March 2004 - cypherpunks-legacy

Scarce objects -- bearer certificates for usage control
by R. A. Hettinga 16 Mar '04

16 Mar '04

Yup, certainly anyone who's thought about paying for, say, grid networks time, or wireless access, has at least plinked around with the subject, but it's nice that someone like *Nick* is thrashing some cycles on the problem. :-) In the interest of "telegraph, telephone, tell Hettinga", I'm just sending this along and will read it myself later. Cheers, RAH ------- --- begin forwarded text

1 0

Cable taps into wiretap law
by R. A. Hettinga 16 Mar '04

16 Mar '04

<http://news.com.com/2102-1034_3-5173320.html?tag=st.util.print> CNET News Cable taps into wiretap law By Ben Charny Staff Writer, CNET News.com http://news.com.com/2100-1034-5173320.html Story last modified March 16, 2004, 11:00 AM PST Cable operators are starting to comply with federal law that has long required telecommunications carriers to help police conduct electronic surveillance. The cable companies are not required to do so yet, but they see the writing on the wall. According to one source, Time Warner Cable is the first cable operator to begin trying to comply with the federal wiretap law. Vernon Irvin, executive vice president at security vendor VeriSign, said during a recent interview that his company had signed a deal with a "major cable operator" in the United States to help it follow the Communications Assistance For Law Enforcement Act (CALEA). Irvin, however, did assert that other cable companies are sure to follow. That's because the FBI has made public a far-reaching proposal to require all broadband Internet providers--including cable modem and digital subscriber line (DSL) companies--to restructure their networks to support easy wiretapping by police. "The cable guys arenmt waiting," Irvin said. The FBI's proposal would, for the first time, force cable providers that sell broadband to come under the jurisdiction of 1994's CALEA, which further defined the already-existing statutory obligations of telecom carriers to help police conduct electronic surveillance. Telephone companies that use their networks to sell broadband have already been following CALEA rules. Because the eavesdropping proposal has the support of the Bush administration, the Federal Communications Commission is expected to take it very seriously. Last month, FCC Chairman Michael Powell stressed that "law enforcement access to IP-enabled communications is essential" and that police must have "access to communications infrastructure they need to protect our nation." Irvin said that details of the VeriSign deal will be announced next week. -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

1 0

If You Want to Protect A Security Secret, Make Sure It's Public
by R. A. Hettinga 16 Mar '04

16 Mar '04

<http://online.wsj.com/article_print/0,,SB107930573476054980,00.html> The Wall Street Journal March 15, 2004 PORTALS By LEE GOMES If You Want to Protect A Security Secret, Make Sure It's Public Here is some news that is shocking but true: The most sensitive, most highly classified secrets of the U.S. government will soon be in the hands of two foreigners, both of them self-described "Linux hackers." It's nothing to be alarmed about, though. Joan Daemen and Vincent Rijmen, two Belgian mathematicians, won a U.S.-sponsored global competition in 2000 to design the encryption system that will henceforth encode the secret communications of the U.S. government. The contest was an entirely open affair, and the winners selected after a lengthy public process. You can go online yourself and test the Daemen-Rijmen Advanced Encryption Standard, assuming you're handy with the likes of matrix multiplication. It seems that the world's cryptographers, while dealing with keeping secrets, do most of their work in public. That's worth remembering as the country moves to electronic voting. The connection between cryptography and voting may not be immediately apparent. But in both fields, the integrity of something secret must be maintained, often in very hostile circumstances. After the Florida recount debacle, there is now a big push in the U.S. toward electronic-voting systems; 50 million people are expected to be using them this November. The problem is that most of the systems being purchased by local election officials are proprietary, "black box" solutions sold by companies who, citing trade secret issues, won't let others look inside them. It's not just conspiracy theorists who are worried about this, but leading computer scientists. Proprietary balloting software leaked by corporate insiders has been discovered by outside evaluators to be full of security holes. Thus, the good folks working to guarantee secret ballots should learn something from the people who work to guarantee secret messages. They never trust anyone who says "trust us." The basic approach in modern cryptography is to keep the pattern of your specific key a secret, but not to worry if the overall design of your lock gets out. It's called Kerckhoffs' Principle, after Auguste Kerckhoffs, a 19th-century cryptographer who, like Messrs. Daemen and Rijmen, was Flemish. He listed six guidelines for a reliable encryption system. No. 2 was, "It must not be required to be secret, and it must be able to fall into the hands of the enemy without inconvenience." The idea is counterintuitive, and for most of the long history of secret codes, it was ignored. But with the rise of computer-assisted cryptography in the past 50 years or so, there has been a sea change in the working assumptions of cryptographers. Now, "you can't get good cryptography by designing in secret," says Whitfield Diffie, co-inventor of the "public key" encryption system that revolutionized the field, and currently chief security officer at Sun Microsystems. If you use the Internet, you are using an alphabet soup of different encoding methods, all available for public inspection: RSA, SSL and more. Many security problems exist on the Internet, but none involve these algorithms. Why make this stuff public? Because even the smartest people make mistakes. David Kahn, author of "The Codebreakers," says that hubris is something of an occupational hazard among code makers. "One of the patterns in cryptographic history is how people always believe the system they just created is unbreakable," he says. "Someone very clever will create a cipher, but then someone even cleverer will come along and find a flaw in it." Mr. Kahn notes that the German businessmen who began selling the famed Enigma machine in the 1920s thought they had an unbreakable system. They marketed the device by boasting that even if someone else had an Enigma, he couldn't read your messages. Lucky for us, they were wrong. Polish, and later British, cryptographers were able to defeat Enigma, in part because at least in the early years, it gave away a clue by repeating the first three characters of a transmission twice in a row. These days, tens of thousands of cryptographers use the Internet as a kind of global Bletchley Park, the famed World War II site where the British cracked Enigma. Indeed, cryptographer Paul Kocher notes a pattern: Cryptographic systems developed in public tend to stand up; those developed in secret, like those for DVD systems or European-style GMS phones, often get broken. But if the entire world can see your encryption method, couldn't some smart bad guy find a flaw in it and quietly use the information against you? In theory, yes. But the real world doesn't work that way. Think of all the graduate students eager to make a name for themselves by pointing out someone else's mistake. Mr. Kocher, for instance, is a cryptocelebrity because as a student, he found a subtle but serious theoretical flaw in the widely used RSA encryption method. The system could then be repaired. You get the point by now. Cryptography is developed in public. If it's good enough for eBay, isn't it good enough for the ballot box? -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

5 4

All your Ohioans are belong to us
by Major Variola (ret.) 15 Mar '04

15 Mar '04

Report: Ohio Sold Records To Fla. Database Company For $50K POSTED: 6:56 pm EST March 14, 2004 COLUMBUS, Ohio -- The state Bureau of Motor Vehicles sold driving records of Ohioans for about $50,000 to a Florida company developing a multistate crime database program, according to a report. The program, called Matrix, lets states share information and cross-reference the data with up to 20 billion records in databases held by Seisint Inc., a private company based in Boca Raton, Fla. Bureau of Motor Vehicles spokeswoman Julie Hinds told The Columbus Dispatch that Seisint paid Ohio $50,073 between October 2002 and December 2003. Hinds said the company signed an agreement not to misuse the information. Twelve states that had expressed interest or were involved in the program have pulled out. Connecticut, Michigan, Florida and Pennsylvania are still participating. A spokesman for state Attorney General Jim Petro, who supports the system, said the information Ohio is sharing is already available to law enforcement. "There's nothing novel here. It's just the speed at which it's done," said James V. Canepa, chief deputy attorney general. The records include details on property, boats and Internet domain names that people own, their address history, utility connections, bankruptcies, liens and business filings, according to an August report by the Georgia state Office of Homeland Security. The American Civil Liberties Union has complained that the system, formally known as Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange, could be used by state and federal investigators to compile dossiers on people who have never been suspected of a crime. Seisint officials have said safeguards are built into the system to prevent such abuses. Ohio and other states have been given releases stating they won't be liable for mistakes if data from the system contain errors. The ACLU has filed a number of public records requests in Ohio and other states to get more details. "Accuracy on this seems to be poor at best," said Carrie Davis, an attorney with the ACLU of Ohio. "We have no idea what these records are." Gov. Bob Taft is reviewing to what extent Ohio should be involved. "We are reviewing various legal issues and also long-term cost implications," Taft spokesman Orest Holubec said. http://www.local6.com/news/2921360/detail.html

1 0

'Special skills draft' on drawing board
by R. A. Hettinga 15 Mar '04

15 Mar '04

<http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/03/13/MNG905K1BC1.DTL&…> www.sfgate.com 'Special skills draft' on drawing board Computer experts, foreign language specialists lead list of military's needs Eric Rosenberg, Hearst Newspapers Saturday, March 13, 2004 )2004 San Francisco Chronicle | Feedback | FAQ URL: sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/03/13/MNG905K1BC1.DTL Washington -- The government is taking the first steps toward a targeted military draft of Americans with special skills in computers and foreign languages. The Selective Service System has begun the process of creating the procedures and policies to conduct such a targeted draft in case military officials ask Congress to authorize it and the lawmakers agree to such a request. Richard Flahavan, a spokesman for the Selective Service System, said planning for a possible draft of linguists and computer experts had begun last fall after Pentagon personnel officials said the military needed more people with skills in those areas. "Talking to the manpower folks at the Department of Defense and others, what came up was that nobody foresees a need for a large conventional draft such as we had in Vietnam," Flahavan said. "But they thought that if we have any kind of a draft, it will probably be a special skills draft." Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has said he would not ask Congress to authorize a draft, and officials at the Selective Service System, the independent federal agency that would organize any conscription, stress that the possibility of a so-called "special skills draft" is likely far off. A targeted registration and draft is "is strictly in the planning stage," said Flahavan, adding that "the whole thing is driven by what appears to be the more pressing and relevant need today" -- the deficit in language and computer experts. "We want to gear up and make sure we are capable of providing (those types of draftees) since that's the more likely need," the spokesman said, adding that it could take about two years to "to have all the kinks worked out. " The agency already has in place a special system to register and draft health care personnel ages 20 to 44 in more than 60 specialties if necessary in a crisis. According to Flahavan, the agency will expand this system to be able to rapidly register and draft computer specialists and linguists, should the need ever arise. But he stressed that the agency had received no request from the Pentagon to do so. The issue of a renewed draft has gained attention because of concerns that U.S. military forces are over-extended. Since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist strikes, U.S. forces have fought two wars, established a major military presence in Afghanistan and Iraq and are now taking on peacekeeping duties in Haiti. But Congress, which would have to authorize a draft, has so far shown no interest in renewing the draft. Legislation to reinstitute the draft, introduced by Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., has minimal support with only 13 House lawmakers signing on as co- sponsors. A corresponding bill in the Senate introduced by Sen. Fritz Hollings, D-S.C., has no co-sponsors. The military draft ended in 1973 as the American commitment in Vietnam waned, beginning the era of the all-volunteer force. Mandatory registration for the draft was suspended in 1975 but resumed in 1980 by President Jimmy Carter after the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. About 13.5 million men, ages 18 to 25, are registered with the Selective Service. But the military has had particular difficulty attracting and retaining language experts, especially people knowledgeable about Arabic and various Afghan dialects. To address this need, the Army has a new pilot program underway to recruit Arabic speakers into the service's Ready Reserves. The service has signed up about 150 people into the training program. A Pentagon official familiar with personnel issues stressed that the armed forces were against any form of conscription but acknowledged the groundwork already underway at the Selective Service System. "We understand that Selective Service has been reviewing existing organizational mission statements to confirm their relevance for the future," the official said. "Some form of 'special skills' registration, not draft, has been a part of its review." -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

3 2

RE: 'Special skills draft' on drawing board
by Tyler Durden 15 Mar '04

15 Mar '04

"A targeted registration and draft is "is strictly in the planning stage," said Flahavan, adding that "the whole thing is driven by what appears to be the more pressing and relevant need today" -- the deficit in language and computer experts." Well, we could outsource 'em! I'd bet there's tons of Arabic-speakers willing to work on the cheap in countries such as Libya, Yemen, and Egypt...Bet there'd be a few Saudi nationals who'd be more than willing to ride alongside some of our boys in Iraq... -TD >From: "R. A. Hettinga" <rah(a)shipwright.com> >To: cypherpunks(a)al-qaeda.net >Subject: 'Special skills draft' on drawing board >Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 18:42:21 -0500 > ><http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/03/13/MNG905K1BC1.DTL&…> > > >www.sfgate.com > > > 'Special skills draft' on drawing board > Computer experts, foreign language specialists lead list of military's >needs > Eric Rosenberg, Hearst Newspapers > Saturday, March 13, 2004 >)2004 San Francisco Chronicle | Feedback | FAQ > > > >URL: sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/03/13/MNG905K1BC1.DTL > > Washington -- The government is taking the first steps toward a targeted >military draft of Americans with special skills in computers and foreign >languages. > > The Selective Service System has begun the process of creating the >procedures and policies to conduct such a targeted draft in case military >officials ask Congress to authorize it and the lawmakers agree to such a >request. > > Richard Flahavan, a spokesman for the Selective Service System, said >planning for a possible draft of linguists and computer experts had begun >last fall after Pentagon personnel officials said the military needed more >people with skills in those areas. > > "Talking to the manpower folks at the Department of Defense and others, >what came up was that nobody foresees a need for a large conventional draft >such as we had in Vietnam," Flahavan said. "But they thought that if we >have any kind of a draft, it will probably be a special skills draft." > > Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has said he would not ask Congress to >authorize a draft, and officials at the Selective Service System, the >independent federal agency that would organize any conscription, stress >that the possibility of a so-called "special skills draft" is likely far >off. > > A targeted registration and draft is "is strictly in the planning stage," >said Flahavan, adding that "the whole thing is driven by what appears to be >the more pressing and relevant need today" -- the deficit in language and >computer experts. > > "We want to gear up and make sure we are capable of providing (those >types >of draftees) since that's the more likely need," the spokesman said, adding >that it could take about two years to "to have all the kinks worked out. " > > The agency already has in place a special system to register and draft >health care personnel ages 20 to 44 in more than 60 specialties if >necessary in a crisis. According to Flahavan, the agency will expand this >system to be able to rapidly register and draft computer specialists and >linguists, should the need ever arise. But he stressed that the agency had >received no request from the Pentagon to do so. > > The issue of a renewed draft has gained attention because of concerns >that >U.S. military forces are over-extended. Since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist >strikes, U.S. forces have fought two wars, established a major military >presence in Afghanistan and Iraq and are now taking on peacekeeping duties >in Haiti. But Congress, which would have to authorize a draft, has so far >shown no interest in renewing the draft. > > Legislation to reinstitute the draft, introduced by Rep. Charles Rangel, >D-N.Y., has minimal support with only 13 House lawmakers signing on as co- >sponsors. A corresponding bill in the Senate introduced by Sen. Fritz >Hollings, D-S.C., has no co-sponsors. > > The military draft ended in 1973 as the American commitment in Vietnam >waned, beginning the era of the all-volunteer force. Mandatory registration >for the draft was suspended in 1975 but resumed in 1980 by President Jimmy >Carter after the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. About 13.5 million men, ages >18 to 25, are registered with the Selective Service. > > But the military has had particular difficulty attracting and retaining >language experts, especially people knowledgeable about Arabic and various >Afghan dialects. > > To address this need, the Army has a new pilot program underway to >recruit >Arabic speakers into the service's Ready Reserves. The service has signed >up about 150 people into the training program. > > A Pentagon official familiar with personnel issues stressed that the >armed >forces were against any form of conscription but acknowledged the >groundwork already underway at the Selective Service System. > > "We understand that Selective Service has been reviewing existing >organizational mission statements to confirm their relevance for the >future," the official said. "Some form of 'special skills' registration, >not draft, has been a part of its review." > >-- >----------------- >R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> >The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> >44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA >"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, >[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to >experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' > _________________________________________________________________ One-click access to Hotmail from any Web page download MSN Toolbar now! http://clk.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/

1 0

Re: If You Want to Protect A Security Secret...don't use slaves as sysops
by Tyler Durden 15 Mar '04

15 Mar '04

More on Fed's seeking to expand CALEA to VoIP. http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,62659,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_8 You know, it occurs to me I need a little 'Bot. What this Bot does is periodically make encrypted "calls" or send out meaningless encrypted messages on a regular basis. Then, it won't be as obvious when I really do need to do this. In addition, let 'em spend themselves silly and tie up resources on my crapola. In fact, how 'bout a worm or something that does the same thing for everybody's machine? -TD >From: "Major Variola (ret)" <mv(a)cdc.gov> >To: "cypherpunks(a)al-qaeda.net" <cypherpunks(a)al-qaeda.net> >Subject: Re: If You Want to Protect A Security Secret...don't use slaves as > sysops >Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 09:11:40 -0800 > >At 05:04 AM 3/15/04 +0000, Justin wrote: > >> If You Want to Protect > >> A Security Secret, > >> Make Sure It's Public > > > >What is "terrible article titles for $500, Alex"? > >Give the author a break, he actually cited K's principle in the friggin >WSJ. > >Thanks for the forwards, RAH. Some of us actually do appreciate the >editorial >service you're providing. (A kindler, gentler cypherpunks.. ;-) > >..... > >Thoughts about the neo-con nazi enslavement of 3l33ts: What was up with >Schindler's >factories? They produced such crap for the Fatherland... heh heh >And how 'bout that siberian gas explosion, eh? Can't even steal good >code >these days... > >--- > >At first, man was enslaved by the gods. But he broke their chains. Then >he was >enslaved by the kings. But he broke their chains. He was >enslaved by his birth, by his kin, by his race. But he broke >their chains. He declared to all his brothers that a man has >rights which neither god nor king nor other men can take away >from him, no matter what their number, for his is the right of >man, and there is no right on earth above this right. >Anthem, Ayn Rand > > > > _________________________________________________________________ Create a Job Alert on MSN Careers and enter for a chance to win $1000! http://msn.careerbuilder.com/promo/kaday.htm?siteid=CBMSN_1K&sc_extcmp=JS_J…

1 0

Re: If You Want to Protect A Security Secret...don't use slaves as sysops
by Major Variola (ret) 15 Mar '04

15 Mar '04

At 05:04 AM 3/15/04 +0000, Justin wrote: >> If You Want to Protect >> A Security Secret, >> Make Sure It's Public > >What is "terrible article titles for $500, Alex"? Give the author a break, he actually cited K's principle in the friggin WSJ. Thanks for the forwards, RAH. Some of us actually do appreciate the editorial service you're providing. (A kindler, gentler cypherpunks.. ;-) ..... Thoughts about the neo-con nazi enslavement of 3l33ts: What was up with Schindler's factories? They produced such crap for the Fatherland... heh heh And how 'bout that siberian gas explosion, eh? Can't even steal good code these days... --- At first, man was enslaved by the gods. But he broke their chains. Then he was enslaved by the kings. But he broke their chains. He was enslaved by his birth, by his kin, by his race. But he broke their chains. He declared to all his brothers that a man has rights which neither god nor king nor other men can take away from him, no matter what their number, for his is the right of man, and there is no right on earth above this right. Anthem, Ayn Rand

1 0

Re: inverse finding
by Tyler Durden 15 Mar '04

15 Mar '04

>I can't stop outsourcing.Don't blame me.Blame your own >govt. Holy Shit, Sarath...what's that got to do with Variola's little quip? And are you trying to suggest (On Cypherpunks, of all places) that the US government should somehow regulate outsourcing? (Me, I work with outsourced experts all the time and for the most part it works out just fine. However, if the US government should do anything, it should be to level the playing field so that outsourced jobs don't go to countries which have no child labor laws, no pollution control or etc..., and even on this I'll probably get hammered on THIS list, which in general doesn't really trust ANY government to do much at all besides shore up its own power....) -TD >From: Sarad AV <jtrjtrjtr2001(a)yahoo.com> >To: cypherpunks(a)al-qaeda.net >Subject: Re: inverse finding >Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 05:40:43 -0800 (PST) > > >I can't stop outsourcing.Don't blame me.Blame your own >govt. > >Sarath. > > >--- "Major Variola (ret)" <mv(a)cdc.gov> wrote: > > At 09:55 PM 3/12/04 -0800, Sarad AV wrote: > > >if gcd(a,m)=1, > > >for a*a inverse==1 mod m > > >is it better to find > > >a invese=a^(m-2) mod m by binary exponentiation > > >modulo m or is it more time efficient by extended > > >euclids algorithm for large 'm'? > > > > I dunno, why don't you think about it some? > > > > How are you going to land a sweet outsourced job > > if you ask others to do your homework? > > > > > > > > > > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam >http://mail.yahoo.com > _________________________________________________________________ Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee when you click here. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

2 1

Repeal every law enacted since 1912
by R. A. Hettinga 14 Mar '04

14 Mar '04

<http://reviewjournal.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=rev…> Sunday, March 14, 2004 Las Vegas Review-Journal VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: Repeal every law enacted since 1912 Michael writes in, asking: "I am a junior in high school, a member of the Libertarian Party and I read your column every week. I am e-mailing you for two reasons: 1) Your last article in response to that woman's letter was great. ... 2) I'm not criticizing you, but I would like to know what alternative you propose when saying we should do away with prisons." I replied: Hi, Michael, The problem with proposing "pragmatic" solutions that might help the statists out of the hideous swamps in which they have bemired themselves is that we're surrounded by proud government-school graduates with little historical perspective, who therefore assume everything our government now does is historically "normal," and who are equally likely to denounce as either a failed comedian or a "nut" anyone who proposes anything radically different. Take Social Security. Point out that this Ponzi scheme is actuarially bankrupt, and the Peanut Gallery shrieks "It's easy to criticize; what do you suggest we do?!" In good faith, we might suggest they do a pro-rated division of any money the government wants to contend is actually in the "Social Security Trust Fund" among those aged 50 and older, based on how much they paid in, while telling workers under 50: "Sorry, you're out of luck. But at least you've got 15 years to save for your retirement, and you'd better get started." The screaming then begins: "But what about the starving oldsters who depend on those payments? They were promised!" And is the target of this outrage those who foisted this transparent socialist fraud on a befuddled nation? No, it's those of us who have bravely assumed the role of bank examiners, merely holding open the door to the empty vault and pointing out they've created an unsustainable system. The case is similar as we begin to examine why the United States has by far the highest incarceration rate in the world. Take the case of Martha Stewart. They couldn't charge her with selling her stock when her broker told her it was going to fall in value, since that's not illegal. Instead, they convicted her of telling the FBI that's not the reason she sold her stock. This is the kind of thing for which Americans now go to prison. So if you find a sucker to buy your used car for twice the Blue Book value, you can't go to jail because it's not a crime. If a cop asks you whether you sold your car for twice its Blue Book Value and you say, "Sure I did. Whatcha gonna do about it?" you can't go to jail, because that's not a crime. But if you tell a federal cop, "No; I sold that car for exactly what's it's worth" ... you can go to jail for 20 years. (While, in the meantime, the cops can lie to you with impunity, and bribe other suspects to testify against you by promising them lesser punishments, with no penalty to the cops or prosecutors if that testimony turns out to be a pack of lies.) And this is the set-up that our critics will tell us is sane, while they can easily be predicted to tell us any radical changes we propose are "nuts." That said, a few modest proposals: Today's "penitentiaries" are a weird invention of the modern "hygienic" movement. Peaking in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, this is the same movement that assured us society could be "cleaned up" by banning the legal commerce in alcohol and other plant extracts ("drugs"); aborting and sterilizing the retarded and those of "inferior races"; putting the government increasingly in charge of child-rearing; coming up with "modern, humane" methods of execution such as the electric chair, etc. In short, these people were dangerous nuts. For starters, we could reduce our prison populations by about two-thirds simply by retroactively repealing every law enacted since 1912. Was murder illegal by 1912? Of course. Rape? Of course. Kidnapping, armed robbery, bunko fraud? All serious criminal behaviors had been outlawed by 1912. So why have the number of lawbooks on the shelf multiplied tenfold in the past 92 years? Release everyone jailed on a drug law (unknown before 1916), for income tax evasion (impossible before 1913), for any kind of illegal possession of or commerce in firearms (laws unimagined a century ago), or for violating any kind of regulatory scheme or edict erected since 1912, and the federal prisons would be virtually empty, while even the state pens would probably see their populations cut in half. Now declare that -- instead of having their guns taken away and being considered for prosecution -- any law-abiding citizen who shoots and kills (or at least permanently cripples) a felon during his commission of a felony will be given a free Browning Automatic Rifle and a $30,000 government reward (the current cost of jailing the culprit for a year while he awaits trial), be declared immune from any civil lawsuit, and will additionally be given a tickertape parade and a medal. Add to any (substantially reduced) criminal sentence a realistic order that the felon must compensate the victim or his family with current assets or future earnings. (This would lend itself quite well to being enforced by private collection outfits, who could follow the "former" felon around, attaching the bulk of his wages.) These things would make real, violent crime far less attractive, with the added benefit of shifting a lot of the "punishment" to established private-sector institutions. It's also a method that worked for millennia in cultures that never even invented the soul-eroding job of "prison guard." Next time: Whoops! What did we do with our welfare state? It was here a minute ago. Vin Suprynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Review-Journal and author of the books "Send in the Waco Killers" and "The Ballad of Carl Drega." His Web site is www.privacyalert.us. -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

1 0