Time: Sun Nov 03 14:34:24 1996
To: Electra Briggs <electra@texas.net>
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: Hit Enter -- Go To Jail!
Cc:
Bcc:
At 03:01 PM 11/3/96 -0600, you wrote:
>Paul:
>I just took a break to check my email.
>Reading all your posts now. Will respond later.
>I must continue slogging away at video project.
>Left a message for Dr. Eva Snead. She will give an update.
>
>I just received this post. What a set up huh?
>
>Take it easy kiddo. Have you taken a B-Complex today?
Had a bunch before bedtime.
I am running low again.
>
>Signing Off,
>Electa
Electra,
Thanks for your caring. I am very very
angry today, because of this biological
attack that is looming. I weep for the
children, literally. Nancy is still too
spooked to think objectively about the
ideas I shared with her. Can I share
them with you? I need to leave her to
her work, so she feels she is getting
something done. Maybe I will just go over
to the nearest children's hospital, and
volunteer some of my time. My heart is
breaking; these criminals at CDC should
be put out to pasture, to eat grass and
horse manure for the rest of their lives,
surrounded by electrified barb wire.
I mean it. They can rub their bare butts
up against 220 volts, for all I care.
They are animals. Thanks for your
patience with me. I am going through
some immense changes; my sword is out
of its sheaf, and I am swinging it over
my head, I am so angry. I will wilt them
with the force of truth, if it's the
last thing that I ever do on this earthly
plane. Mark my words.
/s/ Paul Mitchell
>Date: Sun, 3 Nov 1996 14:18:48 -0500
>To: jaesea@onramp.net, abarber@nab.org, bcousins@panix.com,
> sbatye@ix.netcom.com, saor@maestro.com, capital@inch.com,
> BTARR@aol.com, bjohns@ite.net, matguthrie@enterprise.net,
> ENCORE9016@aol.com, bteague@ixc.net, nannems19@qnet.com,
> sexmagik@earthlink.net, Starshar@worldaxes.com, pnet@uscom.com,
> whrinst@azstarnet.com, Dave.Tilbury@uk.sun.com, robertk@flash.net,
> mblw@psln.com, rtp.warhead@feersum.demon.co.uk, jpalbicke@iconnect.net,
> pdick@noord.bart.nl, Whichwind@aol.com, cquest@norfolk.infi.net,
> zwiz@oo.net, JudyD8@aol.com, russell.gardener@pt.teradyne.com,
> e8726231@stud1.tuwien.ac.at, cjclr@focus.baynet.net, rjs@silcom.com,
> mattes138@aol.com, CBaker1001@aol.com, lynzi@village.yvv.com,
> jlewis@starbase.neosoft.com, electra@texas.net,
> johngee@nm-us.campus.mci.net, SRR1001@aol.com, AdamBaumer@aol.com,
> glenn@gandalf.otsuka.com, JdeSFe@aol.com, mpred@usa.pipeline.com,
> wac@europa.com, renee@blanchette.mv.com, jcpaul@cris.com
>From: jaesea@onramp.net (jc pressler)
>Subject: RTP Hit Enter -- Go To Jail! (fwd) VIA BTARR
>
>From: BTARR@aol.com
>Date: Sun, 3 Nov 1996 13:52:35 -0500
>Subject: Fwd: HIT ENTER -- GO TO JAIL
>
><< >Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 20:10:05 GMT
> >From: "Charles R. Smith" <softwar@us.net>
> >Subject: HIT ENTER- GOTO JAIL
> >
> >All I have to do is hit enter to commit a felony...
> >
> >President Clinton considers encryption software to be a
> >controlled technology. NOT FOR EXPORT under the U.S. Munitions
> >List. I cannot openly post detailed information about Pcypher
> >encryption software to the Internet without being charged with
> >"illegal export of a weapon" by the Federal Government. Nor can
> >I offer free "shareware" for the same reason. Yet, my product
> >is based on public domain materials and is presently being sold
> >in a retail market. In a world were a virus program can spread
> >around the globe in hours and companies thrive on shareware, I
> >am locked out. It is indeed ironic that posting a virus
> >designed to break into computers is quite legal but posting
> >security software that is designed to stop hackers is a crime.
> >Freedom of speech? More like a gag order backed with an open
> >invitation for five to seven at the Federal Hilton, Leavenworth.
> >To me it is plain, simple, good old fashioned censorship.
> >
> >I cannot export because of Federal law. I cannot post because
> >of Federal law. Yet, there are no provisions to limit the
> >import of foreign products. Therefore, I am forced to compete
> >in the U.S. domestic market against non-U.S. companies, while I
> >am kept out of foreign markets by my own government. In other
> >words, if I was an ex-communist programmer still living in
> >Russia I could go world wide. No problemski. Yet, being an
> >American, I am shackled by an overzealous government regulation.
> >This costs American high tech, high paying jobs. This costs
> >federal, state, and local taxes that I would gladly pay on the
> >sales. How many times have you heard anyone say they want to
> >pay more in taxes!? No sales, no money, no jobs, no taxes...
> >The price of an unfair and illogical trade policy.
> >
> >Under current law I can sell encryption software to any U.S.
> >citizen. I can sell it to a minor. I can sell it to a
> >convicted criminal. I can sell it to murderer. I can sell it
> >to a convicted spy. No restrictions. Anyone can dial the toll
> >free number or walk in a retail site and buy a copy. In fact,
> >an agent from any foreign Intelligence service (ie.. KGB, VAVAK,
> >Mossad...) could walk in, buy a copy and put it in the
> >diplomatic bag bound for who knows where. There is no provision
> >or requirement that I or my retailers check every customer to
> >ensure they are a U.S. citizen. However, I cannot sell it to a
> >legitimate foreign company or businessman. That would be
> >considered dangerous. The current law does nothing to stop
> >criminals and terrorists.
> >
> >To illustrate the backward approach taken by the Clinton
> >administration I must first point out that basic information
> >security is NOT required for the Federal government. There are
> >no security requirements for your medical records from HUD, VA
> >or Medicare. There are no requirements by the FAA for security
> >of flight software for airliners. Your tax data, social
> >security data, criminal information and other legal records have
> >zero requirements for security. However, cable TV information
> >is required by Federal law to be kept private and secure. The
> >data that could kill you is open to any hacker, but don't
> >worry... Your cable bill is safe. The current law does not
> >bring personal security.
> >
> >This obsolete view of encryption software by the Clinton
> >administration also makes us soft on defense of our Military
> >Information Infra-structure. DISA (Defense Information Security
> >Agency) estimated that there were over 300,000 security
> >violations against DOD computers in 1994 and over 360,000 in
> >1995. They also noted that over 90% of these violations were
> >never investigated. If anyone can and should use encryption it
> >is our military forces. The GAO estimated that recent attacks,
> >such as the 16 year old hacker that took control of Rome Air
> >Force Base in New York for three days, costs millions to repair
> >and investigate. Encryption played a vital role, protecting our
> >forces during Desert Storm. Yet, the lack of good products and
> >opposition by the President leaves our military wide open to
> >hackers and terrorists. His current policy is a threat to our
> >national defense.
> >
> >This is both a campaign issue and a bi-partisan issue. There
> >are three bills before Congress which will repeal restrictions
> >on encryption software. The first bill was sponsored by Sen.
> >Pat Leahy (D - VT) and is named S. 1587. Two other bills
> >quickly followed, the SAFE ACT (Hr. 3011) proposed by Rep. Bob
> >Goodlatte (R - VA) and the PROCODE bill by Sen. Conrad Burns (R
> >- MT). *** Please note a major Co-Sponsor of PROCODE is Senator
> >Bob Dole ***. In addition, Rep. Rick Boucher, (D - VA) stated
> >before the Information Technology Association of America
> >Conference that "encryption standards proposed by the
> >Administration will not be very useful for the international
> >community". Rep. Boucher, in a split with the Clinton
> >Administration's most recent ESCROW encryption proposals, stated
> >that unless major changes were made in U.S. encryption export
> >laws, the Internet would not see major growth. "Multi-national
> >Corporations are not likely to use systems to which U.S.
> >national security agencies have backdoor keys".
> >
> >President Clinton's encryption policy is a disaster. His
> >Clipper proposal can best be described as the "Maginot Line" of
> >computer defenses. He is now facing strong opposition both
> >inside and outside of his own party. The President has done
> >little to protect our personal and collective security. He has
> >cost us jobs, income, trade, taxes, and perhaps the lead in this
> >important field of computer science. It is time for a change.
> >
> >I am not asking for government support. I am not asking for
> >monetary compensation. I am not asking for a billion dollar
> >program to erect a giant bureaucracy of bit-counting lawyers
> >(can you say Clipper/Escrow?). All I am asking for is an equal
> >opportunity to sell. In summary, a repeal of the export ban
> >will NOT cost America one red cent. Yet, it will yeild billions
> >of dollars in software exports and save many lives. Only then
> >can we provide the computer security so badly needed to protect
> >both the U.S. and our allies from a future Digital Pearl Harbor.
> >
> >1 if by land, 2 if by sea. Paul Revere - encryption 1775
> >
> >Charles R. Smith
> >SOFTWAR
> >http://www.us.net/softwar >>
>
>
>---------------------
>Forwarded message:
>From: celano@ic.net (Peter J. Celano)
>Reply-to: ignition-point@majordomo.pobox.com
>To: ignition-point@majordomo.pobox.com
>Date: 96-11-03 10:24:10 EST
>
>>Date: Sun, 3 Nov 1996 09:46:51 -0500 (EST)
>>From: "David J. Sussman" <djsussma@oakland.edu>
>>To: CS <cs@oak.oakland.edu>, OKCTY <okcty@oak.oakland.edu>
>>Subject: HIT ENTER- GOTO JAIL (fwd)
>>
>>
>>
>>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 20:10:05 GMT
>>From: "Charles R. Smith" <softwar@us.net>
>>Newsgroups: alt.politics.org.cia
>>Subject: HIT ENTER- GOTO JAIL
>>
>>All I have to do is hit enter to commit a felony...
>>
>>President Clinton considers encryption software to be a
>>controlled technology. NOT FOR EXPORT under the U.S. Munitions
>>List. I cannot openly post detailed information about Pcypher
>>encryption software to the Internet without being charged with
>>"illegal export of a weapon" by the Federal Government. Nor can
>>I offer free "shareware" for the same reason. Yet, my product
>>is based on public domain materials and is presently being sold
>>in a retail market. In a world were a virus program can spread
>>around the globe in hours and companies thrive on shareware, I
>>am locked out. It is indeed ironic that posting a virus
>>designed to break into computers is quite legal but posting
>>security software that is designed to stop hackers is a crime.
>>Freedom of speech? More like a gag order backed with an open
>>invitation for five to seven at the Federal Hilton, Leavenworth.
>>To me it is plain, simple, good old fashioned censorship.
>>
>>I cannot export because of Federal law. I cannot post because
>>of Federal law. Yet, there are no provisions to limit the
>>import of foreign products. Therefore, I am forced to compete
>>in the U.S. domestic market against non-U.S. companies, while I
>>am kept out of foreign markets by my own government. In other
>>words, if I was an ex-communist programmer still living in
>>Russia I could go world wide. No problemski. Yet, being an
>>American, I am shackled by an overzealous government regulation.
>>This costs American high tech, high paying jobs. This costs
>>federal, state, and local taxes that I would gladly pay on the
>>sales. How many times have you heard anyone say they want to
>>pay more in taxes!? No sales, no money, no jobs, no taxes...
>>The price of an unfair and illogical trade policy.
>>
>>Under current law I can sell encryption software to any U.S.
>>citizen. I can sell it to a minor. I can sell it to a
>>convicted criminal. I can sell it to murderer. I can sell it
>>to a convicted spy. No restrictions. Anyone can dial the toll
>>free number or walk in a retail site and buy a copy. In fact,
>>an agent from any foreign Intelligence service (ie.. KGB, VAVAK,
>>Mossad...) could walk in, buy a copy and put it in the
>>diplomatic bag bound for who knows where. There is no provision
>>or requirement that I or my retailers check every customer to
>>ensure they are a U.S. citizen. However, I cannot sell it to a
>>legitimate foreign company or businessman. That would be
>>considered dangerous. The current law does nothing to stop
>>criminals and terrorists.
>>
>>To illustrate the backward approach taken by the Clinton
>>administration I must first point out that basic information
>>security is NOT required for the Federal government. There are
>>no security requirements for your medical records from HUD, VA
>>or Medicare. There are no requirements by the FAA for security
>>of flight software for airliners. Your tax data, social
>>security data, criminal information and other legal records have
>>zero requirements for security. However, cable TV information
>>is required by Federal law to be kept private and secure. The
>>data that could kill you is open to any hacker, but don't
>>worry... Your cable bill is safe. The current law does not
>>bring personal security.
>>
>>This obsolete view of encryption software by the Clinton
>>administration also makes us soft on defense of our Military
>>Information Infra-structure. DISA (Defense Information Security
>>Agency) estimated that there were over 300,000 security
>>violations against DOD computers in 1994 and over 360,000 in
>>1995. They also noted that over 90% of these violations were
>>never investigated. If anyone can and should use encryption it
>>is our military forces. The GAO estimated that recent attacks,
>>such as the 16 year old hacker that took control of Rome Air
>>Force Base in New York for three days, costs millions to repair
>>and investigate. Encryption played a vital role, protecting our
>>forces during Desert Storm. Yet, the lack of good products and
>>opposition by the President leaves our military wide open to
>>hackers and terrorists. His current policy is a threat to our
>>national defense.
>>
>>This is both a campaign issue and a bi-partisan issue. There
>>are three bills before Congress which will repeal restrictions
>>on encryption software. The first bill was sponsored by Sen.
>>Pat Leahy (D - VT) and is named S. 1587. Two other bills
>>quickly followed, the SAFE ACT (Hr. 3011) proposed by Rep. Bob
>>Goodlatte (R - VA) and the PROCODE bill by Sen. Conrad Burns (R
>>- MT). *** Please note a major Co-Sponsor of PROCODE is Senator
>>Bob Dole ***. In addition, Rep. Rick Boucher, (D - VA) stated
>>before the Information Technology Association of America
>>Conference that "encryption standards proposed by the
>>Administration will not be very useful for the international
>>community". Rep. Boucher, in a split with the Clinton
>>Administration's most recent ESCROW encryption proposals, stated
>>that unless major changes were made in U.S. encryption export
>>laws, the Internet would not see major growth. "Multi-national
>>Corporations are not likely to use systems to which U.S.
>>national security agencies have backdoor keys".
>>
>>President Clinton's encryption policy is a disaster. His
>>Clipper proposal can best be described as the "Maginot Line" of
>>computer defenses. He is now facing strong opposition both
>>inside and outside of his own party. The President has done
>>little to protect our personal and collective security. He has
>>cost us jobs, income, trade, taxes, and perhaps the lead in this
>>important field of computer science. It is time for a change.
>>
>>I am not asking for government support. I am not asking for
>>monetary compensation. I am not asking for a billion dollar
>>program to erect a giant bureaucracy of bit-counting lawyers
>>(can you say Clipper/Escrow?). All I am asking for is an equal
>>opportunity to sell. In summary, a repeal of the export ban
>>will NOT cost America one red cent. Yet, it will yeild billions
>>of dollars in software exports and save many lives. Only then
>>can we provide the computer security so badly needed to protect
>>both the U.S. and our allies from a future Digital Pearl Harbor.
>>
>>1 if by land, 2 if by sea. Paul Revere - encryption 1775
>>
>>Charles R. Smith
>>SOFTWAR
>>http://www.us.net/softwar
>>
>>Pcyphered signature:
>>4279C640DB607D4D13B808082D7CC6F23938320C1956E31A50781D192D627672
>>601D141C6516051C061976462B382C294542435F19665B2B316E174955445C56
>>5A506675180400041F030A001472657A6A1201191C0E0003784FCCE47ACB9531
>>E1EE5997D5E34A97A351C22B2F1871573A85BB02E3CB5C046FB24E80478AEB74
>>4063578E1E8019425A08091923FE6D4CA375669185FD8935B361CA6B65949FE3
>>57E8629F5981F5030E0AAD2BECA669808B2A038E1D89E810398F0A4DDCD2F5A7
>>B1E6417290D1290346BE790894F6AD1E790C57A0B457C1BE85A5D3CFB42E38E8
>>D5C6BDAECA57F968898F345920D5804CF5832D70534F5C66230AF099F68CAECD
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>=============================================================================
>
>>This mailing list is processed through Majordomo at Oakland University.
>>If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send electronic mail
>>to majordomo@oak.oakland.edu. In the message body put: unsubscribe okcty
>>
>>
>--
>Peter J. Celano celano@ic.net
>http://ic.net/~celano member SPECLUSA < ><
>-------------
>Ready to DO something? Try http://ic.net/~celano/ip/
>Always remember - LIPS SINK SHIPS!!!
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>----------------
>To subscribe, email majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com
>with the message "subscribe ignition-point".
>http://ic.net/~celano/ip/
>
>
>
>
>
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail