On Monday 15 October 2001 06:21 pm, you wrote: > doesn't it strike anyone that this only encumbers those it is > intended to protect? no comment could be interpreted as everyone > being too paranoid to comment. well be careful what we wish for.. Hate to sound ugly, but I just had to say this: I live in Serbia, Yugoslavia, who was considered a totalitarian country under the dictatorship of Slobodan Milosevic. For a while we had some funny laws, i.e. about university and press - all with the reason to protect the regime. And here, they TRIED to pass along a similar "anti-terrorism" law. But, they failed. Even with the fact that they had total control of the parlament, and the fact that they COULD have easily passed it, they withdrew the proposal, since they realized what kind of revolt would that cause. To be exact - this law was about "rebelion against state" (state - read Regime) , also discussed in the form of anti-terrorism, and also in a critical time for the nation, when we were all horrified about Serbs being slaughtered on Kosovo. And it also denied it's citizents free speech, under severe punishment, etc. But, even here they couldn't do that. Think about that, and think about how much are your civil liberties valuable to you? If they couldn't have done it in Serbia under Milosevic, and you let them to it to you in "democracy", perhaps you should feel betrayed? And perhaps you should do a little more that "Refuse to send logs"? Like lobby out, write to your senator/congressmen, hold a rally....???? Not that it's any of my concern, but think - next you may be forbidden to use pgp? (Wander why? ;)) ) Regards, Nikola
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 15 2001 - 11:20:53 PDT