimously passed the bill in June. It will move next to the Assembly floor. Related California 'Son of Sam' law struck down State high court says statute barring felons from profiting from their crime stories could threaten many published works. 02.22.02 Yates story could test state's ban on profiting from crime Analysis Texas' 'Son of Sam' law would likely face constitutional challenge if anyone were to try to buy rights to Houston mother's story. 06.06.02 Massachusetts high court knocks down 'Son of Sam' bill Asked by lawmakers to issue advisory opinion, justices say legislation is too broad, targets a certain kind of content. 03.18.02 http://www.freedomforum.org/templates/document.asp?documentID=16770

1 0

Aldrich a valuable employee.
by Matthew X 20 Aug '02

20 Aug '02

http://rf-web.tamu.edu/files/SECGUIDE/Spystory/Ames.htm#Aldrich Ames References 1. This account is based entirely on unclassified sources, principally the Unclassified Abstract of the CIA Inspector General's Report on the Aldrich H. Ames Case and the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence report, dated November 1, 1994, An Assessment of the Aldrich H. Ames Espionage Case and Its Implications for U.S. Intelligence. The CIA Inspector General's report is available on the Internet at http://nsi.org/Library/Espionage/Hitzreport.html.

1 0

US "ThinkTanks."Arab news.
by Matthew X 20 Aug '02

20 Aug '02

US thinktanks give lessons in foreign policy By Brian Whitaker A little-known fact about Richard Perle, the leading advocate of hardline policies at the Pentagon, is that he once wrote a political thriller. The book, appropriately called Hard Line, is set in the days of the cold war with the Soviet Union. Its hero is a male senior official at the Pentagon, working late into the night and battling almost single-handedly to rescue the US from liberal wimps at the state department who want to sign away America's nuclear deterrent in a disarmament deal with the Russians. Ten years on Mr Perle finds himself cast in the real-life role of his fictional hero - except that the Russians are no longer a threat, so he has to make do with the Iraqis, the Saudis and terrorism in general. In real life too, Mr Perle is not fighting his battle single-handed. Around him there is a cosy and cleverly-constructed network of Middle East "experts" who share his neo-conservative outlook and who pop up as talking heads on US television, in newspapers, books, testimonies to congressional committees, and at lunchtime gatherings in Washington. The network centres on research institutes - thinktanks that attempt to influence government policy and are funded by tax-deductible gifts from unidentified donors. When he is not too busy at the Pentagon, or too busy running Hollinger Digital - part of the group that publishes the Daily Telegraph in Britain - or at board meetings of the Jerusalem Post, Mr Perle is "resident fellow" at one of the thinktanks - the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). Mr Perle's close friend and political ally at AEI is David Wurmser, head of its Middle East studies department. Mr Perle helpfully wrote the introduction to Mr Wurmser's book, Tyranny's Ally: America's Failure to Defeat Saddam Hussein. Mr Wurmser's wife, Meyrav, is co-founder, along with Colonel Yigal Carmon, formerly of Israeli military intelligence - of the Middle East Media Research Institute (Memri), which specialises in translating and distributing articles that show Arabs in a bad light. She also holds strong views on leftwing Israeli intellectuals, whom she regards as a threat to Israel (see "Selective Memri", Guardian Unlimited, August 12, 2002). Ms Wurmser currently runs the Middle East section at another thinktank - the Hudson Institute, where Mr Perle recently joined the board of trustees. In addition, Ms Wurmser belongs to an organisation called the Middle East Forum. Michael Rubin, a specialist on Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan, who recently arrived from yet another thinktank, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, assists Mr Perle and Mr Wurmser at AEI. Mr Rubin also belongs to the Middle East Forum. Another Middle East scholar at AEI is Laurie Mylroie, author of Saddam Hussein's Unfinished War Against America, which expounds a rather daft theory that Iraq was behind the 1993 World Trade Centre bombing. When the book was published by the AEI, Mr Perle hailed it as "splendid and wholly convincing". An earlier book on Iraq Saddam Hussein and the Crisis in the Gulf which Ms Mylroie co-authored with Judith Miller, a New York Times journalist, became the New York Times's No 1 bestseller. Ms Mylroie and Ms Miller both have connections with the Middle East Forum. Mr Perle, Mr Rubin, Ms Wurmser, Ms Mylroie and Ms Miller are all clients of Eleana Benador, a Peruvian-born linguist who acts as a sort of theatrical agent for experts on the Middle East and terrorism, organising their TV appearances and speaking engagements. Of the 28 clients on Ms Benador's books, at least nine are connected with the AEI, the Washington Institute and the Middle East Forum. Although these three privately-funded organisations promote views from only one end of the political spectrum, the amount of exposure that they get with their books, articles and TV appearances is extraordinary. The Washington Institute, for example, takes the credit for placing up to 90 articles written by its members - mainly "op-ed" pieces - in newspapers during the last year. Fourteen of those appeared in the Los Angeles Times, nine in New Republic, eight in the Wall Street Journal, eight in the Jerusalem Post, seven in the National Review Online, six in the Daily Telegraph, six in the Washington Post, four in the New York Times and four in the Baltimore Sun. Of the total, 50 were written by Michael Rubin. Anyone who has tried offering op-ed articles to a major newspaper will appreciate the scale of this achievement. The media attention bestowed on these thinktanks is not for want of other experts in the field. American universities have about 1,400 full-time faculty members specialising in the Middle East. Of those, an estimated 400-500 are experts on some aspect of contemporary politics in the region, but their views are rarely sought or heard, either by the media or government. "I see a parade of people from these institutes coming through as talking heads [on cable TV]. I very seldom see a professor from a university on those shows," says Juan Cole, professor of history at Michigan University, who is a critic of the private institutes. "Academics [at universities] are involved in analysing what's going on but they're not advocates, so they don't have the same impetus," he said. "The expertise on the Middle East that exists in the universities is not being utilised, even for basic information." Of course, very few academics have agents like Eleana Benador to promote their work and very few are based in Washington - which can make arranging TV appearances , or rubbing shoulders with state department officials a bit difficult. Those who work for US thinktanks are often given university-style titles such as "senior fellow", or "adjunct scholar", but their research is very different from that of universities - it is entirely directed towards shaping government policy. What nobody outside the thinktanks knows, however, is who pays for this policy-shaping research. Under US law, large donations given to non-profit, "non-partisan" organisations such as thinktanks must be itemised in their annual "form 990" returns to the tax authorities. But the identity of donors does not need to be made public. The AEI, which deals with many other issues besides the Middle East, had assets of $35.8m (£23.2m) and an income of $24.5m in 2000, according to its most recent tax return. It received seven donations of $1m or above in cash or shares, the highest being $3.35m. The Washington Institute, which deals only with Middle East policy, had assets of $11.2m and an income of $4.1m in 2000. The institute says its donors are identifiable because they are also its trustees, but the list of trustees contains 239 names which makes it impossible to distinguish large benefactors from small ones. The smaller Middle East Forum had an income of less than $1.5m in 2000, with the largest single donation amounting to $355,000. In terms of their ability to influence policy, thinktanks have several advantages over universities. To begin with they can hire staff without committee procedures, which allows them to build up teams of researchers that share a similar political orientation. They can also publish books themselves without going through the academic refereeing processes required by university publishers. And they usually site themselves in Washington, close to government and the media. Apart from influencing policy on the Middle East, the Washington Institute and the Middle East Forum recently launched a campaign to discredit university departments that specialise in the region. After September 11, when various government agencies realised there was a shortage of Americans who could speak Arabic, there were moves to beef up the relevant university departments. But Martin Kramer, of the Washington Institute, Middle East Forum and former director of the Moshe Dayan Centre at Tel Aviv university, had other ideas. He produced a vitriolic book Ivory Towers on Sand, which criticised Middle East departments of universities in the US. His book was published by the Washington Institute and warmly reviewed in the Weekly Standard, whose editor, William Kristol, was a member of the Middle East Forum along with Mr Kramer. "Kramer has performed a crucial service by exposing intellectual rot in a scholarly field of capital importance to national wellbeing," the review said. The Washington Institute is considered the most influential of the Middle East thinktanks, and the one that the state department takes most seriously. Its director is the former US diplomat, Dennis Ross. Besides publishing books and placing newspaper articles, the institute has a number of other activities that for legal purposes do not constitute lobbying, since this would change its tax status. It holds lunches and seminars, typically about three times a week, where ideas are exchanged and political networking takes place. It has also given testimony to congressional committees nine times in the last five years. Every four years, it convenes a "bipartisan blue-ribbon commission" known as the Presidential study group, which presents a blueprint for Middle East policy to the newly-elected president. The institute makes no secret of its extensive links with Israel, which currently include the presence of two scholars from the Israeli armed forces. Israel is an ally and the connection is so well known that officials and politicians take it into account when dealing with the institute. But it would surely be a different matter if the ally concerned were a country such as Egypt, Pakistan or Saudi Arabia. Apart from occasional lapses, such as the publication of Mr Kramer's book, the Washington Institute typically represents the considered, sober voice of American-Israeli conservatism. The Middle East Forum is its strident voice - two different tones, but mostly the same people. Three prominent figures from the Washington Institute - Robert Satloff (director of policy), Patrick Clawson (director of research) and Mr Rubin (prolific writer, currently at AEI) - also belong to the forum. Daniel Pipes, the bearded $100,000-a-year head of the forum is listed as an "associate" at the institute, while Mr Kramer, editor of the forum's journal, is a "visiting fellow". Mr Pipes became the bete noire of US Muslim organisations after writing an article for the National Review in 1990 that referred to "massive immigration of brown-skinned peoples cooking strange foods and not exactly maintaining Germanic standards of hygiene". Since he usually complains vigorously when the words are quoted outside their original context, readers are invited to view the full article at www.danielpipes.org. He is also noted for his combative performances on the Fox News channel, where he has an interesting business relationship. Search for his name on the Fox News website and, along with transcripts of his TV interviews, an advert appears saying "Daniel Pipes is available thru Barber & Associates, America's leading resource for business, international and technology speakers since 1977". The Middle East Forum issues two regular publications, the Middle East Quarterly and the Middle East Intelligence Bulletin, the latter published jointly with the United States Committee for a Free Lebanon. The Middle East Quarterly describes itself as "a bold, insightful, and controversial publication". Among the insights in its latest issue is an article on weapons of mass destruction that says Syria "has more destructive capabilities" than Iraq, or Iran. The Middle East Intelligence Bulletin, which is sent out by email free of charge - but can never-the-less afford to pay its contributors - specialises in covering the seamy side of Lebanese and Syrian politics. The ever-active Mr Rubin is on its editorial board. The Middle East Forum also targets universities through its campus speakers Bureau - that in adopting the line of Mr Kramer's book, seeks to correct "inaccurate Middle Eastern curricula in American education", by addressing "biases" and "basic errors" and providing "better information" than students can get from the many "irresponsible" professors that it believes lurk in US universities. At a time when much of the world is confused by what it sees as an increasingly bizarre set of policies on the Middle East coming from Washington, to understand the neat little network outlined above may make such policies a little more explicable. Of course these people and organisations are not the only ones trying to influence US policy on the Middle East. There are others who try to influence it too - in different directions. However, this particular network is operating in a political climate that is currently especially receptive to its ideas. It is also well funded by its anonymous benefactors and is well organised. Ideas sown by one element are watered and nurtured by the others. Whatever outsiders may think about this, worldly-wise Americans see no cause for disquiet. It's just a coterie of like-minded chums going about their normal business, and an everyday story of political life in Washington. http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=17941

1 0

Thank you,thank you,it was nothing.
by Matthew X 20 Aug '02

20 Aug '02

MPs see video of rat's stem-cell cure By Mark Metherell August 20 2002 The laptop video Stephen Alderton took to Parliament yesterday showed a white rat freed from paralysis by embryonic stem-cell treatment. It is first seen crawling, dragging its crippled rear legs. Then, between 12 and 24 weeks after embryonic stem cell therapy started, the rat begins walking, its back legs limping, but operating. Mr Alderton and his wife, Alison, displayed the video in Canberra in the hope it might lead to similar treatment for their son Luke, aged 2. Luke was paralysed from the neck down two years ago by a rare spinal disease called transverse myelitis. The Nowra couple yesterday appeared with the Premier, Bob Carr, the Federal Opposition Leader, Simon Crean, and a group of scientists and patients who came to persuade wavering MPs to vote for the embryonic stem-cell provisions. Debate on the controversial legislation, the Research Involving Embryos and Prohibition of Human Cloning Bill, is expected to start tonight. On the other side of the debate yesterday were two scientists who have come from the United States to campaign against embryo research. One is William Hurlbut, a consulting professor at Stanford University and a member of President George Bush's council on bioethics. The other, David Prentice, a professor of life sciences at Indiana State University, said evidence backing embryonic stem-cell research was overshadowed by results from less contentious adult stem-cell work. Professor Prentice says beyond the "profound" ethical problems with embryo research, the evidence in favour of alternatives such as adult cells was "compelling". He argues that while embryonic stem-cell research had the "nasty habit of forming tumours", adult cells had been shown to be effective in treating various "animal models of human disease". These, he said, included diabetes, stroke, Parkinson's disease, spinal cord injury, heart disease and retinal degeneration. Australia's leading embryonic stem cell scientist, Alan Trounson, rejects Professor Prentice's claims, arguing the reports of tumours came from isolated and questionable results. Research results from adult stem cells so far had been mixed or not very encouraging, Professor Trounson said The video came from scientists at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, who told the Aldertons there may be hope for Luke within five years from the research. "I'm the first to say its not perfect [research]," said Mr Alderton. "It's a rat and it's not walking perfectly. But it's research you have to have." http://smh.com.au/articles/2002/08/19/1029114078190.html

1 0

Proffr approves the Stuckist internet.
by Matthew X 20 Aug '02

20 Aug '02

Its just routing around more damage isn't it? The Stuckist Net - what is your post-Palladium future? By Andrew Orlowski in London Posted: 19/08/2002 at 18:34 GMT "Your paintings are stuck, you are stuck! Stuck! Stuck! Stuck!" - Tracey Emin [to Billy Childish]. The copyright holders who dominate the entertainment oligopolies in the United States could risk ceding the nation's technological lead, once and forever. How so? Well, we now see that the Pigopolists intend to restrict the open protocols of the Internet. If there was any doubt, it should finally have been dispelled on Friday, as Thomas C Greene reported in Media giants demand ISPs block Web sites. We heard it coming two years ago when a Sony executive let on rather more than he should have, promising to block the packets:- "We will develop technology that transcends the individual user. We will firewall Napster at source - we will block it at your cable company, we will block it at your phone company, we will block it at your [ISP]. We will firewall it at your PC," he said. Three months later we exposed the first attempt to copy control OpenPC hardware - CPRM - plans which now seem quite tender now, following the proposed Hollings Act and Microsoft's Palladium. Sony's plans are succeeding splendidly. Explaining his position on a European TCPA last week, Bill Thompson said he'd arrived at the conclusion that a Fritz-chipped, lock-down Palladium was inevitable, as it had Microsoft and Intel on board as willing executioners. I think he's being optimistic. I can envisage multiple TCPAs: the Disney/Wintel version being the first. Quite certainly, a Chinese TCPA will follow, when they discover how useful it is to monitor individual computer users so precisely. TCPAs might not fall across continental boundaries, either. So although Bill's argument was couched as a breakaway, it's really the US computer industry that's making the first break. His is the first European reaction. The computer industry, in an alliance with the entertainment pigopolists is simply filling a vacuum that's been left by people unwilling to engage on a political level. They'd rather be coding, or warchalking, or, heck, doing anything except face the imminent lock-down. (How many articles about warchalking have you read in the last month, compared to articles supporting the real legislation on offer to limit Pigopolist power? Priorities, please ladies and gentlemen.) Now, I actually side with the constitutionalists here - today's DMCA and the courts may one day strike down potential Fritz bills. But by the time that happens, the freedom of changing your graphics card or upgrading your CPU will be a distant memory. The US PC industry is attempting to lock down the PC that's been an open platform ever since Compaq reverse engineered the IBM PC BIOS, and the fledgling cloners turned their noses at Big Blue's MCA bus. And the Internet protocols have, we've always been open since the mid-1970s. Many people at Intel don't like it - Andy Grove has spoken out against it quite eloquently - but if it means losing Intel's dominant position in the United States, or the huge Chinese market of the future, then Intel will Fritz it's chips for anyone who asks. But with the Internet's key routers, and top level domain name registry files physically hosted in the United States, with phasers set to stun, what are the rest of us - stuck with our antiquated regard for open protocols, open source, open PC hardware - to do? How the Stuckist Internet? We'll call ourselves Stuckists. We like open hardware, and we like routers that don't care about the packets that run through them. We'd like to be stuck there. Where will we be in a world of Multiple TCPAs? Well, the first obstacle will be hardware. There's a ready alternative in Linux, which would thrive in such conditions, but Stuckists will need processors. They could clone x86, or license a non-Intel instruction set such as ARM cheaply, or SPARC for no cost at all. That's the easy part. Manufacturing requires huge capital investment And who delivers the bandwidth? Well, if your needs are local, use your Stuckist PC primarily for communication and not for Hollywood-generated content, it's not going to be a problem. While replacing the TLDs with alternative root systems simply requires political consensus Dragging domain names into the issue might seem odd - but it's an instrument of control. Now this might look like a formidable set of obstacles, until your consider two countries that would welcome this as an opportunity: the world's biggest democracy, and the world's most populous country. Both have far more to gain from fuelling a Stuckist Internet than they might by following the Disney/Palladium path. Lamenting the lack of innovation in US manufacturing (it's a Western issue) John C Dvorak wrote: "Over the years we've always been told that the American edge was our inventiveness. But we can't be inventive if there is no necessity. And there is no necessity when there's no competition and everyone is feeding from the same Chinese manufacturing trough." But it's much worse that that. China has the oldest engineering tradition in the world, but most importantly, ensures that many of the manufacturing deals it has struck with Western technology companies have specified intellectual property transfers. It's rather keen on Linux. India also produces excellent engineers, has many English speakers, and is rather keen on Linux too. Both would see this as an opportunity to lead, rather than follow. China's ambitions are the same as Korea and Japan's twenty years ago: they have no intention to serve a low-tech sweatshop for the west. Is this where the post-Palladium technology industry will be centred? I trust Andy Grove will be lobbying hard with this scenario, to ensure that America's technology lead - which it takes for granted today - doesn't go the way of its automobile industry. Finally, remember that the thirst for communication technologies to be open is very strong indeed. But it doesn't always turn out like that. Radio was for several years a two-way communications system, then it became a broadcasting medium, and now ClearChannels own two thirds of all radio stations in the USA. There's a radio ham underground, of course. But are software libre developers, cypherpunks and the rest of us Stuckists destined for the same fate? Hoping and wishing, Candide-like for the best, that TCPA will just go away, isn't really an option. Tell me what you think of the Stuckist Internet. ® http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/26740.html I'll get my CS latitude 400 back soon and put in SUSE.

1 0

SOCAL Repression news.
by Matthew X 20 Aug '02

20 Aug '02

CALL FOR AN INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT CAMPAIGN FOR THE LONG BEACH/SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ANARCHIST MOVEMENT By Lorenzo Komboa Ervin Recently I visited Los Angeles for a speaking tour, and learned of the harassment and frame-ups of Anarchists in Long Beach/Los Angeles county, California. It seems that repressive police And FBI terrorism is being used to crush the Anarchist movement there. During May Day protests against capitalism held in Long Beach, police without provocation attacked a street demonstration with brutal violence, arresting about 100 persons, and physically injuring several others. People were shot with rubber bullets, beaten with baton, and sprayed with chemical Mace. One of those arrested, Robert Middaugh, was later railroaded to prison with a three year sentence for "assaulting" the one of police officers attacking the protesters. He is now in prison as an Anarchist political prisoner of the government at a California penitentiary. Police justified the police riot by claiming protesters threw rocks, bottles, and other projectiles, and even feces at them, which has been proven to be a total lie. These attacks were unprovoked, and just designed to break up the demonstration and stifle the organizing of the Anarchist movement. They were political repression. Since those protests last year, several other Anarchists have been arrested on bogus charges, and others have received numerous threats and harassment from the police, including constant visits to the Anarchist infoshop. A goon squad of cops have followed them at demonstrations, and tried to goad them to violence. Yet, through it all they have continued to protest pig/stage repression. And they are now being supported by the Black community, especially folks who have witnessed or been the victims of police brutality. The Black community in not only Long Beach, but throughout L.A. county, has been subjected to police racist violence and police racial profiling. Add to this the continuing FBI spying and the January arrest of Sherman A., founder of the radical website, RaisetheFist.com, then one can clearly see that the American government's police forces have singled out the Long Beach area as a test for how to crush the Anarchist movement in this period. As has happened in the past, whenever Anarchism became a dangerous and potent political force, the government then engages in a policy of systematic political repression. This is similar to the FBI's COINTELPRO campaign against the 1960's Black Panther Party and New Left. They framed activists, set groups against each other to prevent joint support, and used massive violence to put down protests. We must support these Anarchists, or they will be coming after us next. Today it's Long Beach and L.A., tomorrow it will be those of us in New York, Chicago, Boston, Atlanta, Detroit, or wherever Anarchists are organized. The new "anti-terrorist" laws give the government a strong hand to put down political dissent, but solidarity is our major weapon. We must support each other, and not allow government lies and misinformation lead us to inaction. I am calling on the international Anarchist Black Cross movement, and Anarchists all over the world to support the Long Beach Anarchists, Sherman A., Robert Middaugh, and others caught up in the government's dragnet. We cannot let this repression go unchecked, and injury to one is an injury to all. WHAT CAN YOU DO? 1. Send donation for legal defense of these Anarchists to: Long Beach Infoshop, 684 Redondo Avenue, Long Beach, CA. 90814-1453. 2. Send letters of complaint to Long Beach city and L.A. County officials demanding that they drop these prosecutions and end the harassment of Anarchists: Mayor Beverly O'Neil, 333 West Ocean Beach Blvd., Long Beach, CA. 90802 e-mail: Mayor(a)ci.long-beach.ca.us ; Tom Reaves, City Prosecutor also needs to hear from you: prosecutor(a)ci.long-beach.ca for bring the misdemeanor charges, as does Steve Cooley, L.A. County District Attorney, who is bring the felony charges, lada(a)co.la.ca.us 3. Send letters of support for the victims of these frame-ups or this repression to: Los Angeles Anarchist Black Cross, P.O. Box 3671, Anaheim, CA. 98203-3671 email: LA_blackcross(a)hotmail.com or Blackcross(a)disinfo.net 4. Spread the word on the case of the Long Beach Anarchists, and when the time comes for a mass solidarity protest (Day of Action) and a tribunal on police crimes, be ready to come there. (dates to be announced) For more information on the Long Beach struggle, or to see pic(s) of the May 2001 police riot, plese go to: http://www.infoshop.com , http://www.StopLBRepression.org , http://www.raisethefist.com/index1.html

1 0

Aldrich Ames smokescreen.The US was served.
by Matthew X 20 Aug '02

20 Aug '02

Cremated.RIP. Death of 'spy who got away' ends Cold War chapter BY MARGARET COKER Cox News Service ZHUKOVKA, Russia - The two-story brick house complete with garage and painted wooden fence has all the trappings of a typical American suburban home. But the occupant for the last 15 years was not a typical American. Edward Howard, 50, the only CIA official to defect to the Soviet Union, lived in this small community about 10 miles north of Moscow. When his body was found early July 12 laying face up in the garden outside the house, an embarrassing chapter of U.S. Cold War espionage came to a close. Yet the life he built in Moscow, which included a cozy relationship with his family and freedom to travel, raises questions about why U.S. law enforcement agencies couldn't bring one of their most wanted fugitives to justice after he defected in 1985. Described as a drunken fool by former colleagues and a traitor by U.S. intelligence officials, the New Mexico native always maintained his innocence, saying in a 1995 memoir: ``I never gave information that could hurt America or Americans.'' Neither the CIA nor the FBI would comment on Howard's case. According to Russian sources, however, the ''spy who got away'' traveled repeatedly to the United States after his defection without being detected by the CIA or FBI. 'SMUGGLED' TO U.S. Victor Andrianov, who retired in 1992 as the deputy head of foreign intelligence, recalled in an interview last week how the KGB ''smuggled'' Howard back to the United States, via Canada, in the late 1980s. ''He wanted to see with his own eyes that his wife and kid were alright,'' Andrianov said. ``It was extremely risky . . . but we owed it to him.'' Indeed, former KGB officials who knew Howard say he traveled widely during his last 17 years. Trips to Nicaragua, Hungary and Switzerland provided U.S. officials ample opportunity to ask for his arrest and extradition. But apparently this was never done, even though the information Howard allegedly sold the Kremlin reportedly resulted in the execution of a Soviet citizen working for the CIA and the dismantling of the U.S. spy network in the Soviet Union. The history of Howard's case reads like a John le Carre thriller. Hired by the CIA in 1980, Howard was training for a posting in Moscow when he was fired in 1983 for lying about drinking, drug use and theft. Soon afterward, Howard got a new job with the New Mexico Legislature, but ran into trouble with the law. Although under probation for a misdemeanor conviction and prohibited from leaving the state, Howard left New Mexico three times: once to attend a conference in Washington, then to visit Italy and Austria with his wife Mary and then one quick trip alone to Vienna. It was the 1984 trip to Austria that piqued the FBI's curiosity -- they allege this is the time when Howard sold secrets to the KGB for $6,000. ELUDES TAIL On Sept. 20, 1985, FBI agents interviewed Howard and put him under surveillance. With his wife's help, he eluded the tail and fled the country on Sept. 21 on a flight bound for Helsinki. From Finland, Howard was smuggled into the Soviet Union with KGB help, according to Howard's former handler, Vladimir Kryuchkov, and given political asylum in Moscow on Aug. 7, 1986. Howard admitted in his 1995 memoirs Safe House that he identified for the KGB photographs of people he had worked with and described general CIA procedures for recruiting agents. But this was the extent of his interaction with the Soviets, he said. Russian versions of Howard's importance vary wildly. The Federal Security Bureau, the successor organization to the KGB, refused to comment on the allegation that Howard's information resulted in the death of Adolf Tolkachev, a Soviet scientist researching stealth aircraft technology in the 1980s. Andrianov said Howard was crucial in unmasking CIA moles, including Tolkachev. ''Howard helped clarify the then-CIA list of residents in Moscow, the covers the U.S. spies used. He told us that the CIA was widely using Hollywood-style masks to leave the embassy building unidentified when going on operative assignments,'' Andrianov told the Moscow daily Komsomolskaya Pravda. ``Edward revealed to us the features of a valuable U.S. agent. We identified the agent as Soviet scientist Adolf Tolkachev.'' AMES TRUE SOURCE Yet other former KGB contacts, who insisted on anonymity, say Howard's colleague convicted spy Aldrich Ames was a far more important source. They said the CIA mistakenly blamed Howard for information sold by Ames. The KGB exploited this confusion, they said, using Howard as a smoke screen to hide Ames, who when he was finally caught 10 years after Howard's defection, was considered the most dangerous traitor in modern U.S. history. Howard's wife, a former CIA secretary, was never prosecuted for helping her husband flee the United States. She and Howard's son, Lee, traveled at least once a year to Russia to visit Howard. The family also reunited on Howard's trips abroad, according to Russian intelligence agents responsible for guarding Howard. COLLECT REMAINS Mary and Lee came to Moscow to collect Howard's remains after a cremation ceremony in July attended by former KGB pals. For those who attempted to apprehend Howard, the news of his death ended an unsuccessful and complex chase. John Hudenko spent half of his 31-year career with the FBI in New Mexico on Howard's trail. He traded faxes with Howard, tracked his movements and even met him in Sweden, where Howard lived for a year after his KGB protector, Kryuchkov, was jailed in 1991 following a failed coup aimed at overthrowing Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev. Yet Hudenko said he was never able to catch Howard in a misstep that could lead to him being brought to prosecution in U.S. courts. In a July interview with the Associated Press, during which he was told of Howard's death, Hudenko expressed no disappointment. ''Justice was served,'' Hudenko said. http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/world/3885352.htm

1 0

Great Satan tortures aussi's.
by Matthew X 20 Aug '02

20 Aug '02

Lawyers demand fair go for al-Qaeda pair By Cynthia Banham August 20 2002 The Australian Bar Association has accused the Federal Government of failing the two Australians held captive by the American military in Guantanamo Bay, and has called on it to support their rights to legal access. The association's president, David Curtin, QC, said it was "entirely unsatisfactory" that Adelaide-born David Hicks and Sydney man Mamdouh Habib had been held for nine months without charge or access to lawyers. "The Australian Government has failed them in not supporting their claim for access to legal advice," he said. "We strongly urge the Attorney-General and the Australian Government to ensure these detainees are treated fairly before the law." Concern among the Australian legal fraternity is growing over the Government's refusal to lobby the US over treatment of the men. The president of Australian Lawyers for Human Rights, Simon Rice, said the group was considering complaining to the Human Rights Commission that Australia had breached its obligations under the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, which asserts a person's right to be detained only if they are charged and brought promptly before a court. http://smh.com.au/articles/2002/08/19/1029114076722.html

1 0