In these post-9/11 days, U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft has been one of the staunchest supporters of Big Brother type initiates: Homeland Security, expanded phone and Intenet taps support, the Patriot Act and so on.

He didn’t always feel that way.

Back in 1997, when he was then a Senator from Missouri, he penned a position paper decrying the Clinton administration’s position on encryption and such.

The paper, ironically enough (given his current inclinations), was titled “Keep Big Brother’s Hands Off the Internet”.

An excerpt:

There is a concern that the Internet could be used to commit crimes and that advanced encryption could disguise such activity. However, we do not provide the government with phone jacks outside our homes for unlimited wiretaps. Why, then, should we grant government the Orwellian capability to listen at will and in real time to our communications across the Web?

The protections of the Fourth Amendment are clear. The right to protection from unlawful searches is an indivisible American value. Two hundred years of court decisions have stood in defense of this fundamental right. The state’s interest in effective crime-fighting should never vitiate the citizens’ Bill of Rights.

Is this the same John Ashcroft we’re all familiar with?

Thanks to Kottke for the pointer.