December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Chaining ciphers
by John Kelsey 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- [ To: Cypherpunks ## Date: 02/01/98 ## Subject: Re: Chaining ciphers ] >Subject: Re: Chaining ciphers >From: ghio(a)temp0201.myriad.ml.org (Matthew Ghio) >Date: 1998/01/30 >One other possibility is to encrypt with plaintext block >chaining, then superencrypt it PBC in reverse order, >starting with the last block first. An attacker would thus >have to decrypt the entire message before knowing whether >the key was correct or not. I've seen proposals along these lines before (I think there was one by Ron Rivest). If you have a hash function and any symmetric cipher, you can do this. BEAR and LION, the two arbitrary-size block cipher constructions by Ross Anderson and Eli Biham, have this property; you have to process every bit of the message to check a key guess. Using normal chaining modes for this kind of thing, at least with 64-bit block ciphers, usually exposes you to internal-collision kinds of attacks. >> One word of caution (which should be obvious, but can't >> hurt to repeat it): if you chain ciphers (e.g. DES | IDEA | >> 3DES | CAST | Blowfish), be sure to use separate keys for >> each of them; otherwise breaking the last one will give the >> key to the whole lot. >Only if the cryptanalyst knows that the decryption of the >last one was correct, which shouldn't be possible without >also decrypting all the other layers. Actually, this isn't necessarily true. The problem is that you can't guarantee that there won't be some interaction between those encryption operations unless you can assume independent keys. The classic example is this: Suppose the first cipher is double-DES encryption with DES keys (K0,K1), and the second and third encryptions are single-DES decryptions with keys K1 and K0, respectively. You now have e_0(e_1(e_2(x))) leaking all your plaintext directly. The proof for why something like E(X) = IDEA_{K_0}(3DES_{K_1}(X)) is at least as secure as 3DES is as follows: Suppose those keys are random and independent, and suppose you have a way to break E(X). Now, anytime you see a 3DES-encrypted block of data, you can break it, as well, by simply choosing a random IDEA key, encrypting it under that key, and then applying your attack on E(X). In other words, the attack on E(X) implies the attack on 3DES(X), but only if the keys are independent. If there is some dependency between K_0 and K_1 that's required for your attack on E(X), then you can't generalize that out to an attack on 3DES, since you don't know the 3DES key when you start attacking it. To take this a little further, note that an attack on E(X) also implies a chosen-plaintext attack on IDEA. If I have an attack that allows me to break E(X), then I can choose a random 3DES key, pre-encrypt all my chosen plaintexts with it, and then request the encryption of all those plaintexts under the secret IDEA key. The result is E(X), so I can now apply my attack to E(X). For more elaborate constructions, like E3(X) = 3DES_{K_1}(IDEA_{K_2}(Blowfish_{K_3}(X))), we can make the same kind of proof. Suppose I can break E3(X). Now, I can mount a chosen-plaintext attack on IDEA. I select a random encryption key and use it to encrypt all my chosen plaintexts under with Blowfish, and then I request their encryptions. When I get the ciphertexts from that, I select a random 3DES key and encrypt them again. I then apply my attack on E3(X) to break the system. Thus, an attack on E3(X) implies an attack on 3DES, IDEA, *and* Blowfish. But only if the keys are independent and random. Note: I read CP-LITE instead of the whole list. Please CC me on replies. - --John Kelsey, kelsey(a)counterpane.com / kelsey(a)plnet.net NEW PGP print = 5D91 6F57 2646 83F9 6D7F 9C87 886D 88AF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBNNRSUiZv+/Ry/LrBAQGTgAP9EhO0wyPT0HKSXqZD61YPwId8E5C4GJK2 c/+27LBZy8WLhiD92NBc42Rzjbxbir8oWlPkSkZa565mYoaILM0CcP7S15ECyfBY yV2yCOlJdoUo2ea70uIucowxpc2zx2G2KPKBLmGS5P5cwNsx8h3i7KDiRfcWSIGN Omqf38rAy6E= =+f39 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

$25.00 for every FREE membership signup
by cash_mr＠hotmail.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This email is intended for Adult Webmasters only! If you are not an Adult Webmaster and want to be removed from this and any responsible bulk emailers list. Please visit Removelist.com's site for removal instructions at: http://142.176.13.105 _____________________________________________________________ MR CASH will now guarantee $25.00 for every FREE membership signup!!! We have changed the program to pay you either the regular Mr Cash rate (Up to $5.00 per raw hit) or $25.00 per sale WHICH EVER IS HIGHER (By far the highest per sale rate in the industry) Your traffic is valuable. Get paid for it every time. The 100's of Webmasters that are already on the Mr Cash program are Automatically switched to the new program retroactive to Jan.16 1998. If you are not already on the Mr Cash program then here are some more Reasons to sign up. We Now 3 Great sites for you to advertise. Advertise one or advertise Them all. You are able to offer the surfer a Free one-week trail membership To 3 Great sites. Your conversion ratio will go through the roof. Sponsors are paid BI-weekly, so they're no long waiting period to receive your check. We use the most dependable software available on the net today. For more information or to sign up automatically Signup for Pussy Paradise at- http://mr-cash.com http://www.pussyparadise.com Signup for Ultimate Hardcore at - http://mr-cash.com/ultimate http://www.ultimatehardcore.com Signup for Erotic Paradise at - http://mr-erotic--paradise.com/topcash http://www.erotic--paradise.com

1 0

Would you like to join our referral program?
by eric-grey＠usa.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello I saw your web site, which was featured on the New Business Sites at Starting Point. I was wondering if you might be interested in participating in our referral program. All you have to do is put our banner or text link on your page. We pay you $50 for every click-thru that signs up for a business credit card merchant account with us. If interested please visit: http://www.tou.com/host/mken/referal.htm Thank you. Marc Kenyon 21st Century Resources

1 0

Updated BBS listing (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: >From ravage(a)ssz.com Sun Feb 1 21:54:18 1998 From: Jim Choate <ravage(a)ssz.com> Message-Id: <199802020354.VAA26715(a)einstein.ssz.com> Subject: Updated BBS listing To: staff(a)ssz.com (Armadillo Group Staff) Date: Sun, 1 Feb 1998 21:54:17 -0600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3010 Hi, I have updated the listing in Rasca's BBS list and it should show up in one of the future O'Reilly 'Learning Linux' books which we've been listed in since it was published. Jim ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi Rasca, I would like to update the entry for my system, Solar Soyuz Zaibatsu (SSZ). The data that has been in the 'Learning Linux' listing has been out of date the last couple of years. I apologize for not correcting it sooner. It's pretty wild that we've been online in one manner or another since 1984 and involved in Linux since late 1992. The correct information is below: BBS Name: Solar Soyuz Zaibatsu (ssz.com) Phone Number: 512-451-6009 (28.8), 512-451-7060 (33.6) (account required) Online: ?, we're on Internet full time via ISDN Expires: ? Modem Speed (CCITT): 28.8, 33.6 City/Country/State (include region code): Austin, US, Texas (?) Whatever network it is on (i.e. FidoNet, etc.): Internet (ssz.com) First Time access to D/L Linux Files (Y/N): Y (if not request mount via staff(a)ssz.com) Allow File Requests - Fido style (Y/N): No, available anonymous ftp and temporary guest accounts (send request to staff(a)ssz.com) Free Access to Linux Files (Y/N): Y BBS Rating (1-5): 5 (what else?) We also support the 'Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer' (cypherpunks(a)ssz.com) 'Experimental Science Instrumentation Mailing List' (tesla(a)ssz.com) and are involved in the 'Austin Linux Group' (alg-l(a)lists.io.com) I also do consulting via 'The Armadillo Group' (consulting(a)ssz.com) We still support hobby/amateur science and technology via 'The Wired Society' (tws(a)ssz.com) We currently run Linux on x86, PPC, & SPARC machines as well as Plan 9. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The most powerful passion in life is not love or hate, | | but the desire to edit somebody elses words. | | | | Sign in Ed Barsis' office | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Re: Bush Gang Suspected In Assault On Presidency Bush Gang Suspected In Assault On Presidency
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Bush gang suspected in new assault on Presidency by Edward Spannaus and Jeffrey Steinberg In the midst of the worst global financial crisis in modern history, the United States Presidency has come under renewed, vicious attack from a combination of British and nominally ``American'' Bush-League circles. This latest attack, which one White House official long ago appropriately dubbed ``bimbo eruptions,'' centered around a Bush ``mole'' who was, unfortunately, allowed to operate inside the Clinton administration, and who now enjoys high-level security clearances in her post at the Pentagon. Linda Tripp, the central player in the renewed assault against President Clinton--staged around a purported sex scandal involving a young White House intern, Monica Lewinsky--was a Bush administration employee from 1990, until Bush left office in January 1993. At the urging of senior Bush administration officials, including Transportation Secretary Sam Skinner, Tripp was retained by the Clinton-Gore transition team in a clerical position, and later assigned to work at the Office of the White House General Counsel, under Bernard Nussbaum and his deputy, Vincent Foster. All the while, she was operating as part of a treasonous Bush-League ``fifth column'' within the Executive branch. While the ``Get Clinton'' media have attempted to portray Tripp as ``apolitical,'' she was, in fact, an ally, from the Bush administration period on, of then-FBI agent Gary Aldrich, who, in 1996, wrote a libellous book against President Clinton, {Unlimited Access: An FBI Agent Inside the Clinton White House,} which also revolved around bogus claims of White House sexual misconduct (see {EIR,} July 26, 1996, p.|72.) Aldrich was another Bush-League mole inside the Clinton White House. His embarrassingly fantasy-ridden book has been trumpetted by the London-based Hollinger Corporation, the leading British Crown media cartel; by its subsidiary, {American Spectator} magazine; and by ``Get Clinton'' money-bags Richard Mellon Scaife. Tripp emerged in 1995 as an asset of Whitewater Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr, testifying before the Whitewater grand jury and later before a Congressional hearing on the death of Vincent Foster. When Lloyd Cutler replaced Nussbaum as White House General Counsel, Tripp, who by then had been widely identified as an unabashed political enemy of President Clinton, was reassigned to the Pentagon, where she eventually got an $80,000-a-year job, which also involved her getting top-level security clearances. Tripp claimed, to anyone who would listen, that she had been transferred from the White House because she ``knew too much about Whitewater,'' a patent lie. Commenting on the role of Tripp as the linchpin in the latest Clintongate assault, Lyndon LaRouche called on Jan. 22 for Tripp's security clearances to be immediately revoked, pending the outcome of a thorough probe of her role in the sordid affair. ``She obviously needs her security clearances immediately pulled, given her role in what has all the earmarks of an illegal attack against the President, ostensibly on behalf of partisan Republican forces. I would certainly hope that there is no one in the Pentagon who would countenance such an obvious assault against a vital American institution, the Presidency. I would expect such treachery from the editorial page writers at the {Wall Street Journal,} but not from our military.'' - An earlier `eruption' - In the summer of 1997, Tripp surfaced again as part of an effort to hit President Clinton with a ``Profumo''-style sex scandal, telling {Newsweek} that the President had sexually harassed a White House aide, Kathleen Willey. Willey denied, under oath, that Tripp's allegations were true. This prompted President Clinton's attorney, Robert Bennett, belatedly, in August 1997, to denounce Tripp as a liar. While working at the Pentagon, in late 1996, Tripp had already begun to cultivate a close relationship with a former White House junior staff aide, 22-year-old Monica Lewinsky, who had been recently transferred to the Defense Department. It is unclear how the two women came to meet, but in short order, Tripp began to exert a significant amount of control over the younger woman. Tripp should be forced, under oath, to detail the circumstance under which she met and befriended Lewinsky. Tripp soon betrayed Lewinsky's confidence by surreptitiously--and, probably, illegally--taping telephone conversations with Lewinsky. By December 1997, Tripp and Lewinsky had {both,} mysteriously, been subpoenaed to give depositions to attorneys for Paula Jones, in her civil lawsuit against the President--a lawsuit instigated by British intelligence operator and former London {Sunday Telegraph} Washington correspondent Ambrose Evans-Pritchard. How Jones's attorneys came to know of the existence of Tripp and Lewinsky is one question that may hold a key to Tripp's role in the present attack against the President. It should be recalled that, prior to being named the independent counsel in Whitewater, Kenneth Starr had been paid by Richard Mellon Scaife, through the Landmark Legal Foundation, to prepare an {amicus curiae} brief in support of Paula Jones. Tripp claims that, on Jan. 12, 1998, she took 20 hours of tape-recorded conversations with Lewinsky to Whitewater Special Prosecutor Starr. The next day, Starr arranged for Tripp to secretly tape her meeting with Lewinsky at the Ritz Carlton Hotel near the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia. At the time that Starr arranged for the FBI to secretly tape the Tripp-Lewinsky meeting, {he had absolutely no jurisdiction to probe President Clinton's relationship to the former White House aide.} Indeed, it is critical that a full-scale probe be conducted, to determine whether Tripp, who was in league with Starr from 1995, was taping her conversations with Lewinsky on her own, or, covertly, on behalf of Starr. At minimum, Starr vastly overstepped his jurisdiction; far more likely, he himself broke the law--along with Tripp--in a flagrant attempt to entrap and destroy President Clinton. - No U.S. precedent - In the 200-year history of the American Presidency, there have been occasional sexual scandals involving top government officials; however, never has such a personal scandal brought down the chief executive. There is only one country in the world where heads of government are brought to their knees through such tabloid scandal-mongering: Great Britain. In 1963, Harold Macmillan's government was brought down by a sex scandal involving Defense Minister John Profumo. It is, therefore, not surprising that a review of the various Clintongate scandals, from the 1993 so-called ``Troopergate'' affair to the present attack, reveals that British intelligence stringer and former {Sunday Telegraph} Washington correspondent Ambrose Evans-Pritchard has been the chief instigator. As early as May 8, 1994, in a {Sunday Telegraph} column, Evans-Pritchard boasted that he had been instrumental in getting Paula Jones to file her civil suit against the President. Evans-Pritchard has elsewhere boasted that his assignment, on behalf of the British Crown's Hollinger Corporation, has been nothing less than the total destruction of the Clinton Presidency. Writing in the Jan. 22 {Daily Telegraph,} Evans-Pritchard loudly bragged of his manipulation of Paula Jones: ``My impression after befriending her four years ago, before she took the momentous step of suing the President, is that her motive was sheer rage.'' ``Paula Jones has now achieved her object of inflicting massive damage on Bill Clinton, with shortening odds that she may ultimately destroy his Presidency,'' he continued. Evans-Pritchard accuses the U.S. news media of covering up the Clinton sex scandals, so that only the {American Spectator} or the British press will print the stories. ``What Paula Jones has done is to use the immense power of legal discovery to force the scandal to the surface. She has finally done the job that the American media failed to do so miserably.'' This was precisely the strategy that Evans-Pritchard had laid out in 1994, when he acknowledged on May 8, 1994, that he had had ``a dozen conversations with Mrs. Jones over the past two months.'' He furthermore admitted that ``I happened to be present at a strategy meeting last month on a boat on the Arkansas River,'' at which Jones's attorney ``was weighing the pros and cons of legal action.'' It doesn't ``matter all that much whether Mrs. Jones ultimately wins or loses her case,'' he wrote on May 15, 1994. ``The ticking time bomb in the lawsuit lies elsewhere, in the testimony of other witnesses.'' ``Put plainly,'' Evans-Pritchard blurted, ``the political purpose of the Jones lawsuit is to reconstruct the inner history of the Arkansas Governor's Mansion, using the legal power of discovery. In effect, the two lawyers and their staff could soon be doing the job that the American media failed to do during the election campaign and have largely failed to do since.'' Evans-Pritchard's motive, in contrast to Jones's ``sheer rage,'' is a deep, abiding hatred of the United States, and particularly, the institution of its Presidency. Anyone who joins Evans-Pritchard in this unfolding assault upon the Presidency, is joining the ranks of traitor Aaron Burr. A thorough probe of the current insurrection, beginning with a spotlight on Linda Tripp, is more than appropriate. >From Executive Intelligence Review V25, #5. -- John Covici covici(a)ccs.covici.com

1 0

The Continued Attack on Cash (Was: "The Right of Anonymity"...)
by Black Unicorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Mr. May said: >Suffice it to say that I find nearly all cases where someone is "demanding" >personal information to be cases where the government has required them to, >for various unseemly purposes, or in cases where credit is being arranged. Of late I tried to pay off a rather large American Express bill. Suddenly, AMEX won't take cash in excess of $1,000 in any single billing period (30 days). The large sign on the wall indicated the substance of the new rule (or the old rule newly enforced) and added that customers "may be required to produce two forms of identification including a government issued identification card and a social security number." Here's a situation where the payor is (theoretically) positively identified to the payee (including ssn), where credit has already been established, and where records are certain to exist for all transactions which are being paid for. The AMEX Corporate card was once a wonderful tool to preserve anonymity with. One could issue several cards for a domestic company, 100% owned by an offshore, and settle in cash. Properly done, this was perfectly legal. Well, once upon a time anyhow. I find it extremely alarming that a general transaction like this can be illegal where almost no case can be made for a danger of money laundering or some kind of support of the "underground economy" (except perhaps that I'd have Pablo Escobar pay off my Amex to compensate me for my illegal smuggling flights, but that's a bit thin in my view). Increasingly, I try and find explanations for these kinds of regulations which do not include a paranoid rant about governments making sure they maintain a firm set of records on every citizen for whenever it might be "needed," (or wanted). Increasingly, this becomes a difficult mental task. Increasingly, it is difficult to make cash transactions. In the end that seems to be the point. Make it difficult to pay with cash. Make it suspicious to pay with cash. Make it an attention getter if you pay with cash. Sound paranoid? Try this. I'd like everyone who reads this to try and go 45 days without using plastic or writing a check. Just 45 days. If you don't grow alarmist very quickly (like in the first week) I'd like to hear your experience. If nothing else, try adding up a few months of finance charges, yearly fees on your credit cards, transactions fees, check fees, interest lost on no-interest checking accounts... see what you're paying to keep people from looking at you like a criminal. There's an interesting new awakening in personal finance right now which advises, among other things, "pay in cash, die broke." I'm interested to see how this "pay in cash" advice, which I have followed religiously years before it was put in print, clashes with post-modern financial regulation. I know things have gotten really out of hand because the phrase "No, I'll pay with cash," which I find I have to use more and more often, turns more and more heads and is met more and more often with a cross look from a teller and a finger pointed at a large sign bearing the heading "Restrictions on Cash Transactions." When the question becomes "Which credit card will you be paying with?" and no longer does one hear "How will you be paying for that?" I think people better start thinking about what's happening. (I'm not on cypherpunks anymore, mail me directly).

2 1

The Continued Attack on Cash (Was: "The Right of Anonymity"...) (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Mon, 02 Feb 1998 00:51:11 -0600 > From: Black Unicorn <unicorn(a)schloss.li> > Subject: The Continued Attack on Cash (Was: "The Right of Anonymity"...) > Sound paranoid? Try this. I'd like everyone who reads this to try and go > 45 days without using plastic or writing a check. Just 45 days. If you > don't grow alarmist very quickly (like in the first week) I'd like to hear > your experience. I've been doing it for many years. Don't have a checking account, don't own a credit card. I do have a saving account with a local credit union and go in every 3-4 days and withdraw what I need for the next 3-4 days. Pay every bill in cash or money order. I'm not going into how I invest my excess capital. If my employer needs me to travel I do it on their plastic. The only irritating thing I find is that I can't walk into grocery stores any more and get money orders larger than $700 and many won't do it for more than $400. I have to pay my rent each month with a $400 and a $397 money order in order to meet the $797 amound due because I'm too lazy to drive the extra 6-8 blocks to the one who will do the $700 money orders. Other than that I don't have a problem at all. I'm going to go tomorrow and buy a new laptop at around $1500. I intend on paying with a wad of $100 bills. Bet you they don't look twice nor will they ask for ID. I've actualy never had a problem paying cash, never had anyone turn real money down... ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The most powerful passion in life is not love or hate, | | but the desire to edit somebody elses words. | | | | Sign in Ed Barsis' office | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

4 3

ELECTRICITY CAN MAKE YOU RICH
by partners＠partnersnow.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

All of us are constantly bombarded by people hawking "unbelievable", "once-in-a-lifetime", "get-rich-quick" business opportunities. I graduated from Yale, became Commissioner of Housing in New York City, started a real estate development company, and now own an 83-year-old diamond-cutting company. Quite bluntly, I won't waste my time even listening to the pitch. And yet right now, I am telling eveybody I know (and, obviously, hundreds of people I don't know) about an opportunity available in the deregulation of electricity that sounds just as outrageous as all the phony talk we've heard in the past. The difference is that this is real. And the urgency comes from the fact that it will never happen again. You might choose to read no further, but you will never be able to say that you weren't there when business history was being made. MAKE NO INVESTMENT AND START PART-TIME Know up front that your participation will not require start-up costs of more than about $300 nor that you leave your current full-time job. You should also know that deregulated electricity in the US, albeit a $215-billion industry, is only one component in a global master plan that will soon tap even larger markets in internet commerce, telecommunications, and energy distribution. In all these markets, our participation will be in partnership with the most respected names in the corporate world. The structure of this precedent-setting Company has already been formed and the names of our partners will be announced over the next few weeks. We intend to do for all services entering homes, offices, and factories what the supermarket did to individual food shops and what the mall did to Main Street stores. The powerful trend to consolidation will naturally successfully extend to essential modern services because the benefits will be the same: lower cost and greater convenience. This is nobody's pipe dream. This is history in the making, and you can become a very rich player by finally being in the right place at the right time and taking action. DEREGULATION CAN ONLY HAPPEN ONCE By the year 2002, the domestic electric utilities industry will be fundamentally deregulated. That means that the out-dated, costly, monopolistic utility providers, which we have always accepted like death and taxes, will be forced to compete in the open market with lower-cost, high-tech, entrepreneurial, service-oriented private companies. In many states, the process has already begun. California's $20-billion industry will be one of the first to deregulate completely in 1998, along with New Hampshire and Rhode Island. Massachusetts and Pennsylvania are right behind, with many other states scheduling to start in 1998, too. Consumers will have the right to choose the source of their power and you will have the opportunity to sell it. And it has all been done before. In the 1970's, the airline industry deregulated and the resulting competition destroyed established companies and made fortunes for others. In the 1980's, AT&T lost its monopoly and now barely holds on to 50% of the market. The significant difference in the deregulation of electricity in the 1990's is that you are right now being given a chance to participate even before it happens. Our Company has developed the multi-million-dollar infrastructure to support its goal of becoming to deregulated electricity what MCI became to deregulated telephone. And the distribution of our electricity will be made only through independent entrepreneurs empowered by the Company to profit every time a customer turns on a light. Even more eye-opening, these "electricity entrepreneurs" will profit to an even greater extent from their monthly commissions on their customers' use of all the other services the new Company will offer: internet commerce, telephony of all kinds, home security, cable TV, and many more. With three or more services "bundled" together, studies have shown that customers are lost at a rate of less than 10% a year. This is true residual income. Compensation accrues from four main sources: (1) up-front agency fees paid to the Distributor when customers subscribe to our services; (2) up-front training fees paid to the Sponsor when new Distributors join the Company; (3) residual commissions paid to the Distributor as a percentage of customers' monthly use of the Company's services; and (4) executive bonuses paid to Distributors on the total volume generated by his or her entire organization. CAPITALIZE ON A PROVEN ROCK-SOLID COMPANY As I said, we are not looking for investors. Our parent is a 13-year-old, $1.4 billion, high-tech company with a D&B 5A-1, no debt, US Olympic Committee licenses, and operations in 23 countries all over the world. It is one of nine companies in the history of the United States that grew from start-up to one billion dollars in sales in less than ten years (others include Microsoft, FEDEX, Nike, and Home Depot). Our Asian division went public on the New York Stock Exchange with Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch as our underwriters. Most important, the Company has established a brilliant, highly-leveraged plan for growth that has empowered over 400 associates, working on their own schedules, usually out of their own homes, to reach an income level that in 1996 averaged $561,000 a year. Significantly, that track record was achieved in industries a small fraction of the size of deregulated electricity and our other future markets. Please be aware that there will be many start-up companies hustling to be players in this historic opportunity. There will be efforts by the utility dinosaurs to hang on to their markets. Be sure that your potential in this industry isn't undermined by the failure of the insubstantial up-starts or the collapse of the prehistoric giants. LIFE IS NOT A DRESS REHEARSAL In my role as President of a diamond-cutting company, I know the frustrations of a capital-intensive, high-risk, low-margin, slow-growth industry. As an Administrator in the medical community, my wife sees the deterioration in doctors' earnings and the downsizing and closing of hospitals everywhere. While many of the old ways of making money are gone, new opportunities abound. Deregulated electricity is the next big opportunity, structured by a genius hyper-growth Company that is already allowing my wife and me to continue our professional work full-time, while enabling us to develop part-time a perpetual income with unlimited potential. The partners we are seeking for this opportunity should be independent, open-minded, self-motivated, highly-principled entrepreneurs. Such a profile might seem demanding, but the financial rewards can be gigantic. I was skeptical, too, at first. But the more I investigated, the more I realized that this is the rare, legitimate, dynamic opportunity that people, not long from now, will look back to and lament that they they missed. Electricity deregulation has never happened before and will never happen again. There is no doubt that fortunes will be made as a result of deregulation and the Company's global vision. The only question is who will be along for the ride. And it might not be for you. There are always reasons. But clearly, if you continue to do what you've always done, you'll continue to get what you've always gotten. And if you've already gotten all the time freedom and all the money you've always wanted, this opportunity is probably not for you. But if you haven't, how long are you going to wait? For more information, please call 1-800-326-9253 or email me back and leave your name and daytime and evening phone number and the best time to call. Serious inquiries only please. /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// We practice responsible emailing. If you wish to be removed from future mailings, please reply with remove in the subject. ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

1 0

BXA Meet
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Should anyone attend this a report would be welcome. Federal Register: February 2, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 21) Page 5353 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Export Administration Regulations and Procedures Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Partially Closed Meeting A meeting of the Regulations and Procedures Technical Advisory Committee will be held February 25, 1998, 9:00 a.m., in the Herbert C. Hoover Building, Room 3884, 14th Street between Constitution and Pennsylvania Avenues, N.W., Washington, D.C. The Committee advises the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration on implementation of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and provides for continuing review to update the EAR as needed. Agenda Open Session 1. Opening remarks by the Chairperson. 2. Presentation of papers or comments by the public. 3. Update on implementation of the National Defense Authorization Act computer control regulations. 4. Update on the Wassenaar Arrangement implementation regulation. 5. Discussion on the ``deemed export'' rule. 6. Discussion on the encryption regulations. 7. Update on the License Process Review initiative. 8. Discussion on efforts to conform the Foreign Trade Statistics Regulations and the Export Administration Regulations on export clearance requirements. 9. Discussion on clarification of EPCI (Enhanced Proliferation Control Initiative). Closed Session 10. Discussion of matters properly classified under Executive Order 12958, dealing with the U.S. export control program and strategic criteria related thereto. The General Session of the meeting will be open to the public and a limited number of seats will be available. To the extent that time permits, members of the public may present oral statements to the Committee. Written statements may be submitted at any time before or after the meeting. However, to facilitate the distribution of public presentation materials to the Committee members, the Committee suggests that presenters forward the public presentation materials two weeks prior to the meeting date to the following address: Ms. Lee Ann Carpenter, OAS/EA/BXA MS:3886C, 14th & Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. 20230. The Assistant Secretary for Administration, with the concurrence of the delegate of the General Counsel, formally determined on December 16, 1996, pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, that the series of meetings or portions of meetings of the Committee and of any Subcommittees thereof, dealing with the classified materials listed in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1) shall be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in section 10(a) (1) and (a) (3), of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The remaining series of meetings or portions thereof will be open to the public. A copy of the Notice of Determination to close meetings or portions of meetings of the Committee is available for public inspection and copying in the Central Reference and Records Inspection Facility, Room 6020, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. For further information, call Lee Ann Carpenter at (202) 482-2583. Dated: January 27, 1998. Lee Ann Carpenter, Director, Technical Advisory Committee Unit. [FR Doc. 98-2393 Filed 1-30-98; 8:45 am]

1 0

Jim Bell Update
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Date: Sun, 01 Feb 1998 Hi, John. Received a letter and phone call from Jim, as below. -------------------------------------- . He had a little altercation with a fellow prisoner ("through no fault of my own" - he thinks he was set up) and his privileges were reduced for 35 days, so that he could only make one phone call each week. . In reference to the bad publicity (all those articles and news alerts) which his case received, he speculates that the government gave a copy of AP to a 'think tank' like Rand, etc., with the request to figure out how to stop or delay AP. But it is his conclusion that AP is unstoppable, although: "I think that one last (temporary) hope for government is to delay AP. Chances are good that the "think tank" decided thatt the best way to delay AP is to discredit me, its author. It was a desperate gamble, particularly because the act of harrassing me automatically gives AP more publicity. That's the reason they will fail; the more they try to "get" me, the worse it will be for them." He wants it noted that his writing and discussions of AP ideas are in the sense of a "prediction", a "warning", or even a "vision", not an advocacy of it. . Regarding his guilty plea, he said it was because he realizes that he did do a few things wrong and that, although he did think that some of the charges against him were overblown and distorted, there was enough of a risk of being found guilty that it didn't make a lot of sense to contest them. He adds, "I also felt (and still do, of course) that government had already 'lost the war' so to speak." . He expects to be out around mid-April. Upon his release he wants to go to some of his favorite restaurants, and to have several BIG pizzas. He hopes he can get his old job back as electronics designer, and has some ideas he wants to work on for a virtual reality peripheral device which will bring everyone steps closer to the Star Trek Next Generation 'holodek'. - end

1 0