Re: Cypherpunks as a Terrorist Organization

[Tim May <tcmay@got.net>]

At 8:02 AM -0700 8/19/97, Duncan Frissell wrote:

>State is lagging in issuing the terrorist organization list required by this
>law.  It is believed that they are chicken because most of the groups would
>be Moslem groups and this would be considered a politically incorrect
>denigration of a "protected group."  Then they'd have to put the IRA on the
>list as well and that would cause controversy.  If they never issue the
>list...
>
>In any case, I don't think that we have to worry because we don't fund
>anyone.  We just send non-cash bits.  The law requires that a foreign
>terrorist group on the "Attorney General's List" (actually State Department)
>receive money or physical support.  I suppose remailers could be targetted
>but that would make for an interesting case since anonymnity remains
>protected.

Actually, this is not true. I guess it depends on who the "we" is/are. I've
made contributions to groups whose goals I support. And several years ago I
helped some political groups get PGP 2.0 installed for use. (They can now
find experts within their own group, as I am hardly current on PGP and its
many variations and installation options. But in '92-'93 I was a local
expert, comparatively.)

It bears mentioning that the "rebel group" in Myanmar/Burma which Phil
Zimmermann is so proud of, becauase they were early users of PGP to protect
their communications and laptops, is both a terrorist and a drug dealing
group. As the rebels battle the forces of Slorc, the regime in power, they
fund their activities with the thriving heroin trade out of the Shan
province. And they ambush Slorc vehicles and kill the soldiers inside,
plant bombs in strategic locations, etc. No different from Hamas freedom
fighters bombing ZOG installations in the Zionist Entity.

And Hamas is now using PGP, frustrating the ZOG and Palestinian Authority
officials to no end. The Engineer, now presumed dead, is thus replaced by
The Cryptologist.

So, when PGP supporters claim that PGP is not being used for "terrorist
activities," they are ignoring reality. Depends on a definition of
terrorism, as always. When the U.S. mines the harbors of countries with
democratically elected governments, or assassinates Patrice Lumumba, Ahmed
Ben Bella, etc., this is called "fighting for democracy." When the
U.S.-backed Cuban emigre terrorist groups blow up planes out of Havana,
this is called "freedom fighting."

When Hamas stages similar acts, it is "terrorism."

So, if PGP supporters help the Burmese rebels to set up secure networks, is
this legal or illegal under the Anti-Terrorism Act? And if PGP supporters
help Hamas set up secure networks, is this legal or illegal?

Exactly what is the difference?

Clinton's Anti-Terrorism Act leaves it unclear which of these actions we
citizen units are allowed to express support, financial, moral, or
technical, for.

Fuck them. They are the real terrorists.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."