--- Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 22:29:52 -0700 To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private> From: Steve Schear <s.schear@private> Subject: Re: [Politech] FBI has sent 13 reporters letters over Adrian Lamo, from AP >A Sept. 19 letter from the FBI directs Associated Press reporter Ted >Bridis to preserve any documents pertaining to Adrian Lamo, stating that >the request is in anticipation of an order requiring materials to be >turned over to federal law enforcement authorities. The FBI said Wednesday >that similar letters went to 12 other reporters or news organizations, >which the agency did not identify. Have any reporters, to your knowledge, archived their notes solely offshore and protected by a trust wherein presentment of a court order for access to archived materials triggers a distress clause, requiring the reporter to physically present themselves to the trust attorney to prove they are not under duress? steve "Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people... Be not intimidated, therefore, by any terrors, from publishing with the utmost freedom...nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your liberty by any pretenses of politeness, delicacy, or decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for hypocrisy, chicanery, and cowardice." -- John Adams -- Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 09:20:27 -0700 From: "Curt Hagenlocher" <curt@private> To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private> Reply-To: curt@private Subject: Re: [Politech] FBI has sent 13 reporters letters over Adrian Lamo, from AP > WASHINGTON -- The FBI has notified 13 reporters that it might > subpoena their records regarding a hacker charged with breaking > into The New York Times' computer system. The obvious and still unmentioned analogy -- "Gee, I wonder if that means that they'll be sending a subpoena to Bob Novak about the Valerie Plame matter." -- Curt Hagenlocher curt@private --- Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 13:48:42 -0700 From: Avi Bar-Zeev <cyranose@private> Reply-To: cyranose@private Organization: RealityPrime Dear Declan, Ignoring, for a second, objections to provisions of the Patriot Act that defy common sense, constitutionality, or even sanity, I'm wondering if this is going to be a clear-cut case of Bush administration double-standard. In the case of Robert Novak publishing the name of an undercover CIA WMD expert, it seems at least plausible that Bush administration officials (two, and supposedly very senior) violated federal law and threatened national security for political purposes. So this begs the question: will the Justice Department now use these same provisions of the Patriot Act to force Novak to disclose his notes and contacts? I'm not saying they should in either case, but since the Justice Department seems to have concluded it has this power, I'm interested to see if they'll choose to use it against potential criminals in the Bush administration. One would presume that any non-criminal administration would be interested in finding and removing any such people from positions of responsibility. Sincerely, Avi Bar-Zeev --- Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 08:52:54 -0700 (PDT) From: mairead <maireadbhean@private> Subject: response to "FBI orders reporters to keep all notes on Adrian Lamo articles [fs]" To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private> Dear Mark Rasch: Welcome to the treatment tax reform activists have come to know and love. Rather, I should say "welcome to the first volley." The direct attacks upon people of your profession have just begun. Years ago, the actions against those who ask legitimate questions of the taxation "authorities" had already escalated far beyond the eye-opening but relatively mild invasion you've just experienced. One example out of the legion of tactics I might mention is a particular Bill proposed in Congress each year, gaining support with each appearance. If (when?) passed, it would make even the mention of certain IRC statutes punishable by a $5,000 fine -- that's $5K *per mention.* Your anger at the situation with which you've been confronted is well founded, and many readers will respond in surprise and disgust as well. I, however, am too "old" in these matters to feel anything except recognition and commiseration. Of course, your issue may be understood as an entirely different one from that of tax reform activists. My understanding comprehends the similarities. I am interested only in the answer to one question: Will enough of you say NO to turn the tide back -- at least for yourselves? - Mairead Hannon _______________________________________________ Politech mailing list Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Oct 02 2003 - 10:46:08 PDT