An interesting message from Brock Meeks, citing FBI Director Louis Freeh's admission that the government may not be content with the Wiretap Bill as written. We all knew this. I hope the collaborators at EFF wake up. --Tim From: brock@well.sf.ca.us (Brock N. Meeks) Newsgroups: alt.activism.d,alt.politics.datahighway,alt.privacy,alt.society.resistance,comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Re: EFF Statement on Leahy/Edwards Digital Telephony Bill Date: 12 Aug 1994 05:38:03 -0500 Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway Lines: 23 Sender: nobody@cs.utexas.edu Distribution: inet Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9408120314.A14499-0100000@well> References: <9407117766.AA776643994@ccgate.infoworld.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: news.cs.utexas.edu On Thu, 11 Aug 1994, Brett Glass wrote:
There is a real danger that ANY concession the EFF makes will be leveraged by the spooks -- who do not appear to care a whit about 4th Amendment rights or personal privacy -- to further undermine our rights in the future. No bill without incredibly strong firewalls against future erosions of civil rights should have ANY support from the EFF.
During hearings on this bill yesterday (thurs.), FBI Director Freeh was asked if, at some point, he thought that the FBI would try to extend the coverage of this bill because, as Freeh admitted, "some criminals aren't going to be caught" because they will use communications systems not covered under this bill Freeh said "it's possible" that the FBI would seek an expanded scope. It's clear the FBI isn't thinking of this bill as an end point, it's just the start for them. Brock Meeks CyberWire Dispatch