- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

another National ID card fuckwit
by citizenQ 25 Sep '01

25 Sep '01

Sept. 22, 2001, 6:54PM Idea of national identification card worth another look By DAGOBERT L. BRITO There have been several suggestions by responsible parties in the past few days that the United States adopt a national identification card program. The idea of a national identification card is one that most Americans find distasteful. An internal passport carries with it connotations of Adolf Hitler's Germany and Big Brother. However, the time has come to reevaluate the costs and benefits of such a card. Recent developments require more security precautions, and a national identification card is one of the less intrusive ways of providing such protection. First, for most Americans a national identification card would not involve any real loss of freedom or privacy. We already hold driver's licenses and use credit cards through which our travel and economic activities can easily be traced. As has been demonstrated many times in recent political investigations, authorities can obtain access to records of most of our transactions and even our phone calls. Therefore, for most middle-class Americans, a national identification card involves no significant restrictions on our freedoms. For those Americans who do not have access to credit cards and driver's licenses, a national identification card that can be used for identification may be a real asset. A smart photo identification card can be issued to every American citizen and resident over 18 years of age. The card would be universal, and no particular group would be singled out to bear a special burden. Every foreign national issued a visa to enter the United States could also be issued an identification card. This card could be coded with the expiration date of the visa and other such information. U.S. citizens and residents would be required to show this card to obtain employment and licences, to rent a car, check into hotels, use credit cards or ATM machines and cash checks. These are all activities that Congress can regulate under the Interstate Commerce Clause of the Constitution. The activities of foreign nationals in the United State on a visa can probably be monitored more closely without violating their rights. For example, it should be possible to monitor individuals undergoing flight training or studying nuclear engineering. This would serve several purposes. First, there are a large number of individuals who are in this country illegally because they have overstayed their visas or else have entered illegally. The issuing of national identification cards would be a way of finding such individuals. A few days ago, before Sept. 11, one could seriously make the argument that "undocumented" workers made a large contribution to the U.S. economy and it was not necessary to be strict in enforcing the laws. It is still true that these individuals make a large contribution to our economy and it is likely in our best interest to allow them to participate, but we must control the border. It is foolish to believe that we can keep out terrorists if we can't keep out simple farm workers. Mexican President Vicente Fox's request that the status of these worker be regularized now seems prophetic. The database generated by such cards would be a valuable tool for law enforcement and intelligence agencies. For most American this data already exists, but it is decentralized and takes time to process. A national identification card could be used to organize this data in a manner in which it could be used rapidly. People opposed to a national identification card are correct in believing that such a database could potentially pose a threat to our privacy and other rights protected by the Constitution. Thus, it is important that access to the database be limited by appropriate safeguards to protect these rights. The events of Sept. 11 mean that the amount of surveillance of airports and other such public places will increase. Employers and law enforcement officers will also be more careful. Unfortunately, there will be a disparate impact on some Americans because many people will make judgements on characteristics such as race or ethnic origin rather than the character of a particular individual. Thus, for many Americans who are likely to be stigmatized because of their ethnic origins, the possession of a valid identification card will be a valuable protection. Since the card can be linked to a database, it would eliminate the need to profile. A security score can be generated on more precise data without the use of such broad categories as race or ethic origin. Some people find the idea of having to produce an identification card oppressive. From personal experience, I find it much less oppressive to show an identification card than to be at the mercy of the discretion of a young, inexperienced or prejudiced border guard or police officer. Brito is a professor of political economy in the Department of Economics at Rice University.

2 1

Interested in making money from home?
by Best marketing plan ever! 25 Sep '01

25 Sep '01

Most people fail in home based business ventures because they are only able to refer 2 to 3 others to a business opportunity. Unfortunately, this is usually not enough to provide a positive cash flow in the first month. We have solved this problem by implementing a compensation plan that allows the average person to succeed. We pay you upfront Quick Cash so you can make a profit right away! Our business model features: 1. Guaranteed monthly income for 1 year 2. Checks paid weekly, no waiting 3. Unlimited Income Potential 4. No sales skills necessary 5. Absolutely no discrimination 6. Very small initial investment 7. Training provided by multi-millionaire Our company is paying a guaranteed $230 per month start up commission when you meet the company requirements. Please answer the following questions. We are searching for the top 50 responses. Please reply to this email, and then answer the questions within your reply. 1. Do you have a burning desire for something in your life that more money would help you to achieve? If so, what is it? 2. If we were able to show you how to make a guaranteed $1000 per month from home on a very part time basis, would you be interested in learning more? 3. Do you believe you could run a business from your home that could replace what you are currently earning? How much money per month would you need to make in addition to what you currently earn in order for you to consider starting a home based business? 4. Which of the following characteristics describe you best? A. Honest B. Trustworthy C. A natural born leader D. Can follow directions E. High morals F. Outgoing 5. As with any business, start up cost is necessary. How much initial capital could you raise to start your business knowing that you can make a guaranteed profit each month? A. $50 B. $100 C. $200 D. $400 E. $500 F. $1000 Thanks for your time. This survey is going to everyone in our database of people who have expressed an interest in making money from home. Please reply with your phone number and best time you can be reached or you may not be contacted. One of our representatives will contact you and share with you how we are succeeding and making money. The average check earned by our affiliates is $500 per month. It is possible to make thousands per month in a very short time with our company. Many affiliates have replaced their "day job" income in just a couple of months. We look forward to corresponding with you. Your information will remain confidential and will not be shared or sold to anyone or any company. Thank you, The Success Team, USA. email Healthwealth2001(a)excite.com Remember to include your phone number and times you can be reached. If you do not have a desire to make more money from home, please reply with "remove please." If you are not in the USA or Canada, please reply with "International" so we can recommend a business that will suit you. ----------------------------------------------------------- -------------- To Opt-Out of future mailings, follow this link: http://www.mynetmarketer.com/optout.htm?CID=323ad038868708edf946a7e2abd89c&… Learn to market like this, follow this link: http://www.mynetmarketer.com/members/430

1 0

Cryptic Gibberish Page
by Blanc 25 Sep '01

25 Sep '01

Does anyone on this list know what this page is about: http://nag.ljudmila.org/wabe/45.html My email name is on it; does their system pick up words randomly from the net to be used for their communications? .. Blanc

2 2

RE: Cryptic Gibberish Page
by Blanc 25 Sep '01

25 Sep '01

:Grasshopper: : :At the root of the tree (http://nag.ljudmila.org/) enlightenment :will be found. : :Peter Trei : <g> Thanks, Master. In cyberspace you never know where your name will show up. The creators must have my name in their files. .. Blanc

1 0

RAND Panelists Say Combating Terrorist Threats Must Not Erode Freedoms
by auto301094＠hushmail.com 25 Sep '01

25 Sep '01

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Panelists Say Combating Terrorist Threats Must Not Erode Freedoms By Derrill Holly, Associated Press Writer Published: Sep 24, 2001 ARLINGTON, Va. (AP) - A national strategy to combat terrorism should not compromise the Bill of Rights, members of a presidentially appointed counterterrorism panel said Monday. "Americans must never be asked to give up a single solitary right that they have under the Constitution," said Gov. Jim Gilmore, R-Va. Gilmore has chaired the advisory panel, charged with assessing the nation's ability to respond to terrorism involving weapons of mass destruction, since its creation in April 1999. He said the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11 have accelerated efforts to produce the panel's third and final report. Although the document is not due until December, it will be released to members of Congress early next month as members consider a raft of counterterrorism proposals. "We're not trying to set up some super intelligence agency," said Gilmore. He and other panel members see the role of the new Office of Homeland Security as a planning and coordination agency. Its primary duties would include budgetary oversight, with little emphasis on investigation, interdiction and apprehension of suspected terrorists. Gilmore said state and local officials should work with federal law enforcement agencies to respond to any threats. "If that's overwhelmed you, bring in the guard or the military as a last resort," he said. The meeting was held at the RAND Corporation Headquarters just blocks away from the soot-stained western wall of the Pentagon, where terrorists flew an American Airlines jet into the building. The 17-member panel was also directly touched by the attacks on the World Trade Center. Member Raymond Downey, the New York City Fire Department's commander of special operations, died when he was struck by falling debris as the Twin Towers collapsed. Those on the panel contend the events have not altered the recommendations they will make to the White House. "Some of the things we've been saying now for two years are still very relevant," said Michael A. Wermuth, a senior policy analyst at RAND. The creation of a National Office for Combating Terrorism was included in the panel's second report, released last December. "There's going to be reaction in this country, and we want to ensure that it's well timed and appropriately focused," said panel member George Foresman, Deputy State Coordinator for the Virginia State Department of Emergency Management. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Hush 2.0 wl8EARECAB8FAjuwxbEYHGF1dG8zMDEwOTRAaHVzaG1haWwuY29tAAoJEKadvsVlUK4P IQ8AoJfdkSqXseXGQqK8z9eifo+LhWDZAKCS7awluh8naCM2OiszwCgWSEpU2Q== =ijUb -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

U.S. Measures May Incite Domestic Terror
by auto301094＠hushmail.com 25 Sep '01

25 Sep '01

http://ebird.dtic.mil/Sep2001/s20010925domestic.htm Stratfor.com U.S. Measures May Incite Domestic Terror Summary -- In the wake of terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, the U.S. government is moving quickly to create a new Cabinet-level agency for homeland defense and ease restrictions on law enforcement agencies. But while these measures may prove effective against foreign attacks, they may also lead to increased domestic terrorism. Analysis -- In a televised State of the Union address Sept. 20, U.S. President George W. Bush announced the creation of a new Cabinet-level agency designed to "lead, oversee and coordinate" a national strategy to guard the United States against terrorism. Congress meanwhile is considering new laws to ease restrictions on wiretapping and eavesdropping. These new measures may be necessary components to protect the United States from further attacks by foreign terrorists. But they will also likely fuel the fears and anger of domestic groups such as the Michigan Militia or the North American Volunteer Militia. In time, as the U.S. security apparatus looks for threats coming from outside the country, the United States may again face attacks from within. More than 800 militia-style groups existed at the peak of the anti-government movement in the mid-1990s, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center. The number has decreased dramatically in the past five years, thanks to a combination of a strong economy and heavy pressure from law enforcement agencies in the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing. The SPLC now identifies only 194 "Patriot" groups that were active in 2000. Generally Patriot groups define themselves as opposed to the "New World Order" or advocate extreme anti-government doctrines, fearing the growth of government bureaucracies and intrusion upon civil liberties. Such groups are likely to enjoy a resurgence in interest, membership and activities as the government adopts more stringent security measures. U.S. lawmakers historically have been very cautious about tipping the balance between law enforcement and civil liberties. It took Congress nearly a year to pass former U.S. President Bill Clinton's anti-terrorism bill after the 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies in East Africa. In the weeks before the recent terror attacks, privacy advocates hailed a major victory when a San Diego judge banned the use of automatic cameras to catch cars driving through red lights. But the attacks in New York and Washington have dramatically altered much of the nation's thinking, as many Americans are beginning to place a greater value on security. This shift is reflected in the federal government. The newly announced Office of Homeland Security, to be headed by Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge, is aimed at knitting together counter terrorism functions now scattered across more than 40 federal agencies, including the FBI, CIA, National Guard and local police and firefighting forces. It will focus not only on preventing terrorist attacks but also on fortifying potential targets by developing plans to protect the nation's transportation, power and food systems, according to officials cited by the Associated Press. The "Mobilization Against Terrorism Act" still under consideration in Congress would rewrite laws dealing with wiretapping, eavesdropping and immigration. Included in the bill are provisions to ease the restrictions the FBI faces on installing its Carnivore Internet-surveillance system as well as streamlining procedures to obtaining voicemail recordings. Further provisions include eliminating the statue of limitations for terrorism- related crimes and allowing federal authorities to detain without a court order non-U.S. citizens suspected of involvement in terrorist activities. Also under consideration is a modification to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to make it easier for prosecutors in certain highly sensitive cases to look through the records of a business, credit card company or Internet provider. Fewer restrictions on law enforcement agents and the creation of a new federal office may be necessary steps to protect the United States from foreign terrorists. But powerful bureaucracies and narrowed civil liberties are exactly the sort of triggers that set off militia groups. We are likely to see a resurgence of militia group activity just at the time that law enforcement agencies are retasking themselves to counter foreign threats. Even if law enforcement agents continue to infiltrate militia groups, it is much more difficult to monitor and prevent activity from individuals. As militia ranks fill, it is not unlikely to expect some of them to resort to the same kind of armed activity as Timothy McVeigh and Ted Kaczynski did in the past.

1 0

None
by None 25 Sep '01

25 Sep '01

Tuesday, September 25, 2001 When the FBI guys come knocking, it's the worst of times By Riad Z. Abdelkarim <http://www.dailynewslosangeles.com/opinions/articles/0901/25/lvew01.asp> The ring at my doorbell that Sunday afternoon was innocent enough. I set aside my laptop computer and my half-eaten Chicken McNuggets and went to the door. When I first peered out and saw two sharply dressed men in business suits and dark sunglasses, I thought I was being visited by a pair of friendly Jehovah's Witnesses. As I opened the door, however, it struck me that these men were a bit older than the young men of faith who usually canvassed the neighborhood. Any lingering doubt about their identities was immediately erased when the two men flashed their badges and announced -- in true X-Files fashion -- that they were with the Federal Bureau of Investigation. "What can I do for you gentlemen?" I asked. My initial puzzled reaction turned to concern when they explained that they wanted to speak with me "about the events of last Tuesday," obviously referring to the horrible terrorist attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. I told them that I would be happy to speak with them if they made an appointment to meet me later at the local office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, where I served as a member of the board of directors. Although the agents were somewhat taken aback by my request, they ultimately agreed. An appointment was made for the following evening, but the agents never appeared to interview me nor did they call to reschedule the meeting. The next morning, I awoke ill and asked that my clinic patients be rescheduled before stepping out to pick up some over-the-counter medication. During this time, two other agents visited both my home and work place. When the agents did not find me, they warned my wife ominously that they "would keep coming back." I was finally able to reach one of the agents by cellular phone, and I made an appointment to meet him and his partner at a local coffee shop. What ensued can best be described as a combination of a fishing expedition and a scene from a straight-to-video B-movie. Holding a thin folder stamped "SECRET" in front of them, the agents initially queried me about my background. One of them stopped in mid-sentence to change a question from "When did you come to the U.S.?" to "Where were you born?" They appeared somewhat surprised when I mentioned I was born in Santa Monica, California, and had lived in Southern California my entire life. I was then quizzed about my political views with such vague questions as "Are we the bad guys in this thing?" I told the agents in no uncertain terms that there could be no justification whatsoever for the horrible terrorist attacks that had taken place. Further, I informed them that my political views are widely known because I frequently write commentaries that are published in newspapers around the country. In fact, in the days following the terrorist attacks, my commentaries condemning the assaults and expressing the shared grief and outrage of American Muslims had appeared in newspapers in California, Texas, Connecticut, Washington, D.C., New Jersey, and Madrid, Spain. The agents subsequently inquired about my numerous affiliations with several prominent and widely respected American Muslim advocacy and relief organizations. At no time was I asked about any specific individual, nor was I asked to identify any suspects in photographs. The interview's low point came when I asked why the agents had gone to my clinic, when I had provided them with a cellular telephone number at which I could be reached. Their answer spoke volumes about the aimlessness of this investigation: "When we learned that you were out sick, we thought that our worst fears had been realized -- that you had fled the country." I could no longer restrain my laughter. "Give me a break," I exclaimed incredulously. To where would I flee? I am an American. I do not possess nor do I desire any other citizenship. By the end of the 75-minute ordeal, I was convinced that the agents were not acting on any specific information but were instead groping wildly for straws in the dark. I found this quite disheartening. I harbor no ill will toward those agents who interviewed me. I realize that they were just following orders. Like other Americans who are Muslims or of Arabic ethnicity, I earnestly support the FBI's attempts to vigorously investigate this heinous terrorist act and bring those responsible to justice. What I do not appreciate is being singled out for questioning merely because of my faith, my ethnicity or my legitimate political activism. As noted in a Christian Science Monitor editorial this week, "to have FBI agents with no preparatory contact knocking on the doors of Arab or Muslim citizens with no clear ties to acts of crime is a sure way to instill fear right where cooperation is most needed." In legal parlance, this practice is referred to as "profiling." In my book, it's just plain racism. And it has no place in my country. --- Riad Z. Abdelkarim is an American-born, -raised and -educated physician active in the American Muslim community. He lives in Southern California. _________________________________________________ ************************************************************************** Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues Send a blank message to: freematt(a)coil.com with the words subscribe FA on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per week) Matthew Gaylor, (614) 313-5722 ICQ: 106212065 Archived at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fa/ **************************************************************************

1 0

None
by None 25 Sep '01

25 Sep '01

Tuesday, September 25, 2001 When the FBI guys come knocking, it's the worst of times By Riad Z. Abdelkarim <http://www.dailynewslosangeles.com/opinions/articles/0901/25/lvew01.asp> The ring at my doorbell that Sunday afternoon was innocent enough. I set aside my laptop computer and my half-eaten Chicken McNuggets and went to the door. When I first peered out and saw two sharply dressed men in business suits and dark sunglasses, I thought I was being visited by a pair of friendly Jehovah's Witnesses. As I opened the door, however, it struck me that these men were a bit older than the young men of faith who usually canvassed the neighborhood. Any lingering doubt about their identities was immediately erased when the two men flashed their badges and announced -- in true X-Files fashion -- that they were with the Federal Bureau of Investigation. "What can I do for you gentlemen?" I asked. My initial puzzled reaction turned to concern when they explained that they wanted to speak with me "about the events of last Tuesday," obviously referring to the horrible terrorist attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. I told them that I would be happy to speak with them if they made an appointment to meet me later at the local office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, where I served as a member of the board of directors. Although the agents were somewhat taken aback by my request, they ultimately agreed. An appointment was made for the following evening, but the agents never appeared to interview me nor did they call to reschedule the meeting. The next morning, I awoke ill and asked that my clinic patients be rescheduled before stepping out to pick up some over-the-counter medication. During this time, two other agents visited both my home and work place. When the agents did not find me, they warned my wife ominously that they "would keep coming back." I was finally able to reach one of the agents by cellular phone, and I made an appointment to meet him and his partner at a local coffee shop. What ensued can best be described as a combination of a fishing expedition and a scene from a straight-to-video B-movie. Holding a thin folder stamped "SECRET" in front of them, the agents initially queried me about my background. One of them stopped in mid-sentence to change a question from "When did you come to the U.S.?" to "Where were you born?" They appeared somewhat surprised when I mentioned I was born in Santa Monica, California, and had lived in Southern California my entire life. I was then quizzed about my political views with such vague questions as "Are we the bad guys in this thing?" I told the agents in no uncertain terms that there could be no justification whatsoever for the horrible terrorist attacks that had taken place. Further, I informed them that my political views are widely known because I frequently write commentaries that are published in newspapers around the country. In fact, in the days following the terrorist attacks, my commentaries condemning the assaults and expressing the shared grief and outrage of American Muslims had appeared in newspapers in California, Texas, Connecticut, Washington, D.C., New Jersey, and Madrid, Spain. The agents subsequently inquired about my numerous affiliations with several prominent and widely respected American Muslim advocacy and relief organizations. At no time was I asked about any specific individual, nor was I asked to identify any suspects in photographs. The interview's low point came when I asked why the agents had gone to my clinic, when I had provided them with a cellular telephone number at which I could be reached. Their answer spoke volumes about the aimlessness of this investigation: "When we learned that you were out sick, we thought that our worst fears had been realized -- that you had fled the country." I could no longer restrain my laughter. "Give me a break," I exclaimed incredulously. To where would I flee? I am an American. I do not possess nor do I desire any other citizenship. By the end of the 75-minute ordeal, I was convinced that the agents were not acting on any specific information but were instead groping wildly for straws in the dark. I found this quite disheartening. I harbor no ill will toward those agents who interviewed me. I realize that they were just following orders. Like other Americans who are Muslims or of Arabic ethnicity, I earnestly support the FBI's attempts to vigorously investigate this heinous terrorist act and bring those responsible to justice. What I do not appreciate is being singled out for questioning merely because of my faith, my ethnicity or my legitimate political activism. As noted in a Christian Science Monitor editorial this week, "to have FBI agents with no preparatory contact knocking on the doors of Arab or Muslim citizens with no clear ties to acts of crime is a sure way to instill fear right where cooperation is most needed." In legal parlance, this practice is referred to as "profiling." In my book, it's just plain racism. And it has no place in my country. --- Riad Z. Abdelkarim is an American-born, -raised and -educated physician active in the American Muslim community. He lives in Southern California. _________________________________________________ ************************************************************************** Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues Send a blank message to: freematt(a)coil.com with the words subscribe FA on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per week) Matthew Gaylor, (614) 313-5722 ICQ: 106212065 Archived at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fa/ **************************************************************************

1 0

right now on CNN
by citizenQ 25 Sep '01

25 Sep '01

I mean "AOL-TV" "What will Americans give up to make sure it (9/11/01) never happens again?" One woman quoted: "Everything, right now..."

1 0

Lo que estabas esperando...
by MisProductos.com 25 Sep '01

25 Sep '01

1 0