Strong police forces without Constitutional limitations might appeal to those wanting immediate safety, but the reality is the opposite.

[Charles A. Reynolds]

I agree!
----- Original Message -----
From: Julian M Catchen <julian@catchen.org>
To: <plug-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us>
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 1:53 PM
Subject: Strong police forces without Constitutional limitations might
appeal to those wanting immediate safety, but the reality is the opposite.


> A message sent out by Bruce Schneier, an cryptography expert.
> Available online: http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram.html
>
> --
>             11 September 2001
>
> Both sides of the calendar debate were wrong; the new century began on 11
> September 2001.
>
> All day I fielded phone calls from reporters looking for the "computer
> security angle" to the story.  I couldn't find one, although I expect
> several to come out of the aftermath.
>
> Calls for increased security began immediately.  Unfortunately, the
> quickest and easy way to satisfy those demands is by decreasing
> liberties.  This is always short sighted; real security solutions exist
> that preserve the free society that we all hold dear, but they're harder
to
>
> find and require reasoned debate.  Strong police forces without
> Constitutional limitations might appeal to those wanting immediate safety,
> but the reality is the opposite.  Laws that limit police power can
increase
>
> security, by enforcing honesty, integrity, and fairness.  It is our very
> liberties that make our society as safe as it is.
>
> In times of crisis it's easy to disregard these liberties or, worse, to
> actively attack them and stigmatize those who support them.  We've already
> seen government proposals for increased wiretapping capabilities and
> renewed rhetoric about encryption limitations.  I fully expect more
> automatic surveillance of ordinary citizens, limits on information flow
and
>
> digital-security technologies, and general xenophobia.  I do not expect
> much debate about their actual effectiveness, or their effects on freedom
> and liberty.  It's easier just to react.  In 1996, TWA Flight 800 exploded
> and crashed in the Atlantic.  Originally people thought it was a missile
> attack.  The FBI demanded, and Congress passed, a law giving law
> enforcement greater abilities to expel aliens from the country.
Eventually
>
> we learned the crash was caused by a mechanical malfunction, but the law
> still stands.
>
> We live in a world where nation states are not the only institutions which
> wield power.  International bodies, corporations, non-governmental
> organizations, pan-national ethnicities, and disparate political groups
all
>
> have the ability to affect the world in an unprecedented manner.  As we
> adjust to this new reality, it is important that we don't become the very
> forces we abhor.  I consider the terrorist attacks on September 11th to be
> an attack against America's ideals.  If our freedoms erode because of
those
>
> attacks, then the terrorists have won.
>
> The ideals we uphold during a crisis define who we are.  Freedom and
> liberty have a price, and that price is constant vigilance so it not be
> taken from us in the name of security.  Ben Franklin said something that
> was often repeated during the American Revolutionary War: "They that can
> give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve
> neither liberty nor safety."  It is no less true today.
>
> Senate Amendment 1562, adopted Thursday, will expand Federal wiretapping
> powers:
> <http://www.cdt.org/security/091101response.shtml/>
>
> Calls to ban encryption:
> <http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46816,00.html>
> <http://www.msnbc.com/news/627390.asp>
>
> Re-emergence of Carnivore:
> <http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46747,00.html>
> <http://latimes.com/business/la-000073542sep12.story>
>
> Erosions of civil liberties are coming:
> <http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46784,00.html>
>
> Other essays:
> <http://www.crypto.com/wtc.html>
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wtcattack/message/93>
> <http://www.cdt.org/security/cdtstatement.shtml>
>
> "Americans must rethink how to safeguard the country without bartering
away
>
> the rights and privileges of the free society that we are defending. The
> temptation will be great in the days ahead to write draconian new laws
that
>
> give law enforcement agencies - or even military forces - a right to
> undermine the civil liberties that shape the character of the United
> States. President Bush and Congress must carefully balance the need for
> heightened security with the need to protect the constitutional rights of
> Americans."
>              - The New York Times, 12 Sep 01
>
> "Our values, our resolve, our commitment, our sense of community will
serve
>
> us well. I am confident that, as a nation, we will seek and serve justice.
> Our Nation, my neighbors and friends in Vermont demand no less, but we
must
>
> not let the terrorists win. If we abandon our democracy to battle them,
> they win. If we forget our role as the world's leader to defeat them, they
> win. And we will win. We will maintain our democracy, and with justice, we
> will use our strength."
>              - Sen. Patrick Leahy, 12 Sep 01
>
> "History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of
> urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure."
>              - Justice Thurgood Marshall, 1989
>
>
>
>
> --
> mail : julian @ catchen.org         | ( topeka )
> www  : http://catchen.org/topeka/   |  phx, az
> sent : Sat Sep 15, 2001 01:48PM MST |
>
>  The DMCA says that companies can use technology to take away fair use,
>  but programmers can't use technology to take fair use back. Now the
>  government is spending taxpayer money putting people from other countries
>  in jail to protect multinational corporate profits at the expense of
>  free speech
>                       --Jennifer Granick, Center for Internet and Society,
>                         Stanford Law School
> ________________________________________________
> See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't
post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>
> PLUG-discuss mailing list  -  PLUG-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss