On 2014-10-17, Griffin Boyce wrote:
Back in 2012, I talked to my attorney about setting up a warrant canary or a dead man's switch -- which he pointed out would have the same legal repercussions as just releasing the gagged warrant/NSL. Why? Because they are frequently phrased in such a way that if you do or fail to do a thing to somehow make it known, then you've violated the order.
Isn't the whole point that "they" will always phrase this sort of thing to an individual's disadvantage, against the constitution and human rights, and that then the only way to fight such tyranny without killing yourself and/or embarrasing them is to have a popular standpoint and/or enough of an extant legal fund. I mean, obviously not to defend yourself, because you can never succeed in that, but in order to make you an unattractive target to begin with? Mutual assurance of destruction, and all that. -- Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - decoy@iki.fi, http://decoy.iki.fi/front +358-40-3255353, 025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9 0509 85C2