wars of attrition & reverse rubber hose

[Tyler Durden]

One still wonders if a point-of-contact approach could work in some of these 
situations.

As an example, how different would Nazi Germany have been if male Jews above 
18 agreed to kill at least one nazi Soldier or obvious cooperator each?

Likewise, any possibility of honey-potting and then baseballbatting the 
scumbags who are writing these letters?

In other words, if the simple day-to-day employees (who don't have combat 
training) of these agencies knew they were taking their life into their 
hands by asking for such information, would this still be happening?

Kind of a reverse-rubber-hose approach to democracy.

-TD


>From: coderman <coderman at gmail.com>
>To: cypherpunks at jfet.org
>Subject: wars of attrition
>Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 18:11:11 -0800
>
>hey, at least the cypherpunks aren't mentioned! *grin*
>[small blessings for a nearly defunct and moribund list perhaps...]
>
>let's get this thought crime party started!
>
>favorite quote:
>"""
>I turned the letter over to my lawyer and told him to send the
>following message to the feds:
>
>Fuck you. Strong letter to follow.
>"""
>
>(so how much of this is actually documented and blatantly intimidating
>versus journalistic 'emphasis' with passion?)
>
>---cut---
>http://www.capitolhillblue.com/blog/2006/03/bush_declares_war_on_freedom_o.html
>
>  Bush declares war on freedom of the press
>March 6, 2006 07:44 AM / The Rant .
>
>By DOUG THOMPSON
>
>Using many of the questionable surveillance and monitoring techniques
>that brought both questions and criticism to his administration,
>President George W. Bush has launched a war against reporters who
>write stories unfavorable to his actions and is planning to prosecute
>journalists to make examples of them in his "war on terrorism."
>
>Bush recently directed Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to use
>"whatever means at your disposal" to wiretap, follow, harass and
>investigate journalists who have published stories about the
>administration's illegal use of warrantless wiretaps, use of faulty
>intelligence and anything else he deems "detrimental to the war on
>terror."
>
>Reporters for The New York Times, which along with Capitol Hill Blue
>revealed use of the National Security Agency to monitor phone calls
>and emails of Americans, say FBI agents have interviewed them and
>criminal prosecutors at the Justice Department admit they are laying
>"the groundwork for a grand jury that could lead to criminal charges,"
>
>CIA Director Porter Goss told Congress recently that "it is my aim and
>it is my hope that we will witness a grand jury investigation with
>reporters present being asked to reveal who is leaking this
>information. I believe the safety of this nation and the people of
>this country deserve nothing less."
>
>As part of the investigation, the Justice Department, Department of
>Homeland Security and the National Security Agency are wiretapping
>reporters' phones, following journalists on a daily basis, searching
>their homes and offices under a USA Patriot Act provision that allows
>"secret and undisclosed searches" and pouring over financial and
>travel records of hundreds of Washington-based reporters.
>
>Spokesmen for the Justice Department and Department of Homeland
>Security admit there are "ongoing investigations" regarding
>publication of stories "involving threats to national security" but
>will not reveal what those investigations include.
>
>In addition to using the USA Patriot Act to pry into the lives of
>journalists, the Justice Department has also dusted off a pre-World
>War I law to prosecute people who receive classified information,
>although the law was aimed at military personnel not civilians.
>
>"This is the first administration that I can remember, including
>Nixon's, that said we need to think about a law that would put
>journalists who print national security things up in front of grand
>juries and put them in jail if they don't reveal their sources," says
>David Gergen, who served as President Regan's director of
>communication and also worked in the Nixon and Ford White Houses.
>
>Political scientist George Harleigh, who worked in the Nixon
>administration, says such use of federal law enforcement authority was
>illegal when Nixon tried it and still so today.
>
>"We're talking about a basic violation of the Constitutional guarantee
>of a free press as well as a violation of the rights of privacy of
>American citizens," Harleigh says. "I had hoped we would have learned
>our lessons from the Nixon era. Sadly, it appears we have not."
>
>In recent weeks, the FBI has issued hundreds of "National Security
>Letters," directing employers, banks, credit card companies, libraries
>and other entities to turn over records on reporters. Under the USA
>Patriot Act, those who must turn over the records are also prohibited
>from revealing they have done so to the subject of the federal probes.
>
>"The significance of this cannot be overstated," says prominent New
>York litigator Glenn Greenwald. "In essence, while the President sits
>in the White House undisturbed after proudly announcing that he has
>been breaking the law and will continue to do so, his slavish
>political appointees at the Justice Department are using the mammoth
>law enforcement powers of the federal government to find and
>criminally prosecute those who brought this illegal conduct to light.
>
>"This flamboyant use of the forces of criminal prosecution to threaten
>whistle-blowers and intimidate journalists are nothing more than the
>naked tactics of street thugs and authoritarian juntas."
>
>Just how widespread, and uncontrolled, this latest government assault
>has become hit close to home last week when one of the FBI's National
>Security Letters arrived at the company that hosts the servers for
>this web site, Capitol Hill Blue.
>
>The letter demanded traffic data, payment records and other
>information about the web site along with information on me, the
>publisher.
>
>Now that's a problem. I own the company that hosts Capitol Hill Blue.
>So, in effect, the feds want me to turn over information on myself and
>not tell myself that I'm doing it. You'd think they'd know better.
>
>I turned the letter over to my lawyer and told him to send the
>following message to the feds:
>
>Fuck you. Strong letter to follow.
>---end-cut---