- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

AnswerChase Newsletter
by Announcement 26 Oct '01

26 Oct '01

1 0

Free VeggieTale Book from Downy -- Win a House from Home Made Simple
by Tide Neighbor to Neighbor 26 Oct '01

26 Oct '01

1 0

AnswerChase Newsletter
by Announcement 26 Oct '01

26 Oct '01

1 0

AnswerChase Newsletter
by Announcement 26 Oct '01

26 Oct '01

1 0

Democrats' new "bio" bill links police to SABRE, Amtrak systems
by Declan McCullagh 26 Oct '01

26 Oct '01

----- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> -----

1 0

Senate approves USA Act, sends to Bush, Ashcroft vows "new era"
by Declan McCullagh 26 Oct '01

26 Oct '01

>Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:30:04 -0400 >To: politech(a)politechbot.com >From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> >Subject: Senate approves USA Act, sends to Bush, Ashcroft vows "new era" > >The Senate just approved the USA Act by a 98-1 vote. Sen. Feingold was the >lone dissenter. Since the House has already voted for the bill, now it >goes to President Bush for his signature. Attorney General Ashcroft has >said that Bush will sign it tomorrow. > >Ashcroft said today, according to a speech attached below: >>The hour that it becomes law, I will issue guidance to each of our 94 >>U.S. Attorney's Offices and 56 FBI field offices directing them to begin >>immediately implementing this sweeping legislation. I will issue >>directives requiring law enforcement to make use of new powers in >>intelligence gathering, criminal procedure and immigration violations. A >>new era in America's fight against terrorism, made tragically necessary >>by the attacks of September 11, is about to begin. > >Text of USA Act v3.0 (final): >http://www.politechbot.com/docs/usa.act.final.102401.html >House debate over USA Act: >http://www.politechbot.com/docs/usa.act.debate.102401.html >How your House member voted: >http://clerkweb.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.exe?year=2001&rollnumber=398 >Feingold's lonely privacy fight: >http://www.politechbot.com/p-02645.html >Background: >http://www.politechbot.com/p-02707.html >http://www.wartimeliberty.com/search.pl?topic=legislation >President Bush's statement that he looks forward to signing the bill: >http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/10/20011024-4.html > >-Declan > >********* > >Attorney General John Ashcroft >Prepared Remarks for the US Mayors Conference >October 25, 2001 > > For more than two hundred years, Attorneys General have called on > the men and women of justice to be faithful stewards of the law. Rarely > in history has an Attorney General asked America's prosecutors and law > enforcement officers to do what they are asked to do today: to be both > defenders of justice and defenders of the people; to devote their talents > and energies to the urgent task of saving lives ahead of losing cases. > > On September 11, the wheel of history turned and the world will > never be the same. A turning point was reached, as well, in the > administration of justice. The fight against terrorism is now the first > and overriding priority of the Department of Justice. But our war > against terrorism is not merely or primarily a criminal justice endeavor > __ our battle is the defense of our nation and its citizens. > > The men and women of justice and law enforcement are called on to > combat a terrorist threat that is both immediate and vast; a threat that > resides here, at home, but whose supporters, patrons and sympathizers > form a multinational network of evil. > > The attacks of September 11 were acts of terrorism against > America orchestrated and carried out by individuals living within our > borders. Today's terrorists enjoy the benefits of our free society even > as they commit themselves to our destruction. They live in our > communities __ plotting, planning and waiting to kill Americans > again. They have crossed the Rubicon of terror with the use of > biological agents. We cannot explicitly link the recent terrorist > attacks to the September 11 hijackers. Yet, terrorists - people who were > either involved with, associated with or are seeking to take advantage of > the September 11 attacks - are now poisoning our communities with Anthrax. > > Forty years ago, another Attorney General was confronted with a > different enemy within our borders. Robert F. Kennedy came to the > Department of Justice at a time when organized crime was threatening the > very foundations of the republic. Mobsters controlled one of the nation's > largest labor unions. Racketeers murdered, bribed and extorted with > impunity in many of the nation's largest cities. > > Then, as now, the enemy that America faced was described bluntly > - and correctly - as a conspiracy of evil. Then, as now, the enemy was > well_financed, expertly organized and international in scope. Then, as > now, its operations were hidden under a code of deadly silence. > > As Attorney General, Robert Kennedy launched an extraordinary > campaign against organized crime. Under his leadership, the mission and > momentum of the Department of Justice were directed toward one > overarching goal: to identify, disrupt and dismantle the organized_crime > enemy within. A new spirit of cooperation was forged, both among federal > agencies and between state and federal law enforcement. Prosecutors > were action oriented - pursuing cases rather than waiting for the cases > to come to them. Investigators focused on function, not form - they > focused on doing what was necessary to get the job done rather than what > was dictated by the organizational chart. > > Attorney General Kennedy made no apologies for using all of the > available resources in the law to disrupt and dismantle organized crime > networks. Very often, prosecutors were aggressive, using obscure > statutes to arrest and detain suspected mobsters. One racketeer and his > father were indicted for lying on a federal home loan application. A > former gunman for the Capone mob was brought to court on a violation of > the Migratory Bird Act. Agents found 563 game birds in his freezer __ a > mere 539 birds over the limit. > > There are obvious differences, of course, between the network of > organized crime America faced in 1961 and the network of terror we face > today. Today, many more innocent lives have been lost. Many more > innocent lives continue to be threatened. But these differences serve > only to call us more urgently to action. > > The American people face a serious, immediate and ongoing threat > from terrorism. At this moment, American service men and women are > risking their lives to battle the enemy overseas. It falls to the men > and women of justice and law enforcement to engage terrorism at > home. History's judgment will be harsh - and the people's judgment will > be sure - if we fail to use every available resource to prevent future > terrorist attacks. > > Robert Kennedy's Justice Department, it is said, would arrest > mobsters for "spitting on the sidewalk" if it would help in the battle > against organized crime. It has been and will be the policy of this > Department of Justice to use the same aggressive arrest and detention > tactics in the war on terror. > > Let the terrorists among us be warned: If you overstay your visa > - even by one day - we will arrest you. If you violate a local law, you > will be put in jail and kept in custody as long as possible. We will use > every available statute. We will seek every prosecutorial advantage. We > will use all our weapons within the law and under the Constitution to > protect life and enhance security for America. > > In the war on terror, this Department of Justice will arrest and > detain any suspected terrorist who has violated the law. Our single > objective is to prevent terrorist attacks by taking suspected terrorists > off the street. If suspects are found not to have links to terrorism or > not to have violated the law, they are released. But terrorists who are > in violation of the law will be convicted, in some cases deported, and in > all cases prevented from doing further harm to Americans. > > Within days of the September 11 attacks, we launched this > anti_terrorism offensive to prevent new attacks on our homeland. To > date, our anti_terrorism offensive has arrested or detained nearly 1,000 > individuals as part of the September 11 terrorism investigation. Those > who violated the law remain in custody. Taking suspected terrorists in > violation of the law off the streets and keeping them locked up is our > clear strategy to prevent terrorism within our borders. > > Today, the Department of Justice is positioned to launch a new > offensive against terrorism. Due to extraordinary bi_partisan and > bi_cameral cooperation in the Congress, law enforcement will have new > weapons in the war on terrorism. Yesterday, by an overwhelming margin, > the House passed the Anti_terrorism Act of 2001. Hours from now, the > Senate is poised to follow suit. > > The president is expected to sign this legislation on > Friday. The hour that it becomes law, I will issue guidance to each of > our 94 U.S. Attorney's Offices and 56 FBI field offices directing them to > begin immediately implementing this sweeping legislation. I will issue > directives requiring law enforcement to make use of new powers in > intelligence gathering, criminal procedure and immigration violations. A > new era in America's fight against terrorism, made tragically necessary > by the attacks of September 11, is about to begin. > > The legislation embodies two over_arching principles: > > The first principle is airtight surveillance of terrorists. > > Upon the president's signature, I will direct investigators and > prosecutors to begin immediately seeking court orders to intercept > communications related to an expanded list of crimes under the > legislation. Communications regarding terrorist offenses such as the use > of biological or chemical agents, financing acts of terrorism or > materially supporting terrorism will be subject to interception by law > enforcement. > Agents will be directed to take advantage of new, technologically > neutral standards for intelligence gathering. So_called "roving" > wiretaps, that allow taps of multiple phones a suspect may use, are being > added as important as an important weapon in our war against terror. > > Investigators will be directed to pursue aggressively terrorists > on the internet. New authority in the legislation permits the use of > devices that capture senders and receivers addresses associated with > communications on the internet. > > Law enforcement will begin immediately to seek search warrants to > obtain unopened voice_mail stored on a computer __ just as they > traditionally have used search warrants to obtain unopened email. They > will also begin to use new subpoena power to obtain payment information > such as credit card or bank account numbers of suspected terrorists on > the internet. > > The second principle enshrined in the legislation is speed in > tracking down and intercepting terrorists. As soon as possible, law > enforcement will begin to employ new tools that ease administrative > burdens and delays in apprehending terrorists. > > Investigators are now able to use a single court order to trace a > communication even when it travels outside the judicial district in which > the order was issued. The scope of search warrants for unopened e_mail > and other evidence is now also nationwide. > > > The new tools for law enforcement in the war against terrorism > are the products of hundreds of hours of consultation and careful > consideration by the administration, members of Congress, and state and > local officials. They are careful, balanced, and long overdue > improvements in our capacity to prevent terrorism. > > The federal government cannot fight this reign of terror > alone. Every American must help us defend our nation against this > enemy. Every state, every county, every municipality must join together > to form a common defense against terrorism. > The law enforcement campaign that will commence in earnest when > the legislation is signed into law will be many years in duration. Some > will ask whether a civilized nation - a nation of law and not of men - > can use the law to defend itself from barbarians and remain > civilized. Our answer, unequivocally, is "yes." Yes, we will defend > civilization. And yes, we will preserve the rule of law because it makes > us civilized. > > The men and women of justice and law enforcement have been asked > to shoulder a great burden for the safety and security of the American > people. We will, as we have in the past, never waiver in our faith and > loyalty to the Constitution and never tire in our defense of the rights > it enshrines. > > Years after he left the office of Attorney General, an observer > of Robert Kennedy wrote that RFK brought these assets to his successful > campaign against organized crime: > *A constructive anger. >*An intimate knowledge of his subject. >*A talented team of prosecutors. >*And, finally, a partner in the White House. > > Today, as we embark on this campaign against terrorism, we are > blessed with a similar set of advantages. Our anger, too, is > constructive. Our knowledge is growing. Our team is talented. And our > leadership in the White House is unparalleled. > > George W. Bush has done more __ much more __ than declare war on > terrorism. George W. Bush is fighting a war on terrorism. Under his > leadership, we have pledged ourselves to victory. > > Terrorists live in the shadows, under the cover of darkness. We > will shine the light of justice on them. Americans alive today and yet > to be born and freedom_loving people everywhere will have new reason to > hope because our enemies now have new reason to fear. > > Thank you. > >###

4 3

America is beyond salivation
by sonofgomez709 26 Oct '01

26 Oct '01

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- On Thursday, October 25, 2001, at 08:42 PM, Mark Talbot wrote: >> Dangerous? Yes, there are dangers to a mandatory national I.D. card, >> but >> there may be greater dangers without one. The fact is, to live in a >> society >> as vulnerable as ours, we may have to give up something - but I >> disagree >> that what's lost is freedom. Instead, it's privacy, and maybe not even >> that. > > This guy is clueless: privacy is a form of freedom. > > I have yet to see a post 9/11 scheme that would actually enhance my > safety in any significant way. Even police states have terrorists. > The United States Government supported the Chechen "freedom fighters" who blew up a couple of apartment building blocks in Moscow. Hundreds died. But this was not terrorism...this was freedom fighting. Now that the U.S. has been hit so hard, the party line in the U.S.G. is shifting rapidly. As for the USA/PATRIOT law, about to be signed into law tomorrow, Friday, October 25, with enforcement to "begin immediately," I am not too worried about roving wiretaps. That's just technological evolution of the standard old judge-approved wiretap. No, what worries me a great deal is the all of the language about terrorist organizations and what happens to those who "provide support" for some claimed terrorist organization (including language about helping them to hide communicaitons, money transfers...sounds like anonymous remailers face civil forfeiture of their assets, plus imprisonment). There is even frightening language (available by grepping the text) about how the asset forfeitiures, arrests, detentions, etc. should not be done for ordinary first amendment practitioners! (Language like: "provided that such investigation of a United States person is not conducted solely upon the basis of activities protected bythe first amendment to the Constitution.'';") My translation of this language: Anyone may be arrested, held without charges, etc., but a positive defense, provided one can hire Gerry Spence, may be that the activity was a 1A activity and hence the Homeland Defense Troopers really should not have kicked the doors in, killed the wife in bed because they saw movement, stomped the cat, and put the anon remailer operator in a dark cell for 15 weeks without any charges being filed or evidence produced... The rest of the bill is filled with equally frightening stuff. Remember, folks, this stuff is not just directed at "Arabic-looking Middle Easterners with student visas." It applies to so-called right wing militias, to freedom fighters against unfair taxation, to gun dealers, even to those transporting their own fucking money! Someone carrying his own money faces forfeiture of the money and imprisonment, as if it were the King's money, not his! This grossly surpasses _anything_ the English masters did to the colonies. Far surpasses. Aspects of this have been the law for a long time, but this formalizes the issue that people cannot transport their own money around without the Crown deciding to seize their money. Fuck them dead. Fuck Washington. I pray for a massive enough attack to kill hundreds of thousands of these snakes in their den. Praise Osama, if this is what it takes. The USA/PATRIOT bill was hastily put together, with most Congresscritters have essentially no idea of its implications for building a police state. The U.S. Congress wastes more than a year debating the impeachment issue over the Lewinsky affair, blah blah blah, then races to construct an American Reich with barely any discussion. Disgusting. The nation is beyond salvation. America is preterite. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- CJ Parker <sonofgomez709(a)yahoo.com> http://profiles.yahoo.com/sonofgomez709 http://members.w-link.net/~sog/INDEX.HTM http://jya.com/cejfiles.htm "The True Story Of The InterNet" The Xenix ChainSaw Massacre http://www.technopagan.org/politics/xenix/ WebWorld & The Mythical Circle Of Eunuchs http://www.technopagan.org/politics/webworld/ InfoWar: Final Frontier Of The Digital rEvolution http://www.technopagan.org/politics/infowarriors/ Space Aliens Hide My Drugs http://www.technopagan.org/politics/sahmd/

1 0

9-11 Narco-Interrogation & Torture
by Matthew Gaylor 26 Oct '01

26 Oct '01

1 0

...
by Eric Cordian 26 Oct '01

26 Oct '01

subscribe cypherpunks

1 0

[linux-elitists] W3C last call on XML Encryption... (fwd)
by Eugene Leitl 26 Oct '01

26 Oct '01

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 11:32:53 -0400 From: Dan York <dyork(a)e-smith.com> To: linux-elitists <linux-elitists(a)zgp.org> Subject: [linux-elitists] W3C last call on XML Encryption... FYI, the W3C has issued a last call for comments on several proposals related to XML encryption. More info at: http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/ Since I know a good number of folks on this list are interested in encryption and Internet communication, I thought I would pass it along as it involves encrypting XML, much of which will no doubt be passed across the Internet. The specific documents are at: XML Encryption Requirements http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-encryption-req This document lists the design principles, scope, and requirements for the XML Encryption. It includes requirements as they relate to the encryption syntax, data model, format, cryptographic processing, and external requirements and coordination. XML Encryption Syntax and Processing http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlenc-core/ This document specifies a process for encrypting data and representing the result in XML. The data may be arbitrary data (including an XML document), an XML element, or XML element content. The result of encrypting data is an XML Encryption element which contains or references the cipher data. Decryption Transform for XML Signature http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlenc-decrypt This document specifies the "decryption transform", which enables XML Signatures verification even if both signature and encryption operations are performed on an XML document. Dan -- Dan York, Director of Training, Network Server Solutions Group Mitel Networks Corporation dan_york(a)mitel.com Ph: +1-613-751-4401 Cell: +1-613-263-4312 Fax: +1-613-564-7739 150 Metcalfe Street, Suite 1500, Ottawa,ON K2P 1P1 Canada http://www.e-smith.com/ http://www.mitel.com/sme/ _______________________________________________ linux-elitists http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-elitists

2 1