-Caveat Lector- from alt.conspiracy ----- As always, Caveat Lector. Om K ----- <A HREF="http://www.aci.net/kalliste/">The Home Page of J. Orlin Grabbe</A> ----- Information SuperSpyWay Landmark Ruling on Encryption by Declan McCullagh Encryption programs are protected by the First Amendment and can be freely shipped overseas, a federal appeals court ruled in a landmark decision Thursday. Claiming President Clinton's executive order limiting the export of such software strikes "deep into the heartland of the First Amendment," a 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals panel ruled 2-1 that the regulation was unconstitutional. The ruling does not apply to off-the-shelf executable programs, but only human-readable "source code" instructions. The long-awaited decision -- which came 18 months after the panel heard arguments in the case -- is likely to spur the development of privacy-protecting encryption software, which can shield confidential email and other messages from prying eyes. US firms have been reluctant to build these capabilities into products because under Clinton's order, they can't readily sell it overseas. "Government efforts to control encryption thus may well implicate not only the First Amendment rights of cryptographers intent on pushing the boundaries of their science, but also the constitutional rights of each of us as potential recipients of encryption's bounty," the majority said. Unless the US Justice Department successfully asks the court to hold off on its ruling, individuals -- and perhaps companies -- in the Ninth Circuit can now export source code. "Assuming it's not stayed and you live in California, Washington, or Oregon, you can post source code on the Internet without fear," says Michael Froomkin, a law professor at the University of Miami School of Law. "If this is upheld, we're going to see a lot more cryptographic use domestically. People are going to start building it into products," Froomkin said. "I am almost speechless," said Tara Lemmey, executive director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which co-sponsored the suit. "It is a giant step forward in bringing down export controls and it goes further than any of the legislation that has been talked about so far because none [of those bills] address the First Amendment issues." "The reality is that it is not over yet, because it still needs to go through the Supreme Court," she added. Wired News, May 6, 1999 Der Fuhrer Invades Yugoslavia War and Orwell Revisited Don't doublethink twice, it's all right. Norman Solomon e-mail feedback 9/2/98 During the week after U.S. missiles hit sites in Sudan and Afghanistan, some Americans seemed uncomfortable. A vocal minority even voiced opposition. But approval was routine among those who had learned a few easy Orwellian lessons. When terrorists attack, they're terrorizing. When we attack, we're retaliating. When they respond to our retaliation with further attacks, they're terrorizing again. When we respond with further attacks, we're retaliating again. When they put bombs in cars and kill people, they're uncivilized killers. When we put bombs on missiles and kill people, we're upholding civilized values. When they kill, they're terrorists. When we kill, we're striking against terror. At all times, Americans must be kept fully informed about who to hate and fear. When the United States found Osama bin Laden useful during the 1980s because of his tenacious violence against the Soviet occupiers in Afghanistan, he was good, or at least not bad -- but now he's really bad. No matter how many times they've lied in the past, U.S. officials are credible in the present. When they vaguely cite evidence that the bombed pharmaceutical factory in Khartoum was making ingredients for nerve gas, that should be good enough for us. Might doesn't make right -- except in the real world, when it's American might. Only someone of dubious political orientation would split hairs about international law. When the mass media in some foreign countries serve as megaphones for the rhetoric of their government, the result is ludicrous propaganda. When the mass media in our country serve as megaphones for the rhetoric of the U.S. government, the result is responsible journalism. Unlike the TV anchors spouting the government line in places like Sudan and Afghanistan, ours don't have to be told what to say. They have the freedom to report as they choose. "Circus dogs jump when the trainer cracks his whip," George Orwell observed, "but the really well-trained dog is the one that turns his somersault when there is no whip." Orwell noted that language "becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts." And his novel 1984 explained that "the special function of certain Newspeak words ... was not so much to express meanings as to destroy them." National security. Western values. The world community. War against terrorism. Collateral damage. American interests. What's so wondrous about Orwellian processes is that they tend to be very well camouflaged -- part of the normal scenery. Day in and day out, we take them for granted. And we're apt to stay away from uncharted mental paths. In 1984, Orwell wrote about the conditioned reflex of "stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought ... and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction." Orwell described "doublethink" as the willingness "to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed." In his afterword to 1984, Erich Fromm emphasized "the point which is essential for the understanding of Orwell's book, namely that 'doublethink' is already with us, and not merely something which will happen in the future, and in dictatorships." Fifty-two years ago, Orwell wrote an essay titled "Politics and the English Language." Today, his words remain as relevant as ever: "In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible." Repression and atrocities "can indeed be defended," Orwell added, "but only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face, and which do not square with the professed aims of political parties. Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness." National security. Western values. The world community. War against terrorism. Collateral damage. American interests. [Norman Solomon is a syndicated columnist.] Metrotimes, Sept. 2, 1998 World Trade U.S. and Asia Divided Over WTO The debate over who will be the next World Trade Organization (WTO) Director-General has further divided Asia from the United States, and brought accusations of the U.S. turning the WTO into a rich man's club. At the same time, the U.S. is threatening trade investigations and actions against several Asian nations, including Japan and South Korea. The U.S. international economic policy remains inwardly focused on appeasing domestic lobbies, while at the same time its foreign policy continues to pursue the role of geopolitical leader. These contrasting international policies are proving counterproductive to developing positive relations with Asian nations, and may contribute to the further regionalization of Asia's economy, rather than U.S.-preferred globalization. The decision-making process for choosing the next World Trade Organization (WTO) Director-General that has been going on for months, has come down to two candidates: Thai Deputy Prime Minister Supachai Panitchpakdi and former New Zealand Prime Minister Mike Moore. Despite the fact that the former WTO head Renato Ruggiero stepped down on April 30, the decision to replace him has already been postponed several times. Not only has no clear consensus emerged, but also there is an increased potential for the organization to halt operations temporarily. Europe and Africa are both divided between the two candidates, although Europe is leaning toward Moore. Supachai has the backing of Asia and the Middle East, while Moore has the support of North and South America, wit h the United States leading the coalition in his favor. The U.S. decision to back Moore formally was greeted with disappointment by Thailand, which has been emerging, with U.S. patronage, as a model of economic reform for Asia. Thailand's disappointment has now turned to anger, as it accuses the U.S. of stalling the decision-making process to pull support away from Supachai. The United States' refusal to back Supachai has raised alarms and accusations from other Asian nations that the U.S. is splitting the WTO along economic and regional borders, threatening the efficacy of the organization in the future. The Executive Director of the Malaysian Institute of Economic Research, Mohamed Ariff, has said, "This is most unfortunate; it looks like a North-South divide. By and large developing countries think that many of these international organizations have been dominated by the North." He further warned that a failure to accept Supachai as the next WTO Director-General could lead less developed nations to be unenthusiastic in implementing WTO policies and decisions. In Thailand, Senate Speaker Meechai Ruchupan has taken a stronger stance, saying, "The lesson of the WTO selection is that it's time we reviewed our foreign policy with all countries, especially the U.S. We have to see who are our real friends and who are our enemies." Thai Foreign Ministry Spokesman Don Pramudwinai has cautioned that "If the selection of the Director- General becomes an increasingly ugly process then the people concerned have to bear the blame." Don further warned, "We feel that everyone is starting to have a lack of confidence in the WTO procedures." On May 3 at a special meeting of WTO officials, which lasted well into the night, Ali Mchumo, the Tanzanian ambassador who chairs the decision-making general council of the WTO, asserted that Panitchpakdi Supachai is no longer a viable candidate for the post of director general of the World Trade Organization. "As far as the process of identifying the most acceptable candidate is concerned, the process is over for Dr Supachai," he said. Diplomats said Mchumo's comment elicited surprise from the delegates attending the meeting. The camp favoring Supachai immediately fought back with delegates abandoning procedure by arguing out loud their case. "Mchumo's getting a clear answer that Supachai is not dead," said the Malaysian delegate, speaking on behalf of the Association of Southeast Asian countries. "Any attempt to impose a decision on the WTO membership could divide us and, as a consequence, gravely impair not only our preparations for (the upcoming ministerial meeting in) Seattle but the entire organization itself." The meeting deteriorated to such an extent that Mchumo was ultimately forced to recant his statement before the evening session convened. However, at approximately the same time as the U.S. was confronting Asia over the head of the WTO, it issued several warnings to Asian nations at the end of last week over their trade practices and potential WTO actions regarding them. The U.S. cited the controversial Super 301 trade act and the Title VII Buy American law, thereby warning South Korea, Japan, India, Hong Kong, and Taiwan of potential investigations or, in some cases, WTO actions over unfair trade practices. China, on the other hand, was congratulated for implementing "a functioning system capable of protecting intellectual property rights," particularly in the field of optical media. This U.S. trade stance has put many Asian nations on the defensive, causing anti- U.S. sentiments to rise within these countries. Concurrent with its domestically focused economic foreign policy (which is being implemented not only vis-a-vis Asia but also Europe, and elsewhere as well), the U.S. has been attempting to strengthen its role as the geopolitical global leader. These two competing goals are working against each other and, so far, the U.S. has failed to realize either one. As it tries to build international coalitions and increase its influence over world events, it is at the same time degrading these relationships with economic policies bordering on all out protectionism. What the United States seems to have forgotten is that political gratitude is often secured by economic generosity. Given NATO's actions in Yugoslavia, the U.S. and Europe are maintaining only a tenuous hold o n international cooperation as they seek to avoid the embarrassment of defeat; however, Asia has no such overriding reason to maintain strong cooperation with the U.S. Once the war in Yugoslavia ends, U.S. economic policies may again lead to increased antagonism with Europe and we may very well see the same patterns as those in Asia emerging. The economic principles being implemented by the U.S. in Asia, including its decision not to back Supachai, are becoming counterproductive to positive U.S.-Asian relations. Only a few months ago, Thailand was showing signs of becoming a close ally and useful associate of the U.S. in promoting its international policy in Southeast Asia. Now it is facing a rise in anti- American sentiments in government circles, while its labor unions, angry at the IMF-proscribed economic reforms, are lashing out at the West in general. Even China, after having been carefully courted to induce economic cooperation, is growing increasingly concerned by changing U.S. military ties with Japan and the Philippines, while the Philippines accuses the U.S. of preferring trade with China over regional security and stability. This tangle will not be easily undone, particularly given the current distractions in Southern Europe. What has become increasingly apparent is that the Asian powers are expressing, ever more vocally, their antagonism over the U.S. backing of Moore for the WTO post, over the U.S. threatening trade sanctions while these countries are in the throes of an economic downturn, and over IMF-imposed reforms. These issues may ultimately undermine U.S. policy in that they may push Asia toward a closed regional economic grouping, over which it may exercise even less influence. Stratfor Daily Briefing, May 6, 1999 ----- Aloha, He'Ping, Om, Shalom, Salaam. Em Hotep, Peace Be, Omnia Bona Bonis, All My Relations. Adieu, Adios, Aloha. Amen. Roads End Kris DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
