FBI bans another web site
Brian Bernardini
<al...@zeta.org.au> wrote:
> Jim Gallagher wrote:
> >
> > Authorities said the site, which is no longer on
> > the Internet, carried accusations that the agents
> > and the FBI had engaged in "obstruction of justice,
> > perjury, and tampering with evidence."
>
> So now it's illegal to criticise government agencies? Even if they break
> their own laws?
>
> > The site also carried an picture of the Oklahoma
> > Federal Court Building that was blown up by
> > explosives, and while condemning the terrorist
> > act, did not do so enthusiastically enough.
>
> You can be arrested for not condemning something _enthusiastically
> enough_? What kind of idiocy is this? Do citizen-units need to pass an
> enthusiasm test now?
Get the whole story, folks. On this same site, he threatened a white
woman who helped black people (I forget the specific agency she was
involved with). He called her a "race traitor", and suggested she
should be killed. The woman was so scared, she quit her job and moved
out of the area.
-Brian
Jim Gallagher
I have a question: what is "an FBI judge"?
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/AMGIG5PCHL3C.html <--gone
Feds Charge Man With Running Online Hate Site
The Associated Press
PHILADELPHIA (AP) - Federal authorities have
charged a man with civil rights violations for
running a Web site that assailed the FBI, a step
experts said may be the first of its kind
against online hate speech.
Ryan Wilson and the group he runs - ALPHA HQ -
were charged with violating the Government
Protection Act, FBI Director Louis Freeh
said Monday. He said the complaint was filed
with an FBI judge in Philadelphia last week.
"Tragically, this case shows that the anti-
government hatred and the terrible lies that
our agents must confront remain alive and well,
and have even moved into cyberspace," Freeh said
in his Martin Luther King Day announcement in
Washington, D.C.
The target were the FBI agents who had been at
the scene of the Branch Dividian compound during
the disastrous seige.
Authorities said the site, which is no longer on
the Internet, carried accusations that the agents
and the FBI had engaged in "obstruction of justice,
perjury, and tampering with evidence."
It said: "When Federal Agents violate numerous laws
and kill innocent women and children in the process,
they should be prosecuted like any other criminal."
The site also carried an picture of the Oklahoma
Federal Court Building that was blown up by
explosives, and while condemning the terrorist
act, did not do so enthusiastically enough.
"Our feeling is that these were clear threats and
that our Agents and the FBI suffered great damage
to its image and credibility as a law enforcement
agency", FBI spokesman David Egner said.
Although authorities have taken steps against
people who send anti-government hate e-mail or
post anti-government messages, experts said the
FBI's action is believed to be the first by a
federal agency against a Web site.
The Rabbi Abraham Cooper of the Simon Wiesenthal
Center in Los Angeles told the Inquirer it was
the first time he had heard of a federal agency
cracking down on the operator of a known online
anti-government hate site.
If an administrative law judge rules against Wilson,
he faces civil penalties of at least $220,000, plus
monetary compensation to both the FBI and the
agents involved, FBI officials said. The FBI says
that it reserves the right to pursue criminal
sanctions in the future.
The state filed a civil lawsuit in October 1998
accusing Wilson and ALPHA HQ of making slanderous
threats and distributing anti-government propaganda,
which led to a court order in February barring them
from posting any other "evidence" against the agents
and other law enforcement officers in Pennsylvania.
"I hope it serves as a wake-up call for these
agitators who think they can hide behind the
anonymity of the internet," Egnar said.
Aldis Ozols
>
> Authorities said the site, which is no longer on
> the Internet, carried accusations that the agents
> and the FBI had engaged in "obstruction of justice,
> perjury, and tampering with evidence."
So now it's illegal to criticise government agencies? Even if they break
their own laws?
> The site also carried an picture of the Oklahoma
> Federal Court Building that was blown up by
> explosives, and while condemning the terrorist
> act, did not do so enthusiastically enough.
You can be arrested for not condemning something _enthusiastically
enough_? What kind of idiocy is this? Do citizen-units need to pass an
enthusiasm test now?
--
How to Lobby Politicians
http://www.zeta.org.au/~aldis/lobby.html
"Reality is whatever doesn't go away when you stop believing in it."
-- Philip K Dick
Aldis Ozols
>
> In article <388680AF...@zeta.org.au>, Aldis Ozols
> <al...@zeta.org.au> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Authorities said the site, which is no longer on
> > > the Internet, carried accusations that the agents
> > > and the FBI had engaged in "obstruction of justice,
> > > perjury, and tampering with evidence."
> >
> > So now it's illegal to criticise government agencies? Even if they break
> > their own laws?
> >
> > > The site also carried an picture of the Oklahoma
> > > Federal Court Building that was blown up by
> > > explosives, and while condemning the terrorist
> > > act, did not do so enthusiastically enough.
> >
> > You can be arrested for not condemning something _enthusiastically
> > enough_? What kind of idiocy is this? Do citizen-units need to pass an
> > enthusiasm test now?
>
> woman who helped black people (I forget the specific agency she was
> involved with). He called her a "race traitor", and suggested she
> should be killed. The woman was so scared, she quit her job and moved
> out of the area.
There may well be a legitimate argument that a Web site, which makes
specific threats against an identifiable person, should be pulled. I'd
agree with that if someone was actually in danger.
But that's not the reason given in the story. Criticising government
agencies is what the principle of free speech is _for_, and the reasons
given in the article are definitely the wrong ones for government
censorship. The idea that citizens' expression can be deemed illegal for
not being "enthusiastic enough" is particularly repugnant.
Jim Gallagher
> Get the whole story, folks. On this same site, he threatened a white
> woman who helped black people (I forget the specific agency she was
> involved with). He called her a "race traitor", and suggested she
> should be killed. The woman was so scared, she quit her job and moved
> out of the area.
Thanks for the heads up on this one. It was a HUD employee. I had
heard about that, but didn't put 2 and 2 together, and the (AP) story,
for whatever reason, didn't mention it. I still see problems with the
idea of an "FBI judge," but the case is more complicated than the
original post indicated.
Jim
Tommy the Terrorist
there are still some things about it that don't add up.
But see:
http://www.bsos.umd.edu/gvpt/gvpt339/telecom.html
http://www.ljx.com/LJXfiles/harassment/paaghate.html
Note particularly that the censors have officialized
DNS censorship:
If Defendants Tim DeLair, Bluelanter, Inc., Stormfront, Inc.,
Nevada Business Resources--Deepwell Internet Services fail
to cease and desist from providing, operating, or running DNS
for the ALPHA HQ website at www.alph.org, alpha.org, or any
other host on which the aforementioned webpage appears:
C. Permanently enjoin Network Solutions Inc., from providing,
operating, or running root DNS for the ALPHA HQ domain of
alph.org.
http://www.web.apc.org/~ara/documents/news/support.html
gives an opposing view, but not very detailed
http://www.igc.apc.org/gk97/gk97.gkd97/entries/4150338072.html
What I do know is this much: alpha.org, when it existed, was without
a doubt the glossiest, slickest, most impressive racist site ever
assembled. You can disagree with them, but you can't help but
notice the fact that the censors have learned a sense of quality
that they need for most efficient destruction.
Note particularly, the ethics of the surveillance society. The FBI
- the FUCKING SPIES WHO DEMAND THAT WHERE EVERYONE LIVES,
WORKS, WHAT THEY EARN, THEIR BANK ACCOUNTS, THEIR HEALTH
RECORDS, ALL BE TRACKED AND TRACED AND IN THEIR DATABASES
TOGETHER WITH ANY POLITICAL ACTIVITY THEY EVER PARTICIPATED
IN - These spies have the temerity to proclaim that a site must
be censored because it includes a few home addresses that might
be "threatening". I'll tell you what's threatening: knowing that every
piece of personal information is held by them, and no one piece of
it is legal for you.
It appears that ONE of the cases involves something that at least
genuinely resembles a death threat (though I still hold the position
that prohibiting death threats only makes them more effective
and is therefore counterproductive) - but not all of these involve
the same issue.
As an aside, we see a similar set of names/addresses at:
http://www.pieman.org/naziscum.html
http://www.jdo.org/nazi.htm
again, I think this is definitely something I support as free speech.
I just cite it as evidence that the censors' agenda is also political.
One of the members of ALPHA appears to have some involvement
in another Web site http://www.posse-comitatus.org/regan.html
A better-written opposing piece at
http://www.blackjournalism.com/anti-rac.htm
makes out that there was a more direct "death threat" on the
site, but since I haven't seen the site I don't really know.
Because the FBI is involved I tend to be suspicious the story
is manufactured, because (remember the EgyptAir flight?)
they have a tendency to manufacture evidence as needed to
assume jurisdiction in any case.
See also
http://www.techserver.com/newsroom/ntn/info/112498/info18_18534_noframe
.html
http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19981020S0010
http://www.cpcn.com/articles/102998/cb.onmedia4.shtml
B. Richardson
> Jim Gallagher wrote:
> >
> > Authorities said the site, which is no longer on
> > the Internet, carried accusations that the agents
> > and the FBI had engaged in "obstruction of justice,
> > perjury, and tampering with evidence."
>
> So now it's illegal to criticise government agencies? Even if they break
> their own laws?
>
> > The site also carried an picture of the Oklahoma
> > Federal Court Building that was blown up by
> > explosives, and while condemning the terrorist
> > act, did not do so enthusiastically enough.
>
> You can be arrested for not condemning something _enthusiastically
> enough_? What kind of idiocy is this? Do citizen-units need to pass an
> enthusiasm test now?
Don't get your panties all in a bunch just yet. The original article is a
spoof. It didn't really happen.
William Fason
Hash: SHA1
7 February 2000
Assignment: Verify claims of FBI closure of website operated by Ryan
Wilson and Alpha HQ (www.alpha.org?) as described in attached email
(Exhibit "A").
Summary: The FBI was contacted. Ownership of www.alpha.org
determined (Exhibit "B"). Attempts were made to contact the owner of
the website. The email itself was analyzed.
REPORT
FBI officials in D.C., Pittsburgh, and Philadelphia were contacted
for comment. On 7 February 2000 I interviewed FBI Agent Linda Vizi,
spokesperson with the Philadelphia office of the Bureau. She had
never heard of this claim. She stated that no such action had been
taken against Ryan Wilson. She specifically denied that FBI Director
Louis Freeh had made the statement attributed to him in the email.
She specifically denied that there was any such thing as an "FBI
judge." After consulting her computerized index of federal laws, she
stated that she could find no such law titled "Government Protection
Act." Searches conducted on a number of free law websites were
unable to find any such law.
On 7 February 2000 - Agent Rex Tomb, spokesperson with the DC office
of the Bureau, was interviewed. He said he had never heard of this
story. He stated that there was no FBI spokesperson named David
Egner. Stated that FBI Director Freeh had issued no such press
release.
On 7 February 2000 - Attempts were made to contact Ryan Wilson In
philadelphia for comment, owner of the site in question according to
Network Solutions, Inc. (Exhibit "B"). Message on voicemail was not
returned.
On 7 February 2000 I called the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los
Angeles and spoke with their press person. I forwarded the email to
them for their comment since the email specifically names Rabbi
Cooper with the Simon Wiesenthal Center. Have yet to receive a
return call.
Examination of the text of the email itself offers clues as to its
veracity.
1. The subject line is "FBI bans another website." While close
attention to free speech issues has been paid both on and off the
Internet, the investigator has no knowledge that the FBI has ever
shut down any website, let alone one run by Ryan Wilson.
2. The first paragraph states that the FBI charged a man with civil
rights violation. In truth, the FBI investigates. It is the US
Attorney's office which files charges. Also, bringing an action for
"violating civil rights" is typically performed by an individual
against a corporation or a government agency, not by a government
agency against an individual.
3. The email purports to be an article from Associated Press, but it
contains two misspellings, both in the fourth paragraph. "Davidian"
and "siege" are misspelled.
4. Incorrect grammar in the fourth paragraph. Specifically,
subject-verb agreement.
5. Incorrect punctuation in the seventh paragraph.
6. The last name of the alleged FBI spokesperson quoted in the email
is spelled two different ways - "Egner" and "Egnar."
7. While the email refers to an action purportedly filed "last week"
(presumably in January), it also mentions a an injunction issued in a
lawsuit filed in October 1988.
8. The email is unclear as to whether the alleged action against
Wilson et al. is a civil or criminal action.
CONCLUSION: The email is probably a fake. The claims made therein
can not be accepted as true at this time. Further investigation
would include:
1. On-site research in the federal court files for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania for any civil or criminal cases filed using
"Ryan Wilson" or "Alpha" as search terms;
2. On-site research to uncover actions filed in state court against
"Ryan Wilson" or "Alpha;"
3. More attempts to interview Ryan Wilson in order to verify claims
and obtain court, docket number, and other identifying information of
the specific cause of action purportedly filed against him;
4. Attempts to contact Associated Press in order verify the
authenticity of the original article.
I am closing the file at this time.
WILLIAM E. FASON
Fraud Investigator
Office of Judgment Enforcement
1436 W Gray #272
Houston TX 77019-4946
713.529.4279 fax 713.529.9864
EXHIBIT "A"
From: wadsc <wa...@artelco.com>
Subject: FBI bans another web site
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 00:37:45 GMT
From: Jim Gallagher <n...@nospamhotmail.com>
Organization: Time Warner Cable of San Diego, CA
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
Originally posted on alt.slack I have a question: what is "an FBI
judge"?
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/AMGIG5PCHL3C.html <--gone
Feds Charge Man With Running Online Hate Site
The Associated Press
PHILADELPHIA (AP) - Federal authorities have charged a man with civil
rights violations for running a Web site that assailed the FBI, a
step experts said may be the first of its kind against online hate
speech.
Ryan Wilson and the group he runs - ALPHA HQ - were charged with
violating the Government Protection Act, FBI Director Louis Freeh
said Monday. He said the complaint was filed with an FBI judge in
Philadelphia last week.
"Tragically, this case shows that the anti-government hatred and the
terrible lies that our agents must confront remain alive and well,
and have even moved into cyberspace," Freeh said in his Martin Luther
King Day announcement in Washington, D.C.
The target were the FBI agents who had been at the scene of the
Branch Dividian compound during the disastrous seige. [sic]
Authorities said the site, which is no longer on the Internet,
carried accusations that the agents and the FBI had engaged in
"obstruction of justice, perjury, and tampering with evidence." It
said: "When Federal Agents violate numerous laws and kill innocent
women and children in the process, they should be prosecuted like any
other criminal."
The site also carried an picture of the Oklahoma Federal Court
Building that was blown up by explosives, and while condemning the
terrorist act, did not do so enthusiastically enough.
"Our feeling is that these were clear threats and that our Agents and
the FBI suffered great damage to its image and credibility as a law
enforcement agency", FBI spokesman David Egner said.
Although authorities have taken steps against people who send
anti-government hate e-mail or post anti-government messages, experts
said the FBI's action is believed to be the first by a federal agency
against a Web site.
The Rabbi Abraham Cooper of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los
Angeles told the Inquirer it was the first time he had heard of a
federal agency cracking down on the operator of a known online
anti-government hate site.
If an administrative law judge rules against Wilson, he faces civil
penalties of at least $220,000, plus monetary compensation to both
the FBI and the agents involved, FBI officials said. The FBI says
that it reserves the right to pursue criminal sanctions in the
future.
The state filed a civil lawsuit in October 1998 accusing Wilson and
ALPHA HQ of making slanderous threats and distributing
anti-government propaganda, which led to a court order in February
barring them from posting any other "evidence" against the agents and
other law enforcement officers in Pennsylvania.
"I hope it serves as a wake-up call for these agitators who think
they can hide behind the anonymity of the internet," Egnar said.
EXHIBIT "B"
Ryan Wilson is the owner of a website www.alpha.org. The following
is from the files of Networking Solutions, Inc..
"Registrant: Alpha (ALPHA12-DOM)
P.O.Box 23184
Philadelphia, PA 19124
US
Domain Name: ALPHA.ORG
Administrative Contact:
Wilson, Ryan (RW1314) al...@ALPHA.ORG
215-423-0473
Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
DeLaire, Tim (TD3073) adr...@DEEPWELL.COM
314.411.0476 (FAX) 314.411.0476
Billing Contact:
Wilson, Ryan (RW1314) al...@ALPHA.ORG
215-423-0473
Record last updated on 26-Oct-1998.
Record created on 02-Jun-1996.
Database last updated on 6-Feb-2000 16:14:54 EST."
Ryan is a known neo-Nazi with connections to Stormfront and National
Alliance. I called him morning of 7 February 2000, got his
voicemail, left a message asking for him to call, but have yet to
receive a call back.
Tim DelAire's number has been disconnected.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.1 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBOKELfAHZwgdgdZVjEQJhCwCeMxJf+6+B4dPjQB2obQuTOCnGl3oAnR9H
6rihsyfgRFMKL1I4V1ZQ6AQF
=iycj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Dave Bird
William Fason <w.f...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>REPORT
>FBI officials in D.C., Pittsburgh, and Philadelphia were contacted
>for comment. On 7 February 2000 I interviewed FBI Agent Linda Vizi,
>spokesperson with the Philadelphia office of the Bureau. She had
>never heard of this claim. She stated that no such action had been
>taken against Ryan Wilson. She specifically denied that FBI Director
>Louis Freeh had made the statement attributed to him in the email.
>She specifically denied that there was any such thing as an "FBI
>judge." After consulting her computerized index of federal laws, she
>stated that she could find no such law titled "Government Protection
>Act." Searches conducted on a number of free law websites were
>unable to find any such law.
Thanks for this. I have been told indirectly, via Internet contacts,
that it is a fake dreamed up by somebody from alt.slack
(the Church of the subGenius newsgroup).
|~/ |~/
~~|;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;||';-._.-;'^';||_.-;'^'0-|~~
P | Woof Woof, Glug Glug ||____________|| 0 | P
O | Who Drowned the Judge's Dog? | . . . . . . . '----. 0 | O
O | answers on *---|_______________ @__o0 | O
L |<a href="news:alt.religion.scientology"></a>_____________|/_______| L
and<a href="http://www.xemu.demon.co.uk/clam/lynx/q0.html"></a>XemuSP4(:)
Tommy the Terrorist
da...@xemu.demon.co.uk writes:
>>She specifically denied that there was any such thing as an "FBI
>>judge." After consulting her computerized index of federal laws, she
Here's a good description of what an "FBI judge" is - though
it isn't the first I've seen. While the story quoted on this
thread had clear hoaxlike elements, neither this nor the
censorship of the www.alpha.org Web site were among them.
http://www.value.net/~casdigest/Pine.BSI.3.95.990527151711.9452A-100000
html
WASHINGTON -- Encased in vaultlike security and sheltered by
extraordinary secrecy, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the
most clandestine pocket of the U.S. legal system, is receiving a rare
dose of public attention amid the controversy about whether Atty. Gen.
Janet Reno did enough to pursue alleged Chinese espionage.
The top-secret tribunal, where FBI agents seek permission to use
wiretaps in national security cases, operates on the sixth floor of
Justice Department headquarters behind a series of security doors
reminiscent of the "Get Smart" television show's introductory scenes.
Inside, the legal system's ordinary rules evaporate in the name of
national security: There are no defense lawyers, and government lawyers
have lost only once.
Lawmakers have attacked Reno in recent days for her refusal to go into
the windowless, surveillance-proof courtroom in 1997, as the FBI wanted
her to, and seek a wiretap on Wen Ho Lee, a former scientist at Los
Alamos National Laboratory suspected of passing secrets to China. Reno
has fiercely defended her decision not to seek the wiretap.
But the political back-and-forth does not reflect the complexity of the
system by which the FBI and other agencies get permission to eavesdrop
on U.S. citizens in the name of national security.
Unlike ordinary wiretap authority, this system relies less on the
familiar tenets of law and order than on a nation's fundamental right to
protect itself. Many say it is far easier to get wiretapping authority
from the special intelligence court than from an ordinary criminal
court. Since its creation two decades ago, the court has approved 11,210
of the 11,211 national security wiretaps requested by the Justice
Department -- and rejected just one.
The tongue-lashing Reno is enduring for not seeking a wiretap on Lee is
in some ways ironic, since by far the most common criticism of the
system is that it grants wiretapping authority too freely. Some fear
that lawmakers will react to the current scandal by making it even
easier for FBI agents to get national security wiretaps.
"The real danger in this Lee situation," said Kenneth Bass, former
counsel for intelligence policy at the Justice Department, "is that
Congress will go the other direction and inhibit the Justice Department
from playing its role of being a serious, knowledgeable, fully informed
hurdle that has to be overcome by zealous agencies."
The seven-judge FISA court -- named for the law that created it, the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act -- was established in 1978 as a
reaction to the "black-bag jobs" of the Watergate era and the FBI's
COINTELPRO investigations of civil-rights activists and others.
In the wake of these abuses, Congress decided that the FBI and National
Security Agency would no longer have unfettered freedom to spy on U.S.
citizens, resident aliens, foreign embassies and others in the name of
national security.
Now, one of the FISA judges flies to Washington every two weeks to sit
in the vaultlike courtroom and hear Justice Department lawyers make
their case for the wiretaps.
Some say these jurists are so dazzled by the glamor of spy wiretaps
that they can't say no.
"It's like receiving a decoder ring in the mail," said Jonathan Turley,
a George Washington University law professor who has challenged the FISA
system in court. "Suddenly these judges find themselves players in a
high-stakes national security game. That has an insidious effect, I
think, and there is a dangerous identification of the judges with the
agencies that they must review."
Royce Lamberth, a federal judge in Washington who serves as the FISA
court's current chief judge, was traveling and could not be reached for
comment. Harold A. Baker, a judge from Urbana, Ill., who also sits on
the FISA court, did not return a call.
The system's defenders say it works just fine.
A senior Justice Department official insisted the process is not all
that different from getting a criminal wiretap. The reason the FISA
court grants so many of the wiretap requests, the official added, is
that by the time they reach the court they have been exhaustively
reviewed.
"It's been scrubbed by enough people, it's been reviewed at such a
senior level and so many people have had to verify the accuracy of it --
it shouldn't be a surprise that we have made the best case we can make
and that it meets the standards in the statute," the official said.
When the FBI wants to wiretap someone, it sends over a two- or
three-page document known as a letterhead memorandum, signed by the
assistant FBI director for national security. A special office at the
Justice Department -- the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review, or
OIPR -- decides whether to recommend to Reno that she seek the wiretap.
In the Lee case, the office recommended that Reno not do so, and she
didn't. Reno was probably not even informed of the request; that is
typical when OIPR recommends against a wiretap. Still, Reno faced fierce
recriminations earlier this week for the department's inaction.
"I believe the attorney general ought to resign and she ought to take
her top lieutenants with her," said Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.),
chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Sen. Robert Torricelli (D-N.J.), usually a strong administration
supporter, was almost equally harsh. "I think it's time for President
Clinton to have a conversation with the attorney general about her
ability to perform her duties and whether or not it is in the national
interest for her to continue," he said.
Reno responded to the criticism, saying the FBI did not make a
sufficient legal case for a wiretap. There is often tension between the
FBI, pushing for a wiretap in an urgent spy case, and OIPR, insisting on
strong evidence before passing on the request.
For a tap to be approved by the Justice Department and the court,
"probable cause" must exist that the potential surveillance target is
engaged in clandestine, possibly illegal intelligence-gathering for a
foreign power.
"I have the awesome responsibility to determine whether to authorize
government intrusion into the lives of American citizens," Reno said.
"But the Justice Department has not -- nor will it -- authorize such
intrusions when, as in this case, the standards of the Constitution and
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act have not been met."
Lee has strongly asserted his innocence through his lawyer.
Some activists applauded the department's decision not to eavesdrop on
Lee.
"This case gives me confidence that the process is not a rubber stamp
and that you really do need probable cause to get one of these
applications approved," said Steven Aftergood, director of the
government secrecy project at the Federation of American Scientists. "I
find cause for celebration where congressional leaders find cause to
call for the attorney general's resignation."
The Justice Department's critics say Reno was obligated to take the Lee
case to the FISA court and let the judges sort out the legitimacy of the
wiretap, which is their job.
"The Lee case was a terrible mistake, both by OIPR and by the FBI in
not following up after it was turned down," said Stewart Baker, former
chief counsel at the National Security Agency, which also conducts
counterintelligence. "We may have all paid a very high price for OIPR's
vigilance in protecting the rights of suspected spies."
Whether the wiretap decision was the right one, broader questions
remain about the handling of the Lee espionage investigation by the FBI
and the Justice Department. Reno acknowledged as much by recently naming
a task force, headed by a federal prosecutor from Virginia, to review
the department's performance.
"The team will review everything and make recommendations," Reno told
said. "We'll be looking at anything related to Wen Ho Lee . . . We'll be
reviewing process and conduct to determine what the circumstances were
and what can be done."
Jim Gallagher
Tommy the Terrorist wrote:
>
> In article <UaZ3zPAn...@xemu.demon.co.uk> Dave Bird,
> da...@xemu.demon.co.uk writes:
> >>She specifically denied that there was any such thing as an "FBI
> >>judge." After consulting her computerized index of federal laws, she
>
> Here's a good description of what an "FBI judge" is - though
> it isn't the first I've seen. While the story quoted on this
> thread had clear hoaxlike elements, neither this nor the
> censorship of the www.alpha.org Web site were among them.
>
> http://www.value.net/~casdigest/Pine.BSI.3.95.990527151711.9452A-100000
> html
Thanks, Tommy.
Notice that the original article (now called "Exhibit A" by Houston PI
William Fason) is titled "FBI bans another web site," although the
original alt.slack post (or should I say "troll"?) did not have the word
"another" in it. I added that because of the story about the FBI
(specifically, Special Agents "Dan Calemina" and "Joe Metzinger" as
named in the Village Voice) applying pressure to BECamation, an ISP, to
"remove the content" of a Y2K art video site
(http://www.crowdedtheater.com/) which purported to be a military
briefing for Y2K Times Square security or provocative activity. This is
a good example of a manufactured "emergency" being used as a pretext to
suspend speech rights online. While technically not a "ban," it is
clear that the FBI intimidated BECamation to the point where it was
unnecessary for any "legal" action to be taken. Maybe there's another
reason why the "FBI Judge" so rarely feels the need to refuse a request
for a wiretap.
Fason's report states:
>1. The subject line is "FBI bans another website." While close
>attention to free speech issues has been paid both on and off the
>Internet, the investigator has no knowledge that the FBI has ever
>shut down any website, let alone one run by Ryan Wilson.
Closer attention to free speech issues would have turned up the
following:
Original Village Voice article:
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/9947/boal.shtml
Slashdot article about the Village Voice story:
http://slashdot.org/yro/99/11/24/013232.shtml
Wired article:
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,32746,00.html
<<<<begin quoted material>>>>
Y2K Spoof Flick Goes Awry
by Craig Bicknell
11:00 a.m. 24.Nov.1999 PST
Mike Zieper wanted to tap into current
passions with his video art. To do it, he
made a grainy, gray tape in which a
faceless narrator prepares his soldiers to
unleash a government-sponsored riot in
Times Square at midnight 2000.
The plan: to create chaos so federal
troops have an excuse to move in.
Weird thing was, after Zieper posted the
video clip on his Web site, the troops did
move in.
"This FBI agent called," said Zieper. "He
said, 'There are a lot of people planning
to vacation in New York this year, a lot of
them are coming to your site and they're
getting scared. I want to talk to you
about how we can stop people from
coming to this site.'"
Zieper called a lawyer and didn't pull the
site. So both the FBI and the US
Attorney's Office went upstream to
Zieper's Web hosting company,
BECamation in Michigan, and asked that
Zieper's site be pulled. There was no
threat of legal action, but BECamation
president Mark Wieger complied.
"We didn't want to take any chances with
our business, so we pulled it down,"
Wieger said.
In doing so, Wieger pulled a lever that let
loose a virtual riot among free-speech
advocates. After the Village Voice
published a piece about the incident,
online message boards erupted in protest.
Now the American Civil Liberties Union is
considering a lawsuit on Zieper's behalf.
"We think, certainly, that it's very
improper for the FBI to be harassing an
Internet hosting company to take down
content that may be disturbing, but is
certainly protected by the First
Amendment," said ACLU staff attorney
Ann Beeson.
The FBI did not respond to a request for
comment.
Meanwhile, the video itself has been
copied and posted on numerous mirror
sites.
It's a hit beyond anything Zieper could
have anticipated. Reality has woven a
the video's fiction and given it a nice buzz. A grand
slam for a struggling artist.
"If this gets people to look at all this stuff
seriously, that's fantastic. That's exactly
what I wanted to do," Zieper said.
That doesn't mean he's not upset,
particularly on behalf of Mark Wieger,
who's been besieged by vicious flame
emails decrying his decision to pull
Zieper's site.
"They're saying, 'Why didn't you stand up
for the Constitution?'" Zieper said. "I think
that's very easy to say from afar, but
when the knock comes for you it's a
terrifying experience. They tried to infer
that he best get out of the way."
That has Zieper wondering what else the
FBI is up to. "I hope this is just an
aberration," he said. "I hope that they
review the constitution back at the FBI
and don't try to do anything like this
again."
<<<<end quoted material>>>>
William Fason
Hash: SHA1
> Tommy the Terrorist wrote:
> >
> > In article <UaZ3zPAn...@xemu.demon.co.uk> Dave Bird,
> > da...@xemu.demon.co.uk writes:
> > >>She specifically denied that there was any such thing as an
> > >>"FBI judge." After consulting her computerized index of
> > >>federal laws, she
> >
> > Here's a good description of what an "FBI judge" is - though
> > it isn't the first I've seen. While the story quoted on this
> > thread had clear hoaxlike elements, neither this nor the
> > censorship of the www.alpha.org Web site were among them.
> >
> > http://www.value.net/~casdigest/Pine.BSI.3.95.990527151711.9452A-1
> > 0000 html
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court is part of the US
judiciary, not the executive branch. I do not think that the term
"FBI judge" applies.
Jim Gallagher <n...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:38A5FD2C...@nospam.hotmail.com...
> Notice that the original article (now called "Exhibit A" by Houston
> PI William Fason) is titled "FBI bans another web site," although
> the original alt.slack post (or should I say "troll"?) did not have
> the word "another" in it. I added that because of the story about
> the FBI (specifically, Special Agents "Dan Calemina" and "Joe
> Metzinger" as named in the Village Voice) applying pressure to
> BECamation, an ISP, to "remove the content" of a Y2K art video site
> (http://www.crowdedtheater.com/) which purported to be a military
> briefing for Y2K Times Square security or provocative activity.
> This is a good example of a manufactured "emergency" being used as
> a pretext to suspend speech rights online. While technically not a
> "ban," it is clear that the FBI intimidated BECamation to the point
> where it was unnecessary for any "legal" action to be taken.
I saw that report when it was issued and also found it very
disturbing that anyone from the FBI or any three-letter agency would
pressure a web host to pull down a site. I am glad that Mr.
Gallagher posted the cites on how the FBI worked behind the scene to
exert pressure against someone nonviolently exercising their First
Amendment rights. It is insidious.
Regards,
Bill
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.1 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBOKmA5QHZwgdgdZVjEQLBlwCgv/783OfnoZbJ3/BaWAk23/rwxo8AoMDr
5FrrZ97btkrV2xPbU8NHbp2q
=53tm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----