I would disagree with you here jim. Perhaps you have a selective memory, but representatives from all the organizations attended the Clipper II hearings at NIST in Maryland and gave the pro-GAK folks a good drubbing. (with NIST's microphone too. They're such good sports...) Person after person got up at the first of those (and subsequent ones) and grilled representatives from the FBI, NSA, NIST, and the White House. The ACLU, EPIC, EFF, CDT, and VTW were all there and pitched in. Somehow I don't think that getting grilled is what's missing. The thing that's holding us back here is that we're all pretty sold on our arguments. When the White House comes to their senses, or Congress overrules them, or the market makes them irrelevant, then we'll have some progress. -Shabbir J. Safdar * Online Representative * Voters Telecomm. Watch (VTW) http://www.vtw.org/ * Defending Your Rights In Cyberspace jim bell writes:

At 02:12 PM 7/21/96 -0400, Bob Palacios wrote:

...

The Center for Democracy and Technology /____/ Volume 2, Number 28 POLICY POST Volume 2, Number 28 July 21, 1996 CONTENTS: (1) FBI Director to Testify at Senate Crypto Hearing; Netizens Can Participate in Hearing Live Online In an effort to ensure that concerned Internet users can participate in this important policy debate,

If there is anything worth complaining about, it is that there simply hasn't been a "debate" in this "important policy debate." The pro-GAK few have consistently avoided appearing in a format in which a genuine debate can occur. And I don't mean a question-and-answer scenario either, whether the questions are asked by Congress or the news media. I'm talking about a REAL debate, one where the pro-GAK's can be seen to _lose_ by being torn to pieces.

Jim Bell jimbell@pacifier.com