-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- About two weeks ago while making a point about the absurdity of taking government on its word, I mentioned an incident involving then Secretary of State Al Haig. Specifically the point was in reply to Mr. Sternlight's assertion that because a public relations official for the NSA had made statements regarding the Data Encryption Escrow plan's harmless nature and the equally harmless and benign character of the NSA's paternal hand, they were unquestionably authentic and complete. Among other points, I indicated that there was significant reason to doubt bald assertions made by government officials, especially in a public relations capacity. One of the examples I used relied on the events following the attempted assassination of President Reagan, (who's name I then spelled incorrectly). Specifically I noted that Secretary of State Haig appeared before the press and announced (in some form or another) that he was in charge. The implication in my statement was that Secretary Haig was not in charge at all, and that relying on government to operate by its own rules, even with the scrutiny of the press is silly. An irate Haig supporter, who also defended the President's name (by correcting my spelling error anyhow) insisted that this event was a big fabrication by the press and that indeed Secretary Haig was in authority in some way or another. He insisted the press had blown the issue out of proportion. I was forced out of town for some time, and was unable to reply immediately. I bring up the point now to clarify my information, and to tie in some interesting concerns regarding secure communications and operations in a Emergency. Secretary of State Al Haig was not next in line for either succession stream, and his asserting so in the national media was a gross error. The relevant authorities are the Department of Defense Directive 5100.30 (1971) and the Constitution of the United States. The first sixteen successors in the Presidential line of succession are: 1. The Vice President 2. Speaker of the House of Representatives 3. President pro tempore of the Senate 4. Secretary of State 5. Secretary of the Treasury 6. Secretary of Defense 7. The Attorney General 8. Secretary of the Interior 9. Secretary of Agriculture 10. Secretary of Commerce 11. Secretary of Labor 12. Secretary of Health and Human Services 13. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 14. Secretary of Transportation 15. Secretary of Energy 16. Secretary of Education. The national command authority line kicks in when the President and his/her successors are dead or cannot be located and immediate U.S. military decisions must be made: 1. Secretary of Defense 2. Deputy Secretary of Defense 3. Secretary of the Army 4. Secretary of the Navy 5. Secretary of the Air Force 6. Under Secretary of Defense for Policy 7. Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering A plethora of the Assistant Secretaries of Defense and General Council to the Defense Department in order of their lengths of service. etc. When President Reagan was injured, and the Vice President (George Bush at the time) was out of town, the successor to the Presidency was the Speaker of the House, Tip O'Neill. The Secretary of State was two more rungs down the ladder. The Secretary of State appears nowhere in the command authority side of succession. Casper Weinberger was the then Secretary of Defense and next in line there. Al Haig's source of sovereignty? Control of the national media? Perhaps that's a touch conspiracy oriented, but how does the proper authority convince the citizenry that he or she should be followed when another authority figure is effectively seizing the reigns? Herein lies the stuff of constitutional crisis. It is the responsibility of the Federal Emergency Management Agency to keep track of the Presidency and the line of succession. The question becomes, if a figure claims authority how is this verified, and enforced? Former FEMA director Giuffrida: "One of the things we discovered is there was no authentication system.... if [someone] got on the horn and said, 'I'm the successor,' and somebody said 'prove it,' [no one could]." Of course this was some time ago, but how much things have changed is a real question. It seems to me that the Unites States has never recognized the potential problems that national crises may cause. I cite a particularly interesting tale that might be amusing if it were not so alarming. On the presidential emergency evacuation procedures from National Security Advisor Brzenzinski's Memoirs: I called in the person responsible for evacuating the President in the event of a crisis. I obtained a detailed account on how long it actually would take to evacuate the President by helicopter.... I ordered him to run a simulated evacuation right now, turning on my stopwatch. The poor fellow's eyes...practically popped: He looked so surprised. He said, "Right now?" And I said "Yes, right now." He reached for the phone and could hardly speak coherently when he demanded that the helicopter immediately come for a drill. I took one of the secretaries along to simulate the First Lady and we proceeded to the South Lawn to wait for the helicopter to arrive. It took roughly two and a half times longer to arrive as it was supposed to. We then flew to a special site from where another evacuation procedure would be followed. To make a long story short, the whole thing took roughly twice as long as it should have. Moreover, on returning we found that the drill somehow did not take into account the protective services and we were almost shot down. There have been significant changes in technology no doubt since the Carter Administration. For one thing fiber optics seem to present some resistance to EMP effects that before threatened normal lines of communication, but how have authentication methods changed? It seems to me that there are great potentials for advance in authority authentication with new technologies not limited to and newer than public key cryptography. On the other hand it seems the United States culture of vulnerability, justified by theories of Mutually Assured Destruction or budgeting concerns, is so strong that such advances would never take hold in a meaningful way. Can you see a reporter in the famed President Haig press conference asking: "Excuse me Secretary Haig, may we examine your FEMA signed authority key?" - -uni- (Dark) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3 iQCVAgUBLaI9HxibHbaiMfO5AQEBZgP/fZaGM/WG4sgJuqmmn/uBgLIoUzn9bBe1 CDaOUYzCvyssFWp23qIqXZMgKVorxQXIObbKORFSfG2Nj+n3gcyKF2oRUtrbqmsT oam6h+wABTpawNt2Kc3P0MwwX9QyHK/afPNpuztwCntdvCOmXd3YHybQ5dLHAk5d ku9cQlHjMBo= =Qz+l -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----