Jim Bell sentenced to 10 years in prison

[John Young]

DF wrote:

>They need an overt act.  Mere chat won't be enough.

True, to a point. What constitutes an act appears to be
going through a dramatic redefinition in cybercrime and
allegedly terrorist-related actions.

An overt act is not the same for everyone; authorities
commit acts (crimes) that the rest of us cannot.

And according to the IRS investigation manual it is
fair game: to encourage such blurred-line-crossing actions,
even taking part in them to vet the promoter; to lie and
deceive to get the actions underway; to lie in court to 
conceal how it was done and who promoted the actions.

In the light that another reported has been subpoenaed for
notes it worth pondering if, as in the case of Bell and CJ,
journalists played a role in promoting line-crossing
behavior, not by doing the job they are known to do, but
by redefinition of the blurred line between reporting and
provoking.

Neither Bell nor CJ would have been sent to prison without
the complicity of the media, witting or unwitting, and in my
opinion, witting moreso. Same goes for this list, which is
for me, a member of the media, and no doubt a member of
other conclaves yet to be revealed in court and to be sure
the hypermedia -- that is the media in which there is a
very blurred line (maybe none at all) between the authorities 
and the traditional media.

Look, this swipe is not about Declan and the guy at Bell's
trial. That is far too simple. What it is about is not taking for
granted avowals of innocence of trusted third parties no
matter what cloak they wear, for those TTP cloaks are now
clearly being used to entrap gullible actors. And any of
the TTPs who say this is paranoid have got a problem
of credibility derived primarily from the overly-concerted
effort to protect their own privilege even as they shop
their subjects as mere news, not quite getting the full
story right due to a blinding reliance on voices (grammar,
syntax, coherency, narrative) of authority which sound 
just like the authorities -- ducks quacking like ducks.

To not blindly tar everyone with this, I concede that those 
who have overtly proven they are trustworthy and continue 
to do so overtly, that is in public under fire, deserve a
chance on trust on short-terms. Talk about deserving trust
from any previleged position is just authoritarian talk.
And citing how many of your fellows have been thrown in
jail or suffered for their role aint worth shit unless you are
one of them. Then your talk aint all quack.