[2J[1m[37;41mĿ[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mFrom newpisgah.keene.edu!mozz.unh.edu!noc.near.net!bigboote.WPI.EDU!news.math[1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mhowland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!feustel Tue Nov  8 00:31:25 1[1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mNewsgroups: alt.culture.usenet,alt.culture.internet,alt.2600,news.admin.polic[1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mc.legal,alt.fan.joel-furr                                                    [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mPath: newpisgah.keene.edu!mozz.unh.edu!noc.near.net!bigboote.WPI.EDU!news.mat[1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!feustel                     [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mFrom: feustel@netcom.com (David Feustel)                                     [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mSubject: Re: Wiretap passes! (Digital telephony bill and privacy)            [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mMessage-ID: <feustelCynzt3.GH4@netcom.com>                                   [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mOrganization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)     [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mReferences: <3939pk$h5a@rcp6.elan.af.mil> <1994Nov1.173859.18197@emba.uvm.edu[1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m30001@s125.infonet.net> <398alp$bm0@news.duke.edu> <398s0q$83@buchanan07.res.[1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mDate: Wed, 2 Nov 1994 23:55:50 GMT                                           [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mLines: 125                                                                   [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mXref: newpisgah.keene.edu alt.culture.usenet:1208 alt.2600:12980 news.admin.p[1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m9285                                                                         [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m                                                                             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m                                                                             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m                           Unanimous Nod For Wiretap Bill                    [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m                                                                             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m                            [from Technology & Liberty]                      [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m                                [By Clark Matthews ]                         [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m                        [in The Spotlight November 7th, 1994]                [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m                                                                             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mThe so-called Wiretap Access Bill, S. 2375, passed at 10:30 PM. on           [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mFriday, October 7th,1994, with "the unanimous consent" of the U.S.           [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mSenate. It is likely to be signed by President Clinton by the time you       [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mread this. Two days previously, on October 5th, the U.S. House of            [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mRepresentatives passed the identical bill, H.R. 4922, by an overwhelming     [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mmargin. There was no floor debate on the bill in either house. There         [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mwas no reading of the bill. In fact, the final Senate vote happened so       [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mquickly that observers watching C-SPAN actually missed it.                   [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mNevertheless, a Senate vote unanimously passing the "Wiretap Access          [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mBill" is recorded as having occurred at 10:30 PM, October 7,1994.            [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m                                                                             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mMANUFACTURING 'CONSENT'                                                      [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m                                                                             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mFBI Director Louis Freeh personally visited every U.S. senator to lobby      [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mfor the bill. I've even heard reports that Janet Reno accompanied Freeh      [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mfor some of these little chats. Nevertheless, several senators               [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mpositioned themselves to stop the vote on the bill, notably Howard           [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mMetzenbaum (D-Ohio), Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Patrick Leahy              [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m(D-Vt.). All of them placed "holds" on the bill in the days before the       [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mfinal vote. These "holds" permitted any of them to prevent a vote and        [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mstop the bill in its tracks. But none of them did. Each of these             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41msenators received a personal visit from FBI Director Louis Freeh in          [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mthe days before the senate recessed for the fall elections. and none         [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mof them exercised their right to stop the bill. So there were no             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mobjections at 10:30 pm on Friday, October 7th, only "unanimous               [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mconsent." No one in the Senate voted for the Wiretap Accesa Bill (or         [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41magainst it). No one left any fmgerprints.  Ask your senators and             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mthey'll tell you no one's responsible. We shall see.  In the end, this       [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41munstoppable bill slithered silently onto the books in the contemptible       [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mtradition of the 16th Amendment, the Federal Reserve Act and many other      [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mlandmark frauds and fixes that have dearly cost our country's liberty,       [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mtreasury and sovereignty. Late at night and out of sight, no one was         [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mresponsible for passing the bill. And no one is to blame. A few days         [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mafter this grubby victory, FBI Director Louis Freeh spoke at the annual      [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mA1 Smith dinner in New York City. Flush with his success with the            [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mWiretap bill-and with the amazing silence of key congressmen and             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41msenators after Freeh's personal visits-Clinton's FBI director compared       [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mhimself favorably with J. Edgar Hoover. The audience gave up a big           [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mlaugh for America's "reinvented" Hoover sans perfume, ponies, peignoirs      [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mand roommate Clyde, of course.                                               [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m                                                                             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mDIGITAL TYRANNY                                                              [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m                                                                             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mThe Wiretap Access Bill, as critics call it, was uroposed by the FBI and     [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mJanet Reno's Justice Department as the "Digital Telephony and Privacy        [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mImprovement Act" of 1994. The bill took its language from the                [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mcomputerized features of automatic, remote-controlled surveillance and       [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41meavesdropping equipment that is now being built into America's new           [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mtelephone networks to spy on citizens. Freeh's and Reno's "Privacy           [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mImprovement Act" had nothing whatever to do with improving people's          [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mprivacy. Instead, it aimed at eliminating people's privacy by                [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41meffectively converting citizens' telephones into remote-activated            [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mlistening devices and call-tracing systems. The Wiretap Access Bill          [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41msimply legalizes these surveillance devices that are already in use in       [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mlarge parts of our country. It also forces taxpayers to pay $500             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mmillion for them.  The Wiretap Access Bill effectively eliminates the        [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mbothersome Constitutional requirement that the FBI obtain court              [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mauthorization to tap your phone or bug your house through your               [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mtelephones. That's because your local telephone company can't tell what      [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mthe devices are doing and, therefore, can't know whether the                 [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41msurveillance is legal or not.                                                [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m                                                                             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mAUTOMATIC GESTAPO                                                            [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m                                                                             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mYou see, the new equipment is remote-activated and it's designed to be       [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41minstalled on the telephone network (not in phone company offices). It        [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mgathers much of the same information about your calls that your phone        [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mcompany does-but the FBI (or whoever) clearly doesn't want your tele-        [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mphone company to know what information it's gathering. Or how much it's      [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mgathering. So the devices run "encrypted" to conceal what they're doing      [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mfrom telco employees, some of whom might become alarmed by the extent of     [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mfederal surveillance or start asking troublesome questions                   [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mabout court orders and warrants. Even if your friends at the phone           [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mcompany were interested in safeguarding your rights, they will               [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mprobably soon discover the same fundamental truth learned by citizens        [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41min places like the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany: It's not a good idea       [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mto ask questions about court orders when it comes to secret police           [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41msurveillance operations. The question of court orders for surveillance       [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mis further subverted by the bill's requirement that your local phone         [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mcompany provide instantaneous, contemporaneous wiretapping capabilities      [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mto the FBI. It seems our rapidly "reinvented" government wants instant       [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mgratification-it has no time for trivialities like presenting court          [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41morders. The monitoring equipment doesn't ask for a warrant before            [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mtapping your calls or bugging your office (or your bedroom). Someone         [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mthousands of miles away simply presses a few keys and the equipment just     [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mdoes it. They can always find a court order somewhere if they need one.      [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mEither way, no one will know what they're up to. For that matter, the        [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mequipment can do this for whomever has the "key codes" that turn on one      [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mof these devices. It doesn't even have to be the FBI.                        [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m                                                                             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m'BLACKMAIL CENTRAL'                                                          [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m                                                                             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mA few weeks ago I lapsed into histrionics on these pages on the subject      [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mof our country's new Wiretap Access Law. At the time, I asked                [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mrhetorically what kind of Congress, judges, courts and journalists we        [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mcould egpect if Bill Clinton's administration succeeded in legalizing        [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mthis frightful, untraceable surveillance equipment.  In my opinion,          [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mthis equipment poses a clear danger of transforming federal                  [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mlaw-enforcement agencies into Blackmail Central. Or worse. I wouldn't        [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mbe the least surprised to learn it has happened already-after all, these     [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mdevices were designed years ago and widely installed and tested in 1992,     [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41maccording to reports. So I ask again now, how will we shield congress,       [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mthe courts and our citizens from politically motivated blackmail and         [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mretribution now that we tagpayers are paying for undetectable,               [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mautomatic federal surveillance as the law of the land? Why, we'll have       [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41ma contemptible, craven and silent bunch like we had this year, of            [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mcourse. When your senator comes around looking for your vote this fall,      [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mremember the "unanimous consent" that passed the Wiretap Access Bill.        [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mWhy not ask him or her why they liked the bill, S. 2375, so much? If         [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mthey don't remember why, ask them if Louis Freeh is as funny in person       [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mas he was at the A1 Smith dinner.                                            [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m                                                                             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m                                                                             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m--                                                                           [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mDave Feustel N9MYI        Internet:<feustel@netcom.com>                      [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m219-483-1857                Compuserve:<73532,1747>                          [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m                                                                             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mEvery American citizen is involved in an abusive relationship.               [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mLiberals are codependents in that relationship (with the U.S.                [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41mGovernment, in case you didn't figure it out).                               [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;41m                                                                             [1m[37;41m[40m
[1m[37;41m[1m[37;40m
