http://www.reason.com/cy/cy092401.html September 24, 2001 Civil liberties may take a hit By Cathy Young [...] The movements of foreign visitors will be scrutinized more closely. Perhaps most alarming to many civil libertarians, it's likely that the government will expand its ability to monitor electronic mail, which has been a controversial issue for some time. Do I like the idea of the government intercepting e-mail? No. But, as long as there's judicial oversight and due process, that's no different from its longstanding power to intercept regular mail. Do I like the idea of people being able to encrypt electronic communications so that they are beyond surveillance? Frankly, I found it scary even before Sept. 11 - precisely because of the threat of terrorism. It is said that there are no atheists in foxholes; perhaps there are no true libertarians in times of terrorist attacks. Even in the Declaration of Independence, the right to liberty is preceded by the right to life.
On Wednesday, September 26, 2001, at 03:18 PM, Declan McCullagh wrote:
http://www.reason.com/cy/cy092401.html
September 24, 2001 Civil liberties may take a hit By Cathy Young
[...]
The movements of foreign visitors will be scrutinized more closely. Perhaps most alarming to many civil libertarians, it's likely that the government will expand its ability to monitor electronic mail, which has been a controversial issue for some time.
Do I like the idea of the government intercepting e-mail? No. But, as long as there's judicial oversight and due process, that's no different from its longstanding power to intercept regular mail.
Do I like the idea of people being able to encrypt electronic communications so that they are beyond surveillance? Frankly, I found it scary even before Sept. 11 - precisely because of the threat of terrorism.
It is said that there are no atheists in foxholes; perhaps there are no true libertarians in times of terrorist attacks.
Even in the Declaration of Independence, the right to liberty is preceded by the right to life.
We see why "Reason" has become so...dismissable. Between Cato arguing for victim disarmament and Reason arguing that "right to liberty is preceeded by the right to life," I say we just kill them all and let Rand sort them out. --Tim May
Like most good publications, Reason gives columnists wide latitude Cathy Young has written some excellent articles in certain areas in the past. Now she's branching out to anti-terror responses, which shows that she's not a libertarian across the board. Reason asked me to write a piece for them on civil lib after 9-11, which I finished last night, so the editors seem to want a variety of voices. -Declan On Wed, Sep 26, 2001 at 03:28:02PM -0700, Tim May wrote:
We see why "Reason" has become so...dismissable.
Between Cato arguing for victim disarmament and Reason arguing that "right to liberty is preceeded by the right to life," I say we just kill them all and let Rand sort them out.
--Tim May
Dear Ms. Young, Declan McCullagh wrote:
http://www.reason.com/cy/cy092401.html
September 24, 2001 Civil liberties may take a hit By Cathy Young
It is said that there are no atheists in foxholes; perhaps there are no true libertarians in times of terrorist attacks.
Please speak for yourself. As a student and friend of liberty, I am a libertarian ESPECIALLY in times of stress, when the befogged and weak are tempted to surrender their freedom.
Even in the Declaration of Independence, the right to liberty is preceded by the right to life.
The two are not separable - the latter is in fact a corollary of the former - so the order in which they are stated is irrelevant. Human life, as opposed to the organic existence of cattle in a feedlot, implies liberty. Best, Marc de Piolenc
In case any of y'all actually care, my response (and others) to Young's essay is here: http://www.politechbot.com/p-02575.html -Declan On Wed, Sep 26, 2001 at 06:18:15PM -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote:
http://www.reason.com/cy/cy092401.html
September 24, 2001 Civil liberties may take a hit By Cathy Young
[...]
The movements of foreign visitors will be scrutinized more closely. Perhaps most alarming to many civil libertarians, it's likely that the government will expand its ability to monitor electronic mail, which has been a controversial issue for some time.
Do I like the idea of the government intercepting e-mail? No. But, as long as there's judicial oversight and due process, that's no different from its longstanding power to intercept regular mail.
Do I like the idea of people being able to encrypt electronic communications so that they are beyond surveillance? Frankly, I found it scary even before Sept. 11 - precisely because of the threat of terrorism.
It is said that there are no atheists in foxholes; perhaps there are no true libertarians in times of terrorist attacks.
Even in the Declaration of Independence, the right to liberty is preceded by the right to life.
Declan, if you meet this bitch at some journalist's party or whatever, tell her "Even in the bill of rights, the rights of the people to be secure in their homes and papers against illegal searches is preceded by the right of free speech" (if you stretch illegible speech=encryption) There are plenty of true libertarians, even more during terrorist attacks. FYI: Our building is now taking to airport style x-ray machines to check bags with. ugh! ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_@_sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ On Wed, 26 Sep 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote:
http://www.reason.com/cy/cy092401.html
September 24, 2001 Civil liberties may take a hit By Cathy Young
[...]
The movements of foreign visitors will be scrutinized more closely. Perhaps most alarming to many civil libertarians, it's likely that the government will expand its ability to monitor electronic mail, which has been a controversial issue for some time.
Do I like the idea of the government intercepting e-mail? No. But, as long as there's judicial oversight and due process, that's no different from its longstanding power to intercept regular mail.
Do I like the idea of people being able to encrypt electronic communications so that they are beyond surveillance? Frankly, I found it scary even before Sept. 11 - precisely because of the threat of terrorism.
It is said that there are no atheists in foxholes; perhaps there are no true libertarians in times of terrorist attacks.
Even in the Declaration of Independence, the right to liberty is preceded by the right to life.
participants (4)
-
Declan McCullagh -
F. Marc de Piolenc -
Sunder -
Tim May