Bear in mind that when I appeared before the grand jury, all the charges against Bell has been made, and no new ones have been lodged, AFAIK. As with CJ, there were public warnings made by the feds through disclosures of continuing grand jury investigations. This tactic has been described as "witness coercion," to assure that witnesses, and prospective witnesses who learn of the active GJ, are intimidated by what may be done to them if they fancy challenging the authorities. The GJ did ask me about AP, though Robb London did not. I stated the scheme was considered to be unworkable by persons more qualified to judge it than me. Still, a juror persisted, why did you publish it. I said for informational purposes about evolving technology. There were other questions from the jury, not London, about disclosing information on the Internet about public officials. London did question about my posting of the CIA query, in particular the address of the alleged CIA employee. And questioned Bell's postings on the same topic. My assumption is that it is those postings which I will be asked to testify about. But AP is always looming, and I think basebuilding for a future attack is in the works despite the recent overturn of the anti-abotionists' case. Officials believe they deserve more protection for their privileges than the citizenry. Beyond that, though, there remains the question of what else might be coming from the grand jury, whether to come in fact, or to come in the form of coercion to not fuck with Sam. Sandy's note on Sam's pressure pointing is apt -- whether Bell, Declan, me or the othjer witnesses yet unknown. And publicly naming a cypherpunk Bell called from jail is typical fear-mongering as with subpoenas. I've warned two reporters they should expect no privileged protection in the Bell case and its likely followup cases -- the stakes are too high for burgeoning anti-terrorism to allow legacy press perks get in the way of high-reward homeland defense. One reporter said no way would they come after me, and they allegedly have. The other reporter said not me, and they did. One reporter said I was too conspiratorial. And he has repeated that here. One thing I've learned from that simple-mindedness is be wary of disingenuous distancing of person's kindly convictions from his vicious job requirements to hang your ass in the public interest, er, to see that justice is done, er, balance viewpoints. Sure, I'm ranting, you see the feds got a wad of my self-incriminating material. And cpunk archives offer much an e-goldmine of cypherpunks movements.